Trimming, Landing & Instructors - HELP!!!

[Okavango]

Hi. I had a terrible lesson (number 14, 14.25hrs total time) last night and need a sanity check. Basic areas where I'd appreciate advice is around trimming (in particular in the circuit), landings and instruction.

Trimming
I've now done 35 circuits and I’m confident with everything in average conditions. My instructor said I was ready to go solo 2 lessons ago though I'm in no major rush either way (at the end of the lesson before last he asked me if I wanted to take it up myself but it was the end of a long lesson so I elected to wait til next time as I didn't see the point in rushing). However - on the next lesson last night, he pulled my trimming apart, continually shouting at me (which made things no easier) as I was ending downwind between 900-1100ft (standard circuit 1000ft aal). This was admittedly my worst flying to date and it's usually spot on - though is this not completely unreasonable behaviour, I'd assume any lift or sink could put you out by 50-100ft and only correct if I go beyond this as a general rule. I do appreciate that I need to tighten trimming as far as possible as any early student would, it's more the conduct (below), which made everything more difficult that concerns me. However, I would appreciate any advice regarding accuracy that should be expected at this early stage.

Landing
After being confident with my landings to date, he then changed tack last night. Best way I can describe my method is to approach stable at 70kts (C152), apply slight back pressure to get 60-65kts over the threshhold then hold everything steady to ~20ft. Then start to flare at ~20ft, levelling at 2-5ft, at which point dropping the throttle and checking any slight drop in height at the time. Then hold steady until I feel the sluggishness and sink from the stall at which point apply gradual back-pressure as it drops, until the rear wheels make contact, then smoothly bring the nose down a second or 2 later. This has allowed very smooth landings over the last few lessons and I've never gone nose in, bounced or dropped the front wheel in any lesson. However, last night my instructor now says he wants me to roundout TO LEVEL AT 20ft. Tried this and we had a heavy landing and bounce - which I recovered and it’s the only benefit I took from the whole lesson. From what I’ve heard from past students, my instructor is known to be a bit twitchy/nervous and this came after he touched the controls in the prior landing and made us balloon. I don't want to question my instructor in any way and always consider he is in the right - but does my technique sound wrong? How many circuits are normal? At this rate I see no end to the exercise.

Instructor
Related to the above, I found his conduct last night to be completely unsatisfactory, and raising your voice in my view has no place in a cockpit, aviation in general or instruction (unless safety is concerned). I kept my calm throughout the lesson and said we could speak when we landed, which we did and I let him know my thoughts and that the issue is one of consistency of instruction. He said "if it's any consolation, it's normal to fall out". I don't believe this should be the case - is this everyone else's experience of instruction/FTO’s?

Would appreciate any advice on the above as at the moment this has ruined the experience and whacked my morale (though will be back!!). Thanks.

[BackPacker]

Well, you're a student pilot but you're already landing - and taking about it, and reflecting on it - like a professional pilot. Obviously I have not seen you fly and have to base everything on what you posted here. But I'd say: don't change a single thing. Just be ready to adapt your style a bit if circumstances (wind!) change - sometimes a little more speed is in order, and sometimes you might want to close the throttle a little sooner or later. But your basic technique seems to be pretty good. So don't worry about that.

If the instructor not only shows dissatisfaction with your landings, but even starts to shout at you, ruining your confidence, it sounds like the instructor has a problem, not you. If he touches the controls and thereby ruins the landing instead of improving it, I wonder what's going on?

Is switching to another instructor, even if only temporarily, an option for you? Did you talk to the CFI about this?

Remember that you are the customer. You are the one that needs to learn to fly from an instructor, not the other way 'round.

[172driver]

Reading your post (but of course not knowing you or your flying), this sounds like an instructor problem more than anything else. If this situation doesn't change very rapidly (i.e. at the next lesson), I'd say change instructor - this attitude only undermines your confidence. Not a a good thing in any learning environment.

HTH

[Pilot DAR]

I was yelled at by an instructor once, and an apology was promptly issued by several people. If the instructor lost his/her cool, that was not acceptable. I suppose everyone gets to make a mistake once (hopefully not once per student), but never again. If you were his crew, would he yell at you? Does he feel that the performance of someone else in the cockpit who is performing a required task, will improve after a yelling? Being the higher order of calm yourself, you are responsible for taking it all in stride AT THE TIME, and finishing your task with reasonable safety. Afterward, an accounting is due.

As for the trimming and landing, you're putting way too much thought into this.

Trimming: As much as possible, based upon your experience in the aircraft type, anticipate trim changes, and trim accordingly, in advance of/during/or just after configuration changes. Regognize that some upsets (turbulance) are not a reason to retrim, so don't. Don't fly the plane with the trim, just use it to help you fly with ease.

Landing: Feel the plane. It already knows how to fly, it does not want to crash either. What is it telling you by feel? Does it feel like it wants to descend in only partial control from 20 feet up? Does it feel like 70kts, slowing to 60 over the numbers sets you up for a good landing? The object of landing, is to have the aircraft stall wings level, and smoothly stop flying just as it touches the runway in good control, with lots of room ahead. That requires slightly differing techniques in different aircraft, but the end result is the same. If you got a stall warning horn as you gently touched, you probably had a great landing too, and had to explain to some pleased passengers what the stall warning sound was. Once you cross the numbers, while keeping the aircraft under complete smooth control the whole time, cause it to smoothly decelerate from then on, and once it gets within a foot of the runway, gently try to prevent it from touching. You know it's going to at some point ('cause the power is nearly all the way to idle now). It would rather fly, let it as long as it will! You're paying for the use of a plane to fly it, not taxi it, get the most for your money! And don't worry about dragging out your landing roll, it will decelerate nearly as fast in the air, as it will on the ground, until the latter stages, when you start to use just a little brakes.

One day you'll be flying a type you've never flown before, and you'll have to figure it out for yourself. This technique is the same for most tricycle wheel planes, though some react to it a little differently than others!

Everyone has a bad flight if you did not bend flesh or metal, it was nothing other than a learning experience, take it that way. Sounds to me though that you learned that another instructor would be a good idea!

Cheers, Pilot DAR

[WALSue]

Personally I'd see about switching instructors/schools.
I've never had a bad instructor but I have found that I learn a lot better (I assume due to confidence) with some over others.
Good luck with everything :ok:

[cjhants]

agree with what`s been said above about FI, have a chat over a coffee with him/her and clear the air.

i have always thought of trimming as a bit like power steering on a car. you could do without it, and its perfectly possible to fly a circuit with the trim in the centre. its just much easier if you can get it trimmed properly in all phases of flight. if you can get it trimmed to approach speed early on finals, you can concentrate all your efforts on landing, and however many hours we have, landing still requires all of our attention. even then, most pilots will tell you they probably make good landings less than 50% of the time. its a black art that has been discussed on these forums and elsewhere extensively.

when i first went up with the CFI at my club, he told me i was flaring too late, although the FI i had in nearly all my training was happy with the way i was landing, and so was the examiner. so its not unusual to get differing opinions, as i am sure you will find on here!

good luck, and enjoy your solo when it happens.

[Okavango]

Thanks all. I'm keeping an open mind at present as he's usually ok though will change instructors in any case at some stage soon just for the benefit of experience. It's just obviously a sensitive stage at present as you need not just your own confidence but theirs as well. Regarding the ballooning, I asked him why he did that (as an honest question wondering why he felt the need to touch the controls) and I suspect he thought I was questioning his skill/judgement.

[Human Factor]

However, last night my instructor now says he wants me to roundout TO LEVEL AT 20ft. Tried this and we had a heavy landing and bounce....

Not surprised. I start to flare my 737 at about 20ft! :ooh::ooh:

[Speedbird48]

Okavango,

You are doing fine, or at least you are able to think through the flare and landing process very well. You appear to be doing well for your experience level. But, as others have said I have not flown with you. Your caution at not wanting to go solo after a long hard day is also commendable.

The flare at 20ft is downright crazy, and again as has already been said you are not in a 737 etc, but probably a 172?? A stable approach starting at 70, and slowly bring it back to 60 at the threshold is just what is needed with the final check at about 2/3ft with the power off.

Get another instructor. He/she may have been having a bad day, but to shout or deride a student is not acceptable. There are others out there and the Chief where you are at present needs to know ASAP. That instructor can kill the schools business stone cold.

Get over it and carry on to bigger and better things. It is all worth it in the end. Good luck.

Speedbird 48.

[Okavango]

Thanks again. This is in a 152. I don't think he wanted to flare at 20ft, just level out and I guess then approach at a much shallower angle/decent rate (and therefore it wouldn't be all one joined up process how I had been doing it until then and how I felt comfortable). Either way it just seemed control authority was being lost too soon and the process felt more drawn out than necessary (to my admittedly inexperienced brain). I come to this from a hang gliding background so I do have a feel for how wings behave on approach/flare though is it the case that he could be worried about hitting some sink or some other effect? (I guess hang gliders are comparatively more responsive due to the low inertia). The best way I can describe his reaction is like when you're the passenger in a car and you feel the driver is getting too close to the car in front - so I can kind of appreciate where he's coming from, though lack of consistency is not helping me and to me my previous approaches felt right (and had been acceptable to him).

[IO540]

Firstly, I would dump the instructor.

Another angle is that you must have sweated buckets during those 35 circuits. You probably did not learn very effectively as this is a very high stress situation. Circuits should be flown only to consolidate procedures, not to learn anything basic about flying.

If you want to learn about basic flying e.g. trimming then go off somewhere peaceful where you can mess around and do it there.

I don't like the current PPL training process where students bang circuits until one could wring the sweat out of their clothing (one can hear the stress on the radio calls) before they are set off solo. I can see it makes for the cheapest PPL but I would never teach it that way round. Some recent research in the USA appears to support this - they found they can do an ab initio PPL/IR in about 50-60hrs and it's nearly all dual, no solo.

[EGBKFLYER]

IO - I agree entirely. Not enough time is invested in the basics before the pressure is ramped up in the circuit. Part of it is poor instruction but I think it's also down to some instructors bending to pressure from students to 'make progress' and get on to taking off and landing etc, rather than spending another session on trimming or other basic skils.

Okavango - dump the numpty and find yourself a proper instructor with some teaching skills!

[stillin1]

I suggest you consider having a chat with the guy before you go for a possibly knee jerk reaction and bin the instructor. Sounds to me like what you were doing at the beginning was just peachy for the stage you are at. Perhaps the guy was just having an off day and is now tinkering with techniques where it is not needed. You do not say weather he is an old and bold or a newish chap. His shouting etc IS inexcusable and HE should have apoligised right away. However, does it merit giving him the boot after what sounds like some decent instruction up until this hiccup! Clear the air and reasses?

[SNS3Guppy]

I'll be the odd man out and assert that yelling can be a tool which is useful and on occasion necessary, though certainly not the norm in every day instruction. It does have it's place, however.

Not having been in the cockpit, I won't be so quick to condemn your instructor without his point of view on the table. I will say that very often when a sort of plateau has been reached, when the student and instructor aren't on the same wavelength, it's a good idea to try it from a different perspective. It may be just an hour with a different instructor to get a little different insight will be all you need. Changing instructors unnecessarily can set you back as you relearn the same things from different techniques...it can do more harm than good (I had six instructors on my way to private pilot). Trying one for an hour or two, though, can give you some valueable insight before going back to your regular instructor pilot.

There's a world of difference between instructing and teaching. Instructors administer a syllabus. Teachers promote understanding and learning by delivering the material to you in a way you can understand, and accept. What you need is a teacher. You may have one right now; only you can tell that.

I think painting by numbers is okay at first (do this at this altitude, pull the power to here, yada, yada), but early flying is more by feel. When is it timeto flare? When the picture out the window begins to look very much like it did when you were taxiing and taking off. Memorize that picture, and you have the landing picture. As you get close to the ground and see it rising around you in your peripherial vision, your goal is to get the ground to stop rising around you and transition a feeling of moving forward. In other words, you stop sinking and start moving forward. It's easy to get caught up in the "hold it off" feeling, and that comes right back to wondering how high you are, and so forth. All you're doing is putting the airplane back where you found it. It was on the ground when you found it, you spent time memorizing this as you taxied and took off and you're just returning it to the same condition.

It's really nothing more than the same feeling you have when you drive over a bridge, in a car. The car starts down the bridge, reaches ground level, stops going down, more moving forward, same sight picture around you as you had before you went up the bridge in the first place. Just in the airplane, and you're descending on air instead of pavement.

Don't be too hard on yourself as your learn to feel the wheels and feel the ground. It's a learning process. I've been doing this a long time now, and it's still very much a learning process. Each time you move to a different type of airplane it's a whole new learning process. Each time you switch seats in the airplane it's different. When you fly an aft-loaded airplane (such as taking off for the first time with passengers on board), it's different. The timing to flare is different. The amount of control travel is different. What's not different is that feeling...of returning the airplane to the same place as where you started.

When we transitioned pilots in tailwheel airplanes, we found that one of the easiest ways to get them accustomed to the wheel landing attitude was to prop the tail of the airplane on a stand or in a truck bed, and have them sit in the airplane. Memorize what it looked like. Then all they had to do when landing was return the airplane to that same sight picture...remember what it looked like when peering out of the airplane, and make it look like that again...using whatever control input (pitch, power, flap, etc) it takes.

Don't become too frustrated. Thomas Edison took 2,000 tries to invent the lightbulb. Some said two thousand failures. He didn't give up. He later said that each one was a success, because each time a design didn't work, he'd eliminated on more possibility, and thus brought himself closer to finding one that did work. Flying is the same way. Each trip around the pattern, each landing, each flare, is exactly the same way. Like a sculptor chipping away all the parts that aren't the statue, you're defining how to fly an airplane with each trial and error...and that's exactly as it should be.

For what it's worth, I start my flare at 30' in the 747, and I'm stuck something like 150' above the pavement...and it's a surprise every time when the moment of truth arrives and the wheels actually touch. There's still nothing more enjoyable for the sheer pleasure of it than making a good landing in a light, single engine airplane...where you really are in charge, where you really do use art in motion, and where you really do simply put the airplane backwhere you found it once more.

I suspect you're doing better than you think...perhaps your instructor's tone is used to show that he expects well of you too. Whatever the case may be, keep at it. Much like a bicycle, at some point it will all "click" and fit together. You'll see.

[TotalBeginner]

I started to learn to fly when I was 19 and gave up when I was treated badly by a new instructor. He took me for my first nav ex and turned me into a nervous wreck. Tutting, shouting, barking orders etc.. This 40min introduction to NAV felt more like 4 hours. The strange thing was that after we landed he commented on how well I'd done...? It didn't matter though, I went home feeling crushed. It was the worst lesson I'd ever had and he was only supposed to be showing me the techniques used for navigation.

Anyway, it was nearly 4 years until I decided to give it another go. This time I went to a different school. I had 2 instructors from start to finish, and they were brilliant. They gave me invaluable advice, criticised where necessary but above all gave me the confidence to fly well and pass my skills test.

[Shunter]

Shouting and bawling has no place in the cockpit. I came back from a nav-ex as a student, and as we settled in downwind I lifted my chart up and gently dropped it behind the seat as it was getting in the way and was at that point superfluous (C152, no door pockets, very snug with 2 big blokes in it). The guy went absolutely mental.

We got on the ground and, being the occasionally abrasive type, I told him that being an instructor and being an obnoxious d1ckhead were not mutually exclusive. Never flew with him again. If you're not getting constructive support from your instructor, say something.

[ChrisVJ]

Interesting contrast as time goes on.

I learned to fly 45 years ago when teachers threw blackboard erasers and no teacher, in school or in the cockpit, would have been sanctioned for shouting. Somehow we did all learn to fly. Some of us even developed a tolerance for shouting and sometimes we even recognised that it may have been appropriate.

Being rather old fashioned and having to maintain order with five teenage boys in the house I have occasionally raised my voice. (Well, maybe rather more than occasionally.) It may or may not be a result of their upbringing that, while some of my boys are a liitle dozier than others they all manage to pay attention when yelled at and discern the required action without getting flustered.

Once we took a friend of my daughter's on a sailing trip with us and as she had sailed with her parents and everyone else was busy I asked her to hold the course while I went and untangled the jib. Just about when I am hanging over the rail fighting three hundred square feet of sail she goes dramatically off course and I am knee deep in rushing water and hanging on for dear life. Of course I yell something like "Get the h*ll back on course" When I get back to the cockpit my daughter has taken charge an our guest has gone below because she was "upset." I am proud to say that I think my kids cope well in such situations.

I was 18 when I got my PPL and I probably would not have had the nouse to change instructors. In fact I had very good instructors and they did not shout anyway though there were the occasional sharp words.

That is all really beside the point though. You are a customer and you are buying the time. If it is in any way not what you want then change it without hesitation.

My eldest son is now learning to fly but he may not have so much choice. He is learning in the Canadian Air Force!

[RatherBeFlying]

I prefer steep approaches in small aircraft as it makes it easier to identify where I will meet the Earth and less likely to get involved with wires or trees. And if the engine acts up, I can still make the runway.

Flaring too high on a steep approach with the engine at near idle can lose airspeed and drop you in from too high:ouch:

So you do have to flare lower, but this can be hard on a nervous instructor, especially if his last student came in on the nosewheel:ouch:

[Lister Noble]

I had excellent training at an excellent local school.
Just two instructors,one for the first 15 hrs or so and the CFI for the rest.
One day they were really tied up and I had an hour with a very experienced pilot, but not so good instructor, that they used on very rare occasions.
I was practising turns when there was a loud crack as he hit me with his clipboard around the back of the head.

"There,look there,look there,that's where he will come from!"

Well it may not have been professional but I've never forgotten it, each time I turn.
Lister

[Pilot DAR]

I don't agree that yelling should be tolerated at all, unless it's simply a situation when the other person cannot hear, and that does not happen to often in cockpits anymore. If a person, in an emotional situation yells (or uses the clipboard for a purpose other than intended), they have lost control. So, they either lack the ability to remain in control, and keep control of themselves, or they just don't care. Either way, that's not what I want to learn.I never yell at anyone else, why would I yell at another pilot? When recently taking type training, I continued to fail to remove my hand from the throttle during takeoff as directed, it's jut violates my instincts over 30 years of flying. But my mentor had a reason for this direction. After being quietly told a few times, subsequent reminders were not yelling, they were a gentle nudge on my elbow. My mentor has no aspirations for the airlines, he is 76 years old. I will learn from him al I can, when ever I can, including being polite and effective in the cockpit. Why would we teach adversarily? It just legitimizes such poor behaviour in the cockpit for future pilots in multi crew environments.Pilot DAR

[SNS3Guppy]

Yes, there's a very good reason for removing your hand from the thrust levers at V1. However, while you may be perfectly open to learning and may never need a raised voice, some do.

I'd be dead today if I stayed a quiet, meek, nudge-em-gently type of pilot. One need not carry on a routine conversation by shouting, but every bit as much as distractions, suggestions, pauses, questions, and other techniques have their place, shouting does occasionally do the trick, and may be very well necessary to jog someone back to reality. If you haven't found this to be the case thus far, with more experience, you may.

Some years ago I found myself in the right seat of a Learjet with a newly minted pilot who required a great deal of supervision. He was given a clearance to descend, and an airspeed restriction to meet. He put out the speed brakes and retarded the power to idle. As I made the thousand foot call approaching the altitude, I noted that he showed no inclination to reduce his rate of descent. His airspeed was bleeding off rapidly and he showed no incination of increasing power or retracting the speed brakes, either.

After several calls of a normal-tone "Airspeed, Airspeed, Airspeed," it became "AIRSPEED, AIRSPEED, AIRSPEED, ALTITUDE, ALTITUDE, ALTITUDE." I pushed the thrust levers up, and he yanked them to idle. I pried his fingers off the spoiler switch and retracted them, he thumbed them out and clamped his hand down over them. Not consciously, mind you; he was locked into a slow-down and go-down mindset, and was otherwise unresponsive and staring straight ahead. I continued to increase the volume and the tone of my insistance as I used both hands to physically remove him from the controls and take control of the airplane. After I pushed him back in his seat, away from the controls, and a very excited ride-on mechanic who was accompanying us joined me in the cockpit to see what was going on, the catatonic pilot suddenly popped back to life. He turned and looked at me, and said quietly, "you don't have to shout."

We were in mountainous terrain, and descended well below our altitude. We were flaps up, and slowed well below our minimum airspeed.

Don't have to shout? Yes, I do. When the situation calls for it, yes, I do.

The thing is, from an instructor's point of view, I'll decide when that might be. Not the student.

[Hogster]

As a low hours PPL, who only got his licence recently, I won't presume to comment on trimming technique but perhaps I can comment on instruction.

I changed schools after about 10 hours or so. I got on fine with my first instructor, or so I thought, but I always felt like I was really bad at flying, to the extent where I nearly gave it up as a bad job. It was only when, through illness, I had a different instructor that I realised "I'm not that bad after all." Shortly after that, I realised that I couldn't go any further with the first instructor. Unfortunately, the second instructor was fully booked, so I ended up changing schools and the rest of my PPL training was with an excellent and totally unflappable instructor.

The point is, a cockpit is a fairly intense learning environment. Though we don't consciously think about it, the stakes are pretty high in the flying game, and you have to be very comfortable with the person that you sit beside. Any 'vibes' in the cockpit will quickly be assimilated, even if they aren't consciously acknowledged.

