How long are your landings?

[Pilot DAR]

I was watching the 172s pound circuits for a bit this afternoon, as well as a couple of really skillfully flown taildraggers. I considered how long their landings were - not in the runway distance used sense, but rather how long was each pilot landing the plane, from the time (and place on the runway) where the first wheel touched, to the point at which it appeared that the pilot was no longer attempting to control the aircraft as it moved through the air.

I watched a pilot three point a 172, and very shortly after saw the elevator droop so as to suggest that the pilot had entirely released the controls. That pilot did not land the airplane for very long.

I watched another pilot, in a gentle crosswind, neatly put down the upwind main wheel of his Citabria, hold the other one off a ways, then later settle the tail gently down, and turn off the runway with the stick held back, and the ailerons still into the crosswind. Nice...

And generally I saw a group of pilots land the club 172s, and devote some effort to keeping a wing low into the crosswind, and holding the nose up throughout the landing - good effort.

It seems to me that the longer you spend landing the plane, the better chance of flying a nice landing! The drop it on, and forget about it, not so much....

[Genghis the Engineer]

The line I was told years ago, and still hold by, is "keep flying the aircraft until all of the bits have stopped moving".

G

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I watched a pilot three point a 172, and very shortly after saw the elevator droop so as to suggest that the pilot had entirely released the controls. That pilot did not land the airplane for very long.

That pilot didn't 'land' the aeroplane at all. He flew it onto the ground. Why are PPLs today (they were where did my PPL) told, nay have it hammered into them, that nose legs are NOT designed to take landing loads and they WILL break if you behave are lazy when landing.

Look at the number of collapsed noselegs in the monthly AAIB reports. Each one of those will entail an expensive airframe repair and engine rebuild (shock loaded) and and probably a new prop. The 'pilots' (I hesitate to call them that) may walk away from such aeroplane damage, but everyone who flies pays for their ham fistedness through their insurance premiums. Insurance is there to cover the unforeseeable, but here it is paying for entirely predictable 'pilot' induced damage.

Why were the tailwheel pilots displaying more skill? Because tailwheel aeroplanes don't let you get away with sloppy technique as trikes do.

[piperboy84]

I fly a taildragger and get seriously jealous of the trike pilots that come in on a crosswind without a care in the world about touching down with a bit of drift or crab knowing for the most part the CG position will swing then round straight, whereas I'm on the rudders peddling 10 to the penny deathly afraid of any crab or drift and the potential humiliation of a ground loop. It's like you have to "earn" a proper landing every damn time, crosswind or not. Who says fear is not a good motivator ?

[9 lives]

It's like you have to "earn" a proper landing every damn time, crosswind or not. Who says fear is not a good motivator ?

Yes, I find the same thing! I often realize that crosswind landings in my taildragger went much better than I feared they would - I suppose because my fear made me work so hard at it!

[Martin_123]

If you're used to flying C150/PA28, C172 may seem a bit more prone to three-pointers, at least from my limited experience.. if it's not trimmed well, it's quite difficult to flare it nicely

as for myself, as a grass-field dweller, letting the elevator go is not an option

[wanabee777]

The F/O's I flew with, who had a respectable amount of taildragger time, were some of the most accomplished aviators I had the pleasure to learn from.

[TowerDog]

. I flew with, who had a respectable amount of taildragger time, were some of the most accomplished aviators I had the pleasure to learn from.

Thx, maybe I was one of them? :)

[rnzoli]

Due to its tandem wheel arrangement, and the fact that the support wheels under the wings are deliberately short, you have to "fly" this thing even during taxiing...

http://www.denbighgliding.co.uk/btrw.jpg

[ShyTorque]

I usually land with zero knots groundspeed but keep flying until well after the engines are shut down..

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

If you're used to flying C150/PA28, C172 may seem a bit more prone to three-pointers, at least from my limited experience.. if it's not trimmed well, it's quite difficult to flare it nicely


First, it should be trimmed. Second, the 172 has absolutely appalling ailerons, to the extent I often wondered if they were even connected to the yoke. The elevators, however, are superb and allow very fine pitch control down to the very lowest airspeeds. There is NO excuse for 3-pointing one.

