Cessna 172 landing techniques - what is the difference?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I think my post explains quite clearly why I employ differing techniques...
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the 172 first gained tricycle gear, the brochure trumpeted it's 'land o matic' landing gear. Judging by some landings I've seen and.....ahem cough, cough, been on board for. Some people took that too literally. Carry a little too much speed on finals and it will float forever or at least until the hedge interrupts proceedings.
Personally like others I used to vary my approaches to match the circumstances. Flying into a 400 metre strip requires one approach style and a long airport runway requires another. The fastest I ever approached in a 172 was in Memphis, 120 mph over the threshold to avoid delaying the masses of DC9s lined up for departure and behind me.
I did come unstuck one day when I flew a 172 with a cruise prop. On a flat calm day, it just didn't want to come down. After three go arounds. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.
Personally like others I used to vary my approaches to match the circumstances. Flying into a 400 metre strip requires one approach style and a long airport runway requires another. The fastest I ever approached in a 172 was in Memphis, 120 mph over the threshold to avoid delaying the masses of DC9s lined up for departure and behind me.
I did come unstuck one day when I flew a 172 with a cruise prop. On a flat calm day, it just didn't want to come down. After three go arounds. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I once turned in on W1 at NZWN so fast we nearly on two wheels, there was a Dash-9 behind us and the controller was getting rather insitent. Now that was a FAST taxi. we landed long and everything, the tommies just aren't that fast.
