How bad was this landing?

[rnzoli]

I did a bad landing on Sunday, where the nosewheel touched down earlier than planned. I am not proud of it, but I can't really gauge how big my error was. So try to score it on a scale of 1 to 5, where

1 = "It was okay, no worries, just try to avoid it in the future." :D :ok:
.
.
.
5 = "Good Heavens, it was horrible you fool, you are damned lucky to have your nosewheel and prop and engine intact after this." :eek: :ugh: :mad:

Background info from the video description:
"This was my first landing at LHKV, and it takes special coordination and holding before entering its airspace due to the parachute activities over the weekends. I already felt that the aircraft settled onto the runway earlier than I expected during the flare (maybe due to the variable winds or misjudging the height above the narrow landing strip). The recording showed that the nose gear touched down slightly earlier than the main landing gears, which is a certain pilot error."

NFp12kscHTE

[TCU]

It looked less of a wheelbarrow and more of a flat landing with pretty much all wheels touching together. I'd go 3.5/5. Good thing is you recognised it was not right

I fly the Katana and its a pretty slippery plane and easy to add 5kts or so of unnecessary airspeed

It also looks like you just forgot to flare....or perhaps it just happened to quickly, which goes back to my thought, you were just a bit too fast

Make sure that stall warner is squeaking as you flare

Would have been a 1/5 if it was a B-52!

[Gertrude the Wombat]

more of a flat landing with pretty much all wheels touching together
Is there anyone here who's never done one of those?

[VP-F__]

less than 1......if you have a look at the prop at its lowest it is no where near the runway. Yes the landing is a bit flat but not dangerous. Careful with a crosswind though as you are landing a little quick maybe which makes it harder to get a proper flare without drifting a long way, if you are kicking the drift off you might end up being pushed sideways a bit.

[rjay259]

Another thing to remember and something you have alluded to is runway width, thinner runway, to what your used to, will make it look like you are higher than you are so you flare late, a wider one makes you think you are lower so you flare early.
With the landing it was flat and that's that.

[Flyingmac]

I see a lot of three pointers carried out by nose-wheel aircraft. Maybe more cameras should be used, to make them aware that they're doing it?


I have an advantage. I have a tailwheel a/c, but frequently fly nose-wheel a/c. The landing attitude is pretty much the same. Or should be.


I don't think you should be shot for that one. A good flogging would be sufficient.:O

[rnzoli]

Thanks for the feedback guys, much appreciated.
My first thought was at wheels contacting the ground "WTF!? How come we touched down already!?" I didn't want to balloon and expected to have more "leg room" to float before starting to pull the stick back for the flare.

So I think I misjudged the height because the runway was narrower than what I am used to. I am not sure, but I might have also split my attention too much, as there were parachuters crossing the runway shortly before me, and one was still on the wrong side, walking towards the runway. He or she stopped just in time, but I had to keep him in the corner of my eye, to ensure that he/she doesn't walk onto the runway while I land. (He or she is captured at 2:07).

Also found this additional information about the risks associated with flat landings.

Flat landing = Bad landing? (http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/110007)

(The answer is yes, it's worth at least a bit of imaginary flogging :) )

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I didn't see any significant flare, and no hold-off. The result was a flat landing - all 3 wheels pretty much touching down together (not 'a bit 'flat', totally flat). That's not uncommon but as you yourself have deduced, it ain't the way to do it. It's poor technique and it overstresses the nose leg which isn't designed to take it (see the countless nosewheel collapses in the AAIB reports).

You need to flare, then hold off just above the runway (try to prevent it touching down by gently easing the stick back as the speed bleeds off with the wheels just above the surface - but don't climb either!). When the aerolpane is ready, it will land despite your best efforts to continue to hold it off.

If you get the chance to fly a tailwheel aircraft that will instill such skills, as the sort of landing you demonstrate would not be tolerated by a taildragger (landing too flat, unless doing a deliberate 'wheeler', would result in a nose-high bounce).

