Back to Squawk list
  • 41

Travel Caught on camera: Terrifying moment KLM plane banked sharply just a few feet over runway as pilots struggled to land in high winds

This is the hair-raising moment a KLM passenger jet banked sharply moments before it landed in the middle of a violent storm in Amsterdam. ( さらに...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Do you think this could have been done by a computer (auto land?) or someone sitting 100s/1000s of miles aways in the safe confines of a cube at HQ?

This right here is why we need human brains in the front.
Certainly autoland or remote piloting could be used. Results might differ'somewhat'.
Results might differ 'somewhat'. Damn, FA has got to give us that sarcasm font.
On the serious side, I hope Boeing stays with it's assist philosophy rather than replace, like Airbus. On Boeing FBW, the pilot still has the feel because the computer just assists the movement like hydraulics did, rather than replace it. Just like keeping the stick/yoke on the 787. I have Airbus drivers as friends that swear by that joystick and how the Bus drives. I guess this discussion will go on forever like Ford & Chevy.
Don't take this the wrong way its just my opinion. This was a good crosswind landing but I feel if the pilot would have slowed down just a little and put the nose more into the crosswind he wouldn't have been rocking as much as he was. But like I said its just my opinion.
Also the maximum crosswind and headwind landing via Auto land is 25Knots of wind. Over that the pilot must take control in landing in head wind and crosswind landings.
I don't but this is what we get from the outside with no wind or anything. It's just all speculation. Now, had he had an incident on landing, such as a gear snap or something, and scattered stuff all over the runway, we might've had more detail. LOL
I hear you. I'm not saying he was way over speed. I am just thinking 5knots lower and a more right nose into the wind as he kept turning right would have made for a better landing. I'm not saying the pilots where's trained well and the wind probably snuck up on them so they did a good job landing the plane and also putting the landing gear closer to the crosswind down first which is what is supposed to happen. I'm not saying I'm better then these pilots not worse but it's just my opinion what I feel I would have done is all. Anyways preacher we should email sometime you seem pretty Kool to chat with or in are case debate LOL.
Well, I think the wind snuck upon him a bit and that was an Oh S%^& moment. I expect he felt better when he saw it was down an had weight on wheels. LOL
gimme that thrust reverse and let's stop this heifer. LOL
Lol yes please. Once he noticed the landing gear on the runway the rudder was all he had to use really and it's better on the runway in crosswinds. Have you seen the 777 crosswind landing on YouTube where the pilots landed sideways??
I am sure they can automatic arm. 757/767 can. You arm them, and when you pull throttles, when weight gets back on wheels and you power up, they are there. Pilot option.Don't know if he had them set or not.
You can arm them on the 777-300er as soon as the plane has ample weight steady on the back landing gears if they are armed will pop up auto with or without reverse thrust but it has to be on landing. It has to do with a sensor detecting the landing.
Yeah, it's all keyed to weight on wheel's. Of course in unknown times, you may want to manually arm in order to have complete control. Just another case of FLYING THE PLANE. I'm fixing to send you an attachment.
One thing I tell people. I'm gonna be ahead of my plane no matter what I'm always about 5 minutes ahead of it. I also try to prepare for landings well in advance and be prepared for anything that can be thrown at me. It maybe a little slow on landing but sometikes slower isn't always bad.
Slower gives you thinking time. You sound like someone that has some big iron behind you.
That's was suppose to be weren't not where's
30west 2
I don't know the B777 autoland max wind limits, however on the B757/767 the autoland max wind limits are: headwind - 25 knots, crosswind - 25 knots and tailwind - 10 knots. I will make an educated guess that use of autoland on that landing was not authorized.
I don't either as most of my time was on a 757, but I doubt there is a whole lot of difference and you are probably correct, although there are some that would have had to have had it to get down. This may be a case of "here, watch this". That said, an actual wind reading would have been very helpful on this thing rather than just saying "worst storm of the century" and "Hurricane Force Winds".
As big as they are, a pilot still has a feel for how a plane reponds, or should.
mariofer 2
Agreed. Whoever was the POC during this landing, does not have a firmware version.
jcsjcs 4
I don't think crosswinds were the problem. Sudden gusts were.
the phrases in this squawk "terrifying moment" and "hair-raising moment" are both just a bit too, too much. This is silly sensationalism that the non-pilots get all hot and bothered about, and the pilots simply note that each of us looks at that video asking ourself " could I get that thing safely on the ground?", and if not, or in some doubt, then go around and go someplace else. You got the fuel and you got the self-preservation instinct. If you have gotten any acrobatic training, or if you are a glider pilot, then this is not so tough a thing to do.
royalbfh 3
Why is this terrifying? and how do they know that the pilot was indeed "struggling? it looked to me like he flew the airplane exactly like he should and landed safely with no damage or injuries/ Why is this even a topic for discussion? In other news, a KLM jetliner landed safely.... Back to you in the studio......
I was thinking the same thing.
That was a go around IMHO, with at least 300 on board - whats the point?
and no I probably wont respond :)
Looks like the hit some shear right after flare. Facebook and CSB reporting gusts to 75mph. Max cert is about 40. Good Job Boeing and flight crew. We have all been there at one time or other if we flew long enough. All could have been good or just light crosswind when they stabilized, then turn into pucker city. LOL
Here is an alternative take on the landing which clearly shows that the Daily Mail version had been sped up.
in response to the nonsense offered down the page some, that autoland or remote piloting could be used, I say balderdash. even when a flight seems from the cheap seats to be "going well", in fact there are constant monitoring and observing, from the best seats , the cockpit, that have to happen for the full duration of the flight, landing, and taxi to terminal. I won't get in any airliner without live pilots upfront, in charge and awake. We pilots make it all look too easy, hardly ever breaking a sweat, but acountants and airline executives spin some fairy tale about needing less pilots or no pilots, butthat is just faulty greed speaking there. I have been there when radars go down, when the weather turns into bad news, and when mechanical and electronic things break in flight. An experienced pilot, who has seen it all several times, prevents bad headlines and crashes and deaths. any one who says differently is stupid.
