The 757 has massive issues in regards to fuel efficiently, it is one of the worst, next to the 767. They are very comfortable, and very fast.. but burn an insane amount of fuel. IE, MIL doesn't care about fuel lol. I honestly don't know why, they don't fly people in C130's
This is why so many airlines haven’t retired the 757 and they want Boeing to build an updated version of it. The plane is so versatile. Can operate from short fields (or ice lol ), has good range, powerful engines, and its stylish. It’s such a well made plane.
It's not stylish, but everything else you said is correct. It looks like it's been on a diet and just starved itself lol. It's so damn skinny. Looks horrible
@@piotrkol91 It looks horrible in my opinion. It's soooo long, it's engines are too powerful for the aircraft, the nose is too short, the wing root is too narrow, and the wings look short and stubby. Just in my opinion. I also don't like it when the engine nacelle covers the exhaust nozzle, as in the case of the 757, and some A320's.
@ShanwickAviation I don't deny this, but my point is it looks bad in my opinion. At least it's really easy to spot from the ground at my school cuz it's so long lol (of course back when school was open)
@@chesterwang3070 as a person who works on a 737 regularly, I would love the opportunity to work on a 757. I hold my airline will buy them if Boeing ever decides to create an updated version of it. Yeah it’s long, but from all my flight attendant friends who worked on it, they loved it.
Love the 757 so much... Such cool aircraft with such great capability. But ouch, that landing. Also, hello to everyone else being recommended this video right now
I dream of being a pilot and flying to every continent, including Antarctica. I imagine it's a great experience to do something so rare and unusual as visiting Antarctica, and it would be especially fulfilling to resupply a remote research station and then bring people back home after a long tour so far from home, on the most inhospitable and distant place on the planet. This video is awesome and it's cool to see the crew so excited to make the trip, and also mindful of the unusual aspects of landing somewhere like that.
Quick lookover, theres runway distance markers aaaaand not shit else. No border markings. 1k-3k markings. Dont see lights rn. Dont see slope indicators on the ground. Fkn everything is white. Yeah no shit landings wont all be butter there
@@TrFusion There are factually 15 reasons why what you call a “hard landing” occurs. Please tell me what type of crystal ball you used to investigate and determine this? An actual hard landing on a modern commercial aircraft will trigger an alert from the computer. The plane cannot fly after this event until it is inspected. An inspection which lasts more than a few hours. The fact that the plane took off without being place out of service for an extended time is a good indication that this was not a “hard landing”.
@@poppiarlin5612 Is it difficult for you to see that this was a damn hard landing? The second bounce nearly had the frontwheel touch down first as it bounced several meters up into the air. It doesn't take some FAA Air Crash Investigation professional to see that.
@@ablietski He is responding rather passionately to transfusions's comment where he makes an assumption of his own(pilot over controlling...) pass along as fact. Yup it's a hard landing with a fast derotation, but without seeing the pilot's control inputs we can't conclude that the aircraft was indeed overcontrolled nor can we say this was a porpoise landing as we can't see whether the landing gear bogies remained on the ground or not during derotation.
It wasn't exactly firm, but yes that is what you're supposed to do, to make sure the wheels have enough grip. Same thing works for landing on wet runways.
It's built to handle it, but yeah, harder than your average paved strip. In this case its actually more dangerous to land smoothly with all of the ice and snow on the 'runway'
Again, this was not a true honest to God hard landing. If it was there would be alarms going off in the cockpit thus signaling an alarm back the the airline also. If this had been a real honest to God hard landing the plane would not have taken off in a timely matter. It would had to undergo a thorough inspection. Not just a few hours either it would have taken days. And for someone to state in a previous comment it was the pilots fault it’s totally crazy. This was probably an intentional landing.
