Odd? landing technique (PA28) wanted by school
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: England
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well... All aircraft should be landed gently,
Have you ever heard of Aquaplaning?
Have you ever heard of the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II?
I suspect that some airliner pilot training focuses more on get the plane on the ground in the touchdown zone, rather than get it to the touchdown zone, and then finesse a good landing.
Professional pilots spend more time worrying about what happens between take off and decision height, amateur pilots obsess about what happens on touchdown. The landing is the conclusion of the airborne period to allow the aircraft to taxi to the stand. After landing, if the aircraft remains on the tarmac with all wheels and tyres intact and facing the same way as on take off and no technical log entry is necessary, you are then ready to proceed to the next and most difficult stage of the flight, taxing to the stand.
Gently? Chuck you are far from being a fair weather Pilot Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or go and fly in Scotland where you will often get 20 gusting 40 and often way off the runway. Chairmans landings ?
Or maybe Leeds which has notorious winds and shear
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/tr...-SIDEWAYS.html
This is the problem there is too much emphasis place on the stall landing pulling back and back and waiting for the wheels to touch at or near the stall.
As I have posted before a Friend who had control problems landed a Citation at a radar estimated 200 KT touch down speed and stopped intact at Edinburgh
Witnessed by Mad jock in these threads.
That was way above the tire limiting speeds and way above the stall and way above a typical VREF of 105 KTS. The aircraft was flown on! You can fly an aircraft on, stall it on or bang it on. I use the above extreme crazy example to emphasis that landing an aircraft is not just about the stall and that VREF AT 1.3X stall in a given configuration is just that a number
Pace
Or maybe Leeds which has notorious winds and shear
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/tr...-SIDEWAYS.html
This is the problem there is too much emphasis place on the stall landing pulling back and back and waiting for the wheels to touch at or near the stall.
As I have posted before a Friend who had control problems landed a Citation at a radar estimated 200 KT touch down speed and stopped intact at Edinburgh
Witnessed by Mad jock in these threads.
That was way above the tire limiting speeds and way above the stall and way above a typical VREF of 105 KTS. The aircraft was flown on! You can fly an aircraft on, stall it on or bang it on. I use the above extreme crazy example to emphasis that landing an aircraft is not just about the stall and that VREF AT 1.3X stall in a given configuration is just that a number
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 10th Jul 2015 at 09:44.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Professional pilots spend more time worrying about what happens between take off and decision height, amateur pilots obsess about what happens on touchdown
I focus on executing a safe flight between takeoff and decision height, and I focus on an appropriate landing between decision height and turning off the runway. Appropriate will first be safe, next have the margins required to prevent an unexpected event from making it unsafe, after that will be the least wear and tear on the plane, and finally, pleasing to the passengers and or observers. Sometimes you can't have everything, and wear and tear is going to occur - but I obsess on keeping it to a minimum....
I like changing 12 year old tires on my 150, because they are weather checked, but still have lots of tread on them, and no flat spots. I like having to review tech logs to see when I last changed brake pads, because I cannot remember. I like having owned my plane for 28 years, and never having to have had to replace a landing gear part, other than tire and brake pads.
Lat night, I was training a tricycle pilot in a beautiful taildragger. The "appropriate" landing for that was to let him bounce it, and yaw around a bit, to learn what it's like. My obsessing about a perfect landing would not have helped him learn. But, I did a couple of "appropriate to my skills" landings to show him what I expected. I was trying to inspire, then allow him to learn.
Appropriate might be a 200 knot landing in a Citation, if a whole bunch of other things have gone wrong, and the aircraft was returned with little other damage.
Appropriate might be "plonking" it on, if you're landing on a 900 foot long runway, in an aircraft whose required runway length for the conditions is 940 feet.
Appropriate might be a 10 FPS arrival to the deck, if you're flying an F-14, I never have...
In those cases, you are accepting an higher maintenance cost, or greater risk of damage to achieve a more specific operational objective. The average student, or rental pilot, on a runway three times as long as the aircraft requires, really has no need to add that maintenance or risk burden with a "non obsessed" rough or careless landing. Instructors should not tolerate it!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Step turn
I have nothing against fair weather pilots. Its their hard earned cash at stake and rolling the curtains on a Sunday morning It might be better to turn over, go to sleep and await another day.
