727 emergency landing without the nosewheel

[Leffe 4]

This pilot on a 727 (Iran air) did a very, skilled landing.http://youtu.be/gFOuyeYwHms/ Leffe

[Paul_Smith 92]

Oh wow! Well done him!

[eSimmer 10]

Nice job. Doesn't seem to have touched the wheel brakes: seems like air braking AKA the F-16 high AOA on landing using the body as an airbrake.That guy knows his B-727.

[ZachLW 37]

Nice job. Doesn't seem to have touched the wheel brakes: seems like air braking AKA the F-16 high AOA on landing using the body as an airbrake.That guy knows his B-727.

In the case of a nose gear failure, I've always felt it a better idea to set the nose down while you still have plenty of pitch control (ie air over the horizontal stabilizer/elevator which translates to more speed). This way, the nose can be sat down much easier, avoiding unnecessary damage to the airframe. Directional control is going to be minimal either way, so why not try and save the aircraft. Plus, braking can be started the moment the nose touches down.

[Paul_Smith 92]

I know where you are coming from and you are probably right, but to be quite honest with you, airframe reuse would not rate highly in my decision making process if I found myself in that situation. In fact, I suspect it would come slightly behind wondering if I could claim reasonable laundry expenses.

[eSimmer 10]

In the case of a nose gear failure, I've always felt it a better idea to set the nose down while you still have plenty of pitch control (ie air over the horizontal stabilizer/elevator which translates to more speed). This way, the nose can be sat down much easier, avoiding unnecessary damage to the airframe. Directional control is going to be minimal either way, so why not try and save the aircraft. Plus, braking can be started the moment the nose touches down.

I agree. The absence of a "ton" of sparks implies that he set her down at the optimal speed: precluding brake usage while, still having enoughelevator control authority. I think airframe damage was kept to a minimal quantity under the circumstances.

[ZachLW 37]

I know where you are coming from and you are probably right, but to be quite honest with you, airframe reuse would not rate highly in my decision making process if I found myself in that situation. In fact, I suspect it would come slightly behind wondering if I could claim reasonable laundry expenses.

I agree. The absence of a "ton" of sparks implies that he set her down at the optimal speed: precluding brake usage while, still having enoughelevator control authority. I think airframe damage was kept to a minimal quantity under the circumstances.

Yeah, I believe you're both correct.I've always said if the airplane betrays me, it's trash. Then again if it's reasonable and safe to save from hull loss, why not?

[Nixon 30]

ZachPlease excuse me but am not sure from your posts if you think the pilot did a good or bad job!

[ZachLW 37]

ZachPlease excuse me but am not sure from your posts if you think the pilot did a good or bad job!

Haha. Sorry Nixon! He did fantastic! I guess I'm referring to most of the nose gear up landings you see, where the pilot will hold the nose off until it just drops onto the runway.Just making conversation I suppose.

[Nixon 30]

ZachConversation is a great thing and I agree with you; he or she did a great job.

[Sumits81 9]

oohh well done there..