Crazy Air Canada 777-300ER Landing @ Pearson Airport (13-Nov-2023)

B

B6_Dolphin

Joined
Apr 20, 2012
Messages
292
Location
WA
Crosswinds were 17 knots, gusting to 26. Luckily, no wing strike.



As a follow-up, the subject aircraft appeared on flightradar24 today heading to Tokyo.
 
I am following the discussion regarding this, and there are a lot of different arguments by pilots, from possible stall to wind etc.
@Astro14 what is your take?
 
In other news, a recent poll by the Dunning Kruger Institute of Aviation and Deep Sea Exploration showed that 52% of guys aged 26-59 who have never flown or landed an actual plane themselves but with several years of extensive experience sipping six or seven Miller Lights in their basement on Friday nights while playing Microsoft Flight Simulator very confidently concluded that they could have easily landed that 777 way better than that pilot did.....

Said one poll participant "C'mon man, gear down, wings level, flaps 30 and 140 knots, it aint that hard dude....."
 
Overcontrolled the crap out of that crosswind landing, is what it looks like. There were big aileron inputs during the approach. Bigger in the flare.

But the reported winds, and the actual winds, aren’t always the same. @Just a civilian pilot can comment on YYZ - my understanding is that the winds there are often tricky.

Who knows, might have been an OE flight.

Everyone assumes pilots on big airplanes like the 777 are experienced, but how does a pilot get experience? They don’t fly around in empty 777s - they operate them in revenue service (with passengers) and gain experience one flight at a time.

Reckon this flight had a less experienced pilot at the controls.

A bit more experienced after that landing…
 
Last edited:
Astro14 said:
Overcontrolled the crap out of that crosswind landing, is what it looks like. There were big aileron inputs during the approach. Bigger in the flare.

But the reported winds, and the actual winds, aren’t always the same. @Just a civilian pilot can comment on YYZ - my understanding is that the winds there are often tricky.

Who knows, might have been an OE flight.

Everyone assumes pilots on big airplanes like the 777 are experienced, but how does a pilot get experience? They don’t fly around in empty 777s - they operate them in revenue service (with passengers) and gain experience one flight at a time.

Reckon this flight had a less experienced pilot at the controls.

A bit more experienced after that landing…
Click to expand...
That is a very thoughtful response. It is very easy to criticize a pilot’s flying, but when it’s you as PIC (pilot in command), that is why you are paid to be there.

I have had the opportunity to flying with a lot of pilots because I am a flight instructor. There are as many ways to land an airplane as there are pilots. However, I have noticed that some pilots like to stir the pot more aggressively and rapidly as they approach the ground. It’s an interesting phenomena. The control movements get more exaggerated as one gets closer to the ground. To me it sounds looks like random flailing, to the guy stirring the pot it is what has to be done to land the plane. If metal isn’t bent or broken, was it a good landing? Was it a great landing? Did the guy stirring the pot have a bad day? Good day?

Every landing is different..
 
AZjeff said:
@Astro14 , how close was that to a bad outcome? On big aircraft how quickly do they respond to control input, don't know how to put it, are you way behind what's happening trying to catch up? Inexperience leads to over-correcting?
Click to expand...
Big airplanes do respond quickly to control inputs - but the flight path doesn't change as quickly as on little airplanes. It's pure momentum. When you're landing a 300,000# machine, there is some inertia to be overcome. So, quick control input, quick change in pitch or roll, but a bit of a delay in the vector of the airplane as forces act on all that mass.

Hard to tell how close a call that was. The bank was excessive, as was the pitch, and the airplane bounced. So, poor landing, for certain.

But you can't tell how close the jet was to scraping anything, and you can't tell gear loading or G force from a video.
 
RedSpider said:
In other news, a recent poll by the Dunning Kruger Institute of Aviation and Deep Sea Exploration
Click to expand...
I am an early graduate of the now prestigious, Dunning Kruger Institute. Fantastic group of folks. As I mentioned, I was taught by Dr. Dunning and Professor Kruger's study subjects themselves, way back in the day. Those folks gave me a sense of unwarranted confidence in my abilities, that just can't be matched by any other course of study, anywhere. Competence, intelligence and training has no place here.....
 
The wind sock was horizontal. Gusts happen. He got the plane down and it is flying again to its next destination. Wonder how it felt to be a passenger in there?
 
I've seen an aircraft carrier landing (A6?) where the pilot hit the deck hard with one side, breaking the strut. It was touch and go training. He had to eventually land on a prepared airstrip.
 
Astro14 said:
Overcontrolled the crap out of that crosswind landing, is what it looks like. There were big aileron inputs during the approach. Bigger in the flare.

But the reported winds, and the actual winds, aren’t always the same. @Just a civilian pilot can comment on YYZ - my understanding is that the winds there are often tricky.

Who knows, might have been an OE flight.

Everyone assumes pilots on big airplanes like the 777 are experienced, but how does a pilot get experience? They don’t fly around in empty 777s - they operate them in revenue service (with passengers) and gain experience one flight at a time.

Reckon this flight had a less experienced pilot at the controls.

A bit more experienced after that landing…
Click to expand...
Nothing unique about the winds in YYZ from my experience except a reluctance by ATC to switch to landings on 33L/R when windy ( significantly slows down arrivals ).

Winds were not that strong and well within the capabilities of the aircraft.

Someone asked, "What are the risks"?

Excessive pitch attitude could result in a tail strike which causes serious damage depending on how hard it hits the runway.

The aircraft was flying the next day.
 
It's rare to have injuries from a hard landing ( except Ego ) despite the obvious damage it can do to an aircraft ( worse if the nosewheel hits the runway and porpoises ). Seen a few aircraft that needed the landing gear replaced after, but no injuries.

That said, about 30 years ago, I recall a B757 that landed in Toronto ( slam dunk visual from the downwind according to the TSB investigator I knew who handled the incident/FDR ) with the speed brakes left out by accident, and the tail hit the runway causing some injuries due to the high pitch attitude during landing.

Of course, there was the Fed EX MD-11 crash from a hard landing in Japan, but that was extreme and rare.
 
Here is a copy of that 1994 TSB accident report. First time I have read it and it says no injuries ( also says landing at Acapulco…..YYZ—ACA-YYZ flight ) , and minor damage. Interesting read. Not sure why the TSB person said there were some injuries based on what the report says. Had to be the flight he was talking about as I don’t see any other incidents like this with this airline ( another bankrupt one ).

https://www.tsb.gc.ca/ENG/rapports-reports/aviation/1994/a94f0048/A94F0048.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom