@jstrahan@drum1805: alright kiddes settle down now! Being a Chief Pilot based in the IAD, DCA, BWI region it is my job to settle arguments. jstrahan is correct. Most pilots do not log their time because they already have their certifs. Besides, at my company it is all computerized and is sent to mother. So before you go and start accusing people of being fake, do some research/studying and read up on your FARs, (the bible), especially § 61.51 Pilot logbooks. -Godspeed
Ignore yourself instead, your lack of faith doesn't change anything. In my opinion there's nothing wrong with the DC-10 MD-11 series as long as you know how to properly control the airplane during the landing phase. If you can learn how to land a Cessna 150 with 15 knots of crosswind, you can learn how to land an MD-11.
I can't believe how many people log in to YouTube and pretend to be something that they're not. Unclesara has not worked at the MCDonnell Douglas factory, and artagus21 likely has never flown a plane before. Just ignore them, guys.
Just curious. How does one prove in this discussion that you are what you say you are? I happen to be an airline pilot with USAF training and over 20,000 hours flying various aircraft. But, anybody else here has no reason to believe me. I am not sure I want to give detailed employment information along with my pilot certificate number. You'll just have to trust me. :)
@jstrahan2 Wow, you're even over here in this video's comments stirring up shit. You bored with your flying career or something? 20,000 hrs, and not one video of your expert flying skills. Go film yourself flying and post it, that way you won't spend so much time being a jerk off commenting on others videos.
Actually, it's more like 22,000, but I lost interest in logging my time long ago. Likewise, I have no interest in videography. Let others brag. Also, how is telling the truth being a jerk? I have reviewed my comments and I don't see how you can come to that conclusion. I try to post as if the person is with me, but I admit, sometimes certain comments set me off, especially when they accuse me of something of which I am not guilty.
@jstrahan2 Now I know you're full of shit, and a total fake. I know more pilots than you ever will, and ALL of them make damn sure they log every single minute they spend flying. A point of pride with all pilots (kinda like you started off by using), is logging as many hours as possible. It's also required if you're a licensed pilot. What if an incident happened, and you were near the area with possible useful info? You need to prove you were there somehow. And that you flew the plane.
I am not a fake. I work for an airline based in Miami. If you would send me a PM, I will arrange to meet you and show you my company ID and licenses. Most of the pilots I know do NOT log every single minute they spend flying. Logging is only necessary if you expect to want an additional rating. Since most of them already have all the ratings they expect, they tend to keep them on odd slips of paper, intending to put it in their log someday. You should see my file cabinet. (12 years of slips :)
As for "proof that you were there", the company keeps close tabs on your location and who was assigned to fly the plane. As for a Hobbs Meter, I haven't seen one of those since I got an airline job. Certainly the 737 I fly now does not have one. Neither does my previous aircraft: CRJ-700, EMB-145, Saab 340, and Beech 1900. You have at least demonstrated that you are not a commercial airline pilot or you would know all these things.
@jstrahan2 Planes use what's called "Hobbs Meters", (but you wouldn't know that since you're not actually a pilot) that's the little meter that tells how much time is on a plane (it's engine and airframe), that's how all maintenance is scheduled, it's important to have when selling or buying a plane. All of those hours have to be tracable. NTSB and FAA look for these when inspecting a plane or crash. Hope they don't find your little comment about not logging your time.
No JumpStarstation, I'm actually 47. I flew the DC-10 as FE, and the MD-11 as captain for 3 years and 100's of successful landings. I probably flew that same jet as both DC-10 and MD-10. I'm now a B757 captain.
What in my assessment of the accident makes you think I'm not qualified to speak about it? The pilot flying failed to maintain centerline, and attempted x-wind controls at a way too low altitude on a MD-10-10, but gave them up and landed on a crab.
Some serious design flaws with dc10/md11 . This was overcome in the market by making them cheap. My observation is that dc10 has killed more people than some designs that were put together with that purpose in the specification.