So practice those hold offs and flares!

[Pace]

If you are asking for a score from 0 to 5 then I give it 5 just because you are asking.

I would rather the question was about the fact that you want to know how to rectify flat or nose wheel landings.

All the professional pilots I know do not do bad landings! OK some might be firmer than others but not bad.
The last BAD landing I did was over 20 years ago and I am pretty norm amongst experienced pilots so that should be your goal regardless of weather winds etc.

SSD above gave some good observations so work on controlling the aircraft when near the ground rather than being a passenger to your landings on a wing and a prayer sort of arrivals
its not about giving a score on how bad it was.

I was right seat to a twin pilot 15 years back in a Seneca which are renowned for the Seneca porpoise if flat or nose wheel landed.
this pilot landed just nose first and the aircraft started bucking down the runway with the bucks intensifying. There is only one way out of that and he failed to do anything about it sitting frozen at the controls.

this results in a broken nose wheel and the aircraft ending up on the props.

i had to take control add power lift the nose till the bucking stopped and we went around.
Fly the aircraft do not become a passenger to it

I know some people here will say that the pilot is low time what do you expect but I would rather be harsh than in a few weeks have you sitting in front of the CFI explaining why the engine is being shock load tested a new prop on the way and the nose has to be repaired :{

Pace

[dirkdj]

About two years ago a Seneca did exactly the same at our airport. Nose wheel damaged, two props damaged, fuselage twisted, etc. Aircraft sat there and was finally dismantled for parts. Nose wheels are for taxiing, main gear is for landing.

[dublinpilot]

less than 1......

Agreed. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. There was very little vertical speed at the moment of touchdown, so no real strain on the nosewheel.

Probably more strain on it, taxiing on grass.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Dublin - as has been said, nosewheels are not for landing on. The landing, though far from seriously bad, shows incorrect technique, as covered above, and needs working on.

[rnzoli]

OK, I got the point from both angles.

I won't lose sleep and won't request a maintenance review from the a/c operator, but I will definitely focus on avoiding this "gotcha" in the future.

I don't need theoretical training on landing, I know how to do it and most of my landings are nose-high as they should be.

This specific one was feeling odd, it was confirmed from the recording, and I wondered if this was a big deal or not. I definitely wasn't a passenger, because someone had to align to the centerline and round it out above the runway too, and that was me. However I missed the right time for starting the flare, and after touchdown, I didn't want to do any late control changes to avoid making even bigger problems (e.g., PIO).

Now while this incident was more like a non-event alone, it is rather dangerous to overlook it and allow it to develop into a bad habit on the long run. Add more variables into the landing, gust, crosswind, short or poor quality grass runway, and there I have the recipe for more serious troubles in the future.

So I promise everyone, that I will improve upon this, with more discipline and practice.

In hindsight, if the parachuters walk across the runway was so distracting for me, I should have just called it a go-around and try again. A low pass at unfamiliar and especially uncontrolled airfields looks to me a much more inviting idea now.

[Pace]

The landing was not seriously bad it just plonked onto three wheels together! Add a greater descent rate and things would have looked more spectacular.
But this is the point its what I call a wing and a prayer arrival rather than a pilot in control arrival and with a certain element of luck.
Work on putting more into the control element of your flying and then all of a sudden you will realise that you are controlling the aircraft not the other way around :ok:

pace

[rnzoli]

Agreed. I lapsed and allowed the aircraft "get ahead of me", instead of me staying ahead of the aircraft at all times. :}

[Oldbiggincfi]

You were probably looking in the wrong place !
Cast your eyes at the far end of the runway and it may never happen again .

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Another thing to remember and something you have alluded to is runway width, thinner runway, to what your used to, will make it look like you are higher than you are so you flare late, a wider one makes you think you are lower so you flare early.
With the landing it was flat and that's that.

So if you are landing on a lake on floats or on a large flat area of snow on skis how do you judge height for the flare?



