Perfect Landing C182

[Double Donk]

I can't seem to get my landings in the C182 up to a good standard. Was wondering if any seasoned 182 drivers could make any suggestions on what works for them. Most of my flying has mainly been on low wing cherokees.
I use 20 degrees of flap, 80 kts final for the 182P

Also would these landing techniques also apply to C206, C207 etc.

and yes i have done searches on this topic.

cheers

[Ratshit]

Double Donk

Get all the flap out and get the speed back. Come over the fence at 65 kts.

R:cool:

[4SPOOLED]

Fly parallel with the runway, close the throttle and try not to land her by increasing AOA and trying to maintain height a couple of foot above the runway, she will do a perfect touch down everytime as long as you have the numbers over the fence.

4S

[Double Donk]

Thanks for the advice.
it looks like i not only need to change my approach speeds but also my instructor.

[flywatcher]

60 kts with two up, a trickle of power, full flaps, well back on the trim (be prepared to push hard forward if you have to go around with full flaps), the 182 will land itself. Try it, you will see.

[heywatchthis]

80 knots is a little fast! 65kts across the fence is fine. If in doubt check the POH
If you are light (1 pob) in both 206/182 would suggest only using flap 20 otherwise you will land very flat. Three pointer in a trigear, not the best. I flew both a/c for flying jumpers, so maybe the were a little lighter. Very rarely used full flap unless I was coming back down with a load of meat. I just added a few extra kts across the fence with a trickle more power, could grease it on. Plus with 2 landings per flight hour, I had plenty of practice!! :} :} :}

[Captain Fun]

Im sure ContactMeNow will have plenty to add to this...

[milkbottle]

Fly parallel with the runway, close the throttle and try not to land her by increasing AOA and trying to maintain height a couple of foot above the runway, she will do a perfect touch down everytime as long as you have the numbers over the fence.

4S

hey 4S, i tried flying parallel with the runway but i hit some cows, talked to my instructor and he recommeded flying towards it instead.

[gassed budgie]

close the throttle and try not to land her by increasing AOA

Please explain.

[Ratshit]

Double Donk - go find yourself an instructor who can actually fly a C150/152 properly (I have to assume that there are still some out there) and do full flap/fully stalled landings until your have them off pat. Yes, it is a big transition from the nose attitude on approach to the nose attitude in the flare - but, learning to fly competently and confidently does require some skills to be learned. When you can do them into wind - go do them in a howling x-wind.

Then go fly the 172/182/206/210 the same way and you should have no more trouble.

R:cool:

[Wingman09]

Double donk

Me and a few friends have done a bit of time in a C182RG Version, haven’t flown a fixed gear one. The gear on the RG is reasonably sturdy and doesn’t have much give, to add to the problem it has 2 very small main wheels. The tires on this aircraft seem to have a high psi. This combination of the two has allowed me to witness and produce some horrible landings. When the aircraft is light she will bounce back to circuit height if its a positive touchdown, when it has been heavy i have witnessed people reducing power to early and it has fallen out of the sky. Like people have been saying get your speeds back over the fence, this will help alot. I have found that the timing of closing the throttle and flaring have been critical to producing a decent landing vs a shocker - (the one where you change your voice or put on an accent so no one recognises you in the tower!!)

Wingman09

[the wizard of auz]

Please explain.
Its called holding off. :hmm:
unless your doing a performance landing, you should be doing this with all your landings.

[sir.pratt]

flying a 206 empty after all my pax have jumped out can be fun - does anyone else run out of trim on base/finals? i think it's the way mine is set up.

anyway, full flap, 65kts over the fence, power off at 5ft, into the flare, greased on every time. hold the nose wheel off the ground as long as poss for the fastish taxi back to the DZ.....

i've got a close-mowed strip across the runway that i target for mains down every time (model a/c runway)

[gassed budgie]

Its called holding off. :hmm:
unless your doing a performance landing, you should be doing this with all your landings.


OK wiz, I'll ask you. How am I going to hold off without increasing the angle of attack ? And what should I be doing in all landings ? Please explain.
And just what do you mean by a performance landing ?
And when it comes to rounding out, holding off and touching down, can you please tell me what the magic word is ? There's only one.

[sir.pratt]

i think he means 'without increasing your nose attitude' - it follows that the aoa will increase if you hold the attitude, and the a/c slows down (remember basic stalls...)

[sir.pratt]

And just what do you mean by a performance landing ?
And when it comes to rounding out, holding off and touching down, can you please tell me what the magic word is ? There's only one.
max performance landing - follows on from max performance take-off. aka 'short field t/o and landing'
flare?

[Chimbu chuckles]

Ohferfecksake:{ :ugh:

[sir.pratt]

shutting up now

[gassed budgie]

i think he means 'without increasing your nose attitude' - it follows that the aoa will increase if you hold the attitude, and the a/c slows down

Ah, now i get it. I land the aeroplane without increasing the angle of attack and without increasing the nose attitude. Who would have thought!

[4SPOOLED]

Rat****,

I think you need to go back to flying school mate because the technique i explained is how WE TEACH STUDENTS TO LAND IN THE FIRST PLACE:ok:

Glad i dont have to instruct now ay!:ugh:

And Someone asked about it being differant to a performance landing? well a performance landing you close the throttle in the flare and try for a more positive landing (ie harder impact) almost touching all three wheels at once.

If you dont land rat**** how i explained in the above post, i would love to hear your technique, would be interesting to talk about it with the boys over a few beers tonight!

4S

[4SPOOLED]

Fly parallel with the runway, close the throttle and try not to land her by increasing AOA and trying to maintain height a couple of foot above the runway, she will do a perfect touch down everytime as long as you have the numbers over the fence.
4S
hey 4S, i tried flying parallel with the runway but i hit some cows, talked to my instructor and he recommeded flying towards it instead.
:D
Hahahahaha Nice one

[4SPOOLED]

This is a classic example of how these stupid flying techniques get a life.