@seneca65r Having worked at the MD factory in Long Beach in assembly for 11 years I would love to hear how the design is flawed and 'overcome' by 'making them cheap'. Entertain me. Exactly, you are clueless and simply lying to strangers to get their attention.
I don't see what went wrong in this incident. It looked like a good landing and then the right gear collapsed further down the runway. From the looks of it the plane fell out from under them. I don't like the MD-11.
..Only a bad judgement about the flare!..To me the app technique seems OK, crosswind from the left, so we let the aircraft face to the win, put left wing little down,always maintainig the centreline, and prior to touchdown right foot and left wing a bit down, because the left wing has more lift than the right one, so we compensate with deflection to the left. Bad luck on final for these crew.
Interesting. I just read the NTSB report on this. Apparently the winds were within parameters. The NTSB faulted the first officer for not correctly compensating for the cross wind and landing hard, resulting in breaking the right main. It sounds like she just didn't handle the cross wind.
DC10s are heaps of crap to begin with. That's why 99.9999% of them are no longer in passenger service and are only used to haul cargo. While the landing may have been a touch hard, it was NOT that excessive being much less than 10ft/second. Any modern airliner would just brush that off while this turd broke up. To blame it on some woman is ridiculous and I've seen some damned good female pilots and some shockingly suck-ass male pilots.. Lay blame where it's due.
texNoz, I couldn't disagree more. I would say that "99.9999%" of McDonnell Douglas DC-10s are no longer in service with commercial airlines because of their age. With age comes cycles (trips, basically) and the more times an aircraft flies, the nearer it gets to the end of its working life, before eventually being scrapped. This is an aircraft that entered commercial service in 1971. That's almost 40 year old technology! How do you explain the lack of early 747s in commercial service nowadays?
How can you compare the DC-10 to the 747?? There's a VERY good reason they ripped the guts out of the MD DC-10 project. There are still a LOT of older 747s still in service hauling cargo.
So because I don't agree with you on a particular aircraft you denounce my knowledge of aviation without even knowing one thing about me other than my stance on this aircraft. I can tell one thing about you though.. You are a liberal hippy with NO debating skills.
Look at the history of the DC-10 and everyone will see it's one of the most plagued aircraft with it's sordid history. Keep watching and you'll see the AirCrapped corps, Scarebus right behind it. Already starting..
Scarebus? You just tipped your hand. Let me guess, you're probably about 15, have the big popup book of airplanes, and are a pro pilot...at flight simulator.
Kids that don't know jack about real world aviation should avoid posting comments on public forums and making themselves look stupid.
Well now, I would not say flying in flight sim is all bad. It does provide a base for general aviation knowledge. Once you actually study and start to try realistic flights you gain a bit of experience. I recently went up for a demo ride with a CFI and he said I did outstanding. I had difficulty maintaining a constant altitude in a turn (I climbed, which I guess is better than descend lol). He said the only real negative habit FS gave me was looking at instruments too much lol.
I agree that computer based flight simulators can be good learning tools, although as you found out, they can lead to bad (and quite dangerous) real world habbits.
My beef is that kids (who's only understanding of aviation comes from books and flight simulator) get on here and they think they really understand aviation enough to make childish comments like texNoz.
I agree completely. I will say though, as far as actually handling the aircraft, I found reality to be much smoother and even easier than flight sim (only a Cessna 172) It can develop bad habits, especially without using a control yoke AND rudder pedals. I have a stick and pedals, but I still managed to turn my yoke while taxiing lol. I used rudder and still made the turn, but it was a little embarrassing lol
I cant think of many planes that were introduced and were immediately problem free. Look at the P-51 for example. I personally think the DC-10 is a nice plane, looks cool for sure lol.
The DC-10 is a fuel hog compared to newer designs. Cargo operators don't mind much because 40 year old planes can be bought dirt cheap. The added fuel cost is a still cheaper than buying/leasing a newer, more fuel efficient plane.
