Zoom Boeing 767 having a hard landing at Manchester airport

[MrBucko41]

Pilot must have had a wedding to go to.

[blaberplane]

INSANE crosswinds broo nice job on the pilot to even get the plane on the ground so all you guy just shut up and try doing that in the real world

[Simonj110]

WTF no reverse thrust !!!

[ollo1982]

@Simonj110 Oh my... There isnt a law that says a pilot HAVE to use reverse thrust... that is up to the pilots to decide if it is needed... if the conditions,and length of runway is ok,there isnt any need for it... saves fuel,and also saves engines...

[lukeperrin123456]

What's wrong with a bumpy landing anyway? They're more fun.

[elephant35e]

@lukeperrin123456 but they hurt ur back though

[daniektessa]

Niceeee

[Turkeysitar]

No reversers for noise abatement procedures. I live next to an airport and the loudest part of a 757 landing is after it touches down when the reversers are deployed.

[jjaus]

@Turkeysitar Why the hell do people buy houses near airports and complain about noise?

[Turkeysitar]

@jjaus them B*tches

[1996zeeshan]

that home may have been provided by goverment, work etc, they may not have had a choice

[TurbineProductionsX]

@Turkeysitar its not always to do with noise abundment, there are many factors to not deploying reverse thrust which isnt very common

[bajesus666]

@Turkeysitar no such thing as noise abatement AT the airport.

[ta666ak666]

There are three simple rules how to perform a perfect landing. Unfortunately, no one knows them.

[youngfart40]

All the people who are posting thier opinions on this landing don't really know what they are talking about. And I seriously doubt any of them have done a crosswind landing themselves. The bottom line is, only the pilot really knows what kind of wind situations he/she was dealing with. This plane was fishtailing seriously on final. To make a plane of this size and weight to do that, means that the winds were pretty intense. So get off you tube people, and leave the flying to the pros.

[TheTGGuy13]

@youngfart40 Well said. :)

[klyd971]

Guess!!!it's a trainee pilot for cessna

[ppvpz]

No reverses deployed..

[ppvpz]

Did you llok??No reverses opened...

[Shinykangaroo]

What a misspelling "Zoom" i am pretty sure it should have been "Boom"

[LorddGray]

Being able to walk away after a landing is certainly a positive, but I've seen people walk away from some horrible landings. I really think that remaining ambulatory is a piss-poor yard stick for a "good" landing. It's like saying that totaling your car but being able to walk away is doing a good job of parking it. It isn't.

[MultiImz]

pretty bad landing!!

[fthrcast]

Not a very good landing. I'd give the pilot 6 of 10. The plane wasn't straightened to the runway line , and you can see the fuse correct itself to straight when the front nosegear bounced left. The runway tread corrected his angle , while the main landing gear took a large amount of pressure. Being straight with the runway tread , and maintaining his last pullup would have made it a 7 or 8.

[midfielderlegend]

And I'm pleased to tell you on this occasion you have passed Mr Blunkett!

[joerox135]

*Ding* "Ladies and Gentlemen, this is your captain, we apologize for the horrid landing and we'll pay for the whip lash and back problems you may have obtained during our wonderful landing, and be careful opening the over head compartments, if they haven't already fallen off the hinges from the land, shift happens, hope you enjoyed the flight" *Ding*

[yehend]

Looks like he hit a bit of wind shear at the last moment. Around 20 feet plane seems to drop rapidly. Did he not deploy reverse thrust?

[DELTA757200]

must be a monday



[jesknow]

Too late on the flair!

[SerenityValleyVFR]

Good landing. Plane was able to taxi away from runway on its own power.

[emersonpla]

that`s the same controller that handled the thomson birdstrike!

[gemerekli]

god thanks that i was not in that plane

[paopaowellwell]

dude where come hard landing ?? i don't see anysign of danger

beside everyday busy airport like japan china us that very normal landing even i try before the airplan touchdown but the pilot pull up make this trip turn one big round in the air second successful landing :) otherwise i would talk to you here today

[addi138]

is it me or all the planes have a hard landing at manchester???

[MiniToasty1]

@addi138 nope they don't, I landed there, It wasn't bad :P

[mobilemonkey625]

the plane is fine.... but all the passengers just have a major concussion...lol

[jamie190595]

i have a vid of my landing... hopefully trying to do my solo on my 16th birthday!! :D

check it out!

[jacosborne14]

That is what I would call a Bad Landing. The sun was shining seemed to be Know wind which means no excuses. The nose gear smacks twice..... Very Bad.

[pimpninja1985]

@jacosborne14 No landing is bad if you walk away form it

[cerrutiboy]

there wasn't any ground effect that the pilot was expecting!!

[XosrovTheGreat]

as we know autopilot can land aircraft smoothly and safely, so why always pilots land manually even in good weather?.