Some of us within reason have to fly, have to be somewhere at X o CLOCK so within reason have to fly. its hard to tell the Boss we cannot go when one after another airline takes off or lands. He expects the same as does Joe Bloggs on his annual trip or two to Majorca in Fly me to the sun airlines so we go within reason.
There are many mornings in winter when its pitch black freezing, windy and pouring with rain when you don't want to go off at 0500 to ****land with the same
Having said that I know plenty of PPLs who use their aircraft for business and pleasure and battle along OCAS in **** weather often with just an IMCR and do a pretty good job.
The worst was the previous winter into Doncaster coming back from Lithuania at Night. forecast winds were strong but not as strong as reality. ended up flying into Doncaster with 45 KTS gusting 70 KTS MAX 80 KTS recorded thankfully 10 degrees off. Liverpool, Manchester same winds stronger cross.
Lorries blown over, shop fronts blown in, even the poor marshaller got blown off his feet.Worst was on the ground taxiing in where it took two of us to hold the controls. Never want to experience that again )) But HOLD OFF FOR A CHAIRMANS LANDING? NO WAY.
Winds don't bother me too much unless they are pretty across and strong and I cannot remember a bad landing in over 20 years. Ok some are firmer than others but not a bad landing and the Doncaster wasn't surprisingly bad just very challenging
As another pilot told me " That is what is expected of us ( Maybe not Doncaster
"! That is in the realms of any pilot hobby ones too but whatever turns you on? If its going back to sleep because the wind is more than 10 KTS so be it that is your choice your chosen limits and no one can knock that
Pace
I have nothing against fair weather pilots. Its their hard earned cash at stake and rolling the curtains on a Sunday morning It might be better to turn over, go to sleep and await another day.
Some of us within reason have to fly, have to be somewhere at X o CLOCK so within reason have to fly. its hard to tell the Boss we cannot go when one after another airline takes off or lands. He expects the same as does Joe Bloggs on his annual trip or two to Majorca in Fly me to the sun airlines so we go within reason.
There are many mornings in winter when its pitch black freezing, windy and pouring with rain when you don't want to go off at 0500 to ****land with the same
Having said that I know plenty of PPLs who use their aircraft for business and pleasure and battle along OCAS in **** weather often with just an IMCR and do a pretty good job.
The worst was the previous winter into Doncaster coming back from Lithuania at Night. forecast winds were strong but not as strong as reality. ended up flying into Doncaster with 45 KTS gusting 70 KTS MAX 80 KTS recorded thankfully 10 degrees off. Liverpool, Manchester same winds stronger cross.
Lorries blown over, shop fronts blown in, even the poor marshaller got blown off his feet.Worst was on the ground taxiing in where it took two of us to hold the controls. Never want to experience that again )) But HOLD OFF FOR A CHAIRMANS LANDING? NO WAY.
Winds don't bother me too much unless they are pretty across and strong and I cannot remember a bad landing in over 20 years. Ok some are firmer than others but not a bad landing and the Doncaster wasn't surprisingly bad just very challenging
As another pilot told me " That is what is expected of us ( Maybe not Doncaster
"! That is in the realms of any pilot hobby ones too but whatever turns you on? If its going back to sleep because the wind is more than 10 KTS so be it that is your choice your chosen limits and no one can knock that Pace
Last edited by Pace; 10th Jul 2015 at 20:23. Reason: Separate subject
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's up to the owner of the aircraft (or whomever pays the bills) to determine the expense verses reward of the operation of the aircraft. If the owner want's the service, the owner pays the cost, right up to damaging the aircraft. The important thing is to make the pilot, particularly the casual pilot, aware that if there is no operational need to be hard on the aircraft, then be gentle with it!
I've had recent occasion to train an amphibian pilot who (apparently) had not had good examples set for him as to how to gently operate the aircraft close to and on the ground. I reminded him that it was his plane, and when I fly it, I do it gently, so he might want to also... He accepted a controller request to exit at Charlie, and began to carve it around a corner at 30+ knots during rollout. I interceded, and reminded him that if he rolled the airplane over, or rolled a tire off the rim, it was his cost ('cause the controller won't pay for it!), and his flight was stopped for the day. If, on the other hand, you have to carve around a runway incursion, it was probably worth the risk.
