Why is landing the bloody plane so hard?!
Definition of an imposter . . .. . . a male poster of falsities
I just can't help it. Every time somebody says thank you for support, of one kind or another
.. . what springs to mind is either Spike Milligan or Ronnie Barker , Ronnie as an archaeologist
who is examining what he thinks is an ancient Egyptian jock-strap .. (at 3.10 on the vid)
There is another youtube taken in England of a Rapide (a dark green one) coming in for a landing.
By studying the inside and outside footage it does help someone about to come to grips with
the type a pretty good idea of timing and what to expect just before and at touchdown. And as an aid
to avoid over-control. It helped me anyway, but I do have to say, after about thirty landings in the last year,
unless the wind is getting up, the Rapide is a pussycat in which to caress the turf.
I just can't help it. Every time somebody says thank you for support, of one kind or another
.. . what springs to mind is either Spike Milligan or Ronnie Barker , Ronnie as an archaeologist
who is examining what he thinks is an ancient Egyptian jock-strap .. (at 3.10 on the vid)
There is another youtube taken in England of a Rapide (a dark green one) coming in for a landing.
By studying the inside and outside footage it does help someone about to come to grips with
the type a pretty good idea of timing and what to expect just before and at touchdown. And as an aid
to avoid over-control. It helped me anyway, but I do have to say, after about thirty landings in the last year,
unless the wind is getting up, the Rapide is a pussycat in which to caress the turf.
Last edited by Fantome; 6th Mar 2015 at 01:16.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thing,
Sorry to drag this back 4 pages, but - isn't the difference between the Warrior and Arrow that the former has the tapered wing, and the latter the old slab/Hershey bar? In which case the low speed behaviour in ground effect is very different. The latter has far more drag and is better at short fields, but can bite you if mishandled; the tapered wing is more forgiving but floats more.
With the slab wing I do tend to keep power on longer, though I'm with Chuck on the need to be ABLE to land without it. (Who am I to argue with a legend anyway?!)
Sorry to drag this back 4 pages, but - isn't the difference between the Warrior and Arrow that the former has the tapered wing, and the latter the old slab/Hershey bar? In which case the low speed behaviour in ground effect is very different. The latter has far more drag and is better at short fields, but can bite you if mishandled; the tapered wing is more forgiving but floats more.
With the slab wing I do tend to keep power on longer, though I'm with Chuck on the need to be ABLE to land without it. (Who am I to argue with a legend anyway?!)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
isn't the difference between the Warrior and Arrow that the former has the tapered wing,
I would agree with the different flying characteristics, it's very noticeable on approach cf the Warrior.
Having flown down the ILS at 110 KIAS you definitely need to close the throttle at minimum height, around 200ft, if you plan to land!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to the OP. There have been a lot of good things said in this thread. Pace talked about energy management: controlling the descent of the aircraft isn't about one control, one outcome. Work with your instructor to understand the set of interactions you are working with. Remember that you don't get to understand the effects of controls chuntering along at 3,500' - you've got no point of reference except your altimeter and ASI. Near the ground you've got a concrete (!) point of reference and what you thought you knew about what control does what all of a sudden gets called into question. Get that right and then you'll get your final approach right.
I only ever learned to land the aircraft when I mastered the final approach...when it felt like I was sliding down final on rails, I all of a sudden found that I could miraculously land the aircraft.
The other point that's been made is that for all the time in the circuit the landing only takes a tiny fraction of that. Get on to your instructor and on a nil wind day, at some quiet strip, do a takeoff, a reversal turn at ~500', an approach, a landing, a takeoff, a reversal turn... It's amazing how many landings you get in an hour.
Another variant is to take off, climb to 800' or so on early downwind, cut the power and do a glide approach to land at the mid point of the runway, take off, then do it again and again.
I was subjected to both of these and it helped me to learn how to land, a thing that previously I never thought I would learn.
