Too high on final

[Purzel]

Hello!

I have a question for you experienced folks:
You are on final, full flaps set in a non-complex SEPL (C172, PA28), power idle. You judge where you will end up touching down and realize this will be too late. So you are too high on final and want to get on the correct glidepath again.

How do you do this best/what are the pros and cons?

1) Push nose down to get to the correct path again, relying on full flaps to prevent getting too fast.
2) Pull so the speed decreases and the glidpath steepens to catch the correct glidepath again.
3) Something else?

Thanks for your input!

[BRL]

Just go around and try again?

[Russ.w.]

Depends on level of experience/confidence in ability - but if in doubt (as above) go around.

[Chris8kcab]

Safest way is to just go around, but every situation is different i.e if your long final short final and depends on how high you are etc.. but if ever unsure just go around and live to fight another day

[fattony]

3) Sideslip?

[18greens]

When i learned i asked a similar question to which the answer was 'An experienced pilot could consider other option such as a sideslip to get back on glide path' and I said 'would that work' and the reply was 'Yes but an experienced pilot would not have allowed themselves to get into that position in the first place'

When in doubt go around.

[achimha]

Sideslip on a Cessna with full flaps is only a good idea if you're not the owner of the airplane. On some models it's not allowed, on others not recommended. In any case it is not good for your flaps.

What works pretty well in a Cessna is pushing the nose down, it won't get much faster. With a bit of experience, you will try harder before going around. It costs time, money and makes a lot of noise. You still need good judgement though...

[Dave Gittins]

the answer to the question is when in doubt - don't.

But it sounds to me that if you are in a 172 at idle power with full flaps and still not going to make the runway you are pretty high and that has presumably been developing for a minute or two.

Maybe you want to review your base and final technique and be more aware of what "picture" you should expect.

[Slopey]

If it's an older 172 with 40 degree barn doors, you won't need to side slip. Just pull the power back and it'll drop like a brick!

[Unusual Attitude]

Sideslip on a Cessna with full flaps is only a good idea if you're not the owner of the airplane. On some models it's not allowed, on others not recommended. In any case it is not good for your flaps.

Not that old chestnut again! :rolleyes:


As for the OP, depends how confident you are chucking the aircraft around at low level, personally I'd happily throw some S-turns or a big boot of sideslip but even so there is a point where its beyond recovery and a go-around is in order....

Sopey, if you think ZV drops like a brick with full flaps you want to try a Tri Pacer witht the power off and on the draggy end of the curve....its something to behold! Great fun though! :}

[Corsairoz]

Be careful what aircraft you are in.

On some small singles a sidslip with full flaps can catch you out in a big way.

I was firmly told never to do it in an AA5. Just relax, abandon it if it does not look right and go around and have another go.

C

[peterh337]

Going around is the safest option, usually.

One "more interesting" method is to sideslip, but that option is type dependent; some types don't like that due to the flaps messing up the airflow over the tail end. I never do slipping in the TB20.

My favourite method is to do S-turns. Can scare passengers though :)

[Noah Zark.]

Fishtailing, i.e. alternative fairly rapid alternating application of rudder gets rid of excess height. (Could be described as another form of sideslip, but without crossed controls) but really as generally said above, unless totally avoidable, i.e. engine failure etc., go round again.

[Pace]

There are other things you can do other than side slip but not sure you should unless you have experience.
One is to increase your distance to touchdown by weaving left and right that also works if another aircraft on final is too close or you need more time for him to clear the runway.
The other is to do an orbit back onto final but that will depend where you are and is unlikely to be an option.
I can remember taking up a hold on final with ATC approval while they cleared some possible debris which had been noticed on the runway.
Both above are not advisable for novice pilots!
Personally I do not like to take full flap unless I am really fairly well assured of landing dragging in from miles out with full flap is not in my book a managed approach and unless full flap is recommended for the aircraft you can use the drag for coming back to your reference landing speed.
I also question the advisability of coming down the approach with a closed throttle as you have little way of knowing if there will be any power there when you do need it and with full flap and closed throttle you are limiting the options available to you to control speed and descent profile.

Pace

[Gertrude the Wombat]

(1) works in a 172 with a long enough runway (you're likely to end up rounding out somewhat fast and using up a fair amount of runway slowing down a few feet up).

Going around always works (provided you still have a working engine).

[Penny Washers]

This happened to me just a few weeks ago, when I was doing a revalidation test. I was told to do a flapless circuit and approach, and as a result misjudged things and ended up too high about half a mile from touchdown. My tester rightly ticked me off for getting too fast on the approach, but this was to get off the surplus height. We were doing the right approach speed by the time I was down to one hundred feet with a little way left to go to the numbers.

