QF A380 and the RAAF roulettes

[serfty]

... I’m guessing he must have helped with delivery of an A380, as I can’t imagine he’d have got away with it on a commercial flight, though wouldn’t that be great to hear over the intercom as you sit down…

I believe JT is actually "A QF pilot"; at the very least he may be certified to handle the controls of a QF aircraft under the watchful eye of a QF 388 certified pilot.

 

[markis10]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

Out of interest has anyone here spoken to anyone who flies the A380. I wonder how they would handle ?

Some input here on the differences with a 747 re reliability :

http://www.frequentflyer.com.au/com.../another-a380-problem-22043-5.html#post306749

 

[tuppaware]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

Know where you are coming from, I saw it at the SIN air show and have to agree it does look slow, big aircraft can be deceiving.

I tell you that it wasn't deceiving when the Singapore Airlines Pilot slammed it down on the runway on my last A380 to LHR! Thought he was landing on an aircraft carrier .

Some input here on the differences with a 747 re reliability :

http://www.frequentflyer.com.au/com.../another-a380-problem-22043-5.html#post306749

I guess Airbus planes dont have that 'feedback' 'how she handles' response that you'd from an older Boeing or DC/MD planes.

 

[samh004]

I believe JT is actually "A QF pilot"; at the very least he may be certified to handle the controls of a QF aircraft under the watchful eye of a QF 388 certified pilot.

Everyone can exaggerate, but his profile has this to say:

About jb747
Location: Melbourne
Interests: Photography, shooting, cars
Occupation: A380 Captain

 

[straitman]

Everyone can exaggerate, but his profile has this to say:

About jb747
Location: Melbourne
Interests: Photography, shooting, cars
Occupation: A380 Captain

Sam,

The reference to JT by serfty was about John Travolta not jb747.

 

[samh004]

Sam,

The reference to JT by serfty was about John Travolta not jb747.

Ahaha, that’ll teach me not to post so quickly, or post while watching TV, getting confused between JT and JB

 

[jb747]

John Travolta did the entire QF 744 FO sim course a few years back. I don't think that he ever flew any of the aircraft. As far as I know he has no training on the 380. I don't know the legalities of him having a 'go', but suspect he would have been quite legal on any non RPT operation, with the appropriate training people present (and perhaps a bit of paperwork).

 

[markis10]

John Travolta did the entire QF 744 FO sim course a few years back..

The one where they teach the FO to make a decent cup of tea, hang on, you said QF, I was thinking bird seed (BA)

 

[jb747]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

Out of interest has anyone here spoken to anyone who flies the A380. I wonder how they would handle ?

Handle. In what sense?

The joystick is extremely light, and the controls are, if anything, quite twitchy.

 

[jb747]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

I tell you that it wasn't deceiving when the Singapore Airlines Pilot slammed it down on the runway on my last A380 to LHR! Thought he was landing on an aircraft carrier.

A carrier landing would break the average airliner. 700 fpm, with no flare whatsoever. Even when we misjudge it, and plant the aircraft, it would be extremely rare to exceed 300 fpm.

Without any knowledge of the landing you mention in London, it's worth noting that a smooth landing isn't necessarily what the pilots are looking for. Right speed, right spot, with no residual drift, and an acceptable rate of descent, is just fine.

Chasing 'smooth' on a wet runway, or in a crosswind, or just trying to finesse it for too long, leaves you at risk of aquaplaning, drifting towards the edge (or a pod scrape or both), or a tailscrape...none of which are all that desirable.

I guess Airbus planes dont have that 'feedback' 'how she handles' response that you'd from an older Boeing or DC/MD planes.

There are a number of issues there. I'm slowly working it out, and my landings are mostly quite decent now, but it's not particularly intuitive. Biggest problem is that of overcontrolling, so after any input it's always best to actually let go of the controls...and that does not come readily. In the Boeing you could stir the pot like mad as you crossed the fence, and not much would happen. Stirring the pot in the AB is bad.

