Worst C172 Landings...
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You really ned to have a look at the POH and find out exctly what the aeroplane is capable of, in terms of performance ie take off/landing distances, with flaps/without, or perhaps a wet runway(factor up) or a grass runway. All that info should be available for you to read. Re the 680 metres you've mentioned, you'll have no problems at all, you could get a bus in and out of that, even without flaps!
Moderator
Yes, but always select the most flap you can safely use, not the least. You'll put less wear and tear on the plane, and if something were to go wrong (runway excursion or intrusion) you'll be going slower, and have a better chance of no damage. Only a big crosswind, or flap failure practice, should have you using less than full flap. If the crosswind is that big, you should rethink your runway choice anyway.
Enjoy the full flaps while you can, perhaps you will transition to one of the many types with a lot less flap effectivness, and you'll miss it! The only aircraft type I've flown with more effective flaps is a deHavilland Twin Otter, and that's a whole different story...
Cheers, Pilot DAR
Enjoy the full flaps while you can, perhaps you will transition to one of the many types with a lot less flap effectivness, and you'll miss it! The only aircraft type I've flown with more effective flaps is a deHavilland Twin Otter, and that's a whole different story...
Cheers, Pilot DAR
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, but always select the most flap you can safely use, not the least. You'll put less wear and tear on the plane, and if something were to go wrong (runway excursion or intrusion) you'll be going slower, and have a better chance of no damage. Only a big crosswind, or flap failure practice, should have you using less than full flap. If the crosswind is that big, you should rethink your runway choice anyway.
Enjoy the full flaps while you can, perhaps you will transition to one of the many types with a lot less flap effectivness, and you'll miss it! The only aircraft type I've flown with more effective flaps is a deHavilland Twin Otter, and that's a whole different story...
Cheers, Pilot DAR
Enjoy the full flaps while you can, perhaps you will transition to one of the many types with a lot less flap effectivness, and you'll miss it! The only aircraft type I've flown with more effective flaps is a deHavilland Twin Otter, and that's a whole different story...
Cheers, Pilot DAR
Also, the point re 'something to go wrong': ever tried a GA with 40 flaps deployed ?? Better not... I say use flaps as required, they are there to help you adjust better to the circumstances, no more, no less.
Blah Blah Blah
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Malmesbury VRP
Age: 49
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes at Peterlee on a windy rainy day. It was not fun.
The runway is short with pylons at one end and an industrial estate at the other. As the runway is narrow I misjudged my approach an touched down to fast and to far down the runway.
So full power and I tried to climb, straight away I got the stall warner going nuts and a sloppy plane, nose down and try to maintain straight and level whilst on the verge of stalling. With just enough airspeed to very slowly climb I reckon I cleared the industrial estate roofs by about 50ft! after that it was safe to start loosing the flaps
I say try to avoid 40 degrees on a 172. 150's are a lot more fun for that sort of thing.
The runway is short with pylons at one end and an industrial estate at the other. As the runway is narrow I misjudged my approach an touched down to fast and to far down the runway.
So full power and I tried to climb, straight away I got the stall warner going nuts and a sloppy plane, nose down and try to maintain straight and level whilst on the verge of stalling. With just enough airspeed to very slowly climb I reckon I cleared the industrial estate roofs by about 50ft! after that it was safe to start loosing the flaps
I say try to avoid 40 degrees on a 172. 150's are a lot more fun for that sort of thing.
680m ~=2200'
20 flap will work fine.
Landing with 20 flap does have some advantages -- the chief being that you will have a decent climb right away should you want to go around. With 30 or 40 flap, you have to get the flaps back to 20 and retrim massively when flying low. One of the reasons the newer C-172s are limited to 30 flaps is that 40 flap go arounds figure significantly in the accident rate of an unusually safe g/a a/c
I just see gcolyer has ably described a 40 flap go around -- best to practice that with an instructor. It's even more "fun" with 4 aboard.
20 flap will work fine.
Landing with 20 flap does have some advantages -- the chief being that you will have a decent climb right away should you want to go around. With 30 or 40 flap, you have to get the flaps back to 20 and retrim massively when flying low. One of the reasons the newer C-172s are limited to 30 flaps is that 40 flap go arounds figure significantly in the accident rate of an unusually safe g/a a/c
I just see gcolyer has ably described a 40 flap go around -- best to practice that with an instructor. It's even more "fun" with 4 aboard.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Aberdeen, UK
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just done a morning of circuits on a 172 and with 40 degrees of flap you really notice it. If you pull the power back the amount of height you can lose is quite spectacular - you'll probably need to keep a little power on and fly it right down to the flare - pull the power too early over the fence and you might not get there!