I'm a former airliner landing gear engineer (math analysis, as opposed to design). I looped the few seconds of "hard" landing at the four-minute mark a few dozen times, and have the following educated guesses (vs certainties -- between the touchdown hidden by the runway's downslope plus that darn subtitle box, there's not enough visual information to be sure). Best guess: Not a hard landing -- just a bouncy one. Some background: * Typical airliner sink rate at touchdown is 4-6 fps. "Design" sink rate (threshold of structural damage) is 12 fps. Structural failure occurs at 15 fps (on paper, anyway -- MD-80 in flight test touched down at about 16 fps and broke the tail off, but not the gear). * Bounce or not-bounce is determined by several factors including sink rate, pitch rate, aircraft weight, shock strut inflation, and especially spoiler phasing. Spoiler deployment (usually by increments) is important for dumping enough wing lift quickly enough that the plane doesn't bounce back into the air (most commonly during a low sink rate landing) due to rebound of the compressed shock strut + tire ... but not so quickly that the landing is hard, or even worse that the shock strut bottoms metal-on-metal. * One telltale sign of a hard landing (or not) is what the wing does. Lots of deflection of course means lots of vertical deceleration, same as for any cantilevered beam. Now looking at what the video shows: * At touchdown, a bit of wing deflection but not much. * Maybe the gear leave the ground or maybe they don't. No way to tell from the video, though there appears to be a lot of rebound which as I indicated above is more about off-nominal parameters in general than a hard landing in particular. * Between what's happening with the main gear, and possibly pitch rate input from the pilot, a big pitch-down onto the nose gear and then back to the mains. * Some more "random" pitch motion from things like braking beginning and an imperfect runway profile. So all in all, a bouncy landing at maybe 8 fps? A bit harder than normal, but not particularly hard -- just exciting : ) Someone asked about the runway's friction. Effective friction coefficient (with antiskid operating) is in the 0.7-0.8 range on dry pavement, more like 0.4 for flooded pavement, 0.4-0.2 on packed snow, and 0.1-ish on ice. It all depends on the particulars of a given surface, but that gives you some idea.
@@thomasvleminckx Is it showing? : ) Actually, I'm quite used to retirement by now, and don't miss 45 minutes (or more) from home to desk. But about five years ago I began noticing the Comment sections of UA-cam aviation/space videos, and was struck by the paucity of specialist input to them. So I took that as an excuse to dispense some "inside" things people wouldn't know absent professional experience. In a few cases, it's been something where I'm the one person still alive who knows the answer, so get it out there on the internet before that number becomes zero.
Love the 757! We called it the SLAVE SHIP when I was a crew member with American Airlines! It was long and with one aisle..looked like a Roman Barge! lol
I'll miss the AA 757, Miami will never feel the same. So many memories from Latam, Caribbean, cross country, and Europe. Thanks for getting me where I needed to go.
Icelandic pilots are the best. We were flying out of Kevlavik airport on a stormy night in november, wind gusts were about 70-80kmh and we were tossed around on the runway but they managed to bring us home safely :D
The 757 is the perfect aircraft. I have seen this plane take off and land so many times when I worked for a rental car agency where we were located at the end of the runway strip. A lot of airlines dumped this aircraft to quickly. Now they complain they need a medium aircraft for fights when this is what it was built for in the first place.
@@MudhaffarAdhwa - I was unaware that there were "Antarctican" native people, and was curious about the origin of your surname. The continent of Antarctica is a genuine mystery to me, and I wish to learn more. As best as I can figure it out, the whole continent seems to be shared by many nations, and I cannot figure out who is the governing body. Can you help?
That runway is well prepared, no wonder the 757 landed without any bother, Pilots from Joe Mc Bryon,s Buffalo Air regularly land on unprepared ice strips in the Canadia Sub Arctic. Delivering fourteen tons of diesel to DEW Radar Sites in a hot rod a 1958 Lockheed L-188 Electra. No ponced up runway with fancy markers ,just bare ice, no anti skid brakes ,just sheer arse clenching piloting.
Marvellous experience . Great shots . I wonder if Icelandic continued with the venture , does anybody know ? Could not choose a more reliable aircraft than the B757-200 .
And how about those mighty Rolls-Royce RB211-535E4 engines! The RB211 and the 757 … brilliant … it doesn’t get much better than that engine/airframe pairing!
"The Kiwis were doing this LONG before NAS arrived on the scene. The only difference being that the Kiwis make these guys look like amateurs..." nzhistory.govt.nz/culture/erebus-disaster On the morning of 28 November 1979, Air New Zealand Flight TE901 left Māngere airport, Auckland, for an 11-hour return sightseeing flight to Antarctica. At 12.49 p.m. NZST, the aircraft crashed into the lower slopes of Mt Erebus killing all 237 passengers and 20 crew on board. It was the worst civil disaster in New Zealand's history. .
