REPLY TO "a dangerous habit i have noticed in my landings"

[echoindiajuliet]

HI guys just posting this to see if anyone can offer any good tips or advice! I am a recent PPL obtainee pilot with just under 80 hours! The reason i am writing this is because i brought two of my friends up today on a local pleasure flight for their enjoyment and just for an all round spin! the problem is the whole flight went perfectly and everything was good and all but i bounced on two of my landings and hit slightly hard on the last full stop! my other two friends who have no knowledge of flying felt they were normal and didnt question at all but that little voice crept inside and said man you could have done way better than that!! I suppose i would be the type of pilot always reaching for perfectionism and things like that really annoy me for ages afterwards coz secretly your trying to impress i suppose! The aircraft is a c172 which i recently started flying again after a long period flying 152 for nearly 4 months weekly! I used to always get great satisfaction out of landing that! i shall set the scene and condition of todays flight! was landing westerly rwy 29 and the wind was 270@13 approach speed was acceptable i thought for conditions 60-65knots with 20degrees flap. normal approaches actually quite low on slope due to higher rpm we have to use on finals against flap drag to run in the new engine, anyway i approached round out height as usual and closed the throttle and allowed the plane to settle but heres where the fun starts float float float!! i then slightly lower the nose and allow it to bleed off as the plane lowers more and slows my natural tendency is to pull back on the stick and increase the angle just before i notice it touches but then it feels like time has stood still until the dreaded bounce just one small one though,i have noticed however that i lose sight of the end of the rwy:bored: during this last flare before touchdown and im guessing thats a problem i must eradicate! why does it land hard if at the slowest and lowest height prior to the wheels actually touching the tarmac and i apply a fair bit of increased angle of attack! at least the stall warners went off on all the landings plus the last one was a bit hard but she landed on the mains first before i lowered the nose anyhow but i am desperate need of a greaser sometime soon!! Advice please!! thanks everyone!:ok:

[Tarq57]

Are you fairly short? I ask because unless the nose up angle is extreme, you shouldn't be losing sight of the end of the runway in the flare.
Also, thisnormal approaches actually quite low on slope due to higher rpm we have to use on finals against flap drag to run in the new engine doesn't make much sense to me.
While a new engine might be a little tight, it won't be noticeable to the pilot.
Why not fly at the normal approach angle that you've been taught to use? At the flap setting you would normally use?
The 172's flaps are rather effective. Especially the last setting if you are in an older 172, which gives a very draggy 40 degrees. Once you flare with full flap, (if the speed is in the range you've indicated) it won't float for long.
You should really be asking your instructor for tips. And maybe practicing the landings. Once you've got them "nailed", you can start introducing variations, like a different approach angle, different flap settings/speeds etc.
Personally, in light winds, I've found 61 on short final, 55 (or less) over the fence, full flap, and just a hint of power - about 1500 - until the flare, works quite well.
[edit]
PS regarding the thread title, this isn't really dangerous, unless you are flying a very shallow approach slope. (A shallow slope will be (a) closer to the ground than necessary, and (b) might not afford a good option if the engine quits on final.)
Don't be too alarmed. It's probably just ongoing practice needed.

[flybymike]

Your quoted approach speed sounds OK but on the other hand extended float followed by bounces suggests excess speed. On most light singles 10 knots above the bottom of the white arc usually works as a "last look" speed before touch down.

Whatever, don't get paranoid about it. Some days just nothing goes right for no apparent reason....next time will be just fine ;)

[RatherBeFlying]

I almost never land a C-172 with 20 flap. As you have seen, any extra speed and it will float.

How long were you up with your friends? If you've burned off 2-3 hours of gas, your weight is down and a few kt. less approach speed is called for.

When I was checked out in the C-172 some decades ago, I was advised 50 kt. over the fence. That was with 20 flap.

A good practice (first few times with an instructor please) is simulated engine failure on the downwind, keep a tight circuit and increase flaps to 40 once the runway is made. In this case 50 kt over the fence is not a good idea -- 60-65 will give you what you need to round out. With 40 flaps, the extra knots go away quite quickly in the flare.