As for the shouting, I guess it can have its place, although my recent instructor's frosty silences were always a very effective aide-memoire when I'd forgotten something or got it wrong. Perhaps your instructor knows you're a good student, and his shouting is a measure of frustration when you don't perform up to your usual level. So it might actually be a backhanded sort of compliment. On the other hand, it might just be the sign of a bad instructor, or an instructor having a bad day. The question to ask yourself is, do you still trust the instructor as a working partner?

My recommendation, FWIW, would be to try another instructor, as soon as you get the chance, and see what difference it makes. If you've only flown with the one instructor, at the very least it's an opportunity to calibrate your progress and to see if another teaching style might suit you better.

Pilot DAR - don't judge the 'clipboard' instructor too harshly. When I was taking clarinet lessons at school, my teacher used to crack me under the kneecap with the bottom of his clarinet if I fluffed my sightreading. Not really to hurt, but just as a reminder to concentrate. It never made me fall out with the teacher, and I got near full marks for sightreading in every exam I took. Now if only he'd done that with my scales too ...

[NovicePPL]

I'm still training for a PPL so I'm not well placed to offer any advice on flying technique. However, I have had three instructors so far; I had five lessons with Cabair and then switched to another school due purely to cost. My next instructor got a place with an airline so I'm now with my third. None of these instructors ever shouted at me and never ripped my technique apart while I was flying. All comments were delivered clearly and calmly and the one time the instructor (Cabair) ever touched the controls during landing he preceeded his action with "Let me help you here" before he lifted the nose slightly before touchdown.

If I may be so bold as offer this note: Many flying schools employ young men and women who have little life experience. Attaining their technical flying qualifications has generally been the focus of their attention for years and all of a sudden they are thrust into a position of relative responsibility and influence that requires good people skills. Some of these individuals are able to handle this but some simply cannot! They are not the gods that (some) believe they are. If your instructor continues to behave this way then request a change and DO NOT feel bad about it.http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

[RatherBeFlying]

Like SN3SGuppy, I was flying with a pilot in a Viscount simulator who managed to get upside down at 16,000' and just sat there all the way to the ground.

I did shout several times -- no response. As it was a simulator and I was going to be able to walk away whatever happened, I did not whack him in the head.

But I still wonder how I should handle the next case.

There was a recent glider accident where the pilot left the spoilers out while the glider sank into the trees.

These are cases of extreme fixation where the brain shuts out perceived extraneous input in favor of the perceived task at hand.

It would be nice to know what short of physical force would get the pilot to snap out of it as auditory input seems to be shut out in these cases.

Perhaps blocking the pilot's vision with a chart would get his attention.

[Put1992]

I do recall being told once about a generally accepted method of instructors extending their arm out, and firmly pushing the student back via the chest if they ever freeze up on the controls. True?

[bjornhall]

I would suggest finding not just one (new?) instructor, but flying with several different instructors. I had six instructors during my PPL, doing most of my training alternating between three instructors on every other flight. It was awesome! They all taught the same syllabus but in slightly different ways and with slightly different styles, and the learning experience got far richer from it. One would be better at spotting and sorting out any specific problems I might have; another might come up with particularly useful exercises to help me move along faster; the third was great at giving me tougher challenges with more "chewing resistance", leaving me a slightly humbled but far better pilot after each lesson.

I know some students don't like that approach at all, while others prefer it. Might be worth a try!

[Piper19]

You're doing fine, I also did go through this fase as student. I think you need to go solo, just to feel more confident. Once you do a circuit on your own and you see you can manage this you'll advance further. I doesn't mean of course you're perfect already at circuits, but you need a boost.

I also don't recommend switching instructors in the beginning. I did this and all they did was confusing me, because they all flew a little bit different from each other. And I had to adapt to the instructor each time, instead of learning the right thing. Once you have the basics done, you can consider changing instructor, just because two teacher can learn you more than one experience wise.

Conserning the trim, you have to feel it in very calm weather the first time. Let go of the stick, see what the nose is doing on the horizon (rising/descending) and trim likewise. Then change power setting, see what the nose does, trim, let go of the stick, see what the nose does, retrim until you get it. Once you have the feel for this, you can manage proper trim jobs when there is less time to think about trimming, or when there is turbulence. (I as student had the big problem to try to trim out turbulences-stupid of course).

About the 20 feet above the runway thing, I think the instructor didn't want you to land, but try to keep the aircraft straight and level above the runway. So you need power management to not let go the aircraft on the ground.

[lazy george]

Okavango do you mind in me asking what airfield you fly from ?? I too am based in Lancashire and had a very bad start to my training fom a local flying school

[Okavango]

Hi all. Thanks for all the advice. To complete the thread, I finally went solo last night and all went well. I had a chat with the instructor and we found some middle ground with the landings and on the 2nd all was well, allowing me to do a further 3 faultless then solo. In his view I would have made the examiner twitchy with my initial flare technique so I've got to repect that. I agree with the use of a number of different instructors for greater experience, though in my view in this first phase I feel continuity is better for all concerned.

The big thing I did notice was that once solo the control in flare (C152) was much more sensitive? I first noticed this lightness of control in transition to approach when I was maintaining level flight to prevent any balloon on deploying flaps. People only seem to mention expecting the increased climb rate though it seemed to me a lighter touch in pitch was required and the lighter aircraft was much more 'floaty' which I guess at the same approach speeds is what you'd expect? This is obvioulsy after only one intense experience so others please correct me if you see differently. Thanks again.

Lazy George - I don't want to name any specifics. However, to help you - I did a fair amount of research before I started out and spoke to schools at Barton, Blackpool and Liverpool - all seemed very professional. This episode excepted, I have no other complaints and though we pay a lot for it, I guess sometimes we've got to accept that instructing is a tough job and everyone can have an off-day so please don't let this put you off.

[DavidHoul52]

If you got a stall warning horn as you gently touched, you probably had a
great landing too

My instructor would kill you if she heard you say this!

What control can you possibly have of your aircraft if it is at stall speed? What would happen if there was a problem and you had to apply full power?

Every instructor has their own pet beliefs about what are the absolutely essential rules to flying. They often contradict each other. Come skills test day one is pleasantly surprised that the examiner is a lot more relaxed and will remind you of what really IS important.

[eharding]

My instructor would kill you if she heard you say this!

What control can you possibly have of your aircraft if it is at stall speed? What would happen if there was a problem and you had to apply full power?


Before the verbal beatings start, I want you to go away for 30 minutes, maybe lie down in a darkened room, and then come back and explain why that posting of yours was a quintessential expression of the purest form of utter bollocks.

Or we can do the shouty-shouty thing now. Up to you.

[BackPacker]

Four more minutes. I'm hoping for a good ol' slugfest 'n gutting.

[Pilot DAR]

I can't resist...

I would like to fly with that instructor. One of us is going to learn something. The word "Instructor" attached to a person's flying license does little to give me confidence that the person has any super pilot skills. They may, they may not. "Instructor" has little to do with it.

A long time ago I had occasion to give an instructor a ride home in my Cessna 150. The instructor was on edge from the very beginning, as I was and am only a Private Pilot, surely he was extending himself beyond his comfort level letting me fly (my plane). What made it worse, there are no right side controls in my plane, all he could do was sit - helpless - Ha!

I told him, as we neared our destination, that I would be orbiting a feature on the ground for a minute, at a very slow speed, and did so. We were out of the airport traffic area, and well above 1000' AGL. I orbited. Ok, I tested his patience, I orbited really slowly. My STOL equipped 150 is capable of very slow airspeeds with 40 flap out. He said nothing. I landed. He lived, but still said nothing...

Days later his boss, for whom I regularly demonstrated STOL kit equipped Cessnas of all different models, said do you want to know what (instructor) said about you flying? I could not resist, what?... "what an idiot, he was flying around in circles, below stall speed!" The boss, himself a very skilled pilot, asked the instructor "if the plane was below stall speed, why did it not stall?" Super pilot had no answer for that. He moved on soon after. He forgot that wings don't stall at a speed, they stall at an angle of attack. I never commanded that angle of attack, until nearly touching the runway upon landing.

You will find that should you be permitted supervised flight into the realm between 1G and 0G, that the plane can be flown, and easily controlled at extremely slow speeds without stalling. This because it does not have the angle of attack, because at less than 1G it's not trying to create the same amount of lift. Please don't try this unsupervised, though I am confident that your instructor should be qualified to safely demonstrate this for you. Don't worry, the wings won't fold until you reach a negative G load of 1.52 X 1.5. You'll be sreaming "stop" long before that!

We can all learn from each other. If your instructor has all the answers, the group here can offer some new and interesting questions to challenge her.

Here's a small part of the applicable design standard for you to discuss with your instructor.

523.77 Balked Landing

(a) [Each normal, utility, and aerobatic category reciprocating engine-powered aeroplane of 6,000 pounds or less maximum weight must be able to maintain a steady gradient of climb at sea level of at least 3.3 percent with:
(1) [Takeoff power on each engine;
(2) [The landing gear extended;
(3) [ The wing flaps in the landing position, except that if the flaps may safely be retracted in two seconds or less without loss of altitude and without sudden changes of angle of attack, they may be retracted; and
[(4) A climb speed equal to VREF, as defined in 523.73(a) (http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/regserv/carac/CARS/cars/523/english/523sa-be.htm#523_73_a).

Note the part where it says full flaps.

When I said stall warning, you thought stall. There is ample speed between the warning and the actual stall, and a landing can be safely made within that margin in any plane you'd be training in. Further to that, when I do the aforementioned balked landing (full flap overshoot) demonstration, I do it from a power off approach, add full power, and I'm content if the flaps stay at full until well iestablished in the climb. If I have just a little stall warning as I add full power and raise the nose, that's okay too, I know just where I am in the aircraft's lift drag relationship. I do not do these from the ground, but the design implication would be that you could if you had to. Yes, it is possible to take off with full flap, though nearly never an approved procedure in the flight manual, so don't do it.

I recently did an unexpected full flap, full power overshoot at 10' AGL in an amphibian very similar to a Lake amphibian - engine way up high. No problem, power full, control the plane, regard the pipping stall warning, and go around. They're designed to do that. In that plane, it's a required practice element for buggered up water landings.

You are being taught in a conservative and safe environment (I hope). As you gain experience, you will learn that planes can do a lot more than you think, and safely at that. A good read through FAA Part 23 (the origin of the passage above) is really worth the time. You'll come to know what you can expect the aircraft to be able to do to keep you safe.

On to the next commenter....

Pilot DAR

[BackPacker]

I, for one, would like to know how many nosewheels she or her students have ruined so far.

Oh, and as for "no control in stalled flight": go and get some aerobatics lessons. There are quite a few things you can do when flying slower than Vs (1g stall speed) and you can stall at higher speeds than Vs as well. Not to mention that some of the most spectacular aerobatics figures require you to stall, otherwise they won't even work.

[BEagle]

After several calls of a normal-tone "Airspeed, Airspeed, Airspeed," it became "AIRSPEED, AIRSPEED, AIRSPEED, ALTITUDE, ALTITUDE, ALTITUDE." I pushed the thrust levers up, and he yanked them to idle. I pried his fingers off the spoiler switch and retracted them, he thumbed them out and clamped his hand down over them. Not consciously, mind you; he was locked into a slow-down and go-down mindset, and was otherwise unresponsive and staring straight ahead. I continued to increase the volume and the tone of my insistance as I used both hands to physically remove him from the controls and take control of the airplane. After I pushed him back in his seat, away from the controls, and a very excited ride-on mechanic who was accompanying us joined me in the cockpit to see what was going on, the catatonic pilot suddenly popped back to life. He turned and looked at me, and said quietly, "you don't have to shout."

Well sorry, but to me that is an extremely poor technique. NEVER, NEVER should you be fighting eachother for control. Fair enough to call 'AIRSPEED' (why not just 'SPEED'?) and make the standard height-to-go call outs, but if no response is forthcoming then it can only ever be "I HAVE CONTROL" and sort the error out yourself. Then "YOU HAVE CONTROL" when you're happy for him to continue - and write it up after landing.

I once had to take control from a student in a 4-jet as he was about to cock up a crosswind landing at an international airport - only to find that the aircraft wasn't in trim either. He hadn't trimed quickly enough when reducing speed following a low drag approach. No amount of call outs would have resolved that, but he relinquished control as ordered and the landing was safe.

[DavidHoul52]

I originally wrote:

What control can you possibly have of your aircraft if it is at stall speed?

To which was the reply:

yours was a quintessential expression of the purest form of utter bollocks

Sorry guys - I don't get it. I haven't seen one intelligent reason for this inappropriately rude comment.

You can stall when doing aerobatics because you have thousands of feet to recover.

Also Pilot DAR, not all aircraft can take off with full flap. There was just such an accident in the US when the flap circuit breaker popped during a touch and go and the pilot did not realise that the flaps were still down. It might be that you CAN go around after the stall-warner has sounded but that's not an argument that you SHOULD hold off that long, is it?

I agree with my instructor (a far better instructor than some I've been with who insist on stupid rules and flying by numbers)- you need a firm landing in strong wind conditions. A gentle landing is not necessarily a good one. Agreed the main wheels should land before the nose wheel but that is possible at 65 -70 kts (in a Cessna) - you don't have to be at stall speed.

If you want to debate this then let it be thoughtful and informed. Don't yell and scream - that's the point Okavongo made at the very start of this thread.

[DavidHoul52]

... and to add my 2p's worth on the original issue...

I agree that getting shouted by instructors during training is often counter-productive. The student gets upset and as a result can't focus properly. I spoke to one student who said he put up with this for 60 hours before deciding to change school!

Having said that I found that as a student I also had a change in attitude myself after much frustration in the circuit. As adults we resent people telling us we've done something wrong once we feel that it's something we've already mastered. We feel that making mistakes means we are hopeless and we're never going to get out of the circuit!

You have to realise that making mistakes and getting things wrong that you previously got right is just part of learning to fly. You are not doing worse than before, it's just that the instructor has raised the bar because he/she knows what you are capable of.

Eating humble pie can be difficult but it's the fastest way to save money and get your PPL!

[BackPacker]

You can stall when doing aerobatics because you have thousands of feet to recover.

My remark did not have anything to do with height or height loss, but with the fact that an aircraft is perfectly controllable near, and even deep into the stall.

But since you're introducing height into the argument: there are manoevers that cannot be done without a stall of one or two wings, but can be done without height loss. In fact, if you do a flick roll in an upline you are even gaining height during the (stalled) manoever. Oh, and a complete sequence in an aerobatics competition will normally include at least one, but maybe as many as three or four fully stalled manoevers in a box extending no more than 3500' from the surface. If you need "thousands of feet to recover" you die. Or, if you're lucky, you're disqualified.

Next time you go up with your instructor, see if you can do the following: with the power at idle (and carb heat on) try to maintain your altitude. Ignore the stall warner, ignore the buffet but just continue to pull until the elevator hits the stops and keep it there. Keep the ailerons neutral and only correct wing drops with the rudder. Yes, with the rudder. Resist the temptation to use the ailerons. You are now in a perfectly stalled condition and (hopefully) in perfect control of the airplane. Notice the ROD by the way - it will not be nearly as much as you might think it will be reading this. This is just slightly beyond the PPL syllabus but will show you that an aircraft can be controlled when stalled. (Don't do this without an instructor though, even once you have the license, and make sure you have plenty height when you do lose the plot and the wing drops too far to recover with the rudder.)

The safest way to land an aircraft, any aircraft, in any conditions, is to fly it until it won't fly no more. That means slowing it down to very near the stall speed and since the stall warner should be set somewhere like 5 to 10 knots above Vs at MTOW, you should hear the stall warner briefly. Anything faster than this is not necessarily unsafe but will increase tire wear and landing distance, and has a higher chance of bouncing, PIO and things like that.

This doesn't have anything to do with a gentle or a firm landing either. Yes, a gentle landing is better on the tires and is appreciated by the passengers, but as you say in a firm crosswind or gusting conditions it might be better to plant it down a little more firmly to get proper sideways control from the main gear a bit earlier.

If you want to debate this then let it be thoughtful and informed.

...instead of making statements on behalf of someone else (your instructor) and being uninformed about this particular bit of the aircrafts flight envelope because you haven't truly been there.

[DavidHoul52]

We are going to have to agree to disagree on this! You have no basis whatsoever for making an absolute categorical statement on this. An aircraft is NOT SAFE when it is just above the ground at near stalling speed and there are strong gusts of wind about.

Sometimes it's worthwhile to rethink what you have always believed to be true.

I won't be up with my instructor. I'm a fully qualified PPL.

Do what you say was NOT a recommendation by the CAA examiner who took my skills test. He was perfectly happy with the landings I made.

and yes I have been really there.

I resent your patronising attitude.

[bjornhall]

(Don't do this without an instructor though, even once you have the license, and make sure you have plenty height when you do lose the plot and the wing drops too far to recover with the rudder.)

Huh? Why not? :confused:

When there are strong gusts of wind about, you have more control while still in the air than you have at flying speed on the ground. I still want to land at the lowest possible speed = stall speed or just above.

While it may be possible to put the main wheels on before the nose at 65 - 70 kts, at least with reduced flap settings, it leaves absolutely no margin for error... So gusty conditions would seem like the worst possible time for such maneuvers, wouldn't it?

[DavidHoul52]

I prefer to make a flapless landing at 70kts if there are strong gusts and touch down as soon and as fast as I can (not above 70kts obviously). If I get blown off the runway I have the option of putting on full power and going around. If I am just about stalling speed with the nose high do I really have that option? Every month we have numerous AAIB accident reports about mishaps due to lack of control just before touch down (fortunately mostly minor)

I also don't see that control after touch down is such a problem. Wheels are on the ground - keep straight with rudder, keep from blowing over with aerilons if needed. Use brakes. If the wind blows you off once you are on the ground then surely you are way outside limits? (Hurricane Ike?)

If the aircraft can be controlled at stalling speed why do we try so hard avoiding just that? (The pilots who were not successful at controlling at stalling speed are sadly no longer with us)

you have more control while still in the air than you have at flying speed on the ground

I think it was during the briefing of lesson one of my PPL course (not with the instructor previously mentioned) that I was told that the faster the airflow over the control surfaces the greater the degree of control. So in fact you will have less control if your speed is slow (and less margin for error). At 65 knots I would venture to suggest that you actually have more control on the ground (depending on the runway surface of course - I'd opt for staying in the air as long as possible when landing in a field of potatoes! :D)

[bjornhall]

I think it was during the briefing of lesson one of my PPL course (not with the instructor previously mentioned) that I was told that the faster the airflow over the control surfaces the greater the degree of control. So in fact you will have less control if your speed is slow (and less margin for error).

Yes... But the point is that your control in the air at low flying speed will still be better than it is on the ground at low flying speed. Somehow we have to transgress the speed range of reduced controllability around the stall speed, and that problem doesn't go away just by getting it on the ground at increased speed...

I'd much rather go around from 10 ft just above stall in the air, than try to do the same while bouncing and sliding over the ground headed for the runway edge and whatever lies beyond it...

[DavidHoul52]

So rotating at 65 knots is dangerous?


bouncing and sliding over the ground headed for the runway edge and whatever lies beyond it...


Doesn't happen on a hard runway.

I've read oodles of accident reports and never of report of this happening to anyone. There is in any case a safety margin at the side of the runway. That will soon stop you.

[eharding]

Sorry guys - I don't get it. I haven't seen one intelligent reason for this inappropriately rude comment.


Because we were waiting for you go go away, review your comments about the control at the stall, maybe have a think about it, and get back to us - or face a bit of a jocular verbal beating.

I think BackPacker has covered that area nicely in the interim - however, in light of some of your comments this evening, I'm just wondering if you are in fact a master wind-up merchant, or genuinely a tyro PPL expounding your rather novel theories of the niceties of approach speed to a slightly bemused audience?

You may well have read oodles of accident reports, but I'll lay odds that if you keep on going with your current attitude, you're going to have one all of your own. I'm particularly enamoured of your belief in the forgiving nature of tarmac runways, and the nature of what lies at the edges.

Have you met G-EMMA, by the way? - I reckon you two would get on like a house on fire.

[BackPacker]

Sorry guys, I've been away all evening and I'm not entirely sober right now.

You have no basis whatsoever for making an absolute categorical statement on this. An aircraft is NOT SAFE when it is just above the ground at near stalling speed and there are strong gusts of wind about.

Maybe I don't with just a few years of experience over you, but you might want to read Wolfgang Langewiesches "Stick and Rudder" who claims exactly the same thing: a landing should be at or near the stall. Of course, his book was published in 1944, revised in 1972 and sold 250.000 copies, but what does he know?

Or should I refer to one of the two (three?) main authors of current PPL books, Jeremy Pratt, who writes "The aim of the hold-off is to ensure that the aircraft touches down at the correct airspeed (slightly faster than the stall)..." (page 13.18 of Flying Training, if you care to look it up)?

I prefer to make a flapless landing at 70kts if there are strong gusts and touch down as soon and as fast as I can (not above 70kts obviously).

