Max VS Negative to Touchdown

Hey, community! Does anybody know (possibly rl pilots chime in) what an acceptable landing VS is for landing in extreme turbulent weather? I recently landed in Fort Wayne (KFWA) which was very brutal in turbulence AND I think I touched down around -700 vs. How would this compare in real life?. A system is obviously going through that area but I really enjoy that region as it is green and peaceful.

What is the maximum landing vs on a negative for an airbus a321? Which I only just recently switched to as my main aircraft which I find to be a much more sophisticated aircraft overall than that of any other airline manufacturer, respectfully. (Seriously respectfully no arguments from Boing fans please).

For the record, there have been no flags anywhere in this thread. Everything has been withdrawn by the poster.

7 Likes

Ah ok I just deleted all my comments thought I did something wrong

1 Like

Lol. That’s actually pretty awesome. Wow.

Its fine, lets get back on topic and let the community answer the original question.

1 Like

So patria patria to be honest I have no idea is -700 ft persecond is acceptable 😂😂 ask deer crusher he’s a real life pilot

1 Like

Ok. I hope he sees the thread for sure. I appreciate your response and if you can hit below 300 vs than you sir are amazing! Lol I hope to meet a better standard sooner than later. I just want to be able to effectively recognize an acceptable VS for the aircraft that mirrors that of reality. 😀

Most aircraft consider a legit hard landing to be -600 vsi

1 Like

Any idea what makes the aircraft go boom (max vs on touchdown)

Go boom? Like crash?

like most things in aviation… it depends. Gross weight and specific airplane landing gear

2 Likes

Here’s a post I think describes it pretty well. From @KindaAngrySliceOfPie:

Discourse was being weird so I screenshotted it.

1 Like

A Cessna would crash with probably 400-600 but a airliner could take more

F18s can take an intense impact

Go boom, meaning what is the acceptable negative VS for a reasonable landing that would not threaten passenger safety nor the integrity of the aircraft.

I’d say keep it no more than 300.

in aviation there is nothing wrong with a landing that might be firm or plop in the zone.

Better to keep it in the zone than float it too far and burn down runway available

1 Like

There is no way that this is accurate, I have flown a lot as a passenger and I do not see the pilots landing at any less than -300vs.

How do you guys land? I hit 2-400 on average and please may a mod or sombody with seeing authority may confirm that. But -700 can cause spine injury to a human being?

That depends on your airspeed on final approach and the glideslope’s angle.

Look for the approach chart of your anticipated runway, there should be tables giving you the required descent (measured by FPM) rate, for different airspeeds, to keep with the glideslope all the way down.

1 Like

After years and years I land between 10-20 fpm to 100-150, max 175 or something like that but I remember on my beginning I used to do -1300 fpm Landing with the landing gear in the runway 😂

1 Like

That’s really good. I don’t think I look at my numbers well enough and am going to record a few flights to see where I’m at an actual touchdown. I use IF assistant and 90% of the time I hear clapping in the background unless its terrible weather and I come down a bit hard.

It depends on the weight of the aircraft. If you’re very light then maybe -700fpm could cause some minor damage to the integrity of the gear trucks.

1 Like