Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Zach

approach and landing speed for a340/md-11

Recommended Posts

HeyI've been flying with the smaller jets for quite a while now and just moved over to the bigger ones (a340 and md-11).Everything is going really well, BUT, in the a340/md-11 checklist it says that the landing speed should be 145-150 knots.Well, I manage to keep the speed att that but it results in a mega flare which doesnt look nice :S.Infact I personally land much smoother and better with 165-175 knot approach..Am I doing something radically wrong, or is everything as it should?After all, when I look at real a340 and md-11 landings on youtube they dont seem to flare very much at all..In my case to kep the 145-150 knot speed I cant see anything out from the cokpit so I have to use virtual cockpit and adjust thee view a bit to be able to land at all :D.thanksZach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest belga1

Hello,Not the first time this question is on the bench 26253307.gifSee this video I posted as answer ...Seem's to me nothing abnormal... just I "grease" the landing there ...http://www.vimeo.com/4111257Regards.bye.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on a lot of factors, you could be doing something wrong, but maybe not, there is a lot more to landing than simply 'the correct approach speed', because that speed can differ based on a lot of things: weather, centre of gravity, weight, height above sea level for the airport etc, etc.Your aircraft weight will affect the approach speed to a large extent, as will how that weight is distributed on your aircraft. So, fuel and payload are things to look at, also you need to check how much power you have set and how much flap you have set on. Airports well above sea level will generally require more speed and power to maintain the approach, and the hotter the temperature, the less lift you'll have and the less power your engines will be able to develop.The flaps create a lot of lift, but they also create a lot of drag too when on large settings (they are meant to do that so they slow your speed on the descent), so the wrong settings could result in you needing too high an angle of attack in order to maintain enough lift along the correct descent profile, which then also needs more power etc. Conversely, not enough flaps can create difficulty in maintaining the correct speed on the descent (think of them as brakes when going downhill). It certainly sounds like some of that could be the case if you cannot see things on the approach, which would tend to indicate you are needing to keep the nose up too high to maintain lift with a high angle of attack, which then needs more power too.If you have too high an angle of attack and need a lot of power to maintain the correct descent profile, you'll be in 'coffin corner' on the flare and that might be your problem. Remember too, that bigger jets have a lot of inertia, and that means if you come in hot, you'll have difficulty flaring correctly, because your aircraft won't want to change its vector as quickly as a lighter aircraft would. You can fluff things a bit in a lighter aircraft because its lower weight means it can pick up speed and change its vector very quickly, but a big jet cannot do that, which, incidentally, is why wind shear is so dangerous for big jets.The thing to do is try an automated ILS approach and watch the settings of things such as the angle of attack, the throttle settings and all that sort of stuff. Set an ILS appraoch up and save the FS file, then reload it a few times and watch the aircraft autoland whilst carefully observing all that is going on. When you've observed all you can, reload the file again and try to emulate what you saw by manually following the needles on the primary flight display.Hope that helps a bit.Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vtx

..first off there is a md11 and a md11f..according to boeing the md11 at max landing weight of 458.000 lbs in standard atmosphire of 59 degrees and standard pressure of 29.92 approach speed is 153..knots thats the base you can work with..if its a hotter day you will be a bit faster..colder a bit slower..pressure also effects speed as posted by clock..and remember this is all at max landing weight..you may be lighter which will affect speed to...so the fact you need to carry a greater speed for a good landing makes me ask ...1 are your flaps down to correct setting..2 is your weight correct..458.000 lbs and 3 have you trimmed the aircraft for landing...like to know how you made out

