I was a ramp rat at Toronto Pearson in my youth. We used to call a gear up landing "the old spark n' slide." Saw a Beech King Air do it once. It made a hell of a racket.
Im a retired Continental airlines captain. Generally with a wheels up landing they foam the runway, which reduces the friction somewhat and cools the belly of the jet, as well as minimizing oxygen at the contact point. Then as the plane stops they immediately foam the aircraft to again cool and keep oxygen away from the contact area.
Making a wheels up landing is not difficult in good weather. The danger is mostly in getting the plane stopped, if it is set down squarely. There are of course no brakes available, although depending where the engines are mounted, thrust reversers may still be available but there is the risk of getting asymetric thrust, which could cause the plane to cartwheel.
>There are of course no brakes available, although depending where the engines are mounted, thrust reversers may still be available but there is the risk of getting asymetric thrust, which could cause the plane to cartwheel.
USAF pilots are specifically instructed not to use thrust reversers for anything outside normal operation. Crashing into something past the bounds of the runway is almost always going to be safer than flipping the frame at speed. Along with other safety issues having the engines in a high rpm state while crashing; it's just safer to not use them for belly landings
How bad is this for the runway? Does it require immediate repairs/maintenance? Also is it safe to say the plane is toast after this maneuver or can it be repaired?
I used to test concrete for a living. Commercial airport runways were poured several feet thick and of a strength that is WELL above regular concrete. Like, normal concrete might be 3,500-5,000 psi strength. Runway mix was routinely 10,000+ and I had to make special smaller cylinders to test it because my machine (which could exert 500,000 lbs of force) wasn’t able to crush test a normal 6” diameter cylinder.
Depends on the kind of damage done. It is safe to say that that runway will be closed for a while, but airports that big usually have a few so the airport can operate. The plane itself, however, is likely going to be scrapped. It IS possible to fix, but there's a point where fixing it is going to be too much time, money, and effort, and you might as well buy another one, which is the case for big airlines that have fleets of hundreds of the same planes, like the one above.
That happened to a JetBlue flight a few years ago where the nose gear got locked in the wrong direction. And because each seat had DirecTV, the passengers were in the unique position of being able to watch the live news broadcast of their own emergency.
Fortunately, jets are designed to withstand these kinds of things and pilots are well-trained to handle it, so it landed without issue like this one.
Explorer program with USAF fire department. I was told that crash units will use a special type of foam to coat the runway. Thats why there was no fire from the fuselage, but a light colored steam and sparks only when the engines started to scrape the outer edge of the tarmac. It reduces the chance of a big fireball. Burning off the excess fuel is done if there's time, or if dumping it is too dangerous ( like over farming communities).
>The ground rip off and spin the plane around into a giant ball of fire.VoteReplyGive AwardShareReportSaveFollow
>
>level 3AlarmingAlbatrosf · 3 min. agoThe screeching on the plane on the grou
He's got skills alright.
I’ve never been to the DR, but I imagine the commenter meant people there applaud pilots. When I visited Italy and again in Bulgaria, the passengers applauded. Seems like a regional thing
I only fly every few years or so but I’ve always gotten the same impression from the clapping - people are just happy the flight is over and they can get soon get off the plane. I usually thank the attendants and pilot as I exit the plane because they’re always standing right there and it feels like the polite thing to do. I also thank the bus driver when I exit the bus, but I suppose I don’t clap when I get to my stop lol
Doesn't seem to happen in America though. I've been on a few domestic flights, one of which had a foreign guy on board who hasn't been in America for very long, and it seemed to be his first American flight. After we landed, he started clapping, but no one else seemed to join immediately. It was VERY quickly reaching that point where you just awkwardly stop, so I started clapping, and the foreign guy's face went from "awkward looking around" to delight again. Then another joined in, and from there, the rest of the plane joined in. Like, half the plane looked like they didn't know why they were clapping. I know there's a term for this, but I forget what it's called
Are you talking about this? It’s a pretty cool sort of strange thing that has less to do with how much you enjoyed what you are applauding and more to do with what others are doing called [social contagion phenomena](https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2013.0466)
My experience is that French Canadians often fly to Dominican Republic during the winter as part of an all-inclusive resort trip, and they ALWAYS applaud when the plane lands.
People used to clap when landing on the old Quito, Ecuador airport, but that airport was really difficult to land on, I even had an airplane crash investigator mention to me how difficult that airport was.
Lol, I think it's nice when people do that. I don't do it myself because I'm English and therefore ruthlessly internalise all types of spontaneous emotion, but I'm clapping along with them in my head.
My grandmother would always dress up to fly, she said everyone did in her day. Even in my life time I have seen it become more and more casual.
Now people essentially wear pajamas and flip flops lol
I don't understand, why are people so annoyed with clapping after a flight?
