[sparky@home]

The first ever Airbus A340 aircraft to land in Antarctica touched down successfully on an ice runway earlier this month.
Operated by Hi Fly, the jet flew from Cape Town in South Africa to the world's southernmost continent and back earlier this month, a total of 2500 nautical miles, or 4630km. It took roughly five hours to fly each way.

https://youtu.be/CBRX3QJJ0Jg

Mods : If already reported , kindly delete.

[V.Narayan]

Beautiful. What a perfect approach. Landings in Antarctica have been going on for many years mainly by military turboprop transports but a big jet is something else altogether due to the landing weight and approach speed. The most commonly used are the Lockheed C-130 and much smaller DHC Twin Otters - both turboprops. Note the grooved (ribbed surface) of the packed ice runway. Note the DC-3 of 1930s vintage refitted with turboprop engines and skis in the background!!!! The DC-3 was built between 1935 and 1946. After modifications on engines and skis it is called the Basler BT-67.

Commercial jets flown by specially trained pilots have landed in Antarctica before led mainly by the Russians and New Zealanders - Boeing 767 being the largest till over taken by this Airbus A340. Interestingly the US Air Force has landed Boeing C-17s in Antarctica too. I believe the first landing was conducted by the Americans in c.1956.

Thank you @sparky@home for sharing this clip. Here's another for our readers.


https://www.nsf.gov/discoveries/disc...media_id=81452

[am1m]

Originally Posted by sparky@home

The first ever Airbus A340 aircraft to land in Antarctica touched down successfully on an ice runway earlier this month.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Note the grooved (ribbed surface) of the packed ice runway.

Wow, what a backdrop! So many questions - Would they have leveled and re-packed the runway with ice? How do the grooves/ribs help? Friction? How do they know there aren't any crevasses/weak spots in the ice? Would they have tested the entire surface of the runway? I guess they must have used different tyres?

Thanks in advance for any information.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by am1m

Would they have leveled and re-packed the runway with ice?

Yes. Packed Ice and gravel runways are common in Russia, Alaska etc

How do the grooves/ribs help? Friction?

Yes to improve the grip of the tyres and reduce the risk of skidding.

How do they know there aren't any crevasses/weak spots in the ice?

The depth of the ice and completeness of the formation was in all probability checked by a sonar device that measures the thickness and gaps in the ice shelf. Ice is surprisingly strong. A ice thickness of just 18 inches can support the landing of small utility planes like the Twin Otter {~5 tonnes} with safety margins to spare. The ice on this ice shelf is ancient and several hundreds of metres thick. Weight bearing is not an issue but as you correctly point out cracks are.

Would they have tested the entire surface of the runway?

Yes and a few hundred metres on either side - my guess. On the only occasion in life I built a runway we had to test the soil's load bearing strength about 200 hundred metres out on either side. This checking is not really about aircraft weight but risk of the runway developing wavy patterns on the surface.

I guess they must have used different tyres?

I don't know really. Maybe not. Aircraft tyres are designed to land at a high speed on wet icy runways which is a lot worse than a dry grooved packed ice runway

Thanks in advance for any information.

Always pleased to respond to courteous posts:-)

[SmartCat]

(Slightly Off topic, but related to Antarctica & commercial aircraft)

Air New Zealand used to run commercial flights to Antarctica (no landing, just low flying) but one flight crashed into a mountain killing everybody on board. The Airline stopped this service after the disaster
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Erebus_disaster

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMn1W6A88Rc

[Cyborg]

Wow, wow, wow! Kudos to the Commander for the fabulous landing. From the angle of approach and touchdown it appears the aircraft must have touched down like a feather. In the earlier days when a Commander made such a landing, the entire aircraft would applause the feat. Nowadays it’s mostly, relatively hard landings which I believe pilots are trained to do.

Thank you for sharing sparky@home!

Cheers

[iamahunter]

That landing was a great achievement!

After the aircraft being parking in the ice, how would that temperature affect the tires? Considering that whatsoever time the aircraft was standing still, the ice was only in contact with one patch of rubber.

How would it affect the next landing(assuming on a normal runway) of the aircraft?

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by iamahunter

After the aircraft being parking in the ice, how would that temperature affect the tires? Considering that whatsoever time the aircraft was standing still, the ice was only in contact with one patch of rubber. How would it affect the next landing(assuming on a normal runway) of the aircraft?

That is an interesting question. The aircraft tyres would be completely unaffected as they are designed for low temperatures. When cruising at 35,000 feet the outside air temperature is minus 54 degrees centigrade give or take a little and sitting retracted in the wheel well the aircraft tyres are exposed to that ambient temperature for hours. So for the aircraft tyres sitting for a few hours on packed ice is business as usual. Hope this helps.

[vharihar]

Would it be correct to say that the aircraft must have relied only on air brakes and not the conventional tyre brakes, out of concerns of skidding, and especially given that the runway is very long?

