Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Private Flying
Reload this Page >

A Cessna 172 is too difficult to land...

Private Flying LAA/BMAA/BGA/BPA The sheer pleasure of flight.

A Cessna 172 is too difficult to land...

Old 9th Sep 2013, 06:40
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 244
A Cessna 172 is too difficult to land...

... according to the vendor in this online ad:

The airplane had 3 landing accidents over last 3 years which have been professionally repaired - but the 3 damages show us that the Cessna doesn't fit within our aeroclub where most members fly Piper a/c.
EDMJ is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 07:58
  #2 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 60
Posts: 4,873
Well, really, it was the pilots (dare they call themselves that!), not the airplane, which had the accidents. Maybe they should change to the very different 182, with the best safety record of all light aircraft....
Pilot DAR is online now  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 08:27
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,985
I would agree aircraft do not crash pilots do !
How many pilots still land on a wish and a prayer rather than being in total control of the aircraft regardless of conditions!
Many even quite experienced arrive rather than land an aircraft!
Yes they all have their idiosyncrasies but it is up to the pilot to identify those and adjust accordingly

Pace
Pace is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 08:30
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 68
Posts: 1,128
EDMJ I'll give you a free tip.
never buy an aeroplane from an idiot.
you have no idea what he has done to it.

no matter how enticing the advert looks walk away from it.
dubbleyew eight is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 08:42
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Many even quite experienced arrive rather than land an aircraft!
Nice one Pace, must remember that line!
clunk1001 is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 09:08
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,063
I think the warning should be to any clubs looking to employ the instructor that did the checkouts!
foxmoth is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 09:53
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 730
Spam can landings

Hi Guys,

The big problem with spam-cans in general and Pa28s in particular is that they are so tolerant of sloppy landings that they permit people to get away with 'landings' that in any other type would be crash-landings.

This leaves it down to the instructors to ensure that proper landing skills are acquired and practiced, (which in most cases, bless 'em, they do).

If, however, the instructors allow their students to assume that any 'landing' is a good landing so long as you can walk away from it, then sooner or later there are going to be broken U/Cs, broken props and shock-loaded engines.

I agree totally with doubleyew eight that it is never wise to buy an aeroplane from an idiot.

Regards,

BP.
BroomstickPilot is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 12:51
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,210
I agree, it is the instruction that is at fault not the aircraft.
A and C is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 14:54
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 65
Posts: 3,115
My flying is probably around one third 172, one third 28 and the other third 182 and 152. I wasn't aware of any differences in landing them.... They just do what you tell them to surely?
thing is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 16:11
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Makes you wonder why Cessna went to all the trouble of designing and testing an undercarriage system which their marketing people dubbed 'Landomatic'. How can you get it that wrong?
gasax is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 17:16
  #11 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 60
Posts: 4,873
I suspect that some pilot lack the internal drive to improve their landing skills, once let loose in the plane. ANY certified GA plane can be neatly chirped on with a bit of practice. Yes, there are differing nuances to it, but ultimately, the technique (for tricycles, anyway) is the same for all. A type change is no excuse.

Or, is someone trying to argue up the need for "type training" between Piper and Cessna!
Pilot DAR is online now  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 19:27
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glens o' Angus by way of LA
Age: 58
Posts: 1,974
The problem is that some pilots figure out pretty quick after a few duff landings that the design and build of the SEP Cessna and piper is so good that you can make a complete arse of the landing and they will for the most part square themselves up and roll out in a very forgiving manner, a visit to any GA field on a cross wind day will see all kinds of landings while still in the crab or with a whole heap of drift or too much speed with no penalty apart from stressed gear which can lead to a relaxing of focus. With the tail dragger the constant thought of the expense and humiliation of a ground loop tends to make you focus on the goal of doing the best you can every time.
piperboy84 is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 19:39
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 65
Posts: 3,115
Having thunk about this I would personally agree with Piperboy in that my own pride makes me do the best I can each time. But then it depends why you fly; I like to do a challenging thing well, or as well as I can.

