REPLY TO "a dangerous habit i have noticed in my landings"

[BeechNut]

Landing with 20 deg. of flap in a 172 is one of my life's lessons learned about 550 hours ago. Came in a little hot, landed, bounced, and got into the worst (and my only) porpoising situation. Fortunately instead of trying to salvage the situation and my pride, I initiate a go-around on about the third bounce before I could shear off the nose gear. Went up, came round, and landed with THIRTY degrees flap and better speed control second time 'round.

Beech

[Piper.Classique]

Excess speed results in a float if you hold the airplane off until it stalls. Otherwise, excess speed means that you touch down at a higher speed.

Absolutely, SNS3Guppy.

In which case if you simply accept the float and refuse the ground, keeping the aeroplane flying the landing will be long, but the aircraft won't bounce.

You should be able to land with any flap setting and be comfortable. The greater the flap setting, however, the slower your approach speed can be, which makes your job easier.

Precisely. Of course, some aircraft have rather poor climb performance on a go-around with full flap, so that might influence your flap setting in some conditions.

The downside to having up-trim as you approach to land is that during a go-around (balked landing, missed approach, etc), then you're going to require substantial forward pressure on the controls.

Yup, but that's only until you can wind the trim again. I like to trim for my approach speed, and accept that I _WILL_ have to push hard on a go-around. Depends on the type, just how hard of course (Pa18a-150 in my case)

[Pace]

Personally, I prefer to trim up so I'm holding either neutral or a little forward pressure; all I need to do is relax as I land. A good rule of thumb as you make your final approach is to stop trimming as you reach your approach speed; trim until then, but stop once you're on speed. I prefer to trim a little more, so I have uptrim; it's an old habit from flying ag (crop dusting) which has the safety effect of causing the airplane to climb if I relax pressure on the stick or yoke.

I will also recommend this piece of advice from Guppy. Especially where you have aircraft which are prone to wheelbarrowing or porpoising having up trip will help against you landing flat or on the nose.

Landing is very much about confidence especially near the ground. It only takes one firmer than normal touchdown to add a fraction of apprehension on the next and hence a succession of firmer arrivals.

Many pilots want to get the landing bit over and are also apprehensive about impressing their passengers. That also adds to a fraction of tension.

Far better to look forward to the landing and to approach it with the thought that you will savour the experience and enjoy it.
Trying to hard and you will get the opposite of what you are trying to achieve so just relax, enjoy and be at one with the aircraft.

Pace

[Lembrado]

Interesting 'advice/bad habits' coming from some of you... especially the trim. I must try that next time. How does it go exactly? 10 feet - let go of stick (the aircraft flares automatically), close throttle, hope for the best.

L

[echoindiajuliet]

HI again guys thanks for all the suggestions! In response to your question Tarq57 i am actually fairly tall at 6ft4" which makes me consider that when the float occurs down the runway my field of view over the cowling is probably alot better than a shorter person meaning i may be raising the nose fairly high prior to touchdown blocking the end of the runway which would explain the touchdown of the mains first and a second or two delay before the nose touches and of course the sound of the stall warner going off! so im guessing im floating down the runway then lastly before touching i raise the nose too high the plane gets excess lift at that time and raises more above the runway at the same time the speed drops suddenly and i lose the lift i gained,because i have the nose high the mains full abruptly from the extra height gained and touchdown followed with a delay by the nose! i wreckon i should resist raising the nose too far and make it my business too hold the end in sight that way it'll touch down faster but alot smoother!! my main mission is always to protect the nosewheel and i am happy to say i have never wheelbarrowed or landed heavily on it! also i noticed alot of people were saying why i wasnt landing with full flap on every landing! i assume its because i was never really thought to use full unless short field and we're so used to the 20degree setting for normal also for touch and go's the less flap the better on touchdown! oh yes the model i fly is a 1985 172P with only 3 stages of flap! I wish i had the extra 10 im sure the drag generated must be really helpful!

[Chuck Ellsworth]

HI again guys thanks for all the suggestions! In response to your question Tarq57 i am actually fairly tall at 6ft4" which makes me consider that when the float occurs down the runway my field of view over the cowling is probably alot better than a shorter person meaning i may be raising the nose fairly high prior to touchdown blocking the end of the runway

May I make a suggestion?

Try moving your head slightly to the side and look alongside the nose where you will be able to see not only the runway but the grass alongside of it.

That will make your ability to judge your height far easier, the further you look ahead the less accurate your height judgment will be.....approximately five hundred feet ahead of the airplane is optimum for the speed a light aircraft lands at.

[Piper.Classique]

Interesting 'advice/bad habits' coming from some of you... especially the trim. I must try that next time. How does it go exactly? 10 feet - let go of stick (the aircraft flares automatically), close throttle, hope for the best.

