Asking HELP about Flare Technique

[SRover40]

Always appreciate your sincere replies.....

I'm a A320 F/O and I've flown my acft about 2 years...
This is my first Jetliner and recently I'm experiencing some big
troubling with flare ...
===================================================
My problem is " Im most cases (sadly....) I do floating at 5 feet...
always 5 feet ...." consequently, at 5 feet airplane lose airspeed and
approach stall speed, then airplane starts falling down fast ....
The result ===> Not a soft Landing.....
===================================================
After setting Thrust idle at about 20~30 feet , I try to look at the end
of the runway and try to get a feeling of going down..down...down....
But it's never easy for me so far....

I'm really waiting for some advices from experienced fellow aviators....

Thx , as always ....

[Olendirk]

well, 2 years, makes abou 1500h. some people say, between 1000 and 1500h you get a big punch. i had it also, the point is, you cant land anymore. its like youre sitting in the aircraft for the first time. no worries. me it helped to fly the aircraft TO the ground, means start the break or flare very very low. makes noise, but you get the feeling back.

sincerely

[sudden Winds]

the first thing I´ll tell you is.......RELAX. fly and feel the airplane, don´t judge the whole flight by how smooth the landing was...

1) make sure you´re adjusting your seat comfortably, not too high, not too low, about the right distance and about the same everytime.

2) try to fly a stable approach, good landings out of bad approaches are a product of luck.

3) try different things...if you ALWAYS float, it means you´re flaring a bit high every time, try flaring less, no matter what the ground seems to do on you. If it lands rather hard then next time you´ll pick an intermediate final attitude between the 1st high, prolonged type flare and the no or minimum flare landing you did the 2nd time...you need to know both edges before you know the spot in between.

4) look outside, use your peripheral vision. The end of the rwy is not the best place to look at, especially if the rwy is long. try to look a bit closer, not just off the nose of the a/c but maybe 500 ft ahead...that should be enough.

5) make sure you´re not approaching too fast for whatever reason that invites floating and floating invites tail strikes, late rejected landings and even runway excursions.

6) make sure you´re able to maintain rwy alignment and flight path with no major difficulties prior to attempting good landings...if you having a hard time with that you ´ll be too worried about not overshooting the rwy and that ´ll leave you minimal attention for a good flare.

7) ask your captains what they think, but don´t ask every single one of them, ´cause they´ll give you different opinions and you´ll get terribly confused.

8) make sure you´re not thinking about this too much. Once you´ve landed (good or bad) go home, and don´t spend the rest of the day regretting your last landing or day dreaming about your next. This is not like dating a nice girl, you´ll get plenty of opportunities here.

Best Regards,
SW.
write if you need anything.

[Ashling]

I'm not an airbus driver so I cannot comment on the specifics of landing an airbus, for that you need to have a thorough read of your flight crew training manual.

A couple of thoughts though.

Remember what you are aiming for, a positive contact in the right place at the right speed. You want to be able to achieve this every time. Trying to grease it on is a mistake and will lead to trouble in poor weather conditions as you will then struggle to land correctly as you have not been practising it. The passengers and cabin crew are not good arbiters of a landings quality.

Pick your aimpoint and drive the aircraft towards it maintaining the descent path all the way to flare (use Papi, glidesope indications to help) and try to avoid overcorrecting close in. A-lot of people are ground shy and shallow off their approach in the last 50-100' pre flare but then flare the standard amout, result long landing. Scan aimpoint, speed, aimpoint, speed repetitively occasionaly taking in glideslope & power setting as required, you can largely do the later by feel.

Next look to achieve a consistant flare technique. Airbus will detail this. The cadence of your rad alt countdown may well help achieve the correct flare point as will looking ahead. On most types you will want to start reducing power to idle as you flare with the aim being idle as the wheels touch.

Keep flying the aircraft on, don't just flare and wait in hope, if you don't achieve touchdown adjust things.

If you detect a large sink rate developing late on use power to cushion it, just as the power bites take it off again to avoid floating. Avoid overflaring to cushion as this may lead to a tailstrike.

Good luck

[FCS Explorer]

as written in post#2 FLY the aircraft to the ground. even if "cut-the-power-pull-a-little-and-see-what-happens-next" is considered the same as a flare (and the way i done it in the beginnings, too)
and by the way: even after years, when you have reached a point where landings are good enough not to worry or think about there will be times when you just think you totally lost your landing mojo.