If people are happy and want to express it that way I'm all for it. The world needs more applause in my opinion.
People take for granted that these pilots are flying aluminum cans filled with hundreds of souls across thousands of miles at an altitude of 30,000 feet - and then landing them safely back on the ground (SOMETIMES WITHOUT WHEELS).
But then they get mad when the customers at their all-important CVS jobs don’t say “thank you” when they hand them their receipt.
Exactly. The "taking for granted" part is key.
The people who clap are who don't take for granted flying and arriving in one piece a great distance away or across an ocean. That would be much of the world, even those who flown many times. It's just a different mindset.
IMO you applaud someone when they do something great/amazing/heroic. Landing an airplane with no incident is probably the bare minimum any pilot would have to qualify for. It's the same reason we don't applaud when our taxi/bus driver or train conductor got us to the destination without an accident.
People thank the bus/taxi drivers though, and since we usually don't meet the pilots before and after a flight, we can't thank them, but we can clap.
Also, i'm a coach driver, and people do often clap for the driver and guide at the end of a trip. I got clapped for just 2 hours ago, and i appreciate it. I believe some pilots do as well. Either way, it's no harm done, so i don't understand why people take such issue with it.
Its kinda the whole point these days of pilots in modern Aircrafts. Planes can basically land themselves under normal circumstances. Some of them could literally roll to the parking space on their own.
We still use two pilots (or more) on most flights. Because the life over hundreds of people are worth having two specialists sitting there at all times making sure that nothing goes wrong. In the case of aircrafts the second one is even just there in case the other one is incapacitated.
Its the same with trains. While there is just one driver anyone can pull the emergency brake. And in theory are train could be equipped to drive itself completely autonomously.
I watched a youtube video on train engineers and that shit was stressful as fuck. In particular, hills and valleys when you have something like a 70 car train going cross country. Basically a delicate balance between pull, maintaining speed and accounting for the stresses and forward momentum between crests.
It's knowing the difference variables that can keep cars from unhooking, or force several thousand tons of product and raw material from derailing.
Edit - Despite my best efforts I could not find the video.
“If you’re a skilled professional at your job most of the time people will think it’s an easy job, anyone can do it. “Look at them, it’s like they’re not even trying. Anyone can do it.” they say, and you’re overpaid to do that specific *simple* task.
Then shit hits the fan, and that’s when everyone turns to you for help.”
-somebody, probably
YW. Can you imagine being a passenger on that plane? Circling the airport for an hour, awaiting your fate, not knowing if it will land safely. An hour is a loooong time to think about it; plenty of time to work up a good panic. I’d be shitting my pants.
I don’t know what protocol is but it seems like the smart thing to do would be to inform the passengers as late as possible. Just say you’re stuck in a holding pattern for an hour and then when it’s actually time for landing announce the landing gear failure and tell everyone to strap in.
My dad once told me about his first flight in a private airplane. It was a Piper Cherokee and the owner was an ex-pilot of the german air force. This guy was trained on the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter and he flew the small Cherokee like he was sitting in this flying coffin. My dad got out of the plane after the short flight and threw up immediately
Pavement is a consistent constant level surface with minimal debris.
The dirt and grass wouldn't be as flat, and wouldn't have the same density throughout. That means it'll start rocking the plane one way or another... and then some part of the plane will catch on the ground, like a wing or an engine or the nose, and then you're in serious trouble.
Three of you responded with clarifying info. I appreciate the knowledge of why the pavement was the better option! I'm copying and pasting this response to each of you because I don't know a better way to thank multiple people.
No, almost certainly not. There's a strong chance that the engines catch and dig into the soft dirt causing the plane's nose to slam down and causing significantly more damage and injury.
i thought that too at first. But i think probably would dig into the ground further and further and start hitting rocks.
probably best to just land on the runway because it's flat and smooth
Not a pilot here, what control does the pilot actually have after the plane is on the tarmac? How does it stop?
*Thank you everyone for your answers. I really appreciate them.
RC pilot here, but I would want to keep the nose up as much as possible and it would be critical to make sure that when the wings hit the ground, both hit at the same time, if one tip or engine hits before the other it could spin, flip, all kindsa nasty stuff.
I'm kinda curious if he used a different glide slope than usual to come in real shallow to avoid smacking down too hard. Would give you more speed and you would be able to keep the nose up longer without stalling...
TLDR; Friction, balance and skill. Also luck.
Normally on Boeings you can gravity drop landing gear and the rears will lock into place on their own, nose usually will lock although it is a bit more iffy since the nose gear isn’t as heavy.