I had thought of a sideslip (which both I and the aircraft can do) but thought that this was hardly the right thing for a test. At the same time, to throw the approach away was to admit that I had got it irretrievably wrong, and this would mean a fail. So what else could be done? And come to that, where does the 'final' approach start? Half a mile out? Or when you have stabilised the speed at the right figure?

An interesting problem, and the only real answer is to get it right from the beginning. But only Allah is perfect.

[rapidshot]

http://db.tt/ETS7lJcN

http://db.tt/LCMfZwhN

[Armchairflyer]

I'd rather go with Mr. Denker on this one: More About Energy and Power [Ch. 7 of See How It Flies] (http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.html#sec-energy-stunts), certainly on an aircraft equipped with flaps (not sure whether Langewiesche isn't rather referring to a flapless aircraft, where the dive would arguably indeed not be as effective owing to the lack of additional drag).

[Purzel]

Thanks for your replies!

Going around is always the safest option, off course. But the questions was mainly, what does work better and why?

So, to sum up the answers most have suggested to put the nose down, the flaps will take care of keeping the speed low in a cessna.
The copy of Stick and Rudder explained the slower approach a bit.

I have done a correction both ways.
In my experience in a PA28 the flaps seem not to be as effective in braking as the cessna ones, meaning that I risk going over flap-speed when pointing the nose down. In addition to that you carry great speed short before (or in) the flare, which is not so good (ballooning).
The slower approach seemed to work well for me, but there is the risk you slow down too much too close to the ground.

Off course, when the final doesn't look like it can be saved, I go around. Have done it often and will do it in the future too.

Thanks again!

[flybymike]

when I was doing a revalidation test..................... to throw the approach away was to admit that I had got it irretrievably wrong, and this would mean a fail.
Before any one else says it, a revalidation is not a test and you cannot fail it.:)

[Pace]

At the same time, to throw the approach away was to admit that I had got it irretrievably wrong, and this would mean a fail

Penny I have never heard of anyone being failed on a go around as that is good airmanship if for any reason you are not happy with the approach/ landing!!!

Pace

[Jude098]

"to throw the approach away was to admit that I had got it irretrievably wrong [and go around]" wouldn't that also show good airmanship in recognising what was wrong and dealing with it safely......even on a GST providing you explained why you were doing what you were doing would they fail you?

[Jude098]

Obviously we had the same thought at the same time Pace, lol

[The500man]

So what else could be done?

Stick/ yoke fully aft. You will come down quickly! ;)

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Penny I have never heard of anyone being failed on a go around
I was under the impression (folklore, not something I've read anywhere official I don't think) that you can't and won't be failed for going around, because they want pilots to believe that going around is never wrong and is always a valid option.

[Midland Transport]

I really think there is only 1 answer to the question. Go Around!! Learning that discipline early in your flying carreer is vital. Trying to practice aerobatics on final is only for the very experienced or stupid. We often in flying have ambitions to fly something bigger, faster , less stable and therefore unless your approach is stable the discipline must be in training to go around.

[Immortal]

I thought side slipping gave you a wrong airspeed indication. Because of the air blowing a bit sideways into the pitot tube.

[foxmoth]

My tester rightly ticked me off for getting too fast on the approach what should come in here is that you turn to the examiner and TELL them, " I am increasing my speed to xx for this reason" - as long as you have good reasons and you inform them them I do not think they should be ticking you off.

( edited because I put in three x's and someone would have said that is too fast for a light single with flaps down!)

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Sideslip. If you don't know how, ask to be shown. It's a basic pilot skill that everyone should have.

It works on all aeroplanes, even big airliners; the guy who glided the airliner for miles over the Atlantic after losing all the fuel and put it down on an island airport slipped off the excess height on final.

The ASI will tell porkies, so fly attitude to keep the speed under control - many folks have a tendency to let the nose drop in the slip, which increases speed so you'll float forever when you try to land.

To the argument 'you shouldn't be too high to start with' I say that's bollox. There's the engine failure case - keep height in hand and slip it off on final. And I remember going into Shobdon once keeping the circuit tight as is my wont in the Chippy when a bomber Cessna announced a mega-final much further out than I was. I was tight left base so commenced a go-around when the A/G reminded me of the parallel grass strip.