[D-OCHO]

And remember:

A good landing is every landing you can walk away from.

A perfect landis is every landing after which the airplane still fly's.



So don't worry

[gatbusdriver]

When I went mixed fleet, and was flying A330 alot, landing the A320 became a bit trickier. Always get the "five......five.....five.....five...." call out followed by the sound of tyres hitting terra firma.

I had to go back to numbers. At 30' think about flaring, as a result of this I would start flaring at approx 20'.

Happy landings

[Mullinax]

Regardless of what type of aircraft you fly, the best you'll ever get is 95/5, meaning that 95 percent of your landings will be pretty good and five percent will be down the tubes. I may even be too optimistic with this figure. Most pilots I know also get on "streaks" both good and bad. A great landing is sometimes just as baffling as a terrible landing.

[SRover40]

You mean start flare at about 20 feet ?

I start reducing descent rate at 50 feet(make v/s 700 --> 400)
, and idle at 30 feet ...

Next time I would try start flare at 20 feet .... ..

[Wingswinger]

My advice would be don't start to reduce your descent rate at 50ft. It's too soon. Keep driving down at the TD point then, at 30R, look at the far end of the runway. At 20R close the TL smartly and flare (only 1-2 degrees), squeeze the rudder to eliminate the drift angle and use the side-stick as required to hold the wings level. Imagine trying to fly low about 2ft above the runway and just hold the attitude. You need to look at the far-end to do this. The aircraft will just sit down. Don't try to hold off to achieve a gentle touchdown - it doesn't work because A320 series land more smoothly the flatter the touchdown attitude. Make sure the TL are closed as you flare and not later otherwise the auto-thrust will add power leading to a float.

[Air of Despair]

Hi,
I'm going through a similar phase, just a little less hours and experience. At the start landing was fine, I think at really low hours when everything is new you just rely on what you were taught when you were learning to fly. As your knowledge increases you realise that there are an awful lot more variables than you thought and hence a lot more things go through your mind. I changed companies after about 4 months and to compound the issue the first company I worked for had all rad alt calls down to '5', my new company only have 50, 30 and retard. I know that at the end of the day you should be landing the aircraft visually but as a low houred pilot you like to have things to hang your hat on. Flaring at 20ft worked beautifully until the 20ft call was removed.

I've spoken to a few of the pilots I fly with and they all say the same thing, relax, look out the window and keep it coming down. I think one of the traps you get caught up in, especially after a few crunchers, is getting a little ground shy. Flaring high, chopping the power and not keeping it coming down really isn't pretty and if you try to soften the touchdown by pulling back you're heading into tail strike country. All I can say to help you is what I'm saying to my self. Drive it down to that aiming point, look out and at approximately 20ft close the thrust levers, check back and hold the attitude. I'm not aiming to grease it in, all I want is a safe landing in the right place that doesn't send the wheels through the wings.
The other thing I am trying to learn is that when you do crunch it in don't beat yourself up about it. On the occasions when the Captain has smacked it in it really doesn't bother them. I guess its another one of those things that comes with experience.

[Lemper]

Hi SRover, and all you guys of goodwill,

Notwithstanding any of the good advices the flying comunity is passing on here, one thing keeps troubling me:

What desperate state has aviation come to, that a young enthusiastic pilot has to ask advice on a basic flying skill on internet!
What kind of instruction, if not instructors, must SRover have been through? With what kind of PIC is he flying, who cannot (apparently) give him some advice, instruction or just coaching?

Gosh, am I happy to retire soon!

[Blip]

I've said it before and I will say it again, for me the Jacobson Flare technique took ALL the guess work out of landing aeroplanes, from the Cessna 152 that I was flying when I first read about it, to the Piper Seminole, the B737-300/400/800 and B767. It works for ANY aeroplane.

There was a thread about this topic last year, and it was apparent to me from the comments made that most of the people that dispapproved simply didn't understand what it was.

Here is the thread...

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=244431&highlight=jacobson

What it does is it allows you to determine WHEN to flare by reference to a point on the runway which is a precalculated distance short of your aiming point. When you see this point on the runway pass below the glareshield, it is time to begin the flare manoeuvre.

Now before anyone attemps to shoot me down, that is the BASICS of it. There are some "if's" and "but's" that allow for heavy/light, fast/slow, etc. and this is explained in detail.

