Landing Technique....Not that old chestnut!!

[Barberspole-5]

This topic has been done to death on this forum but not for atleast 3 months, so I thought Id stir the pot.

Im interested how people teach the landing. My employer has us teach the following:

On final airspeed is controlled by power and flightpath is controlled by elevator. As the aircraft passes the threshold, where the TCH is 25' power is reduced to idle over 3 seconds and the nose attitude gently raised to what is defined as the "landing attitude". In this attitude your eyes are looking at the end of the runway- typically.

Other employers teach power=airspeed, elevator=path, however the flare is commenced when a pre-conceived point on the runway is overtaken by the glareshield ie obscured by the glare shield. At this point the aimpoint changes to points progressively further along the runway. When the final aim point does not move up or down in the windscreen, the landing attitude is selected.

Does anyone have a different idea as to how they land? Id be particularly interested in what the jet guys have to say.

[4Greens]

When you can distinguish the blades of grass flare!

[Sunfish]

Airspeed is controlled by attitude and flightpath by power. Just get in a Piper Arrow and chop the power completely at 100 feet on final and you will find out. It glides like a brick with power off.

Those superior jet pilots apparently do the reverse.

[Captain Sand Dune]

Power for IAS/attitude for aimpoint is (generally speaking) taught by the military.

Attitude for IAS/power for aimpoint is (generally speaking) taught by the civvies.

Guess what........BOTH techniques work just fine if correctly flown.

Just get in a Piper Arrow and chop the power completely at 100 feet on final and you will find out

Chop the power in ANY aircraft at 100FT and it's called a glide (or power off) landing. In that case the ONLY way to control IAS is with attitude.

[Arm out the window]

This topic got a big run a couple of months ago, thread called something like 'power controls airspeed, attitude controls aimpoint' or something, could have been the other way round, but was a lively debate for sure!

[Brian Abraham]

1. Power for IAS
2. attitude for glideslope
3. DONT FLARE
(Navy)

[Barberspole-5]

Airspeed is controlled by attitude and flightpath by power. Just get in a Piper Arrow and chop the power completely at 100 feet on final and you will find out. It glides like a brick with power off.

If u lowered the nose ie controlled flight path with elevator the aircraft would also go down like a brick.

The only way that IAS would be controlled by attitude is if power is fixed ie, in a glide descent or a full power climb.

[eagle 86]

Sorry Brian I think the years between 1967 and now have faded your memory - T28 power controlled the ball attitude ias.
GAGS
E86

[kmagyoyo]

Brian; found 'point and shoot' with power for alpha worked better in the Douglas :ok:
(if that means nothing to you disregard)

[GApilut]

Power + Atiitude = Performance. You are actully manipulating both the attitude and power to achieve a desired outcome. For teaching it is best to tell the student that on base they are controlling the rate of descent with power and airspeed with elevator, so that they arrive turning finals at 600'. On finals the aim point is kept constant and speed controlled with power.

If you try to teach a student (ab initio) on base that power is controlling the speed and elevator the flight path, there will be a few senarious that they wont understand, firstly high and slow, they will apply power. Another classic is fast and low, they will decrease power, and end up even lower.

[Barberspole-5]

If you try to teach a student (ab initio) on base that power is controlling the speed and elevator the flight path, there will be a few senarious that they wont understand, firstly high and slow, they will apply power. Another classic is fast and low, they will decrease power, and end up even lower.

For a slow n high scenario we teach lower nose for approach profile, adjust power for speed (speed will increase anyway)

For low n fast, raise nose for approach profile, adjust power for speed (speed will decrease anyway)

Attitude only controls airspeed when power is fixed

[CAVOK Pilot]

If you really want to test if the elevator controls the airspeed then next time you taxi into position for a take-off sit there and start furiously pumping the yoke and see how fast you go. :p

[Capt Claret]

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=180780&highlight=speed

CAVOK Pilot

:ok:

[Mere Mortal]

Power for speed , attitude for speed they both work. As for flare height, just wait until you see out of the corner of you eye, the Instructor flinch, swear or dive for the controls, smoothly reduce power while raising the nose to the hold off attitude. From here you have 2 options. Option 1, as the wheels kiss the tarmac, turn to your instructor and say "Did I do it right sir?", or, Option 2, apply full power and recover from the balloon the instructor has put the aircraft into.
mm

[Wheeler]

Speed with elevators, ROD with power - Blarrrr....

Get the attitude right. Focus on the numbers, don't let them move on the screen, (they just get bigger) leave the elevators (attitude) alone, and just keep it there on that glideslope with power. Reduce the power over the numbers and flare, then close the throttle and stop the thing landing as long as you can by progressively putting in back pressure. (Not sure this is actually all my idea. Some guy called Jacobson publicised something a bit like this a few years ago - Or have I not done him justice? Anyway, it works and its easy to learn, especially when progressing to something a bit heavier than a 152.)