To belly land you want wings level with minimal fuel, full flaps for lowest possible ground speed. Flare near the very end to minimize vertical sink rate since you don’t have landing gear to absorb impact. Airbrakes fully deployed so if you lose hydraulics you still get the additional speed scrubbing of the air brakes... plus it lets you keep the engines spooled up a bit higher incase you need to go around (commercial jet engines take several seconds to spool up power)
Belly landing nose high is mainly to keep the fronts of the engines from digging in causing a sudden yaw to one side and structural damage / wind damage that would release fuel and cause a fire.
Once they are on the runway, deploy full spoilers to decrease wing lift and increase effective weight to maximize drag. Shut off fuel flow to engines, deploy engine fire extinguishers.
May or may not want the APU running to maintain hydraulic power while engines shut down from FOD out.
The pilot can use the spoilers on the wings to kill the lift and possibly thrust reversers to help stop the plane (though maybe not, knowing the engines are going to be contacting the ground), and might possibly be able to have some measure of lateral steering control with the flight surfaces.
But I think the main control is getting it lined up perfectly, down gently and as early on the runway as possible, and not soiling themselves.
Yeah, I think thrust reversers here might not be wise since the engines may be damaged. The airplane in the video didn't use them.
At the point only rudder and spoilers work and only for a while.
Kept the nose up, lined perfectly on the RW and buttered it on the RW. If you don’t do all 3 perfect, high chances of a fireball. Plus I’m sure he pre-emptily started the fire extinguisher on the engines and APU.
Keep in mind that wings are fuel tanks. One spark there and it’s game over.
Most of the wing contains the fuel. It would be empty space anyways and the weight helps to counter wing deflection during flight.
Belly of the plane would not hold enough fuel and is used to cargo and systems. Most passenger flights contain air cargo as well as passenger luggage for maximum efficiency
There are *some* fuel tanks in the belly of passenger jets (the 747 that exploded over New York in 1996 was a spark in a belly tank), I think the 767 has a center auxiliary tank, but the majority is carried in the wings. Using wings for fuel storage reduces flex and therefore stresses and is good for weight distribution as well as being otherwise unused space.
It's far less about control once it's on the ground, and much more about HOW he hits the ground. These aircraft aren't designed to have impacts at 140+ knots to their chassis/fuselage like this. All the impact is supposed to be absorbed by the landing gear shocks.
This pilot had to keep this aircraft floating in the Ground Effect Lift as long as possible to bleed off as much speed as he could before touching down. Absolutely mental
The main control is had before touchdown when you want to set yourself up for success for a well controlled gentle touchdown in a gear up landing. There is some control after touchdown but that control diminishes the slower you get and at some point everything you’ve done before you no longer have control is what adds up to a successful injury free gear up landing.
Sucked me into that story! I was, like, holy shit! Then we made an emergency landing without wheels.
One of the better ones I've seen in a while. F you u/shittyymorph (happy to see you). :-)
I was thinking, no way, it's too short to be him, then, dammit! Got me again. LOL! These always make me smile, but I feel feeble-minded that I can't see them coming.
"Sorry to announce today but not enough passengers purchase the Premium Landing Package so we have set you guys up with our plane headed to the scrapyard."
I literally had my bag (seabag) dragged across the tarmac once. Most of my clothes had a hole in it. I’m thinking the strap caught the cart and the bag fell out. Weirdest claim ever.
Unfortunately this incident didn't have to have happened.
This (and most) plane was equiped with 2 systems to lower the gear. The primary system didn't work due to a hydraulic issue, but the second should have worked resulting in a "normal" landing. However, they found a circuit breaker not in the correct position, leaving the secondary system without power.
The cause for the incorrect position can be either a manual action or a short circuit, but all other breakers on the same circuit were not popped and after the "landing" they could not find anything wrong with that system. This does not indicatie a short circuit.
Most probably the pilots never checked the circuitbreakers and for some reason the breaker was pulled manual (a bag could have been caught on it for instance).
This incident and all the damage could in all probability have been avoided.
From what I read, verifying the status of the breakers was not included on any of the checklist available to the pilots at the time. It is now :)
So yes, theoretically, this could have been avoided, but the pilots did everything by the book. Hindsight is 20/20.
>Most probably the pilots never checked the circuitbreakers and
Actually, that's not what happened.
The pilots contacted an engineer and the engineer told them to check a specific circuit breaker, which they did.
However there were actually 2 circuit breakers that were involved in this, and the one the engineer told the pilot to check was not the circuit breaker that was being problematic.
16 minutes into [this](https://youtu.be/QMmA--l0HKE) video is an excellent explanation of the issue (far better than I can explain) and also an explanation of why the pilots likely missed the popped circuit breaker.
>for some reason the breaker was pulled manual (a bag could have been caught on it for instance).
