My Bad landings - Explained
Thread Starter
My Bad landings - Explained
I always knew my inability to nail the centerline and land on the numbers wasn't my fault. Now I have proof!
Australia's latitude and longitude coordinates out by more than 1.5 metres, scientists say - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Scientists are recalculating the nation's latitude and longitude coordinates, which are currently out by more than 1.5 metres.
It will improve the accuracy of all spatial information across the nation for a myriad of services including transportation, personal navigation and surveying.
The framework currently in use, known as the Geocentric Datum of Australia, was last updated in 1994.
Because Australia sits on the fastest moving continental tectonic plate in the world, coordinates measured in the past continue changing over time.
The continent is moving north by about 7 centimetres each year, colliding with the Pacific Plate, which is moving west about 11 centimetres each year.
It will improve the accuracy of all spatial information across the nation for a myriad of services including transportation, personal navigation and surveying.
The framework currently in use, known as the Geocentric Datum of Australia, was last updated in 1994.
Because Australia sits on the fastest moving continental tectonic plate in the world, coordinates measured in the past continue changing over time.
The continent is moving north by about 7 centimetres each year, colliding with the Pacific Plate, which is moving west about 11 centimetres each year.
I always wondered what caused your landing at Moorabbin where you bent the firewall of a C172. Now I am the wiser.
Thread Starter
That was caused by being instructed to cross the reference threshold at 70 instead of 55 - 60. 70 worked when it was blowing 20 knots down the runway, not very well thereafter.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
God dammit man take some responsibility for yourself.
Thread Starter
Una mas, my only consolation was that I was shown four or five Oxford birds at flight safety that had done exactly the same thing, only worse.
I found that various flying schools had a habit of adding 5 - 10 knots to approach speeds for no good reason. The only exception was Tvsa(?) at Bacchus Marsh who made it a point of honour to hear the stall warning as your mains touched.
Once I learned the correct approach airspeed of 55-60, holding off and the Jacobsen flare, no further problems.........yet.
I found that various flying schools had a habit of adding 5 - 10 knots to approach speeds for no good reason. The only exception was Tvsa(?) at Bacchus Marsh who made it a point of honour to hear the stall warning as your mains touched.
Once I learned the correct approach airspeed of 55-60, holding off and the Jacobsen flare, no further problems.........yet.
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Redfern
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I found that various flying schools had a habit of adding 5 - 10 knots to approach speeds for no good reason. The only exception was Tvsa(?) at Bacchus Marsh who made it a point of honour to hear the stall warning as your mains touched.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Age: 46
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I remember back to those days correctly, Vref (i.e. 1.3 Vs) for our 172s was 57 knots at full flap, we were taught to maintain 60 on final at that flap (40?), 65 at "normal" landing flap (30?). Possibly 70 flapless.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The POH usually has the answers.
The C172 I occasionally fly specifies 60-70 for final approach.
I agree about the epidemic of too high speeds. Every instructor seems to want the speed they were taught, plus a couple of knots for insurance.
Locally, they use 70 knots for the approach speed, which is (just) within the Cessna recommendations. But, they then apply the MOS tolerances which are +5,-0 which means if you go any further into the book range you are outside tolerances. It's OK to be above the book range by up to 5 knots though.
I have noticed that many aircraft are much easier to land when flown at the book speeds. Maybe those factory test pilots know something after all. Easier landings might save a few students some dollars on circuits too.
The C172 I occasionally fly specifies 60-70 for final approach.
I agree about the epidemic of too high speeds. Every instructor seems to want the speed they were taught, plus a couple of knots for insurance.
Locally, they use 70 knots for the approach speed, which is (just) within the Cessna recommendations. But, they then apply the MOS tolerances which are +5,-0 which means if you go any further into the book range you are outside tolerances. It's OK to be above the book range by up to 5 knots though.
I have noticed that many aircraft are much easier to land when flown at the book speeds. Maybe those factory test pilots know something after all. Easier landings might save a few students some dollars on circuits too.