Double Donk - go find yourself an instructor who can actually fly a C150/152 properly (I have to assume that there are still some out there) and do full flap/fully stalled landings until your have them off pat. Yes, it is a big transition from the nose attitude on approach to the nose attitude in the flare - but, learning to fly competently and confidently does require some skills to be learned. When you can do them into wind - go do them in a howling x-wind.

Then go fly the 172/182/206/210 the same way and you should have no more trouble.

R:cool:

A fully stalled landing ay? isnt that what you do when you land an aircraft anyway? stall it onto the ground, else it would keep on flying wouldnt it?:ok:

[sir.pratt]

Ah, now i get it. I land the aeroplane without increasing the angle of attack and without increasing the nose attitude. Who would have thought!

i never said don't flare. just that aoa increases for the same attitude with a lowering airspeed.

[the wizard of auz]

You obviously don't get it. As the aircraft slows, you WILL need to increase AoA to maintain level flight. This is the hold off stage. if you increase AoA at a slightly slower rate than the aircraft is sinking, it will settle onto the runway.
Not that hard. :)

[4SPOOLED]

i never said don't flare. just that aoa increases for the same attitude with a lowering airspeed.

How can AOA increase for the same attitude with a lowering airspeed?:confused:

As Attitude increases so does AOA while Airspeed decreases.....

Lesson 5, Stalling......

And considering you fly a pitts, one would think you were a gun on the Aeros mate, you should know better than that!

[Ratshit]

Fly parallel with the runway, close the throttle and try not to land her by increasing AOA and trying to maintain height a couple of foot above the runway, she will do a perfect touch down everytime as long as you have the numbers over the fence. 4S

4SPOOLED: I am happy to admit it when I have the bull by its dick instead of its horns, but one would hope that your flying is better than your english expression!

".. try not to land her by increasing AOA .."

maybe better put as

".. try to keep her flying by increasing AOA .." (which is what I think you mean)

Cheers :ok:

R:cool:

[sir.pratt]

How can AOA increase for the same attitude with a lowering airspeed?:confused:
As Attitude increases so does AOA while Airspeed decreases.....
Lesson 5, Stalling......
And considering you fly a pitts, one would think you were a gun on the Aeros mate, you should know better than that!

i never was able to explain a barrell roll without using my hands....

so tell me what happens to aoa for a reduction in airspeed with the same nose attitude? surely if airspeed decays sufficiently with the nose attitude remaining constant, aoa will increase to such an angle that the wing will stall? i always thought that aoa was relative to freestream velocity, therefore reduce freestream velocity, maintain attitude, increase alpha.

[ContactMeNow]

I have flown 182s both light (doing PJE) and heavy (coming down with jumpers and ferrying stuff around).

The C182 is a dream to land, its all about airspeed over the fence! if your light then 60kts over the fence would be plenty with up to 30 degrees of flap, I normally landed flapless (can get down just that bit quicker) and I was over the fence at no more than 65kts with FULL BACK TRIM/NOSE UP and just easing forward on the controls to maintain a stable approach. On all occasions when light I would run out of trim, but a positive round out, with full nose up trim will result in a nice landing everytime, provided that the speed is right!

When slightly heavier, 10-30 degrees of flap worked fine just ensure your over that fence at 65kts. When I got bored I would get the 40 degree's of flap out and come over the fence at 55-60kts. Most of the time when light 40 degrees of flap would result in a flatish landing, still not a 3 pointer, but one hell of a short-field landing :ok: although only one up. Never tried it when "heavy".

The best tip I can give you is ensure that your at your target speed of not more than 65kts. This also depends on the model C182 your flying, the older ones with the more laminar flow wing I find tend to ballon less, maybe the newer models (C182 P and newer) like a bit more a a slower approach, due to that extra bit of lift being produced by the wings??? Personal opinon on that one! :cool:

Done well over 500 landings in a C182 in 6 months, so I can kinda say im fairly current at this. From what you have said 80kts seems a bit fast for me, bring the speed back and you should be fine :ok:

Happy landings mate!
CMN :E

[haughtney1]

60-65kts across the fence..........smoothy reducing power and at the sametime comencing the roundout and flare around 10' off the strip...so that as you run out of elevator/you also close the throttle/and the wheels rumble on the strip/as the 182 stalls...............thats the "hands on approach" rather than all this AOA stuff:ok:
As the guy who taught me to fly years ago said, (in a 172 during the landing flare)..."back back back back back" (on the elevator):)

I should add, if you do this right...you end up using the throttle to finesse your touchdown point, and control how smoothly you land, works a treat in all highwing Cessna's up to and including the C208.

[heywatchthis]

Use to love flying the early model 182's, much better than the later models! Use to have fun, on landing as you start the flare add enough power to arrest the sink rate just hovering down the runway at a foot or two. It would fly at 40 kts!! I did just under 700 hrs in 182's dropping meat. Apart from the 180/185 the 182 is one of cessnas geatest inventions! One of the only true 4 place aircraft. Full tanks, four bums and a few swags, no worries!

[gassed budgie]

well a performance landing you close the throttle in the flare and try for a more positive landing (ie harder impact) almost touching all three wheels at once

Not in my aeroplane you don't. You teach anyone to land a 182 like that, performance landing or not, you'll be paying for the new firewall.
Harder impact........almost all three wheels at once.......I'm whincing whilst I think about. I can almost hear the firewall buckling from here!

The C182 is a dream to land, its all about airspeed over the fence

Sorry, but no it's not. You can land a 182 (or any other common GA type) successfully whether it's doing 50 kts or a 120 kts over the fence.

