We all need to defer to Ruger#3 for expertise on this as he has the only real experience. The question I have is that it seems amazing they were able to take this hit but still able to implement a successful aborted landing and go around. That sounds like crew training to the maximum level. Like someone already had recognized a problem and implemented the abort procedure probably seconds before the first "touch" happened. So yes, Kudos to all our flight crews.
Welcome Guest!
Planes are getting scary with all the close calls
- Thread starter sinclair1
- Start date
Those struts, shock absorbers are huge. It has 18 wheels head high tall to absorb the shock as well. I can only remember one “firm” landing in the 747. This retired Navy guy talked crap about his flying skills all the way from Taipei over to Bangkok. The Captain gave him the landing on that leg. He never got stable and the Captain let him go too far. We touched down firm. The light lens in the roof of the cockpit popped out, fell and broke. There’s inertia reels that are used to evacuate the plane out an hatch in top if all else fails. Their in a rack on the right side of the cockpit. Those popped out of their stowage and fell to the floor. We told maintenance what happened. They inspected the plane, no damage, no tires changed. This guy was getting his operational experience. He got off in Bangkok and I was happy to see him gone. The Captain wrote up his lack of skills.
Be interesting to see any further reports on this. Watching the videos again you can see the wings rocking some on low approach like possibly winds. Then the first hard touchdown followed by another bounce but apparently the plane was already under power for another takeoff by that time.
I don’t mean to downplay the concern either, most accidents happen on landing.
pjciii
Senior Member
Thats because landing is mandatory. Takeoff is optional.
sinclair1
Senior Member
I guess I am a bit of a perfectionist. The ground being 5 ft closer does concern me. What happens if it was 7 ft? A blow out maybe?
What about 10 ft? Compromised landing gear?
How about 15 ft? Thats probably a ball of fire on the runway.
What about 10 ft? Compromised landing gear?
How about 15 ft? Thats probably a ball of fire on the runway.
The airplane is hundreds of thousands of lbs lighter at landing than takeoff. It burned off fuel enroute to leave only min fuel plus enough to get to an alternate. In my 40 plus years in aviation I can think of very few hard landings that led to any significant damage. More an embarrassed crew.
In my trade we always chuckle at this analogy. The pilot performs his trade in the public eye, often is ridiculed for his salary. If he makes a mistake hundreds can die. The surgeon practices his trade behind closed doors, few complain about his income. If his hand slips only one may die.
DannyW
Senior Member
I don't complain about pilot salaries. Personally, I want the highest paid and most overqualified pilot in the front seat when I fly.
Pinching pennies is foolish at 35,000 feet.
pjciii
Senior Member
I don’t think you have thought thru all the options that are possible. I don't have a graph to show it but I would say most are human error vs mechanical.
sinclair1
Senior Member
I am not concerned with mechanical failure.
If your that concerned invest in your cause. Go get trained, buy your own plane. Then you’re assured your pilot meets your standards, which are obviously higher than the regulators.
sinclair1
Senior Member
No need, I will take the risk currently, but will continue to watch as the workforce switches to a diversity focus.
To your point some are on that band wagon more than others. The regulators are the worst of all.
This particular example is a foreign carrier who is renowned for their quality.