Surprisingly, no! Icing can only occur during precipitation or visible moisture in the air (such as in fog or clouds). Antarctica is a very very dry place, it's actually classified as a desert. So as long as it isn't warm and snowing there is no icing risk.
Icelandair Planes have Business Class which is in 2+2 configuration at the front of the plane. Whether or not on the flight there were 2 classes in operation I don't know.
@@MMarchant so where do these people stay? Not that I am ever going there I live in Chicago I have no desire to see anymore snow than I have to deal with at home.
I would imagine it's more to do with visibility. Depth perception when landing on ice can be very misleading (could be why the crunched the landing at 4:00) so company procedures probably state conditions must be near perfect.
Well.....not sure at all WHY I'd want to leave my nice warm condo for... pure cold ? ... you can't fool me it is COLD and Windy,.... I can find snow on my local mountains.
Not a single comment about where the passengers were going when they de-planed. I liked everything about this video, but I cannot think of a single reason why a tourist would want to go there. That place is cold, white and featureless. Repeat, COLD! 🙄
I have just checked the map and err... why is there a need for a plane that can use short landing strips in Antarctica? Its not like the place is massively populated without space for long runways, Im sure they can accomodate a few hundred feet extra :D
You have to build the runway every year on a long enough stretch of solid ice with a gentle enough gradient. Antarctica also has mountains you have to avoid on the approaches, and environmental impacts to consider (esp near the coast). It is never as easy as it seems to position a runway.
I see this is being recommended to everyone at the same time.
yep
The 757 has massive issues in regards to fuel efficiently, it is one of the worst, next to the 767. They are very comfortable, and very fast.. but burn an insane amount of fuel. IE, MIL doesn't care about fuel lol. I honestly don't know why, they don't fly people in C130's
Yup
Yep
Yeah and
This is why so many airlines haven’t retired the 757 and they want Boeing to build an updated version of it. The plane is so versatile. Can operate from short fields (or ice lol ), has good range, powerful engines, and its stylish. It’s such a well made plane.
It's not stylish, but everything else you said is correct. It looks like it's been on a diet and just starved itself lol. It's so damn skinny. Looks horrible
Well I have to agree it looks absolutely beautiful and unique unlike all those new ones ;)
@@piotrkol91 It looks horrible in my opinion. It's soooo long, it's engines are too powerful for the aircraft, the nose is too short, the wing root is too narrow, and the wings look short and stubby. Just in my opinion. I also don't like it when the engine nacelle covers the exhaust nozzle, as in the case of the 757, and some A320's.
@ShanwickAviation I don't deny this, but my point is it looks bad in my opinion. At least it's really easy to spot from the ground at my school cuz it's so long lol (of course back when school was open)
@@chesterwang3070 as a person who works on a 737 regularly, I would love the opportunity to work on a 757. I hold my airline will buy them if Boeing ever decides to create an updated version of it. Yeah it’s long, but from all my flight attendant friends who worked on it, they loved it.
I thought I’d be watching a MSFS2020 video lol
same
@@usecodejelly211 bruh the fuck is that pfp that ytber is cringe af
I don't know how, it doesn't even look like it.
@@ethansaviation2672 MFS cant beat this
@@Simulation101YT ofc it can't, people are just getting silly
Love the 757 so much... Such cool aircraft with such great capability. But ouch, that landing. Also, hello to everyone else being recommended this video right now
Nice aircraft to fly on. I love the 757s.
I dream of being a pilot and flying to every continent, including Antarctica. I imagine it's a great experience to do something so rare and unusual as visiting Antarctica, and it would be especially fulfilling to resupply a remote research station and then bring people back home after a long tour so far from home, on the most inhospitable and distant place on the planet. This video is awesome and it's cool to see the crew so excited to make the trip, and also mindful of the unusual aspects of landing somewhere like that.
When I looked at this I thought it was fake but now I watched it my passion for being a pilot when I grow up is even bigger now
Will you please pay for my hostel accommodation
Woa. Bounced landing at the 4 min mark. Otherwise, great job!
When everything is the same color,,,, it makes it real difficult to land. Oh,,,, there's the ground kinda thing. Okay Ice!