When I used to meat bomb with one the jumpmaster would sit in the open doorway during the return flight and landing (static line drops, RH door removed) and give marks out of ten for minimal flexing of the main gear leg as the RH tyre kissed the tarmac, fully held off of course. The frequent short flights in meat bombing does wonders for one's landing currency!

[Martin_123]

First, it should be trimmed. Second, the 172 has absolutely appalling ailerons, to the extent I often wondered if they were even connected to the yoke. The elevators, however, are superb and allow very fine pitch control down to the very lowest airspeeds. There is NO excuse for 3-pointing one.

When I used to meat bomb with one the jumpmaster would sit in the open doorway during the return flight and landing (static line drops, RH door removed) and give marks out of ten for minimal flexing of the main gear leg as the RH tyre kissed the tarmac, fully held off of course. The frequent short flights in meat bombing does wonders for one's landing currency!
I only have one or two hours on C172, for some reason they are not very popular in Ireland, the one I was flying felt very heavy on elevator so I don't know really. I did a three-pointer on one of the touch and go's. That's the only threepointer I've ever done. Still don't know where it came from

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Trike, being landed properly.....

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b132/GZK6NK/trike_zpsciwfbses.jpg (http://s18.photobucket.com/user/GZK6NK/media/trike_zpsciwfbses.jpg.html)

[DeltaV]

Due to its tandem wheel arrangement, and the fact that the support wheels under the wings are deliberately short, you have to "fly" this thing even during taxiing...

http://www.denbighgliding.co.uk/btrw.jpg
Yes, but that's part of the game you can play with that arrangement.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

If you're used to flying C150/PA28, C172 may seem a bit more prone to three-pointers, at least from my limited experience
172 is (IME) rather less tolerant of being landed too fast than 152. Solution: don't try to land it too fast.

[Mike Flynn]

I quite agree and the 172 electric flaps don't help. Seem to take forever to wind in and out.

The PA 28 flaps are much more manoeuvrable and quickly usable in a go around.

That handbrake style lever gives variable flaps to suit and you can pull it up and down to suit the circumstances. Reminds me of the collective on a helicopter.

I love the flaps on the Piper family which assist getting in and out of short strips.

[rnzoli]

Yes, but that's part of the game you can play with that arrangement.Can? Must! There is a very thin borderline between taxiing and becoming airborne during a fast (dual) backtrack.... https://youtu.be/O2C5hkS22Mg?t=4m12s

[londonblue]

SSD, how do you know it wasn't taking off;-)

[Pilot DAR]

SSD, how do you know it wasn't taking off;-)

You have to look closely, but you can see that the split rudder dive brake is opened. It's closed for takeoffs.

But yes, that is certainly an example of a very nicely flown landing, where the "aircraft" is being flown as far through the landing as possible.

I'm sure that for nearly all of us, we are flying, and in particular landing, because we really enjoy it. So why not enjoy it as far through the landing as possible - fly as long as you can!

[londonblue]

Pilot DAR, thanks for that. I'm a bit of a novice.

On a more serious note I agree with you. However, one issue for me was that during training (and circuit bashing specifically) I was always anxious to get the plane down as soon as possible to have as much runway ahead of me for the "go" part of the touch and go. That is a hard habit to break, but (for me) the trick is to relax and let nature take its course.

[Crash one]

One or two instructors during my PPL kept knocking the rudder use out of me, plus insisting that the nose wheel must be on the ground before the "go" part is started, sometimes too late for my comfort. I came from gliders and after PPL I was advised by my tail wheel differences instructor "next time bring your feet with you!" I was, and still am, pi$$ed off with that. Went back to the gliders to find my feet.
So I'm afraid I have some misgivings about the training.
I also had the advice that a tail wheel landing is not over until the pilot is in bed with someone.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Crash One, your post and other on Proon from time to time do make me wonder about the quality of some flight instruction these days.

