Landing on the numbers
He should have... But we survived and I learned something about go-arounds and I'm sure he learned something about instructing.
I never got out of the plane so I can't say how rough the numbers were. I strongly doubt they would have ripped the undercarriage off, but I can also see the sense in trying to avoid the lumpiest bits of runway if there's enough to spare.
I never got out of the plane so I can't say how rough the numbers were. I strongly doubt they would have ripped the undercarriage off, but I can also see the sense in trying to avoid the lumpiest bits of runway if there's enough to spare.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jan Olieslagers...glad I could help you out. Maybe you can dig up a few bucks and take a lesson.
:-0
----
I've seen a couple of things here that just ain't right. saying that light planes VFR shouldn't be flying 3 degree glidepaths? and why the heck not? (unless higher due to wake turbulence from preceeding traffic)
And aiming short, because you have too much speed? There are more precise ways to fly...read the book I mentioned in previous post and learn to do a spot landing.
:-0
----
I've seen a couple of things here that just ain't right. saying that light planes VFR shouldn't be flying 3 degree glidepaths? and why the heck not? (unless higher due to wake turbulence from preceeding traffic)
And aiming short, because you have too much speed? There are more precise ways to fly...read the book I mentioned in previous post and learn to do a spot landing.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forget the numbers all they do is mark the start of the runway; there's no sign saying land here.
You are the pilot and you decide where to touch down, simply take absolute pride in landing exactly where you decide.
There might be a nasty bump in the grass just after the numbers, if there is enough runway land beyond the bump, lots of houses on the approach and a higher approach and a deeper landing could be the order of the day.
Simple really unless you are a cat driver operating to and from pristine tarmac in which case dump it on the numbers every time; its just a bit boring really and a lot less fun.
You are the pilot and you decide where to touch down, simply take absolute pride in landing exactly where you decide.
There might be a nasty bump in the grass just after the numbers, if there is enough runway land beyond the bump, lots of houses on the approach and a higher approach and a deeper landing could be the order of the day.
Simple really unless you are a cat driver operating to and from pristine tarmac in which case dump it on the numbers every time; its just a bit boring really and a lot less fun.
Moderator
The skill to be able to pick your touchdown point becomes more important when landing on less prepared surfaces. On skis or floats, it can be pretty important to set the plane down nicely just beyond that drift, snowmobile track, or boat wake. that kind of precision is an important skill to practice. Of course, it's important for a forced approach too!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yes the touchdown zone is for instrument approaches and Pref A machines as are the PAPI's.
A 3 degree PAPI approach is just as inapproprate for a light aircraft as a light aircraft profile is to a 747.
A 3 degree PAPI approach is just as inapproprate for a light aircraft as a light aircraft profile is to a 747.
A farm strip is a different matter altogether, and that's why knowing how to touchdown where you want is an essential skill.
Things like bomber circuits and landing long to help ATC are completely different subjects.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying a 3 degree slope or landing according to PAPIs in a SEP means dragging it in long and low on high power. Yes, you can do it. But it's pi55 poor technique, quite innapropriate for that class of aeroplane.
I've noticed that drivers who do this are often the same ones that think there's such a thing as 'rotate speed' for a SEP!
I've noticed that drivers who do this are often the same ones that think there's such a thing as 'rotate speed' for a SEP!
Last edited by Shaggy Sheep Driver; 26th Jun 2012 at 08:09.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You won't if you fly the approach at the correct speed.
The skill to be able to pick your touchdown point becomes more important when landing on less prepared surfaces.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well the accident statistics don't really point towards us having a problem with people undershooting.
On the other hand there are regular listings with going off the side and going off the end.
Touch down zones tend to be contaminated with rubber which when damp/wet give poorer grip than the tarmac behind which is why I tend to avoid them if I can in a light aircraft.
And if you are a CAT driver you most certainly don't dump it on the numbers.
It falls into one of the great sayings in aviation.
Nothing more useless than....
Fuel in the bowser unless your on fire.
Air above you.
Runway behind you.
Spittoon those aids arn't relevant to GA aircraft flying VFR. If you fly as per magenta line borg ops if you have an engine failure on 90% of the approach you are an article in the local newspaper. If you fly a normal GA profile you should be able to adjust your profile on failure so that you either make the runway or at least crash onsite which is realtively clear I hope of people and obstructions.
On the other hand there are regular listings with going off the side and going off the end.
Touch down zones tend to be contaminated with rubber which when damp/wet give poorer grip than the tarmac behind which is why I tend to avoid them if I can in a light aircraft.
And if you are a CAT driver you most certainly don't dump it on the numbers.
It falls into one of the great sayings in aviation.
Nothing more useless than....
Fuel in the bowser unless your on fire.
Air above you.
Runway behind you.
Spittoon those aids arn't relevant to GA aircraft flying VFR. If you fly as per magenta line borg ops if you have an engine failure on 90% of the approach you are an article in the local newspaper. If you fly a normal GA profile you should be able to adjust your profile on failure so that you either make the runway or at least crash onsite which is realtively clear I hope of people and obstructions.
Last edited by mad_jock; 26th Jun 2012 at 09:28.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Glasgow
Age: 40
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To practice landing on small/short runways or for PFLs when returning home, my instructor has had me try to land on the left half of the runway with the piano keys representing a row of trees and one of the touch down zone markers a hedge. Quite satisfying getting that right (and is a good reminder how much runway you really need to land a small plane!!
