Ballooning on landing
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Stuck In Sosua :-(
Age: 62
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where do they get the idea that more than a 3deg approach is necessary? very odd.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: all over the place
Age: 63
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, but I cannot advocate that idea. At what point on the approach do you decide OK I can glide from here? Or is it another one of those standard guesses like 'the approach speed for partial flap'?
You are not going to make the runway unless you are almost over the threshold which should be at 50'.
You will nearly always have a headwind which will reduce the range.
If there is a crosswind you will be crabbing or wingdown to aim for the runway reducing the range.
You will not be at 'best glide speed' so you will have to lower the nose, reducing your range.
You will have flaps extended reducing the range; how many of you know the best glide speed in landing configuration?
With full flaps, the nose will have to pitch down maybe 10deg to regain and maintain the speed lost during the thinking time.
How many will try and extend the glide to the runway because you have taught them that they will make it from a slightly steeper approach, when a landing ahead in a field (but not on top of the approach lights) would be safer for them if not your aeroplane.
Better to teach a consistant approach angle, accurate speed control and then if the engine fails teach how to react quickly, safely and practice choosing a safe landing spot from low altitude.
3deg is standard unless there are obstacles. No wonder it is hard for people to learn to flare if it is from from steep approaches. Ballooning is bound to occur. The attitude change is too great.
3deg gives 300' at 1 mile, 4deg 400', 5deg 500' etc.
Try cutting the engine at 500', at 1 mile from the threshold, at the correct approach speed and count to 5 before you react; making it more realistic. You won't make it to the runway
3deg makes for easy standard calculations;
5x groundspeed gives rate of descent,
3x distance gives height you should be at.
We have to be certified for London City at only 5.5deg which indicates to me a more difficult scenario.
Only my opinion of course
You are not going to make the runway unless you are almost over the threshold which should be at 50'.
You will nearly always have a headwind which will reduce the range.
If there is a crosswind you will be crabbing or wingdown to aim for the runway reducing the range.
You will not be at 'best glide speed' so you will have to lower the nose, reducing your range.
You will have flaps extended reducing the range; how many of you know the best glide speed in landing configuration?
With full flaps, the nose will have to pitch down maybe 10deg to regain and maintain the speed lost during the thinking time.
How many will try and extend the glide to the runway because you have taught them that they will make it from a slightly steeper approach, when a landing ahead in a field (but not on top of the approach lights) would be safer for them if not your aeroplane.
Better to teach a consistant approach angle, accurate speed control and then if the engine fails teach how to react quickly, safely and practice choosing a safe landing spot from low altitude.
3deg is standard unless there are obstacles. No wonder it is hard for people to learn to flare if it is from from steep approaches. Ballooning is bound to occur. The attitude change is too great.
3deg gives 300' at 1 mile, 4deg 400', 5deg 500' etc.
Try cutting the engine at 500', at 1 mile from the threshold, at the correct approach speed and count to 5 before you react; making it more realistic. You won't make it to the runway
3deg makes for easy standard calculations;
5x groundspeed gives rate of descent,
3x distance gives height you should be at.
We have to be certified for London City at only 5.5deg which indicates to me a more difficult scenario.
Only my opinion of course
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are not going to make the runway unless you are almost over the threshold which should be at 50'
You are talking about instrument approaches or pref A machines.
I presume you want them to be full stabilised by 500ft as well.
Thats not the way we teach in the UK for SEP unless it all change in the last 4 years since my FI course.
They should be taught to pick an aiming point 1/3 of the way down the runway and use the flap when they are assured that they can make the aim point. At the point when they select full flap they should be able to glide the rest of the way and make the threshold. The flap is only used to bring the point of impact nearer the threshold.
At no point after passing the downwind end of the runway should the aircraft be in the position of not being able to perform a forced landing and not make the runway.
In fact if you are doing a CPL test doing the circuits and the examiner pulls the engine if you don't make the threshold its an instant fail. And I know a few that have had partials for getting outside the glide range while doing an approach. The examiner spots it, pulls the throttle they can't make it. The caa has another 400 quid.
MJ
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They should be taught to pick an aiming point 1/3 of the way down the runway and use the flap when they are assured that they can make the aim point. At the point when they select full flap they should be able to glide the rest of the way and make the threshold. The flap is only used to bring the point of impact nearer the threshold.
At no point after passing the downwind end of the runway should the aircraft be in the position of not being able to perform a forced landing and not make the runway.
In fact if you are doing a CPL test doing the circuits and the examiner pulls the engine if you don't make the threshold its an instant fail. And I know a few that have had partials for getting outside the glide range while doing an approach. The examiner spots it, pulls the throttle they can't make it. The caa has another 400 quid.
At no point after passing the downwind end of the runway should the aircraft be in the position of not being able to perform a forced landing and not make the runway.
In fact if you are doing a CPL test doing the circuits and the examiner pulls the engine if you don't make the threshold its an instant fail. And I know a few that have had partials for getting outside the glide range while doing an approach. The examiner spots it, pulls the throttle they can't make it. The caa has another 400 quid.