Older aircraft required a 3 person flight crew. Switching to newer, 2 person cockpits meant that airlines didn't have to pay a Flight Engineer anymore.
747-100's are still around hauling boxes for the very same reasons.
It's called Break-A-Plane and you have 3 goes to crack-up a DC-10 with a <10 FPS decent rate on landing. You'd think the guy who just played this game was really good, but it's easy to do in a DC-10...
I don't want to come off as against women, but it's a sensitive subject since affirmative action allowed many women into cockpits of large airplanes when they have no business being there. There are some GREAT women pilots out there...but affirmative action lowered the standard and let many in that should not have gotten through (the government said "meet this quota or we will shut you down". Many men get turned away...but they had to let most affirmative action cases through.
1.The pilot-flying failed to correctly apply crosswind controls.
2. The pilot-monitoring (instructor) failed to either order a go-around or take control of the airplane.
3. I guess we're slowly finding out that the DC10/MD11 line of jets have weak knees and have to be pampered onto the runway (I fly those jets and believe me, I do)
@JumpStartation Actually 47. I flew the DC-10 as Flight Engineer, and the MD-11/MD-10 as captain for 3 years and hundreds of successful approaches and landings. I'm now a B757 captain.
What in my assessment of the accident makes you think I'm not qualified to speak about it? The pilot flying failed to maintain centerline, and attempted x-wind controls at a way too low altitude on a MD-10-10, but gave them up and landed on a crab.
This is a recreation of an earlier crash. Fedex has crashed two large airplanes on landing in the last few years. The pilot of this one was a woman who apparently could not keep the nose straight on touchdown.
It is common for airliners to crab; this means the nose of the aircraft is pointing AWAY from the runway INTO the wind. As the plane is ready to touchdown, the pilot will 'kick out' of the crab angle and use a side slip as described above.
It is no more safe or less safe for a large airplane to bank into the wind as a small plane.
Aerodynamically, the technique for crosswind landings is the same regardless of aircraft size. The pilot dips the upwind wing with AS MUCH CONTROL INPUT AS IS NECESSARY to compensate for side drift. Depending on the wind speed and direction, this may result in a substantial bank angle. Opposite rudder is used to keep the nose of the aircraft aligned with the runway.
No. Bank means a turn. You are in balance flying directly into the relative airflow. As this airflow has a cross wind component relative to the runway centerline it looks as if he "crabbing with the rudder".
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
what a stupid pilot!. basic flying 101 instruction teaches to bank the aircraft into the wind. the pilot was just crabbing with the rudder making the plane crossed up when it touched down- bill randall
First, a large heavy jet may not be safely banked into the wind as you would a cessna. Yes, you do want to keep the upwind wing from lifting by applying some upwind yoke.
Second: Crabbing as you call it is a technique that is used in Cessnas all the way to big jets. you don't use the rudder to crab...the plane is flown on final with no sideslip and merely appears crab when viewed from the ground.
Well, they did clear the active runway. You have to look for the good in everything.
oracle2world 6 months ago
What Flight Simulator?
5421william 7 months ago
pooorca puttana , happy dancing packages .
HtHoOoN 8 months ago
At least he got off the active.
oracle2world 9 months ago
@jstrahan @drum1805: alright kiddes settle down now! Being a Chief Pilot based in the IAD, DCA, BWI region it is my job to settle arguments. jstrahan is correct. Most pilots do not log their time because they already have their certifs. Besides, at my company it is all computerized and is sent to mother. So before you go and start accusing people of being fake, do some research/studying and read up on your FARs, (the bible), especially § 61.51 Pilot logbooks. -Godspeed
JDProductionsINC 9 months ago
Ignore yourself instead, your lack of faith doesn't change anything. In my opinion there's nothing wrong with the DC-10 MD-11 series as long as you know how to properly control the airplane during the landing phase. If you can learn how to land a Cessna 150 with 15 knots of crosswind, you can learn how to land an MD-11.