Mind you - if doing a full stop landing I tend to aim for at least the touch down zone, otherwise its a long slow taxi on the active runway to vacate.
I'd say the most important thing is that as a pilot you are able to select and maintain a reference point, plus arrive there at the correct speed to enable a touchdown and rollout to a stop inside your planned landing area.
IMHO there's nothing inherently wrong with landing an aircraft further down the runway than the TDZ, if you've done it deliberately after assessing LDA vs. LDR for the conditions. The problems start when people land long because of poor speed control and/or inability to stabilise the approach in terms of aiming point.
I have had "interesting" flights with guys who didn't seem to have any consistent technique for putting the aeroplane down and sort of relied on getting it over the end of the runway at various speeds/heights/attitudes, then accepting whatever happened in terms of touchdown point or runway used. I do wonder whether they got like that over time or whether they were *ever* taught to do it properly...
IMHO there's nothing inherently wrong with landing an aircraft further down the runway than the TDZ, if you've done it deliberately after assessing LDA vs. LDR for the conditions. The problems start when people land long because of poor speed control and/or inability to stabilise the approach in terms of aiming point.
I have had "interesting" flights with guys who didn't seem to have any consistent technique for putting the aeroplane down and sort of relied on getting it over the end of the runway at various speeds/heights/attitudes, then accepting whatever happened in terms of touchdown point or runway used. I do wonder whether they got like that over time or whether they were *ever* taught to do it properly...
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my instructor has had me try to land on the left half of the runway with the piano keys representing a row of trees
Just to add my view is the same as above. Nothing wrong with putting it down anywhere you like for a reason. With the absence of any reason there really is no real excuse for not using the runway full length.
I always wonder sometimes with these touchdown zone landers touch and go's if they have a clue how much room they actually need to perform one and give them least risk.
Touch down on or near the numbers power up and your airborne before you are even at the touch down markers. With loads of runway still ahead of you more than if you had just done a normal TO. Even with only 1500m of runway you would still be able to land on before x wind.
Last edited by mad_jock; 26th Jun 2012 at 10:22.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well the accident statistics don't really point towards us having a problem with people undershooting.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but as long as the engine is working
The we have the other magneta line borg factors such as increasing the approach speed for you name it and a bit from mother as well. Power on landings because it makes it smoother and the fact that you have just used could be anything up to a third of the runway for no reason with I might add you doing your performance for the full length.
Its no wonder folk are happily mowing the grass in airfields around the country increasing everyone elses insurance premiums. Purely because they are talent limited.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 2p on this is that I always go for the numbers unless the runway is uneven, such as at White Waltham where its a pretty lumpy around the numbers on one or two of the runways, or when I'm flying into a bigger airport (Oxford for example) and I land deliberately long because of the taxiway positioning.
At least 2/3rds of all my landings are on short farmstrips and the ability to not screw up those landings counts for something. Plus, giving oneself something to aim for leaves you with a sense of achievement if you nail it.
Which is nice.
At least 2/3rds of all my landings are on short farmstrips and the ability to not screw up those landings counts for something. Plus, giving oneself something to aim for leaves you with a sense of achievement if you nail it.
Which is nice.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Age: 40
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have had "interesting" flights with guys who didn't seem to have any consistent technique for putting the aeroplane down and sort of relied on getting it over the end of the runway at various speeds/heights/attitudes, then accepting whatever happened in terms of touchdown point or runway used. I do wonder whether they got like that over time or whether they were *ever* taught to do it properly...
In all seriousness I like to touch down on the numbers regardless of runway length. There are many things that we can take into account such taxiway exit distances, excess rubber on the runway, and whatever but for our usual small aeroplanes I don't think it makes much difference.
Being able to put the aeroplane where you want it is what counts. So touching down on the numbers every time becomes more of a personal challenge whether its a short wet grass runway, or a gazillion mile long stretch of asphalt. I think I'm lucky in that for a runway to be 'short' in my mind it has to be less than 400m and wet grass - keeps it exciting too
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I once followed a pioneer 300 into a flyin at filton that landed on the numbers and then he proceeded to taxi for 10 mins the whole length of the runway. I could not land until he had cleared the active and then also landed on the numbers but my taxi only lasted for 30 secs before parking up behind him. He apologised and said as he was a airline pilot he was not use to landing long. So learn to land appropriately that best suite the conditions.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Worcs/Glos border
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Landing as short as possible, like regularly flying glide approaches, is good practise for when you might have to do it for real.
I do it routinely now at my home strip (570m grass). I appreciate ATC might not want glide approaches all the time if you live at a big airport, but even then I think I would try to do it as often as possible. Who knows - you might start a trend to downsize the bomber runs!
I do it routinely now at my home strip (570m grass). I appreciate ATC might not want glide approaches all the time if you live at a big airport, but even then I think I would try to do it as often as possible. Who knows - you might start a trend to downsize the bomber runs!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was instructing (CFIIMEIATPMEL) at a 2,500 foot strip, I selected the second stripe in the runway centerline as my, and my students, target for landing.
If I don't hit the numbers I will hit the hedge at the other end!!!
IMHO:
If you fly into short fields, every landing should be used to practice and maintain your skills in that area. If that, on a long hard runway with fancy numbers, means landing before, on or behind the numbers then so be it.
If you fly into short fields, every landing should be used to practice and maintain your skills in that area. If that, on a long hard runway with fancy numbers, means landing before, on or behind the numbers then so be it.