In the flare, I use peripheral vision to see exactly how high I am over the runway. Pavement or grass texture is a good clue. In many types you can see where the mainwheels are.

[Khaosai]

Hi,

grab an instructor familiar with the aircraft type and spend enough time in the circuit until you are both happy.

Money well spent.

Rgds.

[India Four Two]

EIJ,

It's been a while since I flew a 172 with anyone in the back, but I am wondering if the fact that the CG was further aft, causing reduced stability, might have had anything to do with your problems.

I also agree with the comments about speed. Try slowing down. In light winds, I use 55kt on final and 50kt over the fence.

Don't agonize too much about it - just keep practicing.

[Lembrado]

echoindiajuliet,

Hi! Don't worry too much, this is a common problem.

Here is your answer:

The book says: 55 over the numbers with 30 degrees of flap (50 for short field and 40 degrees of flap - older models)

Good thinking on your part about adding a speed increment for wind. The rule of thumb for light aircraft is this:

For any headwind component above 10 knots, add one quarter of the headwind component plus all of the gust up to a maximum additional 20 knots. For example in your case; the headwind component is about 12, so a 1/4 of that is 3. 55+3 = 58 knots over the numbers target speed (63 knots approach speed ( 58+5).

Therefore your choice of approach speed (without any form of calculation) was bang on for the conditions, you simply needed more flap.

Lets say on another day the wind is gusting, then what? Amending your example 270/13G19. The headwind component of the gust value is about 5. So your new over the numbers target speed becomes 63 knots. (1/4 of 12 = 3 + all of the gust (5) = 8.

55 + 8 = 63.

This wind increment rule of thumb works for all light aircraft.


I hope that is of some use.


Cheers.

L

[soay]

For any headwind component above 10 knots, add one quarter of the headwind component plus all of the gust up to a maximum additional 20 knots.
I was advised simply to add half the gust factor. What's the reasoning behind making an allowance for the headwind component?

[PompeyPaul]

Why are you trying to land in a nun's outfit ?

[Mark1234]

I think you'll find it's the transition between the two that's the problem: The 150 is more sensitive in pitch, and has shorter legs - I suspect your flare judgement is a smidge off, you'll get it dialled.

Have to confess it's never occurred to me to land with less than full flap though - I'm a little puzzled as to what the purpose in that is.

[bjornhall]

Lembrado,

Do I understand you correctly that the head wind correction you apply refers to the approach speed, and meant to be bled off when on short final?

In that case, I can see it making sense; the wind typically increasing with altitude, means the headwind component will likely reduce on final, resulting in a reduction of airspeed for a constant ground speed. Without the head wind correction, you'd need to speed up (ground speed wise) on short final to prevent air speed from dropping. With the correction, airspeed will bleed itself off as the headwind reduces.

(C.f. GS MINI on the Airbii...) :8

Perhaps worth recalling though that there are many different C172 variants out there... The "proper" (by the book) speed before wind corrections could be as high as 69 kts for a flaps up landing in a heavy C172S... Might not wanna try that at 50 kts! :ok:

PompeyPaul, had a good night out? :}

[pulse1]

i then slightly lower the nose

In my view, based on some bitter experience, if ever you feel the need to lower the nose after beginning the flare, recognise that it has gone wrong and have an escape plan. This plan will probably include the application of some power, to cushion the impact, or to go around.

[Lembrado]

Soay

Adding an arbitrary half the gust value for any direction of wind is meaningless. I only have a basic understanding of aerodynamics, but any factor has to be in relation to what the wing experiences. In this case a headwind component, so that is the value one must consider.



bjornhall

The increment value is to the 'over the numbers' speed. The rest of your explanation fits - the whole reason for an increment is the loss of performance sheer close to the ground.

(I read somewhere that on the airbus the auto throttle goes into a very neat ground speed mode - way beyond me!) Anyway, off topic.