Now I don't know what type of aircraft you're training on, but the POH of the PA-28 specifies an approach speed of 63 knots, the POH of the DR200 specifies 60 knots and the POH of a C-172 talks about 65 knots. These values were established by the very people who designed the aircraft, and validated by test pilots with thousands of hours of experience. And of course these are the approach speeds, which are to be followed by a hold-off phase to bleed off the excess airspeed. So the actual value at which these multi-thousand hour test pilots touch down is even less. But what do they know?

David, your PPL is a license to learn. If the only way you can bring about a succesful landing in gusting/crosswind conditions is by touching down at 70 knots, then you might want to think about some additional lessons about handling your aircraft in those conditions. Because at that speed it only requires one minor bump in the runway to throw you back into the air with very dire consequences.

And I'll be honest with you. When I got my PPL about two years ago, I considered my landings "safe". It took me two more years, 100 hours PIC and 250+ landings to get to the point where I consider 75% of my landing "good" or "nice" - in my case defined by three distinct and separate, very discrete squeaks of the tires a few seconds apart. And it's only since very recently that I've been able to perform landings right at the "demonstrated crosswind limits" of the aircraft without sweaty palms.

There is in any case a safety margin at the side of the runway. That will soon stop you.

Don't count on it. That safety margin contains things like runway edge markers, PAPIs and some other lights and radio antennas. Yes, they are designed to break off easily when hit by an aircraft so they don't kill you. But they are also very expensive, both to repair the aircraft and the object itself. Plus, breaking action is generally poorer on grass than on tarmac so the safety area at the side of the runway will stop you less well than the runway itself.

I resent your patronising attitude.

That's good. That shows us, finally, that you are capable of independent thought instead of regurgitating blindly what your instructor and examiner told you, most likely in a context which isn't uniformly applicable.

[Pilot DAR]

Gee Davidhoul52,

It is my observation that the people posting here generally are trying to assure that the best prevailing wisdom, which is based upon vast experience, is the most prominent. I don't see patronizing as being a part of that. I do agree that some posters have differing ways of presenting their thoughts, but is that not true of everything in life?

I suggest that there is no such thing as a "fully qualified" pilot. Perhaps you would consider yourself a pilot who has demonstrated the required minimum skill set for a PPL. Referring to yourself as “fully qualified” in this group is just asking to be challenged! This group is a microcosm of aviation. If something is not well received here, it probably won’t be well received face to face, when you’re trying to rent a plane, get a job flying a plane, explain to the mechanic why you think your plane really should not be broken, you know what I mean…

No matter where you are in aviation, there are people who have been there before you, and people who are following you. It's up to you who you listen to. Here, it can be a little difficult to tell who's who sometimes, but read postings over time, and it will become more clear. There are certainly a lot of people’s postings here I read with great interest, because after 30 years and 5000 hours, I’m hardly fully qualified, I’ve got lots I’d like to learn!

I have no way of knowing your flying experience, other than by the fact that you assert flying certain techniques as being the most appropriate, where my opinion differs considerably. Does this worry me? No, you're not asking to use my plane. Were you to be making such a request, however, We'd be doing some flying together, and it sounds to me that I would be demonstrating some alternative techniques to what you see as being the norm. These techniques are certainly not unique, judging by the responses here. The ONLY time I try to land a light aircraft without allowing it to be very close to, or to some degree stalling upon touching, would be in the case of a flying boat, some taildraggers, the gliders I’ve tried, or a helicopter. Yes, you could find examples of specific aircraft, whose characteristics would not lend so well to full stall landings, but in the world of light aircraft, these are the exception not the norm. Such aircraft are not those we’re discussing here.

I frequently evaluate, and check myself out on, aircraft types which are new to me, and modifications (hence the need for the test flight). In every case, my first landing will be such that I hold it off the runway as long as I comfortably can. I am usually rewarded with a landing to be proud of. One of my scariest ever landings was when I was fairly newly qualified as a Private pilot, and decided to try to fly a Cessna 182 onto a runway instead of landing it there. It did not work well at all. No harm done, other than my pride. Memorable forever! I've landed both tricycle and tailwheel wheel planes onto surfaces where I had less than a complete idea of what to expect: Off airport deep grass, sand, unbroken snow, and roughly graded land for example. In every case, having the plane going as slowly as possible provided the best result. Stall warning sounding? Perfect! Many times upon touching, I decided not to stay, and went around, full flaps and all! I've never damaged or stuck a plane doing this.

As for full flap takeoffs, very few aircraft would include this as a recommended practice, and I am not advocating any technique not described in the flight manual. That fact that somebody crashed on a balked landing, while not being able to retract the flaps, says to me one of two things: That pilot could not manage the circumstances, and lost control of an aircraft, which as a part of it’s certification had demonstrated that such a maneuver could be safely accomplished under stated conditions, or, The plane was not a certified design, and had not demonstrated this capability. I assure you that were I to evaluate for balked landing capability, and the plane would not safely fly away with full flaps, I would not sign off on that aircraft, and the approval would not be issued. In specifically approved flight testing, I have deliberately taken off several types (including a C172) from a stop, with full flaps, for very specific purposes. On one occasion I had an instructor along with me, who was apparently very surprised at the capability of the aircraft he thought he knew so well. Later in that flight, he asked me to roll it. I declined!

A few thoughts:

If you tried to make my STOL equipped C150 touch the ground at 70 kts, it would fight you terribly, and you would loose. It would rather touch down at about half of that. The very heavy, factory wing C182RG, I used to fly would not like a touchdown at 70 kts either, though it would fight you less.

If you have just touched down flapless at 70kts in any GA aircraft, and somehow get blown off the runway, I’d want to hope that you got blown down the centerline of another runway, which was more into the wind, before I’d try a go around!

Safety margin at the edge of runways? Yes I’ve seen some, and lots of runways, including mine, where 35 feet off the centerline you are not on passable ground. I landed the LakeAmphibian in SanduskyOhio a few months back to clear customs. The paved runways was so narrow, (and I expect the grass at the edge not firm enough to support the aircraft), I had to use reverse to do a three point turn to backtrack! Don’t plane to exit a runway off the side and still have a good day.

Accident reports are probably actually saying “failure to maintain control” not “lack of control”. Certified aircraft have the control, or else they do not get certified. Did the pilot correctly use the control available? By the way, where the damage is reported as minor, such accidents are often only investigated to the level of an interview (sometimes only by phone) with the pilot. What the report says will, in such cases be based (and say so) primarily, or only, on what the pilot reported. Take that with a grain of salt, I assure you the investigators do!

Who is trying to avoid controlling at near stall speeds? That’s when I am devoting extra attention to control, so as to more precisely cause the aircraft to fly as I intend. In cruise flight, you can afford some variability in speeds and attitudes, down near stall speed, the variability is much less tolerable. Sounds to me like the pilots who crashed while flying near stall speed, failed to maintain control of an aircraft which until the moment earlier, could have been controlled.

Yes, the faster the air moves over the wings, the more control available to you for the same control surface deflection. During a control check, you’ve certainly noticed that the control wheel/stick will move a long way (around in the case of a wheel). You’ve also noticed that you do not use much of that available movement in cruise flight (you would be damaging the plane of you did). At landing speeds, you will have to move the controls much farther than during cruise flight to get the same attitude change result. The control is still available, you just need to use more of it for the same effect. While test flying a turbine DC-3, it was demonstrated to me that the control wheel actually goes all the way around! During subsequent test flying maneuvering, I used some of that beyond normal control range!

Indeed, having an plane faster than required on the ground is much more likely to introduce difficulties, than at a slower speed. Mostly, it’s much more able and likely to become airborne again, and when it does, the speed will decay rapidly, then you do have a problem!

An aircraft just above the ground at near stalling speed is perfectly safe, and will continue to be so, unless the pilot fails to maintain control. In a case of strong gusty winds, and that technique being employed, a potentially unsafe condition exists. It was then pilot who was unsafe, not the plane. Either the pilot failed to maintain control, or he/she entered a flying environment where the conditions could be expected to exceed his/her ability to control the aircraft (beyond demonstrated crosswind value). That makes the pilot unsafe, not the plane. Recently I went around for exactly this reason, as previously mentioned in another post. I rapidly came to the conclusion that I might not be able to adequately control the aircraft if I continued the landing. I went elsewhere. Were I to have crashed, it would have been my fault, not the plane’s.

A CAA examiner could well be pleased with the performance you demonstrated. That examiner probably observed that your demonstration of skill met or exceeded the minimum requirements. That does not mean that the examiner could not also find that a different technique was also acceptable and also met the requirements. I offer the example that the applicant could satisfactorily demonstrate a soft field landing technique on every landing, unless asked to do otherwise, and the examiner would have to find the applicant’s skills as having met the minimum requirements.

Davidhoul52, relax, get with the group, open your mind, there’s a lot of wisdom here. If you’re up for a healthy debate, have fun. You won’t get far complaining that you’ve been patronized, few people here seem to really be worried about that!

Pilot DAR

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I wasen't going to respond to this thread but I must comment on this:


Quote:
If you got a stall warning horn as you gently touched, you probably had a
great landing too


My instructor would kill you if she heard you say this!

What control can you possibly have of your aircraft if it is at stall speed? What would happen if there was a problem and you had to apply full power?

David, both your instructor and you are not only wrong but accidents going somewhere to happen if you believe that you can not safely control an airplane to the point of stall as it touches the runway.

The only time you should " have " to apply full power to go around is if the airplane is not traveling in a straight line down the runway during the landing process.

As long as you apply full power before losing complete control of it applying full power is just a normal action for a go around.

[Mark1234]

Quote:
(Don't do this without an instructor though, even once you have the license, and make sure you have plenty height when you do lose the plot and the wing drops too far to recover with the rudder.)
[bjornhall] Huh? Why not? http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/confused.gif

At a rough guess because you're deep into the territory where a little hamfistedness can see you spinning. And a *lot* of pilots won't have training, or be familiar in spinning.

Let me ask this a bit differently, not throwing absolutes:

For the record, I'm a low hours PPL - 85hrs since starting 18months ago, aeros endorsed, 120hrs on gliders preceeding powered. Fly a mix of warriors / arrows / 172 / etc. I know you can fly well down into the stall with control, generally I aim for / execute a full stall landing.

However, in gusty conditions, I'd probably carry 5-10kts more speed, back off a notch of flap (in an old 40degree flap 172), slow down later in the piece, and aim to put it on the floor - still slow / nose high, but not full stall - hard to explain, but kinda letting it roll on, rather than really fighting to keep it airborne as long as possible. Speed wise 75kts short final, 65ish over the hedge into the flare. I can't accurately fly 65 vs 63 in real life.

I don't know what the touchdown speed is (I'm looking elsewhere than the ASI), but I'd estimate about 40kts full stall, maybe 5-10kts more if I'm 'putting' it on the floor.

Why is that extra 5-10 kts on the ground so dangerous? Perhaps with a tail dragger? In most normal GA aircraft my experience would suggest that rudder/directional control isn't an issue in either case, but having the mainwheels on the ground gives an additional margin of lateral stability against gusts.. if you get a thump at low speed it can take a long time for the ailerons to bring the wing back up.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Why is that extra 5-10 kts on the ground so dangerous? Perhaps with a tail dragger?

When wheel landing a tail wheel airplane a few extra knots give you better control.

Therefore it can not be dangerous.....as long as you are in control that is. :)

[Pilot DAR]

Mark,

You will go far - safely.

The extra 5 to 10 kts will probably work out just fine, particularly when using the good techinque you have obviously been taught. It's the idea of not trying to slow down from 10 or 20 kts extra before touching down which alarms me a little.

The extra 10 is not a big deal, but the extra 10 on top of that is. Now you're presenting the opportunity for a bad bounce. The bad bounce can only happen if you still have flying speed when you're on the ground. If you've not got the speed, you cannot fly again. A perfect situation if you've just landed!

My observation is that the only downside of full flap in a single Cessna is a slight tendancy for sailing downwind in a crosswind, which is easily overcome with proper control. I always land with full flap, no matter what the wind or aircraft type (DHC-6 Twin Otter excepted). 'Never had a problem. The slower you're going if you do head off to the formerly mentioned side of the runway , the better chance you have of getting it stopped along the way, and the less damage you're going to do if you get there!

Pilot DAR

[JohnGV]

haha, u all love to argue so much! wat gets me is that PPL students actually love to get stuck in with poor arguments with experienced pilots. pilot trainin is 1 step further to pure arrogance each hour u gain! students tend to solo for the first time, suddenly grow big balls, and come on here and all of a sudden they are expert pilots! shutup, listen to the real experts!

my 2ps worth on the stall horn before landing, the stall horn tends to sound 5-7kts higher than the speed it will stall at, so stall horn prior to touchdown is fine!!!!

[Say again s l o w l y]

My word, there is some gold on this thread and as mentioned some utter bowlocks as well.

First of all. Sometimes a good shouting at is sometimes required for all the reasons mentioned. You don't want to do it all the time and you certainly don't want to destroy someone's confidence, but you do sometimes need to drop people a notch or two. Students often get cocky, start thinking they know it all (as ably demonstrated by some of the posts on here.........) and they need to be reminded that actually they know f'all and could potentially hurt themselves or even worse damage a perfectly good aeroplane because of their attitude.

Flying training sometimes isn't about being huggy, fluffy and all nicey nicey, it's sometimes about not smearing yourself across the countryside and if a dose of "reality" needs to applied in the swiftest possible way, so be it.

So here he we have a "licenced PPL" who's read "oodles of accident reports" trying to explain to Ed and Chuck about approach speeds?:ugh: Do you have any idea of how much experience and knowledge you are taking on?

I'll get the popcorn ready.

[DavidHoul52]

It certainly seems I've sparked off a lively discussion!

I'm not arguing the point out of arrogance, and yes of course I realise I am still very inexperienced and appreciate advise and wisdom from more experienced pilots. I am arguing because I am trying to think this through for myself .. and experienced or not I am entitled to argue my point - as the CAA examiner told me after my skills test. I do not have an "attitude" (you missed my previous post about this obviously)

But I like the way I have been taught even though I am open to hear other opinions. I'm still not convinced about the arguments for holding off to near stall. I know it's a way that has been taught for a long time but I am consistently making safe landings so I think I will stick with the way I know and with which I have the most experience (important point!) , thank you very much!

A conclusion I have drawn from the discussion is that it's important not to follow a rule blindly but to use one's judgement. There are a host of variables to take into account in any one landing. The amount of hold off needed on wet and muddy grass in light winds, or where the runway is short might be very different to one on tarmac where there is a strong wind blowing (Lydd for example)?

Two more spanners to add to the works - one - flapless landings are flatter than full flap landings and two - I have not tried this but Cessna have recommended that for their 150/152 series that pilots do not close the throttle completely after the flare - this because of accidents due to lack of control on the hold off.

[Say again s l o w l y]

I'm not sure where to begin really!

So on the ground the faster you go, the safer you are as you have "more control". Uh huh.

So the fact that it is fairly hard to crash when an aircraft is parked and not moving, apart from being hit by something else, doesn't really fit into that logic does it?

I'll ask you a couple of questions.

At roughly what speed does a 152 actually stall at?

Do you get plenty of warning before the stall? (I'm not including the stall warner in this, but what you actually feel.)

Does the a/c speed actually have anything to do with the price of fish in a stall, or is there some other magical thing involved?

One last thing before I lose the will to live, especially having thought about the standard of groundschool you have recieved, have you tried landing a 152 with power left on? A really good technique that :ugh: and can you point out to me in the POH where it says to do that?

I've just reread your posts, please tell me you are a troll just trying wind people up, because if you aren't I'm going to go and live in a concrete and lead-lined bunker until I know you aren't flying any where near me.

[Pilot DAR]

Okay,

I've learned something... I was wrong. At the beginning if this thread I suggested that yelling at a crew member was not appropriate. I think that I've now met a pilot, who as a fellow crew member, I'd probably have to yell at! (even were he to be the captain!)

Quote:
"it's important not to follow a rule blindly but to use one's judgement."

Yeah, but as it has been written many times:

"Good judgement comes from experience, experience comes from bad judgement"

Which judgement are you working with here? Your experience may be on the horizon, and it may not be good!

Some of the many rules you should follow blindly, and not apply your judgement: Rules of Physics! They apply to flying in many ways you have yet to appreciate...

Pilot DAR

[DavidHoul52]

Did you hear the story about the three ladies from a small remote village who travelled around the world and came back with exactly the same opinions as when they started out?

Look.. all I am saying is that hey.. it's very easy to touch down slow and with the stall warner going off - but as another poster has agreed - one does have reduced control (think wobbly bicycle at close to stop).

I thought it might be a helpful discussion but (with some exception) it seems I'm just getting a lot of sarcasm, tut-tutting and just plain arrogance!

[DavidHoul52]

Quote:
"it's important not to follow a rule blindly but to use one's judgement."

Yeah, but as it has been written many times:

"Good judgement comes from experience, experience comes from bad judgement"


You missed my point entirely. Every pilot has to use their judgement TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE SITUATION no matter what experience they have. It's called "situational awareness" I believe.

[DavidHoul52]

have you tried landing a 152 with power left on

That's not what I said. I was quoting from a news article. My point was that I'm not the only person who thinks there are dangers of loss of control in the hold off at low speed.

[DavidHoul52]

Please tell me you are a troll just trying wind people up

No I'm not.

[BackPacker]

but as another poster has agreed - one does have reduced control

Nobody said that. The only thing that was said is that you need larger control surface deflections for the same effect, once the speed goes down.

But a certificated aircraft has to have large enough control surfaces to be in full control of the aircraft right up to the point of landing, assuming you apply the method described in the POH and are within the W&B and head/crosswind envelope.

So if your POH proscribes a full stall, or nearly-full stall landing (as is the case with the majority of light aircraft) you can be sure that you will have full control thoughout the landing. You just need larger deflections of your control surfaces, thus larger movements of the yoke/stick/rudder pedals.

Personally, I cannot remember ever having hit the stops on any controls, except when doing aerobatics, and then only when doing full-stall maneuvers such as spinning.

[DavidHoul52]

At roughly what speed does a 152 actually stall at?

Do you get plenty of warning before the stall? (I'm not including the stall warner in this, but what you actually feel.)

Does the a/c speed actually have anything to do with the price of fish in a stall, or is there some other magical thing involved?


A stall happens when the wing is at or greater than a certain angle of attack. It can happen at any speed. Your point?

[DavidHoul52]

your POH proscribes a full stall, or nearly-full stall landing

Really? Not seen this in Cessna 152 POH - page number?

[DavidHoul52]

That fact that somebody crashed on a balked landing, while not being able to retract the flaps, says to me one of two things: That pilot could not manage the circumstances, and lost control of an aircraft, which as a part of it’s certification had demonstrated that such a maneuver could be safely accomplished under stated conditions,


The pilot was very experienced and the circumstances were not outside limits. Are you suggesting I try taking off with full flap?

[BackPacker]

Really? Not seen this in Cessna 152 POH - page number?

I don't have a C152 POH here since I don't fly it. I can offer you a quote from the C152 AFE pilots guide though, or the numbers that were taken from the POH and put into the summary by our club. But since you're not likely to have those references there to verify, let's turn the thing around.

I'll retract whatever I said and humbly apologise if you can point me to the section of the C152 POH where it says that touchdowns should be done at 70 knots, otherwise control of the airplane will be lost.

[DavidHoul52]

people posting here generally are trying to assure that the best prevailing wisdom, which is based upon vast experience


Do you think it a good idea to change the way you have been trained to fly and which matches ones own albeit limited experience just because of the opinions of a bunch of hacks on an internet forum.

(Sorry guys but you asked for it :E)

[DavidHoul52]

I'll retract whatever I said and humbly apologise if you can point me to the section of the C152 POH where it says that touchdowns should be done at 70 knots, otherwise control of the airplane will be lost.

I never said that.

[Big Pistons Forever]

May I suggest we return to first principals.

For aircraft with nosewheels, safe landings require that at the moment of touchdown, the aircraft be in the centre of the runway, aligned with the direction of the runway and touch down with a gentle rate of descent and on the mainwheels first with the nose wheel still in the air
Satisfing the above criteria for landing will result in a touchdown slightly above stall speed. Extra speed on the approach will not change the touch down speed, it will only prolong the flare.

Finally control of the aircraft is what makes safe landings. Pilots crash on landings because they were incapable of keeping the aircraft within its safe flight envelope. For low time pilots I would suggest staying away from the edges of the envelope. For landings the way to do that is flying the POH recommended speeds

[Say again s l o w l y]

Now think about what you've been posting and how you seem to think landing works.

For a start. NEVER quote from a news article. How about reading Mr Cessna's book. Not a bad read really and shows up much of the utter balls that you hear throughout club houses and in many of the flying comics available in WH Smiths.

You aren't creating debate, you are showing how little you know. I don't need to have a debate about how to land a Cessna, nor do people like Chuck, Ed, SN3G etc.etc.
That isn't arrogance. It comes from having taught hundreds upon hundreds of people to do it, whilst being able to do it fairly well ourselves in all sorts of weather conditions aswell as understanding why we do what we do, not just quoting some other tosh you've heard in the bar.

As for your definition of situational awareness...............fark me.

Tut tutting! I'm thinking you should be going back to your school for a full refund!