I'm interested to see what's being said here as I had a relatively low time pilot in the 182 a couple of days ago conducting circuts. All of his flying over the last 5 years has been in an A36. His general flying was to an acceptable standard, but it was the landings that needed more than a little attention. We spent some time before strapping ourselves in discussing the landing technique and what he would be looking for to achieve the desired result.
I can say, that after the session of circuts he understood what was required and was landing the 182 very nicely indeed. He later confided to me that the one point I had been hammering him about had never actually been mentioned to him, certainly not in the context of landing the aeroplane.
This reminds me of a rather large and weighty document that I was given a number of years ago to read and make some suggestions on.
It was (I think) put together by the 182 owners association, the CPA Australia and someone else of great import. It stated right at the beginning of the document that 63% of all 182 accidents/incidents were landing related and that of these most involved damage to front end of the aircraft (wrinkled firewalls, etc).
I immediately turned to the appropriate section to see what recomendations were being made to combat this problem and was amazed to find that in a volume of such weight and of such length and of so many, many words and diagrams, it was dealt with in one very small paragraph and in one short sentence in particular.
And what was the recomendation ? Well, we evidentally have to land the aeroplane on the main wheels first. You don't say!
Any pilot worth his own salt knows that of course.
But how do we actually go about doing that ?
Where do we find that elusive piece of information that allows us to do this ? Is it an easy thing to determine or see ? Well I think, yes it is.
It's the one thing that when you get right, will allow everything else to fall into place. It has been mentioned above and its something that even to this day I at times have to remind myself to do and make a conscious effort to look for.

[barit1]

The objective in most light aircraft, in steady winds, is to do an approach to a power-off stall at about two feet altitude. When she "pays off" (my father's term) there won't be enough energy left to bounce; speed's so low only minimal braking is needed; and if brakes and tires come out of your wallet, you've done well by yourself.

Gusty winds are another story; up to 80 kt might be appropriate so you have plenty of control authority.

[FullySickBro]

Gassed Budgie,

I'd be interested to know how you land a 182 at 120kts!! Sounds like a beat up a little too close to the ground :}

65kts
Keep nose wheel off the ground (Less flap can help)

Thats about it I'd reackon, the greasers will come through practise. No need to over analyse, they're a breeze to land :ok:

[beaver_rotate]

although only one up. Never tried it when "heavy". CMN :E

Sorry bit new to your lingo, could you explain the above??

[barit1]

Gassed Budgie,

I'd be interested to know how you land a 182 at 120kts!! Sounds like a beat up a little too close to the ground :}



Sounds like a setup for wheelbarrowing to me! With a touch of crosswind, and only the nosewheel making contact, your nice tame trigear will behave like a taildragger -- and try to swap ends.

...To say nothing of the runway required (I soloed on 2200' of grass, often used a 1800' crosswind strip, have flown a loaded 172 out of 1500' regularly). Learn to conserve runway, and you conserve a lot of other things too. :ok:

Take that 182 up to 3000-4000' and practice slow flight - find the actual power-off stall speed,
then get comfortable maintaining 20% above that for several minutes at a time. Practice slow turns, pick up and lose a few knots, and learn how stable the plane is in this condition. Then go back and shoot some landings. (This from a guy who instructed in T-6 Harvards 65 years ago, and never had a student ding up an airplane!)

[M.25]

Sorry, but no it's not. You can land a 182 (or any other common GA type) successfully whether it's doing 50 kts or a 120 kts over the fence.

I agree with gassed budgie on this. There are certainly some interesting suggestions here though!

Sounds like a setup for wheelbarrowing to me!
Why should crossing the fence at 120kts cause a wheelbarrow landing?

There are many reasons why it is recommended to cross the threshold at a certain speed, but there is no reason why a fast approach couldn’t be followed by a good touchdown.

Round out, close the throttle, fly level a few feet off the runway – progressively raising the nose to maintain altitude whilst the speed bleeds off. Once the nose is in the landing attitude, let the aircraft settle onto the ground. The touchdown speed shouldn’t change. Simple!

Double Donk –
Maybe you could look at perfecting your stick and rudder – particularly at lower speeds. One way to do this might be to practice some low passes. Round out as normal, then feed some power back in to fly the length of the runway at normal ‘hold-off’ height and near landing speed (go-around at a safe point though!) The first couple might be a bit wobbly, but once you can do it smoothly and accurately your landings should improve.

Ps. You might want to ask your instructor why you are landing with ½ flap and 80kts to.

[gassed budgie]

Round out, close the throttle, fly level a few feet off the runway – progressively raising the nose to maintain altitude whilst the speed bleeds off. Once the nose is in the landing attitude, let the aircraft settle onto the ground. The touchdown speed shouldn’t change. Simple!

M.25, you bewty! The aircraft must be landed with the aircraft in the landing attitude.
Attitude is the key word. When we look towards the end of the runway as we round out and hold off, what are we actually looking for ?
We're establishing how high or low the nose might be i.e. the attitude of the aircraft. If it's not where it needs to be, you as the PIC should be and most definitely have to do something about it.
We've probably all seen at some stage an aircraft porpising down the runway, with every bounce getting higher and nastier, it usually being about the fifth impact where the nose wheel comes off.
So why this example ? Because it demonstrates the absolute lack of any sort of attitude control by the pilot. What was he thinking ? What was he doing to resolve the situation ? Not a lot, he was just along for the ride.
We always look for a climb attitude, straight and level attitude, descent attitude etc, when we are out aviating.
I can assure you, it's no different when we land the aeroplane.
It's attitude, attitude, attitude!
So Double Donk, next time your out bashing the circut in the 182 get your instructor to demonstrate what attitude you should be aiming for and make sure that when you're out on your own you always note the attitude of the aircraft when you round out and hold off. If it's not right, fix it.
If you get the attitude right, everything else will fall into place.

[Andy_RR]

Why should crossing the fence at 120kts cause a wheelbarrow landing?