The point of this formula is ease of use in the air and an interesting discussion on the ground.

Cheers.

L

[soay]

Adding an arbitrary half the gust value for any direction of wind is meaningless.
I meant half the headwind component of the gust, just as you did. bjornhall's explanation of the reason for your 1.25 factor on the steady headwind component makes sense, so I'll try that out.

[Final 3 Greens]

echoindiajuliet

You are 80 hours TT, still on the steep part of the learning curve, nothing to worry about - even 20,000 hour pilots have occasional landings they don't like, in fact credit yourself with good airmanship for being unhappy with a landing that didn't meet your own standards :ok:

Best thing to do is get an instructor for an hour and do some circuits; the extra, trained, pair of eyes will give you any feedback you need.

Mark 1234

Have to confess it's never occurred to me to land with less than full flap though

In the UK, many schools teach intermediate flap settings for landing, e.g. I was taught 20 deg on the 150 and 25 on the PA28.

I don't agree with it, as I think pilot needs to be able to judge when to use full flap and when not to, e.g. some types in a tricky crosswind.

[PH-UKU]

Quote:
i then slightly lower the nose

In my view, based on some bitter experience, if ever you feel the need to lower the nose after beginning the flare, recognise that it has gone wrong and have an escape plan. This plan will probably include the application of some power, to cushion the impact, or to go around.

I agree with this. I was always told to imagine the control column was on a ratchet ...... once you start bringing it back approaching the flare ... don't be tempted to push it forward .... there-in lies nosewheel collapses and wheelbarrowing. If it's not working, use a little power as the man says, or go around.

Are you used to flying alone or with 2 fat mates in the back ? ;) ie. were you any heavier than usual, or perhaps with more weight aft?

I normally use 30 deg of flap and go for the steeper approach angle, unless it's gusty and then I'll use 20deg or less, but the perspective is a lot flatter.

Sometimes even use 40deg (but don't try sideslipping with 40deg flap) - at 40deg you come down like a brick (especially with floats ;) ).

Why not go up with an instructor and practice steep approaches and getting the flare right.

PS was your seat position raised or lowered or any different to normal?

PPS Good on you for starting the debate ... just be ready for 1001 opinions

[SNS3Guppy]

Excess speed results in a float if you hold the airplane off until it stalls. Otherwise, excess speed means that you touch down at a higher speed.

Try to be configured for landing early, with your power set, and on-speed. A stable approach makes a good landing easier, whereas an unstable approach to landing increases your workload and causes variations for which you must account...it makes every landing different (and thus hard to be consistent).

Don't get caught in the habit of adding excess speeds for a few knots of wind. If you're talking strong gusts with windshear type conditions, then yes, add some speed. If you have a crosswind of several knots or a headwind of a few knots, leave it alone and simply fly the speed to which you're accustomed. Don't make your job any harder.

Try to hold a fairly constant power setting on approach, with only small, minor corrections as needed. Same for your approach angle.

You should be able to land with any flap setting and be comfortable. The greater the flap setting, however, the slower your approach speed can be, which makes your job easier.

Don't get in the mindset of not being able to relax back pressure, not being able to "push forward" or not being able to increase the rate at which you apply back pressure, as you land. Of course you'll need to do these things.

Personally, I prefer to trim up so I'm holding either neutral or a little forward pressure; all I need to do is relax as I land. A good rule of thumb as you make your final approach is to stop trimming as you reach your approach speed; trim until then, but stop once you're on speed. I prefer to trim a little more, so I have uptrim; it's an old habit from flying ag (crop dusting) which has the safety effect of causing the airplane to climb if I relax pressure on the stick or yoke.

The downside to having up-trim as you approach to land is that during a go-around (balked landing, missed approach, etc), then you're going to require substantial forward pressure on the controls. Some people don't like that. I do; I'd rather be holding forward pressure most of the time, than neutral or back pressure. That said, if you're on speed and trimmed up, you may need slight forward or back pressure during the landing, or you may simply elect to freeze the controls and wait for a ballooning effect to go away. Don't be in the mindset of not being able to relax back pressure, or even apply forward pressure on the controls; they're available for you to do whatever you need to do to make the airplane land. Just remember to apply just enough, and not too much control force, and to generally make small corrections, and make them early.