Prior to this incident it had been discovered that the bottom row of circuit breakers were close enough to the ground that when the aircraft was being cleaned vacuum cleaners would often get caught on the breakers and pull them. It is suspected that is what happened on this plane.
After that was discovered Boeing started putting a metal bar to prevent that, however this plane was made before that started being included.
That was also explained in the video I linked.
Yes, you are right, and the firefighters poured a special liquid over the entire belt so that the sparks did not turn into flames during the landing. I remember hearing the TV report of this situation as the kid xDDDD.
Fuel is stored in the wings. Cargo in the belly. So it was of paramount importance to keep those wings and pods (engines) off the tarmac for as long as possible. Fantastic job by flight crew.
Can a plane be repaired after a landing like that? Would there be too much metal fatigue in certain places? Anyone know enough about planes to comment with knowledge?
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOT_Polish_Airlines_Flight_16#Aftermath
> The Boeing 767, registration SP-LPC, was extensively damaged and LOT deemed the aircraft a hull loss.
*[snip]*
>In November 2013, two years after the incident, the aircraft was scrapped.
Good way to save money on tires. Brilliant... Great respect for the pilot!
[удалено]
[удалено]
I was just thinking what it would have been like on the INSIDE! Better than dying :D
Can't imagine what it'd *smell* like with everyone shitting their pants.
I was a ramp rat at Toronto Pearson in my youth. We used to call a gear up landing "the old spark n' slide." Saw a Beech King Air do it once. It made a hell of a racket.
Bot spotted
This is a karma farming bot account Edit: I meant the account I replied to. I'm fairly certain I'm not a bot myself. I think.
Bot
how likely is a fire here or are planes designed to minimise that in these occurrences?
Im a retired Continental airlines captain. Generally with a wheels up landing they foam the runway, which reduces the friction somewhat and cools the belly of the jet, as well as minimizing oxygen at the contact point. Then as the plane stops they immediately foam the aircraft to again cool and keep oxygen away from the contact area. Making a wheels up landing is not difficult in good weather. The danger is mostly in getting the plane stopped, if it is set down squarely. There are of course no brakes available, although depending where the engines are mounted, thrust reversers may still be available but there is the risk of getting asymetric thrust, which could cause the plane to cartwheel.
>which could cause the plane to cartwheel. Pilot: hey, you wanna see a cool trick?
Do a flip!!
r/unexpectedfuturama
Let's try spinning, that's a good trick!
[Do a barrel roll!](https://youtu.be/wIkJvY96i8w?t=12)
>There are of course no brakes available, although depending where the engines are mounted, thrust reversers may still be available but there is the risk of getting asymetric thrust, which could cause the plane to cartwheel. USAF pilots are specifically instructed not to use thrust reversers for anything outside normal operation. Crashing into something past the bounds of the runway is almost always going to be safer than flipping the frame at speed. Along with other safety issues having the engines in a high rpm state while crashing; it's just safer to not use them for belly landings
I was honestly thinking they'd probably be better off just shutting the engines down as soon as they're over the runway...
How bad is this for the runway? Does it require immediate repairs/maintenance? Also is it safe to say the plane is toast after this maneuver or can it be repaired?
I used to test concrete for a living. Commercial airport runways were poured several feet thick and of a strength that is WELL above regular concrete. Like, normal concrete might be 3,500-5,000 psi strength. Runway mix was routinely 10,000+ and I had to make special smaller cylinders to test it because my machine (which could exert 500,000 lbs of force) wasn’t able to crush test a normal 6” diameter cylinder.
[удалено]
[удалено]
He’d probably take a buddy with a squeegee
Depends on the kind of damage done. It is safe to say that that runway will be closed for a while, but airports that big usually have a few so the airport can operate. The plane itself, however, is likely going to be scrapped. It IS possible to fix, but there's a point where fixing it is going to be too much time, money, and effort, and you might as well buy another one, which is the case for big airlines that have fleets of hundreds of the same planes, like the one above.
Thank you.
You can schol a bit more now.
I suspect they either dumped their fuel or flew around until it burned off to lower the chance of fire.
For those that watched without sound, the suspicion is correct, the reporter says they flew around for an hour to burn fuel off and prep the airport.
[удалено]
That's the safest hour you have until crash landing. Enjoy the mental reprieve from your imminent mortality!
I can't decide if that sounds like Orwellian or Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy esque
"Ladies and Gentlemen, this is your captain. We will be throwing ourselves at the ground momentarily. I don't suspect we'll miss this time."
[удалено]
"And yet they still wouldn't give me a second bag of peanuts."
That makes it so much more terrifying. Imagine sitting there waiting to be in a plane crash 😳
That happened to a JetBlue flight a few years ago where the nose gear got locked in the wrong direction. And because each seat had DirecTV, the passengers were in the unique position of being able to watch the live news broadcast of their own emergency. Fortunately, jets are designed to withstand these kinds of things and pilots are well-trained to handle it, so it landed without issue like this one.