Patrick, if you are referring to what Joel says, please note the tail end of his post regarding the outcome. FA hasn't given us that sarcasm font yet. LOL
Chris B 2
What this supports is that Pilots still need to know how to actually fly. To many have lost that ability to autopilot.
Hear Hear! You are dead right there.
final word on this: all of the components have unpredictability: mechanical problems can occur anywhere, anytime. But weather- I guarantee that KLM pilot knew what he had in front of him from pilot reports from the flights just before him. Those are called PIREPS. That is why he carried a few extra knots of speed over the threshold of the runway, then took just a second to bleed that away, with some side to side motion, then contacted. EXperienced pilots can do that landing anytime, and are happy to not have to do such a landing very often. But they know they can safely do so. He also knows go-around and going to an alternate airfield. Am I right preacher?
Pretty much. I still say the puckered pants can go either way. I have had a pucker or 2 where I didn't soil anything. LOL. With nothing from onboard this looks a lot worse than it is. He could have known what he was in for or he may have been trying to beat the storm. The fact that he got down OK and that there is nothing here from the Airline or pax, we just don't know. Whole point is that he is down, and maybe while a bit bumpy, all are OK and gear probably didn't show up as needing inspected.
I'd be interested to hear from the professionals whether they would have hit the TOGA button and gone for a second attempt? Also like to see footage of previous landing to see if this was a sudden event.
Don't look to me like the Approach was that bad. Looks like a shear gust right at flare. Probably pucker city but they got down OK and as the saying goes, a good one is one you walk away from.
Agreed. Fine job on the part of whoever was flying.
Thanks guys for all the comments but what scares me about this is that its a 777... ive stood right next to it and seen how this huge plane taxi, lands and takeoff and how sluggish this is. So i was shocked to see this plane swaying like a rag doll and how close it came to an accident that could have been fatal. One word... SCARY
Never have flown a 777, but thou they are typed the same, there is difference of daylight and dark between the 757 and 767. Best comparison is that the 757 is a racehorse and very responsive. While the 767 has plenty of power and responds well(I use this because it's close to the 777)it is not near the horse that the 757 is. That said, all will fly and all will perform. Yes they are big but nowhere near underpowered. Still a pilot's airplane. Just in my personal opinion that the 757 is moreso plus a high steppin' lady. And I am just like Patrick posted here below, if there ain't 2 wide eyed living, breathing pilots sitting on the flight deck, I'll drive.
Davon: that was not a scary landing. the pilot had the 777 under control, pretty much, had a bit of a crosswind landing in some choppy , gusty winds the last 50 feet, and most certainly did not soil his underwear that day. It was by NO means near an accident. It is not sluggish, because it has thousands of pounds of thrust, and flies safely at the lower landing speeds . If this scares you, take the bus- but that is far more dangerous than flying. I don't think you know what it is you saw there.
Patrick, I'll agree with you on most of what you said, except the soiled underwear could have gone either way; whether he was just showing of to a young FO or if it caught him by surprise.LOL
now I know the roll rate on the 777 is pretty good, but if you really look at the video, it looks like it has been sped up. 777's just don't move around that much..
1. Was weather condtions above minimums for landing?
2. Did the pilot choose to continue the approach in spite of the extremely unstable winds? Why?
3. Notwithstanding the final safe outcome should the pilot have diverted once he sees on the approach that the landing is going to be very risky?
I've looked at several of these clips of X-wind landings and in my humble (experienced) opinion these guys are making attempts which are way beyond the aircraft max X-wind component. Also the flare techniques are completely wrong. The landing which is the subject of this article was not such a bad one given the conditions.
excellent awareness as the pilot figured out the pendulum swings early on and compensated very well. Gusts and crosswinds in excess of 50 knots is what we saw a skilled pilot recognize and compensate for. We have all had something like this, but this time someone documented excellent pilotage. well done...
Good job but still pucker city. LOL
Like I said below here somewhere, things could have been halfway normal out there where he stabilized, the again, this could have been one of them "watch this" moments. LOL. It would be real interesting to see exactly where the winds were though.
That's a perfectly good cross wind landing. Notice that the pilot is keeping the down wind wing up all the time. It would have been a bit unnerving for the pax. But for the pilots an extra day of training as it certainly isn't the first windy day Amsterdam has had!!
Agreed on this particular occasion, but many clips of other landings show the aircraft pointing away from the centreline and the wings more or less level on touch down. Beats me how the tyres and undercarriage stand up to some of those landings.
IMHO, from some of the comments. Bumpy approach - yes. Landing? Looking at it, it may have been a smooth one from the inside because the gear didn't get slammed into the runway, they actually touched me the wheels had a chance t spin up before the full weight fell on them. As for speed, he would have had made accommodations based on ATIS/AWOS as well as PIREPs, and while someone said he was "too fast", if he was slower, would the ailerons had enough authority to raise the right wing before the engine cowling hit? Looking at the ailerons, The last dip was not intentional as the left aileron is deflected full up, meaning the pilot was turning the control wheel to the left (trying to raise the right wing). The big boys are designed to land crosswind, and the crosswind techniques used in General Aviation will result in a tip or cowling strike in a transport jet. Keep in mind, things always look worse from the outside. I am confident the approach was briefed, parameters for a go-around discussed, and while the approach was no doubt very challenging, up front, I am sure it was less of an event then what the headlines and some comments suggest.
Sorry about the typos...fat fingers on a small iPhone screen :-(
Out of everything you said, THINGS ALWAYS LOOK WORSE FROM THE OUTSIDE carries more weight than anything. This post would have been a lot different if we had anything from the inside or even other aircraft. There may have been a surprise or 2 but nothing that couldn't be handled by an experienced pilot.
Starts at 1:07
coele1 1
*in answer to jcsjcs*
coele1 1
That is exactly what happened. Crosswinds had been there all day and bothered no one. After all, it's their home base. However windsheer occurred. No use talking about go around when you are that low.
ça fait vraiment très peur!
Amist all Monday morning quarter backing he put it down fairly smooth I think