At 120kts, that'd be the fence of the previous paddock then, eh?

[Mount'in Man]

You can land a 182 (or any other common GA type) successfully whether it's doing 50 kts or a 120 kts over the fence.

Hi Budgie, what sort of gas are you sniffing there boy!
I always prefer to put the wheels on the ground early so I can get the tires (and the brakes) working for me ... not strain the wires at the far end fence in the hope of staying off the freeway!


:}

[Centaurus]

Beaver Rotate. You have been fed wrong information that can cause you grief if applied to certain types. The 1.3 Vs is based on CAS not IAS and for example the C152 can be up to 12 knots difference.

[Centaurus]

Wizrad of Auz. Yet another GA myth rears its head.

unless your doing a performance landing,

if what you mean by a "performance landing" is nothing more than the recommended approach speed at 50 ft then by definition you will float as the speed bleeds off. The "performance" landing is carried out by airliners on every landing so there is nothing special about it. Presumably you wish to touch down at the point of stall from the POH recommended speed over the fence then you have no choice except to float some way while holding off to dissipate airspeed. Airliners are landed with flying speed because on touch down they have spoilers that dump weight on the wheels and allow more tyre contact for more efficient braking.

The true "short field" landing is done on aircraft carriers where the over the fence speed aimed at is considerably less than an approach to a long runway.

The short field landing espoused in Cessna POH is a normal 1.3Vs or thereabouts and will involve a float period. If you try and "plant" the aircraft with flying speed then not only will you certainly run the risk of bouncing but the landing run will be longer because of the wheels skidding due to lift still on the wings. The term "performance" landing simply means a normal landing as seen every day with the big jets.

[Ratshit]

Who would have thought you could fill 3 pages with posts on how to land such a simple and easy to fly (and land) aircraft as the C182!

Imagine what we could do if we were dealing with something as compex and difficult to fly as a ....................... ????????????????????

R:cool:

[the wizard of auz]

Centaurus, Mate I don't fly airliners, so I wouldn't know squat about them, although I do fly in conditions that involve me landing on unimproved areas on a pretty regular basis(several times daily, and they aint airstrips). I can assure you there is a method to get a GA type of aircraft on the ground with minimum to no float and stopped in a surprisingly short distance. No its not in the POH, but it can be done, and safely.

[4SPOOLED]

4SPOOLED: I am happy to admit it when I have the bull by its dick instead of its horns, but one would hope that your flying is better than your english expression!

".. try not to land her by increasing AOA .."

maybe better put as

".. try to keep her flying by increasing AOA .." (which is what I think you mean)

Cheers :ok:

R:cool:

I meant what i said.

When teaching a student to land, you simply first, get them to fly a low approach using coordinated aileron and rudder to maintain a few feet above the runway with 20 flap and 2100 rpm.

Next circuit you get them to do the same thing, but you control the throttle, you then close the throttle slowly while they increase AOA trying to maintain height above the runway. Main wheels touch down aircraft has landed you then say " i have control, brake and congratulate them for just landing the aircraft. Student full of confidence next circuit after just landing aircraft all by themselves repeats having no fear of the ground anymore and lands though a tad rough and has completed their first unassisted landing. We as CPL's still use this technique today, round out, fly level, close throttle, hold off (flare) and main wheels touch, simple! So in in actual fact the way to land an aircraft is to try not to!!!

How does that bull dick feel? i seen a good movie called king ping when he milks a bull thinking it was a cow.....many laughs!

4S

[4SPOOLED]

i never was able to explain a barrell roll without using my hands....
so tell me what happens to aoa for a reduction in airspeed with the same nose attitude? surely if airspeed decays sufficiently with the nose attitude remaining constant, aoa will increase to such an angle that the wing will stall? i always thought that aoa was relative to freestream velocity, therefore reduce freestream velocity, maintain attitude, increase alpha.

The AOA is always relative to your Nose attitude no matter where the relative airflow is coming from, If you are in a nose dive or climbing vertically as the airflow is relative to the chord and the nose attitude dictates your AOA.....

I wise man once told me POF to a pilot is like mortor to a bricklayer, understand whats happening and you can use aerodynamics and your sound knowledge of them to fly the aircraft far better!

[4SPOOLED]

[QUOTE=gassed budgie;3010661]Not in my aeroplane you don't. You teach anyone to land a 182 like that, performance landing or not, you'll be paying for the new firewall.
Harder impact........almost all three wheels at once.......I'm whincing whilst I think about. I can almost hear the firewall buckling from here!

Sorry, but no it's not. You can land a 182 (or any other common GA type) successfully whether it's doing 50 kts or a 120 kts over the fence.
[QUOTE]

I will fly an aircraft however my boss tells me to fly it, if i disagree or not, its the bosses aircraft.

On a brighter note, i dont like working for free meatbombing which most 182's are used for, so i doubt ill be flying for you anytime soon and if you think you can land a 182 at 120kts i dont think i want to work for you anytime soon!:ok:

[Ratshit]

4SPOOLED

I did eventually figure out what you are trying to say, but you remain blissfully oblivious to the inherant abiguity of your original post which I, like most most other readers (by their responses), read as

"try not to land by (NOT) increasing AOA"

R:cool:

[sir.pratt]

The AOA is always relative to your Nose attitude no matter where the relative airflow is coming from, If you are in a nose dive or climbing vertically as the airflow is relative to the chord and the nose attitude dictates your AOA.....
!

i have no idea what that means. afaik aoa is a result of r.a.f and chord. chord is naturally relative to the longitudinal axis of the a/c, so i guess by default r.a.f is relative to attitude, but as raf is also relative to airspeed, shouldn't a steady climb at 500fpm and 100kts should have the same (or very similar) aoa as straight and level and 100kts? you haven't changed the speed, just the attitude, so aoa shouldn't change.