Once the flare is commenced, there is another technique that I read about which eliminates overcontrolling, floating, and crunching. Again, the guess work is gone. Doubt, anxiousness, and vague contol input is replaced with confidence, consistency and positive control input.

Anyone who would like a copy please PM me.

[haughtney1]

Blip, whilst I'm sure you fell Mr Jacobson has a point...the technique you describe complicates what in reality is a simple yet misunderstood maneuver.
Heavy 747/777/767/757/737 behave VERY differently to the lightly loaded versions...therefore a fixed reference point for the correct flare height is only a small piece of the puzzle.
The key component to a reasonable landing is the ROD that the aircraft experiences on touchdown...and this is as variable as the surfaces and surface conditions that we all land on.
All that the Jacobson technique proves is that he understands geometry far better than the average line pilot:ok:

[Tree]

Hire an instructor on a taildragger. Ask him to teach you the "wheel landing" technique ("flying" it on in a nose level attitude main wheels first). Use the same technique on any transport category type except bring the thrust to idle as you begin the flare. I believe Boeing recommends "flying it on". Nothing to it unless you are depth perception challenged (and some people are). In that case you will have to rely on the rad-alt callouts. If you wear glasses/sunglasses make sure they are not interfering with your depth perception. I have observed students with cheap sunglasses that caused perception problems.

[ElNino]

Set your seat so that you can only just about see the top of the glareshield.

If you are floating at 5ft, slightly release the back pressure on the stick and it should touch down.

Try flying the approach in manual thrust, it's easier to control the power as required in the flare and it avoids the autothrust adding power and causing a float.

[Blip]

I give up.

How can anyone debate an issue when others don't read what is written.

Haughtny1 said ...the technique you describe complicates what in reality is a simple yet misunderstood maneuver.

Oh the irony! Would you please explain how waiting for the 500 ft markers (for example) to pass under the glareshield is complicated.

Haughtny1 also said Heavy 747/777/767/757/737 behave VERY differently to the lightly loaded versions...therefore a fixed reference point for the correct flare height is only a small piece of the puzzle.

I thought I covered that bit and explained that other bits are covered as well.

Tree said Nothing to it unless you are depth perception challenged (and some people are). In that case you will have to rely on the rad-alt callouts.

No depth or height perception required. In my opinion having to rely on a rad-alt callouts to land an aeroplane is completely unacceptable! It's very much like having to rely on an ILS and PAPI to make a visual approach!

[Dream Land]

Ok, I have two techniques, one for long runways when you are in no big hurry to vacate, the other for single runway airports like in Europe. My suggestion for the first condition:
1. Auto brake LOW
2. Stay on G/S
3. Thrust Levers abruptly to idle 30-40ft (not slow like a DC3).
4. Slow down your normal flare a bit.
5. As soon as you reach the end of flare, start lowering the nose.
If it's too hard for you to slow down your flare rate, stop your flare prior to completely stopping the sink, wait one second and then lower the nose, this technique may also keep you from having problems lowering the nose during spoiler deflection pitch up, good luck.
D.L.

[haughtney1]

How can anyone debate an issue when others don't read what is written.

Because blip you ASSUME that one size (technique) fits all.........

Would you please explain how waiting for the 500 ft markers (for example) to pass under the glareshield is complicated.


Certainly.......plenty of airports I fly into DONT have 500ft/1000ft markers:ok:
It's very much like having to rely on an ILS and PAPI to make a visual approach!
Its what papi's are for :hmm:, if they are there USE them! thats the point...

Back to the flare/landing technique...if was a 100% repeatable technique..then maybe blip you'd have a more valid argument..but its not, it never was..and it never will be:=

[FlexibleResponse]

FLY the aircraft to the ground.

Some great advice above.

The flare manoeuvre is not a one-shot effort.

If you turned your car into a parking slot between two other cars, you don't just wrench the steering wheel once and hope for the best? Of course you would make corrections according to the crossing/closing speed and also the achieved vehicle path, would you not?

If it looks like heading for a hang-up at 5 feet, make a goddam timely correction. Relax! Don't try and turn it into rocket science!

[Blip]

Hello haughtney1

I am not assuming anything. As I have said I have personally transfered the technique from a C152 to a B737 to a B767. I have used it when a B737-800 weighed 66 tons, and I have used it when it weighed 50 tons.