HeyI've been flying with the smaller jets for quite a while now and just moved over to the bigger ones (a340 and md-11).Everything is going really well, BUT, in the a340/md-11 checklist it says that the landing speed should be 145-150 knots.Well, I manage to keep the speed att that but it results in a mega flare which doesnt look nice :S.Infact I personally land much smoother and better with 165-175 knot approach..Am I doing something radically wrong, or is everything as it should?After all, when I look at real a340 and md-11 landings on youtube they dont seem to flare very much at all..In my case to kep the 145-150 knot speed I cant see anything out from the cokpit so I have to use virtual cockpit and adjust thee view a bit to be able to land at all :D.thanksZach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zach -- you can find useful information about the A340 landing speeds in the VAPP section of the excellent website to which Egbert Drenth has provided the link (above). Thanks Egbert!Please bear in mind that I'm only a flightsimmer like many others here and I'm the farthest thing in the world from a pilot who actually flies the A340 or the MD11. However, having taken some time to research the available resources and discussions on the internet, I do believe that the A340 and the MD11 are extremely different in all aspects and especially in regard to landing. I believe that if you check around you'll find that the usual landing speed for an MD11 is about 158 knots, while that of an A340 is around 138 knots. See also the thread on this same forum about the landing characteristics of the MD-11. You will find similar opinions (and indeed the very same message as in the OP) on many aviation forums. Not only does it land at a very high speed, but the MD-11 also requires a different landing technique from other large transport aircraft--and a difficult and tricky technique as well. Just look, on the other hand, at the wings of the 777, A380, and A340 -- there are visual similarities, and indeed these very large, very heavy aircraft all share the trait of landing at relatively low speeds.Now, the question is whether the FS plane that you're flying reflects these characteristics to one degree or another. I hope so! I know that the Project Opensky 777 flies right on the numbers. As to the other types, I don't know what's available. After reading recently about the MD-11, I doubt that any FS model captures its flying characteristics as described by pilots on aviation forums--and I doubt that many of us simmers would be able to land it if it did have fully accurate characteristics. However, my real question is this -- is there, as the original post implies to me, a common "a340/md-11 checklist"? You should probably look for a more accurate checklist. The speeds you quote are way too low for the MD-11 and way too high for the A340, so it's no wonder you're having trouble with landings. Assuming, that is, that you're flying FS models with accurate flight characteristics. It's not easy to find the info, but it's out there. Tip of the hat once again to Egbert Drenth!All the best,Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vtx

158 according to boeing for the md11F 153 for the md11 this might help http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/...eing%20727'

Zach -- you can find useful information about the A340 landing speeds in the VAPP section of the excellent website to which Egbert Drenth has provided the link (above). Thanks Egbert!Please bear in mind that I'm only a flightsimmer like many others here and I'm the farthest thing in the world from a pilot who actually flies the A340 or the MD11. However, having taken some time to research the available resources and discussions on the internet, I do believe that the A340 and the MD11 are extremely different in all aspects and especially in regard to landing. I believe that if you check around you'll find that the usual landing speed for an MD11 is about 158 knots, while that of an A340 is around 138 knots. See also the thread on this same forum about the landing characteristics of the MD-11. You will find similar opinions (and indeed the very same message as in the OP) on many aviation forums. Not only does it land at a very high speed, but the MD-11 also requires a different landing technique from other large transport aircraft--and a difficult and tricky technique as well. Just look, on the other hand, at the wings of the 777, A380, and A340 -- there are visual similarities, and indeed these very large, very heavy aircraft all share the trait of landing at relatively low speeds.Now, the question is whether the FS plane that you're flying reflects these characteristics to one degree or another. I hope so! I know that the Project Opensky 777 flies right on the numbers. As to the other types, I don't know what's available. After reading recently about the MD-11, I doubt that any FS model captures its flying characteristics as described by pilots on aviation forums--and I doubt that many of us simmers would be able to land it if it did have fully accurate characteristics. However, my real question is this -- is there, as the original post implies to me, a common "a340/md-11 checklist"? You should probably look for a more accurate checklist. The speeds you quote are way too low for the MD-11 and way too high for the A340, so it's no wonder you're having trouble with landings. Assuming, that is, that you're flying FS models with accurate flight characteristics. It's not easy to find the info, but it's out there. Tip of the hat once again to Egbert Drenth!All the best,Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Now, the question is whether the FS plane that you're flying reflects these characteristics to one degree or another. I hope so! I know that the Project Opensky 777 flies right on the numbers. As to the other types, I don't know what's available. After reading recently about the MD-11, I doubt that any FS model captures its flying characteristics as described by pilots on aviation forums"I think that the PMDG model is pretty close. I've had one or two hairy landings in mine. :( "--and I doubt that many of us simmers would be able to land it if it did have fully accurate characteristics." Why on earth not? Pilots aren't gods, they're human beings like the rest of us. If they can learn to do it, so can we!Iain Smith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vtx