[sirisobhakya]

@XosrovTheGreat No.

Autopilot only land the plane within vertical speed limit, which can be considered "hard" for many people. Moreover, autopilot, along with ground navigation aid, can also be wrong. If you want smooth landing, pilot is the best answer.

I even think the aircraft in this video landed with autopilot.

[FlyingGuySFO]

More then likely a former military pilot hose guys fly the airplane ONTO the runway. I will never forget my first landing with my instructor. I flew a 152 ONTO the runway. I had been flying FS fo a few years and could put it on a carrier with perfection. All that muscle memory just came back and I landed like I was aiming for the #1 wire. Thankfully those planes are built sturdy.

[hearts76100]

rookie at the controls

[eh777]

bounce landing

[iwantpk2]

POW right in the kisser!

[scorway]

zoom rip

[737westjet]

Could you please remain in your seat while captain kangaroo bounces us on over to the gate!!

[swing0589]

ouch

[iwantpk2]

You think this is bad?

WELLLLLLLLL FUCK YOUUUUUU!

[AmtrakSurfliner768]

Looks like a serious lack of lift. It's like he was flying with plenty of thrust and pitched at a good angle.

One hundred-

forty-

thirty-

twe--- KLUNK!

*Captain spills coffee all over his lap*

[superality]

that's what we call  bumpy

[xnoobSlay3rx]

zoom, fail

[hbcrazyman]

how embarrassing...

[ASENEBS281294]

Another woman pilot

[allibowthepilot]

@ASENEBS281294 i agree

[coltong400]

@ASENEBS281294 Haha thumbs up to you!

[fannypenis]

@ASENEBS281294 Should be in the kitchen

[xnoobSlay3rx]

@ASENEBS281294 loly loly 123

[backintack]

@ASENEBS281294 Patty Wagstaff is a woman and look where she is. sex doesnt mean shit

[alsayed30]

@ASENEBS281294 fuck u woman pilots are better than males -.- ps:im a male

[farooqmm1987]

@alsayed30 yh women are better at jobs because they have more patience. we should have more female pilots and police officers! :)

[Aviator1111]

I can hear the wind from the camera....... heavy crosswind...... forced landing with good result everyone alive.

[tbe555]

Landing was Hard ! due to pilot couldn arest vertical speed properly during flare ! the reason is good cross wind which removed all ground efect ! I think for good landin g in cross wind they should adjust Vref-10 at least ! and stras progressive flare earlie than they did !

[Guiseppe98]

@tbe555 i dont know what any of ur comment means but you made it sound good.

[Hawaiifive01]

If this were a hang glider I'd start yelling WHACK! at :09.

[derwolfistda]

It looks like the plane came in too fast !

And EMIRATEST/ mentioned it. no reverse thrust to spot !

But it slowed down quickly anyway.

[pikapoketpu]

That was obviously a crosswind, with moderate chop is what i'd say. Good landing for those conditions, like to see YOU do better.

[EmiratesT7]

without thrust-reverse?

[Dudeboy4000]

@EmiratesT7 Dont need it if your approach speed is slow enough, the runways long enough and you've theres hardly any traffic so the pilot can run the aircraft till the end of the runway

[EmiratesT7]

@Dudeboy4000 ok thanks for the info!

[Dudeboy4000]

@EmiratesT7 anything to help a fellow Aviation lover :)

[EmiratesT7]

@Dudeboy4000 haha nice.. :D

[AirbusFlightSim2010]

Bang!

[enigma800]

I felt their pain.

[ROBLOXROX007]

Pilot Hangover? XD

[childsca]

"This is your captain speaking, sorry for the rough landing, it seems we hit a bit of a windshear at the end of the runway there."

[MSR651]

that is weird no reverse landing wow a new addition for my aviation concepts. O_O

[gnarkillkicksass]

Sometimes you just don't need reverse thrust and there are heaps of cases were you wouldn't require it. Though having said that, there is nothing that annoys me more then getting a plane handed over with the brakes still cooking from the last guys.

[johninajet]

What aircraft do you fly?

[gnarkillkicksass]

Saab 340.

[johninajet]

lol - the Flight Simulator playing know-it-all pilots make me laugh.

RT won't be applied unless it's totally necessary. The aircraft may have had a defect which meant that it couldn't be used. There are many reasons why RT may not be applied.

[bigplaneboeing]

lol i know i play it but i dont go aound saying on vids "oh that isnt right"

[cptmarc]

nosewheel hit the rwy twice ... but nicely done anyway as its a crosswind landing

[Cagueiro]

OMFG...!!! Why are people so stupid and pretending to know everything about anything...shut the f**k upa...this is a NORMAL landing in crosswind...And stop chatting about piloting practices just b'cause you have a FS at your room, ok!!!

[geardown3greens]

and your a real pilot too? not very professional language used there. what a great example of the aviation world you are!