Remember, if you've got a big error, then a bigger correction, and a small error, a smaller correction. Always be prepared to go around. As the saying goes, "go-arounds are free."

[gfunc]

I had similar issues on the C172 after a long hiatus in my flying (I flew mostly 152s for my PPL issue).

Anywho, with every landing I seem to get three or four for the price of one, hop skip and a jump everytime with varying degrees of severity - nothing dangerous but a bit embarassing with friends and I didn't enjoy the flying as much since the prospect of landing was always on my mind. The strangest thing was that I also flew a PA28 and Alarus at the same time, with absolutely no landing problems. I looked at everything - speed spot on etc and even got some friends flying with me to video the landing.

To cut a long story short, the problem was not my lack of skill it was in perception. When I retrained the instructor was all about the specific phases of "round out" and "flare", these work fine in the low wing aircraft since I find that these are specific phases, punctuated with a long old float in between. This didn't work for me in the 172 since I had trouble figuring out where the mystical line was between "round out" and "flare", so I would either land with too little nose up attitude or drop in from a few feet. My flare was pretty much what echoindiajuliet describes as a last desperate yank on the yoke as you feel the dreaded drop towards tarmac.

For me the solution came from recalling my initial training when I was just a young 'un: Don't think in these specific phases, make a smooth transition from descent at about the height of a double decker bus and try and fly level about 30cm off the surface of the runway. Look down the runway like you would driving down a motorway and if the nose gets in the way look off to the side. For me that's it - just fly 30cm above the runway and manipulate the controls (smoothly!) to maintain this. Since I've changed my mental picture, my landings has been hop-skip-jumpless, consistent and satifactory, plus I've got to enjoy the flight beforehand!

I can only say this works for me, but I hope this helps!

Cheers,

Gareth.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

The aircraft is a c172 which i recently started flying again after a long period flying 152
Many people (including me!) believe that the 152 is a lot more tolerant than the 172 of being landed too fast. Could be as simple as that.

[DavidHoul52]

Don't get caught in the habit of adding excess speeds for a few knots of wind.

I agree with SNS3Guppy that one should fly a consistent approach. I was taught to land flapless if in gusty wind conditions but seldom do. Some of my most gentle landings have been with a strong headwind - makes sense as the groundspeed is slower. Often a pleasant surprise after battling with turbulence on the approach.

[BeechNut]

Landing with 20 deg. of flap in a 172 is one of my life's lessons learned about 550 hours ago. Came in a little hot, landed, bounced, and got into the worst (and my only) porpoising situation. Fortunately instead of trying to salvage the situation and my pride, I initiate a go-around on about the third bounce before I could shear off the nose gear. Went up, came round, and landed with THIRTY degrees flap and better speed control second time 'round.

Beech

[Piper.Classique]

Excess speed results in a float if you hold the airplane off until it stalls. Otherwise, excess speed means that you touch down at a higher speed.Absolutely, SNS3Guppy.

In which case if you simply accept the float and refuse the ground, keeping the aeroplane flying the landing will be long, but the aircraft won't bounce.

You should be able to land with any flap setting and be comfortable. The greater the flap setting, however, the slower your approach speed can be, which makes your job easier.
Precisely. Of course, some aircraft have rather poor climb performance on a go-around with full flap, so that might influence your flap setting in some conditions.


The downside to having up-trim as you approach to land is that during a go-around (balked landing, missed approach, etc), then you're going to require substantial forward pressure on the controls. Yup, but that's only until you can wind the trim again. I like to trim for my approach speed, and accept that I _WILL_ have to push hard on a go-around. Depends on the type, just how hard of course (Pa18a-150 in my case)

[Pace]

Personally, I prefer to trim up so I'm holding either neutral or a little forward pressure; all I need to do is relax as I land. A good rule of thumb as you make your final approach is to stop trimming as you reach your approach speed; trim until then, but stop once you're on speed. I prefer to trim a little more, so I have uptrim; it's an old habit from flying ag (crop dusting) which has the safety effect of causing the airplane to climb if I relax pressure on the stick or yoke.

