Are these guys good or what???

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8595143022111722945&q=aircraft+landing+video

"Ron Webb" > wrote in message
...
> Are these guys good or what???
>
>
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8595143022111722945&q=aircraft+landing+video
>
>

Boeing 777 and 747SP Crosswind Landing Tests
Video shows Boeing test pilots determining the demonstratedcrosswind landing
limits on the 777 and the 747SP. The engineers make educated guesses, but
then the test crews have to go actually prove the numbers. They sneak off to
Brazil to do these tests at a certain remote BAF airbase famous for its
continual atrocious crosswinds. Should the gear sideloads be excessive and
fold one up, there is nobody there to take nasty pix for the Airbus guys to
wave around in the press.
Crosswind Nightmare Landings (3MB WMV)

Watch the video closely. Notice how quickly the plane responds to the
roll commnads that lift the spoilers. The left wing spoilers actuate
and a second later the left wing drops. The rudder must be getting a
good kick too.

James

Ron Webb wrote:
> Are these guys good or what???
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8595143022111722945&q=aircraft+landing+video

"Benbo" > wrote in message
news:1wOfg.16213$lN5.5773@trnddc04...
>
> "Ron Webb" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Are these guys good or what???
> >
> >
>
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8595143022111722945&q=aircraft+landing+video
> >
> >
>
> Boeing 777 and 747SP Crosswind Landing Tests
> Video shows Boeing test pilots determining the demonstratedcrosswind
landing
> limits on the 777 and the 747SP. The engineers make educated guesses, but
> then the test crews have to go actually prove the numbers. They sneak off
to
> Brazil to do these tests at a certain remote BAF airbase famous for its
> continual atrocious crosswinds. Should the gear sideloads be excessive and
> fold one up, there is nobody there to take nasty pix for the Airbus guys
to
> wave around in the press.
> Crosswind Nightmare Landings (3MB WMV)
http://www.tonyrogers.com/video/Crosswind.wmv

>
>

"Benbo" > wrote:

>Boeing 777 and 747SP Crosswind Landing Tests
>Video shows Boeing test pilots determining the demonstratedcrosswind landing
>limits on the 777 and the 747SP. The engineers make educated guesses, but
>then the test crews have to go actually prove the numbers. They sneak off to
>Brazil to do these tests at a certain remote BAF airbase famous for its
>continual atrocious crosswinds. Should the gear sideloads be excessive and
>fold one up, there is nobody there to take nasty pix for the Airbus guys to
>wave around in the press.

Oh, so we only see the ones that MAKE it.... ;-)

Mark "some serious pucker moments there" Hickey

On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 19:10:21 -0800, "Ron Webb" > wrote:

>Are these guys good or what???
>
>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8595143022111722945&q=aircraft+landing+video
>

I don't know about good, but that's the way a good short field is
done. Steep and little roll out <:-))

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"Benbo" > wrote in message
news:1wOfg.16213$lN5.5773@trnddc04...
>
> "Ron Webb" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Are these guys good or what???
>>
>>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8595143022111722945&q=aircraft+landing+video
>>
>>
>
> Boeing 777 and 747SP Crosswind Landing Tests
> Video shows Boeing test pilots determining the demonstratedcrosswind
> landing
> limits on the 777 and the 747SP. The engineers make educated guesses, but
> then the test crews have to go actually prove the numbers. They sneak off
> to
> Brazil to do these tests at a certain remote BAF airbase famous for its
> continual atrocious crosswinds.

PBS did a series on the development of the 777, at one point they showed the
test pilots sitting around waiting for word of the right combination for max
crosswinds; when word came in, they saddled up and headed there (don't
remember where it was but it was stateside).

Are the 777 gear cocked? Look closely.

-
"Jerry Jensen" > wrote in message ...
> Are the 777 gear cocked? Look closely.
>
>

I saw that too, but it is an illusion from the rear tires on the bogie hanging lower
than the front that makes it look as if it is cocked.