[vharihar]

Originally Posted by vharihar

Would it be correct to say that the aircraft must have relied only on air brakes and not the conventional tyre brakes, out of concerns of skidding, and especially given that the runway is very long?

Air brakes and reverse thrusters, of course.

Tyre brakes could result in skidding, isn't that right?

[arijitkanrar]

Originally Posted by vharihar

Air brakes and reverse thrusters, of course.

Tyre brakes could result in skidding, isn't that right?

Aircraft especially Air Transport category aircraft have Anti-Skid brakes. This is nothing but ABS and it prevents the wheels locking up. The system is completely automated since the brakes themselves are hydraulically actuated(brake-by-wire). It is extremely useful in low grip situations like wet or icy runways.
In addition to that there is Auto-braking, which means if armed, the system will automatically apply the wheel brakes, reverse thrusters and spoilers as soon as the aircraft touches down (the weight-on-wheels sensors are activated).

So they would've most likely used all the available braking as the aircraft is sophisticated enough to use the different methods of retardation in the proper amounts.

[arijitkanrar]

Originally Posted by arijitkanrar

Aircraft especially Air Transport category aircraft have Anti-Skid brakes. This is nothing but ABS and it prevents the wheels locking up. The system is completely automated since the brakes themselves are hydraulically actuated(brake-by-wire). It is extremely useful in low grip situations like wet or icy runways.
In addition to that there is Auto-braking, which means if armed, the system will automatically apply the wheel brakes, reverse thrusters and spoilers as soon as the aircraft touches down (the weight-on-wheels sensors are activated).

So they would've most likely used all the available braking as the aircraft is sophisticated enough to use the different methods of retardation in the proper amounts.

A correction to my previous post. The edit time limit expired so I'm adding another post. Apologies to the Mods.
I believe the Auto-brakes only control the wheel brakes and not the spoilers or thrust reversers.
The spoilers can be armed to auto-deploy.
Thrust reversers must be engaged manually I think.

[SJM1214]

Wow, I do love that all-white livery, I can´t imagine how many sim hours this very experienced crew has gone through. Textbook landing for everyone!

[Goandiaries]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Beautiful. What a perfect approach. Landings in Antarctica have been going on for many years mainly by military turboprop transports but a big jet is something else altogether due to the landing weight and approach speed. The most commonly used are the Lockheed C-130 and much smaller DHC Twin Otters - both turboprops. Note the grooved (ribbed surface) of the packed ice runway. Note the DC-3 of 1930s vintage refitted with turboprop engines and skis in the background!!!! The DC-3 was built between 1935 and 1946. After modifications on engines and skis it is called the Basler BT-67.

Adding to your post. The smaller twin otters and Baslers are mainly used for transporting people / cargo between stations within the continent. Air cargo, especially to the eastern part of the continent almost always goes from Cape Town or from Aus/NZ. A few countries including India mainly employ the IL-76 cargo plane which is a little smaller than this Airbus, to ferry cargo as well as passengers from Cape Town to Novo - an airbase maintained mainly by Russians almost in the same longitude as Cape Town. Of course, India being neighbors to this base help in maintenance with our men and machine every beginning of the season or at times of exceptional weather conditions.

Originally Posted by am1m

Wow, what a backdrop! So many questions - Would they have leveled and re-packed the runway with ice? How do the grooves/ribs help? Friction? How do they know there aren't any crevasses/weak spots in the ice? Would they have tested the entire surface of the runway? I guess they must have used different tyres?

Thanks in advance for any information.

All these heavy aircrafts land on ice cap - which are kms thick in general. Therefore, no question of crevasses around this area and you're safe (except close to any outcrops which are not in the vicinity of where the planes land). So basically these are kept in such a way that there is no accumulation of snow. Just blue ice - which are run with pistenbullys and similar snow vehicles fitted with blades to make such grooves on the ice. So, in austral spring every season, the Indians and Russians work on this airbase to receive the IL76 flights from cape town every year for several years now (more than 15 years). India's Maitri and Russia's Novo bases are just in the proximity.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

The depth of the ice and completeness of the formation was in all probability checked by a sonar device that measures the thickness and gaps in the ice shelf. Ice is surprisingly strong. A ice thickness of just 18 inches can support the landing of small utility planes like the Twin Otter {~5 tonnes} with safety margins to spare. The ice on this ice shelf is ancient and several hundreds of metres thick. Weight bearing is not an issue but as you correctly point out cracks are. Yes and a few hundred metres on either side - my guess.

A small correction - the base which this aircraft landed was on the ice cap - which is much more stable and thicker than the ice shelf. You are absolutely right regarding the twin otters, they are used to land on ice shelves regularly. An established airbase like this has no issues since they receive other heavy cargos frequently.

[vjbox]

These modern aircrafts are such engineering marvels and they never cease to amaze me every time I look at them. Give these beauties in the hands of such great skilled pilots and you witness nothing short of magic! So much sophistication and engineering finesse that has gone into them and to me is one of the best human inventions!