[vinayak678]

maybe its a crosswind

[applejuice1324]

that could have been a pilot in training, u never know and it wasn't too hard, there could have been more flare, that is all, very minimal wing flex, so it wasn't too hard!

[StormWild475]

@applejuice1324,That's true,as much as I watched this video,I never thought of that.

[applejuice1324]

@StormWild475 yah, cuz the landing gear can take even more than that

[FOA525]

No reverse was applied aswell.

[Floh]

Maybe for noise abadement.

[dylanfan93]

I think there were no Reverse thrust to save money.

[Mr3293]

A little slow there buddy.

[Mr3293]

Never going on that airline.

[killerjake9000]

You carn't go on that Airline no more because it's gone bankrupt. They bought so many things they did not need that they just spent all the money!

[wellend89]

gpws... one-hundred... fiftfourthirt*SHIT*ten SMACK

[jetairways773]

@wellend89 lol

[323tiim]

@wellend89 haha nice 1 m8 :))

[frequenceez]

straight to the chiropractor

[Ben123planes]

that would have sent peanuts everywhere...

[ad1131]

you can see that at 0:35, he landed so hard it knocked the two O's out of place!  yoikes!

[lotsoffun]

hahahahah i was looking all over the airplane for some part called 'O' until i realized you were talking about z0om, haha

[Mr3293]

lol

[AmtrakSurfliner768]

@ad1131 LOL

[bamsawa]

@ad1131 hehe lols like that..

[aceflyer89]

@ad1131 LMFAO!

[WWA2104]

Ouch!

[sherifbatawy]

i think he was a lil fast

[airman193]

i bet the GPWS was going ballistic

[concordskijr]

That would of woke up the passengers after a long flight!

[DRaG0NREdZ]

Wow, that pilot was in a hurry!

[yahul25]

Obviously, Its their compny policy.. ZOOOM. lol :)

[DRaG0NREdZ]

lol... looks so

[ReeceMac10]

wow realy hard landing.. but brillient aircraft

[gangstaland4]

Wow the wings look huge lol:s

[ronald73blue]

that was one magnificent hard landing! love that 767 shaking on the runway!

[pannekoek55]

Boom! airways...

[zyxelp600]

no wonder its called zoom

[funkysam123]

Shame they gone bust.

Hard landing though- almost as bad as Ryanair

[blueb0g]

yep.. it's company policy for Ryanair pilots to land hard.

[shane3455]

shame zoom anit flying anymore

[OnkelAchmet92]

puh...i dont wanna be on this flight....

pretty hard

[speedbird125]

shame zoom seized operations

[xtravadance]

it's not ZOOM it's BOOM!!! lol

[xmissynkarliix]

dat airline has gone bust now

[JackPoynor]

Thats the great thing about 6R at manchester, you can glide slowly off on the first taxyway.

[machfron]

Several wide bodied jets have lost both wings in hard landings.But those wings cut slots in the massive steel columns of the South Tower.The videos were fake.911 was an inside job.

[xmissynkarliix]

WTF has 9/11 got o do with zoom air

[jindivik321]

mach.....a tiny bullet will cut an inch hole clean through your body if it has enough speed behind it....what the fuck did you expect? the wings to bounce back off the building?.... dickhead

[machfron]

How fast was the fictitious "UA 175" going,cocksucker?

[Motocrosser14]

apparently fast enough to cut through the World Trade Center

[machfron]

The speed of 546 mph attributed to "UA 175" is impossible at 1000 ft and has never been demonstrated.

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron It's sertainly not impossible. Sure the aircraft would be going overspeed but but it wouldn't be under enough stress that it would be impossible.

[machfron]

@cheesemaster1000 The speed of 546 mph at 1000 feet impossible.Where are your calculations ?

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron ok I'll ask my dad, who's a pilot, and get back to you on this one.

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron Ok, my dad said that flying at 36,000 ft a 747 can make it up to 560 mph. He said that just because your at a lower altitude doesn't make it impossible. Now take the 767 into account, it could easily get to that kind of speed just by descending and having the throttles at a high power setting. My dad said it would need to get up to around 650 mph before things got so out of control things could come off the aircraft or it could crash.

[machfron]

@cheesemaster1000 Does your dad have a single documented instance of any airliner doing 546 mph at 1000 feet or lower ?

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron As I assume you won't accept American Airlines flight 77 as a reply I suggest you look at Egypt Air flight 990. Watch the beginning 3 minutes of the second part of the air crash investigation episode on it. Forget 546mph the Egypt air 767 got upto 734 mph (0.99 Mach). Now I admit the aircraft did crash but as the video shows it's not impossible.

[machfron]

@cheesemaster1000 The Pilots for 911 Truth have worked out the dynamic pressures and have concluded that "UA 175" was more stressed than EA 990.Remember EA 990 broke up in thinner air at 22000 ft.