30 degress of flap in an 8 knot crosswind was fine but with 40 degrees it was much harder to compensate for. 20 degrees and 70 knots (and 60ish over the fence) put me down nicely on the numbers, then just a case of holding off the flare - if you've flown 152s before, the 172 does float a fair amount which I've particularly noticed while converting over.
We did a 40 flap touch and go for comparison, and you really need to get those flaps up as fast as possible otherwise it's like rolling along treacle!
SOP for my group's 172 at the home grass strip is 40 flaps and 60 knots for the short field into the wind, but I'd be hesitant to use it unless I really had to anywhere else - length permitting.
30 degress of flap in an 8 knot crosswind was fine but with 40 degrees it was much harder to compensate for. 20 degrees and 70 knots (and 60ish over the fence) put me down nicely on the numbers, then just a case of holding off the flare - if you've flown 152s before, the 172 does float a fair amount which I've particularly noticed while converting over.
We did a 40 flap touch and go for comparison, and you really need to get those flaps up as fast as possible otherwise it's like rolling along treacle!
SOP for my group's 172 at the home grass strip is 40 flaps and 60 knots for the short field into the wind, but I'd be hesitant to use it unless I really had to anywhere else - length permitting.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I stick with 30 deg of flap for most landings. Handling is fine with this amount on. I never use the full 40 deg. Its a pain to shed it all off if you go round. Unless its a really tight airfield 30 deg should do! 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: By the A&P
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if you do it right. it's good for procedural training, but unless you have payware aircraft, it's not realistic enough for a/c systems. it's great for IFR, though. it also screws with you in terms of not wanting to look outside, and being focused solely on the directional gyro and vertical speed indicator your first few flights (i know i was!). yes, it's a good tool, but it is only that, a tool, not replacement for actual experience. it doesn't really help the actual flying that much as you have no actual control feedback. it only helps with understanding what the controls do, not getting a feel for them.
p.s. i've been flying sims with a yoke and rudders since i was 10 and soloed my sixteenth birthday...
p.s. i've been flying sims with a yoke and rudders since i was 10 and soloed my sixteenth birthday...
Moderator
Gee,
Lots of discussion about the non-steller climb performance of a C172 performing a full flap balked landing. Of course, each pilot to their own technique. It is important, never the less, to remember that the C172 with the slow, electric, non-preselect, 40 degree flaps (as opposed to the quick manual flaps), still demonstrated compliance with the CAR 3 design requirement as follows:
3.596.
(c) Balked landing conditions. The steady angle of climb at sea level shall be at least 1:30 with:
(1) Takeoff power on all engines,
(2) Landing gear extended,
(3) Wing flaps in the landing position.
If rapid retraction is possible with safety without loss of altitude and without requiring sudden changes of angle of attack or exceptional skill on the part of the pilot, wing flaps may be retracted.
For comparison, the steady rate of climb with the most favourable flap setting would have to be 1:12 or better, so, yeah, it is a bit like treacle, but it'll do it... And, yes, Cessna did reduce the maximum flap deflection to 30 from 40 in later years, on those models which were no longer seen as having to have "bush plane capabilities". The C185 kept the 40 it's whole production run though.
This is one of the many paragraphs which state that "exceptional skill on the part of the pilot" not be required, to show compliance. A few paragraphs are silent in this respect, suggesting that compliance may be shown by a pilot demonstrating exceptional skill, as long as the plane will do it.
When my home runway started out at about 250 metres long (though with excellent approaches), people would ask "isn't it hard landing [C150 with STOL kit] in such a short runway?" My chosen reponse was "It's like parallel parking one's car, you'd rather not, if you have the choice, but sometimes there's no choice."
It is my opinion that it is our duty as pilots (once properly trained on type) to maintian reasonable skill to fly the aircraft in every configuration for which it is approved. Sure, some are easy, and others demand more skill, but aren't we flying to safely grow our skills and challenge ourselves?