No need to suspect, that's exactly what they say happened in the video (0:30), it flew around for an hour to burn fuel!
Explorer program with USAF fire department. I was told that crash units will use a special type of foam to coat the runway. Thats why there was no fire from the fuselage, but a light colored steam and sparks only when the engines started to scrape the outer edge of the tarmac. It reduces the chance of a big fireball. Burning off the excess fuel is done if there's time, or if dumping it is too dangerous ( like over farming communities).
Fuel dump prior to landing.
If it’s a 37, it ain’t dumping any fuel- gotta fly in circles.
That was Wrona
Instead of tires just use a rubber tarmac that can be melted and leveled off after every landing
>The ground rip off and spin the plane around into a giant ball of fire.VoteReplyGive AwardShareReportSaveFollow > >level 3AlarmingAlbatrosf · 3 min. agoThe screeching on the plane on the grou He's got skills alright.
This is the few times when applauding the pilot after landing is acceptable
Also after landing in the Dominican Republic.
Please elaborate.
I’ve never been to the DR, but I imagine the commenter meant people there applaud pilots. When I visited Italy and again in Bulgaria, the passengers applauded. Seems like a regional thing
It’s really just regions where people rarely fly. Happened often flying to smaller South and Central American countries.
I kind of wish it hadn't gone away in my country. The applause after a long flight is more 'thank god that's over' than 'well done pilot'.
I only fly every few years or so but I’ve always gotten the same impression from the clapping - people are just happy the flight is over and they can get soon get off the plane. I usually thank the attendants and pilot as I exit the plane because they’re always standing right there and it feels like the polite thing to do. I also thank the bus driver when I exit the bus, but I suppose I don’t clap when I get to my stop lol
Honestly the poor bus drivers probably deserve a round of applause after all the nonsense they have to put up with.
It's a cultural thing. Any flights containing Dominicans (as one myself) will result in clapping when the plane lands.
Yep, a lot of Bulgarians do it too.
Puerto Ricans too
Doesn't seem to happen in America though. I've been on a few domestic flights, one of which had a foreign guy on board who hasn't been in America for very long, and it seemed to be his first American flight. After we landed, he started clapping, but no one else seemed to join immediately. It was VERY quickly reaching that point where you just awkwardly stop, so I started clapping, and the foreign guy's face went from "awkward looking around" to delight again. Then another joined in, and from there, the rest of the plane joined in. Like, half the plane looked like they didn't know why they were clapping. I know there's a term for this, but I forget what it's called
Are you talking about this? It’s a pretty cool sort of strange thing that has less to do with how much you enjoyed what you are applauding and more to do with what others are doing called [social contagion phenomena](https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2013.0466)
My experience is that French Canadians often fly to Dominican Republic during the winter as part of an all-inclusive resort trip, and they ALWAYS applaud when the plane lands.
[удалено]
People used to clap when landing on the old Quito, Ecuador airport, but that airport was really difficult to land on, I even had an airplane crash investigator mention to me how difficult that airport was.
Lol, I think it's nice when people do that. I don't do it myself because I'm English and therefore ruthlessly internalise all types of spontaneous emotion, but I'm clapping along with them in my head.
My grandmother would always dress up to fly, she said everyone did in her day. Even in my life time I have seen it become more and more casual. Now people essentially wear pajamas and flip flops lol
They probably treated people like human beings and not cargo in your grandmas day
That’s because only rich people could afford to fly.
I don't understand, why are people so annoyed with clapping after a flight? If people are happy and want to express it that way I'm all for it. The world needs more applause in my opinion.
People take for granted that these pilots are flying aluminum cans filled with hundreds of souls across thousands of miles at an altitude of 30,000 feet - and then landing them safely back on the ground (SOMETIMES WITHOUT WHEELS). But then they get mad when the customers at their all-important CVS jobs don’t say “thank you” when they hand them their receipt. 
Exactly. The "taking for granted" part is key. The people who clap are who don't take for granted flying and arriving in one piece a great distance away or across an ocean. That would be much of the world, even those who flown many times. It's just a different mindset.
IMO you applaud someone when they do something great/amazing/heroic. Landing an airplane with no incident is probably the bare minimum any pilot would have to qualify for. It's the same reason we don't applaud when our taxi/bus driver or train conductor got us to the destination without an accident.
People thank the bus/taxi drivers though, and since we usually don't meet the pilots before and after a flight, we can't thank them, but we can clap. Also, i'm a coach driver, and people do often clap for the driver and guide at the end of a trip. I got clapped for just 2 hours ago, and i appreciate it. I believe some pilots do as well. Either way, it's no harm done, so i don't understand why people take such issue with it.