[kair1234]

i have no idea what that means. afaik aoa is a result of r.a.f and chord. chord is naturally relative to the longitudinal axis of the a/c, so i guess by default r.a.f is relative to attitude, but as raf is also relative to airspeed, shouldn't a steady climb at 500fpm and 100kts should have the same (or very similar) aoa as straight and level and 100kts? you haven't changed the speed, just the attitude, so aoa shouldn't change.

Does this sound right. The formula for lift is L = CL x p x V2/2 x A

L is Lift
CL is Coefficient of lift
P is density of air
V2 is airspeed squared
A is surface area of wing

Density, airspeed and surface area of wing dont change. So climbing compared to level flight you need more lift and to get more lift you need to increase the coefficient of lift. How do you increase the coefficient of lift, you increase the angle of attack (presuming not past the stall).

[ContactMeNow]

[quote=gassed budgie;3010661
On a brighter note, i dont like working for free meatbombing which most 182's are used for, so i doubt ill be flying for you anytime soon and if you think you can land a 182 at 120kts i dont think i want to work for you anytime soon!:ok:

Dont assume anything in life, not only can you fly a C182 for meatbombing, but you can also get paid to do it :ok:

Happy landings

CMN :D

[Chimbu chuckles]

kair1234 aeroplanes climb when they have an excess of thrust over that required for straight and level flight...otherwise service ceilings would be meaningless. An aeroplane wing in a steady climb has pretty much the same AoA as level flight but produces less lift because it is travelling through the air slower... but the vertical componant of thrust works in concert with the lift being produced and the aeroplane climbs...until such time as excess thrust = O and then no matter what you do with the AoA the aeroplane stops climbing.

4spooled AoA is the angle between the chord of the wing and the relative airflow...given the wing has an angle of incidence the chord will never align with 'the nose attitude'.

If you were flying along in your C182 and reduced the power to idle while holding the aircraft attitude unchanged the aircraft would descend...that descent would change the vector (give it a verticle component) of the relative airflow and you would have an increased AoA.

rat**** is not alone in wondering HTF the subject of landing a C182 could be so complex as to require several pages.:ugh:

The AOA is always relative to your Nose attitude no matter where the relative airflow is coming from,If you are in a nose dive or climbing vertically as the airflow is relative to the chord and the nose attitude dictates your AOA.....

I wise man once told me POF to a pilot is like mortor to a bricklayer, understand whats happening and you can use aerodynamics and your sound knowledge of them to fly the aircraft far better!

Sweet Jesus:ugh:

Edit:

You never 'stall' an aeroplane landing it unless you **** up...if you time it right you will have the stall warning sound as you touchdown but that occurrs 5kts or so before the actual stall AoA is reached. What you are doing is trying to achieve the correct landing attitude at an altitude of a few inches coincident with the speed being so low that the wings can no longer support the aircrafts weight at 1g and the aircraft settles gently onto the ground. If you actually stall the nose drops and you will likely damage the nosewheel. Even landing taildraggers in what is known as a 'full stall' landing you don't actually stall...it's a missnomer.

To answer the original question what works in every aeroplane is to approach at the correct speed, reduce the power to idle at the correct altitude, round out and flare the aircraft to the correct attitude and hold that attitude until the aeroplane lands...the skill comes from being able to put all that together consistantly in varying conditions. Cessnas particularly do NOT like excess speed. Anything more than 65kts in a C182 is asking for trouble...55-60kts lightly loaded.

If you actually read the POH you will see that the speeds quoted are those to be acheived at 50 feet. The expectation is you would, at 50', smoothly reduce the power to idle, fly down and gently roundout before flaring into the correct landing attitude...and landing. What causes so much anxst is that people insist on being at 1.3Vs speed at 5' rather than 50'. That is what leads to excess floating and forcing the aeroplane onto the ground causing the firewall damage someone alludes to above.

I think you need to go back to flying school mate because the technique i explained is how WE TEACH STUDENTS TO LAND IN THE FIRST PLACE

Glad i dont have to instruct now ay!

And Someone asked about it being differant to a performance landing? well a performance landing you close the throttle in the flare and try for a more positive landing (ie harder impact) almost touching all three wheels at once.

If you dont land rat**** how i explained in the above post, i would love to hear your technique, would be interesting to talk about it with the boys over a few beers tonight!


I actually find it difficult to believe you ever instructed 4spooled.

[pakeha-boy]

reading some of these posts.....I now know why aircraft crash:ugh:

[scroogee]

Chimbu, "aeroplanes climb when they have an excess of thrust over that required for straight and level flight" at the same airspeed. I had these four words pointed out to me during my instructors flight test.

scroogee

[Sunfish]

To complete this thread you need a comment from a pratt like me, who is now an expert in how not to land a Cessna. I can absoluteley confirm that if you are above the reference sped in the POH by more than about five knots you will bounce, or float and bounce.

As for the idea that if you can land a C150 you can land any Cessna, its BS. The C150 has very little momentum, and its easy for a student to slow it up and get the right reference speed, just close the throttle and she slows down quite quickly. It didn't want to bounce much at all (perhaps because it was very tired, arthritic and worn out:} )

The C172 and 182 are a different matter they will always bounce if you get to the threshold at more than about five knots above Vref.

I love this quote from Mr. Budgerigar:

We're establishing how high or low the nose might be i.e. the attitude of the aircraft. If it's not where it needs to be, you as the PIC should be and most definitely have to do something about it.
We've probably all seen at some stage an aircraft porpising down the runway, with every bounce getting higher and nastier, it usually being about the fifth impact where the nose wheel comes off.
So why this example ? Because it demonstrates the absolute lack of any sort of attitude control by the pilot. What was he thinking ? What was he doing to resolve the situation ? Not a lot, he was just along for the ride.