iainsmith..your 100%right..there are some planes that wont reflect the numbers ..and in some cases not even close..some can be tweeked to be very close or right on but as im sure you know something else suffers...so in alot of cases its a trade off ...opensky planes are very good and respond well to adjustments ..sga also great planes and again respond ok to adjustments ..i use a 757 300 now and tweeked out by me and a 757 300 pilot ..(friend of mine)..the numbers on takeoff and landing are as boeing published..the sga a300b4 i have my friend did not fly but he was able to based on his experence in other heavys help me to get closer than it was to be on the numbers and feel....but the post i put here with the boeing approach numbers and weights are a great way to have atleast a base line from which we can work when it comes to what a plane is all about..

"Now, the question is whether the FS plane that you're flying reflects these characteristics to one degree or another. I hope so! I know that the Project Opensky 777 flies right on the numbers. As to the other types, I don't know what's available. After reading recently about the MD-11, I doubt that any FS model captures its flying characteristics as described by pilots on aviation forums"I think that the PMDG model is pretty close. I've had one or two hairy landings in mine. :( "--and I doubt that many of us simmers would be able to land it if it did have fully accurate characteristics." Why on earth not? Pilots aren't gods, they're human beings like the rest of us. If they can learn to do it, so can we!Iain Smith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Now, the question is whether the FS plane that you're flying reflects these characteristics to one degree or another. I hope so! I know that the Project Opensky 777 flies right on the numbers. As to the other types, I don't know what's available. After reading recently about the MD-11, I doubt that any FS model captures its flying characteristics as described by pilots on aviation forums"I think that the PMDG model is pretty close. I've had one or two hairy landings in mine. :( "--and I doubt that many of us simmers would be able to land it if it did have fully accurate characteristics." Why on earth not? Pilots aren't gods, they're human beings like the rest of us. If they can learn to do it, so can we!Iain Smith
Hello Iain, I don't think the problem is whether or not pilots are gods, or we're human beings, or anything like that. It's just that after reading whatever I could about landing the MD-11 (especially in the wake of the recent accident at Tokyo), I learned two things. The first is that there is a special control augmentation on the real aircraft that automatically changes the pitch at touchdown, and the second is that it's apparently a matter of extremely tight timing and a delicate feel for exactly what's going on to know just what to do--and what not to do, and when not to do it--as the pitch change takes place. Now, although I'm neither a real-world jet transport pilot nor an FS aircraft designer, I've never come across or seen any mention of anything in FS9 similar to the automatic nose-pusher on the MD-11. Furthermore, since I don't have a Cray supercomputer to run FS9 on, I have to be honest and admit that I sometimes get a microstutter or a momentary dip in frame rates at touchdown, especially at large airports with hundreds of AI aircraft around. To put it differently, my FS9 runs very smoothly with the occasional exception of a stutter just at touchdown. More than one other contributor to this board has noted a similar phenomenon. That was part of what I was referring to when I said I doubted that many simmers would be able to land a super-accurate version of the MD-11. On most aircraft, I've got everything trimmed and settling down nicely on the numbers, and a few fractions of a second of stutter at touchdown don't make any difference (although they annoy the h*ll outof me). However, I imagine getting that same microstutter just at the moment when the pitch augmentation kicks in on the MD-11, and in that same split-second I've got to react or not react to the pressure on the control column, and by just the right amount and for just the right duration--well, I don't see it working out too well, at least on my humble computer.So please don't lecture about thinking somebody's a god, or whether or not we can learn to do everything -- it's just a matter of realism in a retail computer simulation, and the limits of it. FS is great, but it's not the real world. Which I for one am happy with, since I have no idea what my existential status would be following even that very first BSOD in the middle of a flight all those years ago, let alone a few landings I might have botched up along the way.All the best,BillP.S. the popular commercial forum "Pprune" has an interesting and extremely long thread on MD-11 landing characteristics in reference to the recent Fedex accident in Tokyo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Iain, I don't think the problem is whether or not pilots are gods, or we're human beings, or anything like that. It's just that after reading whatever I could about landing the MD-11 (especially in the wake of the