A321 Pilot Floats Too Long
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 янв 2024
- Get your aviation apparel today: theaviationcentral.com/
This is Weekly Dose of Aviation #272
Links to sources:
A321 Pilot Floats Too Long - • STORM PIA - Go Arounds...
A380 Go-around - • Aborted Landing Emirat...
Engine Failure - • ENGINE ISSUE EMERGENCY...
Invisible Runway - • Vietnam Airlines Boein...
Missing Winglet - • MISSING WINGLET - Geod...
I do not claim these clips as my own. All credit goes to the rightful owners. The clips are always used with permission from the owner. If your clip was featured and you want it taken down, send me an e-mail explaining the situation and we'll resolve it.
Want me to feature your video? Submit it here » forms.gle/d5EZHGwkMm9MPVJY9
⤵ SOCIALS:
Twitter » / officiallucaas
Instagram » / officiallucaas
Discord » / discord
TikTok » / lucaasyt
⤵ MUSIC:
Music is provided by Epidemic Sound » www.epidemicsound.com/referra...
Business inquiries? Reach me at » contact.lucaas@gmail.com 
Развлечения
That zero visibility one was awesome. Gotta love ILS and modern high tech instrumentation
makes me scared
From what I understand, ILS is still using the same WW2 era radio technology.
@@rockets4kids Autoland with ILS in 0 Vis is available in commercial aircraft from like at least 1960s
@@rzuffu IIRC the HS Trident was one of the first here.
only for runways with cat lll@@rzuffu
I know you have to trust in the instruments, but holy cow landing without seeing is terrifying as a non pilot.
auto land system was used
Surely that only gets you to touchdown?! What if you cant see the runway to track it safely?
@@garygrant9612Yes I think nutbuster knows that. He was just saying. And maybe busting a nut.
Some airports close when there is so much mist
@@jasonbw3581You can hear "Minimum" if at this point you don't see a runway you go around or divert, unless on autoland, and camera capture never shows true naked eye visibility.
That finnair was absolutely amazing! Even though he/she was dealing with high winds, they managed to land it the second time! Exceptional
2:08 Yo Who Else Checked Messenger 😂
those vortices coming from the engine pylons on that A380 are awesome
its really nice to get news and clips of aviation from you, love you vids
Great work lucaas, love your vids. Keep them coming!
These are quite intense and interesting!
The A330 "butter" machine legend continues...even with a winglet missing, in bad wind conditions, Geodis still managed a fairly smooth landing. On the Vietnam 787, I assume Cat III, minimums at 20, they would have touched down even on a go-around. I am not sure why they would not have just opted for the full Autoland in those conditions.
"Not sure why they would not have opted for the full autoland in those conditions"
Maybe they just wanted to hand fly it? If you SHOULD be able to hand fly the aircraft, part of being a good pilot and not becoming complacent is to constantly test your skills to make sure you can still do what you need to do, should the need arise. Flight in IMC to minimums is a good way to stay proficient both at flying the specific type of aircraft you are piloting and proficient at flight in IMC in general.
However, there are more reasons to want to hand fly it even in these challenging conditions:
Many pilots simply like tackling tasks that challenge their skills and knowledge. There's a good reason so many former fighter jet pilots become commercial pilots. They like flying, because flying is never easy, not even on autopilot.
@@44R0Ndin Agree...I have heard more than one commercial pilot say they don't like the Autoland because they can land much smoother when flying in by hand.
Do they not use the autoland? I am not seeing any hands on the yokes.
@@michaelkarnerfors9545 Agree, hard to tell about the hands on the yoke. I assumed it was not a Cat III-c full Autoland because they had a minimums callout at 20, the pilot called out "landing", and I don't think you would normally do this on full Autoland, but I could be wrong. There is a very specific procedure to be followed for Autoland, where the FO is PF down to the threshold, the captain has his hands on the throttles in case of a last second GA, and then the captain takes control of the plane as soon as they touch down, or something like that. It didn't appear they were following that procedure. It is more likely they were flying ILS Cat III-b which can have minimums down to 20. We don't know what their RVR was, but it was probably high enough where the captain decided they don't need the full Autoland.
@@kevindigo22Eh, we are not actually seeing the Captain's arm before touchdown. We do see the First Officer, holding his hands off, but we see almost nothing of the Captain until the wheels touch down. At 00:48-00:49, I see, when stepping frame by frame, something that I think in all likelyhood is his knuckles, on the throttle. And when we do see his right arm after touchdown, his hand is - indeed - on the throttle.
Watch again, are you sure they are deviating from procedure?
EDIT: Oh, never mind, just go to the source video, the captain is holding his hands on the throttle the whole time, for well over half a minute before minimums, letting go occasionally only for affirmative getures, but the hand instantly goes back to the throttle.
on the first one, just hearing the howling of the wind made me uncomfortable!
Nice upload Thank you
Love from Armenia
Amazing clips!
0:33😬. I couldn't imagine the reaction for those onboard that A321
Pucker factor.
