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.

mayotom

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.

have you not read the thread, its clearly explained that this is normal and can be for many reasons, I have been on hundreds of flights maybe 20% Ryanair and have no complaints, most of the rough landings and go arounds have been with the big name airlines, flag carriers of Britain, France, germany, spain.......

Preset No.3

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.

Take another airline and pay a few hundred euro to land quietly and maybe go around. I suppose you want a newspaper too and a meal?

FR make money when their aircraft are in the air, thats how you get cheap flights. The aircraft is down, and your on your way. After you have gotten home, FR crew probably have to do another 3 or 4 flights.

Cessna_Pilot

I fly FR very often and have never witnessed or experienced anything bad about the landings, nor anything else untoward.

At the end of the day no matter what people say no Pilot, whether Ryanair, BA or EI is going to stick a plane on the ground if the required conditions are not met, he will go around and try again.

Armchair pilots eh:eek::rolleyes:

CaptainSkidmark

*Kol* wrote: »

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.

well i dont mean exactly the last 2 meters but the end of the wing if that makes sense?

I was after a few drinks when i wrote that. im not the best at explaining it but erm.....


Anyone see richard hammond's engineering connections about the A380? it explains the winglets fully there! its really informative and something to impress the friends with haha

rugbyman

hello.
have flown over 40 times in last twelve months, 70 % ryanair., and many more times in five years.

have not always noticed it ,but the Ryanair hard landing is a definite feature.
Aer lingus by comparison is a bit more gentle, but both my easyjet flights landed like cotton wool. (airbus, any connection?)

On another point we flew Girona Dublin last night, As we stood on the tarmac (for quite a bit longer than needed, by the way), because our flight was delayed I was in the position of being able to see eight Ryanair planes on the ground in one airport. Only for five mins,mind, as the eight took off minutes after another landed. A ninth landed some minutes later.


I recently read that Ryanair took delivery of its 200 th Boeing. How many are currently in the fleet.

Regards ,Rugbyman

FlutterinBantam

I think Gerona is one of their Spanish hubs.

occasionalflyer

Stevek101 wrote: »

Either way it isn't true.

Not sure to which post you refer, if its mine do you have any other suggestions?

Stevek101

Hard landings happen, it is all weather depending. Being a frequent flyer myself I've just noticed that during the winter and spring months you do have hard landing but clearly that is all due to the weather. This happens regardless of what airline you are flying...

The only other possibly I can think of is that the 737-800 apparently does land harder than a A320.

bladeruner

Stevek101 wrote: »

The only other possibly I can think of is that the 737-800 apparently does land harder than a A320.

i think it does , i reckon the airbus lands nicer.


edited to say , anyone can float it on and grease it but i still think the 320 has softer touch down , this could be related to any number of things , spoiler deployment , oleo extension , etc etc, lets just say they longer legs make the difference

lord lucan

Cessna_Pilot wrote: »

I fly FR very often and have never witnessed or experienced anything bad about the landings, nor anything else untoward.

At the end of the day no matter what people say no Pilot, whether Ryanair, BA or EI is going to stick a plane on the ground if the required conditions are not met, he will go around and try again.

Armchair pilots eh:eek::rolleyes:

Gotta agree. I've had as many 'harsh' landings with EI & BA as i've had with FR. The only continuously smooth landings i've experienced are on trans-atlantic flights(mainly 757/777's).

occasionalflyer

Preset No.3 wrote: »

Take another airline and pay a few hundred euro to land quietly and maybe go around. I suppose you want a newspaper too and a meal?

FR make money when their aircraft are in the air, thats how you get cheap flights. The aircraft is down, and your on your way. After you have gotten home, FR crew probably have to do another 3 or 4 flights.

I posted the thread because I was curious, not because I was looking for a silly response like this one!

Kevster

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,

It's very interesting that you mention this because when I flew into Leeds/Bradford last week, I was sure that the airplane hit the runway at 'too' fast a speed. The wheels certainly touched down with the heaviest bump that I've ever experienced on a flight, and - just based on the way that I was pushed around in my seat - I knew that it was going faster than usual. By the time it came to a slow 'taxiing' speed, there was only a small shred of runway left.

Kevin

Kevster

occasionalflyer wrote: »

Preset No.3. wrote:

Take another airline and pay a few hundred euro to land quietly and maybe go around. I suppose you want a newspaper too and a meal?

FR make money when their aircraft are in the air, thats how you get cheap flights. The aircraft is down, and your on your way. After you have gotten home, FR crew probably have to do another 3 or 4 flights.

I posted the thread because I was curious, not because I was looking for a silly response like this one!

Dude, this is boards.ie - You should always expect dumb/idiotic/irrelevant comments like this one from Preset No.3. It's just something that you'll have to get used too.