recent accident at Tokyo), I learned two things. The first is that there is a special control augmentation on the real aircraft that automatically changes the pitch at touchdown, and the second is that it's apparently a matter of extremely tight timing and a delicate feel for exactly what's going on to know just what to do--and what not to do, and when not to do it--as the pitch change takes place. Now, although I'm neither a real-world jet transport pilot nor an FS aircraft designer, I've never come across or seen any mention of anything in FS9 similar to the automatic nose-pusher on the MD-11. Furthermore, since I don't have a Cray supercomputer to run FS9 on, I have to be honest and admit that I sometimes get a microstutter or a momentary dip in frame rates at touchdown, especially at large airports with hundreds of AI aircraft around. To put it differently, my FS9 runs very smoothly with the occasional exception of a stutter just at touchdown. More than one other contributor to this board has noted a similar phenomenon. That was part of what I was referring to when I said I doubted that many simmers would be able to land a super-accurate version of the MD-11. On most aircraft, I've got everything trimmed and settling down nicely on the numbers, and a few fractions of a second of stutter at touchdown don't make any difference (although they annoy the h*ll outof me). However, I imagine getting that same microstutter just at the moment when the pitch augmentation kicks in on the MD-11, and in that same split-second I've got to react or not react to the pressure on the control column, and by just the right amount and for just the right duration--well, I don't see it working out too well, at least on my humble computer.So please don't lecture about thinking somebody's a god, or whether or not we can learn to do everything -- it's just a matter of realism in a retail computer simulation, and the limits of it. FS is great, but it's not the real world. Which I for one am happy with, since I have no idea what my existential status would be following even that very first BSOD in the middle of a flight all those years ago, let alone a few landings I might have botched up along the way.All the best,BillP.S. the popular commercial forum "Pprune" has an interesting and extremely long thread on MD-11 landing characteristics in reference to the recent Fedex accident in Tokyo.
Hi Bill, sorry I wasn't intending to lecture you but I misunderstood where you were coming from but I see now what you mean. The pitch augmentation control that you mention or LSAS as I think it's called by Boeing, is, according to PMDG, modelled in their version. As I said, I have had a problem during landing with a sudden pitch or roll on at least two occasions so PMDG may well have got it right! I too have read what some RL MD11 pilots have said about its characteristics and one has to wonder why it's still allowed to fly if it's as bad as some say.I know what you mean about stutters, I get them on mine and, yes, they are so annoying! I'm hoping to upgrade my machine sometime this year to get the fluid, stutter-and-jerk free performance that FS9 is capable of.Iain Smith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Iain, and thanks for the interesting reply -- useful information about PMDG claiming to model the LSAS. Have to check that out.... Nevertheless there's that nagging uneasiness that I think we've both experienced in different ways, where trying to add more realism (through complex aircraft, airport sceneries, heavy AI traffic, etc.) bites back with the tiniest little deterioration that can nevertheless cut into performance at just the most critical (and enjoyable!) moments. It's always a matter of tradeoffs and running as fast as you can just to stay in one place -- maybe that's where FS comes closest to RL!All the best,Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158 according to boeing for the md11F 153 for the md11 this might help http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/...eing%20727'
Hmm...i'm curious, this landing speed of about 153-158 knots depending the md-11 version. I was wondering, is this with flap 50 or flap 35?. I was looking at the freeware overland/sms md-11 which i did some test flying on. May i also ask what the average pitch trim is for this aircraft?Thank you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vtx

the speed you saw on the chart is for max gross landing weight..i would say its also with full flaps..as far as trim..that will depend on temp pressure sustained wind etc... trim settings can and will CHANGE depending on all these factors not to mention load and CG..so the answer would be .....give the amount of trim the plane needs... thats what an instructor told me when i asked a similar question...do you feel you are haveing to give to much trim to maintain the speed of 153 -158 ??

Hmm...i'm curious, this landing speed of about 153-158 knots depending the md-11 version. I was wondering, is this with flap 50 or flap 35?. I was looking at the freeware overland/sms md-11 which i did some test flying on. May i also ask what the average pitch trim is for this aircraft?Thank you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...