Lao Aviation HAN-LPQ in Y and a HARD landing
Jul 2, 2012, 7:50 am
#3
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Munich
Programs: Miles & More;
Posts: 377
Great Report - i also liked the other chapters of your travel in Asia.
And you beat me to it! I am flying Lao Airlines next month and was pretty sure i would be the first one here to write a Tripreport about that Airline
And you beat me to it! I am flying Lao Airlines next month and was pretty sure i would be the first one here to write a Tripreport about that Airline
Jul 2, 2012, 5:54 pm
#5
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2009
Location: DFW
Programs: AAdvantage Platinum, Hilton HHonors Gold
Posts: 2,863
Jul 3, 2012, 8:45 pm
#6
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,575
I agree with your sentiments regard Lao Airlines. I flew them 2 segments last year and it was very much on par with the rest of the worlds airlines. The flights were onetime, planes clean and I felt safe.
On a side note... a firm landing doesn't necessarily mean it was unsafe. Many times firm is better. Also, you'd be surprised how many flights are landed by "eye sight" and not the instruments. Everything from the turbo prop to the big heavies, it happens way more than you think and is certainly not unsafe.
On a side note... a firm landing doesn't necessarily mean it was unsafe. Many times firm is better. Also, you'd be surprised how many flights are landed by "eye sight" and not the instruments. Everything from the turbo prop to the big heavies, it happens way more than you think and is certainly not unsafe.
Jul 4, 2012, 11:36 am
#7
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Left
Programs: FT
Posts: 7,285
i have landed at a few airports where you have to come in pretty hot since if you miss the landing you need enough juice to go around. we slammed down in a 777 harder than i ever had in HKG during typhoon winds....so much so the pilot warned of it before landing.
Jul 4, 2012, 12:37 pm
#8
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,575
Approach speed has NOTHING to do with the "juice" that might be needed if a go-around should be necessary. Approach speed is predicated on a/c weight as well as the gust factor of the wind, due to the fluctuation of airspeed the gusts will cause. If a go-around is necessary the "go around thrust" will help take care of the energy required to climb again.
Jul 4, 2012, 3:34 pm
#9
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Left
Programs: FT
Posts: 7,285
Approach speed has NOTHING to do with the "juice" that might be needed if a go-around should be necessary. Approach speed is predicated on a/c weight as well as the gust factor of the wind, due to the fluctuation of airspeed the gusts will cause. If a go-around is necessary the "go around thrust" will help take care of the energy required to climb again.
Jul 4, 2012, 3:53 pm
#10
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,575
The main basis for determining approach speed is the weight. The higher the weight, the higher the airspeed needed to keep the airplane flying. Having said that, during gusty wind conditions, it's not uncommon to bump up the approach speed a few knots above of what the weight requires. This is done because the airspeed can fluctuate a great deal in gusty conditions so it provides an extra margin of protection for maneuverability as well as staying away from the stall speed. Typically this is not done if the wind is calm or consistently blowing from the same direction.
Jul 4, 2012, 10:56 pm
#11
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Cinnabar Mines
Programs: UA Kayaker and LVF, OZ Carbonesque
Posts: 104
Did the snack box still look like this? Your tale of a hard landing reminds me of the message on the box. Yes, you're safe with us.
Snack box by firedeviation, on Flickr
Snack box by firedeviation, on Flickr
Jul 5, 2012, 3:36 am
#12
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2009
Location: DFW
Programs: AAdvantage Platinum, Hilton HHonors Gold
Posts: 2,863
Did the snack box still look like this? Your tale of a hard landing reminds me of the message on the box. Yes, you're safe with us.
Snack box by firedeviation, on Flickr
Snack box by firedeviation, on Flickr