If you just like a bimble on a weekend and are happy to get the thing on the ground the best way you can then I suppose fair enough. Pipers and Cessnas are virtually unbreakable (although people still manage to) so the fact that you can't square off on a xw landing doesn't really add up to much.

Some folk are happy to drive their Ford Focus with automatic everything from a to b as safely as all the automatics will let them without letting the driving experience get in the way, I guess some people fly like that as well, who are we to criticise?
thing is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2013, 21:42
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,985
Thing

I dont think its just that! I flew with quite an experienced pilot who when in the air was very detailed and planned but was lacking in situation awareness, feel, call it what you want.
Calm day he was fine, slight wind from left or right and we either landed in a crab profile or ended up floating across the runway.
It was like he was great up to the last fifty feet but then there was a look in his face which became more of a passenger than someone in control of the aircraft!
we all have different brains which are better at somethings than others!
Planes rarely crash of their own accord pilots sadly do!

Pace

Last edited by Pace; 9th Sep 2013 at 21:44.
Pace is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2013, 01:03
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: A better place.
Posts: 1,803
Learned on a 152, have flown a 172.
Pilots plane - it encourages more precise flying.
Love them.
Flew the Cherokee once.
What a big old mushy bus of a plane!
Give me a Cessna any day of the week - and the view out the window's better!!
tartare is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2013, 02:12
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Land of the long white cloud
Posts: 49
They just do what you tell them to surely?

Close to what I tell my students
Ralis is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2013, 06:52
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,817
There is by and large two ways people get taught to land a piper.

There is the way that you get the POH speed right and then flare and land when the plane stops flying. With a chirp on the stall warner.

Then there is stick 10 on for gusts, 5 knots because those POH speeds are a bit dodgy and finally 10 knots on for mum. A 3 degree profile will be flown.

The plane is then flown onto the ground 5-10knts above stall speed using shed loads of runway airline style.

Try the second one in a C172 or the ones I have flown anyway and you will get one spectacular series of balloons and if you manage to control them finally a spectacular bounce.

Just a theory mind but guess which method I think that the club is teaching?
mad_jock is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2013, 07:35
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 639
A lot of people learning to fly are wanting to be airline pilots, and hence want to adopt more of an airline pilot style to flying an SEP. Big runways and PAPIs also encourage this, as do certain instructors. Equally, the natural urge for caution tends to see a few knots added.

Weekend flyers are often rusty. If you're flying once a month, which turns into once a quarter once weather has played its part, you're not going to be great at xwind landings, and a 10 knot xw having not flown for a few months and only doing ten landings a year is going to be a challenge.
FANS is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2013, 08:10
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,817
Agreed FANS.

But they aren't flying the aircraft properly if they are doing airline ops. The adding a few knots is the problem. And its not just a few knots in some schools by the time you have added everything you can be 15knts over the POH speed. The tommys were famous for this. I was told once that anything under 85 knots and you were going to spin in on finals. The shock on there face when I said I had 800 hours flying them at the book speed with no issues was amusing. The whole flare was utterly horrible bleeding speed off and we used more runway than I do in the work machine. 10-15 seconds in ground affect exposed to getting raped by a gust and of course less drag so it just took longer than above it. But you had to be a meter off the deck next to the papi's. Book speeds and land it on the keys and you stop before the numbers and the round out and flare takes 5 seconds.

And if the foundations aren't there of the proper way of flying a SEP the people lacking in currency don't have a chance in hell when things aren't perfect.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2013, 08:29
  #20 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 151
My view

I wouldn't say the 172 is 'difficult'

It's just pretty hard to land it consistently well.

I find if folk are having trouble with the flare using 40 flap then trying 30 flap makes things a little easier albeit same approach speed.

Try provide yourself with a STABLE approach which also helps.
Kestrel is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.