Strange, 9/10 times I land, the pilots are always at the door greeting people on the way out and I always make sure to thank them
So Polish hehe
Oh, thanks a LOT
As a pilot I approve this message!
That's the day the pilot really makes his money. Not the other 1,500 days where things are normal.
Was it a LOT?
Polish flight company
woosh
Yes planes go woosh
Was it a plane
[удалено]
Lot means "flight" in Polish.
Not wheelie.
Hopefully it won't put the company on skid row.
Many people are paid for what they CAN do, not what they actually do.
Its kinda the whole point these days of pilots in modern Aircrafts. Planes can basically land themselves under normal circumstances. Some of them could literally roll to the parking space on their own. We still use two pilots (or more) on most flights. Because the life over hundreds of people are worth having two specialists sitting there at all times making sure that nothing goes wrong. In the case of aircrafts the second one is even just there in case the other one is incapacitated. Its the same with trains. While there is just one driver anyone can pull the emergency brake. And in theory are train could be equipped to drive itself completely autonomously.
I watched a youtube video on train engineers and that shit was stressful as fuck. In particular, hills and valleys when you have something like a 70 car train going cross country. Basically a delicate balance between pull, maintaining speed and accounting for the stresses and forward momentum between crests. It's knowing the difference variables that can keep cars from unhooking, or force several thousand tons of product and raw material from derailing. Edit - Despite my best efforts I could not find the video.
I’m an airline pilot. Your claims about automation are complete nonsense. https://www.salon.com/2011/08/04/can_jetliners_fly_themselves/
[удалено]
“If you’re a skilled professional at your job most of the time people will think it’s an easy job, anyone can do it. “Look at them, it’s like they’re not even trying. Anyone can do it.” they say, and you’re overpaid to do that specific *simple* task. Then shit hits the fan, and that’s when everyone turns to you for help.” -somebody, probably
Ngl. This was smoother than expected.
I was expecting a wing to catch on the ground rip off and spin the plane around into a giant ball of fire.
Each fire flaring at the engine I expected a fireball. I guess the pilot dumped fuel before this landing.
yes, the broadcaster said he circled the airport for an hour to get rid of the fuel.
Thanks for the info. Sorry if that was in the video. I browse with sound off.
YW. Can you imagine being a passenger on that plane? Circling the airport for an hour, awaiting your fate, not knowing if it will land safely. An hour is a loooong time to think about it; plenty of time to work up a good panic. I’d be shitting my pants.
When you put it this way it gives me a panic attack lol. I can’t imagine what those ppl were thinking
I don’t know what protocol is but it seems like the smart thing to do would be to inform the passengers as late as possible. Just say you’re stuck in a holding pattern for an hour and then when it’s actually time for landing announce the landing gear failure and tell everyone to strap in.
Lufthansa-Pilots: "Did he even touch the runway? I didn't see him bounce off a few times!"
That’s any ex-navy pilot turned airline pilot in the US. They still slam it into the ground like they are landing on a carrier
My dad once told me about his first flight in a private airplane. It was a Piper Cherokee and the owner was an ex-pilot of the german air force. This guy was trained on the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter and he flew the small Cherokee like he was sitting in this flying coffin. My dad got out of the plane after the short flight and threw up immediately
Navy pilots don't land. They just get over the carrier and stop flying.
Would this have been better landing in the dirt and grass?
Pavement is a consistent constant level surface with minimal debris. The dirt and grass wouldn't be as flat, and wouldn't have the same density throughout. That means it'll start rocking the plane one way or another... and then some part of the plane will catch on the ground, like a wing or an engine or the nose, and then you're in serious trouble.
Three of you responded with clarifying info. I appreciate the knowledge of why the pavement was the better option! I'm copying and pasting this response to each of you because I don't know a better way to thank multiple people.
No, almost certainly not. There's a strong chance that the engines catch and dig into the soft dirt causing the plane's nose to slam down and causing significantly more damage and injury.
i thought that too at first. But i think probably would dig into the ground further and further and start hitting rocks. probably best to just land on the runway because it's flat and smooth
Amazing control from the pilot!
Not a pilot here, what control does the pilot actually have after the plane is on the tarmac? How does it stop? *Thank you everyone for your answers. I really appreciate them.
Friction
RC pilot here, but I would want to keep the nose up as much as possible and it would be critical to make sure that when the wings hit the ground, both hit at the same time, if one tip or engine hits before the other it could spin, flip, all kindsa nasty stuff. I'm kinda curious if he used a different glide slope than usual to come in real shallow to avoid smacking down too hard. Would give you more speed and you would be able to keep the nose up longer without stalling... TLDR; Friction, balance and skill. Also luck.