Let me tell you a story. I did my C172 endorsement in very few hours in nice windy weather. Previous experience was the C150 and "landomatic" Warrior.

The following week, being a conscientous so and so, I decided to do an hours circuits to hone my C172 technique. Now flying school SOP's add a few knots to whats in the POH, and then being new to the game and totally unaware of the C172 "bouncability" I came over the fence at a good 70+ knots, blissfully unaware of what I was setting myself up for.

The first bounce was about twenty feet skywards. The resulting series of three bounces, each one bigger than the last are not caused by stupidity, but by a terrified pilot attempting to compensate, resulting in whats called PIO - pilot induced oscillation, the pilots reactions being about half a second behind the aircraft - however I only discovered this afterwards. And no, I didn't think of doing a go around after the first bounce because I was completely taken by surprise. And no, I didn't simply hold the nose up to "protect the nosewheel" twenty feet in the air.

After three determined attempts to tame the beast, each one worse than the last, a very kind tower controller ordered me in on a pretext, hoping I suspect to preserve the integrity of the runway. I'd creased the firewall below the battery box.

The only consolation after paying the $1500 excess, was that there were three more C172's in the repair facility damaged far worse than mine from doing the same thing. One even had the floor pushed up. I have since watched with incredulity a C172 preserve it wheels and tyres by floating almost the entire length of YMMB 17R (1240m)

The combination that caught me was too much speed on threshold - which was masked in my endorsement by a nice headwind to some extent (less kinetic energy), and the size of the bounce, which overcame the training of never letting the yoke go forward, as practiced on the docile C150.

Of course after considerable retraining, landing one now is positively pleasurable - keep the elevator coming back and hold off. The best way to land the C172 is to try and keep it flying.

All right, tear me apart.

[Chimbu chuckles]

scroog you're a pedant:ok:

Its been 23+ yrs since I passed my instructors rating and instructed at this level...i am getting old:{

[training wheels]

The AOA is always relative to your Nose attitude no matter where the relative airflow is coming from, ....

Sorry, but that's incorrect. AoA is the angle between the chordline and the relative airflow. This is one of the very first things taught in POF.

[Ratshit]

Sunfish

I see nothing in your post that moves me to resile from my view that anyone who has been taught to land a C150 properly should have little difficulty with the rest of the Cessna SE trikes.

Cheers

R:cool:

PS: Yes, I do understand that the target appr speed may differ slightly - but the rest of it is just the same.

[the wizard of auz]

I did my C172 endorsement in very few hours in nice windy weather.
There is no such thing as a 172 endorsement. maybe a check flight.
if it took you a few hours to master the 172 after flying anything else, I would strongly suggest you take up stamp collecting.
Just for the record, I did one circuit in a 172, at about three hours after my GFPT and then was signed out to use it.
What was your throttle hand doing while you were bouncing down the runway?. could be you need to change instructors and find one that will teach you the correct bounce recovery procedure other than hold your attitude. that will most likely cause you to stall a few feet high and the nose wheel will suffer far worse than it did.
I guess your coming out of retirement now sunfish. :}

[flywatcher]

Four bent 172's in the hangar at the same time, all with firewall damage. Who is teaching these people? What a reflection on the industry as a whole if training standards are so abysmal. How can anybody be so cruel to a perfectly good aircraft. Jesus wept. John 11-35

[4SPOOLED]

I give up:ugh:

Your nose attitude dictates the AOA and the AOA is the angle between the chord and the relative airflow.......

We climb because of excess thrust as weight is more than lift in a climb due to the vertical component of lift reducing in the climb as lift is perpendicular to the relative airflow, and the more excess thrust we have the steeper we can climb, ie a FA18 climbing near vertical.

Stick to the numbers in your 182 POH, you will land it well with time on type as we all do, and its fruitless debating it, because nothing beats practise in the aircraft.

Safe flying boys and girls

4S

[Sunfish]

With the greatest of respect, there is "learning" and there is "learning". Knowing how little I know, I now try and seek out the great and good among the instructor community and never pass up an opportunity to fly with a different instructor when chance offers it.

I still find flying educational, delightful, useful, and my only regret is that I didn't start about 30 years ago. I used to sit in the cockpits of B727's, 767's during overhaul at lunchtime looking blankly at the controls (when I wasn't bowling awfully to wombat). It was a good thing for AN that I was not learning to fly at the time.

[4SPOOLED]

I will agree with you Sunfish that a 172 can be a tad more "floaty" than a 152. It can catch you by surprise if you let it, however its just a big 152 plus 5knots.

I still fly them regulary myself and after usually flying heavier types, it spins me out still how much they get affected by a little bit of wind. I still occasionaly get caught if i smoke it in a tad fast trying to save some time on the switch! :{

Safe flying Sunfish, at least someone is prepared to admit they were not born an aviation prodigy that could do no wrong:ok: Im also glad you learnt from it and it didnt scare you off!

[training wheels]

Your nose attitude dictates the AOA and the AOA is the angle between the chord and the relative airflow.......

Sorry mate, not having a go at ya as we all do indeed make mistakes, but this ain't true either. You can have a low nose attitude and still have a high enough angle attack to invoke a stall. Nose attitude is not the same as AoA.

Take a look at this article from Flight Safety Australia;

http://www.casa.gov.au/fsa/2000/sep/FSA34-35.pdf

Angle of attack is not nose attitude. It is the angle formed between the chord line of an aerofoil and the relative airflow or relative wind.

If you were an instructor, then check out your briefing notes on "stalls". This point shoud have been covered in the "stalls" brief.