Having said that, my daughter who is a beautiful hands and feet pilot has a very dim view of my "competent" landings. As I round out with her in the right hand seat there is an audible intake of breath over the intercom and out of the corner of my eye I see her reflexively grabbing for the stick, only to restrain herself at the last moment. She always seems surprised when we sweetly kiss the ground. There's as many ways to land well as there are pilots. She just needs to have faith in her old man :-)
I only ever learned to land the aircraft when I mastered the final approach...when it felt like I was sliding down final on rails, I all of a sudden found that I could miraculously land the aircraft.
The other point that's been made is that for all the time in the circuit the landing only takes a tiny fraction of that. Get on to your instructor and on a nil wind day, at some quiet strip, do a takeoff, a reversal turn at ~500', an approach, a landing, a takeoff, a reversal turn... It's amazing how many landings you get in an hour.
Another variant is to take off, climb to 800' or so on early downwind, cut the power and do a glide approach to land at the mid point of the runway, take off, then do it again and again.
I was subjected to both of these and it helped me to learn how to land, a thing that previously I never thought I would learn.
Having said that, my daughter who is a beautiful hands and feet pilot has a very dim view of my "competent" landings. As I round out with her in the right hand seat there is an audible intake of breath over the intercom and out of the corner of my eye I see her reflexively grabbing for the stick, only to restrain herself at the last moment. She always seems surprised when we sweetly kiss the ground. There's as many ways to land well as there are pilots. She just needs to have faith in her old man :-)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I round out with her in the right hand seat there is an audible intake of breath over the intercom out of the corner of my eye I see her reflexively grabbing for the stick
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Inverness-shire
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To the OP.
For a little light reading try "Propellerhead" by Antony Woodward. That will persuade you that you're really not doing so badly and Page 92 has some useful words of wisdom about landing. He had similar problems to yourself.
All the best with the flying. Don't give up.
For a little light reading try "Propellerhead" by Antony Woodward. That will persuade you that you're really not doing so badly and Page 92 has some useful words of wisdom about landing. He had similar problems to yourself.
All the best with the flying. Don't give up.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John Farley, who did glide land Hawker Harriers, writes in his book:
"A few years later i found myself on Aero FLight at Bedford where we operated several very valuable single engine prototype research aircraft. The boffins were naturally very keen not to lose one of these just because the engine stopped. Without exception, the aircraft were all the aerodynamic opposite of a good glider. In the jargon they were very low lift over drag devices (low L/D) which meant that they all had very steep glide angles.
We have now arrived at one of the enduring myths of aviation. Aircraft that glide down at 30 or 40 [degrees] angle must be awful to land. Wrong. Totally wrong. They are the easiest of all so far as the final approach and landing goes. Only when I started practicing glide approach and landings for aircraft of that type did I start to get a 100% success rate with smooth touchdowns, just after the runway numbers, and at the correct speed.
Because of the steep glide angles, it is necessary to be pretty close to a suitable runway when the engine stops. The difficulty that had previously dogged me of looking out the window in order to judge the shallow glidepath and so how to fly round the circuit, just vanished. With the nose apparently pointing straight down at the ground you can see exactly where you will impact in you do nothing. Wind is not an issue and there is nothing to judge. All you do is throw down the gear and flaps dive at the flap limit speed and point the thing at the beginning of the lead in lights (or just short of the runway if there are no lead in lights). Then pull out of the dive at the last moment, and fly level, as low as you dare, until the speed bleeds to the one you want for touchdown."
John goes on to describe glide landing Hawker Hunters.
This is from page 354 of John's excellent book: "A View From the Hover"
It is probably the mindset we have for a "normal" circuit, and the need to be harmonious with traffic, which prevents pilots getting comfortable with different power off approach techniques.
I have flown the technique that John describes in the foregoing, in my 150, and it works fine. It also works in the 182 amphibian, and my Teal amphibian. This technique will be easier for helicopter trained pilots, who get used to picking a power off landing site in the area just above their toes on the pedals. Doddling around at "best glide speed", selecting the best field is not always the best plan.
Learning to do anything well, is more easily accomplished by removing variables while you practice. Learn the basics well, then begin to add the variables at the rate you can deal with them. The use of engine power is a variable, try to remove it from what you have to deal with while you work to perfect your landing technique.