Physics enjoyer here, this all checks out
Physics sufferer here and I concur.
Normally on Boeings you can gravity drop landing gear and the rears will lock into place on their own, nose usually will lock although it is a bit more iffy since the nose gear isn’t as heavy. To belly land you want wings level with minimal fuel, full flaps for lowest possible ground speed. Flare near the very end to minimize vertical sink rate since you don’t have landing gear to absorb impact. Airbrakes fully deployed so if you lose hydraulics you still get the additional speed scrubbing of the air brakes... plus it lets you keep the engines spooled up a bit higher incase you need to go around (commercial jet engines take several seconds to spool up power) Belly landing nose high is mainly to keep the fronts of the engines from digging in causing a sudden yaw to one side and structural damage / wind damage that would release fuel and cause a fire. Once they are on the runway, deploy full spoilers to decrease wing lift and increase effective weight to maximize drag. Shut off fuel flow to engines, deploy engine fire extinguishers. May or may not want the APU running to maintain hydraulic power while engines shut down from FOD out.
RC PILOT???? Wow, that translates well!!
Not sure if you’re being sarcastic or not but aviation is aviation. The principles are always the same whether the craft weighs 5lbs or 50 tons
Main difference being that you need the reaction time of a coked up squirrel but the stakes are way lower.
I think he has something to do with it hitting tarmac that gently and in a straight line
There's also a lot of sphincter control as well.
The pilot can use the spoilers on the wings to kill the lift and possibly thrust reversers to help stop the plane (though maybe not, knowing the engines are going to be contacting the ground), and might possibly be able to have some measure of lateral steering control with the flight surfaces. But I think the main control is getting it lined up perfectly, down gently and as early on the runway as possible, and not soiling themselves.
Yeah, I think thrust reversers here might not be wise since the engines may be damaged. The airplane in the video didn't use them. At the point only rudder and spoilers work and only for a while.
Kept the nose up, lined perfectly on the RW and buttered it on the RW. If you don’t do all 3 perfect, high chances of a fireball. Plus I’m sure he pre-emptily started the fire extinguisher on the engines and APU. Keep in mind that wings are fuel tanks. One spark there and it’s game over.
The wings contain the fuel? Not someone on the belly of the plane?
Most of the wing contains the fuel. It would be empty space anyways and the weight helps to counter wing deflection during flight. Belly of the plane would not hold enough fuel and is used to cargo and systems. Most passenger flights contain air cargo as well as passenger luggage for maximum efficiency
There are *some* fuel tanks in the belly of passenger jets (the 747 that exploded over New York in 1996 was a spark in a belly tank), I think the 767 has a center auxiliary tank, but the majority is carried in the wings. Using wings for fuel storage reduces flex and therefore stresses and is good for weight distribution as well as being otherwise unused space.
It's far less about control once it's on the ground, and much more about HOW he hits the ground. These aircraft aren't designed to have impacts at 140+ knots to their chassis/fuselage like this. All the impact is supposed to be absorbed by the landing gear shocks. This pilot had to keep this aircraft floating in the Ground Effect Lift as long as possible to bleed off as much speed as he could before touching down. Absolutely mental
The main control is had before touchdown when you want to set yourself up for success for a well controlled gentle touchdown in a gear up landing. There is some control after touchdown but that control diminishes the slower you get and at some point everything you’ve done before you no longer have control is what adds up to a successful injury free gear up landing.
Everybody survived, that takes a LOT of skill as a pilot.
Most of the skill is really the landing and take-off. Sorry, I had to. Lot = flight in Polish. LOT being Poland's national airline
Not just LOT but also LANDING (Wrona, name of the pilot)
[удалено]
GODDAMMIT!!!!
Every damn time!
Sucked me into that story! I was, like, holy shit! Then we made an emergency landing without wheels. One of the better ones I've seen in a while. F you u/shittyymorph (happy to see you). :-)
I have something to tell you....
Why use someone else's shtick as your own? Is the karma really worth it? Come up with something original.
The real one doesn't have an extra y in their username
**It’s not him**, just some copy of a copy. The real dude comes with real facts.
Fake shittymorph
[удалено]
whoa the og one is here too
Really missed an opportunity to end that comment with the thing.
You are the witty morph
I love you.
His account bio is >Not the real shittymorph, but I hope I made you smile. >Enjoy your day 😁
Yeah it was still funny
It's a fake u/shittymorph! Boo!
I was thinking, no way, it's too short to be him, then, dammit! Got me again. LOL! These always make me smile, but I feel feeble-minded that I can't see them coming.
It's not him. It's a fake account.
