Soft vs Hard landing
Would a pilot always be boxed in as a Soft or a Hard lander ?
No, I'd hope not. You shouldn't get out of training unless you're coming up with reasonable landings. Some aircraft are prone to either sides of the scale. Of course my version of reasonable and yours (and the cabin crews') is likely to be quite different. Very smooth landings...the ones that feel like glass, are, as often as not, the result of overly long flares (i.e. floats), and aren't graded very well by us. Firm landings are most likely the result of an underdeveloped flare. I am much more interested in the aircraft being 'on the spot' than I am in how smooth the landing is.... Extended floats put runway behind you, give much more opportunity for any crosswind to move you off the centreline, and also put the tail ever closer to the ground.
The 747 and the 380 are both inclined to floating if given half a chance, so my aim is always to just kill the sink rate, and then immediately let it land. The 767 just about can't be landed really smoothly. It sits down quite solidly, but it's a function of the way the gear compresses and the spoilers rise that give that effect, not the landing itself.
As a bit of a generalisation, I find the FOs are generally the ones that give the really smooth landings. The Captains are much more concerned about everything else....
Smooth landings are much more likely on long runways, than they are on short. (And taken to an extreme, naval aviators do not flare AT ALL).
Or that is entirely out of his control : winds, weight etc.....
Some flights you'd hardly notice the plane has landed whereas some other flights land with a thud.
What are the variables that determine if the plane is going to have a soft vs a hard landing ?
The lap of the gods to a degree. You're unlikely to get a nice landing out of an unstable approach. Gusty days are hard work. Some runways are problematic ... for instance Melbourne 36/16 is uphill in one direction and downhill in the other. Most guys get the uphill bit right (it will give a very solid landing if you don't), but onto 16 many landings float. Hot days are harder than cold. The 767/747 and 380 are all much easier to land at heavy weights than at light (though as a passenger you'll never see the very light weight landings).
Ps: waiting in line for some sushi @ Tsukiji Market, Tokyo (QF21 landing 4 hrs ago - with a thud !)
Tokyo can be one of the more difficult places to land. The runway alignment has more to do with land acquisition than it does with prevailing winds, so it often has very nasty crosswinds. It regularly features on youtube videos. A thud is likely to be perfectly acceptable...
Tokyo was sufficient fun that the pilots would often congregate in a bar that gave a view of the landing zone, and grade all the landings. It was much easier to be critical if you'd already done yours for the day.
The Aviationist » [Video] Airbus A380 scary crosswind landing at Narita airport