artagus21 10 months ago
I can't believe how many people log in to YouTube and pretend to be something that they're not. Unclesara has not worked at the MCDonnell Douglas factory, and artagus21 likely has never flown a plane before. Just ignore them, guys.
thatBMWkid 10 months ago
Just curious. How does one prove in this discussion that you are what you say you are? I happen to be an airline pilot with USAF training and over 20,000 hours flying various aircraft. But, anybody else here has no reason to believe me. I am not sure I want to give detailed employment information along with my pilot certificate number. You'll just have to trust me. :)
jstrahan2 9 months ago
@jstrahan2 Wow, you're even over here in this video's comments stirring up shit. You bored with your flying career or something? 20,000 hrs, and not one video of your expert flying skills. Go film yourself flying and post it, that way you won't spend so much time being a jerk off commenting on others videos.
drum1805 9 months ago
Actually, it's more like 22,000, but I lost interest in logging my time long ago. Likewise, I have no interest in videography. Let others brag. Also, how is telling the truth being a jerk? I have reviewed my comments and I don't see how you can come to that conclusion. I try to post as if the person is with me, but I admit, sometimes certain comments set me off, especially when they accuse me of something of which I am not guilty.
jstrahan2 9 months ago
@jstrahan2 Now I know you're full of shit, and a total fake. I know more pilots than you ever will, and ALL of them make damn sure they log every single minute they spend flying. A point of pride with all pilots (kinda like you started off by using), is logging as many hours as possible. It's also required if you're a licensed pilot. What if an incident happened, and you were near the area with possible useful info? You need to prove you were there somehow. And that you flew the plane.
drum1805 9 months ago
I am not a fake. I work for an airline based in Miami. If you would send me a PM, I will arrange to meet you and show you my company ID and licenses. Most of the pilots I know do NOT log every single minute they spend flying. Logging is only necessary if you expect to want an additional rating. Since most of them already have all the ratings they expect, they tend to keep them on odd slips of paper, intending to put it in their log someday. You should see my file cabinet. (12 years of slips :)
jstrahan2 9 months ago
As for "proof that you were there", the company keeps close tabs on your location and who was assigned to fly the plane. As for a Hobbs Meter, I haven't seen one of those since I got an airline job. Certainly the 737 I fly now does not have one. Neither does my previous aircraft: CRJ-700, EMB-145, Saab 340, and Beech 1900. You have at least demonstrated that you are not a commercial airline pilot or you would know all these things.
jstrahan2 9 months ago
@jstrahan2 Planes use what's called "Hobbs Meters", (but you wouldn't know that since you're not actually a pilot) that's the little meter that tells how much time is on a plane (it's engine and airframe), that's how all maintenance is scheduled, it's important to have when selling or buying a plane. All of those hours have to be tracable. NTSB and FAA look for these when inspecting a plane or crash. Hope they don't find your little comment about not logging your time.
drum1805 9 months ago
Ok professor, humor me and correct my grammar so I can learn from you.
artagus21 1 year ago
No JumpStarstation, I'm actually 47. I flew the DC-10 as FE, and the MD-11 as captain for 3 years and 100's of successful landings. I probably flew that same jet as both DC-10 and MD-10. I'm now a B757 captain.
What in my assessment of the accident makes you think I'm not qualified to speak about it? The pilot flying failed to maintain centerline, and attempted x-wind controls at a way too low altitude on a MD-10-10, but gave them up and landed on a crab.
What makes YOU an expert?
artagus21 1 year ago
@artagus21 For a pilot, you are clearly not very intelligent.
ihatemuckdjs 10 months ago
Was this the one with woman pilot, or not?
ejuoi 1 year ago
Some serious design flaws with dc10/md11 . This was overcome in the market by making them cheap. My observation is that dc10 has killed more people than some designs that were put together with that purpose in the specification.
seneca65r 1 year ago
@seneca65r Having worked at the MD factory in Long Beach in assembly for 11 years I would love to hear how the design is flawed and 'overcome' by 'making them cheap'. Entertain me. Exactly, you are clueless and simply lying to strangers to get their attention.
unclesara 1 year ago
@unclesara The design is not flawed. I flew the MD-11 for a couple of years. The comment above was said perfect.. requires a pampered landing.
mrgeeProductions 11 months ago
what happened to the bounces?