You were probably looking in the wrong place !
Cast your eyes at the far end of the runway and it may never happen again .

Of all the advice in how to judge height when flaring this has to be the very worst.

It started about thirty years ago in the flight training industry and was embraced as practical and safe by the industry and since then has become the norm.

No wonder pilots have problems judging flare height.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

So if you are landing on a lake on floats or on a large flat area of snow on skis how do you judge height for the flare?
I was taught, variously (for lakes)


(1) look at the shoreline out of the corner of your eye


(2) look down and judge from the waves


(3) sometimes (glassy water, shore a long way off) there's nothing much to go by, so no flare, just descend in the landing attitude.


I got laughed at somewhat by one instructor for doing (2) and then a landplane flare, when I think he wanted me to do (3) (because (2) only works sometimes).


But I didn't have you teaching me, or I'd no doubt know the right answer :-)

[Chuck Ellsworth]

But I didn't have you teaching me, or I'd no doubt know the right answer :-)

You are doing quite well in your ideas of where to look.

But here is my suggestions to make things easier.

There are really only two types of water surface.

(1) A water surface with a viable surface caused by wind...or in some cases debris or plant material visible.


In which case you should be looking at the surface at the point at which you plan to flare ( Round out. )

Not only does this give you the best visual clues to judge closing rate and height to start the flare it also is where you should be looking for floating debris such as dead heads and such.

It makes no sense to look way into the far distance and then get lucky with the correct flare height only to touch down on a dead head and possible die in the resulting crash.

Once you have flared to the level attitude you look forward about three to five hunderd feet...this will give you the correct height judgement and also allow you to see any debris in the water.

There you go...

I seldom go into detail with these issues because flight instruction should be done in an airplane....the internet is a poor communication tool.

(2) Glassy water..

You use the glassy water approach attitude controlling rate of descent with power....and look ahead between three to five hundred feet to check for debris in the water.

:ok::ok::ok:

[Pace]

You were probably looking in the wrong place !
Cast your eyes at the far end of the runway and it may never happen again .

so what do you do on a black black night with a night landing ? or in very poor visibility when the RVR is on minima ?

I can remember a sim session when we got to the fun bit the challenge at the end of the session.

The instructor put the weather at minima failed an engine and then failed the autopilot/flight director! Trundling down the approach flying raw data He then announced that the airport had gone down in 200 meters in fog! Ok fly the missed approach and divert until he added the deal breaker of 300 ibs of fuel per side in the Citation Jet.

The only option was to fly the needles to the ground using height call outs for a flare point. 10 feet and put the aircraft into a landing attitude, thrust levers closed and wait for the aircraft to touch. Thankfully it did so you can land in thick fog too if you have to. Outside references then become non existent! still didn't land flat or on the nose so get the handling right :ok: Remember you can only really land an aircraft when there is no excuse to ever do a bad landing no matter what the conditions

Pace

[Chuck Ellsworth]

It is so refreshing to know aviation still has aviators in its ranks to help offset the mass produced licensed mechanical robots the puppy mill mentality schools churn out.

so what do you do on a black black night with a night landing ? or in very poor visibility when the RVR is on minima ?

Exactly....:ugh::ugh::ugh::{:suspect::sad::E:ok:

[Big Pistons Forever]

To the OP: A 3 point touchdown is always bad. But the important point is to not beat yourself up, but think about the circumstances that got you there so that you can avoid a repeat performance. The principal reason for flat landings is an approach speed that is too fast. Too fast approaches often come from rushed circuits. If you are going to a new airport work hard to make the final approach stable and on speed.

I teach new pilots to make a personal 100 foot call. If the they are not stable and on speed at 100 feet AGL I want them to go around. The discipline of sticking to this creates a virtuous circle. You don't want to go around so you work at getting the approach right. The good approach gives you good landings:ok:

Chuck. It is really necessary to pile on the mindless instructor bashing on every thread you post on. :hmm:..... Never mind I guess I should have expected you back since there seems to be a shortage of posters you can disrespect/insult on the "other" forum.....

