Scudrunners

I don't get it.  Looked perfect to me.

Yes indeed -- perfect -- hit the target on a contaminated runway. Just shows you how fucked up things are.

Jesus, have a good laugh reading the experts comments below that on Youtube.

Nelson Airport 3100 feet long with an icy runway, you need to get her down and stopped doesnt need to be pretty.

I guess people would have preferred to see him float
the first half of the runway, fishing for a greaser.

WTF is it with people and greaser landings?  Is it
really worth running off the end of the runway for?

Do the expert structural engineers think it was
damaged during the landing?

I must have missed something. What was wrong with that landing?

Looks like it should be a " how to land on a contaminated runway " video to me.

Exactly.  I don't know what the fuck people are thinking today.

[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=5325.msg13722#msg13722 date=1483912012]
WTF is it with people and greaser landings?
[/quote]
It's the recency effect: everything else being equal the last thing to happen to you is remembered most clearly.  Couple that with the general attitude that the best of something is the one that has the most of some often arbitrarily chosen value.

Is it right?  Not really, but that's how it is until someone addresses it properly.

I viewed the video several times.  Not a hard landing, but an "arrival", a "rock and roller".

The aircraft appears to be a fast at touchdown which is almost a three pointer.  After touchdown, the rear wheels come off the ground momentarily.  When they're back on the ground, the nose comes off for a short period.  Then all three are in contact and reverse thrust is applied.  The runway appears to be minimally contaminated as reverse is cancelled prior to the turn off.

This is not what I would use as an example of "How to land on a contaminated runway".  This was a bit of "an arrival". 

PS  A smooth touchdown is quite acceptable - and easily accomplished - on all but wet runways.

Kal Tire operates two Citation Jets out of a 3500 foot runway here and their approaches are on speed, on glide slope, with smooth, no bounce landings.  A thing of beauty.   

J

[quote author=John Swallow link=topic=5325.msg13773#msg13773 date=1484085086]
I viewed the video several times.  Not a hard landing, but an "arrival", a "rock and roller".

The aircraft appears to be a fast at touchdown which is almost a three pointer.  After touchdown, the rear wheels come off the ground momentarily.  When they're back on the ground, the nose comes off for a short period.  Then all three are in contact and reverse thrust is applied.  The runway appears to be minimally contaminated as reverse is cancelled prior to the turn off.

This is not what I would use as an example of "How to land on a contaminated runway".  This was a bit of "an arrival". 

PS  A smooth touchdown is quite acceptable - and easily accomplished - on all but wet runways.

Kal Tire operates two Citation Jets out of a 3500 foot runway here and their approaches are on speed, on glide slope, with smooth, no bounce landings.  A thing of beauty.   

J
[/quote]




[url=http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article ... HVugVg8KK0]http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article ... HVugVg8KK0[/url]




[url=http://jetadvisors.com/cessna-citation-ii-performance/]http://jetadvisors.com/cessna-citation-ii-performance/[/url]


Interesting critique of what looked like a safe landing to a short, wet runway to me.


Interesting also a king air B200, for example,  takes a lot more landing distance than a light citation.