Anyone wanna broaden this? Maybe good ideas for tailwheels? - or night landings?

[Cloud Cutter]

Point it somewhere near the start of the runway, and pray. I keep managing to walk away from them.

GApilut got it in one - you are using both power and attitude to control both glideslope and airspeed. As far as teaching a new student goes, deffinately Power controls glidepath. Think of it in terms of energy - if IAS is constant, the only means you have to control the rate you loose gravitational potential energy, is to change the amount of chemical potential you convert (ie, want more height, add more coal).

Keep in mind that you're dealing with secondary efffects here, not just the initial change - obviousely if you pull back on the stick you will arrest your ROD, but the secondary effect is a loss of IAS and for a sustained adjustment you require a power change.

[Capt. On Heat]

Just let the co-pilot or the student do it then you don't have to worry.

[Avgas172]

Instructor Captain pull yoke back Houses get small .... Instructor Captain pull yoke more back.... houses get bigger again , student pilot need new undies ...:yuk:

[Barberspole-5]

Using 'more height means more coal' analogy, if im on profile but slow how do I adjust the speed?

[GOATRIDER]

dont know if this helps---when landing a Cessna 207 when the airport disappears its time to clost the throttle and wait for the elusive squeal of the gear (and/or pax)---mmm nice...on the A4 Skyhawks we used to spool the trusty J52 up to 75% power and fly the thing on at around 2000 fpm down and 120 knts---mind you the gear could take it...does this help?

[Barberspole-5]

Hi Goatrider, yes it all helps, thanks for your reply, im interested to hear how people teach/fly the landing.

On the A4, how did you control flight path? with pitch or power? any money it was pitch for path, power for speed....

[eagle 86]

BP5,
When flying an A4 to a carrier, the Landing Signals Officer would call for "power" if he observed the aircraft going low on glidepath ie power was controlling glidepath - pitch controlled "alpha".
GAGS
E86

[Cloud Cutter]

Barberspole-5

Don't know about you, but I would add power and lower the nose. Unlike the scenario I gave when airspeed is constant, you require an increase in kinetic energy and don't want to sacrifice gravitational potential at any greater rate, so the only means of energy input you have (short of changing configuration) is to burn more fuel.

Obviously you and I can see that you are using both power and attitude to adjust your speed while remaining on slope, but this can be a bit complex for a very new student. If you break it down into two steps - your too slow, lower the nose - the resulting increase in ROD means you’re too low, so add power. The more intelligent student will pre-empt the second step, and do both at the same time. The less intelligent student will pick this up with experience.

This is why I have always told my students to apply ALL proceedures in conjunction with common sense. A proceedure is just a template.

[Barberspole-5]

QUOTE]Using 'more height means more coal' analogy, if im on profile but slow how do I adjust the speed?[/QUOTE]

Don't know about you, but I would add power and lower the nose.

Cloud Clutter,

For a newby, its hard enough to stay on the glideslope, I would have thought a power application would be easier, because if the student lowers the nose he is now low and probably not on the correct speed either.

If he maintains the attitude and adds power the secondary effect would be a pitch up, but so long as they keep their aimpoint in a constant place on the windscreen, applying elevator as required, all they have to do is keep the aimpoint in a constant place in the windscreen.

It seems a little strange that people teach ILS's by using pith for path, but teach a visual approach pitch for airspeed, at the end of the day why not tech pitch for path? the aeroplane doesnt know the difference between a visual approach and an ILS.

[Cloud Cutter]

If you increase airspeed by adding power, and maintain the same attitude you will get high on glidepath as per the lift formula. You would need to move your aim point higher up the wind screen.

people teach ILS's by using pith for path

Who does this? By the time people are flying an ILS, they should have a grasp on the equilibrium of forces acting on an aircraft and not need these made-up little rules of thumb. At this stage it would be better to teach 'power and pitch control airspeed and glidepath'.

[18-Wheeler]

When the radar altimeter calls 30', pitch up 2° over a couple of seconds and hold the attitude.
Works well.

[757manipulator]

For larger planes.....

Thrust controls airspeed..i.e. set it..tweak it..forget it...

Elevator controls ROD more or less...check at 30' radio...flare at 20' radio..and hold....ease the thrust levers closed as the mains..caress the tarmac:)

[Jerrym]

I must admit that I find this post an interesting read. I'd like to throw a new spin on the subject.

I personally prefer the point and shoot technique described above, and from my experience is the easier of the two methods to teach a student. Power however does not control airspeed or loss of altitude. It controls only one thing. Energy. The elevator does not control airspeed or loss of altitude. It converts energy.