I will also recommend this piece of advice from Guppy. Especially where you have aircraft which are prone to wheelbarrowing or porpoising having up trip will help against you landing flat or on the nose.

Landing is very much about confidence especially near the ground. It only takes one firmer than normal touchdown to add a fraction of apprehension on the next and hence a succession of firmer arrivals.

Many pilots want to get the landing bit over and are also apprehensive about impressing their passengers. That also adds to a fraction of tension.

Far better to look forward to the landing and to approach it with the thought that you will savour the experience and enjoy it.
Trying to hard and you will get the opposite of what you are trying to achieve so just relax, enjoy and be at one with the aircraft.

Pace

[Lembrado]

Interesting 'advice/bad habits' coming from some of you... especially the trim. I must try that next time. How does it go exactly? 10 feet - let go of stick (the aircraft flares automatically), close throttle, hope for the best.

L

[echoindiajuliet]

HI again guys thanks for all the suggestions! In response to your question Tarq57 i am actually fairly tall at 6ft4" which makes me consider that when the float occurs down the runway my field of view over the cowling is probably alot better than a shorter person meaning i may be raising the nose fairly high prior to touchdown blocking the end of the runway which would explain the touchdown of the mains first and a second or two delay before the nose touches and of course the sound of the stall warner going off! so im guessing im floating down the runway then lastly before touching i raise the nose too high the plane gets excess lift at that time and raises more above the runway at the same time the speed drops suddenly and i lose the lift i gained,because i have the nose high the mains full abruptly from the extra height gained and touchdown followed with a delay by the nose! i wreckon i should resist raising the nose too far and make it my business too hold the end in sight that way it'll touch down faster but alot smoother!! my main mission is always to protect the nosewheel and i am happy to say i have never wheelbarrowed or landed heavily on it! also i noticed alot of people were saying why i wasnt landing with full flap on every landing! i assume its because i was never really thought to use full unless short field and we're so used to the 20degree setting for normal also for touch and go's the less flap the better on touchdown! oh yes the model i fly is a 1985 172P with only 3 stages of flap! I wish i had the extra 10 im sure the drag generated must be really helpful!:ok:

[Chuck Ellsworth]

HI again guys thanks for all the suggestions! In response to your question Tarq57 i am actually fairly tall at 6ft4" which makes me consider that when the float occurs down the runway my field of view over the cowling is probably alot better than a shorter person meaning i may be raising the nose fairly high prior to touchdown blocking the end of the runway

May I make a suggestion?

Try moving your head slightly to the side and look alongside the nose where you will be able to see not only the runway but the grass alongside of it.

That will make your ability to judge your height far easier, the further you look ahead the less accurate your height judgment will be.....approximately five hundred feet ahead of the airplane is optimum for the speed a light aircraft lands at.

[Piper.Classique]

Interesting 'advice/bad habits' coming from some of you... especially the trim. I must try that next time. How does it go exactly? 10 feet - let go of stick (the aircraft flares automatically), close throttle, hope for the best.

MMMmmmmm Don't think I saw anyone suggest that :ugh:. Just let me take a look here.........
Nope, no-one said to let go of the stick (or the yoke, come to that)

SNS3Guppy suggests a slightly nose high trim, I trim for my approach configuration. But by all means have a go the way you propose, after all it isn't my a/c you will be bending:rolleyes:

There will of course be a trim change on closing the throttle. Which way will depend on what you are flying. If you are flying a powered approach this may or may not be noticeable. On a glide approach it is of course irrelevant. As the original poster mentioned using power against flaps this may have influenced his round out and hold-off. I prefer not to use the word 'flare' as it implies a discrete action rather than a continuous process. I do believe in not forcing the aircraft to land. When there is no longer enough lift to sustain level flight it will do so all by itself, at the lowest possible airspeed. The great trick is to be only just above the ground at this point :O, and then to keep straight in the ground run. Even with a nosedragger!