I chopped the power, dropped full flap again, while hoinking it round to line up with said grass strip for which I was too high. A full-rudder slip cured that and we landed just after the numbers and taxyed clear. I think I'd re-fuelled and and was well into my bacon buttie before the Bomber landed. ;)

[jxk]

We've all made aware of the Best Glide speed for an aircraft. So, assuming we increase or decrease the speed in relation to the best glide speed we will will Decrease the glide distance. If, we put the nose down, reduce the power and increase the speed presumably we will get rid of the height and shorten the distance to the threshold.
I've tried this in a C150 and it works. Any comments?

[Tugpilotsmiffy]

Go back to the school that trained you and ask them to do it properly this time

[Talkdownman]

Every approach is to a go-around.
A landing off it is a bonus.

[cumulusrider]

Every approach is to a go-around.
A landing off it is a bonus.

I dont think so. I fly gliders!!

[DeltaV]

You only need one engine stoppage on approach to teach the value of holding on to height until you absolutely have to get rid of it to land so I'm in favour of learning high sink rate manoeuvres and I squirm when I see singles being dragged in on 3 degree glide slopes (a misnomer if ever there was one). I fly a single and acknowledge that multi engine types may well be different.

[Sillert,V.I.]

...to throw the approach away was to admit that I had got it irretrievably wrong, and this would mean a fail.

To throw the approach away when it had gone irretrievably wrong would, to me, be a sign of good airmanship :ok:.

A forward slip is indeed a possibility for the competent, if appropriate for the type & configuration. Shoving the nose down in some types will quickly exceed the flap limiting speed & in a non-emergency situation this should be a no-no :=.

In an emergency when a go-around would be impossible or ill-advised, I'd suggest the inexperienced pilot in a simple SEP would be best advised to just shove the nose down & accept the overspeed condition.

[BackPacker]

In addition to what's been said before, may I also caution you AGAINST your option 2?

From a theoretical standpoint option two, slowing down well below minimum drag speed, should work to steepen your approach. BUT you are very, very close to the stall which means that low-level turbulence, wind shear or a gust might lead to a stall-spin scenario. Also, flying very close to the stall means you have no energy buffer to speak of to flare. And it requires quite a bit of energy to get back on the other side of the drag curve, so if you do need to execute a go-around you might not be able to do that without some significant sink, even with full power on.

My solution if I'm high (or if ATC all of a sudden asks me to do a short circuit, which really amounts to the same thing, aerodynamically) is to close the throttle, pull the nose up until the speed is below Vfe, lower the flaps all the way in one go, then push down keeping the speed just below Vfe. That will give you maximum drag and the steepest approach. And the excess speed will wash off surprisingly quickly once you round out. You can, as said, further increase drag with S-turns and/or sideslips.

But keep in mind that eventually you have to obtain a normal approach path/speed, from which you can do a normal flare and landing at your designated touchdown point. If it's a marginal-length runway don't try to recover a bad approach with these techniques. Go around and make sure the approach is OK next time.

[18greens]

Immortal I thought side slipping gave you a wrong airspeed indication. Because of the air blowing a bit sideways into the pitot tube.


It does in theory but i've never noticed it.its easy to over compensate and come screaming out of the sideslip at xxx kts.

If you need an asi and an altimeter to land an aircraft you haven't flown enough.

[Inlovewithflying]

I would say slidesips as well

[Crash one]

Last year I did a reval in a C152. went to my home strip to land, normal approach for my taildragger but too high for the 152, at 100 ft & nearly over the trees I remarked "That will do for me" & opened the throttle for a go around, Instructor said "That'll do for me too, no problems."

If you need an asi and an altimeter to land an aircraft you haven't flown enough.

Hardly an answer for a student asking the question.:ugh:

[flybymike]

You only need one engine stoppage on approach to teach the value of holding on to height until you absolutely have to get rid of it to land so I'm in favour of learning high sink rate manoeuvres and I squirm when I see singles being dragged in on 3 degree glide slopes (a misnomer if ever there was one). I fly a single and acknowledge that multi engine types may well be different.
Do you only ever fly from A to B if there is a runway beneath you? or do engine failures only ever occur on final approach? Might not repeated cooling engine damage as a result of making every approach a glide approach, end up giving you the very engine failure, the consequences of which you are trying to avoid? or do you in fact allow for the consequences of possible engine damage by keeping some power on? in which case you are still going to land short if it all goes quiet up front.
When one has paid for a new turbo charged engine due to poor engine temperature management, one takes a different view on these things.

[flyinkiwi]

So you are too high on final and want to get on the correct glidepath again.

How do you do this best/what are the pros and cons?