--
SeeYaa:) Harbin Osteen KG6URO

This is YOUR future:
http://halturnershow.com/aztlan_caps.wmv
http://media.putfile.com/La-Gran-Marcha
The Mexican Solution:
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=papers&code=06-D_18

-

Ron Webb wrote:


> Are these guys good or what???

>
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8595143022111722945&q=aircraft+landing+video

Must be THE reason the airport is now closed!


Cheers!
D~
-------------------------------------




--
##-----------------------------------------------##
Delivered via http://www.equity-loan.info/
Your home, its financing and everything about it
Web and RSS access to your favorite newsgroup -
rec.aviation.homebuilt - 20221 messages and counting!
##-----------------------------------------------##

That is not a crosswind landing. It is or was the normal approach for Kai
Tak. I can't remember if it was buildings in the way or what precipitated
the requirement but it certainly had nothing to do with wind. Yes it looks
impressive, maybe thats why they are well paid, 'course it's a doddle
compared to landing on a carrier deck in heavy seas.

"DA" > wrote in message
m...
> Ron Webb wrote:
>
>
>> Are these guys good or what???
>

Dante wrote:
> That is not a crosswind landing. It is or was the normal approach for Kai
> Tak. I can't remember if it was buildings in the way or what precipitated
> the requirement but it certainly had nothing to do with wind. Yes it looks
> impressive, maybe thats why they are well paid, 'course it's a doddle
> compared to landing on a carrier deck in heavy seas.

My CFI's first real landing of a 747 (as opposed to sim work) was at Kai
Tak as a Northwest first officer. Heck of a way to break in.

Rich Ahrens wrote:
> Dante wrote:
> > That is not a crosswind landing.
Near the beginning of the video there is a windsock in the frame.
I agree now that the crosswind component does not
seem that high. (Speaking as someone who last was a pilot
in the 70s!) I have seen that video before and I had believed
that the trouble was caused by a crosswing landing,

> > It is or was the normal approach for Kai
> > Tak.
Well hardly!

> > I can't remember if it was buildings in the way or what precipitated
> > the requirement but it certainly had nothing to do with wind.

I was a passenger into there twice. I can't recall the second one
but I do recall that on the first one (747) I was looking out of the
right hand window onto a skyscraper's balcony at a woman
hanging out her washing. She was very close. (A few hundred feet?)
The aircraft was banked quite steeply to the right at this time.

On the left there was a mountain. A big mountain.

I had a look for a while from the ground and the airliners
were just leveling the wings as they crossed the fence.
The fence was not far from the threshold. Just a couple of
seconds.

There was a big visual target (really, a big red and
white billboard) on the mountain and I
guess that the drill was to aim for it until a mark
or line was crossed and then to turn right at some rate
and hopefully come out (most of the time) pointing the
right way, This video shows that it did not always
come out exactly right.

Maybe you can have a look using Google Earth?

> My CFI's first real landing of a 747 (as opposed to sim work) was at Kai
> Tak as a Northwest first officer. Heck of a way to break in.

That wasn't him/her in the video? <g>

wrote:
> Rich Ahrens wrote:
> > Dante wrote:
> > > That is not a crosswind landing.
> > > It is or was the normal approach for Kai
> > > Tak.
> Well hardly!
> The aircraft was banked quite steeply to the right at this time.
>
> On the left there was a mountain. A big mountain.
>
> I had a look for a while from the ground and the airliners
> were just leveling the wings as they crossed the fence.
> The fence was not far from the threshold. Just a couple of
> seconds.
>
> There was a big visual target (really, a big red and
> white billboard) on the mountain and I

Save the following to a file *.kml and oopen it in Google
Earth to see the Kai Tek threshold.
The mountain is 1400ft and 2 miles away
pretty much on the extended centreline.