"A few years later i found myself on Aero FLight at Bedford where we operated several very valuable single engine prototype research aircraft. The boffins were naturally very keen not to lose one of these just because the engine stopped. Without exception, the aircraft were all the aerodynamic opposite of a good glider. In the jargon they were very low lift over drag devices (low L/D) which meant that they all had very steep glide angles.
We have now arrived at one of the enduring myths of aviation. Aircraft that glide down at 30 or 40 [degrees] angle must be awful to land. Wrong. Totally wrong. They are the easiest of all so far as the final approach and landing goes. Only when I started practicing glide approach and landings for aircraft of that type did I start to get a 100% success rate with smooth touchdowns, just after the runway numbers, and at the correct speed.
Because of the steep glide angles, it is necessary to be pretty close to a suitable runway when the engine stops. The difficulty that had previously dogged me of looking out the window in order to judge the shallow glidepath and so how to fly round the circuit, just vanished. With the nose apparently pointing straight down at the ground you can see exactly where you will impact in you do nothing. Wind is not an issue and there is nothing to judge. All you do is throw down the gear and flaps dive at the flap limit speed and point the thing at the beginning of the lead in lights (or just short of the runway if there are no lead in lights). Then pull out of the dive at the last moment, and fly level, as low as you dare, until the speed bleeds to the one you want for touchdown."
John goes on to describe glide landing Hawker Hunters.
This is from page 354 of John's excellent book: "A View From the Hover"
It is probably the mindset we have for a "normal" circuit, and the need to be harmonious with traffic, which prevents pilots getting comfortable with different power off approach techniques.
I have flown the technique that John describes in the foregoing, in my 150, and it works fine. It also works in the 182 amphibian, and my Teal amphibian. This technique will be easier for helicopter trained pilots, who get used to picking a power off landing site in the area just above their toes on the pedals. Doddling around at "best glide speed", selecting the best field is not always the best plan.
Learning to do anything well, is more easily accomplished by removing variables while you practice. Learn the basics well, then begin to add the variables at the rate you can deal with them. The use of engine power is a variable, try to remove it from what you have to deal with while you work to perfect your landing technique.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just another hint for the original poster. That is regarding trimming the aircraft correctly for any different configuration and power pitch adjustment.
Correctly trimmed the aircraft should fly a glide path with the smallest inputs from the pilot.
Many new and some more established pilots land flat or nose wheel heavy for that very reason.
Speed control and accuracy is vital.
Once the aircraft is stable and configured and in the last couple of hundred feet trim back so that a slight forward pressure is required to maintain that glideslope!
That will avoid the heavy flare and the flat or nose wheel landing.
you should be able to play the controls in the flare without undue pressure and not feel like your pulling on a ten ton bag of potatoes
A number of posts have talked about a stabilised approach leading to a good landing! I agree with that but maybe not that the approach is stable 6 miles out
It has to be stable at the missed approach point if its not chuck it away and go around just don't land on a wing and a prayer hoping that it won't be too bad as a passenger to the aircraft rather than being in control
But accurate trimming makes life a heck of a lot easier and probably not taught well enough
Pace
Correctly trimmed the aircraft should fly a glide path with the smallest inputs from the pilot.
Many new and some more established pilots land flat or nose wheel heavy for that very reason.
Speed control and accuracy is vital.
Once the aircraft is stable and configured and in the last couple of hundred feet trim back so that a slight forward pressure is required to maintain that glideslope!
That will avoid the heavy flare and the flat or nose wheel landing.
you should be able to play the controls in the flare without undue pressure and not feel like your pulling on a ten ton bag of potatoes
A number of posts have talked about a stabilised approach leading to a good landing! I agree with that but maybe not that the approach is stable 6 miles out
It has to be stable at the missed approach point if its not chuck it away and go around just don't land on a wing and a prayer hoping that it won't be too bad as a passenger to the aircraft rather than being in control
But accurate trimming makes life a heck of a lot easier and probably not taught well enough
Pace
Moderator
you should be able to play the controls in the flare without undue pressure and not feel like your pulling on a ten ton bag of potatoes
Some planes are more heavy to flare than others, and with variability for C of G too. Get used to being ready with some muscle.