1) Push nose down to get to the correct path again, relying on full flaps to prevent getting too fast.
2) Pull so the speed decreases and the glidpath steepens to catch the correct glidepath again.
3) Something else?

My first advice to you is what others have already said, GO AROUND! It is a very rare thing to pull a good landing out of a bad approach. You are always better off going back up into the circuit/pattern and having another go.

Secondly, anything you read here is always superseded by what your instructor tells you. Never try anything without consulting with your instructor first, or better yet, get them to demonstrate something for you before you have a go yourself.

Having said that, I shall now answer your question 3. There are sideslips, something which your instructor or school may or may not teach you. If they do not then they will have their own reasons for not teaching them that you will simply have to accept and move on. The next thing that was not mentioned is S turns. I was taught this technique during my primary training instead of slipping (which I learned after I got my PPL). The pros are that you are making coordinated turns, it is quite a fun maneuver to fly and it is quite effective because you are in effect lengthening the final approach distance without gaining airspeed whilst losing height through energy sapping draggy turns. The cons, IMO it is arguably more dangerous than slipping and can only be used where there is a clear and wide approach (i.e. not into Farmer Jims 300 meter strip surrounded by trees, tall hedgerows and power lines in a river valley). It also tends to scare the hell out of non pilot passengers so you must brief them.

[Pilot DAR]

The cons, IMO it is arguably more dangerous than slipping and can only be used where there is a clear and wide approach (i.e. not into Farmer Jims 300 meter strip surrounded by trees, tall hedgerows and power lines in a river valley). It also tends to scare the hell out of non pilot passengers so you must brief them.

Hmmm. If the surroundings of the runway environment are a factor in your decision to S turn or not, you're thinking to S turn way too low! If you are so far back on a non emergency approach that you can fix it with S turns, you can probably fix it just by pulling off the rest of the power, or adding the rest of the flap. If those won't work, and you would rather not sideslip, you have no choice but to go around. The foregoing does not apply to emergency approaches, as your choices are already rather limited. That's why you practice those regularly - right?

In my opinion, S turns are one way of probably turning a stabilized approach into a non stabilized approach. Perhaps tolerable, but a less than ideal thing to do. A sideslip keeps the approach stabilized the whole time. You can enter, intensify and recover it instantly, and maintaining your alignment with the runway centerline at all times should be assumed, or something else is wrong too.

There is a lot of chatter about how scary sideslips can be - nonsense. Yes, some 172's are placarded to "avoid" with flaps out, but this is not "prohibit". For reasons already well discussed, certain models of the 172 are a bit fussy in a full flaps sideslip, but if you're paying attention, and flying the plane, they are fine. Perhaps there are other types placarded to avoid sideslips, though I am not aware of them.

Bear in mind that sideslips are a certification requirement. every certified single has demonstrated sideslip stability during certification test flying. I sideslip everything I test fly, and have never had a problem (including 172's). The certification requirement is as follows:

Static directional and lateral stability.

(a)

(1) The static directional stability, as shown by the tendency to recover from a wings level sideslip with the rudder free, must be positive for any landing gear and flap position appropriate to the takeoff, climb, cruise, approach, and landing configurations. This must be shown with symmetrical power up to maximum continuous power, and at speeds from 1.2 VS1 up to VFE, VLE, VNO, VFC/MFC, whichever is appropriate. (2) The angle of sideslip for these tests must be appropriate to the type of airplane. The rudder pedal force must not reverse at larger angles of sideslip, up to that at which full rudder is used or a control force limit in Sec. 23.143 is reached, whichever occurs first, and at speeds from 1.2 VS1 to VO.


(b)

(1) The static lateral stability, as shown by the tendency to raise the low wing in a sideslip with the aileron controls free, may not be negative for any landing gear and flap position appropriate to the takeoff, climb, cruise, approach, and landing configurations. This must be shown with symmetrical power from idle up to 75 percent of maximum continuous power at speeds from 1.2 VS1 in the takeoff configuration(s) and at speeds from 1.3 VS1 in other configurations, up to the maximum allowable airspeed for the configuration being investigated (VFE, VLE, VNO, VFC/MFC, whichever is appropriate) in the takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, and approach configurations. For the landing configuration, the power must be that necessary to maintain a 3-degree angle of descent in coordinated flight. (2) The static lateral stability may not be negative at 1.2 VS1 in the takeoff configuration, or at 1.3 VS1 in other configurations.
(3) The angel of sideslip for these tests must be appropriate to the type of airplane, but in no case may the constant heading sideslip angle be less than that obtainable with a 10 degree bank or, if less, the maximum bank angle obtainable with full rudder deflection or 150 pound rudder force.