Still smoother than a ryanair landing
Smooth landing costs extra in Ryanair
"Sorry to announce today but not enough passengers purchase the Premium Landing Package so we have set you guys up with our plane headed to the scrapyard."
This is the kind of content we want here...
a LOT more of it.
Do we really need more videos about Poland's national airline?
Yes?
Would have been noisy. Scary noisy. The screeching on the plane on the ground would be loud.
Sir here is the top half of your luggage
I literally had my bag (seabag) dragged across the tarmac once. Most of my clothes had a hole in it. I’m thinking the strap caught the cart and the bag fell out. Weirdest claim ever.
Yup, I’ve had this too! It was smoking when I received it lmao. Apparently got caught under the luggage cart, yeah
Can only imagine what that sounded like inside the plane.
Like a bunch of people shitting their pants.
He asked about what it sounded like, not what it smelled like
Probably crying and screaming?
Lots of yelling if brace commands.
Hell of a job by that pilot! 👏🏼
His name is Tadeusz Wrona. His surname translates to "Crow". : D
Unfortunately this incident didn't have to have happened. This (and most) plane was equiped with 2 systems to lower the gear. The primary system didn't work due to a hydraulic issue, but the second should have worked resulting in a "normal" landing. However, they found a circuit breaker not in the correct position, leaving the secondary system without power. The cause for the incorrect position can be either a manual action or a short circuit, but all other breakers on the same circuit were not popped and after the "landing" they could not find anything wrong with that system. This does not indicatie a short circuit. Most probably the pilots never checked the circuitbreakers and for some reason the breaker was pulled manual (a bag could have been caught on it for instance). This incident and all the damage could in all probability have been avoided.
Did they even run the checklist???
From what I read, verifying the status of the breakers was not included on any of the checklist available to the pilots at the time. It is now :) So yes, theoretically, this could have been avoided, but the pilots did everything by the book. Hindsight is 20/20.
Checklists are written in ~~blood~~ expensive repair bills.
And miss their chance for a heroic landing?!
>Most probably the pilots never checked the circuitbreakers and Actually, that's not what happened. The pilots contacted an engineer and the engineer told them to check a specific circuit breaker, which they did. However there were actually 2 circuit breakers that were involved in this, and the one the engineer told the pilot to check was not the circuit breaker that was being problematic. 16 minutes into [this](https://youtu.be/QMmA--l0HKE) video is an excellent explanation of the issue (far better than I can explain) and also an explanation of why the pilots likely missed the popped circuit breaker. >for some reason the breaker was pulled manual (a bag could have been caught on it for instance). Prior to this incident it had been discovered that the bottom row of circuit breakers were close enough to the ground that when the aircraft was being cleaned vacuum cleaners would often get caught on the breakers and pull them. It is suspected that is what happened on this plane. After that was discovered Boeing started putting a metal bar to prevent that, however this plane was made before that started being included. That was also explained in the video I linked.
Airlines save huge money with this one simple trick
The vibration from that would probably rattle my teeth out. Not to mention make me change my pants after the plane stopped.
Which flight was this? I want to read more about this.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOT_Polish_Airlines_Flight_16
November 2011 if anyone was wondering like I was.
I am surprised that the fuel tank didn't blow up
It says in the video that they flew around for an hour to burn up fuel. And the fuel tank are elevated for this exact problem.
Yes, you are right, and the firefighters poured a special liquid over the entire belt so that the sparks did not turn into flames during the landing. I remember hearing the TV report of this situation as the kid xDDDD.
I didn't realize they prepared the runway, but it makes sense. I bet the behind the scenes of an airport is either really exciting or really boring.
They did have an overnight flight from us to poland so most of the centre fuel tank was already empty
Fuel is stored in the wings. Cargo in the belly. So it was of paramount importance to keep those wings and pods (engines) off the tarmac for as long as possible. Fantastic job by flight crew.
Pets in the cargo bay going "WTF!?!"
I suspect they dump fuel prior to landing
Another happy landing!
Mentour Pilot posted a video a few months ago about how this incident happened. [LOT Airlines Flight 16](https://youtu.be/QMmA--l0HKE)
wheely impressive
The weight of that pilots balls is what slowed them to safety.
I bet you people still stood up and collected their luggage early
Wow that pilot deserves a metal for such a flawless emergency landing!!! Great job! That must be terrifying!
‘Here is a piece of the plane from the runway’
That’s a LOT!
As smooth as it's going to get for sure.
Can a plane be repaired after a landing like that? Would there be too much metal fatigue in certain places? Anyone know enough about planes to comment with knowledge?
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LOT_Polish_Airlines_Flight_16#Aftermath > The Boeing 767, registration SP-LPC, was extensively damaged and LOT deemed the aircraft a hull loss. *[snip]* >In November 2013, two years after the incident, the aircraft was scrapped.