Cheers and safe flying :)

[training wheels]

I used to sit in the cockpits of B727's, 767's during overhaul at lunchtime looking blankly at the controls
..and making whhooooooish whhoooosh noises with your mouth, no doubt! :E :)

[BrokenConrod]

"Angle of attack is not nose attitude. It is the angle formed between the chord line of an aerofoil and the relative airflow or relative wind"

"No matter what the attitude or airspeed, if you pull on the stick to the critical angle, you will stall"

"Although most people associate stalling with high attitudes and low speeds a stall can occur in a 45-degree descent at 200kt, and yet an aircraft can be unstalled in a vertical climb at 5kt as long as the angle of attack is less than the critical angle"

Stalling myths
Impress your friends with these simple stalling one liners.
1. Friend: “Don’t bank too steep! You increase the risk of stalling!”
You: Bank is unrelated to stalling. Stalling is a function of angle of attack. Pulling, in the turn causes the stall.
2. Friend: “What speed does she stall at, mate?”
You: Any speed you like! But always at the critical angle of attack.
3. Friend: “If you cross the controls you will increase the danger of stalling!”
You: Crossing the controls cannot possibly, on its own, stall the aeroplane. If that was the case sideslipping approaches would be impossible. However, if you increase the angle of attack to around 16 degrees, you will stall and that’s where there’s trouble: yaw + stall = spin.4. Friend: “How can you tell me that you can pull the nose up 45 degrees above the horizon when it stalls at a lower angle?”
You: Angle of attack and nose attitude are not the same. Think about a loop. We point in every direction in pitch, but we do not stall unless we pull to the stall position.5. Friend: How fast do you have to go to get into a high speed stall?
You: A high speed stall occurs any time when you pull to the stalling angle above the published power-off 1G stalling speed. So, how fast? Just about any speed you like up to and beyond Vne.

FLIGHT SAFETY AUSTRALIA, SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2000

[4SPOOLED]

Sorry mate, not having a go at ya as we all do indeed make mistakes, but this ain't true either. You can have a low nose attitude and still have a high enough angle attack to invoke a stall. Nose attitude is not the same as AoA.
Take a look at this article from Flight Safety Australia;
http://www.casa.gov.au/fsa/2000/sep/FSA34-35.pdf
If you were an instructor, then check out your briefing notes on "stalls". This point shoud have been covered in the "stalls" brief.
Cheers and safe flying :)

If you are talking about a Dynamic stall then, yes you can have a low nose attitude in relation to the horizon to invoke a stall, however i was not talking about stalling!

If you want to also get smart a dynamic stall when you exceed the critical angle usually on a high speed decent followed by an abrupt pull up, the nose attitude and AOA in relation the the relative airflow is still at or exceeding the 16 degree angle of attack required for a stall.

A stall is not an airspeed problem but rather a AOA problem, and AOA is still relative to nose attitude!!

We could debate this crap all day really!

[gassed budgie]

If you want to also get smart a dynamic stall when you exceed the critical angle usually on a high speed decent followed by an abrupt pull up, the nose attitude and AOA in relation the the relative airflow is still at or exceeding the 16 degree angle of attack required for a stall


Now 4S. If you could hear how slow I'm typing, you'd have some idea of how slow I'm thinkin'. Your just makin' it too hard for me to fathom what your on about at times. Kings English please.

[Miraz]

A stall is not an airspeed problem but rather a AOA problem, and AOA is still relative to nose attitude!!


AOA = Pitch Attitude + Angle of Incidence - Angle of flight path

Whilst it is fair to assume that the angle of incidence is fixed during your flight (excluding flaps or other moveable surfaces that may effectively alter the incidence angle), that still leaves means that AOA vs Attitude will vary with the flight path.

Am I missing something?

[4SPOOLED]

the nose of the aircraft is connected to the damn wing isnt it? so its fair to assume that what ever the nose does the wing will also do. Once you grasp that concept, you consider where the relative airflow is coming from! if you are in a nose dive the relative air flow is now coming at you from the ground!, pitch the nose up to hard and fast to return to straight and level, or try and climb and the wing exceeds the critical angle, usually around 16 degrees and you have a stall!

Whatever the nose is doing the wing is also doing right? just as in effects of controls you demonstrate that you have full control of roll pitch and yaw in any attitude.

[Miraz]

consider where the relative airflow is coming from! if you are in a nose dive the relative air flow is now coming at you from the ground! Whatever the nose is doing the wing is also doing right? just as in effects of controls you demonstrate that you have full control of roll pitch and yaw in any attitude.

Err...no - your argument only holds true whilst the aircraft is on the ground.

Consider the following simplified situations:-

Scenario 1 - Nose on the horizon(zero pitch), airspeed low - hence the wing is generating relatively little lift and accordingly the aircraft is descending

Scenario 2 - Nose on the horizon (zero pitch), airspeed high - wing is generating lots of lift and accordingly the aircraft is ascending

The AOA is higher in the first scenario, although the nose is pointed in the same direction in both cases.

[sailing]

I spent a few years doing joy flights in a 172 and para drops in a 182. The easy way to land them is to do a proper hold-off, and let the stall do the actual landing for you. The way to know you've held off enough is to hear the stall warning. Keep pulling till you hear it, then a bit more! And yes, pax would sometimes ask what the noise was, so I'd tell them.:)

[ContactMeNow]

I spent a few years doing joy flights in a 172 and para drops in a 182. The easy way to land them is to do a proper hold-off, and let the stall do the actual landing for you. The way to know you've held off enough is to hear the stall warning. Keep pulling till you hear it, then a bit more! And yes, pax would sometimes ask what the noise was, so I'd tell them.:)

I always said, it was the sound of a good landing :E

Only heard it once :ugh:

CMN :}

[4SPOOLED]

Err...no - your argument only holds true whilst the aircraft is on the ground.

Consider the following simplified situations:-

Scenario 1 - Nose on the horizon(zero pitch), airspeed low - hence the wing is generating relatively little lift and accordingly the aircraft is descending

The relative airflow is now coming from the direction you are descending, so high AOA and nose attitude relative to the airflow in descent.