Cheers, Pilot DAR
Lots of discussion about the non-steller climb performance of a C172 performing a full flap balked landing. Of course, each pilot to their own technique. It is important, never the less, to remember that the C172 with the slow, electric, non-preselect, 40 degree flaps (as opposed to the quick manual flaps), still demonstrated compliance with the CAR 3 design requirement as follows:
3.596.
(c) Balked landing conditions. The steady angle of climb at sea level shall be at least 1:30 with:
(1) Takeoff power on all engines,
(2) Landing gear extended,
(3) Wing flaps in the landing position.
If rapid retraction is possible with safety without loss of altitude and without requiring sudden changes of angle of attack or exceptional skill on the part of the pilot, wing flaps may be retracted.
For comparison, the steady rate of climb with the most favourable flap setting would have to be 1:12 or better, so, yeah, it is a bit like treacle, but it'll do it... And, yes, Cessna did reduce the maximum flap deflection to 30 from 40 in later years, on those models which were no longer seen as having to have "bush plane capabilities". The C185 kept the 40 it's whole production run though.
This is one of the many paragraphs which state that "exceptional skill on the part of the pilot" not be required, to show compliance. A few paragraphs are silent in this respect, suggesting that compliance may be shown by a pilot demonstrating exceptional skill, as long as the plane will do it.
When my home runway started out at about 250 metres long (though with excellent approaches), people would ask "isn't it hard landing [C150 with STOL kit] in such a short runway?" My chosen reponse was "It's like parallel parking one's car, you'd rather not, if you have the choice, but sometimes there's no choice."
It is my opinion that it is our duty as pilots (once properly trained on type) to maintian reasonable skill to fly the aircraft in every configuration for which it is approved. Sure, some are easy, and others demand more skill, but aren't we flying to safely grow our skills and challenge ourselves?
Cheers, Pilot DAR
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is my opinion that it is our duty as pilots (once properly trained on type) to maintian reasonable skill to fly the aircraft in every configuration for which it is approved. Sure, some are easy, and others demand more skill, but aren't we flying to safely grow our skills and challenge ourselves? [/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT]
Cheers, Pilot DAR
Cheers, Pilot DAR
However:
a) just because something is legal and approved does not mean it's also a good idea
b) the OP obviously has/had very little if any experience on type.
In this context, I think 40 deg flap on a 172 is not such a great idea. Practice it by all means, and once you know your a/c and you need this bush-flying capability, sure, go ahead and use it. Just be aware of the limitations this particular config places on the a/c.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Silicon Hills
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I own a '72 "L" model with 40 flaps and generally like using all 40 deg so long as there's not much cross-wind. Just my preference, I have always used max flaps on most aircraft. Of course, I'm generally solo or just one pax, and would probably just use 20-30 more often if near gross so I have a bit more margin on go around. Solo, my 150hp 172 is quite controllable on go-around with all 40 deg, and will even climb at a leisurly rate.
I do find that my Skyhawk, at lighter weights, likes to fly a bit slower than book speeds on short final. I generally use 65 mph, not knots, slowing to 60 mph as I cross the threshold and flare. If you have the aircraft trimmed for 65-70 mph on final, it shouldn't need any large pull to flare. Sounds like you have it trimmed too fast. I'd say work on getting the speed below 65kts or 70 mph down final, 5 less even better if you're light, and trimmed for those speeds. As another said, hold it off until the stall horn sounds, and it shouldn't bounce at all unless you've dropped it in from 10' up.
I do find that my Skyhawk, at lighter weights, likes to fly a bit slower than book speeds on short final. I generally use 65 mph, not knots, slowing to 60 mph as I cross the threshold and flare. If you have the aircraft trimmed for 65-70 mph on final, it shouldn't need any large pull to flare. Sounds like you have it trimmed too fast. I'd say work on getting the speed below 65kts or 70 mph down final, 5 less even better if you're light, and trimmed for those speeds. As another said, hold it off until the stall horn sounds, and it shouldn't bounce at all unless you've dropped it in from 10' up.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPL152
It may be that you were flaring too low. I don't know what type of approach you were attempting, but with 40 flap it would usually be a "performance" landing. For landing the 206 into short grass strips on parachute ops. I used to use full flap, 1.2 vso and a steep approach (5 degree or so). The trade-off is that you need to round out higher than usual due to the reduced effectiveness of the rudder at the slower speed, the greater change of attitude required to full stall and the higher descent rate.