So if you want to sideslip, go ahead. Do not stall while doing it, 'cause that is a spin entry, but other than that, you're fine. If your instructor has not shown you, ask. If they will not/cannot train you to do them well, you need to find another instructor. Sideslips are a necessary and basic flying skill.

[JimNtexas]

Perhaps because I learned to fly in a J-3 I find side slips to be most natural thing in the world in light aircraft.

I'm a partner in a PA-28-181 and a Cessna C-177RG.

Slips are your only option if you are high on final with full flaps in a Cherokee. 'Just push the nose down and risk an over speed' is just crazy talk!!

Cherokees slip just fine at any flap setting and any amount of rudder deflection (not that there is much rudder on these airplanes).

Slips are not the least bit dangerous in any high wing Cessna single. If you have a 40 degree model you need to aware of the possibility of some pitch movement. On a 30 degree model like our Cardinal slips are a non-issue and there is no restriction in POH.

Even though the Cardinal is super slick compared to any PA28 it is unlikely to need much more than a few seconds of slip if you are high on final, given the power of the Cessna flaps.

The only danger in slipping either airplane would be if the pilot is afraid to let the nose stay below the horizon. But that pilot is dangerous anyway.

[sevenstrokeroll]

wow...only a few mentioned the ''s turn''. so many myths regarding slips...go out and practice them at altitude and see how they work.

BUT NO ONE has mentioned doing a 360 degree turn on final to lose altitude. While one must mention this to tower as it is an unexpected maneuver, it is perfectly fine to correct a gross altitude error.

and to those who always worry about the engine quitting...well that is fine...but if you fly IFR ever, you are simply dependent upon your engine working. I might add that Lindbergh's engine worked just fine using the best technology from 85 years ago.

you might have been high due to wind changes, and Ihope you start evaluating wind using the old standby's of wind detection...cloud movement, your movement over the ground etc. good for the guy posting from stick and rudder.

[Big Pistons Forever]

This is not rocket science. Established on final with full flap and at the proper approach speed if the touch down point is moving down in the windshield go around. Yes you can sideslip and S turn or even as seven pointed out do a 360 but I have to ask why. An early assessment that the approach is not going to work should result in an overshoot and a circuit which will add only a few minutes to a flight and allow you to regain a normal and familiar flight path to a proper final approach.

The accident record is sadly full of landing accidents where too high and too fast approaches were pushed to their inevitable conclusion.......don't be "that guy"

[DeltaV]

or do engine failures only ever occur on final approach?
Of course not, but mine did

[Purzel]

Wow, thanks for all the replies!

We were in a PA28, so side-slipping would be an option (our C172 are placarded as well, but side-slipping seems to work like everywhere else). When I learned, I learned first in a PA 22 Colt, no flaps, so side-slips were/are taught off course.

I was in the plane with an instructor for my revalidation (every two years check), and he said the only way to do it would be to push the nose down. I remeber clearly another instructor telling me years ago that the most effective way would be to lower the speed below approach-speed. So, two different opinions from two different instructors.

That is why I asked here for opinions from more people and as I suspected, there is no single truth about this (apart form going around off course).

We don't use S-turns, mainly because our airfield is smack in the middle of the town and some people living there seem to be allergic to even seeing planes. We stick to our circuit very stricktly.

The only thing that makes me wonder is why neither I nor my instructor thought of side-slipping. A very effective way, I will ask the instructor the next time I see him if there was a reason for not using a side-slip.

Oh, btw, I am not a student anymore. But we all try to do things the best possible way and this just one thing where I always try to improve.

Thanks again for your replies! :D

[India Four Two]

I'm definitely in the side-slip camp. As SSD said, ignore the ASI and fly attitude.

I was recently doing a BFR in a Warrior in New Zealand and when downwind to land on the seal (flyinkiwi knows what this is, but for others it's the paved runway ;)), my instructor changed runways on me. Suddenly I was at 1000' on close-in right-base. However, with idle power, full flaps and full side-slip, we made it comfortably to the threshold.

I've side-slipped almost every light-aircraft (and all gliders) that I've ever flown, even 182s and Cardinals. Never had any problem, not even with the Cardinal, where you can get some buffet on the all-flying tail.

However, with the exception of gliders, I would never sideslip with non-pilots on board. I did it once and got some anxious looks from my passengers.

(our C172 are placarded as well, but side-slipping seems to work like everywhere else).

