CAT II? No problem!

Hey everyone!


Today I took the Air Canada A321 our for a spin in CAT II conditions. It was fun with a nice landing! Unfortunately wasn’t 100% grease but it was somewhere at that -170 VS area.


Flight details

Route: Full takeoff and landing at KSFO
Aircraft: Air Canada A321
Flight time: 15 minutes



Lately I’ve been getting heavy criticism for the “bright” shots. Please keep in mind this is my style, it has been internally noted but will most likely not be changed, thanks!

See you around!

39 Likes

Lately I’ve been getting heavy criticism for the “bright” shots. Please keep in mind this is my style, it has been internally noted but will most likely not be changed, thanks!

Who could complain about this? I love this style! It really brings out the details in the aircraft and scenery. Personally, I think this style is great. What software did you edit this with? Keep up the great work!

2 Likes

Great photo mate! I really like the black Air Canada livery especially on the A321.

3 Likes

Thanks man! Very much appreciated! It’s people who have been posting “random or funny” comments on my posts about them being too bright. Obviously I accept their opinions but at times it’s a little bit annoying.

Also I used Both Lightroom and Snapseed for this!

1 Like

No problem! I use Snapseed, but it might be cool to see how different the pictures can be if I use lightroom too… 🤔

1 Like

Yeah! A cool mix 😉

1 Like

See, this is where the whole aviation community loses it for me, when did this become the focus? Like sure everyone wants to set it down nice, but 170 is right in the range airplanes are designed to land. Auto land targets about 150 for Boeing, and at least for Boeing’s but I have every indication to believe that Airbus should be similar, pilot manuals are explicit, Don’t float the aircraft, and Don’t keep increasing the flare angle to decrease FPM. Far too many pilots that I see on live keep pulling back floating well past the touch down zone, and causing tail strikes. Fly the plane to the ground, landing below about 60 FPM can actually damage the aircraft. When enough pressure isn’t applied it can cause the gear to shimmy causing significant damage. Not to mention tail strikes, and poor breaking action caused by delayed activation of the auto break system, and runway being eaten up floating it. Not to say don’t try to be smooth, just saying 170 is perfect, fly the plane first, and if it’s smooth great, but don’t sacrifice an actually good landing.

4 Likes

I said this because my average landings are at -150 and I’m not joking. And why I said that was because it definitly wasn’t my best landing, especially for CAT II. I’m actually good at landing.
Everyone has their standards at certain things.

1 Like

That livery fits the background really well! Really well done!

I mean you don’t need to love the style and that’s taste, but no need to exert heavy criticism at all.
I personally do really like pictures like today though!

1 Like

Thanks as always Julian!

1 Like

Great shot buddy, keep up the good work.

1 Like

Thank you Vinne!

Sorry is that came off as being too personal. It’s just a gripe I’ve had for ages, and wanted to say something. There’s far more annoying cases, sorry I came for you. I just feel like every needs to chill out

1 Like

No no worries, I was just genuine confused there for a second 😂 All good mate.

1 Like

I love this style as well. The shadows and blur effects on that photo are stunning!

1 Like

Thanks man, that means a lot to me!

Nice shot! Looks like the front wheel will hit first though…

1 Like

Not really. I think you’re mistaking the back wheel for the front wheel 😉 Thanks mate!

That’s is wonderful editing @BravoCharlie

Awesome job!

1 Like

That pic looks like the front wheel is inches from the ground and the nose is tipped down thats all lol Maybe its a deceiving pic lol

1 Like