Look. Not all of here are students, some of us have more than 50 hours in our log books. Chuck probably stopped counting at 20,000 hrs and has been teaching for longer than you've probably been alive for. I could tell you to nearest 200 hrs what's in mine but no closer and as for the others I've mentioned, they all know what they are talking about, so do yourself a favour. Sit down with a copy of the POH, think about how an aircraft actually flies and don't pontificate on stuff you currently have no idea about.

Using a wobbly bike as an analogy for an aircraft at low speed..............You're making me want to utter profanities!

[DavidHoul52]

can offer you a quote from the C152 AFE pilots guide

The guide says "gradually raise the nose to ensure a low touch down speed on the MAINWHEELS FIRST" (their emphasis). It doesn't say what "low touch down speed" is, or whether this is close to stall speed, still less that the stall warner should be sounding.

[DavidHoul52]

Finally control of the aircraft is what makes safe landings. Pilots crash on landings because they were incapable of keeping the aircraft within its safe flight envelope.

Agreed!


For landings the way to do that is flying the POH recommended speeds


The POH recommends the approach speed (which I have no problem with) , not the touch down speed.

[Say again s l o w l y]

http://www.langleyflyingschool.com/PDF%20Documents/Pilot%20Operating%20Handbooks/Cessna%20152/Section%204%20Normal%20Procedures.pdf

Read page 10.


Quote:
people posting here generally are trying to assure that the best prevailing wisdom, which is based upon vast experience

Do you think it a good idea to change the way you have been trained to fly and which matches ones own albeit limited experience just because of the opinions of a bunch of hacks on an internet forum.


If you have been trained to fly and think in the way you are coming across here, then I would suggest that you go down to the monkey house at your local zoo and ask them how to land a Cessna.

[Katamarino]

I think you'll find that to be at an angle that will ensure the mainwheels touch first, and for the aircraft to still be descending, you'll want to be a lot slower than 70 knots :D

[DavidHoul52]

You aren't creating debate, you are showing how little you know. I don't need to have a debate about how to land a Cessna, nor do people like Chuck, Ed, SN3G etc.etc.
That isn't arrogance. It comes from having taught hundreds upon hundreds of people to do it, whilst being able to do it fairly well ourselves in all sorts of weather conditions aswell as understanding why we do what we do, not just quoting some other tosh you've heard in the bar.


You have exactly the attitude I'm talking about. You haven't even read my posts properly. You must be a nightmare of an instructor. Do you do this yelling and swearing during your lessons?

[DavidHoul52]

think you'll find that to be at an angle that will ensure the mainwheels touch first, and for the aircraft to still be descending, you'll want to be a lot slower than 70 knots


I have no argument with that. I was talking about an approach speed of 70 knots , no flaps in windy conditions.

[DavidHoul52]

Read page 10.

Very funny



If you have been trained to fly and think in the way you are coming across here,

Should I not be thinking at all then?

[Katamarino]

You said:


"Quote:
If you got a stall warning horn as you gently touched, you probably had a
great landing too "

My instructor would kill you if she heard you say this!

What control can you possibly have of your aircraft if it is at stall speed? What would happen if there was a problem and you had to apply full power?

Every instructor has their own pet beliefs about what are the absolutely essential rules to flying. They often contradict each other. Come skills test day one is pleasantly surprised that the examiner is a lot more relaxed and will remind you of what really IS important.


If you're hearing the stall warner 'as you gently touch' the runway, you're not on the approach, are you? You're a few inches either side of 'landed'!

I shan't echo the many, very well written points about how many aircraft have a lot of control even deep within the stall...but they're all correct. Try it!

[DavidHoul52]

Using a wobbly bike as an analogy for an aircraft at low speed..............You're making me want to utter profanities!

What's wrong with the analogy? I think it's quite good. Slow speed - good control - VERY slow speed - much less control.

[Say again s l o w l y]

I have read your posts and simply you are coming across as someone who doesn't know what they are talking about, but is too arrogant to admit it. You are digging yourself into a deeper and deeper hole.

You are arguing with people who do this for a living and have been around this business for a long time. Landing a Cessna is one of the easier things in flying. Explaining how it happens is also not rocket science.

Just because you drive a car, does that mean you'll take Schumacher to one side and explain how he's doing something wrong? No. Why not? Because you wouldn't be adding anything to his knowledge would you?

Well, talking guff about landing Cessnas is about the same thing.

Think about what others have typed here and take a deep breath.

When this was posted, you should have taken the advice offered.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHoul52
My instructor would kill you if she heard you say this!

What control can you possibly have of your aircraft if it is at stall speed? What would happen if there was a problem and you had to apply full power?

Before the verbal beatings start, I want you to go away for 30 minutes, maybe lie down in a darkened room, and then come back and explain why that posting of yours was a quintessential expression of the purest form of utter bollocks.

Or we can do the shouty-shouty thing now. Up to you.

[DavidHoul52]

many aircraft have a lot of control even deep within the stall.

I don't think I'll try it if you don't mind! Just the thing a new PPL needs to hear.

[DavidHoul52]

tosh you've heard in the bar.

I never go to the club bar. PPRune is a good alternative though, don't you think?

[Katamarino]

I was asked to do a full stall on my skills test - you'll have to do it one day! Try it thousands of feet up, of course, and with a different instructor for good measure. Expanding your appreciation of how the aircraft will perform will only make you safer :)

[Say again s l o w l y]

Your FI should not just be teching you the basics of how to manipulate the controls, but to think about what and why you are doing it.

You need a good understanding of the mechanics of flight, you also need to have enough sense not to listen to a lot of the cobblers that is preached around aviation about "how to do things."

Always think about why you are doing something, but when it becomes blatantly obvious that someone knows more. Shut up and listen. I still do it and you know what? I'm still learning stuff too, but keep the bullsh*t filter on all the time and always reference what someone else has told you back to first principles.

Does it make sense or are you being fed a line? There isn't one way to do anything in aviation, there are lots, but there are still right ways and wrong ways. You need the basic understanding to realise that.

For example, quoting rubbish from flying mags is generally the wrong way to do anything. Sometimes there is some excellent advice, but sometimes there is some real horse manure. You need to learn what is good and what is bad.

[DavidHoul52]

I have read your posts and simply you are coming across as someone who doesn't know what they are talking about, but is too arrogant to admit it. You are digging yourself into a deeper and deeper hole.

Think about what others have typed here and take a deep breath.


Thank you. I am taking note of the more sensible replies. Possibly some of what I've written is rubbish but I'm waiting for convincing answers besides "thats the way we've always done it" and "thats what the book says".

I'm wanting a cast iron solid argument what can I take to me previous instructor and say "Look here!". You guys have really been a disappointment so far.

[Pilot DAR]

When you consider the lift/drag curve of any airfoil, the angle of attack will have to increase as the speed decreases, up to CLmax, after which things change.

Using tricycle aircraft for our dicussion, all of the POH's I reviewed said to touchdown mainwheels first - or, prevent the nosewheel from touching first.

If you look at the lines formed by the contact points of the nose to main tires, in an unloaded condition, relative to the angle of incidence of the wing, it will become apparent that at a certain airspeed, the wing would be nowhere near CLmax, and thus have a very low angle of attack. couple that low angle with the fixed angle of incidence, and the previously established wheel contact point angle, and it is obvious that at some speed it will not be possible to put the mainwheels down first. Hence the need to slow down. If you have yet to experience a nosewheel shimmy in a Cessna, you've had the good judgement to fly very well maintained aircraft. When you experience that shimmy, you will imediately begin to worry that you will actually loose the oleo before you get the plane stopped. If the nose had been held off longer, and then held light during the rest of the rollout, the chance of a shiimy are greatly reduced, and should it happen, the effect not damaging.

The very earliest Cessna 150, 172 and 182 had longer nosewheel shruts than they do now, they had to be shortened because of problems associated with touching the nosewheel first on landing.

If your instructor had owned and maintained the Cessna in which she taught you, for 20 years, she would have been teaching you these techniques. You would not be permitted to fly any Cessna for which I was responsible unless you demonstrated these techinques consistently.

And please pay attention. I did specifically say in plain words not to attempt full flap takeoffs unless the POH says to. Consider this instruction.

I higly recommend to you, the book: Cessna Wings for the World, by Thompson (a former Cessna test pilot).

Okay I have to read more of the humour here, I can't keep up!

Pilot DAR

[DavidHoul52]

I was asked to do a full stall on my skills test - you'll have to do it one day!

Done it many times!

[DavidHoul52]

Your FI should not just be teching you the basics of how to manipulate the controls, but to think about what and why you are doing it.

Exactly, but I'm not a student.


There isn't one way to do anything in aviation, there are lots,

That's what I'm saying.


quoting rubbish from flying mags

Wasn't from a flying mag but from a report (US).

[Katamarino]

Well then, there you go! Note how the rudder and elevator are still fairly effective, and in a number of aircraft the inboard end of the wing will stall first, and mean that you can even safely carry on using aileron in the stall.

The post above yours here gives a superb explanation of the aerodynamics involved - and on an aircraft like a 152, the angle of attack that you'll want to touch down at (mainwheels first), and the rate of descent you'll want at that point (roughly 0!) give a speed of around stall speed. Hence if you hear the chirp as you touch the wheels on, you've landed at the right angle, speed, and rate of descent.

[DavidHoul52]

When you experience that shimmy, you will imediately begin to worry that you will actually loose the oleo before you get the plane stopped. If the nose had been held off longer, and then held light during the rest of the rollout, the chance of a shiimy are greatly reduced, and should it happen, the effect not damaging.

Yes I know about this and I appreciate that it's not possible to land nose wheel up above a certain speed. But surely it doesn't need to be so slow and nose high that the stall warner sounds?

[Pilot DAR]

Gee David,

If you're waiting for more convincing, well supported answers than those you are receiving here, it's proabaly time to buy lottery tickets and wait to win also! Both might happen, but you've got a life to live in the mean time, so make the best of what you've got right in front of you!

Aviation probably has even better wisdom to offer than that which you are getting here, but not much better, not right now, and probably not free! Perhaps your standards are too high. (though I can't figure out how they came to be so, certainly not from having good exmples set for you)

If you would like an hour or two of advanced dual flight training in my Cessna, I'm in Ontario, Canada, and you're on, my treat. More free instruction, if you present yourself here. As the recipient of a lot of very good free advice over 32 years, I owe some back. Honestly, you need it!

In the mean time, make the best of what you have...

Pilot DAR

[DavidHoul52]

The post above yours here gives a superb explanation of the aerodynamics involved - and on an aircraft like a 152, the angle of attack that you'll want to touch down at (mainwheels first), and the rate of descent you'll want at that point (roughly 0!) give a speed of around stall speed. Hence if you hear the chirp as you touch the wheels on, you've landed at the right angle, speed, and rate of descent.

This is what I have issue with! Nothing in previous posts convinces me that it's necessary to be THAT slow.

[DavidHoul52]

If you would like an hour or two of advanced dual flight training in my Cessna, I'm in Ontario, Canada, and you're on, my treat. More free instruction, if you present yourself here. As the recipient of a lot of very good free advice over 32 years, I owe some back. Honestly, you need it!


Thanks for the offer and the advice!

I'm not meaning to make light of some of the good posts here, but for an inexperienced PPL the best way to go is the way you been trained. If there was anything wrong with that training the CAA examiner would have picked it up immediately. He did in fact give me a lot of helpful advice but as I said previously he did not make any suggestions concerning the hold off - which he would have done if he thought it would be helpful.

So - sorry to have put some worthy forumers noses out of joint. You may be right but I suspect you may not be right as you think you are.

This is my final post on this thread (so you can all breathe again!)

[Katamarino]

I suppose its a matter of opinion - in my own, still limited experience (270ish hours, mostly Cessnas) then you can get away with being a bit faster on a longer, tarmacced runway. Once you start flying into shorter, rougher strips there are more considerations - I'm sure you were taught that for a short/rough field landing you want to land as slow as possible. This would, here, be on the stall warner - it means you stop quicker, and protect the nosewheel from being smacked on the bumps, or hitting an uneven bit of runway before the mains touch down!

Also, when flying in or out of high fields (I've been in and out of some at 8000'), I find due to the higher TAS you get from the same IAS, its much better to reduce the groundspeed as much as possible and land as the horn goes.

Basically, my opinion would be that while landing a Cessna as the horn goes is often not strictly essential in many situations, in a fair number it *is*, and I find it best practice to try and aim for these landings as often as possible. In a gusty wind, a few knots faster might not hurt, of course.

So in conclusion, I think maybe we meet in the middle on this!

[Pilot DAR]

It's okay, I was breathing all the way along, it happens when you're laughing! Sorry to sound unkind, but this has truly been funny!

I suppose that David indicating that he will post no more is fair enough, everyone is entitled to know and work within their limit. Perhaps David will retreat and read for a while. Thus, in fairness, I shall refrain from any other direct references to his past posts.

This will not be the last time a pilot asserts him or her self as being authortative, when really, they have a lot to learn. I have certainly done it! (as I think back feeling somewhat foolish). I'm sure that the group will devote itself to "helping" the next unwary pilot to fall into such a discussion...

I enjoy reading the posts here, because I learn so much. Sometimes I learn something new, sometimes I learn that I was headed down the right path already, sometimes I learn how to explain something about which I have some knowledge, sometimes I learn to type better!

Pilot DAR

[Say again s l o w l y]

Pilot DAR you are obviously a far better man than I, because I won't! I agree totally with everything you've written here.

David, a few last points. A chirping stall warner is just that, a warning device to alert you are approaching the stall. It isn't telling you that you are stalled.
That is why I mentioned earlier that it might be an idea to go up and learn in the landing configuration the difference between a "chirping stall warner" and actually being stalled.

Frankly your FI should have demo'd this and got you to fly it in a controlled environment.

An examiner is looking for you to be safe and are only judging you on a very small number of landings. The emphasis is on being competant rather than being ace of the base.
Have you ever taken part in a spot landing competition or landed at an extremely short field? If you try your technique you will end up off the end of the runway or miles from the touchdown point wondering why you can't get it down when everyone else can put it on a sixpence.

As for your assertation that you aren't a student. Get shot of that attitude right now. We are all still students of flying no matter what our bits of paper say or how many log books we've been through.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Chuck probably stopped counting at 20,000 hrs and has been teaching for longer than you've probably been alive for.

Yeh, I passed that number about 25 years ago.

The bottom line is all fixed wing airplanes I ever flew landed just fine with the nose held up in the landing attitude for that airplane with touch down at or just above the stall speed.

I started in the biplane era and progressed to the fly by wire glass cockpit technology airliners......

The secret is control the thing and keep it tracking down the center line and avoid high speed contact with the runway.

[DavidHoul52]

Sorry I know I promised not to post any more on this thread but the following may be of interest. It comes from "handling notes for a Cessna 152" from ThePilotsFriend website

handling notes on the Cessna 152 (http://www.pilotfriend.com/training/flight_training/fxd_wing/cessna152.htm)


Apply full flaps (30 degrees) as needed and establish 60 KIAS glide. (trim as needed) The normal Cessna landing is made with full flaps. Full flaps improve landing accuracy. Crosswind or strong gusty winds are the only justification for using minimal flaps. C-152s can be slipped with flaps according to the POH.

About 1970 the FAA came out with a recommendation that power off landings not be considered "normal" Many instances of inability to re-apply power were occurring. The FAA now recommends that power be maintained into the actual flare and only be taken off at actual touchdown. Plan your approaches with the understanding that power will be applied. Then if power is lost, the removal of flaps will allow a safe power off landing.

Go-Around, Full Flaps

Full power, carb heat cold. Lock arm to hold the yoke firmly forward to prevent pitch up and anticipatory right rudder to counteract P-factor. Establish level pitch attitude while bringing the flaps up. Milking flaps up or by notches at speeds below 60 is best way. Climb on reaching Vy.



Short Field Landing

The traffic pattern for a short field landing is flown the same as a normal landing traffic pattern up to the final approach.

On final approach, establish a full flap, power on descent at 54 KIAS. Power setting should be adjusted as necessary to establish a glide path, which will bring the aircraft just above any obstacles.

Once it is apparent that the aircraft will clear the obstacle without power, slowly close the throttled and maintain 54 KIAS. Maintain 54 KIAS down to the flare and land the aircraft with a minimum amount of float.

Once the aircraft is on the ground, retract flaps, lower the nose gently, and apply smooth but firm brake pressure.

Note: If the final approach on a short field landing is properly planned and executed, final approach will not involve any additions of power. A lower approach speed can be used at lower weights.

Soft Field Landing:

The traffic pattern is flown just as it would be for a normal landing until final approach. On final, a 60 KIAS full flap glide is established.

Once the runway is assured reduce power to idle RPM and flare normally over the runway. Increase the pitch attitude prior to touchdown and bring power up to 1200 or 1500.

Once the main gear touches the runway, continue back elevator pressure as required to keep the nose wheel off the runway while bringing up the flaps. Removal of the flaps will allow the pitch attitude to increase.
Keep the power on sufficient to keep the nose off. With proper power application it is possible to taxi clear of the runway without the nose wheel touching.

Crosswind Landing:

Crosswind landing involve flying a crabbed traffic pattern with one addition. On final approach, when the aircraft is aligned with the runway centreline, the aircraft will begin to drift. The upwind wing is lowered to the point where the aircraft stops drifting and (the wing) is maintained in this down position. Rudder pressure is applied in the opposite direction of the aileron deflection to keep the aircraft nose/tail lined up with the runway centreline. Pressure must be maintained on both controls in order to keep the aircraft so aligned. 20 degrees of flaps rather than full flaps may be used on final, depending on wind strength and (crosswind angle) component with the runway. touchdown is accomplished with the upwind wheel of the main gear touching the ground first. Once on the ground, apply increasing upwind aileron gradually to full aileron, and maintain directional control with the rudder pedals.


Normal Landing
Airspeed 60-70 knots (flaps up)
Flaps-- AS DESIRED (below 85 knots)
Airspeed--55-65 knots (flaps down)
Power--REDUCE to idle as obstacle is cleared
Touch down--MAIN WHEELS FIRST
Landing roll--LOWER NOSE GENTLY
Braking--Minimum required

Short field Landing
Airspeed 60-70 knots (flaps up)
flaps--30 degrees (below 85 knots)
Airspeed-MAINTAIN 54 knots
Power--REDUCE to idle as obstacle is cleared
Touch down-- MAIN WHEELS FIRST
Brakes--APPLY HEAVILY
Flaps--RETRACT

Balked Landing (Go around)
Throttle--FULL OPEN
Carb heat--COLD
Flaps--RETRACT ONE NOTCH
Airspeed--55 knots
Fly over the right edge of runway for traffic visibility
Flaps--RETRACT each notch when altimeter shows positive climb

[BackPacker]

Sounds like a good summary of how things should be done. It concurs with what's in my AFE pilots guide for the 152, and with the extract from the POH that somebody posted. This in contrast to:

I prefer to make a flapless landing at 70kts if there are strong gusts and touch down as soon and as fast as I can (not above 70kts obviously).

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Oh,Oh....I must be doing things wrong as far as how to teach landings goes.

When doing type ratings on the PBY I teach them to close the throttles at two hundred feet especially during water landings, when they are competent landing without the power crutch I then allow them to use power when ever they want to.................

[Pilot DAR]

I suppose that the addition to the collective wisdom provided by tose notes is a generally good thing, though I would have issue with some of what is written, and expect to see a competent pilot also be able to do it another way...

Landings may be made carrying power once the pilot has mastered power off short field technique. I've force landed C150's three times (as well as a few others), and in all but one case, precise power off glide path control with the addition of flaps, and sideslipping as required got me safely into the chosen spot with no damage. I was nose to fence once though, ten more feet, and I would have scratched paint.

I vigorously oppose the concept of removing extended flap during the approach. Once it is down, it stays down until you're safely on the ground. For someone who is so concious of stalling close to the ground, this should be a natural one. With the flap extended, you have a reduced stall speed, and you may be flying in that lower speed range quite safely. If you retract flap, the stall speed goes up. If you don't accelerate, you are going to stall. Worse, if using preselect flaps, or the Cessnas which have an up detent on the switch, one motion can retract all of the flap, not just some. Imagine how busy you will suddenly become trying to reselect flaps while recovering a stall very close to the ground? I challenge you to show me anywhere in a Cessna publication where the pilot is instructed to remove flaps during an approach which is intended to teminate as a safe landing. Don't do that!

I also do not approve of "locking" a control system (which includes the pilots limbs) in flight. Fly the aircraft. Locking things is not required during any normal flight in any certified aircraft. There are maximum permitted control forces, and any proud pilot can manage at least those values.

Anticipating "P" factor? We are talking a light Cessna here right? It's not a F4U Corsair! If you're having to think to anticipate "P" factor, and apply control inputs to counter act it, you're thinking too much, and not flying enough! On a Cessna 185, 206, 207 and 210 you can notice a little "P" factor, and some rudder is needed, but this should be a normal reaction to the perception that the aircraft needs a control input, just as a small gust of wind would affect the aircraft.

For the thoroughness of the document, it does seem to overlook a rather basic, yet important pilot responsibility in the balked landing instructions. While you're busy locking arms and anticpating which pedal to push, and not climbing until Vy, and milking flaps off, you're also flying the aircraft so as to clear the obsticles right? You'll see lots of accident reports about pilots who forgot that too!