For the owners I know with more expensive, or exotic GA aircraft, this is the primary reason the aircraft are not so readily available to new pilots to fly, the small return is not justified by the higher cost to fix things resulting from mishandling. I see occasional inquiries here as to where one can rent a C206 or Lance type plane. The truth is that these aircraft are less tolerant of rough handling, and the owners know it, so they want to know who's flying it and how...
The fact that you can treat a plane gently does not mean that you always do, it just means that you can, and you always try, circumstances considered....
I've had recent occasion to train an amphibian pilot who (apparently) had not had good examples set for him as to how to gently operate the aircraft close to and on the ground. I reminded him that it was his plane, and when I fly it, I do it gently, so he might want to also... He accepted a controller request to exit at Charlie, and began to carve it around a corner at 30+ knots during rollout. I interceded, and reminded him that if he rolled the airplane over, or rolled a tire off the rim, it was his cost ('cause the controller won't pay for it!), and his flight was stopped for the day. If, on the other hand, you have to carve around a runway incursion, it was probably worth the risk.
For the owners I know with more expensive, or exotic GA aircraft, this is the primary reason the aircraft are not so readily available to new pilots to fly, the small return is not justified by the higher cost to fix things resulting from mishandling. I see occasional inquiries here as to where one can rent a C206 or Lance type plane. The truth is that these aircraft are less tolerant of rough handling, and the owners know it, so they want to know who's flying it and how...
The fact that you can treat a plane gently does not mean that you always do, it just means that you can, and you always try, circumstances considered....
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Step Turn
We all try and treat the aircraft gently. There is nothing I like better than the exclamations of approval when you do not feel the tyres touch and on decent sized runways even with corporate jets we go for chairmans landings.
Brakes on something like the Citation are very expensive as are tyres so we use reverse thrust to conserve the brakes even on long runways.
I take your point on exciting runways at too high a speed you can feel the strain doing so.
Pitot I will knock off on the last part of the landing roll and usually get my knuckles rapped for doing that before exit but with only 2 minutes and a $15000 bill if the system is damaged its off
But that doesn't change the fact that if you fly all weather there are times when you have no choice but to fly into heavy turbulence or fly in strong wind conditions which means that if you really want to damage the aircraft hold off for the stall 6 feet up with severe down draughts and then you will see real damage and a hike in the insurance
Pace
We all try and treat the aircraft gently. There is nothing I like better than the exclamations of approval when you do not feel the tyres touch and on decent sized runways even with corporate jets we go for chairmans landings.
Brakes on something like the Citation are very expensive as are tyres so we use reverse thrust to conserve the brakes even on long runways.
I take your point on exciting runways at too high a speed you can feel the strain doing so.
Pitot I will knock off on the last part of the landing roll and usually get my knuckles rapped for doing that before exit but with only 2 minutes and a $15000 bill if the system is damaged its off
But that doesn't change the fact that if you fly all weather there are times when you have no choice but to fly into heavy turbulence or fly in strong wind conditions which means that if you really want to damage the aircraft hold off for the stall 6 feet up with severe down draughts and then you will see real damage and a hike in the insurance
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 10th Jul 2015 at 21:20.
Oh dear Lord, we've descended into the 80-something circle of Hell, where the usual suspects pontificate about the only possible way to land an aircraft & endlessly correct each other about the minutiae concerning landing various different non-GA aircraft.
The reality is that we've only heard the OP's side of the discussion, not the school's.
What I do know is that the landing technique described by the OP is what held me back when I was learning to fly back in the 90's:
Two up, in a low wing aircraft with full landing flap, that involves heaving back really, really hard against the trim, attaining a stupidly nose-high attitude, wondering if the tail tie-down is going to hit the ground while out of the corner of your eye you see the instructor looking at you with a WTF? look on his face.
It was only later in my training that I realised that I only needed to round out until the aircraft had reached a sensible landing attitude. In a nosewheel aircraft a sensible landing attitude was one that kept the nosewheel off the runway until after the main wheels had absorbed the stresses of landing. Once I start to round out I have zero interest in the ASI & no interest in the minimum flying speed. My intention is to let the aircraft descend until the wheels are as close to the landing surface as I dare & then hold off & hold off until I reach a sensible landing attitude. Then I hold the attitude & let the aircraft descend to the ground as the airspeed reduces. This "minimum flying speed" stuff is irrelevant, the stall warner may squeek before touchdown but that is merely a factor of the change in AoA as the aircraft descends the last few inches, I know that I usually touch down a good 5 or 10 knots above the minimum IAS achieved in full landing flap stalls.