MMMmmmmm Don't think I saw anyone suggest that . Just let me take a look here.........
Nope, no-one said to let go of the stick (or the yoke, come to that)

SNS3Guppy suggests a slightly nose high trim, I trim for my approach configuration. But by all means have a go the way you propose, after all it isn't my a/c you will be bending

There will of course be a trim change on closing the throttle. Which way will depend on what you are flying. If you are flying a powered approach this may or may not be noticeable. On a glide approach it is of course irrelevant. As the original poster mentioned using power against flaps this may have influenced his round out and hold-off. I prefer not to use the word 'flare' as it implies a discrete action rather than a continuous process. I do believe in not forcing the aircraft to land. When there is no longer enough lift to sustain level flight it will do so all by itself, at the lowest possible airspeed. The great trick is to be only just above the ground at this point , and then to keep straight in the ground run. Even with a nosedragger!

gfunc has got it right, even if he is not yet an ancient pilot

For me the solution came from recalling my initial training when I was just a young 'un: Don't think in these specific phases, make a smooth transition from descent at about the height of a double decker bus and try and fly level about 30cm off the surface of the runway

[SNS3Guppy]

In which case if you simply accept the float and refuse the ground, keeping the aeroplane flying the landing will be long, but the aircraft won't bounce.

This is one way one can do it. However, one can also touch down at a higher speed. Holding the airplane off until it can no longer fly is a common and accepted way of flying a light airplane to a landing, but it's not the only way.

In many large airplanes, there's little or no flare at the end of the approach; a power reduction as one lands, but that's about it. The airplane isn't landing at stall speed, either. The same can easily be done, and be done acceptably, in a light airplane.

A multitude of techniques can be applied. I'm not recommending any particular one here, as any technique should be taught rather than simply read off the internet and tried.

Raising the flaps upon touchdown is one common method of dumping lift and putting weight on wheels. It's one I've used many times on icy runways or rough conditions and gusty conditions. Obviously one doesn't want to confuse a flap handle with a gear lever at the wrong time, and one doesn't want to dump the flaps at the wrong time...but it's a viable technique. In certain cases, so is raising the flaps prior to touchdown (a more advanced technique, and again, one that should be taught and not simply tried because one has read about it on the internet).

By far the most productive way to ensure a good landing is to have a good approach; be on speed and configured. This applies whether it's full flaps, no flaps, or partial flaps. Try landing with power and without power. (After all, let's face it, your first, or next emergency engine-out landing will be without power, most likely).

I transition between big, heavy airplanes, and light airplanes, regularly. I may be flying something that requires a very high approach speed and a high speed landing, and then something that requires a very slow landing on a short runway. By far, I find the hardest thing is to get myself to slow down. Transitioning to bigger and faster isn't hard; going the other way is. However, that's also one of the most important parts of the approach and landing; gettting slow enough to be on the proper approach speed, and holding that speed.

Try to get in the habit of not having to jockey the throttle throughout the approach. Try to come as close as you can to one power setting that you can use throughout the approach. If you can do this, and keep your airspeed consistent, then you'll be getting closer to a stable approach. A stable approach doesn't guarantee a good landing, but an unstable one makes a good landing very difficult. Good approaches are the precursor to a good landing.

Remember that you practice your landing with every taxi, and with every takeoff. The same picture from the cockpit, the same height above the ground...that's where you start, and that's where you want to end up. Memorize it when you taxi.

When I was first doing flight training, I flew a J-3 cub. The cub, of course, is a tailwheel airplane, and the cockpit picture looking out is a little different once the tailwheel is in the air on the takeoff roll, or when doing a wheel landing. Accordingly, we'd place the tail of the airplane on a sawhorse and sit in the airplane. Close our eyes, picture a trip around the pattern, open them and look at the sight picture. Again and again. When you land the airplane, it's no different. You're just putting the airplane back where you found it...same height above the ground, same picture.

People often try to feel for the ground, guess at when to "flare" or simply take a wild shot in the dark at where to start holding the airplane off the ground. There's no need for this. You already know, because you were there when you got in the airplane, when you taxied it, and when you took off. Just put it back. This is what a landing is all about; putting the airplane back. When you land and the sight picture looks about like it did when you left, you've arrived.

There are a few exceptions (tailwheel landings, steep nose-high flares, etc)...but even these can be duplicated in practice to some degree. I've tied the tail down on a Cessna 172, for example, or blocked up the nosewheel, and had students sit in the cockpit and open and close their eyes while "chair flying" or imagining their flight, to get the sight picture. One might be surprised how much this can help, and be thankful for how little it costs.

I'm getting set to check out in an airplane which is new to me. I'll go fly it today. I have several checkrides coming up in it over the next few days, this next week. I have to take a checkride in it, then turn around and give checkrides to others, while the FAA watches me. It's an expensive airplane to fly, and we have no simulator. Accordingly, I'm spending a lot of time in the books on the ground, and in the airplane in the hangar, getting as familiar as I possibly can. I'm running through the cockpit layout, the location of controls and switches, the sight picture and attitude, procedures and checklists, radio and equipment use, etc. All before we start an engine.