Trimming zero pitch force to crossing the fence is fine, but after that, in an ideal landing, there should be a more or less steady, progressive application of back pressure until you touch. For most types, trimming that out will not be practically possible, and if you did manage to trim such the plane touched down trimmed to neutral pitch force, you would have so much nose up trim applied ('cause you'd be practically trimming to the stall) that if you had to go around from there, you'd have a massive amount of trimming to do to prevent very high pitch up forces with the application of power.
Trimming to zero control force will provide you with the least possible tactile sense of what the plane is doing, and lesser stability. Leaving a little pitch force to fly against will help you feel the plane better, and land with greater precision. After all, you're flying the plane right? It's not flying you!
When I used to fly the Piper Cheyenne, I found that very pleasing landings could be obtained by using the electric trim to trim up through a certain speed over the fence. This was lazy, and potentially dangerous, should a go around be needed. I learned to just fly the plane properly, which will require some muscle from time to time...
I am very pleased with a tricycle landing, if at the time of the touch, the pitch control is most of the way nose up, and moved smoothly to full nose up to maintain the nose light attitude until you run out of elevator effectiveness, and the nose settles gently on, then still hold the nose light with full elevator until the plane has stopped rolling, simply to reduce the loads on the nose strut.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Timbuktu
Posts: 962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes the Arrow is a slab; but even taking that into consideration it tends to dump itself onto the runway. I'm not talking bone shattering arrivals here, just firm instead of the lightest kiss of tyre on ground but being as I pride myself a bit on my landings it's a bit annoying to hear that 'clunk' as you touch down.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arrow - I found that no matter how smooth the touchdown, it's easy to let the nosewheel drop with an audible "clunk"
The low tail Arrows, like the rest of the Cherokee line, are stabiliator, rather than H stab & elevator configuration. This is good for the cruise configurations, where the plane spends most of its flying time. however, at slow speed, high pitch up control application, it's a little less ideal.
The stabilator provides down balancing lift, and control force by change in its angle of incidence only - there is no change the camber of the horizontal surface as a whole. Thus with very great stabilator AoA, a stall is more easy to achieve. Therefore, the lift can be lost more suddenly with full nose up control applied, as the plane slows.
The combination of H stab and elevator, on the other hand, tends to hand on longer, as the camber increases with elevator deflection, and resists stalling a little more.
The early Cessna Cardinals (all Cardinals are also stabilator only) were the subject of an AD to install a slot in the stabilator to delay stabilator stall. Later models all had the mod from the factory. This was about for the same reason, the nose dropping out at the last minute.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every once in a while these forums are worth their weight in pure gold when we get polite discussions going with a mix of inexperienced and very experienced pilots involved.
We have some real experienced people here some of which I know like Pilot DAR who was kind enough to have visited me at my home.
So lets keep this going and I want to very clearly enforce the fact that flying an aircraft has far to many variables to allow for one size fits all solutions and fixed ideas on conforming to any one technique.....such as a stabilized approach is the cure all for a good landing.
Nothing could be further from the truth, yes generally speaking a stabilized approach makes it easier to produce good landings.
However it is a fools paradise to believe that the stabilized approach will be the best method for a safe landing all the time.
I firmly believe that every airplane should have one of these installed between the airspeed indicator and the altimeter.
Home | Alpha Systems - AOA
I would suggest those of you who are not familiar with this instrument take the next few hours of spare time and read everything on their web site.
I will continue this discussion in due course and discuss practicing landings by using a method we teach in gyroplane flight training called " Crow hops "
I should not really get involved in these discussions because I am supposed to be retired but I guess it is just in my DNA.....like the saying goes " There is no whore like an old whore "
i
We have some real experienced people here some of which I know like Pilot DAR who was kind enough to have visited me at my home.