########### <snip> ################
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<kml xmlns="http://earth.google.com/kml/2.0">
<Placemark>
<name>Tai Kek - threshold</name>
<LookAt id="khLookAt639">
<longitude>114.1855754172161</longitude>
<latitude>22.33115115307646</latitude>
<range>9224.606404125258</range>
<tilt>4.617814675820289e-010</tilt>
<heading>137.0698383241931</heading>
</LookAt>
<styleUrl>root://styleMaps#default+nicon=0x307+hicon=0x317</styleUrl>
<Point id="khPoint640">
<coordinates>114.1943674119204,22.32364675210839,0</coordinates>
</Point>
</Placemark>
</kml>
########### <snip> ################

On a side note, when I was discussing the Kai Tak approach with a neighbor
who is retired from Flying Tigers, he told me something interesting I didn't
know about 747's.

Apparently, when you touch down and the gear takes on the weight of the
aircraft, the spoilers automatically extend, planting it firmly on the
runway. This would seem to be a handy arrangement.

Rich S.

wrote:
> Rich Ahrens wrote:
>> My CFI's first real landing of a 747 (as opposed to sim work) was at Kai
>> Tak as a Northwest first officer. Heck of a way to break in.
>
> That wasn't him/her in the video? <g>

No. You do realize that the above two sentences are all I wrote in what
you seem to be attributing to me? Everything else you responded to was
someone else's post to which *I* was responding.

Hey! That WORKS!

Cool!


> Save the following to a file *.kml and oopen it in Google
> Earth to see the Kai Tek threshold.
> The mountain is 1400ft and 2 miles away
> pretty much on the extended centreline.
>
> ########### <snip> ################
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <kml xmlns="http://earth.google.com/kml/2.0">
> <Placemark>
> <name>Tai Kek - threshold</name>
> <LookAt id="khLookAt639">
> <longitude>114.1855754172161</longitude>
> <latitude>22.33115115307646</latitude>
> <range>9224.606404125258</range>
> <tilt>4.617814675820289e-010</tilt>
> <heading>137.0698383241931</heading>
> </LookAt>
> <styleUrl>root://styleMaps#default+nicon=0x307+hicon=0x317</styleUrl>
> <Point id="khPoint640">
> <coordinates>114.1943674119204,22.32364675210839,0</coordinates>
> </Point>
> </Placemark>
> </kml>
> ########### <snip> ################
>

wrote:

>I was a passenger into there twice. I can't recall the second one
>but I do recall that on the first one (747) I was looking out of the
>right hand window onto a skyscraper's balcony at a woman
>hanging out her washing. She was very close. (A few hundred feet?)
>The aircraft was banked quite steeply to the right at this time.
>
>On the left there was a mountain. A big mountain.

The first time I flew in, I have to admit I was wondering if I was
going to end up in a big ball of aluminum. From then on (I used to
fly into HK fairly often), I'd look around for those who hadn't ever
landed there before to see what someone looks like when they're about
to die. ;-)

It IS disconcerting to look UP at apartment buildings whizzing by the
wingtips, isn't it?

Mark "white knuckle airlines" Hickey

In article om>,
wrote:

> wrote:
> > Rich Ahrens wrote:
> > > Dante wrote:
> > > > That is not a crosswind landing.
> > > > It is or was the normal approach for Kai
> > > > Tak.
> > Well hardly!
> > The aircraft was banked quite steeply to the right at this time.
> >
> > On the left there was a mountain. A big mountain.
> >
> > I had a look for a while from the ground and the airliners
> > were just leveling the wings as they crossed the fence.
> > The fence was not far from the threshold. Just a couple of
> > seconds.
> >
> > There was a big visual target (really, a big red and
> > white billboard) on the mountain and I
>
> Save the following to a file *.kml and oopen it in Google
> Earth to see the Kai Tek threshold.
> The mountain is 1400ft and 2 miles away
> pretty much on the extended centreline.
>
> ########### <snip> ################
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <kml xmlns="http://earth.google.com/kml/2.0">
> <Placemark>
> <name>Tai Kek - threshold</name>
> <LookAt id="khLookAt639">
> <longitude>114.1855754172161</longitude>
> <latitude>22.33115115307646</latitude>
> <range>9224.606404125258</range>
> <tilt>4.617814675820289e-010</tilt>
> <heading>137.0698383241931</heading>
> </LookAt>
> <styleUrl>root://styleMaps#default+nicon=0x307+hicon=0x317</styleUrl>
> <Point id="khPoint640">
> <coordinates>114.1943674119204,22.32364675210839,0</coordinates>
> </Point>
> </Placemark>
> </kml>
> ########### <snip> ################

I tried saving everything between the # signs and another including the
# signs and got an error message both times.
What am I doing wrong?