Scenario 2 - Nose on the horizon (zero pitch), airspeed high - wing is generating lots of lift and accordingly the aircraft is ascending

The relative airflow is now coming from the direction you are climbing in, so high AOA and nose attitude accordingly :ok:

[sailing]

The relative airflow is now coming from the direction you are descending, so high AOA and nose attitude relative to the airflow in descent.



The relative airflow is now coming from the direction you are climbing in, so high AOA and nose attitude accordingly :ok:

I think the problem in this discussion is that 4SPOOLED knows what's going on, but thinks that 'nose attitude' is measured against relative airflow, as AoA is.
I, and I think most others here, think that 'nose attitude' is the angle between the longitudinal axis and the horizontal???? ie. the attitude as seen looking out the front window.
What say you, 4S?

[4SPOOLED]

I think the problem in this discussion is that 4SPOOLED knows what's going on, but thinks that 'nose attitude' is measured against relative airflow, as AoA is.
I, and I think most others here, think that 'nose attitude' is the angle between the longitudinal axis and the horizontal???? ie. the attitude as seen looking out the front window.
What say you, 4S?

Yes!

But its just a differant spin on the same ****! but most of the time you refer to the attitude against the horizon just as the little instrument called the AH does!

Play around with aeros though and you realise that attitude can mean a whole lot more than the horizon!

Safe flying Guys and Gals!

[barit1]

Back in the good old days there used to be a highly sophisticated instrument called a "wool tuft". If you attached it to a scrap of wire out in front of the leading edge (maybe 6"-12" fwd) it could give you an INTERACTIVE AERO LESSON (at least that's what I think they called it).

I bet if I started making them I could sell them for $500 or more - the lessons learned would be worth many times that, so it should be a real bargain, don't you think? :}

[Chimbu chuckles]

Play around with aeros though and you realise that attitude can mean a whole lot more than the horizon!

:confused:

'Hole' and 'stop digging' spring to mind.:E

[Sunfish]

Barit, you can buy those "wool tuft" thingies for Cessnas at most pilot shops. I think they are called "Pitot Covers":}

[pulse1]

A UK AAIB bulletin published today on a landing accident to a 182 said:

"The AOPA study showed that landing was the phase of flight when most Cessna 182 accidents occurred, and that the type had a greater proportion of hard landing accidents relative to other comparable types. The study noted that common factors in accidents were: pilots transitioning from types of aircraft with lighter elevator controls; a forward centre of gravity, which typically occurred with two persons on board, and poor speed control on short finals."

[sailing]

:confused:

'Hole' and 'stop digging' spring to mind.:E

I don't think he can hear you as his ears are already below ground level!

[sir.pratt]

The relative airflow is now coming from the direction you are climbing in, so high AOA and nose attitude accordingly :ok:

(types slowly) how........if the r.a.f is coming from the 'direction you are climbing in', how can you have a high aoa? wouldn't the aoa be low (high forward airspeed), but the ATTITUDE be high? wouldn't a high aoa lead to a stall? 16deg i think you've quoted

[Wheeler]

Getting back to the point, I have a lot of sympathy with Double Donk and still have 'whoops' even after 500hrs in the 182.. Yes, I can embarass myself quite easily in a 182. The trick is holding off or getting it to poke its nose up before the mains contact - sometimes that nose wheel just won't come up. I reckon speed is the key but if you are too slow (and some of those saying 60-65 on final might be a tad slow? 80 certainly is far too fast), there is not enough wind going over the elevators and the nose will not come up no matter how hard you pull, especially with full flap and no-one in the back - the result is usually bang or bounce. Rounding out at the correct height is very important with 182's - start pulling too early - and guess what? - bang!

The RG is harder than the fixed version, probably because it has those little wheels, apparently shorter back legs (so harder to keep off the nosewheel) and the bigger heavier (but much better!) Lycoming up front. Bumpy gravel runways certainly exacerbate this situation. Having said all of that, yeah they are easy enough to land safely but personally I find greasers fewer and farer between - However, comparisons above with 152's and 172's are superfluous. The basic technique might be the same but RG's in particular are much heavier and far less forgiving if you don't fly the numbers and round out/hold-off accurately - which of course is why I still have my 'whoopses'.

[JulieFlyGal]

I give up:ugh:

Your nose attitude dictates the AOA and the AOA is the angle between the chord and the relative airflow.......

so are you saying nose attitude and angle of attack are the same thing? all theory books i've read on aerodynamics explicitly says it's not.

[185skywagon]

there is not enough wind going over the elevators and the nose will not come up no matter how hard you pull, especially with full flap and no-one in the back
I would bet that, in this config, the aircraft would outside the forward CoG envelope. Most people do not give this much thought. Put some stuff in the back. My old 182A flight manual stipulated the addition of weight in the baggage compartment when only the front seats were occupied.

It certainly is the case with nearly all C180/185's.

[FullySickBro]

Farrkkk me it ain't that hard!!! :rolleyes:

[bushy]

Cessnas engaged in para dropping often have a forwrad Cof G,(outside limits?) due not only to having no weight in the back when landing, but also due to the weight of the seats that have been removed.
It's common.

[Ratshit]

5 pages on how to land a C182!

What a crock of sh*t!

R:cool:

[gassed budgie]

However, it is best not to teach students to "keep raising the attitude in the hold off". It is better to get them to "prevent the aircraft from sinking by looking at the far end of the runway", as this will prevent them thinking about attitude (and sometimes ballooning).

I beg to differ D_7. The aircrafts attitude is exactly what a student should be being looking for and thinking about when landing an aircraft.
If you watch enough aircraft shooting touch and goes, it becomes obvious after a short period of time that 4 out of 5 pilots in those aircraft weren't thinking about too much of anything at all, certainly not attitude. And that's a shame.