gfunc has got it right, even if he is not yet an ancient pilot

For me the solution came from recalling my initial training when I was just a young 'un: Don't think in these specific phases, make a smooth transition from descent at about the height of a double decker bus and try and fly level about 30cm off the surface of the runway

[SNS3Guppy]

In which case if you simply accept the float and refuse the ground, keeping the aeroplane flying the landing will be long, but the aircraft won't bounce.


This is one way one can do it. However, one can also touch down at a higher speed. Holding the airplane off until it can no longer fly is a common and accepted way of flying a light airplane to a landing, but it's not the only way.

In many large airplanes, there's little or no flare at the end of the approach; a power reduction as one lands, but that's about it. The airplane isn't landing at stall speed, either. The same can easily be done, and be done acceptably, in a light airplane.

A multitude of techniques can be applied. I'm not recommending any particular one here, as any technique should be taught rather than simply read off the internet and tried.

Raising the flaps upon touchdown is one common method of dumping lift and putting weight on wheels. It's one I've used many times on icy runways or rough conditions and gusty conditions. Obviously one doesn't want to confuse a flap handle with a gear lever at the wrong time, and one doesn't want to dump the flaps at the wrong time...but it's a viable technique. In certain cases, so is raising the flaps prior to touchdown (a more advanced technique, and again, one that should be taught and not simply tried because one has read about it on the internet).

By far the most productive way to ensure a good landing is to have a good approach; be on speed and configured. This applies whether it's full flaps, no flaps, or partial flaps. Try landing with power and without power. (After all, let's face it, your first, or next emergency engine-out landing will be without power, most likely).

I transition between big, heavy airplanes, and light airplanes, regularly. I may be flying something that requires a very high approach speed and a high speed landing, and then something that requires a very slow landing on a short runway. By far, I find the hardest thing is to get myself to slow down. Transitioning to bigger and faster isn't hard; going the other way is. However, that's also one of the most important parts of the approach and landing; gettting slow enough to be on the proper approach speed, and holding that speed.

Try to get in the habit of not having to jockey the throttle throughout the approach. Try to come as close as you can to one power setting that you can use throughout the approach. If you can do this, and keep your airspeed consistent, then you'll be getting closer to a stable approach. A stable approach doesn't guarantee a good landing, but an unstable one makes a good landing very difficult. Good approaches are the precursor to a good landing.

Remember that you practice your landing with every taxi, and with every takeoff. The same picture from the cockpit, the same height above the ground...that's where you start, and that's where you want to end up. Memorize it when you taxi.

When I was first doing flight training, I flew a J-3 cub. The cub, of course, is a tailwheel airplane, and the cockpit picture looking out is a little different once the tailwheel is in the air on the takeoff roll, or when doing a wheel landing. Accordingly, we'd place the tail of the airplane on a sawhorse and sit in the airplane. Close our eyes, picture a trip around the pattern, open them and look at the sight picture. Again and again. When you land the airplane, it's no different. You're just putting the airplane back where you found it...same height above the ground, same picture.

People often try to feel for the ground, guess at when to "flare" or simply take a wild shot in the dark at where to start holding the airplane off the ground. There's no need for this. You already know, because you were there when you got in the airplane, when you taxied it, and when you took off. Just put it back. This is what a landing is all about; putting the airplane back. When you land and the sight picture looks about like it did when you left, you've arrived.

There are a few exceptions (tailwheel landings, steep nose-high flares, etc)...but even these can be duplicated in practice to some degree. I've tied the tail down on a Cessna 172, for example, or blocked up the nosewheel, and had students sit in the cockpit and open and close their eyes while "chair flying" or imagining their flight, to get the sight picture. One might be surprised how much this can help, and be thankful for how little it costs.