[piperboy84]

Long time TW pilot with minimal trike experience with a question, how is it possible to land flat if you have the aircraft attitude trimmed in the landing config? I.e. Nose proud. Seems you would have to be pushing instead of pulling during the round out to get it landing flat.

[Pace]

Piper boy

incorrect trimming can make a flat or nose wheel landing more likely especially if the pilot is not ready for or expecting the out of trim forces required to change from a descent profile to a landing attitude.

it can help in the descent profile to trim the aircraft slightly nose up so a slight force is required to maintain that descent profile. Changing to a landing attitude then becomes more of a finger control rather than a muscle building arm movement

Pace

[Flyingmac]

I strongly disagree with that technique. On final, the a/c should be trimmed so that positive back pressure is required for speed reduction over the hedge/threshold. Don't trim the feel out of the stick.:=

[Pace]

The aircraft should be correctly trimmed for all phases of flight. If it is trimmed for a descent profile it will not be trimmed for a change from that profile to a landing attitude so there will be a certain amount of out of trim forces.

So many flat or nose wheel landings are because the aircraft is not properly trimmed for the descent profile so by the time the pilot gets to change to the landing profile the stick forces are heavy.

What does a correctly trimmed aircraft have to do with a lack of feel?

pace

[rnzoli]

You guys are converging onto what I realized this morning actually.
I didn't have a camera in the the cockpit, but it suddenly occurred to me one specific difference in this approach from my other landings, and it may have played an important role.

Normally I trim the a/c aft (nose up) of neutral, when I reduce power and start descending from circuit altitude. This helps me maintaining altitude for a while and decelerate below flap extension speeds and maintain good approach speed with T/O flaps. Then with LDG flaps extended, I have to push the stick quite a lot. THis lends itself to easier go-arounds at any time, just release the forward pressure on stick and add power. If no go-around, at round out I release the forward pressure a bit, but not completely, otherwise the a/c will balloon, then a few second later I neutralize the stick and start pulling back gradually.

But on this specific occasion, the final was quite long, the parachuters walk across the runway was disturbing and I did something I never did before. I glanced at the IAS and it was below the approach speed, so I added power AND TRIMMED THE A/C DIFFERENTLY, i.e., a little forward of neutral again. THe thinking was that whatever should distract me, I must not stall out on the final by any chance, because that would have really amazed all those parachuters.

This meant that the a/c arrived to threshold with a little nose-down trim instead of my usual little nose-up trim. So it can be that my muscle memory release pressure on the stick as preparation for flare, the a/c started to nose over again (you can see this attitude change in the video recording in slow motion), instead of the usual behaviour of nosing up. I missed that moment and couldn't correct in time.

So I suspect now that I might have landed flat because in this specific approach I set a slightly nose-down trim, instead of my usual slighly nose-up trim. What do you think about this? Could this be a factor as well? (Apart from all the rest we discussed already)

[Pace]

If we start from the point that the aircraft should always be trimmed for any change of configuration then it follows that changing from a descent profile to a landing profile even if the aircraft is trimmed for the descent profile it will be out of trim for the landing profile if no changes are made.

If you are used to a certain pressure on the column/stick and apply that pressure with the aircraft out of trim for the flare it is possible that is why you landed flat on this occasion.

Trimming should be instinctive and natural to you like breathing otherwise you make hard work for yourself

Pace

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Never trim into the flare... "feel the force!".

[P6 Driver]

I can't comment on the approach and landing, but what an excellent quality video!

[VP-F__]

never trim the flare.....you have one hand on the stick, one on the throttle, unless you have an electric trim hat of some sort you don't have a hand for the trim wheel. Maybe I have been unlucky not to have that luxury

[rarelyathome]

And if you do have electric trim, the last thing you want is trim runaway in the last stage of the approach to landing. I always aim to be stable and trimmed for the approach as soon as possible and then leave the trim alone.