The same can be done for a Cessna 172 or any other light airplane, and it's something I ask of any student. It's far less expensive than doing the same thing in flight, and it can pay dividends when you do turn a propeller and go fly. Visualizing what you will see before you do it is one way to help improve your performance; doing it from the same cockpit you'll be flying, over and over, and simulating the same sight picture is a BIG part of that puzzle. Give it a try. Don't forget that you're doing it as you taxi out, too...and even as you takeoff. A lot of times people forget that they're being prepped mentally for the landing all the time...not just on approach. Keep that in mind and see if it improves your performance.

[Piper.Classique]

Holding the airplane off until it can no longer fly is a common and accepted way of flying a light airplane to a landing, but it's not the only way.

In many large airplanes, there's little or no flare at the end of the approach; a power reduction as one lands, but that's about it. The airplane isn't landing at stall speed, either. The same can easily be done, and be done acceptably, in a light airplane.

True. But I buy my own tyres

For the rest, yes, absolutely. I spend a lot of time just sitting in new types, until I can put my hand on anything I want with my eyes shut, as well as getting a feel for the attitude.

[Lister Noble]

I had trouble landing,I was told imagine a double decker,imagine a bedroom window etc,all to no avail.
I sat in the aircraft on the tarmac on a quiet day,just looking around,seeing what the view was like,the height at touch down etc and then it all clicked.
As said before ,try this and see how it goes,and good luck!
Another thing was I always encountered the most horrendous turbulence and crosswind on landing.
The instructor told me I was holding the yoke as though it was a snake about to strike,and let go and see what happens.
Obviously he was hovering on the controls but all the turbulence etc dissapeared like magic,the second I got back the controls it was there again.
I reckon I might have had something to do with that.
Anyway I bought some lightweight leather gloves,gripped the yoke gently and gradually the turbulence went somewhere else!
Lister

[Pace]

Lister

The aircraft controls should always be smooth and fingertip stuff hence the importance of having the correct trim.

I know of one instructor who got his students to fly along the runway at about four feet above the runway in the landing config and at the VREF speed.

he then got them to bring the throttle back to idle and then to try and stop the aircraft from landing by pulling back slowly and smoothly.

I big part is not flaring too soon or too late but getting a good mental picture of where the flair point is.

Years back i was forced to land below minima on a PAR at a military base because of technical problems. The vis was 400 metres and cloudbase around 100 feet.

After that i was interested in whether you could land off an ILS in 200 metre fog. With another pilot to be the eyes we flew an ILS in a Seneca flying the needles to a radar alt of 10 feet in a blind landing.

The landing worked well with no outside reference but by using the rad alt and purely feeling for the ground.

At least that exercise convinced me that it is possible to land in zero zero at a push and if you have too.
It also shows how easy landing should be if you can see

Pace

[BeechNut]

Raising the flaps upon touchdown is one common method of dumping lift and putting weight on wheels.

SOP on a Beech Sundowner; otherwise it is too light on the mains and normal braking will lock the wheels on dry pavement unless you raise the flaps.

Beech

[Lister Noble]

Pace

There was nothing wrong with the trim,there was something wrong with the pilot.
It's called pilot induced oscillation.
A common affliction with new students,apparently.
Lister

[flybymike]

And with old timers from time to time.....

[Mark1234]

Originally Posted by Final 3 Greens

In the UK, many schools teach intermediate flap settings for landing, e.g. I was taught 20 deg on the 150 and 25 on the PA28.

How on earth do they teach performance? Pretty much every POH I've looked at gives landing distance charts, not to mention threshould speeds etc, which are predicated upon full flap. Come in with less and the numbers all change, not to mention you land faster - I was always taught the aircraft was at it's most vulnerable on the ground at speed, when it's neither fish nor fowl.

I agree with guppy that you should be able to land with any flap setting, but to do so as a matter of course, and not use all the tools available seems more than a bit daft. As for the go around arguament, you just move the lever...

[Molesworth 1]

I was smugly watching landings at Stapleford today. Practically every aircraft either bounced or ballooned.

I had to wipe the smile off my face later when I came back in from a flight and also bounced . (I told myself they were just "little" bounces - my passenger wasn't unhappy).

The reason - 330/4 knots on runway 22. (1 knot tailwind)

[Pace]

The reason - 330/4 knots on runway 22. (1 knot tailwind)

Molesworth

What has a tailwind got to do with a bad or bouncy landing? It is common to land with 10 kts tailwind and you do not have to bounce.

Dont blame the tailwind, the crosswind, the amount of flap.

There is only one thing to blame and thats the pilot.

Pace

[Molesworth 1]

Interesting to read that the aircraft does not in fact "bounce" - it just looks like it. The bump on the wheels causes the nose to go up into a higher angle of attack and the excess speed makes the aircraft airborne again.

[Tarq57]

So define "bounce", then.

[Molesworth 1]

"Bounce" is more of a Newtonian thing. Its not like the wheels have springs in them! "Bounce" would happen in an identical way in vacuum whereas the aircraft landing "bounce" is caused aerodynamically. If it was a physical thing we'd all be in hospital with broken backs.