@@kenhurley4441 ,,,,,,,,,,
Quick lookover, theres runway distance markers aaaaand not shit else. No border markings. 1k-3k markings. Dont see lights rn. Dont see slope indicators on the ground. Fkn everything is white. Yeah no shit landings wont all be butter there
4:02 Damn, that's a hard landing.
@@TrFusion Holy shit, that must have been a scary landing as passengers
@@TrFusion
There are factually 15 reasons why what you call a “hard landing” occurs.
Please tell me what type of crystal ball you used to investigate and determine this?
An actual hard landing on a modern commercial aircraft will trigger an alert from the computer. The plane cannot fly after this event until it is inspected. An inspection which lasts more than a few hours.
The fact that the plane took off without being place out of service for an extended time is a good indication that this was not a “hard landing”.
ikr
@@poppiarlin5612 Is it difficult for you to see that this was a damn hard landing? The second bounce nearly had the frontwheel touch down first as it bounced several meters up into the air. It doesn't take some FAA Air Crash Investigation professional to see that.
@@ablietski He is responding rather passionately to transfusions's comment where he makes an assumption of his own(pilot over controlling...) pass along as fact. Yup it's a hard landing with a fast derotation, but without seeing the pilot's control inputs we can't conclude that the aircraft was indeed overcontrolled nor can we say this was a porpoise landing as we can't see whether the landing gear bogies remained on the ground or not during derotation.
Shorter runway made of ice, land her FIRM just like this captain did. It's good for her !! That's gotta be quite a rewarding adventure.
It wasn't exactly firm, but yes that is what you're supposed to do, to make sure the wheels have enough grip. Same thing works for landing on wet runways.
@@chesterwang3070 I'm assuming that that runway was grooved, too? Either way, that would be a cool thing to see in-person as an aviation fan.
Landing looks like it's very hard on the airframe though!
That must’ve been a mistake😂. On the proving flight, I saw a very smooth landing
It's built to handle it, but yeah, harder than your average paved strip. In this case its actually more dangerous to land smoothly with all of the ice and snow on the 'runway'
Again, this was not a true honest to God hard landing.
If it was there would be alarms going off in the cockpit thus signaling an alarm back the the airline also. If this had been a real honest to God hard landing the plane would not have taken off in a timely matter. It would had to undergo a thorough inspection. Not just a few hours either it would have taken days.
And for someone to state in a previous comment it was the pilots fault it’s totally crazy. This was probably an intentional landing.
I'm a former airliner landing gear engineer (math analysis, as opposed to design). I looped the few seconds of "hard" landing at the four-minute mark a few dozen times, and have the following educated guesses (vs certainties -- between the touchdown hidden by the runway's downslope plus that darn subtitle box, there's not enough visual information to be sure). Best guess: Not a hard landing -- just a bouncy one. Some background:
* Typical airliner sink rate at touchdown is 4-6 fps. "Design" sink rate (threshold of structural damage) is 12 fps. Structural failure occurs at 15 fps (on paper, anyway -- MD-80 in flight test touched down at about 16 fps and broke the tail off, but not the gear).
* Bounce or not-bounce is determined by several factors including sink rate, pitch rate, aircraft weight, shock strut inflation, and especially spoiler phasing. Spoiler deployment (usually by increments) is important for dumping enough wing lift quickly enough that the plane doesn't bounce back into the air (most commonly during a low sink rate landing) due to rebound of the compressed shock strut + tire ... but not so quickly that the landing is hard, or even worse that the shock strut bottoms metal-on-metal.
* One telltale sign of a hard landing (or not) is what the wing does. Lots of deflection of course means lots of vertical deceleration, same as for any cantilevered beam.
Now looking at what the video shows:
* At touchdown, a bit of wing deflection but not much.
* Maybe the gear leave the ground or maybe they don't. No way to tell from the video, though there appears to be a lot of rebound which as I indicated above is more about off-nominal parameters in general than a hard landing in particular.
* Between what's happening with the main gear, and possibly pitch rate input from the pilot, a big pitch-down onto the nose gear and then back to the mains.
* Some more "random" pitch motion from things like braking beginning and an imperfect runway profile.