[rnzoli]

Okay, so I should have just added more power to regain speed, without touching the trim already set up for the final approach. In the same way as I don't retract flaps on approach, I should also stick to the normal nose-up trim that I am used to, and add power to maintain speed, no change to a proven and practiced landing config.

This is a very good lesson I learnt from this incident.

(Just to put it into perspective what low-hour pilot means: I had about 1 hour solo PIC time in this aircraft before this specific flight and about 12 hours in total with instructor, operator check ride, authority skill test, in this aircraft. My total flight time with all aircraft: ca. 130 hours, c.a.60-70 as PIC. So there is a lot to learn...)

what an excellent quality video!Thanks a lot, I love to take an HD camera along on my flights for reviewing any issues later. Some extracts are on Youtube. Unfortunately, this time I couldn't secure the camera tightly enough to the tail mooring hole, and there was a lot of vibration under takeoff and cruise power. The vibration reduced with lower engine power setting, hence it became somewhat acceptable for the approach and landing phase. I am really sad that the cruise part is shaking too much for video processing. Unfortunately the battery also ran out by the time of our landing at our home base, so I couldn't show that I can actually land a plane normally too :p Maybe next time!

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Don't trim the feel out of the stick.

Leave the trim that was set for the approach.

You land an airplane by sight and attitude, there is not a certified airplane on earth that needs trim to change the attitude from approach attitude to the touch down attitude...that is what the elevator is there for.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

You land an airplane by sight and attitude, there is not a certified airplane on earth that needs trim to change the attitude from approach attitude to the touch down attitude...that is what the elevator is there for.
I was once taught to wind the trim fully back on a Super Cub before landing, on the grounds that the last thing the instructor wanted was for me to dig the fronts of the floats in. This didn't half mean a lot of forward force needed.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

And back when you could low fly (really low) without getting filmed by someone with a phone camera, I used to wind on a turn of up trim and fly at high power, high speed and a forward push held on the stick.

It was my 'sneeze factor', and if I suddenly needed height I had speed to trade for it and instant back stick just by relaxing the push.

[Pace]

I think some are misunderstanding what I am saying regarding trim. I am not suggesting as you flare that you are winding trim in the flare I am suggesting that in the last part of the approach you premeditate the trim changes and slightly trim the aircraft so a little forward pressure is required on the last part of the approach.

Some aircraft are different regarding trim forces. The Seneca twin is notorious for flat landing and being heavy on controls if not trimmed correctly.
Many pilot complain about their landing behaviour yet that slight premeditation on trim will make all the difference to landing the aircraft.

i have not had a bad landing in over 20 years so must be doing something right :E If you accept that the aircraft should be correctly trimmed for every configuration change then why should it be out of trim for the actual landing bit?

Pace

[stevelup]

It would feel very alien to me having to apply forward pressure during approach. It's an interesting discussion though!

[Pace]

It would feel very alien to me having to apply forward pressure during approach.

Again I am not suggesting you trundle down the approach having to apply forward pressure only that at the point just before you transition from the descent profile to the landing configuration that you premeditate part of the trim required in the landing configuration and wind in that bit extra to take the weight off the controls

Just imagine for one second that you had a sophisticated Gizmo on the aircraft which automatically trimmed the aircraft for you would your landing be better like that? correctly trimmed for the landing configuration than what some are saying which is that you should accept landing an out of trim aircraft which is what some are arguing for.
I cannot see the logic in that

Pace

[stevelup]

Ah, I see. I'm thinking that I do that as some kind of subconscious action - but I'm not actually sure!

I'll check next time.

[rnzoli]

Might depend on your approach profile as well. Trimmed for optimal forces during the flare may be the very close to the trimming required on a shallow (IFR-like) approach. But if I deploy landing flaps and cut the throttle only when I am sure I reach the threshold, then I must "dive" to the runway and that requires significant forward pressure till round-out. I won't trim this out, otherwise I will have to pull hard on during the flare.