Good job captain! !!
Chris B 1
That tip just before touch down is surprising. I think he was trying to get the upwind set of wheels down first, it just didn't happen that way.
Well, stuff happens, and he got down without any blown tires or snapped gear we know of.LOL
Go arounds? slower approach? you are idiots. Why go around when it could be WORSE on the next attempt? Why go slower, so you can hit a hole and stall? This pilot can fly me through any storm!!
To David and Mike and Pat. You are absolutely right; so don't let them "bully" you! This is a simple case of "I'm landing the big SOB no matter what"!! Though they are often ignored, there are always pilot options all the way to touchdown. And to exclude a go-around is ridiculous. Excellent"recovery"; but horrible and very dangerous judgement! That move in the AF would have meant grounding and retraining before next flt in command!
chudddds 1
Hello ladies and gentleman, today's flight will be offering an inflight special on Depends.
"Pucker"...Yep sorta like "suddenly having the super human ability to snap a railroad spike between your butt cheeks"
Perfectly done......Congrats to the flight crew
I'll let those pilots fly me anywhere. skills.
Ed Mentz 1
yeh, and why my brother in law could not go from a kc135 to an airline, they want FIGHTER pilots who know how to fly a plane, not computer monitors who dont... there may be some truth in that....(?)
I wonder how long it took to pry the seats out of the pilot's and copilot's ...

