Fast landings

landmonster

Apologies if there's a thread for this but the search won't work for me.

Flew back into Dublin from Spain with Ryanair this week and we must have hit the runway in Dublin faster than any other time I've landed anywhere. I was seriously concerned we wouldn't have enough room to stop but he jammed on the brakes and we probably had lots of room anyway.

Still, overheard someone else commenting that a lot of Ryanair flights land very fast.

Anyone else noticed it?

Sn@kebite

landmonster wrote:

Apologies if there's a thread for this but the search won't work for me.

Flew back into Dublin from Spain with Ryanair this week and we must have hit the runway in Dublin faster than any other time I've landed anywhere. I was seriously concerned we wouldn't have enough room to stop but he jammed on the brakes and we probably had lots of room anyway.

Still, overheard someone else commenting that a lot of Ryanair flights land very fast.

Anyone else noticed it?

Hi, landmonster!
The last time i was on a RA flight was back in 1998 going to and from Paris. I thought the landing in France was fine but when we came back to Dublin the landing was fine (speed wise) a but there was alot of hard-braking.

civdef

If you walk away from it, it's a good landing.

Sn@kebite

civdef wrote:

If you walk away from it, it's a good landing.

From a pilot's point-of-view anyway. Don't know if passengers would be as optimistic though:p

robinph

Most of their landings are fine, but there has been a couple of times where they have seemed to be going a touch fast when it came to turning off for the taxiways so that they didn't have to carry on up to the next exit which would eat into their turnaround time.

deman

Just had two RA flights in this last two weeks. Both times were unnoticeably fine.

oscarBravo

civdef wrote:

If you walk away from it, it's a good landing.

...and if you can use the plane again, it's a great landing.

jackofalltrades

civdef wrote:

If you walk away from it, it's a good landing.

Seconded.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

The plane could have been caught by a gust of wind or anything. It's happened to me before on a non-Ryanair flight when from about 20m above the ground, the plane dropped much faster than one would expect and hit the ground with a bit of a jolt.

jellybean520

I've been on a RA flight where it was about to touch the tarmac but instead nailed the throttle again and took off back up in the air. I have friends who have had similar experiences with RA. This could be a result of coming in too fast so they have to go back up and try again?!

Timing is everything with RA, just so long as they don't compromise on safety.

el tel

The reason there are firm landings at the end of Ryanair flights is that they don't piss about trying to grease the aircraft down and risk landing half way down the runway when they could otherwise exit earlier and get to the gate more quickly. Any pilot can do a smooth landing onto a nice long runway, landing a good way down and then take their time about exiting and taxiing back. Ryanair flights don't have this time luxury, they get it down on the spot and go for the first sensible exit, which will involve a reasonable amount of braking (they use brakes rather than lots of thrust reverse, which burns a lot of fuel). Also, the 737-800 flies like a hound with flap40 (max landing flap, to reduce the landing distance required), as it's stretched beyond the original design length and also can't be extravangantly flared, again due to the long tail, so you have to land it quite flat and hence often firmly if you don't want to scrape the tail and shorten both the aircraft and your career. Also the new 737-800 are slippery buggers compared to the old ones and so their pilots are reported to struggle somewhat with keeping the approach speed down. It has been said that as they are under corporate pressure to get down quickly, go-arounds are not favoured in general and so they go for the hard landing with mucho braking instead. Of course M O'Leary refutes this 'corporate pressure' arguement and has said that as the pilots are trained to fly these things they should be able to land correctly at the right speed. I can see both sides to this arguement myself.

There are other reasons to the fast hard landings - including the aircraft's crosswind landing characteristics, the ryanair landing SOP's and the very low underslung engines etc...

In short, it's nothing to be alarmed about - the planes can take it and Ryanair as as safe as any.

JSK 252

I thought the winglets had a lot to do with it.

Captain Chaos

JSK 252 wrote:

I thought the winglets had a lot to do with it.

The winglets reduce drag and in doing so increase fuel economy and thus the range of the airliner by 5-10% even though they add weight to the airframe.

JSK 252

I understand that but what I heard was that the winglets allowed the plane to descend faster and thus landing speed has to be compensated.

FlutterinBantam

Nope... winglets reduce the drag over the wings and channel the air flow from the leading edges to reduce drag and by that, fuel consumption.

Other than that they have no aerodynamic function.

pclancy

Interesting reading el tel, i didnt know those points about the 738s handling, have their been many tail strikes due to the long tail? I dont mean just ryanair, ive no worries with their safety, theyre just a very efficient corporate machine that works every drop from its planes and people!

On the subject of BA landing too fast, Go arounds are a part of normal life with every airline, if theres a problem with the approach, weathers too bad or for some reason landing clearance cant be got due to a plane or other obstruction on the runway they decide to fly a planned for route away from other traffic and back into the pattern for landing, its at all times safe. It does feel weird to land then have the throttles nailed and go round again!

JSK 252

FlutterinBantam wrote:

Nope... winglets reduce the drag over the wings and channel the air flow from the leading edges to reduce drag and by that, fuel consumption.