I did meet this just once at Guernsey a long time ago when being checked out to hire a PA38 while on holiday. I did my usual fully held-off landing and his comment was something like "no need for that in these".

Oh dear.

[foxmoth]

One or two instructors during my PPL kept knocking the rudder use out of me, plus insisting that the nose wheel must be on the ground before the "go" part is started,
The first part is just bad teaching unless you were actually over using them. As far as insisting the nose is down goes I have no problem with that in principle, he maybe wants to see how you control the nosewheel onto the ground. I do a thing similar in the early part of tailwheel conversions - I want to see them control the direction down to a low speed, but I will brief not to "go" until I call it, and if I am not happy with the distance left, we stop and taxi back to the hold.

[TRPGpilot]

SSD, how do you know it wasn't taking off;-)
It was not taking off because it was not strapped to a great massive fuel tank pointing vertical along with 2 solid fuel rocket boosters!

[foxmoth]

It was not taking off because it was not strapped to a great massive fuel tank pointing vertical along with 2 solid fuel rocket boosters!

Must be a Yank, can't understand British humour!:rolleyes:
(Or maybe French being in Montserrat)

[Crash one]

The first part is just bad teaching unless you were actually over using them. As far as insisting the nose is down goes I have no problem with that in principle, he maybe wants to see how you control the nosewheel onto the ground. I do a thing similar in the early part of tailwheel conversions - I want to see them control the direction down to a low speed, but I will brief not to "go" until I call it, and if I am not happy with the distance left, we stop and taxi back to the hold.

"Control the nosewheel onto the ground". If the a/c has enough airspeed that the elevator is capable of keeping the nose up then it is too fast to require nosewheel control, (I think?) eventually gravity will take over etc. (headwind considered of course). I am talking about some pushing to get it down.
There were other aspects of training that were, in my miserable opinion, lacking.
But as a student pilot one is expected to worship the instructor!

[foxmoth]

If the a/c has enough airspeed that the elevator is capable of keeping the nose up then it is too fast to require nosewheel control, (I think?) eventually gravity will take over etc. (headwind considered of course). I am talking about some pushing to get it down.
You did not say that he was trying to get you to push it down, using the elevators to keep it off is exectly what I mean by controlling the nosewheel and there are many that do not do it, as you say, eventually gravity will take over, but there are some very strange techniques I have seen over the years, as an instructor I would like to see that correct technique was used - from what you say this was not the intention, so yes poor (flying) technique from the instructor.

But as a student pilot one is expected to worship the instructor

There are certainly many of my students that never did this, and not something I would want, much better that you are more approachable so the student can question WIHIH

[Crash one]

You did not say that he was trying to get you to push it down, as you say, eventually gravity will take over, but there are some who just do not hold the nosewheel off and others that will do that then push it down, as an instructor I would like to see that correct technique was used - from what you say this was not the intention, so yes poor technique from the instructor



There are certainly many of my students that never did this, and not something I would want, much better that you are more approachable so the student can question WIHIH

Sorry I didn't make nosewheel thing clear.
Most instructors are fine, I find it embarrassing to criticise any of them, it sounds like sour grapes, know it all, etc.
Due to financial and domestic constraints I have got a total of four exercise 14 in logbooks, 1956 gliders (ATC) 1983 gliders, 1986 C152, 2006 C152. So what would be the reaction of newly qualified instructors one third of my age during the early stages of my final push to the NPPL if I had mentioned those?

[foxmoth]

So what would be the reaction of newly qualified instructors one third of my age during the early stages of my final push to the NPPL if I had mentioned those?

I would say you take it up with the CFI if you do not feel you can take it up with the instructor him(her)self

[MrAverage]

.......you can only have one first solo.......

[Crash one]

I would say you take it up with the CFI if you do not feel you can take it up with the instructor him(her)self

I didn't feel the need to take it up with anyone.

[9 lives]

.......you can only have one first solo.......