ILoadng 1 year ago
I don't see what went wrong in this incident. It looked like a good landing and then the right gear collapsed further down the runway. From the looks of it the plane fell out from under them. I don't like the MD-11.
JetMechMA 1 year ago
what is this websight name?
oniel4u1234 1 year ago
@oniel4u1234 websight? I can't believe people as dumb as you actually exist. You must be American...
ihatemuckdjs 10 months ago
That looks like an insane crosswind and an excellent crab.
TonkatrainHONKHONK 1 year ago
Is this flight simulator or another plane
simulator thingy?
jerrythedutchmapler 2 years ago
Its an animation created by the NTSB. It is not a flight simulator per say.
marick626 1 year ago
..Only a bad judgement about the flare!..To me the app technique seems OK, crosswind from the left, so we let the aircraft face to the win, put left wing little down,always maintainig the centreline, and prior to touchdown right foot and left wing a bit down, because the left wing has more lift than the right one, so we compensate with deflection to the left. Bad luck on final for these crew.
rasfcivil 2 years ago
Interesting. I just read the NTSB report on this. Apparently the winds were within parameters. The NTSB faulted the first officer for not correctly compensating for the cross wind and landing hard, resulting in breaking the right main. It sounds like she just didn't handle the cross wind.
RobertGary1 2 years ago
Holy crap! What was that, a 100 knot cross wind?
RobertGary1 2 years ago
@RobertGary1 shut the fuck up you retard
ihatemuckdjs 10 months ago
they didn't use the rudder that much
miked9372 2 years ago
DC10s are heaps of crap to begin with. That's why 99.9999% of them are no longer in passenger service and are only used to haul cargo. While the landing may have been a touch hard, it was NOT that excessive being much less than 10ft/second. Any modern airliner would just brush that off while this turd broke up. To blame it on some woman is ridiculous and I've seen some damned good female pilots and some shockingly suck-ass male pilots.. Lay blame where it's due.
texNoz 2 years ago
texNoz, I couldn't disagree more. I would say that "99.9999%" of McDonnell Douglas DC-10s are no longer in service with commercial airlines because of their age. With age comes cycles (trips, basically) and the more times an aircraft flies, the nearer it gets to the end of its working life, before eventually being scrapped. This is an aircraft that entered commercial service in 1971. That's almost 40 year old technology! How do you explain the lack of early 747s in commercial service nowadays?
mikey0118 2 years ago
How can you compare the DC-10 to the 747?? There's a VERY good reason they ripped the guts out of the MD DC-10 project. There are still a LOT of older 747s still in service hauling cargo.
texNoz 2 years ago
Judging from your comments here, you simply don't know very much about aviation.
AirplaneRider 2 years ago
So because I don't agree with you on a particular aircraft you denounce my knowledge of aviation without even knowing one thing about me other than my stance on this aircraft. I can tell one thing about you though.. You are a liberal hippy with NO debating skills.
Look at the history of the DC-10 and everyone will see it's one of the most plagued aircraft with it's sordid history. Keep watching and you'll see the AirCrapped corps, Scarebus right behind it. Already starting..
texNoz 2 years ago
Scarebus? You just tipped your hand. Let me guess, you're probably about 15, have the big popup book of airplanes, and are a pro pilot...at flight simulator.
Kids that don't know jack about real world aviation should avoid posting comments on public forums and making themselves look stupid.
AirplaneRider 2 years ago
Yup, you got me.... 15, stupid, busted.. I'm so ashamed..
texNoz 2 years ago
Well now, I would not say flying in flight sim is all bad. It does provide a base for general aviation knowledge. Once you actually study and start to try realistic flights you gain a bit of experience. I recently went up for a demo ride with a CFI and he said I did outstanding. I had difficulty maintaining a constant altitude in a turn (I climbed, which I guess is better than descend lol). He said the only real negative habit FS gave me was looking at instruments too much lol.