So all in all, a bouncy landing at maybe 8 fps? A bit harder than normal, but not particularly hard -- just exciting : )
Someone asked about the runway's friction. Effective friction coefficient (with antiskid operating) is in the 0.7-0.8 range on dry pavement, more like 0.4 for flooded pavement, 0.4-0.2 on packed snow, and 0.1-ish on ice. It all depends on the particulars of a given surface, but that gives you some idea.
It's hard to stay retired, isn't it?
@@thomasvleminckx Is it showing? : ) Actually, I'm quite used to retirement by now, and don't miss 45 minutes (or more) from home to desk. But about five years ago I began noticing the Comment sections of UA-cam aviation/space videos, and was struck by the paucity of specialist input to them. So I took that as an excuse to dispense some "inside" things people wouldn't know absent professional experience. In a few cases, it's been something where I'm the one person still alive who knows the answer, so get it out there on the internet before that number becomes zero.
@@marcmcreynolds2827 Well, your insight is more than welcome. Thanks for this.
Why not. A 757 is a easy airplane to fly and lots of range.
fantastic moment NAS Corporation....nice video
Love the 757! We called it the SLAVE SHIP when I was a crew member with American Airlines! It was long and with one aisle..looked like a Roman Barge! lol
I'll miss the AA 757, Miami will never feel the same. So many memories from Latam, Caribbean, cross country, and Europe. Thanks for getting me where I needed to go.
If only all of Icelandic was as intuitively understood as Loftleidir
Icelandic pilots are the best. We were flying out of Kevlavik airport on a stormy night in november, wind gusts were about 70-80kmh and we were tossed around on the runway but they managed to bring us home safely :D
The 757 is the perfect aircraft. I have seen this plane take off and land so many times when I worked for a rental car agency where we were located at the end of the runway strip. A lot of airlines dumped this aircraft to quickly. Now they complain they need a medium aircraft for fights when this is what it was built for in the first place.
757 continues to impress. Fantastic bird.
Further proof that the 757 is the BEST sky pencil and should be redone with new engines for future sales.
Great job! Very nice to see the classic 757 still in action. Such a nice plane that Boeing should have never taken out of production.
GREAT NEWS FOR THE BOEING COMPANY AND THE PILOTS. OUTSTANDING FOOTAGE ALSO. THANKS!
How the hell did I never hear about this until the UA-cam algorithm did its thing 6 years later!!!?
RIP In Pieces. 100 passengers now have slipped lower disks.
That was a pretty hard landing. Can imagine it’s hard to determine sink rate without the makers and contrast of a paved runway
during these kind if conditions, getting the plane on the ground is more important then a smooth landing
@@747simmer4 thanks you for actually making sense in a comment. Hah,
I was waiting for someone to use just a bit of logic
The 757 is so overpowered it is a natural fit for a job like this.
757 The most handsome
Nah the 747 is
@@LanesAviationYT nah 757
@@LanesAviationYT The 747 is the queen and the 757 is the sports car
A sturdy, versatile aeroplane the 757.
I worked on this airplane, what a small world
The Antarctica flight is a very different experience from other flights, isn't it?
Why is UA-cam promoting tourism in Antarctica? 🧐
As an Antarctican, it's a government initiative
@@MudhaffarAdhwa - Is that your real name? Just curious.
@@gilbertfranklin1537 yeah why 🤔
@@MudhaffarAdhwa - I was unaware that there were "Antarctican" native people, and was curious about the origin of your surname. The continent of Antarctica is a genuine mystery to me, and I wish to learn more. As best as I can figure it out, the whole continent seems to be shared by many nations, and I cannot figure out who is the governing body. Can you help?
That runway is well prepared, no wonder the 757 landed without any bother, Pilots from Joe Mc Bryon,s Buffalo Air regularly land on unprepared ice strips in the Canadia Sub Arctic. Delivering fourteen tons of diesel to DEW Radar Sites in a hot rod a 1958 Lockheed L-188 Electra. No ponced up runway with fancy markers ,just bare ice, no anti skid brakes ,just sheer arse clenching piloting.
Marvellous experience . Great shots . I wonder if Icelandic continued with the venture , does anybody know ? Could not choose a more reliable aircraft than the B757-200 .
The 757 is one of a kind.