In aeroplanes - yes. I have managed two first solos in my career, the second one was more un nerving than the first.

I was mentoring held off landings to two pilots yesterday, (C172 and C150). During my checkout in the 172 (class one instructors was checking me out), he seemed surprised that I would hold the nosewheel off as long as the plane would allow. He was also unaware that 15 flap would allow lightening the nosewheel loads even while taxiing. Indeed, while I was taxiing out, another instructor radio'd us to tell us that our flap were extended a bit - Yes, I intend that. My instructor was a little surprised that the nosewheel would lift off in a 15 flap takeoff, within the first couple of feet of ground roll, and could be easily held off thereafter until airborne.

When you consider the amount of rudder back there, and it's arm to the main wheels, compared to the rather small amount of nosewheel rubber contacting the ground at a short arm, it is not surprising that the rudder as actually very effective for steering on the ground, as long as some air is passing over it. From my experience, if the horizontal tail will control pitch, so as to lift the nose to tailwheel off, there's lots of rudder to steer any GA plane (some powerful warbird types are different in that regard)..

While mentoring the 150 owner last evening, I managed to make the landing use ou about 4000 feet of the 6000 foot runway, by very slowly reducing the power, as he had to control the aircraft the whole time during the landing - it worked quite well.

Pilots spend much too little time in the flare!

[Fly4Business]

Taxi with flaps was an absolut NoGo on the 172 during my initial training, as this was near coast and one of the usual squalls would lift and blow you off taxiway. So, it all depends on where you are.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Pilots spend much too little time in the flare!

Many pilots do. Not taildragger, pilots, however; their aeroplanes won't allow it!

[foxmoth]

.......you can only have one first solo.......
Three for me - gliders, fixed wing then helicopters. This is not including my Navy fixed wing flying, I had gone solo on gliders and C150 but then did flying grading on Chippy which they counted as ex14 and the same on BFT with the Bulldog.

Many pilots do. Not taildragger, pilots, however; their aeroplanes won't allow it!

Dont you believe it, I can certainly demo this for you (not of course my normal technique)!

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I'd be interested in how a tailwheel pilot could land without properly flaring, Fox. For a 3-pointer it's axiomatic or you'll either not spend long enough flaring which will lead to a bounce which has to be 'dealt with' by catching it with power and trying again or going around, or you'll spend too long flaring which means you'll drop it on with a bang when the bottom falls out and it stalls!

[ShyTorque]

I used to tell my students that mainwheels were for landing on, nosewheels were for steering with.

[Level Attitude]

insisting that the nose wheel must be on the ground before the "go" part is started, sometimes too late for my comfort.A 'Touch and Go' is a way of saving time by Landing and then Taking Off without stopping the aircraft.

It is used to enable many more Take Offs and Landings to be practised in a given time and, I would suggest, that it's main benefit is actually in being able to practice Landings.

To me, an aircraft has not landed until all of its wheels are on the ground.
Getting airborne before this happens is a 'Go Around' where the wheels touched the ground.
All wheels on the ground is certainly the only time I would want to be changing the flap setting from 'Landing Configuration' to 'Take Off Configuration'

Although a 'Touch and Go' may be the plan if, by the time the aircraft has Landed, it is not safe to proceed with the Take Off then (as foxmouth has said) DON'T
(Take Off = Always Optional whereas Landing = Always Mandatory)

If, on the Approach, the aircraft's flight path means that neither a Take Off nor a Full Stop are likely to be safe after the Landing then a Go Around should be initiated.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

To me, an aircraft has not landed until all of its wheels are on the ground.

True, but in a trike the main thing is to land gently on the mains with the nose wheel held off. That's what takes time to learn. Once the aeroplane is in that position continuing to hold off the nose wheel until the elevator runs out of authority is easy, so 'going' on a touch and go before the nosewheel has landed surely has great benefit in fitting as many 'landings' as possible into each hour, rather than the backtrack and take off that might well be required if one waits until the nose wheel has landed.