There is no requirement for the aircraft to be able to reach the threshold on a normal circuit, that's why we teach, fly and test glide circuits. Nowhere in the CAA standards documents does it stipulate that in the circuit the runway must always be reachable if the engine fails, and that applies to the CPL skills test too. Please show me any such stipulation from the CAA.
There may be some confusion here with the glide circuit where the student is required to demonstrate the ability to make a glide approach to a safe landing, but that is demonstrated academically from a differently set up circuit, ie the glide circuit.
A powered approach should be flown with power applied, aiming for touchdown close after the threshold. You will not be able to make the runway if the engine fails at 100'on a powered approach to a 500m strip, in the same way you won't make the runway if it fails at 250' after take off.
Homeguard and Pilot Bear
A 3 degree approach is optimum for larger GA twins and jets because of their greater inertia. That is why an ILS and VASIS is set at three degrees.
Just because 3 degrees is the standard for those types it does not follow that light trainers should follow suit - far from it in fact. Try a full flap approach in a Cessna 172 at 3 degrees and even if the pilot can accurately judge three degrees without an electronic or visual glide slope, he will need considerable power to maintain such a flat angle.
The Cessna 172 POH states " Normal landings can be made with power-on or power-off with any flap setting desired".
Normal power-off angle with full flap will be around 6-7 degrees and with a trickle of power, around 5 degrees. Perfectly safe and normal for light aircraft with very little intertia at the flare. Thousands of wartime trainee pilots were taught glide approaches on Tiger Moths as the standard method of landing. The glide angle of a Tiger Moth at 58 knots with no flaps of course was around 5 degrees.
The most common cause of ballooning is excess airspeed beyond the manufacturer's recommended speed. This excess speed is very often mandated by the instructor in the mistaken belief it allows more room for error. On the contrary, it encourages slack airspeed control and the excess speed invariably converts into a balloon because the student is caught unawares by the increased sensitivity of the elevators.
If the manufacturer's recommended threshold speed is used, balloons are less likely and the problem is solved for the time being.
Of course, winds can cause airspeed excursions and an inexperienced student can be caught out. This is where recovery technique from a balloon by landing ahead on the remaining landing area should be taught to the student. It is not good enough to advise the student to always go-around off a balloon. In fact it could be ill-judged advice.
A low speed , full flap go-around at full power and considerable yaw takes careful, concise handling. A stuff-up here can be dangerous because of the low speed and yaw. Mis-handling can lead to a full power incipient spin at very low level.
Far better to teach the student to take the lesser of two evils and simply recover from a balloon by judicious use of power and carefully judged nose attitude to land straight ahead within the available length. Students will need plenty of practice at this manoeuvre and they will gain confidence. Of course they should also be competent at go-arounds of impossibly high balloons and therefore they must be afforded practice until quite safe at this very trickly low speed high drag manoeuvre.
A 3 degree approach is optimum for larger GA twins and jets because of their greater inertia. That is why an ILS and VASIS is set at three degrees.
Just because 3 degrees is the standard for those types it does not follow that light trainers should follow suit - far from it in fact. Try a full flap approach in a Cessna 172 at 3 degrees and even if the pilot can accurately judge three degrees without an electronic or visual glide slope, he will need considerable power to maintain such a flat angle.
The Cessna 172 POH states " Normal landings can be made with power-on or power-off with any flap setting desired".
Normal power-off angle with full flap will be around 6-7 degrees and with a trickle of power, around 5 degrees. Perfectly safe and normal for light aircraft with very little intertia at the flare. Thousands of wartime trainee pilots were taught glide approaches on Tiger Moths as the standard method of landing. The glide angle of a Tiger Moth at 58 knots with no flaps of course was around 5 degrees.
The most common cause of ballooning is excess airspeed beyond the manufacturer's recommended speed. This excess speed is very often mandated by the instructor in the mistaken belief it allows more room for error. On the contrary, it encourages slack airspeed control and the excess speed invariably converts into a balloon because the student is caught unawares by the increased sensitivity of the elevators.
If the manufacturer's recommended threshold speed is used, balloons are less likely and the problem is solved for the time being.
Of course, winds can cause airspeed excursions and an inexperienced student can be caught out. This is where recovery technique from a balloon by landing ahead on the remaining landing area should be taught to the student. It is not good enough to advise the student to always go-around off a balloon. In fact it could be ill-judged advice.
A low speed , full flap go-around at full power and considerable yaw takes careful, concise handling. A stuff-up here can be dangerous because of the low speed and yaw. Mis-handling can lead to a full power incipient spin at very low level.
Far better to teach the student to take the lesser of two evils and simply recover from a balloon by judicious use of power and carefully judged nose attitude to land straight ahead within the available length. Students will need plenty of practice at this manoeuvre and they will gain confidence. Of course they should also be competent at go-arounds of impossibly high balloons and therefore they must be afforded practice until quite safe at this very trickly low speed high drag manoeuvre.