Purzel,

Is your 172 placarded against slipping, or is it an advisory placard?

By the way, I also learnt to fly on a Colt. A lovely little aircraft, but since the next aircraft I flew was a Chipmunk, it slipped a bit in my affections. I would love to fly one again just for old times sake.

PS I see flyinkiwi also mentioned about slips and passengers.

[Purzel]

Is your 172 placarded against slipping, or is it an advisory placard?

Hmm, now that you asked I didn't know, so I took a look at the POHs of our current C172. They don't have this entry anmore. :O
Flaps only up to 30°. So I probably only remeber it from a C172 we have sold already, that model had 40° flaps.
IIRC it was advisory, but I cannot check anymore.

[Flap 5]

Just come across this as I don't normally look in the Private Flying forum. My twopennyworth:

Engine idle, carb heat hot, full flap. Point at the end of the runway / landing strip or even before. As long as you can maintain below flap limiting speed you are okay. Make a double flare. The first at around 20 to 30 feet to point at your touchdown point. The second at your normal flare height. Simples.

[pulse1]

I am not a great fan of 360 degree turns on final unless you are absolutely certain there is no other traffic in the circuit.

I recently joined a busy right hand circuit with several aircraft ahead of me, one of which was a helicopter (why?). After turning final with 2 ahead, I looked left and there was a motor glider parallel with me at the same height. I just went around, which is when I discovered that my passenger had accidentally changed the frequency on the radio but that's another story.

After landing, I spoke to the pilot of the m/glider, believing that I had just not seen him ahead of me in the circuit. I discovered that he had done a 360 to the left to give him adequate spacing with the helicopter. I had just not seen him as I had not expected anyone to be effectively rejoining a right hand circuit from the left.

[flyinkiwi]

PS I see flyinkiwi also mentioned about slips and passengers.

In actual fact I was talking about S turns, but yeah forward slips can cause non pilot passengers to freak out too. ;)

[riverrock83]

I recently joined a busy right hand circuit with several aircraft ahead of me, one of which was a helicopter (why?).

I believe helicopters have to follow the standard circuit pattern too - unless there is a special helicopter circuit or they are cleared to do something else.

At the airport I'm at (Prestwick) they "land" at a designated point in the centre of the main runway. The Navy S&R helicopters often get cleared to take off from just outside their hanger, but all others hold at the same points that fix wing do and take off from the runway. I've been in the circuit as a solo student with navy helicopters messing up their spacing in the circuit causing the controller to have to re-arrange things (he commented to be on the ground afterwards that it was the navy's fault...), and I must admit I had a snigger when the normally Glasgow based helimed Eurocopter got told off by air traffic control for trying to hold at a non-existent hold point when hover taxiing:
xxx ready for departure
no your're not - you're not at Mike
Mind you - there was snow on the ground which probably made things more difficult.

However, back to topic, if you're a helicopter driver, being too high on finals isn't likely to really be an issue...

[Genghis the Engineer]

Thoughts:

- Sideslipping a PA28 is fine

- Sideslipping a C172 is okay, it's just that some dislike it a bit.

- Going around is usually okay, but I've had the odd day when it wasn't (failing light, weather coming in...)

- Orbiting on finals is seldom okay. Manoeuvring close to the ground is a common way of killing yourself, and that non-radio straight in join the tower didn't know about will be up your backside.

- Diving most light aeroplanes is not okay, you just end up too fast. On the other hand, most older microlights and something like a Piper Cub it's fair game as the profile drag will just get rid of the excess energy for you.

- You will not get ASI or altimeter misreading whilst sideslipping in most light aeroplanes. But, know your aircraft - if there's a static on one side of the fuselage only, then it may be prone. Earlier C150s for example.

G

[goldeneaglepilot]

Genghis and PilotDar have both written some good advice.

My thoughts are that if the approach is wrong then the landing is not going to be pretty. There are lots of methods of arriving at the right height and speed. An excellent method is side slipping, however it is a method that requires practice and good instruction. Even in a C172 with 40 degree flaps its not a big deal. Never let the nose get high and its safe. Get the nose high and your not far off a spin entry.

Set the landing up when your a few miles out if your on a long final join, alter the base leg position if base or downwind join (make it wide or short to arrive on finals with the correct speed and altitude and if its an overhead join no excuse....

Having sat in a jump plane at 10000 feet with two miles on the GPS to run to the threshold (when doing a type rating) I was surprised to hear the instructor tell me to make it a straight in approach from that position. My first introduction to the fabled Sarajevo 1 alpha type approach !!