All wheels on the ground is certainly the only time I would want to be changing the flap setting from 'Landing Configuration' to 'Take Off Configuration'

On a 'wheeler' touch & go in the Chippy one has to remove one's left hand from the closed throttle, transfer it to the stick to continue to hold the tail up, transfer one's right hand from stick to flaps to raise the drag flap, RH back on the stick, LH back on throttle, open up for the 'go' of the touch and go. It takes a lot longer to describe than to do! All this time the little wheel at the back is off the ground.

Nothing wrong, in my book, with reconfiguring the aeroplane as long as it has landed, albeit with the little wheel (which ever end of the aeroplane it's on) still off the ground, though it may be a bit 'one armed paper hangar' to expect a low houred student to do it.

[Level Attitude]

SSD,
Just for discussion/debate purposes:
Quote:
To me, an aircraft has not landed until all of its wheels are on the ground.True, ..... So, we agree!


Once the aeroplane is in that position continuing to hold off the nose wheel until the elevator runs out of authority is easy,Holding the nose off may be easy (though some students/pilots do forget), but doing it whilst maintaining the Runway centreline and Runway direction seems to be impossible for most students (and some pilots) and definitely requires practice.

If you accept that a "Take Off" is permissible anytime after the main wheels have touched the ground then you are also accepting that the "Take Off" will start from wherever the touchdown happened to occur.
Most students do not touchdown on the centreline and the vast majority seem to prefer the left hand side of the runway - which way is the aircraft likely to yaw when full power is applied?
Directional control in the flare, hold off, touchdown and subsequent roll out or acceleration seems to be beyond most (especially early) students.

Nothing wrong, in my book, with reconfiguring the aeroplane as long as it has landed, albeit with the little wheel (which ever end of the aeroplane it's on) still off the groundExtending Flaps causes a Pitch Up, Retracting Flaps causes a Pitch Down. Configuring from Landing to Take Off with the Nose Wheel still off the ground could have interesting consequences.

A Take Off should always require a positive decision to proceed, and that decision should not be made unless both the aircraft and pilot are ready (Acft configured for Take Off, Acft on the Runway Centreline, Runway ahead sufficient)


so 'going' on a touch and go before the nosewheel has landed surely has great benefit in fitting as many 'landings' as possible into each hourThis is practising neither Landings, nor Take Offs. It is practising flying an aeroplane close to the ground with its main wheels touching the ground or, as I posted earlier, a Go Around (where the wheels happened to touch the ground).

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

LA, if you read the rest of my post you'll see that I disagree!

But see also my note at the end re students and config changes on the roll, which you might also have missed.

[foxmoth]

I'd be interested in how a tailwheel pilot could land without properly flaring, Fox.

Bring it in too slow and you will spend very little time in the flare, an experienced tailwheel pilot will get away with this, a less experienced pilot needs more time to sort the height properly and can end up stalling it on from height or, as you say, bouncing, and I have seen people do both!

As far as SSD and LA's discussion goes, there is an argument for both, initially I would say the instructor should see that the pilot concerned controls the nose onto the ground properly and maintains directional control down to a reasonable speed, once the student has demonstrated that OK, then you can do the landings without the nosewheel having to go down - but this should only be a real consideration if you have a marginal runway, on a long enough one the time saving is negligable.

[Crash one]

Extending flaps causes pitch up>>etc. Not necessarily.
Depends where the wings are. My low wing taildragger has a second trim tab operated by the flap lever. This thing is spring loaded to pull it up as the flaps are retracted, the operating cable is underneath. Therefore flaps down, trim tab down, elevator up to counter pitch down.
As for reconfiguration. My method:- Throttle up, drag flaps up, tail up if it isn't already. In that order. Faffing with flaps first while running out of runway does not achieve anything except running out of runway.
In the 152:- Throttle up, flap lever fully up then down to the first stop, keeping the training wheel off the ground. For the pedantics, thumb hits the carb heat at full throttle in both cases (just).
I have, only once, dragged mine off the ground with full flaps, full tanks, and a pie eater, missed the trees by not a lot but it still flew, perhaps a hot day and more pies may have been less funny.
Perhaps I should mention the runway is 600metres grass with a distinct slope up at the last 150metres. If the method works there then it will work just as well on 6000 metre Tarmac.