I'm getting set to check out in an airplane which is new to me. I'll go fly it today. I have several checkrides coming up in it over the next few days, this next week. I have to take a checkride in it, then turn around and give checkrides to others, while the FAA watches me. It's an expensive airplane to fly, and we have no simulator. Accordingly, I'm spending a lot of time in the books on the ground, and in the airplane in the hangar, getting as familiar as I possibly can. I'm running through the cockpit layout, the location of controls and switches, the sight picture and attitude, procedures and checklists, radio and equipment use, etc. All before we start an engine.

The same can be done for a Cessna 172 or any other light airplane, and it's something I ask of any student. It's far less expensive than doing the same thing in flight, and it can pay dividends when you do turn a propeller and go fly. Visualizing what you will see before you do it is one way to help improve your performance; doing it from the same cockpit you'll be flying, over and over, and simulating the same sight picture is a BIG part of that puzzle. Give it a try. Don't forget that you're doing it as you taxi out, too...and even as you takeoff. A lot of times people forget that they're being prepped mentally for the landing all the time...not just on approach. Keep that in mind and see if it improves your performance.

[Piper.Classique]

Holding the airplane off until it can no longer fly is a common and accepted way of flying a light airplane to a landing, but it's not the only way.

In many large airplanes, there's little or no flare at the end of the approach; a power reduction as one lands, but that's about it. The airplane isn't landing at stall speed, either. The same can easily be done, and be done acceptably, in a light airplane.

True. But I buy my own tyres :O

For the rest, yes, absolutely. I spend a lot of time just sitting in new types, until I can put my hand on anything I want with my eyes shut, as well as getting a feel for the attitude.

[Lister Noble]

I had trouble landing,I was told imagine a double decker,imagine a bedroom window etc,all to no avail.
I sat in the aircraft on the tarmac on a quiet day,just looking around,seeing what the view was like,the height at touch down etc and then it all clicked.
As said before ,try this and see how it goes,and good luck!
Another thing was I always encountered the most horrendous turbulence and crosswind on landing.
The instructor told me I was holding the yoke as though it was a snake about to strike,and let go and see what happens.
Obviously he was hovering on the controls but all the turbulence etc dissapeared like magic,the second I got back the controls it was there again.
I reckon I might have had something to do with that.;);)
Anyway I bought some lightweight leather gloves,gripped the yoke gently and gradually the turbulence went somewhere else!
Lister:)

[Pace]

Lister

The aircraft controls should always be smooth and fingertip stuff hence the importance of having the correct trim.

I know of one instructor who got his students to fly along the runway at about four feet above the runway in the landing config and at the VREF speed.

he then got them to bring the throttle back to idle and then to try and stop the aircraft from landing by pulling back slowly and smoothly.

I big part is not flaring too soon or too late but getting a good mental picture of where the flair point is.

Years back i was forced to land below minima on a PAR at a military base because of technical problems. The vis was 400 metres and cloudbase around 100 feet.

After that i was interested in whether you could land off an ILS in 200 metre fog. With another pilot to be the eyes we flew an ILS in a Seneca flying the needles to a radar alt of 10 feet in a blind landing.

The landing worked well with no outside reference but by using the rad alt and purely feeling for the ground.

At least that exercise convinced me that it is possible to land in zero zero at a push and if you have too.
It also shows how easy landing should be if you can see :)

Pace

[BeechNut]

Raising the flaps upon touchdown is one common method of dumping lift and putting weight on wheels.

SOP on a Beech Sundowner; otherwise it is too light on the mains and normal braking will lock the wheels on dry pavement unless you raise the flaps.

Beech

[Lister Noble]

There was nothing wrong with the trim,there was something wrong with the pilot.
It's called pilot induced oscillation.
A common affliction with new students,apparently.
Lister

[flybymike]

And with old timers from time to time.....

[Mark1234]

In the UK, many schools teach intermediate flap settings for landing, e.g. I was taught 20 deg on the 150 and 25 on the PA28.