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron Yes but EA 990 it was going at mach 0.99, which is more than equivilant to 546mph at 1000ft.

[machfron]

@cheesemaster1000 How did you work that out ?

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron oh jeez I can't be bothered to argue with you any more, I just don't see how you can say its a conspiracy when witnesses and TV cameras picked up the Jet hitting the tower.

[machfron]

@cheesemaster1000 The videos were obvious fakes.Watch 911 Taboo and September Clues.

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron Yes but EA 990 was going at mach 0.99, which is more than equivilant to 546mph at 1000ft.

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron and by the way I just watched this video "WTC MISSILE STRIKE 911: United Airlines Flight 175 Impossible Speed" you've probably already seen it, at the end it says how fast the jet was descending proving that it could have got up to 546 mph easily.

[redmilkcrate]

Well its all to do with bending moments and sheering forces. A plastic ruler travelling at speed sideways will tan your arse good and proper. But if you bend the 2 ends together it will snap. Aircraft wings are very similar. It's basic physics.

[machfron]

Why don't you work out those bending moments at the wing root ?The wings of the bomber that hit the ESB sheared off.

[redmilkcrate]

Okay i will. It'll take me a while. I need to research the specifications of the aircraft. You could probably look it up in a table that may have been produced by Boeing - so that would be easier. the thing is these things can and are calculated. I'll also try to find the shearing forces for the wings travelling horizontally. It might take me a week to find the time to do it and then actually do it. I'll get back to you when it's done.

[machfron]

OK.I'll wait.Incidentally I have determined the fuselage would have crumpled at 127 tonnes.And that each column would take about 25 tons before plastic deformation.

[redmilkcrate]

That's interesting - so the fusalage did indeed crumble because of course the forces would have been lot greater than that when they hit the towers. Also the plastic deformation would have occured if all it takes is 25 tons to cause it. There is no doubt that 2 planes were flown at the world trade centre. The is a chance that it could have been US airforce pilots flying the planes. But that's for an other discussion with somebdy else. I'll post my calculations when they're done.

[machfron]

We didn't see the fuselage buckle.Therefore the videos are fake.Therefore 9/11 was an inside job.

[redmilkcrate]

I'm not so sure - at that kind of speed and momentum would the fuselage buckle quite so simply or would it ust penetrate the building in the way that it did. The whole thing is erie. Personally I don't doubt what happened - but wouldn't like to say who orchastrated the whole thing.

[redmilkcrate]

I'm going to see a friend in a couple of weeks who's interested in hammering out some of the calculations discussed above. But i work away and am only home for the weekend so it will be another 2 weeks.

[machfron]

OK.The dimensions of 767 wings are available on the net.Thickness is 1 to 2 mm.Two spars if I recall.

[redmilkcrate]

I think the formula to use would be:

T=2 (U.G) 1/2 -------  V

T is the impact shear.

U is change in kinetic energy.

G is shear modulus.

V is the volume of the beam (wing).

These are figures that I'm going to have a quick scout round the internet to find about the 767, and have a play with.

I'll get round to working it out. It's not kind of the priority at the moment.

[redmilkcrate]

Now the formula didn't come out very well after posting.

T = 2 x (U x G all over V) to the power of half.

[machfron]

Ok.I'm still waiting.

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron OMFG! Answer me this. "Why the hell would the US Government want to kill 3000 innocent civilians and lose billions in lost revinues?"

[machfron]

@cheesemaster1000 To start endless wars for oil and military industrial complex profits,obviously.

[cheesemaster1000]

@machfron Are all australians as wacky as you?

[swpilot2494]

ZOOM Air: My Ass hurts after landing....

[WitchOvAgnesi]

Big deal. I've been on FAR worse landings than that.

[iranair777]

love how the plane bounced

[777airlinepilot]

jeez that wasnt one of the best landings!

[89liam146]

because they landed on 05r the runway exit point is approximately 1.3miles down the runway so they dont use reverse thrusters as there is no need to slow down fast if they did use reverse then they would have to taxi to the nearest exit point. does that make sense?

[rorymarsh]

Zoom has since gone into administration.. maybe the fast landing was to save some money on fuel! haha!

[LufthansaDAIGO]

No reverse...?!

[AirbusBoeing2008]

Reverse isn't always used I recentley flew EGCC-KSFB and KSFB-EGCC on a B763 reverse was not used on either leg.

[brydon189]

I saw something similar at KATL. ATC comes on and says "A little fast there Delta?" Then their FO came on and said "Yeah, sorry about that, the captain just did an overnight in Mexico and the food has reached the end of it's trip."

[wardy92]

Approach was way too fast for a 767

[KINGDANIEL0000]

what do ya expect from an airline called Zoom! lol j/m

[swatjosh0745]

haha true its not ba

[blaz346]

what happened to reverse?