If you don't have 500ft/1000ft markers, you use something else such as counting the centreline markings (30m long with 30m spacing).

Of course you use what ever landing aids are available to you, but my point is if the rad alt callouts are MEL'd, that shouldn't have any affect on your ability to land an aeroplane. I'm sure on the day the guy/girl would find a way of putting it down but there might be an unnecessary increase in stress levels.

I'll leave it at that. I'm not wanting to pontificate and I acknowledge that there are many ways of flying an aeroplane, it's just that I get a little annoyed when people dismiss this technique when I KNOW it works. It has allowed me to never doubt myself below 50 ft. I have heard of people's careers in airlines be destroyed because they had a problem in the last 50 ft for whatever reason and it simply does not have to be that way.

It is simply a template to work from when you are low in experience, and it is something to fall back on when the conditions are tough where most of the other visual cue's are either missing or misleading. It has "saved" me numerous times when landing on 30 metre wide runways (rather than the usual 45 m) where you feel like you are higher than you think. When I see the point on the runway pass underneath the glareshield, I think for a split second "well it sure doesn't feel like I should be flaring yet, but geometry doesn't lie." I start the flare manoeuvre and sure enough it goes on nicely just beyond the 1000 ft markers.

I'm not saying I'm a sh#t hot pilot or anything, I'm just saying it works for me time and time again and it should not be dismissed by people who demonstrate to me they don't understand what it is about and just how adaptable and flexible it is. It is not a "one size fit's all" because it is not one size to begin with. It fits C152's and it fits B737's and B747's.

OK that's all I will say. Thank you. I hope ALL the contributions on this thread helped the people who asked for it.

:)

[Ashling]

Why get wrapped up overly on whether Jacobson is hoop or a revelation. It has helped many find the correct point to flare and no doubt those people swear by it. For others it is overcomplicating an essentialy basic skill. Neither is wrong. For someone struggling to find their feet it may be enough to give them something to hang their hats on and is worth a try.

I have never come accross Jacobsons technique before but it has some merit in my view. Promoting a constant approach angle all the way to the flare is correct technique as is achieving a consistent point to flare which is what Jacobson is about.

What I would say is that the flare point and technique needs to be as the manufacturer recommends. If not your doing it wrong so know that advice for your type.

The 2 most common errors I see on the line day to day are people shallowing off their approach in the last 100 ft especially the last 50 ft taking them long and flat and initiating the flare too high. Many do not even realise they do it.

Essentialy people lack the confidence to bring the aircraft all the way into the flare point and become ground shy. Encouragement from colleagues is needed alongside discipline, courage and determination from the individual to drive the aircraft into the flare point. If Jacobson helps someone find that point then good for him.

[esreverlluf]

Just use the force!!! The more you think about it, the harder it gets.

May the force be strong with you.:ok:

[stator vane]

when i was in the right seat, i would observe the captains that flew like i wanted to fly---and watch their every move. and i mean every move.

and the US had a rostering system that would put a crew together for a month at a time.

and of course, due to the rapidity of the approach, and my duties, i could only study one aspect or the other at any certain time, but over the several flights together, i was able to watch every thing he would do, even watching where he would look. and the best was Wayne Carter in Alaska. and the truth is they all are doing things that they can't really explain but you will be able to observe. it is true that there is a feel that is developed over time that cannot be explained. like playing the guitar or like Wayne, playing the drums.

and over time, i didn't do too bad myself.

and like earlier mentioned, we all go through phases to where we can't make it pretty regardless of the conditions.

and whatever you do---NEVER NEVER say, "let me show you how to do it"

the runway has ears!!! and will come up to meet you and show you who your daddy is!!!

[john_tullamarine]

i would observe the captains that flew like i wanted to fly

I hark back to my first couple of jet months on the line (722). With an abundance of F/O seniority at the time, I bid for a lovely English gentleman (who is no longer with us, unfortunately).

Now, Stan was a good, honest, workmanlike piklot type of chap (as well as being one of Nature's loveliest gentlefolk) but, try as I could, I could not work out how the devil he landed the bird. He would drive it into the flare and then, just as I made ready to scream out in terror (722 pilots will understand precisely what I mean), the aircraft would (somehow) just run gently along the ground. In the five years or so I had on the 72 I flew with Stan for a good few months in total .. and his worst landing was better than my second best (my best was an absolute artefact of smoke and mirrors and had very little to do with my inputs .. the aircraft kissed the ground without sound or vibration ... quite an unnerving sensation as the only indication of ground roll was the decreasing airspeed. However, being young and very cocky I was quite prepared to take credit for it while having no idea how it had happened and, hence, little chance of repeating the experience ...)

