Sack the Technician!

[RonMac]

I am C9 captain.

So, if I make a tad hard landing at St Maartins, which is a delightful airport, and my holiday makers are 90% happy, and I have to fork out
$16,000 for a newish tyres, I do not need a sarcastic Techy type suggesting I leave landings to someone else!

690 ft is but a gentle bouncy bounce, that is encouraging the passengers to look forward to the start of their holidays in a spirit of
adventure!

NIt picking from technician....disgraceful.

[Sovek]

690FPM is a little hard, 11.5 feet per second to be percise, thats a little on the rough side, a touchdown at 250FPM= 4 feet per second, alot nicer.
If you dont want to hear the mechanics complain, land softer.

[RonMac]

Indeed I am Mr Slick, it was just the St maartins approach is such fun(?) gettinmg anyting on th eground is a triumph. I am sure AS^
weather produced wetahrr that did not help.

R

[Joeflyer]

Well, since most landings are considered "controlled crashes", how about stopping the rate of descent before touch down?

[Kpeters]

Some time I'd rather use a little more thrust, get past some feet on the rnwy but kiss land.

[aibiria]

Kpeters wrote:
Some time I'd rather use a little more thrust, get past some feet on the rnwy but kiss land.

you are not doing that with a b777, b747 or a a340. Right??

Cause I was the other day landing my 777 and I basically ran off the rwy as I wanted a kiss landing.

Can you imagine that in the daily mail???

MOST EXPENSIVE "KISS" LANDING IN HISTORY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>> Very sweet

[Kpeters]

Nah with a Bac-1-11 and Fokker F-100 un runways with more than 9500ft, and I land and just let em run.... :D

[jboweruk]

Joeflyer wrote:
Well, since most landings are considered "controlled crashes", how about stopping the rate of descent before touch down?

That's Carrier landings not ordinary ones.