@@michaeldalpiaz540 Flying IFR should really be taught to every pilot. Everything you need to fly safely, and with the help of modern VOR and ILS systems, even navigate and land in the shoddiest of weather, is on the instrument panel. I'm only speaking in my experience as a sim pilot though, I've heard that irl it's made a lot more difficult due to how screwed up the body's spatial orientation gets if there's no visual reference for movement.
@@gregoryborton6598 Yup, every pilot that goes through basic training is required to have 3 hours of simulated IMC training ("hood work") to prepare them for the rare chance of venturing into IMC. A competent pilot will be able to save his life by using the instruments to get himself out of IMC (U-turn or descent). Actual instrument rating requires a lot more hood work (40 hours minimum) and the ability to incorporate every possible procedure and equipment emergency. And of course without autopilot. However, instrument flying skills perish quickly and easily so the FAA mandates that instrument rated pilots meet certain criteria for recency of experience (called "currency").
As a private instrument pilot, though years ago, I can relate to how extremely welcome, to put it mildly, it is to see those approach lights long before reaching minimums, especially after having to depend on the instruments for some time to get there, such as descending in steps with other planes at a busy airport. The pros must get used to it since they do it all the time, but when it's only occasionally that one has to do it, you can't help but experience quite an adrenaline rush followed by marked relief when you can see those super bright lights guiding you home.
@@arthurmead5341 The 757 is too cramped. I was stuck on one for a 5 1/2 hour flight across the US. This is a route that was formerly flown only by the wide-body jets.
@@jah0524 flown across the Atlantic on many aircraft. The 757 is no more or no less cramped than any wide body when it comes to economy seating. Two aisles make absolutely no difference.
I moved to the USA from UK about 30 years ago, and our first destination was this exact airport during a severe thunderstorm. It shut all runways down for almost an hour. This was my first experience with a severe thunderstorm in the USA and I thought the world was ending.
I''m not a pilot, but I've heard that any landing you can walk away from, is a good landing. I kinda like that expression. This cockpit view gives you a feel of what these guys do on a daily basis. Personaly, I'd have soiled myself. And given that this was posted in 2011, I'd propably not have stopped screaming yet. Nice one guys. Kudos.
Friend, when I first flew I was terrified....I though I would not be coming back... I was the most scared person on that aircraft. It's ok to be afraid. Planes are safe....I now have flown a lot, and am used to it. I am glad I did it....I have seen the Pyramids of Egypt, a lot of wonderful things, and met lovely people. Give it a try...Good luck
He had 3 red and 1 white on the PAPI and his EGPWS called "Glideslope"... That's a bit more than I am comfortable with. His PNF also should have called it and he should have called correcting. I wouldn't have been proud of this.
You can always hit the centreline, if you know for sure exactly how the wind is blowing.... and nobody ever knows that for sure!!! That was pretty good judging by the cockpit indicators, and the wheels stayed off the grass..... lots of accidents are caused by low level corrections, in the interesting area just above the ground! Not to mention the possibility of skidding sideways on a wet runway... patience!! Cross wind component looked enough to get a Cessna 150 down going square across.
A 1 dot deviation is not a huge deal and actually VERY common. It's not the end of the world. Also the crosswind crabbing technique did just fine. Landing isn't about being perfect. No landing is ever perfect. Flying is about being safe. Despite what you call a dangerous approach because they were 1 stinkin dot low, was actually a very safe approach. I would without thought fly with those pilots any day.
they could compansate for the crosswind landing by taking the plane a bit right from the centerline of the runway and make it closer to the centerline or exectly on it at touchdown.
As a passenger I noticed some pilots seem to make a concerted effort for the wheels to touch down as smoothly as possible, while others just want the plane on the ground.
In a strong crosswind you want to be slightly upwind at touchdown. Put the downwind gear on the centerline. If you blow a tire downwind, or a thrust reverser does not deploy upwind you've bought some runway to wiggle with downwind. Keep in mind also that runway contamination/braking reports will be a factor. A crab in the 75' is fine all the way through touchdown, no need to kick it out and frankly kicking it out at 20-50 ft in gusty crosswinds is asking for a "stress event" in your life. The gear trucks are designed to take the side loads and a slick surface works to your advantage in this scenario. "Glideslope" callout over the lights is not something you go jerking the airplane around over slight back pressure to slow the ROD until your over the pavement - just keep what you have. The ONLY action to take if your at risk is TOGA - you don't try and fix it/recapture at 75ft. He was not in any way at risk as he had visual. CAT III - yeah TOGA - but in CAT III you're just a passenger and the computers NEVER get it wrong. :) - 737 driver.
This wasn't a low visibility landing, as you can see then saw the Runway at about 900ft. And you can see also (of couse, if you understand the basic of aviation) that they made a low approach, 3 red one yellow.
A/C it's okay and passengers are okay .. that's what we called safe landing .. regardless to there position on GS and they weren't aligned with the Localizer but all of that due to the Downdrafts from the thunderstorms and there were X-wind component that's the reason !!! And for ur information guys in order to land in this type Conditions the crew must obtained the Low Visibility Approach rating .. those guys did a great job .
Many Boeing airplanes are actually certified to land with a full crab for a x-wind and then straighten up after touchdown for the roll out, without using the wing low sideslip method at all.
It always amazes me that such a wonderful piece of technology as a modern airliner has such Mickey Mouse windshield wipers. Are you telling me that the engineers couldn't come up with something better? I think of this every time I see one of these rainy day landings or takeoffs.
The wipers need to do their job below 1000’ and also have the ability to stow properly at 34,000’ doing Mach .80. The fact the engineers can accomplish both is actually quite an accomplishment.
The fact that even HAS wipers is a win. That 757 is old school though, either junk it or give it a refitting: www.aviationtoday.com/2017/05/09/ups-upgrade-boeing-757-767-cockpits/
@@Species5008 judgmental , nice word and you are right , i read the technical explanation , so i withdraw . nevertheless , maybe we can see it as a sign, given all of the technical perfection , forces of nature are really strong
I hated instrument training, especially approaches under the hood & the few I've done in actual IFR down to near minimums. I'm such a visual person it's hard to not see where I am & trust my gauges.
The guys up front are fully capable of hand flying the approach and landing...as a retired pilot I can tell you most of the time we couple the auto pilot to the approach...sit back and monitor...so don't think we are super humans...