 

[Craigie]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

A carrier landing would break the average airliner. 700 fpm, with no flare whatsoever. Even when we misjudge it, and plant the aircraft, it would be extremely rare to exceed 300 fpm..

...

First up can i just say i've loved every one of your posts, great to have a current captain around!!!

Couple of questions i've always wanted to know..

1) How hard can you hit the deck in these airliners? Obviously the undercarraige must be rated fairly high, but sometimes when touching down hard i tense up worrying about the poor wheels!!

2) Lets say you got a 25-30+ knot crosswind (don't know how often that happens).. is there much crab angle coming into the runway, and is it hard to pull such a large aircraft straight when you're landing?

3) Do you have a "feel" for when to flare? Reason i ask is that you're so far from the back wheels, it might be hard to judge? I'm guessing..

oh and whats risidual drift?

Ok enough from me haha

 

[tuppaware]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

A carrier landing would break the average airliner. 700 fpm, with no flare whatsoever. Even when we misjudge it, and plant the aircraft, it would be extremely rare to exceed 300 fpm.

Without any knowledge of the landing you mention in London, it's worth noting that a smooth landing isn't necessarily what the pilots are looking for. Right speed, right spot, with no residual drift, and an acceptable rate of descent, is just fine.

We landed on a wet runway, it was very smooth until close to the runway - then we hit quite hard. Nothing major - but unexpected. All other trips I haven't felt it.

Correct my understanding but doesn't AB's automatically decrease pitch near landing ?

 

[jb747]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

1) How hard can you hit the deck in these airliners? Obviously the undercarraige must be rated fairly high, but sometimes when touching down hard i tense up worrying about the poor wheels!!

I think it's fair to say that it will take a lot more than you might imagine. There are g sensors that record the impact (at numerous points). You'd need to exceed around 1.8g before the engineers would need to look at anything. Most landings are probably around 1.2g, and very firm ones, around 1.4g. Roughly.

2) Lets say you got a 25-30+ knot crosswind (don't know how often that happens).. is there much crab angle coming into the runway, and is it hard to pull such a large aircraft straight when you're landing?

You can work out the crab angle pretty easily. Divide the crosswind by your ground speed in nautical miles per minute. So, a 30 knot crosswind, and a g/s of 140 knots (2.33 nm/min) gives just under 13° of drift.

The aircraft have a lot of rudder power, so it's easy enough to point it down the runway. But, you have to make a couple of things coincide. You don't want to remove the drift too soon, as the aircraft may well be pointed down the runway, but it will immediately start drifting towards the runway edge. On smaller aircraft, you can drop the upwind wing slightly, to counter that effect. But, you can't do that in the big stuff. So, basically, you have to reach the point at which it's pointed down the runway, exactly as the flare ends, and you touch down.

On the Boeings, they make that a lot easier, by allowing you to land with ALL of the drift still intact. You don't have to push it straight at all. In practice, in light winds most people do, but on wet runways it's much better to land with all of the drift still there. Generally I used to work on the theory that if I got bored in the flare, and had nothing better to do, I'd start to squeeze the rudder in. I didn't really care how much of the drift I removed though. The aircraft (767 and 747) didn't present any problems straightening themselves after touchdown.

Airbus have a 5° limit for the amount of drift that is allowed to be present at touchdown, so you do have to go to a lot more trouble to get rid of that drift. Flare too high, or squeeze straight too soon, or too fast, and you can give yourself some issues.

3) Do you have a "feel" for when to flare? Reason i ask is that you're so far from the back wheels, it might be hard to judge? I'm guessing..

You learn to judge where the wheels are. Actually, you just try to get your eyes to the same point, and it takes care of itself from there. Initially, you tend to rely on the rad alt callouts, but you soon learn the picture.

 

[jb747]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

We landed on a wet runway, it was very smooth until close to the runway - then we hit quite hard. Nothing major - but unexpected. All other trips I haven't felt it.

Realistically, your version of hard, and mine, could well be two very different things.