N2

Kevster

You hit the mail on the head!

pclancy

I think the point he was trying to get across was that you get what you pay for and Ryanair are low frills hence you get a hard landing-which is rubbish-any landing from any airline will vary from day to day and airport condition or even how tired the pilot flying is!!!! I bet if you went for a few flights in a day with a rostered crew you'd see how their landings vary during the day or at differernt airports and at different weights.

Im still of the frame of mind from my earlier point that the pilot is trained and paid to fly within the law and no airlines policy would make any pilot land unsafely. Its just not done. There's nothing unsafe or especially rushed about anyones landings and a low cost airlines crew have sat the same exams that any other airlines have done. Anyone not sitting in the cockpit isnt qualified to judge the speed of a landing its just impossible, a very good point was made earlier that 737-800s need to be planted more firmly down due to their length then A320s hence to someone sitting in the back it may feel firm/fast but it would never be dangerous....

I of course realise that GA aircraft are a different kettle of fish but my instructor has always praised firm bump landings more then total greasers as you always tend to use more runway length by floating the plane into the ground then touching down just before or at a stall.

occasionalflyer

N2 wrote: »

Kevster

You hit the mail on the head!

I have better things to do than involve myself with this sort of nonsense.:mad:

bladeruner

Kevster wrote: »

Hi,

It's very interesting that you mention this because when I flew into Leeds/Bradford last week, I was sure that the airplane hit the runway at 'too' fast a speed. The wheels certainly touched down with the heaviest bump that I've ever experienced on a flight, and - just based on the way that I was pushed around in my seat - I knew that it was going faster than usual. By the time it came to a slow 'taxiing' speed, there was only a small shred of runway left.

Kevin

Th speed of the aircraft through the air at touchdown has no relation to the "bump" on landing .
Flying faster then the bugged speeds does not mean a hard landing .

BTW Kev, if you look out the cockpit window when lined up on the runway at Leeds airport,you cant see the other end of the runway cos there a blumin great hill on the runway that would put some of the streets in San francisco to shame, so if you are landing down the hill , you better plant it or you will float all the ways down the runway

**Timbuk2**

Landing speed is not always proportional to the 'hardness' of a landing. I've been in very hard landings, where you have to check that everything hasn't fallen out of your pocket, but I've also been in very soft landings that you barely notice you've touched the ground. Some of the softest landings are the landings that are performed at higher speeds

As for turning off the runway at high speeds - this is done very commonly. Runways are often connected to high speed exits, which are exits off the runway that occur at slight angles, unlike the other exits which occur at right angles. They are often strategically placed where planes most commonly are at a speed to turn off (this speed depends on the airport as far as I know and it might be something like 35 knots - I'm open to correction).
Planes will often brake hard and turn off fast to get off on these exits, as the alternative is almost slowing to a stop further up the runway and turning off at a 90 degree angle

N2

Ok, my agreement with Kevster has to do with idiotic comments.
As a professional Pilot I find that some of the uninformed statements made by posters infuriating!

On a final approach the crew of any commercially operated aircraft will have a landing gate at which the aircraft must be stabilized, if not a go around must be initiated, if not it's tea and bickies in the the chief pilots office! At my company it's 500' in VMC and 1000' in IMC agl. The criteria for stabilization are
1. The aircraft is on the correct flight path.
2. Aircraft speed is not more than Vref +20 or less than Vref (I think this is where people are getting confused thinking that speed= a heavy landing, it tends to be the opposite as speed leads to a float which uses up runway, again possible tea and bickies as you watch a shinny new Boeing pulled out of the grass).
3. The aircraft is in the correct landing configuration, gear, flaps etc.
4. Sink rate no greater than 1000' fpm, unless briefed!
5. Power setting appropiate for the configuration.
6. All checklist complete.
7. Only small pitch/heading changes required.

The 7 above points are Boeing recommendations, I don't know about Airbus.

The "hard" landing is different, a firm landing may actually be briefed for as in Bristol, Leeds, Derry any short runway where conditions may be wet with strong X-winds, ie just put it in the touch down zone and stop it, as you gain more experience they become less firm with the same result.
As someone already said the 738 is quite difficult to land because you actually arrest it's rate of desent, rather than flare it, and also it's landing gear geomitry can be hard to judge, again it gets better with experience.
A high speed exit can be taken below 65 kts which may feel fast in the cabin, but most single runway airports require minimum runway occupancy time and indeed it's a point of airmanship for the guy behind you that you vacate early, nothing worse than waiting for a landing clearance at 100' as some lad takes his time on the runway, if you want to ATC poetry in motion go to Gatwick where their runway occupancy time begins with speed control 30 miles out.

I hope some of my above rant helps. I'm flying for 17 years now (I think) and sometimes it just boils down to "ah jayaus I planted that" we all do it!

eire2009

yea was on a flight dublin to eindhoven (month ago) and the landing was frightningly fast and the wheels felt like they were after being pushed into the aircraft after it ..

I wasnt sure we would stop the noise of the air breaks aswell ..

Cant be a normal ive never had one like it before..