Landing Question!

[India Four Two]

I'm with Chuck and SSD.

Keep the pattern tight and use the runway picture to judge the approach slope. I don't look at the PAPI/VASIs at all.

[sevenstrokeroll]

wow...without a doubt there is a problem with some of your flying!

to those who have called my views balderdash or speaking out of my arse...I would not check you out in any plane at the flying schools or clubs I've been employed as an instructor (CFIIMEI).

While once upon a time you could reasonably be sure your engine would quit in the pattern, that is not the case now. (I am not saying an engine can't quit and am saying you should always have a plan and a pre selected field).

Power on approaches are the normal way to land a plane...it is the safest, most consistent way to land a plane...BIG OR SMALL.

Now, if you want to pretend you are a bush pilot, go out and rent a single engine BUSH.

And yes, there are some airports that don't have Vasi/papi. And yes you should know what a normal approach looks like in case there isn't a vasi...indeed, if the vasi was turned off, and you were flying your normal pattern, and then the VASI was turned on , you should be ''right on''.

Someone who comes in high to the numbers is asking to misjudge your flare and prang the plane.

back before 1927, engines had their problems...after lindbergh made it to paris, properly maintained engines proved pretty darn reliable.

AS to stalling (aerodynamic stall). If you are dividing your eyes between outside and inside, checking speed and sink rate and looking out the windshield, you won't stall.

some smart guy ment9ioned the 45degree point to the ''runway'' to start base turn...that's fine, but end up on the vasi on finallllll!!!!!!!

And yes, if you are out practicing forced landings, there are options available to you.

I also noticed people using different flap settings...you might want to take time to readjust your seat as the ''crutch'' of anything but full flaps is just to compensate for a poorly adjusted seat. (thought some builders offer alternate flap settings for landing in certain wind conditions).

Landing ''on the numbers'' sounds good...except for the one time you are a tiny bit short.

in 38 years of flying as an instructor, corporate pilot, regional pilot and big airline pilot I've never seen such trash written about landings as on this thread.

oh and original poster...go out and find a real instructor and a much newer plane...and have him demonstrate a power on approach and landing to commercial standards, pick a spot on the runway and at the worst he should be within 200 feet of it...and a good guy can do it within six inches.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

sevenstrokeroll, I've never read such a load of drivel in my life as your last post!

I don't believe you are an instructor, as your post contains examples of basic lack of aviation knowledge.

As captain eppaulletes says in the video (you did watch it, didn't you?) it's not about engine failure in the circuit.

The 'smart guy who mentioned the 45 degree angle to turn base' was me. And also the guy in the video, who really is an instructor, and a good one too. You say fine, then use the PAPIs. How the hell would you do that, as a correct circuit (turning base when the runway is 45 degrees behind you) will place you on final a lot steeper than 3 degrees! Unless you are in the habit of flying your circuits at 50 feet!

You are NOT a pilot! You are a wannabe troll!

And theres so much more total crap in there I really can't take you at face value

I think you are a flight sim wannabe. The other horse **** in your post kind of confirms that.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

...and never call it a plane Bader, it's an aeroplane!

Harrumph.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

to those who have called my views balderdash or speaking out of my arse...I would not check you out in any plane at the flying schools or clubs I've been employed as an instructor' (CFIIMEI)

This is a public forum and as long as we are somewhat civilized we can express our opinion.

I also am a flight instructor and teach advanced flying, I could come to your airport and see if you could be trained to actually " fly " an airplane then you would be a bit more qualified to check people out.


You said this:

you should be on the vasi/papi for all landings except when you are actively avoiding wake turbulence or practicing ''obstacle'' landings.

This is my personal opinion:

That is pure horse sh.t.

You also said:

Power on approaches are the normal way to land a plane...it is the safest, most consistent way to land a plane...BIG OR SMALL.

That is also pure horse sh.t.

Oh by the way I have been teaching flying since the 1950's and I use my real name here because I am quite content with who I am and not worried about expressing my opinion when it comes to flying.

You would be wise to re-read what I just said above.

Because that will be my last bit of advice to you on this subject.

[sevenstrokeroll]

dear shaggy...I didn't watch the video and you must be a complete fool. if you are flying your pattern wide enough you can easily be on the vasi once upon final.

I am not a troll, as I mentioned CFIIMEI, and a 737 captain now. I have more time in the flare than you have in the air.

I think you learned how to fly at one airport and never looked at special airports requiring real judgement. Your views are that of a complete and total amateur.

I really don't care what you think, but if you are trying to mislead the young original poster you are offering nothing but crap.

as to mr chuck...I'm glad you have been teaching advanced flying, you seem to be king of the donkeys. Advanced flying would include instrument flying...care to show me an ILS using your techniques? HA.

You must enjoy making things up. IF some smart guy went to the trouble of inventing the VASI, researching the choice of a 3 degree glideslope, why should we listen to you...you should be out inventing a VASI with a power off approach glideslope.

I love it when people come up with better ideas than agreed upon norms.

Oh, and mr sheepdip, how come there are vasi's at airports without instrument approaches?

oh my...why not come up with other crap that you can try to convince neophytes to believe.

