Hard Landings on SQ

[b777jubilee]

Hi Guys

Dont know if you guys experienced hard landings before. On my flight to Sydney on 25th last month, on approach to Sydney in morning, my flight slam on the runway hard which woke everyone up from their slumber.

Was told by a friend who is a pilot that sydney runway is narrower at 150ft versus typical 200ft, and when at night, the pilot tend to misjudge and did not flare the aircraft in time which result in hard landing.

I kind of amazed by that as A380 pilots in SQ are experienced pilots who have flown for many years, unlike 777 where you have newly checked out FOs at the controls. My only other experience onhard landing is at CGK on a lion air flight, which again, the pilot did not flare the aircraft and slam on the runway.

Any one else had experience real hard landing on SQ?

[diecastdrool]

Hi Guys

Dont know if you guys experienced hard landings before. On my flight to Sydney on 25th last month, on approach to Sydney in morning, my flight slam on the runway hard which woke everyone up from their slumber.

Was told by a friend who is a pilot that sydney runway is narrower at 150ft versus typical 200ft, and when at night, the pilot tend to misjudge and did not flare the aircraft in time which result in hard landing.

I kind of amazed by that as A380 pilots in SQ are experienced pilots who have flown for many years, unlike 777 where you have newly checked out FOs at the controls. My only other experience onhard landing is at CGK on a lion air flight, which again, the pilot did not flare the aircraft and slam on the runway.

Any one else had experience real hard landing on SQ?

Oh boy, this is a classic SQ style of landing planes. I dont know about others, but out of 10 flights with SQ, 7 ended up in hard landing for me. This experience was also shared by my other friends and colleagues who frequent SQ. They just slam the runway!!

Maybe SQ pilots can verify this here (if there's any)? Thanks

[sqdazz]

Ive experienced a whole range of different landings with SQ.

The weather conditions have a lot to do with it. A more solid landing on a wet runway is preferable.

[b777jubilee]

Ive experienced a whole range of different landings with SQ.

The weather conditions have a lot to do with it. A more solid landing on a wet runway is preferable.

yes more solid landing is preferable for wet conditions. Granted that its was wet that day (not very wet) but as I had window seat, I can see that the plane did not flare prior to touchdown. So the reason for hard landing is more not flaring rather than wet runway.

[sqdazz]

yes more solid landing is preferable for wet conditions. Granted that its was wet that day (not very wet) but as I had window seat, I can see that the plane did not flare prior to touchdown. So the reason for hard landing is more not flaring rather than wet runway.

everyone has a bad day now n then!

[SilverChris]

Hard landings aren't really unusual are they?

[b777jubilee]

Hard landings aren't really unusual are they?

was rather unusual for me. Although I dont travel very often, but I still clock about 6-8 flights on SQ per year and I must say i never experienced real hard landing before. That was the first. Perhaps I was lucky

[Kyo]

I've had... hard and soft and well-goosed (i.e. wonderful) landings also on SQ.

Chalk this one up to an aberration, I'd say

[flymeroundthemoon]

SQ Only?

IMHO, every carrier/pilot, has his day. It depends on the CAT landing and WHO is landing, an experienced Captain or a Trainee # 2 on a manual approach? To suggest that SQ is worse than others on a consistent basis is unreasonable.

[SQflyergirl]

A more solid landing on a wet runway is preferable.

yes more solid landing is preferable for wet conditions.

Bingo...........

I can see that the plane did not flare prior to touchdown. So the reason for hard landing is more not flaring rather than wet runway.

If the plane did not flare you would have exited via an emergency slide with the plane sloping forwards because it'd have been missing the nose wheel gear.

I find a lot of passengers tend to make uninformed statements - and these are typical (besides the hard landing thingy)

1) OMG - we landed on the left side and then bounced to the other before settling down

2) OMG - did you hear the engines lose power when we went through that bad turbulence/cloud?

3) OMG - We shut down one engine on the way to london to save gas.

Needless to say they have never heard of (in order) - a crosswind landing, turbulence penetration speed nor windmilling engines actually causing DRAG. Oh well.... I'm too girly to bother to explain to them when i hear these sorts of things

[sunnyday]

i must say i am very impressed with SQFG

[sunnyday]

go google southerly buster. not saying that this was a case of southerly buster.

but it's quite well known to have pretty bumpy and turbulent conditions on approach to sydney. conditions like this sometimes dictate a slightly firmer landing than usual.

as you mentioned, sydney runways are 45m wide which isn't much if you get blown away by the crosswind.

of course at the end of it all, the pilot's skill still plays a part

[Nick C]

http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=5q6rdB...eature=related

Exciting yeah?

[concept|infinit]

http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=5q6rdB...eature=related

Exciting yeah?

interesting

[Singapore Sling]

i must say i am very impressed with SQFG

Aren`t we all.

As to hard landings, I would say SQ is no worse than any other airline.