The power, or to be more technically correct, the throttle controls the Energy of an aircraft. If we think back to out physics days, Kinettic Energy, is the energy of a moving body, in this case an aircraft's airspeed. Potentional energy of an aircraft can be in two forms. Both its height above the ground, and the fuel in the tanks. The fuel in the tanks (potentional energy) can be turned into either Potentional energy (height), or Kinettic energy (airspeed).

Alright. Here's an experiment for you next time you're out flying. And this will only work in smooth conditions. Trim the aircraft for straight and level flight. Once established, apply full power (while not exceeding red line), balance with rudder, but do not touch the control column. What happens? The aircraft will pitch up and start to climb. Here we are converting the potentional energy of the fuel into potentional energy in the form of height. But . . . . Have a close look at what happens to the airspeed. You will find that it has reduced by a few knots.

Lets put this in plain english. Increasing power, causes a reduction of airspeed. We are however adding more energy to the equation, and thus have more height that we can turn back into airspeed if desired.

Now, if we conduct the same experiment, but this time hold the attitude the same, we get an increase in airspeed. So this time we are converting the Potentional energy of the fuel, into Kinettic energy, in the form of airspeed. Now we have more energy in the equation, and thus have more airspeed that we can turn into height if desired.

So this means that a change in power adds energy to the equation in the form of either Potentional Energy (height), or Kinettic Energy (airspeed). What converts between the two? Simple. The elevator. You can trade airspeed for height, or height for airspeed very easily.

Now getting back to an approach. Power changes effect the energy of the aircraft. We've established that. Whether you want to turn it into Kinettic energy, or Potentional energy is entirely up to you. You either adjust the control column, or you don't. We have all been in a situation where an aircraft has too much energy. Either too fast or too high on finals, which, if not managed correctly, results in an embarressing situation, and possibly a trip to the maintenance hanger.

At the end of the day, both techniques are correct. One uses the throttle to control potentional energy, and the other to control kinettic energy. The elevator controls the other form of energy. Either technique can be learned by a student, with no right or wrong way of flying the approach. And for the record, if you give this explination to a student on his / her first circuit lesson, they're liable to take up lawn bowls instead. Always use the KISS principle.

As for the landings. I haven't figured those out yet. I just close my eyes. . . . . . . .

[kmagyoyo]

GOATRIDER....go back to your 207 mate your not even close.

Barberspole5 your spot on. Push/pull with your right hand until the Flight Path Marker (FPM) was on the desired bit of runway and do the same with the other hand until the E bracket was in the middle of the FPM. Piece off piss....this of course (was) the joys of having a HUD and performance flying to your hearts content. If the ROD was less than 800fpm approaching the hard black stuff you would let her drive on, but any more than that then a burst of power was applied to arrest the ROD (2000' fpm my ar$e...you would break the jet)

75% power from memory was min inflight so you didn't go there...in the early days you were taught to take about 4% off your downwind setting as you tipped base and popped the boards out which put it around 82-84%ish. Being a good Bograt thou' the approved technique was to A; do such a tight CCT you never rolled out in the downwind, B; as you tipped base keep lots of power on, pop the board and overbank to drop the nose (around 80 degrees looked satis) and C; roll wing level as you cross the threshold.


Glory days...now have to worry about flaring, critique from the SLF etc etc etc

[Lead Balloon]

On Final

Pitch for the Airspeed
Power for the Altitude

[Creampuff]

From Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators pp 350-352 by H. H. Hurt, Jr. University of Southern California, published by U.S. Navy 1960, revised 1965:For the conditions of steady flight with a given airplane, each angle of attack corresponds to a specific airspeed. Each angle of attack produces a specific value of [lift coefficient] and each value of [lift coefficient] requires a specific value of equivalent airspeed to provide lift equal to weight. Hence, angle of attack is the primary control of airspeed in steady flight.

Primary control of airspeed in steady flight by angle of attack is an important principle. …

[T]he rate of climb in steady flight is a direct function of the difference between power available and power required. … For this reason, it is apparent that power setting is the primary control of altitude in steady flight. …

FLYING TECHNIQUE. Since the conditions of steady flight predominate during a majority of all flying, the fundamentals of flying technique are the fundamentals of steady flight:

(1) Angle of attack is the primary control of airspeed.
(2) Power setting is the primary control of altitude, i.e., rate of climb/descent.

With the exception of the transient conditions of flight which occur during maneuvers and acrobatics, the conditions of steady flight will be applicable during such steady flight conditions as cruise, climb, descent, takeoff, approach, landing etc. A clear understanding of these two principles will develop good, safe flying techniques applicable to any sort of aeroplane.[Italics and capitals in original text.]