[Pace]

GEP

There are techniques for knocking off a lot of altitude quickly and getting speed back to landing but it does take skill and familiarity with the aircraft.
We have sometimes been held high maybe 15K with 7 miles to touchdown and that involves everything out including speed brakes an S descent and picking a reference point ahead of touchdown.
The idea is to go below glide and quickly arrest the descent pitching for the glide and the speed will come off fast but not one with PAX on board :E

Pace

[BackPacker]

but not one with PAX on board

And in VMC only I presume.

[Pace]

Of course in vmc and I would not recommend it because you are arresting a high descent rate, going below the glide and adding drag with pitch as well as having every other bit of drag out! not a situation to make a mistake : )

[bingofuel]

with 7 miles to touchdown and that involves everything out including speed brakes an S descent and picking a reference point ahead of touchdown.
The idea is to go below glide


I take it your company does not operate a stable approach policy?

[Pace]

Of course we do ! We were discussing ways of loosing speed and I chucked this in of one I would NOT recommend ; )

[UL730]

Worth considering a check in POH about prolonged slips when fuel tanks are less than ¼ full. This is certainly true of my low wing PA23.

Stabilised approaches tend to lead to stable landings – no issues about throwing a landing away if you are staring at 4 whites but the trick is to use one’s superior judgement to avoid using one’s superior skills etc

My colleague at work used to drive 737’s for BMI and recalls as a very green FO – he ended up with a hot and high approach at Glasgow: quite properly instigated a missed approach but had the obligatory tea and biscuits talk afterwards (see judgement/skills ratio above)

[englishal]

There are plenty of ways of getting down in a hurry, but you need to be proficient to do it safely due to close proximity of the granite! One other method is to get on the back of the drag curve....I.e. slow right up, so you are just above stall. This causes a lot of drag and lower forward speed so you get quite a steep angle of decent with low airspeed.

I would stress this is advanced stuff and to do it safely you need to know your aeroplane 100% and be 100% sure of your abilities, but you could always ask your FI to show you.

[chipmeisterc]

1 does not work, and is working of a flawed assumption..

Pushing down may seem tempting but think about it..lowering the nose == lower angle of attack == less lift == less drag and much more speed!! These are all the things you dont want when trying to land, basically be prepared for a float /balloon fest.

Coversley however pitching the nose up == higher nose = nailing approach speed == higher aoa = more drag = steeper decent.

If im not coming down quick enough, I make sure I have the nose not down, but up!

[BackPacker]

Chipmeister, have you forgotten about parasite drag? It doesn't vary with the AoA, but increases exponentially with your airspeed. And flaps are an incredible effective device to create parasite drag. That drag is what gets rid of the excess energy, not the induced drag from creating lift.

Of course your airspeed will increase so you will need to aim well short of the runway and do the two-stage flare to get rid of the excess airspeed. But this method will get you down steeply without becoming another stall/spin statistic.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Pushing down may seem tempting but think about it..lowering the nose == lower angle of attack == less lift == less drag and much more speed!! These are all the things you dont want when trying to land, basically be prepared for a float /balloon fest.
Feel free to think about it as much as you like.

In real life, however, in a 152 or 172 with full flap you can shove the nose down quite a long way and you get lower but you don't get much faster, in particular it's dead easy to get a lot lower with no significant risk of getting faster than the flap limiting speed.

There has been considerable discussion as to whether or not this results in a pretty approach (and I would agree that it doesn't), but nobody who has tried it in those particular aircraft is claiming that it doesn't work. Because it does.

[Final 3 Greens]

Just a caution with regard to slipping, it stresses the vertical stabilizer and in particular the fixings that hold it in place.

In an emergency, it's a good option, but do you really want to do it regularly?

[Pilot DAR]

Could we please have some faith in the design of certified aircraft?

it stresses the vertical stabilizer and in particular the fixings that hold it in place. In an emergency, it's a good option, but do you really want to do it regularly?

Yes, I slip regularly, and to full pedal deflection. I keep it slower than Va though...

We who certifiy aircraft designs, and write flight manuals, carefully confirm that the design requirements have been shown, and with adequate margin for careless piloting technique, and consider what needs to be written in the flight manual. If there is no warning about maneuvering, keep the plane within the stated limitations, prevent it from stalling, fly within your skill set, and slip it all you want. That's what it was designed for!

The prevailing design requirement reads: (my bold)

Sec. 23.441

Maneuvering loads.