DEAR ORIGINAL POSTER...CALL UP A DESIGNATED EXAMINER AND ASK HIM FOR THE BEST INSTRUCTOR IN YOUR AREA.

Knowing how to do a power off approach doesn't mean it should be your normal approach...just like knowing short or soft field techniques doesn't mean you use them every day.

Good luck.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I said I was through with this crap with you sevenstroke...but you are truly arrogant as is so apparent in this comment to another poster.

I am not a troll, as I mentioned CFIIMEI, and a 737 captain now. I have more time in the flare than you have in the air.

therefore in answer to this.

as to mr chuck...I'm glad you have been teaching advanced flying, you seem to be king of the donkeys. Advanced flying would include instrument flying...care to show me an ILS using your techniques? HA.

I started flying IFR in the fifties when we only had the Radio Range for airways.

During my career I have flown IFR in over sixty countries and can not even remember the different types of aircraft.

When I retired after over fifty years flying for a living I was still flying IFR and the last airplane type that I was trained on was the A320 and my training was done at the factory in Toulouse France.

I use my real name here therefore I am not about to post something that is untrue.

What were you flying in 1957 when I started flying IFR?

Chuck E.

[Heston]

To the OP - this thread is a classic example of why it is a bad idea to ask for advice about something as important as approach and landing technique on an internet forum. But I expect by now you can tell who has real experience and who is talking bo11ocks (Mr SSR that's a UK technical term that you should be familar with).

[foxmoth]

and a 737 captain now

Obviously the problem here, a "big" aeroplane pilot who only knows how to fly that way, like a few other experienced instructors here I also fly big aeroplanes - bigger than a 737, but I still do not teach flying the VASIS, not only is it a very shallow angle, but puts you FAR further into the field than needed, in the States not a big problem, but certainly in the UK there are many fields where teaching people to land like this results in them using up more airfield than is comfortable when they land other than a big airfield that has approach lights, especially in light winds, and the cause of more than a few crashes. I would agree that powered approaches are the norm these days, but as many have said, not 3 degrees.

[mary meagher]

Okay, guys, lets be polite and respectful.....

(Actually I love it when a thread descends into abuse and name calling, so keep it up! I used my real name by mistake when I joined, so I am ALWAYS polite and respectful...)

Now flying at big airports in the US of A, one often finds oneself mingling light aircraft with 737s etc. So if you are flying a 172 into Baton Rouge, for example, it is only good sense to expedite the approach, land promptly, and get out of the way. Which isn't easy to do if you are dragging yourself in on the vasi's.

As a glider pilot with 1800 hours of landing gliders (and with instruction flights off a winch launch, you can average 3 landings an hour, no problem)
we have to get it right the first time. Every time. You have to judge your circuits, approaches and landings by eye, your eye. And if its a strange farmers field, you don't even have any help from the altimeter in planning the circuit, it all has to be judged by eye. WHICH REALLY COULD HAVE HELPED THOSE POOR CHAPS WHO SPLASHED DOWN IN BALI in a brand new Boeing (see Rumours and News for details). They probably couldn't see the vasi.....

As a power pilot, tug pilot, with IR, and l400 hours of power flying in the logbook, I have mixed it with the big aircraft, in the US, and the only place I interfered with the smooth flow of commercial airline traffic was at Kerry International Airport, in Ireland....but that's another story altogether.

To my mind, flying a light single down the IR glideslope is far from ideal.

[foxmoth]

Okay, guys, lets be polite and respectful.....

A spot of pot and Kettle here Mary!

Avoid ex military instructors.

[Pace]

Mary

I have never seen so many heavy metal pilots sprout out of one thread! Makes me feel quite insecure as a bottom of the pile biz jet pilot
As one who is not convinced with glide approaches I wish someone would explain the scientific benefits of such approaches!

I even had one in the Citation being held at 10 K for other traffic and then asked if I could make it for a straight in while 20 miles out.
Thrust to idle, air brakes out, flaps, Gear anything which could come out including willy waving common in these threads

Went down like a train but still pulled it onto a conventional glide before landing!

All flying is about energy management it is in your gliders where on still days you only have potential energy trading altitude for airspeed.
But then you guys/ and gals are slippery with a good glide ratio.
Try a glide approach on some singles I can think of and you will have to be quick and accurate in the flare.

So the glide approach ??? I can understand instructors wanting to hammer out circuits and as many as possible by staying high and coming down closed throttle.

I can understand some low powered aircraft which are very draggy needing to tap into airframe potential energy.

I do not see it as an accurate on the dot landing method as there is more scope to get it wrong landing fast or long!

The other thing to consider is conflict! A guy recently posted a u tube clip of himself on final.
He was on a conventional glide to have a small aircraft drop from above in front of him literally feet in front of him.
We fly circuits to minimize collision potential and that should include glidepaths as much as possible.

One thing I would like to ask is the glide approach pilot who is asked to extend downwind for say two aircraft on finals! Does he descend to pick up a conventional glide path or maintain altitude on finals until picking up his steep glide?