If you want a recent reference, go to the article on angle of attack in the latest Aust Flying. It notes that all those speeds you remember (best ROC, best glide etc) are actually attempts to achieve an angle of attack that produces the corresponding performance.

[itchybum]

Not sure WTF you're all talking about...

I use the MCP to control flightpath and the Speed Window (A/T) to control IAS. ;) :ok:


I must say, and it was nearly 20 years ago, but I thought the RAAF taught:

POWER = ROD and AIMPOINT

and

ATTITUDE = IAS.

That's why they like young guys who have flown gliders prior to Pilots' Course because they know how to control IAS using attitude.

[Arm out the window]

Itchy, the RAAF basic training technique for at least 20 years has been:

Round base, attitude for IAS and power for ROD (check height half way round)

On final, elevator to set aimpoint, power for airspeed.
If on the wrong profile, choose a new aimpoint (eg if too low on path, set the aimpoint further up the runway temporarily, keep using power for IAS, when back on profile, reselect the numbers as the aimpoint).

Just the way it was taught, works for many but obviously there are more than one way to skin the cat.

[cjam]

Now days I fly power for airspeed but in lighties used to fly attitude for airspeed. One good reason for using attitude for airspeed I reckon is when your 50hour ppl student finds themselves on the back side of the drag curve they will instinctively lower the nose if their airspeed starts to decay. anyone agree?

[Sunfish]

Yup, works for me. And furthermore, how do you think you control speed with no engine power at all?

[Cloud Cutter]

when your 50hour ppl student finds themselves on the back side of the drag curve they will instinctively lower the nose if their airspeed starts to decay. anyone agree

Diffinately. I think that's the main reason for teaching it that way.

In larger aircraft you have more inertia, so you can pretty much set the power as required for a certain airspeed, and use the pitch to fine tune the flight path. This is of course what the A/P or F/D does on a non A/T aircraft.

[Arm out the window]

As mentioned above I came from the 'Power for speed, Elevator for Aimpoint' school of finals technique; just a question for them that do it the other way (oo-er matron!) - doesn't it feel a bit wishy-washy using power to adjust your finals aimpoint?
I guess I like the directness of being able to 'peg' the aimpoint at a certain spot in the windscreen with elevator and drive on down using the throttle to keep the speed right.
Having said that, I keep an open mind, so would be happy to hear opinions from youse that use the opposite tack, so to speak.

[Brian Abraham]

Number 86 you're right. A man is entitled to an opinion but he's not entitled to be wrong in his facts. Fail. I could claim senility but won't. Only had to lean over and get the book out of the bottom drawer.

Cut gun in close------POWER, POWER, POWER-------hello ramp

Blue Skies,
Brian

[Barberspole-5]

Yes CC if attitude is the same and power is applied you will be higher than GS.

I'll just clear things up.

On Gs and slow means attitude is too high with not enough power which means add power for speed and re-adjust attitude to put the aimpoint where it should be in the windscreen.

when your 50hour ppl student finds themselves on the back side of the drag curve they will instinctively lower the nose if their airspeed starts to decay. anyone agree

Not the safest option near the ground, especially in a high flare, first and foremost GO AROUND by adding power. With go-around power, power is now fixed, control of the airspeed would be with the elevator such to avoid an excessively low airspeed.

As for earlier final power again I would say would be safest, obviously inconjunction with adjust of attitude, to ensure a stall situation does not develop.

[Cloud Cutter]

No, if you encounter significant negative shear on short final in a light aircraft it is critical (particularly for a student) that you lower the nose in addition to adding power. I had to do this a couple of weeks ago going into Wellington as the speed went from Vref + 20 to less than Vref in the space of a couple of seconds at about 100 ft - it is a very important instinct to develop IMO for anything other than a very large or swept wing aircraft.

Under these conditions you would do well to avoid a 'high flare' which would really just be asking for it. The practice of adding half the gust factor to your Vref is really just a way of keeping more AofA up your sleeve. By the way, it wasn't just deluded old me doing this on the day in question - just about every T/P on approach had a good 3-5 degree nose down pitch at some point on short final.

[Dry_Twotter]

Landing a 207 - turn final with flap 20 and about 75kts. choose aimpoint carefully as this is where you WILL land/crash. Hit full flap on mid final and double your current power setting . watch airport fence disapear under the nose and begin the highly specialised flare sequence - cut power - REEF BACK - arrest the balloon, FULL POWER, REEF BACK AGAIN, REVISE THE LORD'S PRAYER, BANG, BANG,BANG, LAND - look over towards the company hangar and see the CEO and Chief pilot watching!