"Rich S." > wrote in message
...
> On a side note, when I was discussing the Kai Tak approach with a neighbor
> who is retired from Flying Tigers, he told me something interesting I
didn't
> know about 747's.
>
> Apparently, when you touch down and the gear takes on the weight of the
> aircraft, the spoilers automatically extend, planting it firmly on the
> runway. This would seem to be a handy arrangement.

Many Military aircraft have that same system including the A-6E and EA-6B
(they call it the "Flaperon Popup" system).

"Dante" > wrote in message
...
> That is not a crosswind landing. It is or was the normal approach for Kai
> Tak. I can't remember if it was buildings in the way or what precipitated
> the requirement but it certainly had nothing to do with wind. Yes it
looks
> impressive, maybe thats why they are well paid, 'course it's a doddle
> compared to landing on a carrier deck in heavy seas.

Barbers Point Hawaii has a very similar approach. You come in straight
toward to the beach and as soon as you cross the 'surf line' you bank 90
degrees and line up on the runway. You don't have a lot of time to react and
you've really got to 'slam it over' to line up on the runway. In fact, the
Pilot is looking out his side window to see the runway and start the turn.

On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 14:29:48 -0500, Rich Ahrens > wrote:

>My CFI's first real landing of a 747 (as opposed to sim work) was at Kai
>Tak as a Northwest first officer. Heck of a way to break in.

Excuse me but I think I detect grade AAA1* bull$hit.

Probably in the mid 90's there was article in the flying press about
Kai Tak covering such things as the flying club and light aircraft
activity (sunday mornings only) but they also followed an aircraft all
the way through the approach, with a copy of the approach plate and
pictures from the cockpit and the ground at each stage. If I recall
correctly it was a USA based carrier they followed. Great emphasis
was put on the fact that absolutely no one except pilots with very
high hours on type can bid for the HK routes and that the approach is
flown in the simulator many times before they do it for real.

The idea that new crew on type would make their first real landing at
Kai Tak is laughable - unless of course he was coming in over the
water to land on 31 when it's a piece of ****.


--

Martin wrote:
> Excuse me but I think I detect grade AAA1* bull$hit.

Your privilege. I'm reporting what he said, so I'm not bull****ting.
Whether or not he is - well, I know him, and I don't know you, so I'm
more inclined to believe him than you.

> If I recall correctly it was a USA based carrier they followed. Great
> emphasis was put on the fact that absolutely no one except pilots
> with very high hours on type can bid for the HK routes and that the
> approach is flown in the simulator many times before they do it for
> real.

Your recollection sounds spotty and even if accurate is apparently based
on a single carrier. And I'm sure he would have flown it in the sim.

> I tried saving everything between the # signs and another including the
> # signs and got an error message both times.
> What am I doing wrong?

The file that worked for me looks like this:



<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<kml xmlns="http://earth.google.com/kml/2.0">
<Placemark>
<name>Tai Kek - threshold</name>
<LookAt id="khLookAt639">
<longitude>114.1855754172161</longitude>
<latitude>22.33115115307646</latitude>
<range>9224.606404125258</range>
<tilt>4.617814675820289e-010</tilt>
<heading>137.0698383241931</heading>
</LookAt>
<styleUrl>root://styleMaps#default+nicon=0x307+hicon=0x317</styleUrl>
<Point id="khPoint640">
<coordinates>114.1943674119204,22.32364675210839,0</coordinates>
</Point>
</Placemark>
</kml>




No blank lines anywhere, and saved as "KaiTek.kml"
Don't forget the ".kml" extension.

Oh yea, you have to have Google Earth installed.