I really would like a technical discussion of the glide approach and its benefits and not the will waving from last night?

Pace

[foxmoth]

Pace,
Apart from the OPs instructor I have not actually noticed many advocating glide approaches as the norm, most would seem to be saying much the same, a powered approach, but not on a 3 degree glide.

[piperboy84]

Like I said before on other strings here, the wheat does eventually get separated from the chaff on arguments that are backed by real experience decidedly pulling out front.

My 2 cents to the OP from a low time VFR duffer. I would not get caught up on the strict adherence VASI/PAPI approach method, for me the learning is in not what a set of lights can tell you, it is what you your eyes tell your gut about the site picture on final depending on the type of approach and landing you are trying to accomplish i.e. big/busy airport get down and get the foxtrot out of the way of the big guys waiting, or as most of your early flying will be into small fields possibly grass and probably without even runway markers if you get reliant on approach aids i think you will dull your "sight picture" skills and "on the fly" decision making capabilities and perhaps can be caught unawares when landing aids are not present at a new field you visit or indeed during an emergency landing. When I fly into fields with VASI/PAPI ( which is the minority of my landings) I just fly as I would for a grass field and upon noticing what the lights show i say to myself "Hmmm so that is where the big guys would be at this stage of their approach" then pay no further attention to it and get back to MY approach. Again, I am not in anyway a experienced pilot nor an instructor but a guy whose flying involves in and out of unprepared and short agricultural fields that I,m probably the first person to ever land on which makes it exciting and rewarding and most importantly really makes you think about where you want to be on the approach and touchdown unaided by any lights/markers/landmarks etc.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Yep, powered but steeper than 3 degrees, and of course the PAPIs will bring you over the numbers at 50'. I like to be landing by then! Like this, though this is a glide approach:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpBQeA0nmIs

Sorry about the high vis; I don't usually wear one when flying.

Here's a powered approach to Sleap


And my usual approach to Liverpool JL

[Pace]

but not on a 3 degree glide.

Foxmoth

That was not a slope picked out of the air but one which the majority of aircraft can be stabilized on slippery or not so slippery!
Some airports like LCY have a much steeper glide but its interesting to note that both the pilot and aircraft have to be approved to fly those steeper slopes.

There was a stupid argument and it has raged for years re pitch for speed or power for speed.
What a load of utter nonsense.
The same with this argument.
It is all about energy management, drag management two sources of potential energy engine /airframe
If we consider those a truer picture emerges rather than these stupid entrenched camps neither which are wrong or right.

Pace

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Pace - No!

Insisting ALL landings even of light singles should be in accordance with VASIs / PAPIs as one or two probably non-pilots on here have...... IS PLAIN WRONG!

[captainsmiffy]

Aaah....Chippy flying.....miss that sooooo much!

Gentlemen, ladies, you just have to be flexible in aviation - that is what the last 14000 hours has taught me. Dont make hard and fast rules about the ONLY way you are to approach the field. That said, 3 degrees is a tad shallow for a light aeroplane in anybodies book....

Learn to fly a variety of approaches for a variety of different situations. That said, I always took pride in trying to tighten it up and being able to glide onto the runway in a light single lest the engine quit on me (and it did, three times!). Know the capabilities of both yourself AND the aeroplane and learn to use it in a flexible fashion. There, said it. That is my ten penneth worth from a pilot who has flown light singles all the way up to A380s, including 6 years of single-engine instruction and examining.

Be safe.....

[foxmoth]

Pace,
We are not talking flying 747 or even corporate here, we are talking light aircraft and following VASIs, If people want to this that is up to them, but is unnessesary, it puts you 1,000' into the runway - at some airfields that can be over halfway into the runway, and many who are used to flying like this will use the same picture where they do not have lights to follow, not a good idea, plus you end up with the bomber circuits that many seem to fly these days.
You might also like to remember that you should be rolling out on final at about 500', if you do this on a 3 degree slope you will, as has been pointed out elsewhere be outside the ATZ at most GA fields, especially at the end of the downwind leg and on base.

Perhaps the fact that you cannot get my username right is an indication of how in touch you are with LIGHT aviation

[Pace]

SSD

Have I suggested that ? Have I pointed out a reason why the majority of ILS are 2.5 to 3 deg? yes.
What I have done is explain the principals behind any approach and landing which is energy management and drag management.
My Citation held high no distance to get down for a straight in landing I want a high descent rate I need to stop that descent rate and stabilize before landing !!! Energy drag management!
You in your low powered draggy single! Steep Glide approach drag out tip the nose and lo and behold you are tapping into the potential energy in the airframe.
Leave engine power on and you have too much energy for the drag that is available speed shoots up.
What you do to get down is your business but whatever you do will be governed by the laws of physics.
It aint rocket science unless you are lucky enough to ride a lightning then who needs potential energy from the airframe vertical to 40K

Perhaps the fact that you cannot get my username right is an indication of how in touch you are with LIGHT aviation

FOXMOTH my apologies and rectified I have flown most singles maybe 25 types and have around 3000 hrs in piston twins of varying types, winter, night summer in all weather so yes I am probably out of touch with light GA


Pace