[This poster has been suspended.]

royalbfh 1
are you a pilot Mr. Oxlong? It wasn't as "unstable as you can get". yes, bumpy, yes windy and gusty. That's why you train for all types of WX so you don't get in trouble in less than favorable conditions. The decision to go around at that moment might have been proven to be catastrophic. By the time those big fans came up to T.O n1 the wheels would have already been on the ground. The PF did a great job and NOTHING happened!
Am why is this post negative thumbs up
Dubslow 11
Because the Daily Mail is a trashy publication that always goes for massively overblown headlines that are oftentimes just straight up lies.

Though in this case they actually got it reasonably close to the truth... that's quite the wind shear there
I do have a great understanding of planes and the flying dynamics even though i have never flown but in saying that i know that the most unpredictable thing is weather in aviation. For the pilot to control the plane is not impossible and is not scary. What was scary however is the UNPREDICTABLE gust that banked the aircraft as it was like 5 ft from landing. If the aircraft, to my analysis, was maybe say another 5 ft from touchdown thT aircraft may have suffered damages.
This was not an example of autoland or remote poloting. Auto land has maximum crosswind limits, although wind conditions are not given, from the video you can assume that the crosswinds are well above the limits for using auto land.

This is an example of a skilled pilot landing in difficult conditions.
Am I the only person who thinks the footage has been speeded up?
btweston 1
The Daily Mail is pretty whack, but that was intense.
Bob: "hit a hole"? Whoa!! LOL
Good piece of flying by the pointey end crew. They were on their game.
zennermd 1
Agreed! That was one spectacular and graceful landing.
Nope - that was a superbly controlled landing. Scary as heck to the passengers, yes, but totally under control.
chalet 1
KLM/Air France continue to bleed, losses in each of the past 5 or quarters amounted to roughly half a billion Euros each time. I would hate to see that this otherwise absurd landing had to do with undue pressure on pilots from upper echelons to cut flying times as much as posible to reduce expenditures.
Well, I have read all the comments posted here and have watched the movie a number of times.
In my humble opinion this is a demonstration of a well handled approach and landing in difficult conditions by a competent pilot, with what is still required today despite all the computers and gizmos THE ABILITY TO FLY THE AIRPLANE AND GOOD JUDGEMENT is paramount. It will be many decades,if ever,that this can be perfectly replicated by any electronics. It is something which is difficult to define in our species not everyone has it, but generally training, application and experience brings it out in the 'right stuff' in many aspects of human endevour.
Piloting airplanes safely is one, and the continued maintenance of handling skills is essential this was a demonstration of such.
The Media love anything that can be sensationalised and the 'armchair experts' love to expound their 'knowledge'. It was ever thus...


アカウントをお持ちではありませんか? 今すぐ登録(無料)!機能やフライトアラート、その他様々な設定をカスタマイズできます!