I had this topic discussed with one of my instructors. He advised me to keep pushing the stick during the last part of the approach, because it's a relatively short part of a VFR approach, and the light forces after round-out are more important. However he mentioned that tow planes have a much longer steep descents, and they have to trim their elevator to that. Which addmittedly requires a great deal of struggle with controls during and after the round-out.

[Flyingmac]

Trim for a stable approach, then leave the trim alone. You should be landing with positive back pressure.


The earlier post citing full nose-up trim on a Super Cub on floats. This reduces the effect of the elevator at full travel.:=

[Pace]

Flying Mac
Explain rather than just making statements why the landing part should be out of trim ? How much back pressure do you want ? Is this not part of the reason that some land flat ?

I taught a Seneca pilot to premeditate the trim changes from approach trim and to taking a bit more nose up trim in the transition phase and it sorted his heavy control problems. Obviously the Seneca has a stabilator rather than an elevator.

Why? For what logical reason do you promote landing with an out of trim aircraft ? I can understand from a instructors viewpoint with low time students you need the student to be on a stable approach with as little to do especially in the last phase of the flight where there is room for error but I don't understand later on why you should want an out of trim aircraft when there is no need ?

Pace

[Flyingmac]

No reply. Because I know you can't be serious.:=

[9 lives]

should be trimmed so that positive back pressure is required for speed reduction

For any certified airplane, back pressure will always be required for a speed reduction (all other things being equal) - it's a certification requirement.

We DO NOT trim an aircraft full nose up for the flare, apply the required back pressure to raise the nose - two reasons:

If you have foolishly trimmed full nose up, and then choose to go around, you have a wrong handful, and added task of lots of untrimming to safely climb away. Secondly, you want to feel the backforce changes in the controls as you flare! It is that force which indicates your flare, which is the approach to a stall - you feel that!

In floatplanes, we maintain the required pitch attitude by correct application of pitch control - which will require force applied to the controls. We do this because the pilot flies the plane, the plane does not fly the pilot, - particularly in a floatplane! Floatplane pilots are proud to have and use pilot muscles!

Do not retract flaps during the approach unless you're doing so as a part of applying power to go around.

Add power during a normal approach to displace your desired touchdown point [to the runway] otherwise there should be no need for the use of power to affect the aircraft handling, trim, nor control forces during a normal landing. There is no reason to not make power off approaches "normal" and the use of power only to assure that you arrive at the desired touchdown point. This may not be easy to achieve, but is worth the effort in skills development.

[Pace]

We DO NOT trim an aircraft full nose up for the flare, apply the required back pressure to raise the nose - two reasons:

If you have foolishly trimmed full nose up, and then choose to go around, you have a wrong handful, and added task of lots of untrimming to safely climb away. Secondly, you want to feel the backforce changes in the controls as you flare! It is that force which indicates your flare, which is the approach to a stall - you feel that!

Step turn

Some interpretations of what is being said are unbelievable who has suggested trimming full nose up? If you did that the aircraft would not be trimmed
I have suggested that a pilot before changing the configuration from the descent profile to a landing profile Slightly trims towards the neutral landing configuration
by adding a touch of back trim in the final area of the approach sector. and you will not get back force changes in an aircraft which is correctly trimmed ?

Then I get these wild and ludicrous statements?

Pace

[Flyingmac]

Some interpretations of what is being said are unbelievable who has suggested trimming full nose up?


Post 35

[Jan Olieslagers]

About two years ago a Seneca did exactly the same at our airport.
Which Seneca, and which airport? (out of sheer curiosity).

[Chuck Ellsworth]

When flying a PBY I never ever trimmed it after trimming for the final approach.

Anyone who thinks a light airplane either single or twin engine needs a lot of back pressure in the flare/hold off when landing should try the PBY.

It can require about fifty to one hundred pounds of back pressure in some cases.

On take off on the water the back pressure to get on the step is at least one hundred pounds of pull.