So lets keep this going and I want to very clearly enforce the fact that flying an aircraft has far to many variables to allow for one size fits all solutions and fixed ideas on conforming to any one technique.....such as a stabilized approach is the cure all for a good landing.
Nothing could be further from the truth, yes generally speaking a stabilized approach makes it easier to produce good landings.
However it is a fools paradise to believe that the stabilized approach will be the best method for a safe landing all the time.
I firmly believe that every airplane should have one of these installed between the airspeed indicator and the altimeter.
Home | Alpha Systems - AOA
I would suggest those of you who are not familiar with this instrument take the next few hours of spare time and read everything on their web site.
I will continue this discussion in due course and discuss practicing landings by using a method we teach in gyroplane flight training called " Crow hops "
I should not really get involved in these discussions because I am supposed to be retired but I guess it is just in my DNA.....like the saying goes " There is no whore like an old whore "
i
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last time I did a 'greaser', I had 3 RAF CFS bods on board
'Oops' was his choice of words...
Even the Gods get it wrong sometimes.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I echo was has been posted above about poor L/D aeroplanes being the easiest to land. The most complex and most capable aeroplane I ever had a share in and flew regularly was the Yak52. It almost landed itself!
With that massive paddle prop in fine pitch, power off, gear and flaps down, it came down like an upside-down Harrier. The first time it was demonstrated to me during my check out we were so close to the runway I didn't think we'd land in the same county never mind anywhere near the numbers. But as John says, you point it at very short final and flare, and the thing lands itself, rolls a short distance, and stops (this is on grass).
The only fly in the ointment was fitting that in with C172s on 3 degree 'drag it in on power' 3 mile approaches off bomber circuits (to a small grass field!). And there were plenty of those!
With that massive paddle prop in fine pitch, power off, gear and flaps down, it came down like an upside-down Harrier. The first time it was demonstrated to me during my check out we were so close to the runway I didn't think we'd land in the same county never mind anywhere near the numbers. But as John says, you point it at very short final and flare, and the thing lands itself, rolls a short distance, and stops (this is on grass).
The only fly in the ointment was fitting that in with C172s on 3 degree 'drag it in on power' 3 mile approaches off bomber circuits (to a small grass field!). And there were plenty of those!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3 mile approaches off bomber circuits
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PilotDar
This was directed at the OP so I presume C150 PA28 etc!
The PA34 Notorious for the Seneca porpoise and resulted collapsed nose gears was often cause by incorrect trimming and the stabilator at low speed.
the Citation needs trim a bit forward on the take off roll In the normal takeoff setting it feels like it needs aft trim but as speed increases it becomes spot on.
regardless in any aircraft trim is important.
Too what degree is another matter.
Students /low time pilots often do not handle heavy controls and end up flatting it on or worse landing on the nose wheel
There is also a massive variable in the amount of flair required to land an aircraft you could fly it on with very little flair or require a lot of flair in a short coupled aircraft. something which has a huge distance from the mains and nose will take very little to keep the nose clear while a short coupled aircraft will take a lot. Landing an aircraft is not set in stone at or near the stall as demonstrated by my pilot friend who landed at 200 KTS in Edinburgh with control problems.
Pace
This was directed at the OP so I presume C150 PA28 etc!
The PA34 Notorious for the Seneca porpoise and resulted collapsed nose gears was often cause by incorrect trimming and the stabilator at low speed.
the Citation needs trim a bit forward on the take off roll In the normal takeoff setting it feels like it needs aft trim but as speed increases it becomes spot on.
regardless in any aircraft trim is important.
Too what degree is another matter.
Students /low time pilots often do not handle heavy controls and end up flatting it on or worse landing on the nose wheel
There is also a massive variable in the amount of flair required to land an aircraft you could fly it on with very little flair or require a lot of flair in a short coupled aircraft. something which has a huge distance from the mains and nose will take very little to keep the nose clear while a short coupled aircraft will take a lot. Landing an aircraft is not set in stone at or near the stall as demonstrated by my pilot friend who landed at 200 KTS in Edinburgh with control problems.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 6th Mar 2015 at 17:55.