(a) At speeds up to VA, the vertical tail surfaces must be designed to withstand-
(1) A sudden displacement of the rudder control (with the airplane in unaccelerated flight with zero yaw) to the maximum deflection allowed by the control stops or by pilot strength, whichever is critical;
(2) A yaw angle of 15 degrees with the rudder fully deflected (except as limited by pilot strength) in the direction tending to increase the slip; and
(3) A yaw angle of 15 degrees with the rudder control maintained in the neutral position (except as limited by pilot strength).
(b) The average loading of B23.11 and figure 1 of Appendix B and the distribution in figures 7, 6, and 8 of Appendix B may be used instead of the requirements of subparagraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3), respectively.
(c) The yaw angles specified in paragraph (a)(3) of this section may be reduced if the yaw angle chosen for a particular speed cannot be exceeded in--
(1) Steady slip conditions;
(2) Uncoordinated rolls from steep banks; or
(3) Sudden failure of the critical engine with delayed corrective action.

[Maoraigh1]

Just a caution with regard to slipping, it stresses the vertical stabilizer and in particular the fixings that hold it in place

Are you saying it stresses them beyond the designers planned normal use stresses? Turning increases stresses on the wings. Landing and taxiing cause much greater undercarriage forces than flying. Running the engine stresses the propellor and engine mounts.
I sideslip because you can add/take off sideslip without taking a hand off the controlls - and it is used in crosswind landings.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Just a caution with regard to slipping, it stresses the vertical stabilizer and in particular the fixings that hold it in place.

In an emergency, it's a good option, but do you really want to do it regularly?

Quite right, just as becoming airborne stresses the horizontal mainplain and tailplane, and their attachment bolts, so should also be kept to a minimum.

G

[BackPacker]

(1) A sudden displacement of the rudder control (with the airplane in unaccelerated flight with zero yaw) to the maximum deflection allowed by the control stops or by pilot strength, whichever is critical;

Slight side issue. The design requirement is from neutral to full deflection (and presumably back to neutral). It is NOT a requirement to be able to handle a left-right-left-right yawing input to full deflection each side. Some Airbus pilots found that out the hard way.

Maneuvering Speed and Broken Airplanes | Left Seat (http://macsblog.com/2011/01/maneuvering-speed-and-broken-airplanes/)

Quote from the article:

What the Airbus crash taught us—or at least should have taught us—is that Va certification standards, and certification flight test results, protect the airplane from only a single control input in only one direction at a time. Any combination of control inputs that rotate the airplane around more than a single axis creates loads for which Va does not necessarily consider or test.

Flying slower than Va also only protects the airframe from moving a flight control – elevator, ailerons, or rudder – to its full travel in a single direction, not from stop to stop. So certification calculations and flight testing show that moving the ailerons fully and abruptly full left at a speed slower than Va, for example, will not break the airplane. But if the ailerons are suddenly moved fully back to the right without the airplane stabilizing in a steady attitude, Va offers no guarantee.

[Pilot DAR]

Backpacker, I agree, but I would think that a sideslip entered or maintained by rudder motion from stop to stop is going really wrong already!

Though the Airbus event is a definite example of bad, it's not really relevant to GA aircraft. There are inertial forces in larger aircraft which really are not present in smaller aircraft. More simply, parts of light aircraft don't really "wag" the way they can on large ones. I am not aware of any failure of a V stab in a GA aircraft resulting from sideslipping.

If all the people who are so concerned about the security of the V stab, would assure that they do not push down on the H stab, while moving the Cessna on the apron, we'd be even better off. After all, the V stab on nearly all C 150/152's is attached to the H stab - then to the fuselage! What you do to the H stab, you do to the V stab too!

[Unusual Attitude]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Final 3 Greens
Just a caution with regard to slipping, it stresses the vertical stabilizer and in particular the fixings that hold it in place.

In an emergency, it's a good option, but do you really want to do it regularly?

Quite right, just as becoming airborne stresses the horizontal mainplain and tailplane, and their attachment bolts, so should also be kept to a minimum.

G

Utter class! :E

[Pilot DAR]

Quite right, just as becoming airborne stresses the horizontal mainplain and tailplane, and their attachment bolts, so should also be kept to a minimum.

Ah, but Genghis, if the aircraft does not become airborne, then the landing gear attaching bolts are subject to stresses from bearing the weight of the aircraft....

But back to the topic... Today in the Caravan, I got a big thermal while turning final = high approach. With the engine at idle, and some slip, I had to add a smidge of power before I flared.... Slipping is extra draggy in the Caravan, 'cause you get a bit of spoiler too!