An anicdote about control forces: I was to test fly a Robertson Cessna 206, which I was the last pilot to fly weeks earlier. As maintenance had been accomplished, I gave it a good walk around, and checked all the controls, including trim. All fine. Off I went. The plane leapt off the ground, and headed for heaven (well, that's where I suddenly thought I was headed!) Full nose down trim, and a fifty plus pound push force on the control wheel were required for the whole painful and exhausting curcuit. I was thinking about how to lock my body into the control wheel somehow to relieve my aching arms. No go. Power managment was a lesson in extreme muscle required in my left arm, while the right was doing something else. The landing was an excersise in how much push force to relax to flare. I landed, no bent metal - very angry words to the mechanics.

It turns out that although the flight controls were all moving in the correct direction, the limits of travel for the elevator trim had been reversed during reassembly. They are 5 and 25 degrees. Where I probably needed 15 to 20 for trimmed flight, I only had 5.

Canadian readers will find an accurate description of this event in the Aviation Safety Letter (I did report it to the Transportation Board, though it qualified as an incident, not an accident). The scary thing is that the event reported in the ASL was not me! It also happened to Transport Canada's own Cessna 206! I take flight control checks following maintenance much more seriously now! And I thought that I had an idea of how to be a safe pilot!

Pilot DAR

[DavidHoul52]

Sounds like a good summary of how things should be done. It concurs with what's in my AFE pilots guide for the 152, and with the extract from the POH that somebody posted. This in contrast to:



I prefer to make a flapless landing at 70kts if there are strong gusts and touch down as soon and as fast as I can (not above 70kts obviously).

Badly written on my part. What I meant was "keeping float to a minimum" 70 kts
is an acceptable approach speed without flaps.

[mark sicknote]

When doing type ratings on the PBY I teach them to close the throttles at two hundred feet especially during water landings, when they are competent landing without the power crutch I then allow them to use power when ever they want to.................Chuck. You could have saved me time and had me solo sooner. I was having trouble with my pre-solo circuits (landings basically). Asked my instructor for a break and suggested 90 / 180 / 360 engine offs. I nailed every one and realized that I had been attempting to "avoid" landing by adding throttle on short final when it was not required.



Cheers,

Sicknote:ok:

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Sicknote, there are two types of people who are out there when it comes to flight training.

Flight instructors......people who instruct you to follow their instructions...no matter how wonky they may be.

Teachers......people who teach you how a given airplane is best flown.

I teach pilots how to fly a given airplane and use methods that are not normally used in the flight instructors world of rote training.

For one thing I use a camcorder and we review the lessons on a TV or lap top after the flight...when a student has started to diverge from the proper flight path during the approach or landing phase I freeze the picture and have the student use a laser pointer to show me where they were looking at the time and what picture they perceived they were getting.

Also in the latter stages of the landing I count down the height from fifty feet to six inches until the student has the picture burnt into their cranium.

By the way when I ask them to show me where they were looking almost every time they are looking to far ahead.......which of course is to be expected as that is what they have been taught.

I have often toyed with the idea of offering a training program to improve teaching techniques and flying skills to " flight instructors " then I get overwhelmed by the gigantic pool that need such training and I realize it would be just too difficult a task.:E

[JohnGV]

Chuck,

Where on the Island do you fly from? CYYJ? CYCD? or up north?

What flying club are you with?

Cheers

[DavidHoul52]

Chuck,

Do you think you could create multiple clones of yourself and distribute them liberally on this island?

[Crash one]

David
I have read this thread with amused interest with regard to the utter rubbish you have written. It is a sad reflection on the modern training system that such arrogant self opinionated "fully qualified" people such as yourself are being let loose in a/c. Now you have the audacity to ridicule people who you are not qualified to lick the boots of.
I would suggest that you take a long hard look at your own capabilities, stop trying to question other people's, especially those who are trying to give you advice. For what it's worth I think you are an accident looking for a site, I hope I'm wrong for the sake of whoever loves you.

[DavidHoul52]

No it was not utter rubbish, nor was I being arrogant.

Just asking questions. Anything wrong in that?

I suppose I could have added "in my opinion", "could it be that" etc but my typing is a little slow.

I was in fact surprised that such a large number of ppruners had a different view to my highly respected instructor.

I suspect that neither they or she are 100% right, but there were some good posts (as well as some stupid ones). Further experience and reading up on POHs and CAA safety recommendations is the way to go I believe.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Chuck,

Where on the Island do you fly from? CYYJ? CYCD? or up north?

I'm at CYCD.

What flying club are you with?

Cheers
JohnGV

I am not a member of any flying clubs, but I do keep a new Husky in one of the Hangars at the south end...


**********************************************************


Chuck,

Do you think you could create multiple clones of yourself and distribute them liberally on this island?

For what purpose David?

[ProfChrisReed]

David,

It seems to me from what you've posted that your instructor, and thus you, have a real fear of stalling on landing. You're therefore deliberately putting the aircraft on the ground something like 20kt or more above the stall.

Think about it rationally for a moment. You carry your approach speed down to the point where you round out (more experienced pilots will probably have let speed bleed off a little by then, but assume you haven't). You are now flying parallel to the ground, ideally a few inches above it but perhaps a couple of feet. What's the worst that could happen if you stall?

The answer is that you arrive rather more suddenly than you intended, but without enough force to lose your fillings or damage the aircraft. It's a non-event. There's no time for a nose drop or wing drop.

This is from just over 700 landings in gliders, in some of which I definitely stalled; early on in training, not being quite able to do it right, later from either loss of concentration or being caught out by a sudden gust, curlover, etc. Still alive, didn't break any aircraft.

The advantage of holding the aircraft off until it won't fly any more, which in practice means the wheels touch a knot or two above the stall in most cases, are substantial:

1. You won't take off again if you hit a bump.

2. You won't bounce back into the air like a kangaroo - in any glider I've flown, landing at the kind of speeds (as a multiple of Vs) you use would hurl you skywards, leaving you with decaying energy and a real risk of stalling in from a dangerous height. Or, if it's a noseweheel glider, you'd punch the nosewheel through the fuselage.

3. Less wear and tear on the airframe.

Gliders aren't different in this respect from powered aircraft for landing, except perhaps that with some power types the penalties for being too fast are less severe. The collective wisdom on this thread is that the lowest energy landing is the safest, with appropriate modification for aircraft type and conditions. This is also the wisdom in books on flying, and in aircraft handbooks. You have to recognise that your instructor has taught you a technique that goes against this overwhelming set of opinion.

So, ask yourself what's so dangerous about stalling 1 foot above the ground. This might help you understand the reactions to your postings. The dangers of forcing an aircraft on to the ground at high speed are well known (see numerous accident reports).

[DavidHoul52]

Chuck,

Do you think you could create multiple clones of yourself and distribute them liberally on this island?

For what purpose David?


To bring sanity. (Note to self: STOP! STOP! STOP!)

[DavidHoul52]

So, ask yourself what's so dangerous about stalling 1 foot above the ground.

Dear Prof,

Stalling 1 feet above the ground is not dangerous, but I understand that floating in any kind of cross wind certainly is. This is basic, or am I wrong?

What would I know? - I've just spent a year and a small fortune learning absolutely nothing, it seems.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Floating in a cross wind dangerous............................ If you aren't a troll then I'm seriously sh*tting myself about the standard of training in this country.

Can you keep the thing pointing down the centreline in a cross wind? I hope so. Can you put it on the ground with ripping the gear off? Yes, then what is dangerous?

Sliding off the side of the runway and not doing anything about it because your crosswind technique is poor or non-existant is dangerous.

[DavidHoul52]

I'm not the only one who thinks so.

"Floating makes the pilot vulnerable to many problems, like crosswind, turbulence, and the end of the runway"

Paul A. Craig "The Killing Zone" pg126

and again (referring to soft-field landings)

"The soft-field technique's prolonged flare means that the airplane remains in the air longer and at an ever-decreasing speed. During that flare a crosswind can be a problem. The airplane is only 2 feet above the surface, which is not enough room to correct for wind placing one wing low and holding with rudder. Soft-field landings are susceptible to drift." (pg 133)

[DavidHoul52]

If you aren't a troll then I'm seriously sh*tting myself

no need for this - please grow up

[Say again s l o w l y]

No I am. If you aren't trolling for a reaction, then there are so many holes in your knowledge or misunderstandings in the physics of flying that I am genuinely worried.

Being vulnerable to something and it becoming dangerous are totally different things.

Vulnerable to a cross-wind? So do you have a good cross-wind technique?

How about quoting from your own experience rather than misquoting from books.

[DavidHoul52]

I am able to cope well with crosswinds within limits (not much in a Cessna), thank you.

I really can't believe the meanness and lack of objectivity of some posters! Because a person doesn't agree with you doesn't make them a "troll". For goodness sake!

Experience is good. Reading from people who have experience is good. Some of them have posted on this forum and I'm listening to them.

Is private aviation a fascist state controlled by some kind of mafia? A forum is just that - a place where you can say what you like. Don't condemn people for saying what they understand. If you really have a convincing counter-argument then please say it. Calling people names and trying to belittle them only shows that you doubt your own position.

[eharding]

Is private aviation a fascist state controlled by some kind of mafia?


You may choose to think that. Personally, the CAA staff I've met and flown with have proved to be perfectly charming, not in the least bit Italian, nor have I ever woken up with the horse's head at the end of the bed.

However, I understand from numerous accounts that isn't always the case.

Seriously. Dave. Knock it off.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

David, whoever your instructor was either did not make sure you understand this subject or was incompetent...either way you need to find another instructor and get some remedial training before you hurt someone.

If you truly believe this you really do need retraining.


"Floating makes the pilot vulnerable to many problems, like crosswind, turbulence, and the end of the runway"

You can float right off the end of the world and be perfectly safe as long as you are capable of flying the thing properly.

[gasax]

David, please stop talking (well typing) and start listening (well reading).

Selective quoatations from stuff you have read is fine - it shows you can read!

Please try to understand.

Forcing an aircraft onto the ground is nearly always possible - done well it is pretty smooth, badly done it is an accident.

Landing as slowly as possible - needs a level of skill. I've just toured around the west and south of France. My aircraft with flaps can fly very slowly - so often I can do a 'light aircraft' landing in strong winds with no flap and quite high speeds. It is convenient and done carefully safe enough. And given the high wind strengths I used that technique a bit. This is the process I think you are using and you can get away with it for quite a while.
Years ago I flew with a woman with a similar technique - after a difficult flight she tried to land at about 80kts - I tried to intevene and eventually on the runway I took control and caused a bit of a scene. She was very offended and we never flew together again.

Give me a short runway and all the stuff you have heard kicks in - it has to - it is the only way to land. But I have something of an advantage of nearly a 1000 hours and I have no idea how many landings. That level of experience means I can put an aircraft on the ground gently under most conditions - not unfortunately a lot more.

I fly with instructors every 2 years and after 20 years I am happy to talk through the technicalities - last 2 renewals (revalidations) both had comments about 'protecting the nose wheel' and 'holding the nose up'. Which is fine - but at the time I was only flying taildraggers - so who was orientated for keeping the nose up? - probably me. But I'm happy to listen an happy to learn. I've read any amount of stuff, flown quite a lot and am acutely aware there are people who have over 100 times my experience and may just know a bit more.

I would congratulate you on the splash you have made on Pprune. Now wind your neck in and start listening - you will be surprised at what you could learn.

For what it is worth a prolonged hold off represents no particular threat - you are already flyoing along the centreline - the controls may be crossed but that is what is required - the aircradft should be slipping into the wind and flying straight, it will touch down windward wheel first and then sit down. No drama, no issues, no susceptability to drift

[Say again s l o w l y]

Actually David. Please keep posting. I've never retrained anyone by message board. I'd love to be part of the team that first achieves this feat.

I'm not trying to insult you, nor is anyone else. What we are all concerned about is the attitude that is evident in your posts. Now that might not be reality, but all we can work on is what we read.

So far I have been very surprised by many of the comments that you have made and some of the knowledge you have displayed.

If you had been one of my students, then I would be dismayed at the lack of knowledge I had instilled in you. That wouldn't be your fault, but mine for not having trained you correctly.

[DavidHoul52]

Hopefully I will be judged by my airmanship and not what I have written on an internet forum.:ok:

[Crash one]

An a/c will not "float" unless it has a speed well in excess of the stall speed, this is often called "flying", if the speed is Vs +0 on touchdown (touchdown is the bit where the wheels are in contact with the planet) this planetary contact will initiate a phenomenon called deceleration, now, as 0 knots of deceleration are required to reach Vs it won't take very long. Once Vs is reached the aircraft is refered to as landed (no flight is happening). If further flight is required (a go-around) speed must be added, this requires (glider pilots please look away now) more throttle / power. The average 152 will climb very nicely at 60 knots, therefore if it is on the ground at 60 knots & you apply back pressure to the yoke in order to keep the nose wheel from doing the wibbly wobbly thing the aeroplane will climb, but, & this is a big BUT, if you (glider pilots can look now) do not add power immediately the aircraft will do the decelerate thing several feet up in the air until it reaches Vs, at which point it will fall down at the rate of 32fps. This has been known to hurt.
Now, If you have spent a year & a small fortune at your flying "school" but haven't learned that, then yes, you have learned absolutely nothing, & I suggest you ask for your money back.
I am deliberately being flippant because it seems you deserve it.
I believe you are arrogant because you will not accept the advice of people who were teaching flying while you were wetting your nappies, & in fact you are trying to tell these people they are somehow wrong.
Now, if that is not a reasonable description of arrogant then please point me at a better one.

[DavidHoul52]

David, please stop talking (well typing) and start listening (well reading).

Most of the replies indicate they misunderstand what I am saying. Probably it's just the way I've put it. Practically, in the real world probably my landing would not be much different to yours.

[DavidHoul52]

I believe you are arrogant because you will not accept the advice of people who were teaching flying while you were wetting your nappies, & in fact you are trying to tell these people they are somehow wrong.
Now, if that is not a reasonable description of arrogant then please point me at a better one.


Basing my flying techniques on the advice of unknown posters on an internet forum would be very foolish indeed.

All this talk about re-training is laughable - I don't think I am the one who is being arrogant - do you?

[DavidHoul52]

An a/c will not "float" unless it has a speed well in excess of the stall speed, this is often called "flying", if the speed is Vs +0 on touchdown (touchdown is the bit where the wheels are in contact with the planet) this planetary contact will initiate a phenomenon called deceleration, now, as 0 knots of deceleration are required to reach Vs it won't take very long. Once Vs is reached the aircraft is refered to as landed (no flight is happening). If further flight is required (a go-around) speed must be added, this requires (glider pilots please look away now) more throttle / power. The average 152 will climb very nicely at 60 knots, therefore if it is on the ground at 60 knots & you apply back pressure to the yoke in order to keep the nose wheel from doing the wibbly wobbly thing the aeroplane will climb, but, & this is a big BUT, if you (glider pilots can look now) do not add power immediately the aircraft will do the decelerate thing several feet up in the air until it reaches Vs, at which point it will fall down at the rate of 32fps. This has been known to hurt.

Yes I am well versed on go-arounds, thank you

[Crash one]

Dead horses & floggings come to mind.

[Pilot DAR]

David,

I've got to wonder if perhaps your instructor is a skilled aviatrix and instructor, who taught you well and completely, but to no avail.

You went into the flying school having selectivly read all passages of books, magazines and accident reports which supported your early beliefs about the physics of flight. Despite her most heroic efforts, she just could not convince you otherwise. But, was just too much a lady to tell the truth about your unwillingness to consider informed assistance, and death grip on errant ideas about aviation.

Your advancement in aviation will work out best for you by your buying your own aircraft, because I really struggle to see you convincing anyone else that you have what it takes to fly theirs safely. If someone else who carefully considers the skill set of piloting you have presented here, lets you loose in their plane, trust me, they're also trying to not hurt your feelings by telling you to get more training. They'll turn their back on you as you taxi away, so as not to witness what will become of their aircraft in your hands.

If you tally up the total piloting hours of experience of the posters here, who are all telling you exactly the same thing, it sounds like you'd get a number pushing 50,000. Why on earth would you think to argue with that?

So, we've had a blast here, and a few good laughs at your expense. We, to your exclusion, have bonded a little more with each other, and that really is why we spent the time typing. We're really not thinking that we will actually be in the seat beside you, or that you'll ever fly our families around, so the true personal investment for the rest of us in you is pretty low!

Also remind yourself that being the recipient of another's wisdom is a privilage. We give or withold it at our sole discretion. You are not the first to present your "fully qualified" wisdom here, and you won't be the last. I suspect a few of the others who spouted "fully qualified" wisdom here have probably signed up again with a different name, because of the shame they caused themselves in their first incarnation! It would appear to me, that although I did offer you the opportunity for some experience (an offer which stands), others apparently have told you to stay away from them - that's gotta hurt!

25 years ago, I probably made a fool of myself (okay, more recently too) and a very senior and respected pilot called me a "Sunday pilot". I made it my goal to live that down. Thousands of hours, hundreds of different planes, and dozens of Transport Canada flight test programs later, the end of my deserving to be called a "Sunday pilot" may be nearing (they do let me fly all seven days if I want).

David, aircraft manufacturers, modifiers and pilots pay a lot for my opinion on their aircraft. Cessna buys products from my company, which I developed and own. and you won't listen for free! When someone refers to you as a Sunday pilot, celebrate, you're on your way up!

Pilot DAR

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Basing my flying techniques on the advice of unknown posters on an internet forum would be very foolish indeed.

David.....take a deep breath and think for a moment about what you are typing.

I am not an unknown poster on an internet forum, I use my real name and I have been teaching pilots how to fly for over fifty years......it is my opinion based on what you have typed here that you are either a windup artist, an idiot, or someone who is badly in need of proper flight training.

[DavidHoul52]

Chuck - I appreciated your posts. This has nothing to do with my actual performance as a pilot (good or bad) believe me. I was not trying to wind everyone up. It was just a small point which I still believe as valid but I think has been misrepresented out of all proportion. I'm sure if you were in the right hand seat you would be more than satisfied with the standard of my landings given my limited experience!

[Say again s l o w l y]

One thing to mention. A few times you make reference to the examiner being happy with what you have done. Well, many of us on here are also examiners as well as FI's.

Your comments on stall warners and landing attitudes are just one example

I agree with my instructor (a far better instructor than some I've been with who insist on stupid rules and flying by numbers)- you need a firm landing in strong wind conditions. A gentle landing is not necessarily a good one. Agreed the main wheels should land before the nose wheel but that is possible at 65 -70 kts (in a Cessna) - you don't have to be at stall speed.


Touching down at 65 kts in a 152.................Nice way of destroying the nosewheel.

We are going to have to agree to disagree on this! You have no basis whatsoever for making an absolute categorical statement on this. An aircraft is NOT SAFE when it is just above the ground at near stalling speed and there are strong gusts of wind about.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I prefer to make a flapless landing at 70kts if there are strong gusts and touch down as soon and as fast as I can (not above 70kts obviously). If I get blown off the runway I have the option of putting on full power and going around. If I am just about stalling speed with the nose high do I really have that option? Every month we have numerous AAIB accident reports about mishaps due to lack of control just before touch down (fortunately mostly minor)

I also don't see that control after touch down is such a problem. Wheels are on the ground - keep straight with rudder, keep from blowing over with aerilons if needed. Use brakes. If the wind blows you off once you are on the ground then surely you are way outside limits? (Hurricane Ike?)

If the aircraft can be controlled at stalling speed why do we try so hard avoiding just that? (The pilots who were not successful at controlling at stalling speed are sadly no longer with us)


Not sure where to start with this one. Could you point me in the direction of a recent report where someone fell out of the sky on approach because they stalled just before touch down?
Taxiing in strong winds can be dangerous. I've landed perfectly safely in conditions where we had to sit for a fair while until conditions improved enough to allow us to taxi safely or even open the doors. (Admittedly this was in aircraft slightly larger than a 152 and in conditions far beyond what most light aircraft could handle)

So rotating at 65 knots is dangerous?


Quote:
bouncing and sliding over the ground headed for the runway edge and whatever lies beyond it...

Doesn't happen on a hard runway.

I've read oodles of accident reports and never of report of this happening to anyone. There is in any case a safety margin at the side of the runway. That will soon stop you.


:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh: Nay, nay and thrice nay.

Two more spanners to add to the works - one - flapless landings are flatter than full flap landings and two - I have not tried this but Cessna have recommended that for their 150/152 series that pilots do not close the throttle completely after the flare - this because of accidents due to lack of control on the hold off.


Yet you later post that the advice (which I think is utter b*lls by the way) is that it is due to engine response that closing the throttle completely is frowned upon by Mr Cessna. What's that got to do with a "lack of control on the hold off."

You missed my point entirely. Every pilot has to use their judgement TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE SITUATION no matter what experience they have. It's called "situational awareness" I believe.

Situational awareness encompasses many things. It has little in reality to do with actually flying. For many of us, the flying is virtually automatic and situational awareness is about everything going on around us, from other traffic on the radio, navigation, ATC, what's likely to come up next, how the a/c is behaving etc.etc.
It is not just about handling the aircraft.

Quote:
many aircraft have a lot of control even deep within the stall.

I don't think I'll try it if you don't mind! Just the thing a new PPL needs to hear.

Why not? You should have been shown this on numerous occasions throughout your training. Whether you are a newly minted PPL or not you should have a good understanding of what your aircraft is actually capable of.