DerPilotMann 2 years ago
I agree that computer based flight simulators can be good learning tools, although as you found out, they can lead to bad (and quite dangerous) real world habbits.
My beef is that kids (who's only understanding of aviation comes from books and flight simulator) get on here and they think they really understand aviation enough to make childish comments like texNoz.
AirplaneRider 2 years ago
I agree completely. I will say though, as far as actually handling the aircraft, I found reality to be much smoother and even easier than flight sim (only a Cessna 172) It can develop bad habits, especially without using a control yoke AND rudder pedals. I have a stick and pedals, but I still managed to turn my yoke while taxiing lol. I used rudder and still made the turn, but it was a little embarrassing lol
DerPilotMann 2 years ago
I cant think of many planes that were introduced and were immediately problem free. Look at the P-51 for example. I personally think the DC-10 is a nice plane, looks cool for sure lol.
DerPilotMann 2 years ago
@mikey0118
To add to your reasons:
The DC-10 is a fuel hog compared to newer designs. Cargo operators don't mind much because 40 year old planes can be bought dirt cheap. The added fuel cost is a still cheaper than buying/leasing a newer, more fuel efficient plane.
Older aircraft required a 3 person flight crew. Switching to newer, 2 person cockpits meant that airlines didn't have to pay a Flight Engineer anymore.
747-100's are still around hauling boxes for the very same reasons.
hzzlrp10 8 months ago
what is the game
dricaboy12 2 years ago
its an ntsb plane crash investigation video, it shows wht the pilts were doing before the crash
Artaphernes 2 years ago
It's called Break-A-Plane and you have 3 goes to crack-up a DC-10 with a <10 FPS decent rate on landing. You'd think the guy who just played this game was really good, but it's easy to do in a DC-10...
texNoz 2 years ago
I don't want to come off as against women, but it's a sensitive subject since affirmative action allowed many women into cockpits of large airplanes when they have no business being there. There are some GREAT women pilots out there...but affirmative action lowered the standard and let many in that should not have gotten through (the government said "meet this quota or we will shut you down". Many men get turned away...but they had to let most affirmative action cases through.
quinnjim 2 years ago 3
Bruttissima simulazione, completamente diversa dalla realtà. Pessima.
clsegull 2 years ago
1.The pilot-flying failed to correctly apply crosswind controls.
2. The pilot-monitoring (instructor) failed to either order a go-around or take control of the airplane.
3. I guess we're slowly finding out that the DC10/MD11 line of jets have weak knees and have to be pampered onto the runway (I fly those jets and believe me, I do)
artagus21 2 years ago 13
@artagus21 How the F the FAA passed the MD-11 as safe is a total mystery.
dergrossen 1 year ago
@dergrossen
actually the plane involved was an MD-10 which is a converted death can, pardon me, DC-10
ie210 1 year ago
@artagus21 Fuck DC-10's and MD-11's. I'll never fly on those planes.
beeroosterm 1 year ago
@artagus21 it looks like there was obvious control problems fella... no need to bash the pilots for a situation you did not experience.
Soupyskank 1 year ago
@artagus21 Hello Russian landing gear!
raptors222222 1 year ago
@artagus21 How old are you, ten?
JumpStartation 1 year ago
@JumpStartation Actually 47. I flew the DC-10 as Flight Engineer, and the MD-11/MD-10 as captain for 3 years and hundreds of successful approaches and landings. I'm now a B757 captain.
What in my assessment of the accident makes you think I'm not qualified to speak about it? The pilot flying failed to maintain centerline, and attempted x-wind controls at a way too low altitude on a MD-10-10, but gave them up and landed on a crab.
What makes YOU an expert?
artagus21 1 year ago
@artagus21 I never said I was the expert. But what makes me think you're ten is the grammar.
