Dont land like its the sim

Reply Subscribe

Page 3 of 7

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

07-07-2018 | 01:09 PM

#21

C130driver

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Jul 2016

Posts: 463

Likes: 0

Word on the street is that after the U2, the MD-11 / DC-10 are the hardest planes to land. Those skinny wings don’t give you much room for error.

07-07-2018 | 01:23 PM

#22

jdt30

Line Holder

Joined: Dec 2005

Posts: 985

Likes: 65

Quote:

Originally Posted by C130driver

Word on the street is that after the U2, the MD-11 / DC-10 are the hardest planes to land. Those skinny wings don’t give you much room for error.

The 67 isn’t hard to land. It’s just not the easiest to grease on.

07-07-2018 | 03:28 PM

#23

Airhoss

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 5,738

Likes: 5

From: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdt30

The 67 isn’t hard to land. It’s just not the easiest to grease on.

I got pretty good with it, but its definitely a different beast to land than the 757.

07-07-2018 | 06:31 PM

#24

FL370esq

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Jun 2015

Posts: 3,361

Likes: 58

Quote:

Originally Posted by joepilot

NOT on the 727.

Joe

There were three different techniques to landing the 727.............and none of them worked.

The B727....where we are all passengers during the last 3 feet.

07-07-2018 | 07:30 PM

#25

XHooker

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Mar 2008

Posts: 1,083

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by C130driver

Word on the street is that after the U2, the MD-11 / DC-10 are the hardest planes to land.

Never flew the DC-10, but I did wrench on it and I've never heard anyone say it was difficult to land, though I think FedEx has gone through a few on landing accidents. The MD-11, OTOH, I've heard is an absolute beast that demands your full attention, particularly in gusty winds. I'd like to hear a FedEx pilot's opinion. I think I heard it was related to the size of the horizontal stab.

07-07-2018 | 07:33 PM

#26

UAL T38 Phlyer

Moderate Moderator

Joined: Mar 2008

Posts: 5,681

Likes: 0

From: Curator at Static Display

Quote:

Originally Posted by FL370esq

There were three different techniques to landing the 727.............and none of them worked.

The B727....where we are all passengers during the last 3 feet.

Truth!! Had a Captain tell me "The day you think you have finally figured it out...is the day it will bite you in the a$$...." Thankfully, I never dropped the rubber-jungle.

Hoss, for me, just the opposite: I find the 767-300 is the easiest to land airliner I've ever flown, especially in a 5-kt crosswind. 757-200? Stick forces get too high in the flare. 757-300 a lot easier than the -200, but I haven't flown it (or the 767-400) in more than two years.

07-07-2018 | 07:38 PM

#27

XHooker

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Mar 2008

Posts: 1,083

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grumble

I know nothing about the 764, but landing with power is an almost sure fire way to bang the tail on the uberbuppy.

I think TK has gone overboard on this. The statistics say you're right, yet the two pilots I've flown with who said they were on 900ERs that banged the tails both landed power off. One hit hard and one was slow and when the spoilers extended on landing, the nose pitched up another three degrees. LSS, don't have power on, but don't chop the power and begin to flare at 20 feet or hesitate to add power with an in close sinker because TK scared the kaka out of you about landing power on.

07-07-2018 | 08:05 PM

#28

BMEP100

Banned

Joined: May 2014

Posts: 1,182

Likes: 0

From: Tom’s Whipping boy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airhoss

I’ve got a grand total of one landing in a 767-400. The 300 quite a few more. On a 300 you want to hold the power in until the bitter end. Either that or add a couple of kts to your target speed.

Oy ve. Pick up a copy of Stick and rudder. Pay attention to the part about angle of attack.

Btw, the brakes on the 763 are the worst I've seen since the DC-10 -10. Just another reason not to carry extra speed/ power.