Quote:
When you experience that shimmy, you will imediately begin to worry that you will actually loose the oleo before you get the plane stopped. If the nose had been held off longer, and then held light during the rest of the rollout, the chance of a shiimy are greatly reduced, and should it happen, the effect not damaging.

Yes I know about this and I appreciate that it's not possible to land nose wheel up above a certain speed. But surely it doesn't need to be so slow and nose high that the stall warner sounds?

No it doesn't, but it doesn't half help. Landing is about energy management. Why touchdown with lots of energy that then has to be dissapated throughout the weak braking system and by putting extra force on the nose oleo and main springs?

I can't be bothered to delve any further, but how about you answer some of the questions that have been put to you along the way?

None of us give two hoots about how good your landings are. I'm sure on a nice day with a long tarmac strip in front of you, they are fine. What I and everyone else is finding so frustrating is your attitude. That is what makes or breaks us as pilots.

I like to think I'm alright as a handling pilot. I can get aircraft to do what I want most of the time. Thing is, there are many out there who's handling skills are better than mine. Even some of the students I've taught. (not many I hasten to add!!!) but the difference between me and a student is what goes on between the ears. I know when to quit or when not to go. My yellow streak has taken years of cultivation and is now quite impressive.

Experienced flight instructors are more interested in what you are thinking than what you are doing.
Of course you have to reach a good standard of flying ability, but there is so much more to flying than that.

Pilot DAR :D:D

[Pilot DAR]

Yeah,

It is great of Chuck to use his real name. I honestly thought you were not supposed to do that, for some internet reason I did not understand. Many people here know who I am through PM's and most are welcomed. Some will have to earn the "privilage" of an introduction...

Don't worry David, I know enough about aviation, that I know I'm not steering you wrong. Need some reassurance? The aircraft pictured here: Lake Central Air Services - Lake Aircraft; Services Available (http://www.lakecentral.com/survey%20solutions-2.htm) are a few of my flight test projects. They're all safely back on the ground.

Pilot DAR

[DavidHoul52]

Those float planes look like fun!

[Pilot DAR]

Yeah, but the ones which are the most fun with my work there are these: Thurston Teal Amphibian (http://www.seabee.info/teal.htm) The boss is not so keen on them, so he doesn't post photos of them as much.

[Pilot DAR]

I test flew this one http://www.lakecentral.com/images/cessna_boom.jpg in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. Transport Canada insisted that I spin it many times, and dive it to 110% of Vne several times. Not as fun as it sounds, when you have 750 pounds of bagged gravel tied down behind you. I lost a paddle out there somewhere....

[Chuck Ellsworth]

It is great of Chuck to use his real name. I honestly thought you were not supposed to do that, for some internet reason I did not understand.

I have never had any reason not to use my real name on these forums.

One thing for sure it makes one be very careful of what one posts.:ok:

And I seldom have pilots jump all over my advice and claim it is useless.:)

[DavidHoul52]

Most of your questions don't seem to be questions but I'll try my best:ok:


Touching down at 65 kts in a 152.................Nice way of destroying the nosewheel.


Main wheels at 65 kts. No nosewheels damaged at our flying school as long as I've been there.


Could you point me in the direction of a recent report where someone fell out of the sky on approach because they stalled just before touch down?


I didn't say that.



So rotating at 65 knots is dangerous?

My point was that if the plane should not be on the runway at 65 kts why do we use that speed to rotate?



Quote:
bouncing and sliding over the ground headed for the runway edge and whatever lies beyond it...

Doesn't happen on a hard runway.



I think a lot of this discussion is about differences of technique between grass and concrete/tarmac runways.


Quote:
Two more spanners to add to the works - one - flapless landings are flatter than full flap landings and two - I have not tried this but Cessna have recommended that for their 150/152 series that pilots do not close the throttle completely after the flare - this because of accidents due to lack of control on the hold off.
Yet you later post that the advice (which I think is utter b*lls by the way) is that it is due to engine response that closing the throttle completely is frowned upon by Mr Cessna. What's that got to do with a "lack of control on the hold off."



Ignore this one. The report seems to contradict itself.


Quote:
You missed my point entirely. Every pilot has to use their judgement TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE SITUATION no matter what experience they have. It's called "situational awareness" I believe.
Situational awareness encompasses many things. It has little in reality to do with actually flying. For many of us, the flying is virtually automatic and situational awareness is about everything going on around us, from other traffic on the radio, navigation, ATC, what's likely to come up next, how the a/c is behaving etc.etc.
It is not just about handling the aircraft.

So are you saying landings are always the same - not matter wind strength, wind direction, condition of runway, and that one should always use the same landing technique no matter what? (If your answer to that question is "no" then maybe I am not so wrong after all?)


many aircraft have a lot of control even deep within the stall.

I don't think I'll try it if you don't mind! Just the thing a new PPL needs to hear.



Stalling at 50 feet wouldn't be that much fun.


No it doesn't, but it doesn't half help. Landing is about energy management. Why touchdown with lots of energy that then has to be dissapated throughout the weak braking system and by putting extra force on the nose oleo and main springs?


An aircraft is designed to cope with normal landings. The Cessna 152 POH does not prescribe landing with the stall warner going off - so it is not a normal landing. It states merely that it is necessary that the main wheels land first. (Goodness how many more times do we have to go through this)
Have some humility and please think this through!

[Pilot DAR]

Chuck,

The time will hopefully come where I am deserving of credit, which can be measured on the same scale as that upon which your experience is measured. You will have no problem identifying me should the need ever arise.

In the mean time, I always post as though I'm wearing "Pilot DAR" on a name tag at a PPRuNe bash. Hopefully more people will shake my hand than their fist at me!

Pilot DAR

[Pilot DAR]

My technique on a grass runway or a paved one will always be the same, touch down with full flap, as slowly as possible (as much energy dissapated in the air, rather than on the ground).

Thus, Yes, I always use the same landing technique, unless I am praticing system failures (flaps) or performing a specific flight test which requires a different technique for the purposes of evaluation of the aircraft.

It's worked for me for tens of thousands of successful landings. Sure I try other things because I'm open minded, but I'm not a fool, I know that some things are just really asking for trouble! If I look like I'm going to create trouble, the people who want the test flights done don't call me anymore!

[Say again s l o w l y]

An aircraft is designed to cope with normal landings. The Cessna 152 POH does not prescribe landing with the stall warner going off - so it is not a normal landing. It states merely that it is necessary that the main wheels land first. (Goodness how many more times do we have to go through this)


Does it tell you what you should have for breakfast too? No. Odd that.

Landing with the stall warner starting to hoot is good practice. End of story. You don't have to, but you sure as heck aren't going to hurt yourself or the aircraft because of the hooter making a bit of noise. Not normal........:eek:

Shall I let you into a little secret. Most Cessna landing accidents are caused by having too much speed on approach or by being too high, either way, too much energy.

So what happens? The pilot gets to the runway, starts to flare, but it won't touchdown. What happens then. Pilot gets a bright idea. "I'll force it down" Stick goes forward, nose wheel contacts the earth.
Springy nose oleo send the a/c skywards again, pilot shoves forward again, springy nose oleo sends it up again etc.etc until the third rendition of this farce. The energy is disappating all the way through this until dafty in the left hand seat finds themselves 10 ft above the runway in a nose down position without flying speed.

What do you think happens then? Prop and nosewheel meet runway. Nosewheel collapses and you have one very bent a/c and one very embarrassed pilot. Happens far more regularily than someone falling out of the sky early on in the landing.

All caused by having too much energy or speed or height or whatever you want to call it. Too much energy means you can't put the mainwheels down first. You are treading a much finer line than you need to by landing too quickly.

Have you ever heard of a phenomenon called ground effect and how it affects your landings?

Your assertation about runway edges are utter bunk and not worth arguing with.

No-one ever mentioned trying out stalling at 50ft. If your name was Kirby Chambliss then you could get away with it. For you I would get up to a sensible altitude and try it out. See what happens. The a/c works the same near the ground.

You've also utterly missed my point about situational awareness. You take everything into account. Weather, ATC, traffic etc to decide what your actions should be. however you can't just say that landing technique is part of "situational awareness" it is, but only a part not the whole thing. In fact I find I consider that sort of thing automatically, without conscious thought, so I don't really take that into my situational awareness. I'm thinking about who is around me and where the best place for a cup of coffee is as the most important parts of SA.

Right I'm off to bed.

[Pilot DAR]

Wow, you guys in the UK sure stay up late!

Following an accident of a Cessna 172 being flown by an "instructor" into a very short runway I used to occasion, the only witness, the mother of the owner of the runway, was interviewed by the investigator.

During the interview, she apparently asked (the investigator told me later) "The brakes are on the main wheels right?", "yes" replied the investigator... "Then" mom continued, "wouldn't the plane stop better if the main wheels were on the ground instead of the only the nosewheel?".

It would appear that the "fully qualified" instructor had got close to the ground, somewhat too fast, and decided that the best way to keep the plane there, was to hold in down with forward control. It worked, the plane never left earth again!

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Chuck,

The time will hopefully come where I am deserving of credit, which can be measured on the same scale as that upon which your experience is measured. You will have no problem identifying me should the need ever arise.

Pilot Dar:

My experience is spread over many years there is no doubt.....but I am truly impressed by your credentials and your common sense approach to the subject of airmanship.

As a last comment on this thread I do feel that we have given David enough advice and any further back and forth trying to reason with him will only drag this forum down.

[Pilot DAR]

Yes Chuck,

I do agree about draggng the forum down, not matter how proud, even this forum can be undermined by a fool. I must say that the effort that we have expended, has at least for me anyway, been well rewarded by a number of good laughs! I can't help thinking that we are all the victims of a cunning joke, and we shuld be careful that the joke is rather passing near us, than actually on us!

Either way, David has a slim hope of flying more safely, as he will one day scare the dickens out of himself, and then begin to realize that our combined wisdom has some value after all! Until then, Rental Cessna nosewheels, and runway edges in the UK, watch out!

The opportunity to exchange ideas with experienced professionals on this forum is well worth enduring the occasional foolishness, which is also encountered, though I agree that there's not too much farther to take this...

I will continue to follow your posts with interest and appreciation...

Pilot DAR#315

[Katamarino]

PilotDAR - may I ask what the boom on that Cessna is for?

[Say again s l o w l y]

Chuck, I've got to agree. As they would say on Dragon's Den "I'm out!"

[Pilot DAR]

Katamarino,

The boom contains magnetic sensors, which are used for geological surveys. The ones which trail are simple to flight test. The ones which point forward on the fixed wing aircraft require extra testing, with specialized equipment, to assure that they do not start a divergent vibration, and break off.

Those booms which are installed on floatplanes are also flight tested during water landings and takeoffs, to assure that they are not damaged by contact with the water during normal handling. The Cessna Caravan amphibian I test flew last summer did have a minor concern about this, as I could hear the water slapping the boom as I came on and off the step.

Pilot DAR

[13thDuke]

Hopefully I will be judged by my airmanship

I've got a sneaking suspicion the AAIB may just do that.

[Pilot DAR]

That is the most succinct wisdom in eight pages!

[DavidHoul52]

The pilot gets to the runway, starts to flare, but it won't touchdown. What happens then. Pilot gets a bright idea. "I'll force it down" Stick goes forward, nose wheel contacts the earth.

Good point - a number of accident reports reflect this. I'm not advocating this for a minute. Too high approach speed also leads to extended (is that the right word?) float discussed earlier. I'm sure you will agree the only solution is to go around.

[DavidHoul52]

Wow, you guys in the UK sure stay up late!

Wasn't a good idea (yawn)

[DavidHoul52]

we have given David enough advice

More than enough - thanks.:)

[DavidHoul52]

Either way, David has a slim hope of flying more safely, as he will one day scare the dickens out of himself, and then begin to realize that our combined wisdom has some value after all! Until then, Rental Cessna nosewheels, and runway edges in the UK, watch out!


.. and all this because I don't want to wait for the stall warner to go off! How many more times to have to say MAIN WHEELS FIRST. Where did I ever advocate a three point landing?

There's been a lot of "attacking the person rather than the argument" in this thread. This is a fundamental error of logical argument (from what I remember of Philosophy 101). Those who have put forward a reasonable argument (even if it's only "I've always done it that way and I've had no problems") I can respect. Those that say that this reflects my flying or that I should do this or should do that, I'm arrogant etc etc... all I can say is you've got a lot to learn in relating to other people never mind other pilots, and really wouldn't want to fly with you with that kind of attitude - not even as a passenger.

I'm out too (off to bonny Scotland for an Advanced Handling Course - "I'll take the high road and you'll take the low road.. ta..de..dum..diddly.. da" :ok:)

Take care!

[Say again s l o w l y]

Where are you doing the handling course? Seeing as I'm based up here and know pretty much everyone in the Scottish flight training world. I'll get a report and see if my suspiScions are correct.

You may well be flying at one of the clubs I taught at or was CFI at or with people I trained, so it could be interesting!

Did someone mention how small a world GA is by any chance? Especially up here in Jockistan.

Oh and by the way. The weather is utter mince.

[DavidHoul52]

Yes - and could you arrange nicer weather please?

I'm counting on you Scots sorting me out!

[Say again s l o w l y]

I've been trying to find a good anti-rain dance for years. I think I'm fighting a losing battle though........... It seems to get worse and worse every year.

[13thDuke]

You should try flying under some bridges while you're up there David.

Everything else seems to go over your head. :bored:

Looking forward to you posting any reports you get Say Again!

[BFPO]

This thread has been most informative (and entertaining!)

I'm not at all any sort of authority on this subject being only a 22 hour PPL student, but my instructor says I should AIM to hear the stall warner just prior to touching down.

[DavidHoul52]

I've been trying to find a good anti-rain dance for years. I think I'm fighting a losing battle though........... It seems to get worse and worse every year.


Sun out today in the Big Smoke!

Stall warners sounding loud and clear all over Heathrow! Despite the noise passengers are very pleased with the softly softly landings that are now taking place. Speed limits of 65 knots have been imposed on runways 06R,06L,27R and 27L. This for takeoffs only. Touch downs are restricted to 35 knots.

Incoming flights are stacked up to FL200 waiting to land.

[DavidHoul52]

You should try flying under some bridges while you're up there David.

I believe the summit of Ben Nevis is used for Short Field Landing practice. By the time I get home I should be able to land in the back garden.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Stall warners sounding loud and clear all over Heathrow! Despite the noise passengers are very pleased with the softly softly landings that are now taking place. Speed limits of 65 knots have been imposed on runways 06R,06L,27R and 27L. This for takeoffs only. Touch downs are restricted to 35 knots.

Incoming flights are stacked up to FL200 waiting to land

I know that responding to posts like the above is not the smart thing to do, but having read your continuing mocking of those here who tried to give you advice I just can't resist adding one more comment David.

You are making yourself not only appear to be ignorant, but a lot of us are getting tired of your insulting those who frequent this forum by mocking those who tried to give you good advice.

The best response I can think of right now is your high speed touchdowns are only exceeded in kenetic energy by your insulting manner.

[DavidHoul52]

My FI has been cautioned about teaching incorrect landing techniques. The CFI wants to hear that stall warner going off on each and every landing. The CAA has announced that all students taught by my FI and passed their skill tests will have to be re-examined after undergoing special training. Their PPLs will be suspended in the mean time.

A new Law of Physics (Motion) has been passed by parliament. The previous law stated that the angle of deflection to a moving object by a force acting at right angles to it was determined by the speed of that object but this has been changed to state that that angle of deflection is constant no matter the speed of the moving object.

This law is to come into effect in all parts of the UK immediately (except for Scotland)

[DavidHoul52]

You are making yourself not only appear to be ignorant, but a lot of us are getting tired of your insulting those who frequent this forum by mocking those who tried to give you good advice.



There was more mocking than good advice if you care to look. The "good advice" was along the lines of "you're wrong - I am right". There was not one jot of good advice about landings apart from "you need to be re-trained" etc.
A person who looks at issues objectively acknowledges points made by the other party. I am the first person to admit I am wrong if you can convince me. If you look elsewhere in this forum you will see that to be the case.

Some posters have met me half way and then moved on as this IS really tiresome. Tiresome by a number of vehement protesters who either have misunderstood what I said in the beginning (which was not a huge deal anyway), jumped up in self-righteous shock horror. Made all sorts of judgements about a person they don't know.

Maybe I did get some facts wrong - as I said I was just debating - trying to understand an issue someone had spoken about. I do understand it a lot better I feel. Not because I'm stubborn and "not listening". I am not a child. As I HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID - no one in any kind of authority has a problem with my airmanship or landings. I have limited experience on grass fields so I am undertaking additional training on this.

What more do you want? I am entitled to my own opinion and landing technique so long as it falls within safety limits. I happen to believe landings that are so slow that the stall warners sounds are NOT safe in certain conditions. Posters have said that they have never had a problem with this technique. Well good for them! I respect their opinion. But it's not the only opinion. The posters who most object to what I have said comprise only a handful of individuals. They may or may not be very experienced. Most hide behind nom-de-plumes. There are thousands of people involved in General Aviation. Most are too busy and too sensible to get involved in a stupid argument like this.

I have made my point - you have made yours. Just because I am inexperienced doesn't make me wrong. I am not going to have an accident touching down at 60 knots on a good runway. I am not going to break any nose wheels.

I'm sorry - I shouldn't have raised the issue in the first place. I thought this was a forum for reasonable discussion but it seems it is a haven of a bunch of self-opinionated, arrogant old farts (not that young myself mind you!).

I should have known better reading some of the previous threads in which I was not involved.

[BackPacker]

Speed limits of 65 knots have been imposed on runways 06R,06L,27R and 27L.

EGLL doesn't have 06R and 06L.

If you can't back off a bit, at least proofread what you write, David. Remember that we have not seen you fly or met you in real life. All we have to base our opinion of you on, is what you write here. Spelling, interpunction, small and big mistakes, mistyped approach speeds and all.

[DavidHoul52]

Plenty spelling mistakes in the other posts if you care too (oops) to look!

You're clutching now at straws!

[DavidHoul52]

EGLL doesn't have 06R and 06L.

It's just a joke, for goodness sake!

[DavidHoul52]

Looking forward to you posting any reports you get


I'll post some nice pics.

[Contacttower]

Boot on the other foot now!

:hmm:......

David you seem to be talking mostly about the C152 and for what its worth I rarely hear the warner when I land....which works fine for me (standing by for a series of extracted judgements about how bad a pilot I might be).

It does vary though from plane to plane....PA28 I again rarely hear it and dare I say that aircraft does seem to land smoother in a slightly flatter nose attitude than some some instructors would teach. The Firefly and the Bulldog I find always has the warner on landing and the Super Cub would (for a three point landing) of course if it had one.

But honestly it really doesn't matter much...as long as the nosewheel doesn't take any significant weight on landing.

Anyway the court of PPRuNe has clearly found DavidHoul52 of London guilty of crimes against aviation in the first degree and shall sentence him forwith.... :D:D:D

[DavidHoul52]

getting tired of your insulting those who frequent this forum


If anyone has been insulted, blamed, mocked, ridiculed, misquoted, even sworn at - it is I! There's reams of it. I can hardly believe it.

[DavidHoul52]

Quote:
Boot on the other foot now!
......

David you seem to be talking mostly about the C152 and for what its worth I rarely hear the warner when I land....which works fine for me (standing by for a series of extracted judgements about how bad a pilot I might be).

It does vary though from plane to plane....PA28 I again rarely hear it and dare I say that aircraft does seem to land smoother in a slightly flatter nose attitude than some some instructors would teach. The Firefly and the Bulldog I find always has the warner on landing and the Super Cub would (for a three point landing) of course if it had one.

But honestly it really doesn't matter much...as long as the nosewheel doesn't take any significant weight on landing.

Anyway the court of PPRuNe has clearly found DavidHoul52 of London guilty of crimes against aviation in the first degree and shall sentence him forwith....


Whew! A decent response at last!:D Thanks!

[DavidHoul52]

interpunction


???????????????????????????

[BFPO]

Interpunction (n.) The insertion of points between word or sentences; punctuation.

[Say again s l o w l y]

The thing is David. You aren't anything new here or in GA.

Someone with 5 minutes experience pontificating and making statements that are not only wrong but total and utter knackers.

This hasn't been a debate of any kind. With millions of hours flown on 152's landing one isn't exactly something that needs to be debated, especially amongst a bunch of people who have been flying and teaching on them for donkeys years.

I can back up any statement I have made using my knowledge of the aircraft and the principles of flight and aerodynamics. Can you?

You haven't really been insulted. Your knowledge has been questioned, weighed up and found wanting.

That isn't an issue. None of us were born knowing anything about flying.

What has been concerning has been your attitude to being corrected. You'll find people only got snippy AFTER you came up with more nonsense.

Ed gave you a hint after your very first post. His was one of the funniest "go away and think about it" posts I've seen on here.
What you didn't do was go and have a think and wonder why you got the reaction you did.

We are generally a polite bunch here (well apart from me obviously) and for Chuck to have posted how he has, has really surprised me. Not only will you struggle to find a more experienced instructor on this planet, but to get him riled, let's just say. I've never seen that on here before.