I remember standing at the front door of a 767 as the passengers were disembarking, after a pretty solid arrival into Brisbane. One lady had a real go at me as she walked past, 'cos it wasn't a smooth landing. Given that it was gusting to 55 knots, with up to 38 knots of crosswind, I was pleased to have simply hit the runway and remained upon it.....

Correct my understanding but doesn't AB's automatically decrease pitch near landing ?

Gawd, I hope not. Why would it do that?

 

[Craigie]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

Wow yea thats awesome, thanks for the reply! Correct me if i'm wrong but it sounds like the principles are generally very much the same as small aircraft, down to the last second adjustments even though your flying a giant aircraft...?

Just quickly, was there many go-arounds when the 380's came into general use as the pilots got used to them?


Oh and this was my favourite line..

...Generally I used to work on the theory that if I got bored in the flare, and had nothing better to do, I'd start to squeeze the rudder in.

So casual

 

[samh004]

Have certainly enjoyed reading the last few posts in this thread

 

[serfty]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

...

Airbus have a 5° limit for the amount of drift that is allowed to be present at touchdown, so you do have to go to a lot more trouble to get rid of that drift. Flare too high, or squeeze straight too soon, or too fast, and you can give yourself some issues.

You learn to judge where the wheels are. Actually, you just try to get your eyes to the same point, and it takes care of itself from there. Initially, you tend to rely on the rad alt callouts, but you soon learn the picture.

I experienced a 388 landing into MEL a bit over a year ago watching TailCam:

A380 really is THAT good!!!! - FlyerTalk Forums

Actually, watching the tail cam as it approached, I noted the aircraft had a slight yaw to the left. This indicated a westerly breeze as we were landing on 34.

The breeze must have eased a tad as the aircraft started to drift off centre to the left, so the aircraft was straightened and began to drift to the right, eventually going past the centre and a bit more. So a bit of nosing back to the left and the aircraft lazily began to head back towards center, then straightening up over the runway as it reached the centre line in perfect alignment for touchdown.

SkyCam - fascinating!

 

[jb747]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

Correct me if i'm wrong but it sounds like the principles are generally very much the same as small aircraft, down to the last second adjustments even though your flying a giant aircraft...?

Basic principles are exactly the same.

Just quickly, was there many go-arounds when the 380's came into general use as the pilots got used to them?

Go-arounds from screwing up the approach? Doubt it.

You spend a lot of time in the simulator before you get to the aircraft. It isn't an aircraft to fly circuits in. You set up a long stable approach, and leave it at that.

 

[tuppaware]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

Gawd, I hope not. Why would it do that?

Thanks for all your information for us wannabe pilots.

I was googling airbus flight control laws -
Airbus Flight Control Laws

Could be a load of bullshít but it did mention something about a Flare Mode to force the pilot to flare the plane.

 

[jb747]

Re: A380 Aerial shots

Thanks for all your information for us wannabe pilots.

I was googling airbus flight control laws -
Airbus Flight Control Laws

Could be a load of bullshít but it did mention something about a Flare Mode to force the pilot to flare the plane.

Is that what it does?

This is a quote from the site you referenced:
System memorizes pitch attitude at 50' and begins to progressively reduce pitch, forcing pilot to flare the aircraft

This is a quote from the A380 flight manual:
Flare and derotation law
The objective of the flare law is to:
-Provide a conventional aircraft behaviour during the flare
-Allow a precise control of the vertical speed and touchdown point
-Provide a smooth derotation and avoid a hard nosewheel touchdown.

The flare law is a DIRECT LAW without autotrim, with some damping provided by load factor and pitch rate feedback.
The flare law provides FULL elevator authority
The flare law is active below 100 feet.

The upshot of that is that flare law means that the aircraft stops being 'smart' and gives the pilot back full authority in pitch, with no further computer games. The exact opposite of what the quote you referenced says.

In simple terms, when flare mode engages, it basically throws it all back in your lap.