And how about those mighty Rolls-Royce RB211-535E4 engines! The RB211 and the 757 … brilliant … it doesn’t get much better than that engine/airframe pairing!
Does anyone know the ICAO code for this airport? Because I want to fly here in X-Plane 11 or Microsoft Flight Simulator.
They said it's a non-instrumental airport, so there must be no ICAO code. You can search it up on the map, because it was included in this video.
SCGC for this particular airport. Another common one in Antarctica is NZIR at McMurdo.
@@PUpilot Thank you mate.
Love ❤️ and enjoy the Boeing 757. It’s a work Horse. Amen 🙏🏻
I thought this was gonna be some funny flight sim challenge
Great video!
This is a good video, thanks for sharing
757 - every pilots dream.......skinny, long legs and big boobs ! It was my first Boeing type rating.
Happy it was icelandair
Why the heck did Boeing stop 757 production?
Subbed. Great content. The best is yet to come in Antarctica.
She is just such a beauty *_*
That had to be a 7000 foot runway for that plane to stop !!!
amazing! I would love to work there!
The Thing slipped aboard the aircraft disguised as one of the crew.
The Boeing 757 is the best plane Boeing had ever built, they need to bring back this masterpiece. It’s way better than the Airbus A320 family.
They still have lots flying
They won't, but the 797 will probably be similar to the 757 but more efficient and a bit larger
But the 757 and A320 aren't competitors, the 737 and A320 are.
WOAH, is nobody going to mention those triple axle ford vans?
That was a ksp landing right there
Where is the airport on that glacier
Wish I was there.
The Kiwis were doing this LONG before NAS arrived on the scene. The only difference being that the Kiwis make these guys look like amateurs...
"The Kiwis were doing this LONG before NAS arrived on the scene. The only difference being that the Kiwis make these guys look like amateurs..."
nzhistory.govt.nz/culture/erebus-disaster
On the morning of 28 November 1979, Air New Zealand Flight TE901 left Māngere airport, Auckland, for an 11-hour return sightseeing flight to Antarctica. At 12.49 p.m. NZST, the aircraft crashed into the lower slopes of Mt Erebus killing all 237 passengers and 20 crew on board. It was the worst civil disaster in New Zealand's history.
.
Their 757's were Air Force ones. As for the DC-10, those did not land there, just sightseeing flights.
@Mike Henry
Quack! Quack!!
Bahaha, goddamn Yanks are SUPER precious!!! XD
How did I know jr would be Iceland air
Someone needs to send this to Swiss001
I love aviation and I think this is supper cool, It just takes us the other way from saving our planet from global warming
Some of their planes are at KROW for storage. Thanks COVID! That tail number TF-FIN is definitely here, refuels on it it a few times now.
What if the plane goes tech and your stranded there, what do you do
Fly some help there from either Chile or one of the many other Antarctic landing strips supporting international missions.
Nice 🙂👍
Awesome
So, there's no concern about icing once the aircraft is in Antarctica?
Surprisingly, no! Icing can only occur during precipitation or visible moisture in the air (such as in fog or clouds). Antarctica is a very very dry place, it's actually classified as a desert. So as long as it isn't warm and snowing there is no icing risk.
Does George V work at Icelandic?
One place I haven’t landed a 75.
J H C!!!, it looks like a Ryan Air flight landing at Bristol, do the same flight in Joe,s 1942 Douglas DC-4 Skymaster.
I guess you could call it ice landair
Is there deicing for the aricraft before take-off in Antarctica? if yes, do the have deicing trucks in Antarctica?
No need. The air is so dry.
no because the air is dry and it dosent snow as much as people think
What’s the Runway Friction Index out there ?
I seriously hope one day thell start making passenger flights to Antarctica
DAP Airways still flies to Antarctica doing commercial flights
@@MMarchant yay
"Into Antarctica"
Will you please pay for my hostel accommodation
Looks like a pretty long runway to me
Hey everyone, let's fucking ruin the last pristine place on Earth so we can win at Instagram!!!
Why do they only have a 2-2 configuration?
for weight
Icelandair Planes have Business Class which is in 2+2 configuration at the front of the plane. Whether or not on the flight there were 2 classes in operation I don't know.
Well the cabin is in a all 2 2 layout.
Do they still fly these? And how do I get tickets?