You can mock about stall warners going off when landing and make glib comments about airliners and stall warners, but to those who know anything about the difference between high inertia and low inertia aircraft realise you just don't know what you are talking about.

Instructors like to answer questions with other questions. That way it forces you to think about an answer which you are more likely to remember rather than just giving you an answer that you'll probably forget within a week.

[JohnRayner]

Davidhoul52..

are you thomas harrison...

are you thomas harrison...

ARE YOU THOMAS HARRISON IN DISGUISE??

ARRRRRE YOU THOMAS HARRISON INN DIS-GUISE?

There. Got that off my chest.

Regards all.:)

[Pilot DAR]

Amazing!

Fortunately, I see this as entertainment, so it's fun to watch. As I said, it really does not affect me either way, so what do I really care about the outcome anyway!

There has been a favourble aspect to this huge debate about facts well in eveidence for decades, the rest of us got to know each other better. That's fantastic! Thanks David! How unfortunate it had to be at your expense.

The first attacks were at your ideas, not you, but for reasons which escape me, you seem to deliberately provoke more attacks, until they could only be upon you, as opposed to your ideas. Even after that, you stirred the pot!

In the beginning, I (not speaking for the others) saw a "new" pilot thirsting for a little knowledge. I'm happy to help. Indeed it was my post to another new pilot whom I was trying to reassure, which you quoted, and flung back at me with excess sarcasm. However, seeing your reasonable thirst for knowledge, I poured you a little of mine.... So did others here.

You spit it back at us! What a surprise! You know what, a group of us here have an amazing amount of knowledge, so just for fun, we drowned you in it. I'm quite honestly surprised your can still make it up for air after such a soaking! Credit to you for stamina!

I offer to you a practice manuever you can try very safely, which will demonstrate to you what we have been saying:

When you get onto a not busy, grass runway with your new pilot mentor in Scotland, tell him you're going to do the following for practice, and ask him to follow through with you (telling him first will relax him)

At a point on the grass runway free of any traffic, prior to moving at all, roll full right aileron, look left, and extend the flaps to the same angle as the aileron - about 15 degrees. Hold the wheel full back, and add power to 2000 RPM, the nose will come up, the nose wheel will come off the ground a little, and you'll find that you can taxi around all day long like this. When you can't see the runway ahead of you over the cowl, don't let the nose come up any higher. Banging the tail will make people unhappy (that's why we're not doing this on pavement). You will find that you will have excellent pitch control at a very low airspeed, raising and allowing the nose to settle in perfect control, You can play at this for quite some time as long as runway space and traffic permit. If there is a breeze, the nose wheel will come off before the plane moves forward at all.

When the aircraft is moving forward under your control this way, and you have adequate runway ahead of you and a takeoff clearance, apply full power gently, and just hold exactly that attitude. The aircraft will takeoff perfectly, as long as you point it right down the runway. Remember that attitude. When you see it just before you touch at landing, you're going to have a landing we'd all applaud! Overlook the fact that you took off with 15 instead of 10 flap, just think of yourself being a little naughty!

I'm ready for the next comment.........

[Mark1234]

Dear me!

David, you've obviously read 'The Killing Zone'. If there's one theme to that book, it is that attitude is a killer. The section on pilot personalities is particularly pertinent - For my part, I'm the "It'll be fine, rules are for other people" type. Consequently I keep a weather eye on that aspect of my personality whenever near a plane.

Hopefully you've also taken note - It's not hard to take guess or two where you might fall.. and it's that black and white, I am right, the world is wrong attitude that's causing you such grief in here, and by the sound of other threads, in the cockpit too. Particularly when it's apparently based on one instructor, and little experience.

As you're discovering, different instructors have different ideas. There are different ways of skinning the cat, and there's a lot of merit in flying with many, and absorbing the best of each.

You are of course right that taking internet advice isn't necessarily smart.. but wind the neck in, watch a little, and you'll soon figure who knows what they're talking about - The same applies to other sources, instructors, books, you name it. No doubt you're attached to your instructor, but you may be realising by now that what you've been taught is somewhat at odds with the general concensus.

For example my 150 pilot guide (asa) says that 'Many schools recommend approaches are not made with full flap as the excessive drag can make it difficult during the flare, and requires a high degree of skill during the go-around'(!!!!) I'll be unequivocal here and stick my neck out - if you can't manage a go around or flare in a 150 from full flap, tear up your license... it's for your own good!

Lastly - take a look in the POH - specifically at the landing distance figures for the 152 at zero flap. Unless yours is very different to mine, you won't find them. Consider why.

[13thDuke]

David - I wasn't going to post on this thread again, quite simply because I've come to the conclusion that you may actually be too stupid to listen to any type of reason. However, I think this thread should be required reading for all novice pilots who don't have a death wish.

The simple truth is, arrogance and stupidity go together with flying like strawberries and mustard. I don't know much, but I do know that.

GA is under enough pressure in this country without you driving your plane into someone's house because you decided that Newton's Third law of Motion was a matter of opinion.

Do you realise how lucky you are to have access to some of the experience on this forum? And it's all free. Yet you think this is a 'debate' amongst equals.

YOUR ATTITUDE IS GOING TO GET YOU KILLED.
Please try not to take anyone else with you.

:ugh::rolleyes::=

[OneIn60rule]

I've never had such a big laugh since they aired "FATHER TED".

I must say someone on this forum should consider remedial training. Nevermind the fact he/she passed his/her test.

There's nothing wrong in landing an aircraft on the warner.
Such landings are often the case on a PA-38.

On other types, the warner may never go off at all.


There is a lot to learn as a new PPL. Either admit you are wrong and start learning again or go on being oblivious is what I would say.

1/60

[Crash one]

I believe this is a dead horse job.
Many highly qualified instructors, pilots, aviators of vast experience have done their best.
David seems to have started a new thread.

Quote: Check outs
Is there any chance instructors doing a check out (for hiring purposes) could restrict themselves to checking and giving helpful advice on their local circuit and environs without attempting to re-train one with their own ideas (except where there is an obvious safety issue, of course)
Un-quote
-------------------------------------------------------------------

This has been one of the most entertaining threads I have seen on here or any other forum.
At least I have learned a few things & will try a few more.
Pilot Dar
My mate has a 152 on a tarmac strip & I have an Emeraude on a deserted grass strip. Both of us became "fully qualified" last August.:ugh:
I shall persuade him to let us practice that this weekend.

[Pilot DAR]

Crash One,

This is a geat way to practice precision low speed control very safely. You'll really get a feel for the relationship between pitch control authority and airspeed (or lack thereof). The 15 degree flap setting seems to be the key. It directs the airflow more precisely over the horizontal stabilizer, and makes it more effective. You will find that while you are very established in this configuartion with the nosewheel off, if you retract the flaps, you can no longer hold the nosewheel off.

This technique allowed me to get a 172 out of an airport where the long path between the hanger and the runway had been all torn up with a bulldozer. The ground was much too rough for the nose wheel, and all sorts of debris would have been drawn into the propeller. Two heavy helpers in the back seat, and the aformentioned procedure, and the 172 now had the ground handling characteristics of a Cessna 180, and got out to the runway just fine. Of course my heavy helpers got out before takeoff!

Do be very careful to not slam the tail tiedown ring down onto hard ground. The whole assembly which holds it into the tail can be broken off inside, and that is a big fix! Another option is to temporarily replace the tiedown ring with an AN5 bolt. If there are two of you, pilot who will be performing the taxiing sits in the seat, second person pushes the tail down gently to contact the ground so the pilot gets a sense of what the worst case view will look like. (Assure that the other person is instructed to apply the down force on the stabilizer right on the rivets of the forward spar, right next the the fuselage fairing, so as to prevent damaging the stailizer structure).

The 152 may have slightly different power settings compared to my 150 to accomplish this, as the engine and propeller are different, but it will work.

Once you perfect this, you'll be all set if you ever have to operate from gravel runways, and want to prevent gravel damage to the prop! It works to verying degrees on most Cessnas. Different story on PA-28's - warnings required for those in this regard!

Have fun!

Pilot DAR

[DavidHoul52]

extend the flaps to the same angle as the aileron - about 15 degrees.

Welcome back Pilot DAR! I thought you had gone off in a huff!

Sounds like a fun idea. I don't think Cessna 152 does 15 degrees flaps (20 maybe?). People might wonder what the hell I'm doing though!

[DavidHoul52]

it's that black and white, I am right, the world is wrong attitude that's causing you such grief in here


Not true at all. I've said repeatedly that I'm open to advice from wherever - it just needs to make sense and relate to my own experience. I was playing the devils advocate in this column - I still can't believe that an aircraft floating above the ground at near stall speed is as stable in turbulence and gusty conditions as when travelling a few knots faster, and getting down on the runway as soon as it is safe to do so. One doesn't need to be a pilot to understand that - it's just simple physics, and I haven't had a satisfactory answer as yet. That is not being pig-headed - I'm just looking for people's ideas - thanks for them, by the way. You will find - even in this thread - that not everyone agrees that dead slow is always best in all conditions.

Something else I've found is that just about everyone in aviation seems to have their own idea about what is dangerous. For me, it's traffic. On my own I sit in the left hand seat peering this way and that like a terrified chicken at times. No doubt I'll obtain a balance in time.

I was very impressed with the book, by the way and helped a lot with my attitude during training and understanding what the priorities are. A strange idea he has though - is that he considers touch-and-goes dangerous and will not allow his students to do them. Do they taxi back to the beginning of the runway after each circuit I wonder?

[Pilot DAR]

No David,

Don't worry, no huff! I cannot be huffed at all easily! We have a timezone difference (so I get to stay up later) and I also work! Yesterday was my meeting at Transport Canada for discussion of the details of several flight test programs I will be undertaking shortly - one on the very nice turbine DC-3 in the photos... Towed survey bird.

Single Cessnas with powered flaps (with a few very early model exceptions) have electric motors. They are actuated by either a simple switch of one of two configurations, or "preselect", which is all 152's. Without going into the design details of how those systems both work. I can assure you that you are able to set the flaps to whatever angle you wish, even between "stops". Cessnas with manual flaps (older ones of many models, and all 180/185), and other aircraft types (non Cessnas) do not necessarily work this way though, and could not have the flaps so positioned.

Cessnas with manual flaps enable the use of the flaps instantly for dramatic sudden changes in lift and drag. Somtimes very skilled pilots use this feature in STOL and float operations.

Be careful here David, you might be learning.....

Pilot DAR

[DavidHoul52]

David - I wasn't going to post on this thread again, quite simply because I've come to the conclusion that you may actually be too stupid to listen to any type of reason. However, I think this thread should be required reading for all novice pilots who don't have a death wish.

The simple truth is, arrogance and stupidity go together with flying like strawberries and mustard. I don't know much, but I do know that.

GA is under enough pressure in this country without you driving your plane into someone's house because you decided that Newton's Third law of Motion was a matter of opinion.

Do you realise how lucky you are to have access to some of the experience on this forum? And it's all free. Yet you think this is a 'debate' amongst equals.

YOUR ATTITUDE IS GOING TO GET YOU KILLED.
Please try not to take anyone else with you.


Have you actually read my posts or are you just going along with the lynch-mob? If so please tell me exactly what I have written that is likely to get myself killed.

Moderator - please can you delete extreme posts like this please.

[DavidHoul52]

I can assure you that you are able to set the flaps to whatever angle you wish

Worth knowing. Thanks!

[DavidHoul52]

Interpunction (n.) The insertion of points between word or sentences; punctuation.


Not in my dictionary. Is it an American word?

[DavidHoul52]

I think the reason why so many people in this thread are upset is because they have always landed a certain way and here's a new upstart PPL trying to say something different. Bad for the ego. I'd probably react the same if I were they. When it comes to landings maybe it's best to stick with the way you know best? Learning to land sure takes up a huge chunk of any PPL course!

[Say again s l o w l y]

No David, that isn't the case at all. I couldn't give two hoots what an "upstart PPL" thinks about my landing technique.

I know what works and why. You obviously don't understand the physics and aerodynamics behind it. Which is the problem.

You are trying to say that you know what you are doing, when in reality you are landing safely because of repetition not knowledge.

Do you find your landings aren't consistent? Do you find that there is often a big difference between your aiming point and where you actually touchdown?
I might have one slightly dodgy landing in every hundred (and when I say slightly dodgy I mean not touching exactly where I want, not crashing it in and loosening fillings and rivets) if you thought about the landings you are doing. Could you say the same thing? If not why not. I've already said I'm no Biggles, so there must be a reason for the difference. Experience. Yes, but mainly knowledge brought about by greater experience.

Having a good think about the principles behind flying would be useful and have another read of all that has been written here. There is some very good stuff. You've had the benefit of easily 100+ years of flying knowledge handed to you here and yet you think you might have a better way..............C'mon use your noggin and realise just how stupid that sounds.

[DavidHoul52]

Do you find that there is often a big difference between your aiming point and where you actually touchdown?

No not really.

I'm pretty consistent on the airfield I know well, especially with powered approaches. Glide approaches need some more practice (so my examiner told me!) I sometimes also get the wrong picture on wide runways so I flare too high, but have done some work on that and they are much better now.

[Pilot DAR]

Hey David,

I'd watch asking for extreme posts to be deleted... If that were to be done, a lot of what you are posting would have to be deleted first!

Your clinging to some misinformed belief that you have uniquely found a better way to assure good landings in a Cessna 152 is amusing to many of "us", and very pilot career limiting to you... How...

Unless you are going to buy every aircraft you fly, and then not insure it, you will be presented with the need from time to time to demonstrate your skills to other pilots, who upon satisfaction, will provide whatever recommendation is needed for you to fly that aircraft. Those pilots, and I certainly have been one many times, are watching for know it alls - they are the worst kind of person to let loose in a new plane.

This past spring, I was asked to check myself out in a Bellanca Viking, so I could then check out the new owner. I have a total of 1 hour flying a Viking, more than 25 years ago. Does it sound odd to you that an insurance company would (a:) insure me to fly a high performance single with no check out, (b:) then check someone else out in it, and (c:) take my word that he can fly it safely and insure him because of what I (not Viking expert) said about his flying? You're still busy trying to convince a check out instructor at the flying club that you have not forgotten how to fly since your last rental a month ago!

So what's the difference? The insurance company apparently has enough confidence in me that they are certain (for the cost of a Bellanca Viking anyway) that I will figure the plane out safely on my own, and then recognize a good pilot in that plane when I see him/her fly it. And what's the element of flying a plane that a pilot new to that plane is most likely going to screw up at crash? Landing it.

So apparently the insurance company (indeed, more than one) is satisfied that I can figure out how to land any piston powered land or seaplane, because that's what I'm insured to do, including test flying following modification.

So if the insurance company, who has millions of dollars of risk exposure out there has confidence that I have it well figure out, why wouldn't you?

David, if your flying career progresses to the point where you point where you fly other types of aircraft, memorizing airspeeds, and blindly employing a technique by rote, which seems to work on a C152, because you refused to willingly learn and embrace other ways of accomplishing the same end result safely, will be the most career limiting thing you can do to yourself. You will just never be allowed to fly other people's aircraft. If that is the case, yes, you wasted a small fortune learning to fly, and worse, you threw away the opportunity to be welcomed into a circle of really interesting people.

Your apparent objectives defy logic!

Pilot DAR

No smiley faces intended, they seemed to have popped in on their own?!

[Say again s l o w l y]

If you are only consistent on one airfield, then that says to me that you are flying using the "monkey see, monkey do" approach. ie You can do it consistently there because you know that at point A you do one thing, point B another.

This isn't the same as actually knowing what you are doing. When something changes, you aren't able to compensate, because the basic knowledge of why you do something isn't there.

No wonder you had trouble when you went for a checkout. What you need to do is take a step back and think about an approach and what needs to haapen for it to be successful. How can you influence the aircraft to ensure the thing ends up where you want it.

If you are too high, what do you need to do. Too low? Too fast, too slow and sinking. What flap setting would you use and why?
What speeds and why? etc.etc

Imagine the aircraft on the ground, stopped after a successful landing and work backwards from there until you get back to the Top of Descent point.

Always give yourself time and space, don't rush your approach or cut corners. Plan it all in advance and you'll find it all just clicks together and you suddenly seem to have eons of time on your hands.

You can get away with less thinking when you get more experienced, but for now, make sure you plan meticulously and that doesn't mean just your W&B, performance calcs and route planning.

Before you enter the circuit. Take a deep breath and think about what you will be doing next and plan when you will be doing everything in order. 30 seconds of clear thought BEFORE you enter the circuit can make all the difference. We all do it, it's just that you do it a lot faster when you are more experienced.

[DavidHoul52]

uniquely found a better way to assure good landings in a Cessna 152

I didn't "find" it. It was the way I was taught. Perhaps I shouldn't have banged on about it or tried to explain it. I'm going to be very embarrassed if my FI finds out about this.:O

[DavidHoul52]

Before you enter the circuit. Take a deep breath and think about what you will be doing next and plan when you will be doing everything in order. 30 seconds of clear thought BEFORE you enter the circuit can make all the difference. We all do it, it's just that you do it a lot faster when you are more experienced.


Thanks for the advice. My approaches and my nav are my two best points - no problem with either!

[Say again s l o w l y]

Don't worry David. He's well aware of it.;)
Did I forget to mention that originally I'm from North London and spent a number of years teaching people in the Essex and North London area?

[DavidHoul52]

The opportunity to exchange ideas with experienced professionals on this forum is well worth enduring the occasional foolishness, which is also encountered, though I agree that there's not too much farther to take this...

That was 2 pages and some 50 posts ago!:cool:

[DavidHoul52]

Did I forget to mention that originally I'm from North London and spent a number of years teaching people in the Essex and North London area?

You must know the people at Earls Colne very well then?

[Say again s l o w l y]

I spent 2 years teaching there full time and still pop in when I'm in the area. So fairly well.

I know the Andrewsfield mob pretty well too.

[DavidHoul52]

Hmmm......

[DavidHoul52]

By the way, did anybody see the Vickers Vimmy come off the runway at the Farnborough airshow due to the wind? Was on take off. No harm done though.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

There is a saying that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

We seem to have discovered a new truism here:

You can never reason with an idiot...taught by someone who interacts well with idiots.

[DavidHoul52]

Don't be so silly. Calling people names doesn't display much maturity.

No one has commented on ContactTower's post (page 9). I thought that was a more honest and balanced reply than much of the pontificating here. Not to say others didn't put in good advice but a bit off topic and mostly what is in the PPL syllabus already.

Much more helpful advice given in the "Checking Out" thread I felt.

The instructors owe me a debt of gratitude for hijacking the original topic of discussion (this happened on page 2):ok:

The Vickers Vimmy post was not meant as support for my argument, by the way.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Quote:
Before you enter the circuit. Take a deep breath and think about what you will be doing next and plan when you will be doing everything in order. 30 seconds of clear thought BEFORE you enter the circuit can make all the difference. We all do it, it's just that you do it a lot faster when you are more experienced.

Thanks for the advice. My approaches and my nav are my two best points - no problem with either!

David. Please read and try to understand what I have written. I make no mention of navigation. I'm talking about how to think in the cockpit not about a particular section of a flight.

You mention that your approaches are good. Really? A good approach generally means a good landing. If yours are inconsistent at anywhere but one airfield, then I'll wager that the approach isn't as good as it could be.

You are coming across as really obtuse and are simply not grasping what has been written. Chuck has a point. I simply don't know how much clearer any of us can be. Don't just flick through the posts. Read and digest them properly. You might learn something.

[Pilot DAR]

A former boss used to have a sign over his desk which read: Don't try to teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time and annoys the pig". Now I am certain that I know what it means.

David (which is a name), "idiot" is not a name, it's a description of a person.

You're perhaps getting better advice on the other thread, because you learned from this thread to not be so insulting and unwilling to embrace another point of view. I suppose someone owes it to the posters on the other thread to warn them about what may await them right around the posting corner!

You think we're writing to you here, we're really not, we're writing to everybody else! What is written here is understood much more widely than perhaps you realize. There are lots of people who read here, but not necessarily post....

[DavidHoul52]

If yours are inconsistent at anywhere but one airfield

Did I say that? Not generally, no. I wouldn't have my PPL if that was the case.

[DavidHoul52]

David (which is a name), "idiot" is not a name, it's a description of a person.

You know bloody well what I mean!

I have not consistently targeted one person. You have! This is really, really getting ridiculous and that is really, really bad form.

What do you think of ContactTower's post????

Name me one thing that I have said that is dangerous for students or other pilots to read? If so I will detract it. (The students are mainly over at Flyer Forum - much more pleasant and positive atmosphere there)

It's this patronising tone - no doubt well meant - which undermines your credibility. Talk to people as intelligent human beings. Stop right there - don't make any more insulting remarks. I have not insulted you guys - not agreeing with you is not insulting you. A forum is a place for discussion among equals - you are not in the right hand seat. I really can't believe there's an internet forum where people think there's a pecking order.

A few comments like that ContactTower one way or the other and this thread would have finished on page 2.

You will notice my own comments are often tempered with qualifiers, a sense of humour, and general chit chat.

I don't believe GA is dominated by a bunch of nazis but it sure seems this forum is!

[BackPacker]

I don't believe GA is dominated by a bunch of nazis but it sure seems this forum is!

I think you've just gone too far and I hope it won't take too long for BRL to put you to bed.