Oh, how I envied that man's manipulative and management skills ....

the runway has ears!!! and will come up to meet you and show you who your daddy is!!!

isn't that just the awful truth ...

[Centaurus]

What desperate state has aviation come to, that a young enthusiastic pilot has to ask advice on a basic flying skill on internet
Sadly true. One suggestion is to buy yourself an hour in the simulator. It may be expensive unless you can get a company discount but it will work wonders in the end. You can do an awful lot of landings in one hour including strong crosswinds. Set the simulator up at 3-500 ft on final to save time and get more landings in. Re-position the simulator back to 300 ft shortly after each touch-down. Importantly, make sure you get a good quietly spoken simulator instructor - not one that talks incessantly so much that your concentration is destroyed. You should get at least 20 landings in one hour and if you find still no improvement you may seriously need glasses.

[Phil.Capron]

Can we have a debate about when to close the thrust levers because although I never flew an Airbus,on some a/c closing the thrust levers B4 flaring is not a good idea.

[TopBunk]

Phil

The difference with the Airbus A319/20/21 etc, is that making the approach with the A/thrust engaged means that the T/Lvrs are in the 'Climb' detent, whereas the thrust being produced is at the approach level.

When the voice says retard for the flare, the first 75% of the movement of the T/Lvrs has no effect, as the thrust is below the lever angle. By the time you get them back to the stop/idle position it is where you want them, ie just before/at touchdown. In effect, at about 20ft you can smoothly and quickly close the T/Lvrs and all will be well.

I agree, trying this in a B737/747 will usually result in an 'arrival' due in addition to the power off/pitch down tendency of the older Boeings, which of course the Airbus doesn't have.

Regards

[stator vane]

i don't think so.
hard to beat the equipment we have now.
yes, the terms and conditions have changed, but it still beats being unemployed.
and looking at it from another perspective, the opportunity for young, low hour in-experienced pilots to strap on a transport category aircraft--could be worse.
perhaps it is an added plus that the internet is here by which we can ask all sorts of questions.
we flew with bastard captains back then as they must do now. but when i flew with a good one, i wasn't too proud to ask all sorts of questions.

a definite sign of increased disposable income to even consider renting a simulator to practice landings. and i have never seen a simulator that came close to real airplanes for landings. definitely artificial.

[javelin]

To the original poster -

Has anyone discussed the different techniques between engine fits on the 320 ?

CFM technique doesn't work on V2500 and vise versa due to different flap setting in CONF full and different thrust off characteristics between the engines.

Briefly -

CFM, thrust comes off quickly, leave until 30', start the flare at 20', if you haven't touched within, say 1/2 a second, relax the backpressure on the sidestick to start derotating. You preserve the speed and don't rotate the mains into the runway.

V2500, thrust comes off slowly, tends to float. Check Vapp against Vls below 100', provided you have the 5 knot margin, close the thust levers after the 50' call, start the flare at 20', derotate if you haven't touched in 1/2 a second.

PM me for more - I have about 8,000 hours on 320,321 and 330 :ok:

[FlexibleResponse]

V2500, thrust comes off slowly, tends to float. Check Vapp against Vls below 100', provided you have the 5 knot margin, close the thust levers after the 50' call, start the flare at 20', derotate if you haven't touched in 1/2 a second.

Are you sure that the FCOM says this?

[Reel Marine]

Remember, the Airplane has to BLEND the Laws and this happens at 50 feet where the airplane takes a picture and progressively drops the nose which forces the pilot to flare and pick up the nose. The flare isnt much, usually at average weights the A/C is comming in at 2 1/2 degrees nose up and the flare is at about 5 degrees nose up at Config full.

So starting the flare at 30 feet and reducing the power concurrently will provide a good landing.

[LLuke]

I think your speed drops below Vref, after that the ground effect is not compensating enough.

In your case I would try aim for almost level flight below 5 feet (why not aim for 0 feet) and close thrust levers a bit later. Floating sounds too passive. Don't worry if you land positively at the end of the flare it won't be hard anyway. You must have felt the gear, to know next time where it is. I always disconnect A/P and A/T early to get the feeling.

