Bang it on???
 

Why do so many pilots keep insisting that you have to " Bang it on " when landing rather than " Fishing for a greaser. "

What control inputs are recommended to " Bang it on " if you are flying a nose wheel airplane?

How do you " Fish " for a greaser. ?

Bang it on???
 

Do you want a positive touchdown to get the wheels spinning up quickly as well as making sure the anti-skid is singing and dancing, coupled with any weight-on-wheels equipment fitted, or do you want to spend an age scrubbing rubber off and not have as much directional control?

How often do you have to rely on anti- skid?
Why would you spend an age scrubbing off rubber after touch down? I try not to land skidding or drifting sideways, or landing to fast or to far down the runway.

Welcome to the 21st century where stopping distance and preventing over-runs is more important than making the SLF think you're an ace 'cause you can grease it on.

Are you seriously saying you don't know what "fish for a greaser" means and how its done........ Really ? :confused:

Thanks for pointing out what century it is J.O. but if you read my first post you will see I was asking how you bang it on. Do you stall way above the runway or just drive it on at a high rate of descent?

In other words I was curious to know how the bang it on procedure is taught.
I think I understand the importance of not running off the end of the runway.

I think they " fish " for a greaser by moving the elevators like it is a water pump. It has been a long time since I flew with you B.P.F. and I can't remember how you did it.

When I get bored this sure is a neat way to pass time. :ok:

Haha...gotta love lazy Sunday afternoons eh. I'll take a break and join in.

So, may I point out that in a Dash-8 you only need the wheels spinning up to 17 knots to have the anti-skid kick in...35 knots if the system sees you needing the brakes right away because the PSEU detects a fail to spin on one of the four tires...not exactly quick. And, after a good couple thousand hours on Dash-8's, I've found the adage that its like "landing a shopping cart thrown from the back of a pick-up doing 100 down the 401" is more than often accurate...so you shouldn't be worried about those old WOW sensors sending the "we're here" signal to the PSEU. :8

I digress, I'm of the belief that if you have the runway to spare, take a couple feet and try and give your passengers a comfortable return to mother earth. If, however, the runway is of shorter value then sure plop her down so you don't each up too much of that precious room. I don't, however, subscribe to the 21st century belief that we should aim for every landing to have half the overhead bins open and all the pregnant women give birth.

Perhaps if we aimed to always give our passengers a smooth landing we would be able to con people into paying more for a ticket, thus getting better T&C's. :}

There are many airports in my system that are unforgiving in winter or with a contaminated runway. I am based at DCA and fly to LGA and BOS quite often. We also see Providence and other airports with shorter runways.

DCA is not the place in winter to go looking for a "greaser". It's time to get on the pavement and get on the binders to find out just what you have. If is a rather queasy feeling to give the airplane totally over to the anti-skid and simply sit there and listen to it jerk and rattle. It does a very good job by the way but it is doing the stopping not me.

You don't necessarily have to bang it on but runway behind you is useless.

I've never flown the Dash 8 +TSRA but from riding in the back many times it sure has a firm arrival most of the time, it sort of feels like the main gear is bolted to the bottom of the seat with no shock absorbing built in.

For sure all airplanes do not handle the same.

However my curiosity was caused by reading so many conversations where the pilots describe a good landing as one that is banged on, somehow I missed the era when we strived for such an arrival, if we needed a firm touch down it was accomplished by wheel contact and the stall happening at the same time which meant a high alfa arrival at a controlled rate of descent at touch down.

Generally speaking the runways that commercial aviation use are long enough that you do not have to perform a maximum short landing very often.

My favorite runway is 20L at SBRJ it is just over 4300 feet and they operate 737's there with no problem.

Great view on final landing there. :):)
Exactly, it is all about flying accurately.

I have yet to meet a pilot who would prefer to land with a big thump, rather than a nice a squeek as the wheels smoothly roll on.