I have recently been flying a 172 with 40 flap and found that it handles in a similar way to the 206. It is also true that the CofG is likely to be on the forward limit with just a pilot and plenty of fuel on board - bear in mind this is a potential four-seater and one-up will require plenty of back-pressure to flare.
On another note, four bounces?!!! Probably best to go-around after the first!
It may be that you were flaring too low. I don't know what type of approach you were attempting, but with 40 flap it would usually be a "performance" landing. For landing the 206 into short grass strips on parachute ops. I used to use full flap, 1.2 vso and a steep approach (5 degree or so). The trade-off is that you need to round out higher than usual due to the reduced effectiveness of the rudder at the slower speed, the greater change of attitude required to full stall and the higher descent rate.
I have recently been flying a 172 with 40 flap and found that it handles in a similar way to the 206. It is also true that the CofG is likely to be on the forward limit with just a pilot and plenty of fuel on board - bear in mind this is a potential four-seater and one-up will require plenty of back-pressure to flare.
On another note, four bounces?!!! Probably best to go-around after the first!
But don't flare too high with 40 flaps -- once the nose comes up, the airspeed will drop like a rock and so will you.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Shropshire UK
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't beat yourself up.
I gave myself a flight to remember on 7th April 2002, when I bunked off from a business trip to Raleigh, North Carolina and rented a brand spanking new 172 Skyhawk.
My first ever rental in the US and it was shiny, clean, leather and aircon. A complete change from the knackered smelly old PA28 donkeys I hired in the UK.(and less than half the price)
So, having zipped the 90 mins out to Kittyhawk's uncontrolled strip right next to the Wright Bros memorial I flared it neatly over the numbers ....and....dropped it on the last foot with a screech of rubber that turned heads.
I'm probably only ever going to have one landing at FFA in my logbook, and it was memorable, but not in a good way.
So relax, be happy, and save the good ones for your memory bank.
regards
HnH
I gave myself a flight to remember on 7th April 2002, when I bunked off from a business trip to Raleigh, North Carolina and rented a brand spanking new 172 Skyhawk.
My first ever rental in the US and it was shiny, clean, leather and aircon. A complete change from the knackered smelly old PA28 donkeys I hired in the UK.(and less than half the price)
So, having zipped the 90 mins out to Kittyhawk's uncontrolled strip right next to the Wright Bros memorial I flared it neatly over the numbers ....and....dropped it on the last foot with a screech of rubber that turned heads.
I'm probably only ever going to have one landing at FFA in my logbook, and it was memorable, but not in a good way.
So relax, be happy, and save the good ones for your memory bank.
regards
HnH
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: No idea - what does the GPS say?
Age: 65
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some very useful info posted above. Its given me a couple of new things to try. It would get very boring if every landing were a greaser
The main point to remember is that if you set up the approach right, the landing will invariably be good. i.e. nail the speed and flap settings as early in the final approach as you can, and fix your touchdown point on the screen, use power to keep it there - right up until you flare.
Another thing that I find very useful, and I don't think has been mentioned yet, is to put on a touch of rear trim. This has 2 advantages. Firstly, it helps keep the nose that little bit higher in the approach without adversely affecting forward vis, and requires less effort on the yoke to flare. Secondly, if you decide you have got it wrong, your aircraft will already be trimmed for the climbout when you go-around. I was taught this in a 182, which get veeeeery heavy in the flare, but it works well in all the other a/c I fly.
The main point to remember is that if you set up the approach right, the landing will invariably be good. i.e. nail the speed and flap settings as early in the final approach as you can, and fix your touchdown point on the screen, use power to keep it there - right up until you flare.
Another thing that I find very useful, and I don't think has been mentioned yet, is to put on a touch of rear trim. This has 2 advantages. Firstly, it helps keep the nose that little bit higher in the approach without adversely affecting forward vis, and requires less effort on the yoke to flare. Secondly, if you decide you have got it wrong, your aircraft will already be trimmed for the climbout when you go-around. I was taught this in a 182, which get veeeeery heavy in the flare, but it works well in all the other a/c I fly.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hmm, I suspect that our friend Wind_Up_Turn is a bit more knowledgeable than he claims to be - I know what a WUT is, but it's not knowledge you'd associate with many PPLs ! I should listen to him.