How much does the Birmingham runway vary in altitude along its length? Looks like a couple meters.
Ah yes new week new vid ❤
Awesome ILS landing!
Let’s go! Another banger video 😅
Nice video
Got the 5 callout in the fog!! Nice!!!
Commercial pilots navigating blind in 3 dimensional space.
Train engineers: "A train needs a human operator on board!"
Man that finnair pilot did a good job. It sounds and looks like the conditions were too tough to land at that airport, so maybe they should've considered another airport for everyone's safety, but glad they got the job done. Just the way that plane was swinging side to side I'm sure the winds were tough.
It was a strong wind but it was not side wind. Almost direct head wind. Gusts of wind just made planes float more and that happened to Finnair during first try. Since the winds were high, ground speeds were quite low and that allowed some floating to happen and still have enough runway left.
They managed to land the second time
He didn’t float down the entire runway. Manchester’s runways are both amongst the longest in the country. A combination of ground effect and a huge head wind meant he floated beyond the touch down zone and therefore went around…
Thats a lot of wind in Manchester.
Beatiful
The a330 buttered 😊
That zero viability was crazyyyyy. Awesome pilots
You should look at the a380 go arounds at bhx
Terceira, Azores, also known as Lajes airfield, where Portuguese and American Air Forces are based. Good videos! ;)
0:42 This is probably why we will never have flying cars.... Imagine some dude flying work rearending an airliner due to this conditions.
You should feature the Video of a 747 landing on a 15 meter wide runway from a few years back
My chin dropped when I saw it last week
1:03 So they DO have minimums, after all )
The first one is litterally me in msfs when i've been flying the 747 for a long time and i switch to smaller planes
I hadn't seen one of your videos in a while. You didn't say "luckily everyone was okay."
It's always "Is everyone okay" But never "Is lucaas okay" ;)
What’s a good entry level option from your website? I don’t want to drop $100 to try out a gel blaster?
"Approaching Minimums"... "Fifty"... "Fourty"... "Thirty"... "Minimums"... "Ten"...
What I would not do to go back 50 years in time and play that to an airline pilot, just to see their reaction.
They had this 50 years ago. 🤷🏻♂️ So the reaction would be the same as today.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 Cat III landings started to be introduced in the 1970s, so I believe that in January 1974, very few pilots had done an autoland wth minimums called at 20 ft.
@@michaelkarnerfors9545 very few pilots have done it today. In my 31 years of flying, I’ve never done a CAT3. Heck, I’ve never even been qualified for it. Most guys I know, even the ones qualified, still have either never done it in real life or only done it a few times.
Having said that, I’m sure there are pilots who have done tons in their career, probably more based on the type of weather they regularly fly into.
I used to regularly fly CAT 2s into the London area. But I don’t fly there anymore and I haven’t had to do a cat 2 in years.
To be honest, the cargo aircraft with the missing winglet isn't such a huge deal as you might think.
The only effect that the winglets have on the aircraft is to weaken the primary vortex coming off of the wingtip, aka it reduces wake turbulence.
The energy for the wake turbulence has to come from somewhere, and it comes from the kinetic energy of the aircraft, so the winglets also increase aerodynamic efficiency, which saves operators money by reducing fuel burn.
However, you can offset the increased fuel burn of one or more missing winglets by loading more fuel, taking cargo and/or passengers out, or a combination of those two things.
So it doesn't surprise me to learn that the winglets aren't part of the MEL, or Minimum Equipment List, the things the aircraft MUST HAVE FUNCTIONAL in order to fly with passengers or cargo. If they're on the MEL, then this was a specially approved ferry flight to get it to a repair center, in which case it would have been carrying more than the usual amount of fuel, and no cargo or passengers.
There is more that I can deduce from just the information provided by seeing the aircraft landing with only one winglet:
The most obvious is that before this aircraft departed, it suffered winglet damage, likely on the ramp due to striking an airport vehicle or another aircraft (hopefully the former).
Additionally:
I can tell that they chose to not send a replacement winglet to the repair services that may or may not be available at whichever airport this aircraft was damaged at. So instead of moving the winglet, they moved the entire aircraft, after all technically the aircraft still flies.
There must be some form of repair service available where it was damaged, because what was left of the winglet looks to have been intentionally removed. This is a good idea, it prevents weakened parts of the remaining winglet from detaching in fight or during taxi and/or departure/landing. If that happened while the aircraft was still at or over an airport, that would create a FOD hazard. The aircraft's performance with only one winglet is also something they likely tested when designing the aircraft, so fully removing it brings the aircraft's performance back to a fully known state.
This airport it's landing at is probably a repair hub for that company, there would be no other reason for this aircraft to be landing at it with only one winglet.