I have however met lots of pilots that let the aircraft float well past the intended touchdown point by continuing the flare in an attempt to get a greaser, rather than holding the landing attitude without more flare and letting the wheels make a firm but safe touchdown at the best spot.

But I guess a mundane statement of the obvious isn't the point of this thread.:ugh:

Yes I guess you found the jump seat does provide a good view.

I have never sat in a jump seat landing at SBRJ, I was always in the left seat as I was based there for a while in 1999/2000 B.P.F.

It was a great winter flying the top management of TAM Airlines around and living on Copacabana Beach.

Never flown a Dash 8, but have dead- headed more times than I care to remember, I made a point of getting a seat from which I could see the gear, it really became quite entertaining, wet runway, the wheels just skimming along the water on the runway, beautiful, cant actually feel the touchdown, wheel starts to rotate, then, BAMB! the "lift dump" does its thing and the passenger's are certain the pilot has never flown before, it must be very frustrating for the pilots to have to put up with this every landing,

I can attest that as a pax, it ain't known as the crash 8 for nothing...Jesus wept!
On the mighty cripple 7 we merely hear 20' on the RAD ALT, heave..then relax as it rolls on with a minimum of fuss:ok: and you catch a 3 wire....:}

B.P.F my curiosity has gotten the better of me and I would like to know why you would take the time to post the following.
Your response makes no sense at all.

Why don't the both of you get together, have a bunch of coca-cola's, have a brawl, dust yourselves off and go back to you seats and drink some more coke and laugh about how ridiculous this little ongoing battle is. The tension between you seems very child like. Just get it over with, move on

Or go to the other place and sling sh*t around. They thrive on that over there.

Actually I left that other place to get away from this type of activity.

I probably should just ignore such posts.

Indeed you should, Chuck. I got hoofed off that other place for taking an equally hard line on stupidity! And, for comparing the hourly rental rates of airplanes to the price of Las Vegas "working" girls. They're pretty much the same hourly rate, one without the wildly pontificating 22 year old instructor though, making it the better deal.
WD

BPF: Great to see someone other than me uses that phrase! :)



Forgive my lack of local knowlege, but what is 'The Other Place?


MJ:ok:

AVCANADA

Abandon hope all ye who enter here. http://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/wink2.gif


They are, however, both 22 years old...at least, that's what her ID said. haha

60% of the time, it works every time.

Avcanada gets more posts in a day then this forum gets in a month, I wonder why that is...........

Anyway I drop in here every once in a while and it never ends well so I guess I am a slow learner.

I think I will just stick to the occasional post in the Private Aviation forum and leave the Canada forum to you guys.

Enjoy

Chuck was the only guy I met in my flying carrier who could properly teach landings. Before you stone me on this forum, realize, that I am not saying that he is the only guy who can teach landings properly. I only said he is the only guy I met in my 10000 hrs of flying who could do it. Thanks to him I can relieve the suffering of many post-traumatic-airline-training-department-disorders.
Airline instructor, unless he she has a previous instructing background, is just trained to recognise somebody's mistakes, but is not equipped with the tools
How to fix them. Airline instructor was not even trained to give instrument rating or a licence. Just renew it.airline instructor can only give a type rating to pilots, who are supposed to know how to fly. And now we get the co pilots with 150 hrs total (60 hrs actual flight time). Coming in. They don't even have a license to take their mother up in a Cessna on a nice Sunday afternoon. And these guys are the future instructor pool. So that is the reason we have all these "arrivals". Of course everybody makes mistakes sometime and that is normal. But to many airline guys the last 50 feet of flight is a mystery even more compounded by the educationally non-equipped training departments. So they know only firm landing as opposed to long greaser. Not too many seem to know you can still land nicely right at the touch down zone.
Who is gonna cast the first stone?