[9 lives]

True, but in a trike the main thing is to land gently on the mains with the nose wheel held off. That's what takes time to learn. Once the aeroplane is in that position continuing to hold off the nose wheel until the elevator runs out of authority is easy, so 'going' on a touch and go before the nosewheel has landed surely has great benefit in fitting as many 'landings' as possible into each hour, rather than the backtrack and take off that might well be required if one waits until the nose wheel has landed.

Agree.

If a student cannot maintain pitch attitude as intended, and the centerline, then yes, they need more practice, and perhaps instruction. Dumbing down a skill to accommodate lacking skills is not good - expect that skill to be developed and maintained. If a pilot cannot keep a tricycle aircraft on the centerline they have no hope of flying a taildragger - in which all pilots two generations ago learned to fly. If a pilot cannot maintain pitch during a flap reposition they should worry about a gusty day.

To me, an aircraft has not landed until all of its wheels are on the ground.

If the purpose of the landing was to teach approach and landing, and a touch and go is intended I can be content that the nosewheel (or tailwheel) does not touch, and indeed if this is the outcome, I think that the demonstration of skill needed to do that is great compensation for not just dropping the nosewheel on, or threepointing.

Taxi with flaps was an absolut NoGo on the 172 during my initial training, as this was near coast and one of the usual squalls would lift and blow you off taxiway.

I suggest that if wind conditions are such that the use of 10 or so flap while taxiing a 172 landplane could increase risk of being blown around over no flaps, perhaps it's too much wind for the average pilot.

I'd be interested in how a tailwheel pilot could land without properly flaring

I agree that a full flare is going to result in a three point landing in a taildragger - which is not my personal choice. I find that one of the taildraggers I regularly fly (172 taildrgger) can be brought to stall warning, and still wheel landed nicely. This is my preferred method in that plane.

I like the idea that the main wheels touching is considered a part of a landing, and not the point at which the pilot says "I'm down", and stops flying!

[Fly4Business]

If a pilot cannot keep a tricycle aircraft on the centerline they have no hope of flying a taildragger - in which all pilots two generations ago learned to fly. If a pilot cannot maintain pitch during a flap reposition they should worry about a gusty day.
For sure, but one of the easier entries is a tricycle today and I suspect it killed far less people on learning to fly. Although "in the old days" taildragger was the challenge from the beginning, it is nowadays thought as an advanced skill with separate training. So, times did change.
Absolutely agree on pitch keeping during flap reposition and yes, both ways. Extending flaps appears to be taught quite well, but I sometimes feel getting 'em in in flight not so well. This weekend we had a trip to very short fields and what I saw after short&soft field takeoffs was sometimes scary.
If the purpose of the landing was to teach approach and landing, and a touch and go is intended I can be content that the nosewheel (or tailwheel) does not touch, and indeed if this is the outcome, I think that the demonstration of skill needed to do that is great compensation for not just dropping the nosewheel on, or threepointing.
The OP wrote about "pounding circuits", which reads training in my eyes. I think it es perfectly well to do that kind of training with a student for skills demonstration. I remember my FI requiring full touch&gos to be demonstrated to him without nose wheel on the ground before being allowed to go solo.
I suggest that if wind conditions are such that the use of 10 or so flap while taxiing a 172 landplane could increase risk of being blown around over no flaps, perhaps it's too much wind for the average pilot.
Yes, and to have a common frame of reference I welcome if this is tried with an instructor right seat. I believe to judge "too much wind" requires to actually face that and again, better with instructor then later by bad surprise. I met quite some people really afraid of "gusts" (above 5 knots ...), because they almost never did xwind landings. Respect for nature is necessary and good, but overemphasized fear is not.
I agree that a full flare is going to result in a three point landing in a taildragger - which is not my personal choice. I find that one of the taildraggers I regularly fly (172 taildrgger) can be brought to stall warning, and still wheel landed nicely. This is my preferred method in that plane.
I think this really depends on the specific taildragger and there may be all variants, from trim well and it lands itself, to always fighting the bloody hell all the way down to stop.
I like the idea that the main wheels touching is considered a part of a landing, and not the point at which the pilot says "I'm down", and stops flying!
Oh yes!

