Back to Squawk list
  • 38

Lowest 737 Landing

제출됨
 
You better watch your head as the planes come in at Skiathos Airport. (www.youtube.com) 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


mschacht44
Inches away from a 737 yard sale on the runway. That said, I would love to see this in person.
guymed03
Hope this pilot's next job isn't a Cruise ship.
preacher1
Per Mr. Mittal's post below, methinks that Captain needs a little more training.
akayemm
" ... The runways at Skiathos are characterised as 'short and narrow' and, as such, airlines typically require their pilots to undergo additional training for operations there. Landings may only be performed by captains, so if a captain is taken ill on an inbound flight, then it must be diverted to an alternative airport (usually Volos/Nea Anchialos which is the closest facility to accept passenger flights). ...... "

ref.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skiathos_Island_National_Airport

Crazy landscape, of sorts for an airport !
Enjoy
flyingcookmosnter
Stop the vid at the right time and you can see how close the mains come to the perimeter fence.

Cool share, thx.
PhotoFinish
Wow! Less than the height of one wheel.

Must be a really short island runway. Guess you don't want to come in high and go off at the other end of the runway.
tyketto
This is why I really wouldn't want to compare this to St. Maarten. For aircraft type, it's definitely a close comparison. As far as the landing, I'd compare this more to St. Barts than St. Maarten. That airport, plus this one really does have the potential to get your head taken off.
akayemm
Dear friend Brad Littlejohn, may I supplement about St. Bart , just a 650m strip ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustaf_III_Airport
A crazy description.
And crazy locales
https://maps.google.co.in/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=21.125498,81.914063&spn=47.698535,79.013672&z=4

" The History Channel programme Most Extreme Airports ranks Gustaf III airport, which is casually referred to as "St. Barth's", as the 3rd most dangerous airport in the world. " ....... google wikipedia
spatr
spatr 1
Wiping out before the runway isn't much better.
PhotoFinish
"you don't want to come in high and go off at the other end of the runway..."

into the water.

Seemed to be a stabilized approach, just a tad low. The fence would break away. But still seemed a bit too close to the threshold of such a short runway that regularly receives commercial passenger jets.

I get it. Still would suck to hit the fence, rip it out of the ground and drag it all the way down the runway. Would get a bit messy, and embarrassing.
preacher1
LOL, Suck is an understatement. LOL
ExCalbr
Nah. It's hard to tell from the video, but it looks to me to be at least three times a wheel diameter above a line that would be the same height as those signs. And I think those signs are higher than the fence. I could take a screen shot into an image editor, take some measurements, and do some calculations to get an accurate height. Perhaps someone else will do so. That would be a bit anticlimactic, though, with little point other than to satisfy some pedants. It was, indeed, a low landing.
unclebigpete
Exactly, Vic, it's not as low as it seems at first glance. The camera angle distorts it considerably, and as the main wheels cross over the cars beside the brick wall, the wheels are about 15 feet up. Passing over the guardrail on the left, they are still at least 10 feet over anything fixed.
preacher1
He is bad low. Tat is not standard fare for that airport. There is another video posted showing others at least reaching the marks on the runway rather than the threshold as this jobob did. Put the fence and thrillseekers aside, he was low. He touched on the threshold!!
PhotoFinish
I don't say touching the threshold isn't low, but had Asiana 214 touched down on the threshold, that plane would still be flying today and all those passengers would have been been violently shaken, leading to all kinds of severe injuries and death.
akayemm
Dear preacher1 and PhotoFinish, please correct me. The way PhotoFinish has mentioned, touching down at the 'threshold' may be bad BUT NOT fatal for landing.
Yes, a second earlier, in context of threshold, results can be disastrous .
Isn't it what you two are trying to say ?
akayemm
Post script
Considering landing speed of 160 kmph/100 mph/87 knots, in one second the aircraft will travel 44 metres/147 feet .
Landing as many metres or feet earlier than threshold !
The actual may be around 120 knots ? Almost 1.5 times the distance as computed above !
OMG
PhotoFinish
It's not useful to speak in terms of seconds at flight speeds even when approaching touchdown, when the distances distanced are only feet, rather than mikes traveled during the flight.

The variance in short landing distance between the two examples is over 500 meters. More specifically, the 737 was only a few feet short of runway (but still landing on level concrete).
The Asiana plane was 500 meters and a few feet short of the hash marks on SFO's 28R runway (also hitting concrete but not level at all. the concrete was vertical rather than horizontal in the shape of a seawall keeping out San Francisco Bay).

Most of the 500 meters between where Asiana crashed and where they were supposed to land is flat level concrete. Only a few feet further and the severity of the adverse consequences would've dropped quickly (no pun intended).

I still think that Asiana 214 would've cleared the sea wall had it nose not been turned up in such a steep attitude, stalling the plane prior to crossing the seawall. The mains and the tall hit the sea wall. A more gentle attitude aiming at the threshold would've provided significantly more lift, increasing the likelihood the plane would've crossed safely over the seawall.

From the point on, it's all level concrete (mostly runway and a bit of RSA for about the first 400 ft). That would've greatly increased the chances of either a safe (albeit hard) landing or a go around (possibly with a touch and go).

For comparison, as far as the 737, landing a few feet short of the runway markings won't have a significantly adverse impact (as long as the concrete is thick enough and the plane doesn't hit an obstacle (fence, car, person, camera, etc.)
preacher1
Threshold is just that, at the edge. It will generally take the weight of specified weight aircraft, but will not handle the impact of that same aircraft landing as there is a much higher weight involved. That said, you can get by with it sometimes and as PF was talking about 214, if he would have cleared the seawall and landed on that threshold, he might not have scattered everything over the landscape and killed 3 people/injuring many.
preacher1
Wheels were low over the fence but look at the tail
Musketeer1
Just wanted to put on a show for the crowd, passenger safety be damned. Low, flat, and bouncing before the threshold isn't what I would call a short field landing. That being said I could sit and drink next to one of these runways all day long.
geharper
Exciting, but yes, a "Tad" low. He actually landed short of the white line that marks the beginning of the runway.
preacher1
There is another video posted on here somewhere that shows other flights landing, but they aren't near that low. LOL
ForeverJewyl
Wow
Look at the tail of the plane as its landing.
Couldn't be any closer
n7224e
Maybe this is where the Asiana guys ended up.
PhotoFinish
No way. Then had trouble with 11,000 on a clear afternoon. This strip is just barely 5 grand. This is not the flight that pilots who unsure of their skills will volunteer to fly.

[This poster has been suspended.]

preacher1
His low landing. There is another video posted that is showing 757's and 37's landing much higher and getting the marks as they should.
whm3
Nice work!
devsfan
Free buzz cut..#4 please!
mynewego
mynewego 1
No that bad, low, but obviously not too low, chill out everyone. In fact, there maybe some unforeseen difficulties and the crew actually nailed it. Yes CAVOK, but there are other factors in an apprach.
preacher1
You need to look at that video again; then look at the other one. Taking the gawkers and all the thrill out of it, forget the fence and look at the threshold and runway marks. THE SUCKER WAS LOW, FOR WHATEVER REASON. Look at the other video and you'll see the 757's hitting the marks as they should. Inch may be as good as a mile when it comes to a near miss or landing but I sure wouldn't want that as a routine happening. If the landings are captains only, that one needs mere training.
CaptainFreedom
He put a good scare into those lamebrains who like to have a passenger jet whisk 10 feet over their heads.

[This poster has been suspended.]

mynewego
mynewego 1
You are stupid.

로그인

계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
종료
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..
종료