This thread should be called, " Noobs with lack of skills and knowledge"
even with a book " Landings for Dummies" there is no hope in this low skill and low IQ environment. There will always be idiots flying around. It s a system fault. It s just too easy to become pilot with some $. You can learn what to do but if you don't have the skill to do it then why don't you just quit this job and help aviation become safer.

In my exalted opinion, any landing where the overhead bins stay closed is a greaser. :ok:

During my rather long career flying stuff some of my most enjoyable times were doing PBY type ratings and I never had an airline pilot who was not a pleasure to fly with.

They all quickly realized that it was really fun to actually fly an airplane again and once they rid their brains of SOP's to rely on and re-learned the simple basics of airplane handling they all turned out to be really good hands and feet pilots,

They could then go back to their big aluminum zoom tubes with all the magic buttons and had no trouble readjusting to operating their machines....because they had the confidence of knowing they had re-learned how to fly, not just operate an airplane. :ok:

Unfortunately, thus far in the 21st century, runway overruns seem have become more common (or at least a higher percentage of incidents/accidents). Seems like we've seen one every couple of weeks. Some worse than others.

SWA/Midway. AA Kingston. AA Jackson Hole. AIE Mangalore. TACA Tegucigalpa. TAM São Paulo. Misc. in Russia, Asia, Africa....

It's getting to be a bad habit.....

A smooth touchdown is a nice feeling. But I'll stick with the idea that "a small bang at the start of the landing roll is preferable to a BIG bang at the end of the landing roll."

Saw a 737 overrun a 2500m runway today. Amazes me really.

I won't cast any stones PBY because, for the most part, I agree...although a instructor at a 705 operator myself, I'm lucky to have that instructing background. A small minority of the airline instructors I've come across sit back, monitor for SOP creep and pull up the pre-programmed syllabus from the box. The sim does its thing, the crew do their thing, the instructor makes comments, and the world is a happy place. But the airline industry created them. We can't fault them, we have to fault the system. Some guys are great pilots, but so-so instructors. Some great instructors are so-so pilots, and some great pilots are great instructors. It takes all types.

However, I've noticed in the last little while a big push by many of the instructors and course developers to get "back to basics." I've had many memos come down the line updating our syllabus to include a lot more "fly the airplane" work. Of course, simulator time is so precious and the amount of items that Transport wants to see out of an 8 or 10 session initial type rating does not give too much time for landing attitude training, but this is where a beefed up Line Indoctrination or even an extra sim session focusing on "technique" wouldn't go amiss.

Unless anyone has any ideas for me to send up the chain on how to include such training in an 8 session initial!?! http://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/badteeth.gif

Of course, I'm just thinking aloud here. Its a busy place up in that brain of mine and not all of it prim and proper.

I'm not casting any stones, I agree! I bounce the odd landing, but I never accept that doing this carelessly is acceptable. Fly it like you own it, and want it to last!

In my opinion, the only reason to bang a civil plane onto the surface would be it something unexpected occurred in the last seconds of the flare, and getting it down suddenly was the best thing. Otherwise, I think it's just laziness. A couple of more seconds actually flying the plane in the flare, and a good landing would probably have been the outcome.

But then... a good flare is a stall, and I hear that today's new pilots are afraid to stall (perhaps because their instructors were!). Yes, I generalize somewhat, but pilots, fly your plane like it's an extension of you. Fly it so the people who see you flying it say to themselves: "wow, I want that pilot flying my plane!". Fly it so your peers here are proud of the care you take with it - pride in your workmanship!

You never stall a jet on landing! It is not a light general aviation aircraft.
Yes a smooth touchdown is targeted for, however never use another couple of seconds to achieve that. With 140 to 160 kts landingspeed, you run out of runway very quickly.

Also a lot of jets are vulnerable to a tailstrike with extended flares.

I can't agree with this as an absolute statement. It is true that in most cases, the desirable stall warning at touchdown is just that, a warning, so correct, the aircraft was not truly stalled.