[Flyingmac]

I see lots of circuits flown by students under instruction. Bomber circuits, too fast approaches and flat landings seem to be the norm these days. A particularly worrying trend is retracting all the flap after touching down on a touch and go.


I watched one student recently, bounce a landing on a solo circuit. He decided a go-around was a good call, and promptly retracted all of the flaps at around 15ft before going for the throttle.
Interesting outcome.


I think we're entering an era where students are being taught badly by Instructors who were taught badly. Slippery slope.

[Fly4Business]

Bad circuit flying always has been a privilege of student flyers ;-). It has to improve over time though and the instructors have to have a very close eye on it. The spread in instructing skills is indeed feeling increased, covering everything from the old and bold ones, over the buts intuition airmen, all the way down to quick-fancy-dirty buttoneers. Btw: retracting flaps completely after touched down is in many ATO handbooks now, so formal no error.

[9 lives]

Btw: retracting flaps completely after touched down is in many ATO handbooks now, so formal no error.

... Which will become a habit which will have to be untaught once that candidate pilot begins to fly RG's!. I flew a bunch of practice circuits in my buddy's 182RG yesterday, and was thinking about this as I did touch and goes: "Flaps identified (hand on knob), pause, think, reselect to 10, and go."

In single engine Cessnas, should you desire to effectively control pitch attitude on the runway, 10 - 15 flap out will give you a little more control. So that's where I leave them until I'm clear of the runway, airborne safely, or no longer taxiing over rough ground - as the case may be....

[Steve6443]

I watched one student recently, bounce a landing on a solo circuit. He decided a go-around was a good call, and promptly retracted all of the flaps at around 15ft before going for the throttle.
Interesting outcome.


Something similar happened to me when I was learning to fly after landing solo for the first time and being given the OK to touch and go. My first reaction was full throttle and once I'd done that, I retracted the flaps from full to 10 degrees - the outcome was also 'interesting' as the plane immediately leapt into the air just as I was retracting the flaps :eek:

Since then I have NO issues determining what happens first on a go-around or a touch and go :p

[Crash one]

Perhaps "what to do first" depends on the runway length and aircraft.
Flying out of a short grass strip in a low wing aircraft with a direct control flap lever like a handbrake handle, throttle first is no problem. Slow moving electric flaps, high wing with hefty pitch up tendencies is different.
One size fits all doesn't work.

[300hrWannaB]

The first aircraft in which I had the pleasure in being a part owner was a Cessna 150.
Electric 40 degree flaps, aerodynamics of a wall, and an engine that was inadequate for a lawnmower.
I could land it on a handkerchief sized field. Not a hope of getting it out in the same length.
An interesting habit was that you had to keep a close eye on the flap lever, as it would happily wind everything back home again. You could land on 40 flap, but a go around needed to be on 15. Power on. Flick the flap lever, muscle around doing the trim change and carb heat. Flap overshoots to zero. Climb rate vanishes. Add that flap. It overshoots and winds towards 30. Trim becomes heavy, trees get closer. Sort it all out and decide that it's not a short field plane after all.

[Crash one]

Well understood, know your aircraft, mine has similar problems. Flap lever has two positions, the pawl and slots are somewhat worn, short final at 150 ft, no wind, quickly select full flap, swap hands, close throttle, 50ft, loud bang as flap lever pops out, instant flaps to zero, pitch up, bugger! Grab flap lever, land left handed using flap lever as an airbrake. I must fix that.

[fireflybob]

I see lots of circuits flown by students under instruction. Bomber circuits, too fast approaches and flat landings seem to be the norm these days. A particularly worrying trend is retracting all the flap after touching down on a touch and go.