This worked for me on the Fokker 50 and the B737 (-3/4/8/900). On the 74 it is more or less the same, Making sure that shortly after the 10 feet call I am in level flight. Close thrust near the end of the flare.

Not sure, but I hope this will help you on 'the Bus'

[SRover40]

I sincerely appreciate you fellow pilots' advices.....
I really do....

I now try to get a "PICTURE" while landing maneuver...,
which is difficult yet....
I think I have to get this picture thing first for most importantly..

But I still got a hard time to have the useful reference to tell
my height when doing roundout-flare ..
Of course I try to see runway end .. but seems like THAT is not enough
reference for me... unfortunately....

...
....

Hoping to become a pilot who can GIVE advices to other pilot.....

[LLuke]

It is not only about height, but also about terrain closure rate. That's what you see by looking at the end of the runway. After the 10 feet call has passed, at your guessed 0 feet, you want the terrain closure rate to be (nearly) 0.

You can only guess the aircrafts height if you're looking around, or down over the nose, but then you don't see the closure rate anymore.

You should be looking at the end of the runway, to see what the aircraft is doing. When you get more experienced, you will be able to do it with height/looking nearby, i.c.w. muscle memory.

Hope this helps...

edit: typo

[hpcock]

My 2 pence.....

Remember, at 50ft, the bus will push it's nose down by 2 degrees. What I tend to do is, depending on wt & config - on appr keep a/c attitude at approx 2.5deg nose up. At 50ft, pitch upto 5 degrees and hold that attitude. Generally gives a good, stable transition to flare without too much float.

Secondly, where you look is where you land in the 320.

Good luck & happy landings

[AirRabbit]

I know, and I recognize, that “landing an airplane” is everyone’s point of pride – and everyone has their own technique for getting to that point. So, without trying to step on anyone’s technique (or their pride) I thought I’d offer my version of 2 cents (or pence) on the things that pretty much have to go right as a result of whatever technique applied.

Almost everyone knows about and understands the term, “flare,” when talking about landing an airplane. However, not everyone understands this term in the same way. Basically, the flare is pulling back on the elevator controls to raise the nose (increase the pitch attitude) to “break” or “reduce” the rate of descent prior to touchdown. But, where is that you want the nose to go? Can you put it anywhere? No, certainly not. Well, if that’s true, then you want it to go to some specific spot. What is that spot? It is whatever attitude that is the “level flight” attitude for that airplane, in that configuration, and at that airspeed. What airspeed? The airspeed you have upon completing the flare. What height above the runway should you be at the completion of the flare? Well, the closer to the runway the better, as long as you don’t drive it into the runway before completing the flare. Most people believe that something between 2 and 5 feet above the surface is a good target to shoot for at the end of the flare, just to help ensure that you don’t land before you are ready to land.

By deflecting the elevator and rotating the airplane to the flare attitude, kinetic energy is dissipated – the airplane slows down – in fact, it slows so much that the “level flight attitude” will not keep the airplane in level flight; it WILL descend – unless you increase the attitude to something higher OR you add power. The fact is that if you flared to the level flight attitude and left the power alone (i.e., kept what you had to maintain airspeed on final), the airplane would descend – just not as fast and you’d be much farther down the runway by the time you actually touched down – but you WOULD touch down. If you pushed the power up a bit, you could maintain that level flight attitude AND airspeed and fly at that altitude and airspeed. If you pulled the power OFF, you would descend a bit more quickly than you would without the power reduction, but at a significantly less rate than what you had on final – and this is precisely what you’re trying to do – descend the airplane at a rate that will allow a firm but satisfactory touchdown.

An aside: why you might need or want to I wouldn’t know, and I would never recommend doing this in a transport category airplane, but if you had the runway necessary, you could keep the nose attitude coming up to keep the airplane from descending (because you would need a higher and higher angle of attack to compensate for the slower and slower forward speed) until you get to that point where the wing would stall. If you did this correctly you would have landed the airplane with the least amount of forward velocity. Of course your nose position would be really high and you very well may not have enough forward velocity to keep the elevator effective, and, as a result, the nose would likely fall.

