Teaching people to land a PA28
Trickling the power off from the threshold to the flare (whilst maintaining the 63kt).
1. Progressively ease back on the control column to maintain level flight
1. Progressively ease back on the control column to maintain level flight
2. Ease back on the control column and select the landing attitude for the aircraft and wait for it to slow down/run out of energy and land.
Conversion to type. Instructor-"70 knts on final". Me-"55 would be better". Instructor-"No, 70 knts, 65 over the numbers". Resulting float with help from ground effect eats up the runway to the point where a go-around is prudent. Aircraft in landing configuration stalls at 34 knots.
No doubt we'd have landed ok with 1500mtrs of tarmac but not the 500mtrs of wet grass that we had to play with. No mention in this thread of hard/grass/short/long.
No doubt we'd have landed ok with 1500mtrs of tarmac but not the 500mtrs of wet grass that we had to play with. No mention in this thread of hard/grass/short/long.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flyingmac, I don't know if you're talking about PA28, which has (at lest -161 II and III) full dirty stall speed at 44 KIAS, but you should be aware that many aircraft (especially C172) have enormous CAS/IAS deviation near stall speed.
For example, C172P has a full flap (30°) stall speed 33 KIAS/46 KCAS and at 40 KIAS, CAS is 47 kts and at 50 KIAS, CAS is 53 kts. That means that if you fly the approach at 50 kts IAS, you are actually only 7 knots above stall speed and not 17 as you may think, since your approach CAS is 53 knots and stall speed (CAS) is 46 kts.
I'm not saying you should fly 70-75 knots into short strips, possibly with terrain that prevents you from going around, but you have to take any possible wind, downdraughts on final (which could force you to land on a road, railroad or river before the threshold) in consideration and 55 knots seems quite slow.
For example, C172P has a full flap (30°) stall speed 33 KIAS/46 KCAS and at 40 KIAS, CAS is 47 kts and at 50 KIAS, CAS is 53 kts. That means that if you fly the approach at 50 kts IAS, you are actually only 7 knots above stall speed and not 17 as you may think, since your approach CAS is 53 knots and stall speed (CAS) is 46 kts.
I'm not saying you should fly 70-75 knots into short strips, possibly with terrain that prevents you from going around, but you have to take any possible wind, downdraughts on final (which could force you to land on a road, railroad or river before the threshold) in consideration and 55 knots seems quite slow.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The first town on the Thames
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
2 Posts
Conversion to type. Instructor-"70 knts on final". Me-"55 would be better". Instructor-"No, 70 knts, 65 over the numbers". Resulting float with help from ground effect eats up the runway to the point where a go-around is prudent. Aircraft in landing configuration stalls at 34 knots.
From the PA-28-181 POH:
"The airplane should be trimmed to an initial approach speed of about 75 KIAS with a final approach speed of 66 KIAS with flaps extended."
Unless you are absolutely sure you know what you are doing, stick to the POH numbers.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No mention in this thread of hard/grass/short/long.
More to the point, what difference does it make to the correct technique for landing i.e. 50ft to touchdown?
If the performance figures say the runway is long enough then that is OK. If having applied the appropriate factor(s) for grass or wet or tailwind or downslope and the runway length is still sufficient then that is also OK.
However, Tigger_Too quite correctly points out - if the POH gives you a speed to fly then that is the speed to fly and it follows that if the same POH provides figures that show the grass strip you want to fly into is too short then trying to fly in there by shaving 10Kt off the certified approach speed and praying that dragging it in across the road does not cause a collision with a tractor is making a bad situation worse.
The aircraft in question was not a PA28 and the approach speed in the POH is quoted as 55kias. Not 70 as the instructor was insisting upon. As for the C172, the speeds quoted in my own POH are INDICATED airspeeds and nothing else.
Part of my initial training (many moons ago) consisted of approaches and landings with ALL of the instruments covered. Those were the days.
Back to painting the shed.
Airplane pilot prank goes wrong, yet right
Part of my initial training (many moons ago) consisted of approaches and landings with ALL of the instruments covered. Those were the days.
Back to painting the shed.
Airplane pilot prank goes wrong, yet right
Last edited by Flyingmac; 29th Jul 2010 at 11:47.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My landing technique is to point the aircraft at the runway. It seems to work.
The PA28 has to be about the easiest aircraft known to mankind to land. It wasn't nicknamed the "landomatic" for no reason.
Get the speed/energy management right, close the damn throttle and don't land on the nosewheel. Job done.
The PA28 has to be about the easiest aircraft known to mankind to land. It wasn't nicknamed the "landomatic" for no reason.
Get the speed/energy management right, close the damn throttle and don't land on the nosewheel. Job done.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Downwind
Age: 40
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow.... a PPL with less than one years experience comes on the instructor form to tell tell us instructors how to fly airplanes
. What other pearls of wisdom do you have for us guys who have been doing it for 20 + yrs
. What other pearls of wisdom do you have for us guys who have been doing it for 20 + yrs
Apologies if I caused you some confusion. It has been known (at least to me) that Students and PPL holders alike post their own views on these boards in addition to the well informed instructors. My post was only my take on the subject so far - which I thought was a fair point. You may be so kind as to go back and re-read my post again and you will note that the views expressed where far from telling "instructors how to fly airplanes" and the views contained were indeed IMHO (In my humble opinion). Nor did I present them as pearls of wisdom. Though since you asked what other pearls of wisdom I have for you, I would suggest reading a post and taking it for what it is. When you have done that, if you disagree with the content of the post I (as a lowly PPL Holder with less than one year's experience) have made you might be so kind to highlight the mistake and what you feel would be a better approach.