JumpStartation 1 year ago
@artagus21 Another YouTube Chuck Yeager.
unclesara 1 year ago
@artagus21, feel better now?
eatingcatshit 8 months ago
The landing gear collapsed from side loading(sliding sideways) for too long.
screamingcockatoo 2 years ago
what simulator is that?
BlindShorty11 2 years ago
Its a computer application, that interprets the FDR information, and compiles it into an animation.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
Comment removed
xhappyxlifex 3 years ago
This is a recreation of an earlier crash. Fedex has crashed two large airplanes on landing in the last few years. The pilot of this one was a woman who apparently could not keep the nose straight on touchdown.
quinnjim 2 years ago
Oh I see. sorry I didn't read the description.
Thanks for the details.
xhappyxlifex 2 years ago
She was what appears to be trying to combat a crosswind.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Use your rudder paddle to keep the plane on the runway and use revers throttle after you land, you Moreon
sideslide23 3 years ago
yes it is a bit unfortunate when you spell moron wrong lolol
iTzCUBIX 3 years ago 2
Unless you spell it MAROON. then it is acceptable :)
As in WHAT A MAROOOOON!
bphendri 2 years ago
this is an NTSB recreation o what happened, what r u talkin about?
neilawuk 2 years ago
How did the landing gear collapse?
jorgemartinez18 3 years ago
What crash?
Airportchris2 3 years ago
Cos kurwa troche krzywo
Wino2101 3 years ago
i was expecting a screamer at the end :P
StefanSreto 3 years ago
look u hav to look at it this way it could of been worse!
fenderboy199 3 years ago
so thats were my packege went...
creepyguy3 3 years ago 6
how do you get that program?
johnyboy1790 3 years ago
Dammit, now I know why I never got my package. :(
rancherodave 4 years ago 2
It is common for airliners to crab; this means the nose of the aircraft is pointing AWAY from the runway INTO the wind. As the plane is ready to touchdown, the pilot will 'kick out' of the crab angle and use a side slip as described above.
desertwindz 4 years ago 2
It is no more safe or less safe for a large airplane to bank into the wind as a small plane.
Aerodynamically, the technique for crosswind landings is the same regardless of aircraft size. The pilot dips the upwind wing with AS MUCH CONTROL INPUT AS IS NECESSARY to compensate for side drift. Depending on the wind speed and direction, this may result in a substantial bank angle. Opposite rudder is used to keep the nose of the aircraft aligned with the runway.
desertwindz 4 years ago
ill never forget seeing that plane crash and the one that happened in '06 at kmem on 36L
jb0078887 4 years ago
It was actually 18R, I know, I landed on 18L 2-3 mins later!
MD11Fr8Dog 3 years ago
the simulated aircraft movments & the control movments DON'T match
remyhaggard12 4 years ago
They do, actually. The fact is that the airplane doesn't move with the controls but sightly after them.
Brusini 4 years ago
dummys the landing gear failed
Cris311 4 years ago
Alotofairlinesliketocrabintothewind
BB10Pilot 4 years ago
No. Bank means a turn. You are in balance flying directly into the relative airflow. As this airflow has a cross wind component relative to the runway centerline it looks as if he "crabbing with the rudder".
Lumpenproletariate 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
what a stupid pilot!. basic flying 101 instruction teaches to bank the aircraft into the wind. the pilot was just crabbing with the rudder making the plane crossed up when it touched down- bill randall
aflyboy4u 4 years ago
First, a large heavy jet may not be safely banked into the wind as you would a cessna. Yes, you do want to keep the upwind wing from lifting by applying some upwind yoke.
Second: Crabbing as you call it is a technique that is used in Cessnas all the way to big jets. you don't use the rudder to crab...the plane is flown on final with no sideslip and merely appears crab when viewed from the ground.
rallyden 4 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i didn't write that comment
aflyboy4u 4 years ago
its MD10,not your small cessna
ScaredPilot 3 years ago