So, as we said, you have to pull back on the elevator control to arrest your rate of descent – the flare. OK. You pull back on the controls to raise the nose to the level flight attitude. THIS is the attitude in which you want to touch down. However, from this point the airplane is going to slow – and more so as you pull the throttle(s) to idle. This will cause the airplane to want to pitch down. Why? Because you would have had the airplane trimmed for the final approach – configuration, airspeed, power, and rate of descent. You’ve now changed this. You now are at the level flight attitude and probably beginning to reduce power (if you haven’t started already). The airplane will want to pitch down, but you must not let it. To keep the airplane from pitching down, you would need to pull back on the elevator control. Notice, this “pull” is to keep the nose of the airplane in the level flight attitude; it is NOT to bring the nose any higher than what is necessary to maintain level flight. If you do bring the nose any higher, while you may continue to descend, you will increase the likelihood of touching down and “skipping” back into the air – sometimes before the signal to deploy the spoilers is generated; and sometimes just after – meaning that you might get airborne a bit, have the spoilers deploy – and drop whatever distance you’ve managed to skip to! Not very pleasant!

This may seem to be a rather small point, but it is significant in landing the airplane. Normally, it should take a pilot between 1½ and 3 seconds to flare the airplane – and the airplane should not be held in the flare (off the ground) for more than 3 seconds … this means reaching the level flight attitude and saying “thousand one, thousand two, thousand three, touchdown” (uh … I’d do this to myself or in a whisper if there is someone else on the flightdeck with you). This is true in no wind, headwind, tailwind, and crosswind conditions. And, also importantly, at the end of that 3 seconds, I’d recommend PUTTING the airplane on the ground, now! You chew up a good deal of runway while in the air, giving you less and less concrete on which you can count for good surface contact and good brakes to get you stopped.

There are several techniques regarding the retardation of the throttles – and each airplane requires that you become familiar with the technique that best fits the way you fly and how the airplane responds. Some pilots will start retarding the throttles over the runway threshold; others will wait until level flight attitude is achieved. The speed at which the throttles are retarded will be directly dependent on where you start to reduce power and how quickly the airplane will decelerate in this configuration and in ground effect. The throttle(s) should be in idle at, or just prior to, touchdown.

Every airplane I have flown lands best from the level flight attitude. When I teach, to help my students to understand, for themselves, what this attitude really is, I have often asked them to make an approach to land the airplane, except that when they complete the flare, I ask them to continue to fly down the entire length of the runway AT THAT ALTITUDE and AT THAT AIRSPEED, without climbing or descending; and without accelerating or decelerating. The height I ask them to shoot for is something less than 5 feet. As you would understand, no doubt, in order to do this, the pilot MUST achieve, and keep, the airplane at “the level flight attitude;” or the height would not be maintained. This practice helps to “fix” the level flight attitude picture for them. If we are fortunate enough over a several-day period to have varying weather conditions, I’ll ask them to do the same thing in each of those different conditions. This allows them to see that level flight attitude is the same (as long as the weight and configuration of the airplane is the same) regardless of the weather conditions; and, most importantly, it allows them to find what cues they want to use to determine that the airplane IS in that level flight attitude; i.e., they are not dependent on what someone else has used and likes … they can “do it for themselves.”
(This can also be done very satisfactorily in a properly qualified flight simulator with sufficient motion, sound, and visual cues.)

Why do I recommend this approach? It’s my opinion that landing an airplane is anything BUT a mechanical exercise. In my years of doing this, I have found that by asking my students to do something “the way I do it” works only for a small fraction of my students. But when I describe what I want as an “outcome,” and let them determine, on their own, “how” to do what I’ve asked them to do, they normally learn it better and learn it faster, because it’s something with which they feel comfortable, and it seems more “natural” for them. Therefore when I say, “flare the airplane to achieve a level flight attitude a small distance above the runway surface,” it makes little difference to me what technique they use to achieve that specific goal (within reason, of course) – as long as that goal is achieved.

The biggest reason landing “mechanically” won’t work, is that none of us humans are as precise and as capable of repeatable performance as we would like to think we are. Remember, when we depend on the autopilot to land, we usually rely on 3 of them, at least two of which must be in agreement – and as you all know, “George” is a lot better at doing things precisely and repeatably. The only thing that shouldn’t change from landing to landing (and the thing that “George” gets right all the time) is that the airplane lands from the level flight attitude – for that configuration and that airspeed and that gross weight.