[DavidHoul52]

well prove me wrong then!

Chucks comment came out of the blue. He wasn't even responding to anything? Is he sober?

[BFPO]

David, you seem to criticise this forum rather a lot. If you dislike it so much, why do you come back? I have taken a lot of good advice from this site from those with vast amounts more experience more than me, for which I am grateful. You just seem to want to upset the very people who set out to help and advise you! You have proved that you don’t want to take anything on board from the huge knowledge base here and to be honest, it's just getting irritating.

[DavidHoul52]

It's just this thread!

Otherwise, yes I do like the forum.

Sadly this thread is now getting dark and maybe it's time to quit.

Thanks to those who had something positive or entertaining or anecdotal to say even if you didn't agree with me.

To a handful of others - you take yourselves too seriously. You need to earn the right to be heard.

[BFPO]

Need to earn the right to be heard... are you for real?!! Given their knowledge and experience, I would opine that it is YOU, David, who needs to earn the right to be heard!

[Contacttower]

Actually on that note David we'd be interested to know if this thread has changed your views at all on the subject. I mean everyone is posting with the assumption that it's gone completely over your head but I can't believe it has.....

Not that it matters a huge amount but have your views changed at all?

Do you still believe that landing with the warner on is dangerous?

I'm not taking a side at all (as I said previously my opinion is pretty neutral on this subject) I'm just curious to see how much you've believed/considered/taken on board from the other posters. It can be difficult to either admitting one's changed one's mind or has thought about it when one believes (rightly or wrongly) that the people you are arguing against are being rude to you.

[DavidHoul52]

What I will do - since you guys think I haven't been "listening" (last time I was accused of that I think I was 12!) - I will read through all the posts again - yours and mine - and write up a summary, trying to be as objective as possible.

How's that?

You are going to have to give me some time. It doesn't matter - nothing on the telly tonight and my girlfriend is over in Ireland for a few days.

In the mean time keep firing away with those insults!

[DavidHoul52]

we'd be interested to know if this thread has changed your views at all

Short answer - yes I do still think landing with the stall warner going is dangerous where there are strong cross wind gusts. I don't see anything wrong with it at other times (maybe my view has changed slightly in this respect). I don't believe it is necessary - at least not with the aircraft I am familiar with.

I have also come to believe that as landing is such a core part of flying and flying training that one should not try to change radically the way one does it without some time with an instructor and even then only if you have some safety concern (or the way you have been taught is not working for you)

And just to add... I think everyone agrees on the fundamentals of landing - approach speed - height of flare - landing on the main wheels - controlling for cross-winds and so on.

[DavidHoul52]

Actually maybe that will do by way of summary. Thanks ContactTower!

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Short answer - yes I do still think landing with the stall warner going is dangerous where there are strong cross wind gusts. I don't see anything wrong with it at other times (maybe my view has changed slightly in this respect). I don't believe it is necessary - at least not with the aircraft I am familiar with.


David, please accept my apology for referring to you as an idiot.

However you are only suffering from ignorance of the physics and aerodynamics of the art of flying because this is 100% wrong.


Short answer - yes I do still think landing with the stall warner going is dangerous where there are strong cross wind gusts.

Maybe the time has come to quit arguing such nonsense and go find someone who can either teach you how to fly or recommend your PPL be revoked.

Now that I have apologized for my comment about you being an idiot I trust this finishes our conversations?

[DavidHoul52]

David, please accept my apology for referring to you as an idiot.

However you are only suffering from ignorance


I accept your apology and am grateful to hear I am not an idiot - only ignorant. :)

[DavidHoul52]

Actually come to think of it - no instructor I have ever been with has ever taught me to wait for the stall warner.

Maybe it's you guys who are trying to wind ME up.

Oh dear:sad:

[Pilot DAR]

David,

Your most recent statement is very reassuring, as now I do see that you have taken our efforts on behalf of your safety completely to heart.

You acknowledged the problem very well, and now you have execellent background with which to seek out a solution! If you ever encounter an instructor who will not support your efforts to grow in skill, and understand the true elements of landing in general, as opposed to a "by rote" method, have them post here, and refer to your need for advancement, and we (well, I will anyway) will expent effort on your behalf to convince them too!

Objective met the whole way around near as I see it! Good work people!

Pilot DAR

[DavidHoul52]

Thanks Pilot DAR!:D

Do you guys have a secret virtual meeting room somewhere?

[bjornhall]

Short answer - yes I do still think landing with the stall warner going is dangerous where there are strong cross wind gusts.

Back to basics then: Why?

As far as I understand your thinking, your reasoning is that landing at higher speed gives you better margin to the stall, where control is supposedly dangerously limited.

My reasoning (and my PPL is even fresher than yours, so I'm also just trying to learn this and am prepared to stand corrected!), is that control is not dangerously limited in the air just above stall speed, but it is dangerously limited on the ground at flying speed and in strong/gusty winds.

For your wheels to provide any cornering force, you have to have weight on them. On the ground at close to flying speed you have hardly any cornering force since you are still too light on the wheels, and you are no longer able to generate a sideways force in the normal way (by banking). So you are basically at the mercy of the wind. If you don't get a strong sideways gust in the few seconds it takes you to decelerate enough to become heavy on the wheels and get a cornering force, you'll be fine. If you do get such a gust, you're blown off to the side; if the gust is bad enough, you'll end up on the grass.

That, I believe, is why even though the runway is long, smooth, and hardened, it is still not a good idea to touch down fast in strong winds. Of course, if the runway is not as long, not as smooth, and soft, it's imperative not to be on it at high speed.

That is my thinking and how I'm flying (at the moment!); as said, I'm happy to be corrected, if called for!

[DavidHoul52]

For your wheels to provide any cornering force, you have to have weight on them. On the ground at close to flying speed you have hardly any cornering force since you are still too light on the wheels, and you are no longer able to generate a sideways force in the normal way (by banking).


Interesting thought. You would still have the rudder, of course and the weight would come on to the wheels quite quickly, especially if you didn't have full flaps down. If you applied aerilon the plane wouldn't bank but it would put more weight on that wheel, effecting an increase of what you call "cornering force". The wind would act against this tending to force the other wing down. Banking doesn't have much effect at low height in any case, rudder is more effective (and safer)

That's just my guess - trying to think aerodynamically!

I am expecting the cry of "rubbish" at any moment, but since you asked....

[BackPacker]

That is my thinking and how I'm flying (at the moment!); as said, I'm happy to be corrected, if called for!

You are very correct, so keep flying like you do now.

As far as I'm concerned, anytime an aircraft is above the stall speed, it is flying (aerobatics/unusual attitudes excepted). And as you say, if the wheels are connected to the tarmac it is flying but with limited ability to bank, thus not able to correct crosswind gusts all that well. And another thing that can go wrong is a bump in the runway, throwing you back into the air with nothing on the clock but the manufacturers name, waiting for an imminent and costly arrival.

So actually touching down should be done with the least energy/speed above the stall that the airframe allows, so that when the wheels touch the tarmac the aircraft has landed, instead of continuing to fly.

Caveat: there are some aircraft that should be landed slightly above the stall because of a tailstrike risk. I've heard (but not experienced) this about Cirrusus (Cirri?) and I have personally experienced a few harmless tailstrikes in the Robin R2160, due to the large keel, when landing in a lightweight configuration, both full and no flaps.

[DavidHoul52]

You are very correct, so keep flying like you do now.

Gold star for you mate! (I thought you were asking me - but never mind)

[bigfoot01]

Move away from the thread... please, it is getting painful. Can it be locked or something? I am sure at the beginning of this some poor chap was asking about trimming and being shouted at!

To be as neutral as possible, everybody agrees they are quite capable and happy landing the Cessna 152/150 in their own way, so there you go!

Step back.

Don't feel the need to quote this article and then follow up your own comment 10 minutes later.

After stepping back, don't feel the need to step forward again.

After you have not felt the need to step forward again, continue with the feeling not to step forward again.

After that feeling has continued for a while, don't feel the need to summarise your learning from the thread, or expressing how you feel as a result of interacting from the thread, or acknowledge that you understand what everybody has said on the thread, but oh yeah - by the way - you were right anyway.

Then if you feel the urge to write something else on this thread - don't!

I am a relatively new PPL. If fly a 150. I am really average at landing. I have learnt surprisingly little from this thread.

Try not to feel the urge to quote any part of this comment.

Don't feel the need to express a view on how pprune has evolved as a result of this thread.

This is my personal opinion!

[Pilot DAR]

You're standing with your back frimly pressed into the farthest, darkest corner of our virtual meeting room. So, you're in it, but have yet to actually be welcomed out into the light, where your NAME can be read. Best advice is to make sure that you're proud of your name before you step out into the light, in the active middle of our virtual meeting room.

There may be hope, There's only "up" for you to go!

[Say again s l o w l y]

Robins 200/2160's are a type where you have to be careful with tailstrikes. It is easily done, seldom damaging because of the sprung skid, but something to watch out for nonetheless.

Just heading back a bit David. You did say that your landings were pretty consistent on the airfield I know well

So to me that means you are less consistent elsewhere.

Now don't get your ego in a twist over this, you don't have to prove anything to me. I've been around students and newly minted pilots since I was 19 and teaching them since I was 20, so it's nothing new.

All of us are here trying to help you, not beat you up or drive you away from flying.

I'm really glad to see you using a bit of thought in your post about "cornering forces" however don't forget that once you are on the ground, the airflow over the wings can be a bit different as you are no longer part of the airmass. Have a look at the Cessna strong wind taxiing diagram in the POH for an idea of where to put the control column when you have different wind coming around the aircraft as you taxi.

The only thing that made me raise my eyebrows a bit was this Banking doesn't have much effect at low height in any case, rudder is more effective (and safer)

What exactly are you talking about here? 6 inches to go or 100 ft to go? I'm certainly always using the controls as they were designed in all areas of flight and unless there is a cross wind then I keep the a/c in balanced flight at all times.
Could you clarify your statement for me as I'm a bit confused.

[DavidHoul52]

If I agree with bigfoot you are all going to get upset again, aren't you?

[DavidHoul52]

rudder is more effective

Thought I might get stung for that one!

That is what I was told - I'll have to ask my FI to remind me of the exact reason. Just after take off it's the same story. As golden boy just told us one doesn't have a lot of room to bank at low height. There may also be a danger of the wing stalling (increased load factor).

[Say again s l o w l y]

No. I'm not. At last we seem to be slowly getting through and I will help anyone who asks for it. I just want to try and ensure that the time and effort I have put in so far haven't been wasted.

I'm posting because I want you to become a safer and more competent pilot. If some of what I or any of the others have written gets through, then great. I don't expect anyone else to get much out of this, because it is not aimed at them. This is aimed at breaking through the layers you have surrounded yourself in which protect you because you don't seem to have that much real confidence in what you are doing.

Some might say that is the most stupid statement they've ever read given some of your posts, but I recognise a lot of what you are saying. Bluff, bluster and extreme reactions to offers of help and refusals to answer questions are prime examples of under confident people with limited knowledge. It is a defense mechanism.

An easy one to deal with once both sides recognise it.

I'll help you out as much as I can, but you need to recognise that other people do have more knowledge and experience and that you need to be extremely clear in what you post to avoid misunderstandings.

If I see a load of guff on here, then I'll correct it as will others as you've already seen.

One bit of advice that was given to me as a kid. "You are born with two ears and one mouth. Use them in that order."
Sometimes you need to learn when to take a telling.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Thought I might get stung for that one!

That is what I was told - I'll have to ask my FI to remind me of the exact reason. Just after take off it's the same story. As golden boy just told us one doesn't have a lot of room to bank at low height. There may also be a danger of the wing stalling (increased load factor).

Firstly. Never, ever make statements you can't back up, especially on something like this.

Have you ever tried the wing down cross wind method? Bank angle is fairly useful and with a high wing aircraft like a Cessna you aren't as likely to put the wing tip into the runway as you would be with a low wing machine.

Now think about your statement about the wing stalling.........Again, come on think about it. Use that aerodynamics knowledge that you must have from having passed the ground school course.

Load factor is not an issue in this is it. We are talking about 10-15 degrees bank angle at the most close to the ground, not something that is going to worry the stall speed.

If you are worried about stalling, then what's likely to happen if you do stall it when the a/c is out of balance due to you using rudder instead of aileron?

[DavidHoul52]

I appreciate that experience counts for a lot, but looking through the literature this doesn't seem to be a lot of hard information about what we have been discussing.

No you are not getting through to me. Nor do I need to be "got through to". Don't be so patronising.

As I said, not one instructor (out of about half a dozen) has ever told me to hold off until the stall warner sounded. I see there was a similar discussion about use of flaps in gusty conditions. Different posters had different views but there was none of this heavy stuff.

Until you can produce something definite from a POH or an AAIB safety recommendation then hold off!

[DavidHoul52]

We are talking about 10-15 degrees bank angle at the most close to the ground, not something that is going to worry the stall speed.


If the wing stalls it's going to drop and you will veer off the runway. Even more dangerous on take off.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Which wing will stall first and why?

You still seem mightily worried by stalling. Again what happens if you stall out of balance?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

If the wing stalls it's going to drop and you will veer off the runway. Even more dangerous on take off.

Say again slowly, I have come to the conclusion my apology for calling this poster an idiot was a mistake.....

[Contacttower]

You still seem mightily worried by stalling. Again what happens if you stall out of balance?In a C152 probably not a lot.....:zzz:

But seriously though 10-15 degrees bank on landing is not going to do much to the load factor or the stall speed.

When your instructor told you to use the rudder close to the ground she probably didn't mean it is more effective in the literal sense...since altitude doesn't change the effectiveness for a given control deflection as such (OK not at light aircraft heights anyway)....what she probably meant was that the rudder is simply a better tool than the ailerons for making the aircraft do what you want it to do close to the ground in terms of pointing down the runway.

[Say again s l o w l y]

As I said, not one instructor (out of about half a dozen) has ever told me to hold off until the stall warner sounded.

How come you had so many instructors? Normal practice is to try and minimise the number. 6 is a fairly large number in a PPL course.

I think we have a misunderstanding here. Nobody is advocating just holding off until the warner sounds and then touching down.

Just to clarify, when you are in the flare and the wheels are just about to touch. Hearing the warner start to protest is just about perfect.

I don't have an extended hold off. I just apporach and land the thing. No sitting a couple of feet up waiting for the energy to disappate as you munch up runway.

You mention AAIB reports or the POH. For a start why would an AAIB report mention anything to do with landing technique unless an accident was caused by poor piloting in the landing phase.
Why would the POH go into that much detail? It doesn't for example tell you that you shouldn't stick hotdogs in the exhaust stack either.

As for getting "through" to you. Have you still not got it yet? All the people on here have tried in their different ways to help you. We've all identified that you require a little bit of help and knowledge. The smart thing to do would be to listen to the weight of opinion.

We all have our own way of doing this, but you seem determined not to listen. If you were a member at my club with an attitude such as you have displayed, then you would be out. End of story. This isn't picking on you, this is just saying it as it is. If you'd have come out with statements such as "If the wing stalls it's going to drop and you will veer off the runway. Even more dangerous on take off." in earshot of most FI's, then you probably get a whack round the head with the Jeremy Pratt "Principles of Flight and Aircraft General Knowledge" textbook and told to re-read the thing.

Now. I have been in contact with various members of the flying community both up here and down south and this and your other threads have been well noticed.
You might say that you are the talk of club houses up and down the country. Especially in schools near the M25 and A12.

Being notorious in such a small world is not advisable. So I suggest you pin back your ears and stop getting all snotty. You were obviously happy to listen to your FI when you were training. Why on earth would you stop now?

At least you are getting it for free now!

[Pilot DAR]

For a pilot with good perception, and quick reflexes, flying a 150/152/172, it is entirely possible in a light cross wind to have the downwind mainwheel come off the ground first, because the control input was ailerons hard over into the wind, and controll wheel well back. I believe that just before that wing lifted that mainwheel off the ground, it was quite stalled, as it was not able to produce sufficient lift yet. As the speed increased and the angle of attack of the wing remained constant, the wing became less and less stalled, until finally it produced enough lift, and picked the main wheel up. At that point, you're either going to make things right by rolling level, and picking the other main wheel up, or applying a boot full of rudder to crab, and hold that attitude while maintaining heading. (or you could be on a huge frozen lake, and continue the takeoff as a circle). In the case of rudder to crab, you'll be scrubbing the upwind mainwheel quite a lot, and may get the bill for a new tire.

Was the downwind wing stalled? Who cares, it was lifting enough wasn't it? As you increased speed, the upwind wing started to lift enough too. Was it stalled? Who cares, it was lifting too! So now you're flying, so there must be enough lift, are you stalling? Who cares, as you are accelerating, you might even be climbing a little. Cross wind? Who cares, you're still holding the upwind wing low as you need to, adjust if required. Engine quits, okay we care a little now... Going to suddenly stall? Not if you decide to keep flying the plane! You're only a foot off the ground, and not really going very fast yet, land back on the runway. It happened to me in June.

This probably sounds a little extreme for a paved runway, but is a techinque for getting out of the mud on wheels, or slush on skis, and vital getting a heavy load out on floats. Once one of the main (wheel/ski/float) comes off the surface, whatever drag it was producing, slowing your takeoff is suddently gone. In a float plane there's often a noticible feeling of push from behind.

The aformentioned is not for the new pilot to experiment with without some qualified supervision.

Pilot DAR

P.S. Step back? This is like gambling which costs nothing, when do you step back from a slot machine, when you never have to put money in? Forget that none's going to come out, I just like watching the wheels go around!

[DavidHoul52]

This time I'm really having to say goodbye!

Thanks for some of the more interesting posts (especially towards the end). What I've really got out of this is that there are other ways of looking at landing to that which I was taught. But I'm not going to try them at home.

By the way I only had one instructor for my PPL training except for three hours at the beginning.

This thread started on the topic of verbal abuse. Talking about my attitude etc is nothing short of psychological abuse. Don't go there! There's nothing more dangerous than do-it-yourself psychologists. Attitudes are important in flying, of course - but look at yourself before you judge others. Even better - just look at yourself and don't judge others. Stick to what you know - flying - and what you have experienced.

What I should be judged on is this: becoming obsessed in the last few days on this thread! Not healthy at all. I've had a heavy head cold which made me feel not much interested in much else. It's finally lifting. Whoopee!

Also a chance to hone up on my creative writing skills.

There seem to be various other individuals on this thread who don't seem to have a life. You really need to get out more (or getting on with your work!)

Special request: if I make ANY MORE posts on this thread please tell me to get the hell out.

Thank you.

[mark sicknote]

Not a problem...

[Say again s l o w l y]

Oh well. When I read the accident report at least I'll know we've tried. Can't do more than that really.

[Final 3 Greens]

I am a relatively new PPL. If fly a 150. I am really average at landing. I have learnt surprisingly little from this thread.

That's a shame, because some very fine pilots and teachers of pilots have shared some excellent information.

Your lack of learning probably says more about you, than them.

[bigfoot01]

No, it says something about this thread...

[Final 3 Greens]

You might wish to go back and read Chuck Ellsworth's posts on how to land.

I learn something every time I read Chuck's postings about aviation.

There are few people who can fly Catalinas, Airbusses and helicopters.

Chuck is one of them and he has taught many people to sharpen their flying skills by sharing that experience.

[BRL]

Special request: if I make ANY MORE posts on this thread please tell me to get the hell out.

That is easy!!! You just been thread banned! :D

[Crash one]

I have to say that I don't think I could be a flying instructor. I have far too short a fuse. The patience & tolerance of you guys is nothing short of amazing. SAS, Chuck & all, I genuinely salute you.:ok::D

[Chuck Ellsworth]

It is all part of teaching, if we did not have people who appear to be difficult to teach no one would realize just how difficult it can be sometimes.

You should be grateful David showed up, where could you find a better example of difficult?

[Crash one]

I agree with you Chuck.
But I seem to remember my Mother once saying, "Why be difficult when with a little more effort you could be bloody impossible?" Our David seems to believe that philosophy.
I have learned a few things, I'm going to try a few more. One thing I have to do is nail speed control at very short final, I have on occasion dropped it from a few more inches than was comfortable.
I fly an Emeraude 610 kg taildragger out of a grass strip, Iv'e got about 25 hrs on it, 120 hrs total inc PPL (152). Will it "come" with solo practice or should I get help?

[Pilot DAR]

Crash One,

Tail draggers are much harder to grease on than a C152, so don't let it bother you. With 25 hours, you're off to a great start, keep it up. I would never say don't ask for help, but I would say don't worry yourself, it will come to you.

Although a stall just at touchdown is generally a good thing, I do agree that some taildraggers are happier at speeds a little higher than stall at touchdown. They will stall on, but a tailwheel first landing is never gentle! The taildragger I fly will not tolerate a full stall landing without bucking you, unless you have it perfectly three pointed right when you stall and touch simultaniously, which I did once!

Pilot DAR

[Crash one]

Pilot DAR
Thanks I don't feel so useless now.
The instructor that checked me out suggested I leave a trickle of power on till it touched down then close the throttle to kill the energy, I did that with him & greased it on, right on the numbers on tarmac, quite pleased with myself. Since then even on the grass, landings like that are few & far between & I keep thinking I'm going backwards.
I shall persevere.