Other than that they have no aerodynamic function.

Yah but they do allow the plane to climb and descend faster.

FlutterinBantam

Ok.. never read any technichal data to say they did, but ,if you say so.

Who am I to disagree.

JSK 252

From reading about winglets for the past few weeks on the web I get the following feedback:

Winglets have the potential to give the following benefits:

Improved climb gradient. This will enable a higher RTOW from climb limited airports (hot, high or noise abatement) or obstacle limited runways.

Reduced climb thrust. A winglet equipped aircraft can typically take a 3% derate over the non-winglet equivalent aircraft. This can extend engine life and reduce maintenance costs.

Environmentally friendly. The derate, if taken, will reduce the noise footprint by 6.5% and NOx emissions by 5%. This could give savings on airport noise quotas or fines.

Reduced cruise thrust. Cruise fuel flow is reduced by up to 6% giving savings in fuel costs and increasing range.

Improved cruise performance. Winglets can allow aircraft to reach higher levels sooner.

Good looks. Winglets bring a modern look and feel to aircraft, and improve customers' perceptions of the airline.

FlutterinBantam

Good man... all of which confirms what I said.... winglets reduce drag.
You can get a higher RTOW if the drag co-efficient is reduced.

Put it like this... you are driving a truck witht a square rig!!!

big wind resistance=drag.. put a "hood" over the cab and funnel the air over the square bit. presto!! less drag=less fuel consumption.

Performance is enhanced and Bobs yer uncle.;)

FlutterinBantam

More bang for yer buck basically is the result:D

Captain Chaos

JSK 252 wrote:

Yah but they do allow the plane to climb and descend faster.

Climb yes, descend no. There is an airframe limit for how fast a plane can descend while in the glide slope without stalling and keeping negative Gs to a minimum. If it starts to decend too quickly, measured in fps the pilot will know about it as a warning alarm will go off in the cockpit alerting him/her of the situation.

JSK 252

Captain Chaos wrote:

Climb yes, descend no. There is an airframe limit for how fast a plane can descend while in the glide slope without stalling and keeping negative Gs to a minimum. If it starts to decend too quickly, measured in fps the pilot will know about it as a warning alarm will go off in the cockpit alerting him/her of the situation.

Yah, thats called the planes flight envelope. I never said anything about glide slope Im talking about initial descent say from 41,000 feet which is normal on a boeing 737-800 with winglets. Winglets which do reduce drag allow the plane to descend maybe 100 feet more per minute without the effects of stalling and negative G forces.

Thats what I have been told anyway.

occasionalflyer

I just flew back from Spain last week, Ryanair 737 landed extemely heavy and braked sharply. There was a gasp round the cabin - not nice. If they are going to these extremes to save time and money might make me think twice about using them again, even though the service isn't bad for the money.

Biro

occasionalflyer wrote: »

I just flew back from Spain last week, Ryanair 737 landed extemely heavy and braked sharply. There was a gasp round the cabin - not nice. If they are going to these extremes to save time and money might make me think twice about using them again, even though the service isn't bad for the money.

How do you conclude that they are related?

CaptainSkidmark

Captain Chaos wrote: »

The winglets reduce drag and in doing so increase fuel economy and thus the range of the airliner by 5-10% even though they add weight to the airframe.

the winglets allow the entire wing to create lift and dispense the wind vortex's at the top of the winglet rather then dispensing the vortex over the last 2 meter's or so of the wing or so thus loosing lift on the last 2 meter's or so

occasionalflyer

I was referring to previous posts, in which the connection between the two had been made by other subscribers. It just seems to 'fit'.

Stevek101

Either way it isn't true.

FlutterinBantam

CaptainSkidmark wrote: »

the winglets allow the entire wing to create lift and dispense the wind vortex's at the top of the winglet rather then dispensing the vortex over the last 2 meter's or so of the wing or so thus loosing lift on the last 2 meter's or so

Do you mean disperse?

Not meant to be pedantic, just interested.

That post is very informative, just making sure I have it right.

I can see sense in either word.

*Kol*

CaptainSkidmark wrote: »

the winglets allow the entire wing to create lift and dispense the wind vortex's at the top of the winglet rather then dispensing the vortex over the last 2 meter's or so of the wing or so thus loosing lift on the last 2 meter's or so

The "wing tip vortices" still leave the "wing tip" whether there are winglets installed or not (not the last two metres of the wing).

In the case where there are winglets fitted the vortices are much smaller.

pclancy

What seems to you as an occasional flyer might have been a hard/fast landing. If it wasnt safe you would have gone around, im sure the crew were happy considering they are professional pilots who have spent a long time learning how to do it and have probably already landed several times that day

Aircraft land at different speeds depending on their weight, outside air temp, runway length etc and decelerate again at different rates depending on many factors.

Contrary to popular belief you're taught to place the aircraft down firmly to avoid floating down the runway and greasers are by no means certain and never promised by any airline regardless of its cost model. IE low fares or high fares theyll all land the same way.