Too high approach speed seems to be a common factor - Vat = 1.3 Vs

[A and C]

As Fireflybob says "approach speed seems a common factor ".

I see all sorts of reasons used to increase the approach speed, the common ones being increased weight & gusty conditions as well as "that's what they do on airliners " ( that usually from the orange jet wannabes ).

I discovered most of this while having a coffee in the lounge of a flying club while getting warm having just changed yet another badly flat spotted tyre.

The student congregation around the TV watching airline cockpit videos seemed to regard the flight manual approach speed as a minimum to build apon to get more safety with speed rather than a speed calculated by the aircraft manufacturer for an approach at MLW.

As they usually fly the aircraft well below the MLW I offered the opinion that to achieve 1.3 Vs they might well consider reducing the approach speed below that quoted in the flight manual.

While the approach speed reduction to achieve 1.3 Vs might be far too radical for flying instruction it did bring home the fact that at usual operation weights the flight manual speed will provide adequate gust protection as it is bound to be above the aircraft's true 1.3 Vs.

[Pilot DAR]

It's also worth note that Vs is a 1 G speed. If you fly at less than 1 G, there will be a commensurate reduction in Vs. On approach you might be flying just a little less than 1 G at times, and certainly have the option to reduce pitch into a gust, which will give you a momentary increased margin against stall.

I had occasion recently to demonstrate a slipping glide approach with a fairly steep turn to final. The instructor riding with me was startled by the steep turn, but I reminded him that I was slipping will above stall speed, and not pulling any G.

[foxmoth]

It's also worth note that Vs is a 1 G speed. If you fly at less than 1 G, there will be a commensurate reduction in Vs. On approach you might be flying just a little less than 1 G at times, and certainly have the option to reduce pitch into a gust, which will give you a momentary increased margin against stall.

Usually when you get a +v gust then it will increase your airspeed, push you above the glideslope and increase the g, the tendency then is to lower the nose so you can end up too fast, get a negative gust and the reverse happens, but this means the tendancy is to raise the nose, without an increase in power this is where people get into trouble, the stall speed might drop with the reduction in g, but this soon disappears and you are left low with a lower than ideal airspeed!

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Most students do not touchdown on the centreline and the vast majority seem to prefer the left hand side of the runway - which way is the aircraft likely to yaw when full power is applied?
And if you haven't finished landing yet, you may not have got round to / remembered to raise the flaps yet, and in some aircraft full power with full flaps from the left hand side of the runway can see you off the tarmac and into the left hand grass no matter what you do with the feet ...


Having nearly done that at least once, I prefer nosewheel down (naturally, not pushed), flaps up, steer back to somewhere near the centreline, all nice and relaxed and deliberate, then the "go" bit of "touch and go" may be an option if there's enough runway left.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

- which way is the aircraft likely to yaw when full power is applied?

Errm.... to the right. That's why it's full power and left foot forward in the Chippy on T/O (and Yak - but initially less that full power on that beast especially in a 'from the right' crosswind or it'll turn right despite full left rudder).

[Armchairflyer]

@SSD: unless I am mistaken, you are correct for the Chipmunk and Yak with prop rotation being counter-clockwise, but not for most aircraft (such as C150s, but also Cubs) which will yaw to the left when applying power.

I am not sure that the two aircraft you mention are the best examples to base the reply to "where does the aircraft yaw when power is applied" on, especially in the context of student pilots.

[9 lives]

- which way is the aircraft likely to yaw when full power is applied?

Errm.... to the right.

For aeroplanes whose propellers rotate counter clockwise as viewed from the pilot's seat, yes.

For many other airplanes, whose props rotate clockwise (Continental/Lycoming/Pratt & Whitney/Franklin/Allison powered, among others) expect the aircraft to swing to the left with power application. The affect in airplanes like a Cessna 185 or SM1019 can be pronounced. Cessna 206/210, and high powered Cherokees also, but less so.