But, there are circumstances when the controls are being held full nose up at touchdown, and the aircraft settles on, sometimes with power. In those cases, it is likely that the aircraft is practically stalled at touchdown. Some floatplane or soft field landings would be like this.

Obviously, a stall to the point of a pitch down at the time of touch down will not work out at all well. Happily, before a plane pitches down, it will be settling as it approaches a stall, and settling in a nose high attitude is very nice, for what is termed a "full stall" landing.

I think there are about zero private GA aircraft with a landing speed of 140 to 160 kts! That well exceeds the Vne of both of my planes! With a light GA aircraft, whose landing speed would be in the range of 45 to 65 kts, spending those few extra seconds to achieve a gentle landing will not increase the runway used - as you're slowing down in the air anyway! All slowing in the air costs zero, where any slowing done on the ground costs in tires and brakes, and some landing gear wear and tear.

Please do use those few extra seconds to slow in the air, touch down more slowly, and gently! Not all landing areas are nice smooth pavement!

With respect: Could be.....


My bold.

Yes, I generally agree, but it is not the only way. Allowing the notion of a "full stall" landing, which is possible in many aircraft types, supports the understanding objective for new pilots.

I have tailstruck my taildragger in a fully stalled landing (though I seek to avoid doing this). I have never tailstruck a floatplane, no matter how hard I held the controls against the nose up stop!

But, in the interest of objectivity, yes, if you fly a STOL equipped tricycle Cessna at very high AoA, close to a hard surface, it is possible that the tail tiedown ring will strike the ground first, and doing this is bad.

I'm not suggesting that fully stalled landings are common, but they can be executed more often than they are, and this objective (without striking the tail) is generally good.

Really?????

You can do this in any airplane?

If I pull the controls fully back on final, and I'm a foot off the runway, my VSI won't indicate anything, as I will have landed before it has a chance. No wreck involved - that would be a new experience for me, which I skillfully prevent!

If I have approached the stall in stable deceleration, and the controls are fully back, the plane is defined as being stalled. If I land it that way, it was a full stall landing. I have not cited CLmax as a stall criteria.

But yes, impressionable pilots, do not take 51's advice, and approach the runway at 2000 FPM down, fully stalled - It won't work out at all well, and he'll be asking for a video! It is obviously VERY important to 51, that pilots are reminded that a stall warning and a stall are not the same thing, and it's true!

If you have achieved a stall warning at touchdown, and your landing was "nice", you did very well. Pat yourself on the back, and do it again!

Why does almost every discussion about flying turn into arguing over semantics?

No one is correct at all times and in this case I used the wrong word.

Then again maybe my fundamental knowledge of aerodynamics is lacking and I should be careful I don't hurt myself the next time I go flying. :ok:

I think its because we're all masochists Chuck...otherwise, we wouldn't be pilots.

Unfortunately Step Turn, you have to. Even with the controls held fully aft the aircraft may not yet have exceeded CLmax. It may, as it pitches in response to the input, but until you exceed that critical angle you are not stalled. Simply holding the controls in a specific position is not the definition of a stall...if I may from one of my favourite books on the subject, Mechanics of Flight by AC Kermode (Kermode, Pearson Education Limited, 10th Edition, 1996)

It's the "we find that the shape of the aerofoil" that we are concerned with here. By holding the controls, you are simply changing the shape of the aerofoil. But, as Mr. Kermode notes, this does not change the stalling angle. Therefore, just by holding the controls in their full aft position does not mean you are stalled.

Also...I don't like teaching the whole "hear the horn." I never did as an instructor and I cringe at it now (although I admit, they do end in pretty good landings in GA aircraft...not so much in the Transport Category world though). Putting that idea into a new students head at such impressionable stages of development could become a problem were that student to go out and try the same thing with a decent crosswind. A bit of aileron and suddenly they've wing dropped it onto the runway all because they remember their instructor saying "all good landings begin with a stall horn."