:confused: How on earth do they teach performance? Pretty much every POH I've looked at gives landing distance charts, not to mention threshould speeds etc, which are predicated upon full flap. Come in with less and the numbers all change, not to mention you land faster - I was always taught the aircraft was at it's most vulnerable on the ground at speed, when it's neither fish nor fowl.

I agree with guppy that you should be able to land with any flap setting, but to do so as a matter of course, and not use all the tools available seems more than a bit daft. As for the go around arguament, you just move the lever...

[Molesworth 1]

I was smugly watching landings at Stapleford today. Practically every aircraft either bounced or ballooned.

I had to wipe the smile off my face later when I came back in from a flight and also bounced . (I told myself they were just "little" bounces - my passenger wasn't unhappy).

The reason - 330/4 knots on runway 22. (1 knot tailwind)

[Pace]

The reason - 330/4 knots on runway 22. (1 knot tailwind)


Molesworth

What has a tailwind got to do with a bad or bouncy landing? It is common to land with 10 kts tailwind and you do not have to bounce.

Dont blame the tailwind, the crosswind, the amount of flap.

There is only one thing to blame and thats the pilot.

Pace

[Molesworth 1]

Interesting to read that the aircraft does not in fact "bounce" - it just looks like it. The bump on the wheels causes the nose to go up into a higher angle of attack and the excess speed makes the aircraft airborne again.

[Tarq57]

So define "bounce", then.:rolleyes:

[Molesworth 1]

"Bounce" is more of a Newtonian thing. Its not like the wheels have springs in them! "Bounce" would happen in an identical way in vacuum whereas the aircraft landing "bounce" is caused aerodynamically. If it was a physical thing we'd all be in hospital with broken backs.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Its not like the wheels have springs in them!
The things I fly have two levels of springs - the tyres have air in them, and the legs are designed as springs.

[Molesworth 1]

Dont blame the tailwind, the crosswind, the amount of flap.

There is only one thing to blame and thats the pilot.


Absolutely, but it's a common mistake to neglect to take into account the lack of head wind. Well at least that is what was happening to all the landings I was watching in the space of about 10 minutes (either bounce or balloon)

Ground speed is going to be faster, not so?

[gasax]

The 'bounce' due to an increase in the angle of attack is a tailwheel configuration only activity.

Which is partly why Cessna called the undercarriage on the then new 172 as 'Landomatic' - they thought it was that easy! A trike that bounces actually reduces the angle of attack and so is less likely to experience a high bounce - which of course then begs the question............

[Mark1234]

And what has groundspeed got to do with anything? You fly the aeroplane with reference to the airspeed. The only thing that needs taking into account is that you require more space to stop :E

[Tarq57]

I'm just happy to know I've never bounced an aeroplane in my life.:ok:
(Now. How to convince the then-passengers of that fact of semantic nit-picking...)

[DavidHoul52]

Groundspeed will have an some effect I reckon. Your aiming point is moving towards you more quickly so you steepen your approach. Also the impact with the ground will be more forceful .

Interesting the difference between tailwheelers and tricycle geared.

[Crash one]

I'm just happy to know I've never bounced an aeroplane in my life.http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif
Tarq57
Unless you are a supergod you don't fly a tailwheel.

[Final 3 Greens]

Groundspeed will have an some effect I reckon. Your aiming point is moving towards you more quickly so you steepen your approach. Also the impact with the ground will be more forceful .

Obvious, innit.

If you have a strong headwind, you have to fly a lot faster to get where you're going and then you bounce like hell, cos you're going fast across the cart ruts on the grass runway. :E:E:E:E:E:E:E

[Piper.Classique]

And what has groundspeed got to do with anything?
Wear and tear on the tyres and brakes, not to mention the far hedge :}

[Molesworth 1]

The 'bounce' due to an increase in the angle of attack is a tailwheel configuration only activity.




I got the explanation out of Langewiesche's "Stick and Rudder" so, yes, he probably did have taildraggers in mind.