That said I agree entirely with say again slowly below and this is the point I was getting at;
Get the speed/energy management right, close the damn throttle and don't land on the nosewheel. Job done.
I have met both!
Ryan
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the C172, the speeds quoted in my own POH are INDICATED airspeeds and nothing else.
Of course TAS is taken into account when measuring performance but that is done by applying pressure altitude and temperature to the appropriate tables.
The test pilot will have checked PEC and there will be a table or graph in the book.
However, the test pilot will also have tested the appropriate approach speed and used that to determine the performance and certification.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for the newbies on this site....
DFC has a reputation for posting compelete and utter bollocks with all things to do with instructing and flying aircraft.
Please bear this in mind when you read his posts.
I don't have a clue what he has posted but if he is true to form from a year ago when i eventually put him on ignore he will be talking bollocks but in a way that sounds correct.
You should treat this post as a NOTAM
DFC has a reputation for posting compelete and utter bollocks with all things to do with instructing and flying aircraft.
Please bear this in mind when you read his posts.
I don't have a clue what he has posted but if he is true to form from a year ago when i eventually put him on ignore he will be talking bollocks but in a way that sounds correct.
You should treat this post as a NOTAM
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too many students fly final too fast. If the speed is right, the stall warning will come on during the flare. If it comes on while still on approach, keep the power on, or add power if the IAS is too slow.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sweden
Age: 41
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too many students fly final too fast. If the speed is right, the stall warning will come on during the flare. If it comes on while still on approach, keep the power on, or add power if the IAS is too slow.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco, California, USA
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KISS
I can't understand this concept that prevails in GA in the UK of making everything more complicated than it actually is. Granted there are some decent points made here but IMHO most is nonsense, or at least to me. It is a good idea when flying at night to judge the flare based on your peripheral vision but to be honest I can't see the need when flying daytime VFR in VMC. There is no need to watch the ROD or the ASI after crossing the threshold, or cut the power at 50' or pitch up 0.65 degrees. OAT, airport elevation and prevailing winds will vary and as such each profile would be flown slightly different.
When landing, I set up a decent approach, sit back and feel the aircraft. I let the aircraft tell me what it needs and adjust accordingly. The event should be an exercise of the senses not of arithmetic or physics (We assume we all have a decent knowledge of anyway, don't we
). I'm not saying my landings are perfect but they are far from terrible. Landing a plane, which lets face it is not rocket science, should be in every pilot's blood. One should develop, over time, a gut feeling of when things are going well and when we should try again. At the end of the day all we are doing is returning the aircraft to the ground with the primary objective of not destroying it, property or those contained within.
Ryan
KISS
I can't understand this concept that prevails in GA in the UK of making everything more complicated than it actually is. Granted there are some decent points made here but IMHO most is nonsense, or at least to me. It is a good idea when flying at night to judge the flare based on your peripheral vision but to be honest I can't see the need when flying daytime VFR in VMC. There is no need to watch the ROD or the ASI after crossing the threshold, or cut the power at 50' or pitch up 0.65 degrees. OAT, airport elevation and prevailing winds will vary and as such each profile would be flown slightly different.
When landing, I set up a decent approach, sit back and feel the aircraft. I let the aircraft tell me what it needs and adjust accordingly. The event should be an exercise of the senses not of arithmetic or physics (We assume we all have a decent knowledge of anyway, don't we
). I'm not saying my landings are perfect but they are far from terrible. Landing a plane, which lets face it is not rocket science, should be in every pilot's blood. One should develop, over time, a gut feeling of when things are going well and when we should try again. At the end of the day all we are doing is returning the aircraft to the ground with the primary objective of not destroying it, property or those contained within. Ryan
KISS
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't come here often, but I do own and fly a PA28 with later type wing (not the old Hershey bar which behaves differently).
Successful landing in moderate wind conditions is a simple matter of following the advice in the POH. Approach speed about 70 to 75 depending on weight with two stages of flap, over the hedge at 60 to 65 with third stage of flap close the throttle, round out, flare slowly and if you have it right it'll touch down as the stall warner starts to chirp and the control column comes full back.
Approach any faster and it'll float for miles.
In gusty conditions cross wind or otherwise it's wise to add add about half the difference between the steady speed and the gust speed and it will land in cross winds well above 20kts like that.
Successful landing in moderate wind conditions is a simple matter of following the advice in the POH. Approach speed about 70 to 75 depending on weight with two stages of flap, over the hedge at 60 to 65 with third stage of flap close the throttle, round out, flare slowly and if you have it right it'll touch down as the stall warner starts to chirp and the control column comes full back.
Approach any faster and it'll float for miles.
In gusty conditions cross wind or otherwise it's wise to add add about half the difference between the steady speed and the gust speed and it will land in cross winds well above 20kts like that.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would strongly disagree with that statement by your instructor.
A very common fault is people stop flying the machine after the wheels touch the deck.
This is bad enough in a tricycle geared aircraft. The tail wheel pilots are flying it from the moment they start the engine
A very common fault is people stop flying the machine after the wheels touch the deck.
This is bad enough in a tricycle geared aircraft. The tail wheel pilots are flying it from the moment they start the engine
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Out there, somewhere
Age: 60
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Say Again Slowly
"Landomatic"was the Cessna marketing description of their sprung steel landing gear.
Notwithstanding this, I agree that the PA28 is the easiest aircraft that I have ever landed.
"Landomatic"was the Cessna marketing description of their sprung steel landing gear.
Notwithstanding this, I agree that the PA28 is the easiest aircraft that I have ever landed.