Anyhow, important thing - approach speed. It's in the manual (I'd hesitate to say what I think it is, because there are so many subtle variations of C172 - so look in the manual for the aircraft you are flying). [Same applies to any other speed, do not take anybody here's word for it, nor any proprietary checklist - USE THE BOOK THAT HAS "CESSNA" AND THE RIGHT REGISTRATION ON THE FRONT.]
Next, for the right approach speed / flap setting, get the pitch attitude right. If you fly a consistent (and correct) attitude until the roundout, most other things will slot into place.
Trim setting - you don't need tables, trim so that the aircraft flies the right approach speed / pitch attitude hands off, if you don't, you are just creating work for yourself, and increasing the risk of getting the wrong pitch attitude when workload goes up near the ground / doing RT / etc.
Finally - set power to give you the touchdown point - if speed and attitude are right, and the aeroplane is trimmed, then tweak power to keep your touchdown point stationary in your field of view.
And finally, it's a VFR aeroplane with a reasonable view and plenty of attitude / feel cues - try and get a feel for it, don't try to fly by numbers - it'll do you no favours. I'm sure, like the rest of us, when learning you got shouted at for fixating at the dials (I'm sure that I did anyhow) - there was a reason for that. This is particularly true in the roundout and flare, the C172 is not designed to be flown by the numbers - feel the ground effect, feel the (large!) stick force, and keep easing it back just off the ground until it lands itself - do not tell it when to land, let it tell you.
G
Anyhow, important thing - approach speed. It's in the manual (I'd hesitate to say what I think it is, because there are so many subtle variations of C172 - so look in the manual for the aircraft you are flying). [Same applies to any other speed, do not take anybody here's word for it, nor any proprietary checklist - USE THE BOOK THAT HAS "CESSNA" AND THE RIGHT REGISTRATION ON THE FRONT.]
Next, for the right approach speed / flap setting, get the pitch attitude right. If you fly a consistent (and correct) attitude until the roundout, most other things will slot into place.
Trim setting - you don't need tables, trim so that the aircraft flies the right approach speed / pitch attitude hands off, if you don't, you are just creating work for yourself, and increasing the risk of getting the wrong pitch attitude when workload goes up near the ground / doing RT / etc.
Finally - set power to give you the touchdown point - if speed and attitude are right, and the aeroplane is trimmed, then tweak power to keep your touchdown point stationary in your field of view.
And finally, it's a VFR aeroplane with a reasonable view and plenty of attitude / feel cues - try and get a feel for it, don't try to fly by numbers - it'll do you no favours. I'm sure, like the rest of us, when learning you got shouted at for fixating at the dials (I'm sure that I did anyhow) - there was a reason for that. This is particularly true in the roundout and flare, the C172 is not designed to be flown by the numbers - feel the ground effect, feel the (large!) stick force, and keep easing it back just off the ground until it lands itself - do not tell it when to land, let it tell you.
G
my advice - always fly the numbers. they are there for a reason, and will not let you down in your moment of need.
and sometimes, you need to tell the aeroplane what to do. experience lets you know when and where you can do that.
I think that you misunderstand me Sir Pratt.
Fly the attitude, let the numbers define the attitude - but keep your head out of the cockpit flying by feel and attitude in an aeroplane like the C172, not constantly monitoring the ASI (albeit with an occasional check on it of-course - the numbers are of-course your baseline).
Which unless my memory is getting dodgy in my old age, is how I was taught to fly, and I imagine most other people too.
I'd also expect within the first hour to be thinking about attitudes, not 1000.
G
Fly the attitude, let the numbers define the attitude - but keep your head out of the cockpit flying by feel and attitude in an aeroplane like the C172, not constantly monitoring the ASI (albeit with an occasional check on it of-course - the numbers are of-course your baseline).
Which unless my memory is getting dodgy in my old age, is how I was taught to fly, and I imagine most other people too.
I'd also expect within the first hour to be thinking about attitudes, not 1000.
G
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Silicon Hills
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, but since we're talking about SE aircraft, there's also the school of thought, (which I adhere to) that says that those who regularly practice full flap approaches and landing at minimum safe airspeed, (when conditions are conductive of course) are much better prepaired to successfully park the aircraft in a small pasture should the need arise. I've flown with too many pilots who need 1500' minimum to land a C172 or similar. Should only take half or less of that done right. And it does take practice to judge the descent to arrive at the flare just over the fence at Vso+5.