They don't operate that route now, but you can fly to Antarctica with DAP Airlines
@@MMarchant so where do these people stay? Not that I am ever going there I live in Chicago I have no desire to see anymore snow than I have to deal with at home.
Flat earthers wya
they fell off the edge
Chillian Spanish is hard to understand! It sounds like they are speaking Russian.
Great to see there are sub titles!
@HigNoMee How can you tell?
@HigNoMee Is that harder than Spanish?
@HigNoMee ok from what I can tell in this video you guy's speak gibberish.
HAHAHAHA You're joking but it is true, Chileans speak spanish very funny and indeed... we (latinos) need subtitles (sometimes) to understand them.
@@alahollywood O Great maybe you can help me with my spanish? ?
That landing at 4:00. Yikes🤣
Everyday our world gets smaller and smaller.
what language is this?
icelandic
It’s icelandair the language is in the name mate
Eskimo
Those RR's seemed a little smokey.
May be due to extremely cold temps?
what language are they speaking??
Icelandic, of course.
@@orvaldursigursson5740 I thought it was Antarctican 😂😂
@@zero1fifty8 Oh,,,,, that's cold!
@@zero1fifty8 Only penguins speak that.
@@zero1fifty8 On ice; icelandic.
4:04 hard landing
No big deal, US Air Force C141 landed in Antarctica, circa 1992.
The USAF/USANG has been flying jets from NZCH to McMurdo since the 1960's.
@@kwerk2011 Yep, Me Retired long ago VXE-6 Aviator. 4 years to the ice.
4:02 I literally shouted ‘OUCH!’
We should leave that continent alone. It needs our absence
Nah better to leave the Americas alone and invade Antarctica
why they need to see the rwy from that far? cant they program an RNAV approach...? or is it prohibited?
Because there is no rnav or any instrument approach procedure available.
@@Ryan-sw4xy thx captain obvious, you can program one yourself bro... with the fmc
I would imagine it's more to do with visibility. Depth perception when landing on ice can be very misleading (could be why the crunched the landing at 4:00) so company procedures probably state conditions must be near perfect.
@@aengberg1 makes more sense. but still kind of weird with two GPS's and three inertial navigation systems on board
@@aengberg1 Yes you are right That's not a nice landing also the wheels seem to buckle in the snow
4:03 ryanair intensifies
it's a 120 ton jet landing on a 2000 meter long way in antarctica. The runway is made out of ice the plane cant break only reverse snd spoilers
Well.....not sure at all WHY I'd want to leave my nice warm condo for... pure cold ? ... you can't fool me it is COLD and Windy,.... I can find snow on my local mountains.
excellent airmenship
I do not read videos!
Not a single comment about where the passengers were going when they de-planed. I liked everything about this video, but I cannot think of a single reason why a tourist would want to go there. That place is cold, white and featureless. Repeat, COLD! 🙄
next up lad plane on aircraft carrier
I have just checked the map and err... why is there a need for a plane that can use short landing strips in Antarctica? Its not like the place is massively populated without space for long runways, Im sure they can accomodate a few hundred feet extra :D
You have to build the runway every year on a long enough stretch of solid ice with a gentle enough gradient. Antarctica also has mountains you have to avoid on the approaches, and environmental impacts to consider (esp near the coast). It is never as easy as it seems to position a runway.
Yeah, but the 6X6 van wins
A bit unrelated, but kinda funny that the orange Ford 4x4 van still has a Utah license plate on it.
Flat earthers would probably say it's all fake.
The newest 757 is 16 years old. This is the last place on earth that needs more tourists.
Daaanngggg ryanair landing in antarctica...
That is not ryanair that is icelandair
you would wish to know which landing is better on ice or wet runways
here goes those stupid ryanair jokes
2:49 - that's at the airport in Punta Arenas, Chili, isn't it? I can tell that's not Antarctica
But they have to takeoff somewhere
@@bae146forever3 I know, I already knew they took off from Punta Arenas, I was stating how it was easy to tell that it was there and not Antarctica.
El pepe
Great. Let's fuck up another wilderness with tourisim.
4:01 hard landing 🤦🏻🤦🏻
What are you going to do when you are carrying a 130 ton jet plane on a 2000 meter runway in antarctica