Finally, if the winglet(s) are NOT on the MEL (meaning you can fly passengers/cargo with one missing), they would have exchanged this aircraft's cargo with items destined for this particular airport, if there were any such items at the location it took off from. Otherwise, the cargo would have been transferred to another aircraft and it would have flown with no cargo to this airport it is landing at. That's simply part of how these air freight companies maximize profit from these cargo aircraft, they do their best to ensure that no aircraft ever takes off with no cargo in it, otherwise you're paying for the aircraft to fly with nothing inside it that's making them money, which is extremely costly even if they're only paying for fuel burn.
Speaking of fuel burn, they almost certainly loaded more fuel on to this aircraft, even if they didn't have to take any cargo off of it. This is simply to compensate for the increased fuel burn caused by the missing winglet.
That is a long post
That’s not how an MEL works at all. You have it totally backwards.
Anything that’s not on the MEL cannot be inop or damaged or missing. So when you say that if the winglet is not on the MEL, it’s allowed to be missing is incorrect.
An MEL list will cover items that can be inoperative, broken or missing. For instance, if you have 3 radios and radios are not on the MEL, all 3 has to be working or you can’t go anywhere. But radios will be in the MEL and it will indicate with how many radios the airplane can still dispatch. (2 out of 3 for example).
With winglets they are on the MEL. It will indicate how many are allowed to be missing for dispatch. Most airplanes can have them both missing so it will say: 2 installed, 0 required for dispatch.
It will also tell the repair requirements. Usually an amount of flight days. Probably 10 days, but that’s a guess.
That this airplane is likely landing somewhere to be repaired as you said, is absolutely not a requirement. The airplane can probably fly for days on revenue flights without the need for an immediate repair.
The MEL will give instructions as to extra fuel burn to be expected etc.
Winglet probably got nicked as he was flying over Edgeley.
Whats with manchester first the a321 and then the a330
Manchester is my local airport i got a telescope video of it going over my house on the first attempt
The Aa380 pilot was manaced by the Shelbies…
Is Birmingham airport runway really curvy or some optical illusion!? The last clip.
Runways are allowed to have elevation changes. From the point of view of the camera it just looks a lot more than if you were to walk down it.
Three kilometer long runway and those are just 2-3 meter height differences. That is basically nothing and like said here, that is more of an optical illusion due to long distance and hard zoom.
It’s the bovril effect
@@RoyalMela Thank you.
What did those 787 guys set as minimums? That minimums call at 20ft doesn’t make any sense for either CATIIIB/A or CATII.
A category III B approach is a precision approach and landing with no decision height or a decision height lower than 50ft (15m) and a runway visual range less than 700ft (200m), but not less than 150ft (50m).
So yes, 20 feet could be the DH.
Second landing where u really trust your instruments.
did the 787 pilots land manually or with auto land
auto
Always great video brother from the imperial county California 👍👍🇺🇲
The Viernamese landing with no visibility below minimums at appx. 50 ft agl, no way & vector to another airport
They had the runway insight. Normal landing.
1:54 ETOPS FTW
What´s with Birmingham airport runway, it looks like a switchback, who the hell built and or authorized that?
Nice 👍
I put the day and the month
Finnair low pass :)...worth watching
Finnair 350 FO upgrades to captain on 321
Why do runways undulate? Shouldn’t they be as flat as possible?
Ideally, I suppose. Otherwise it probably doesn’t matter so much since the ground is the ground. Once the plane is on it, it’t on it.
@@inncogneato6341 But they undulate so dramatically at times. It almost seems like they were designed like that.
Still crazy to me how many clips make it into these videos that are clearly from Microsoft flight simulator
Which ones?
None of them are. 🙄
Vietnam airline pilots 🔥🔥🔥
"three thirty" or "three hundred and thirty" ?!?!?
So for all you airplane people,, how much does a missing winglet affect a plane’s handling/ aerodynamics?🤔
Bugger all.
Not much, winglets like this are used to prevent drag and partially lower the stall speed, they do not generate lift so it would not effect the flight handling
@@Henelingit does nothing to the stall speed.
It doesn’t affect handling. Only increases fuel burn a little bit.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 some winglets are purely in place to lower the stall speed, I had to do a paper on it. The ones that are primarily used are those found on the A320-232. They are more commonly known as ‘wingtip fences’
I can speak British even though I was born and live in the US
Sure this isn't a simulation?
Letsgoo, finnair TORILLE🇫🇮🇫🇮🇫🇮
Pilot: "Ahh, perfect cruise. This is an ekranoplan, right?"
Copilot: "No, it's an airliner."
Pilot: What? Shit, pull up! Pull up!"
Say what? Did you just say " Diverted to Terceira, a small remote island?" Azores and specially Terceira ain't remote, in fact that's an airbase that is used by all Nato countries, that happens to have a civilian side, furthermore it was extremely tactical during ww2 and to this day, some countries have wanted Azores (santa maria airspace), because moneeey.
Aside that, azores are cool, a lot of cows there, beware.
Cheers!
ja koht jossai iltalehes......
Niinpä
1:05 5
Really hate the robot voice!
Which one?
Turn your sound off.
There is no quality control with these jets it seems
What do you mean?
First
You are not first
Second
First comment
Use your real voice please.
Second
First