I have no idea whether this is relevant to the OP's post, whether the OP really does try to land at the absolute minimum flying speed & what training the flying school is giving the OP. I just really, really hate the concept that we should touch down at the minimum flying speed.
The reality is that we've only heard the OP's side of the discussion, not the school's.
What I do know is that the landing technique described by the OP is what held me back when I was learning to fly back in the 90's:
keep the aeroplane flying 6 inches off the ground for as long as possible..touchdown at minimum flying speed
It was only later in my training that I realised that I only needed to round out until the aircraft had reached a sensible landing attitude. In a nosewheel aircraft a sensible landing attitude was one that kept the nosewheel off the runway until after the main wheels had absorbed the stresses of landing. Once I start to round out I have zero interest in the ASI & no interest in the minimum flying speed. My intention is to let the aircraft descend until the wheels are as close to the landing surface as I dare & then hold off & hold off until I reach a sensible landing attitude. Then I hold the attitude & let the aircraft descend to the ground as the airspeed reduces. This "minimum flying speed" stuff is irrelevant, the stall warner may squeek before touchdown but that is merely a factor of the change in AoA as the aircraft descends the last few inches, I know that I usually touch down a good 5 or 10 knots above the minimum IAS achieved in full landing flap stalls.
I have no idea whether this is relevant to the OP's post, whether the OP really does try to land at the absolute minimum flying speed & what training the flying school is giving the OP. I just really, really hate the concept that we should touch down at the minimum flying speed.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a nosewheel aircraft a sensible landing attitude was one that kept the nosewheel off the runway until after the main wheels had absorbed the stresses of landing. Once I start to round out I have zero interest in the ASI & no interest in the minimum flying speed. My intention is to let the aircraft descend until the wheels are as close to the landing surface as I dare & then hold off & hold off until I reach a sensible landing attitude. Then I hold the attitude & let the aircraft descend to the ground as the airspeed reduces. This "minimum flying speed" stuff is irrelevant, the stall warner may squeek before touchdown but that is merely a factor of the change in AoA as the aircraft descends the last few inches, I know that I usually touch down a good 5 or 10 knots above the minimum IAS achieved in full landing flap stalls.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see occasional inquiries here as to where one can rent a C206 or Lance type plane. The truth is that these aircraft are less tolerant of rough handling, and the owners know it,
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glens o' Angus by way of LA
Age: 60
Posts: 1,975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most of the time I do the standard approach and round out landing, but every now and then I enjoy coming in high, power off at 800ft agl, full flaps' almost full back trim for vs0 (adjusted for weight) X 1.25 on the airspeed and let her come down like an elevator with a quick burst of power going thru ground effect and she stops on a dime with no round out.
Mistime the power and you're either going to get a sore arse or a balloon.
Mistime the power and you're either going to get a sore arse or a balloon.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 years ownership of a C206 taught me the exact opposite
Different experiences for different people....
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading through this (interesting) discussion, causes me to ask another question. Do any of the instructors on here ever require their students to do a two-wheel touch and go? So a full T&G where the nosewheel never touches the ground? Preferably in a crosswind that's, say, 1/2 to 2/3rds of the maximum demonstrated crosswind?
I never did this during my PPL training but did so in later club checks, and found them very enjoyable. Teaches you very good roundout skills, and the right technique for keeping the aircraft straight in the roll, using aerodynamic controls only.
I never did this during my PPL training but did so in later club checks, and found them very enjoyable. Teaches you very good roundout skills, and the right technique for keeping the aircraft straight in the roll, using aerodynamic controls only.
Do any of the instructors on here ever require their students to do a two-wheel touch and go?
MJ
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: England
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do any of the instructors on here ever require their students to do a two-wheel touch and go? So a full T&G where the nosewheel never touches the ground?
Or maybe Leeds which has notorious winds and shear
Just to extend the somewhat rigid discussion on a fixed finals procedure compared with a semi-intuitive P1 i/c landing.
Power on right through to touch-down IS more or less imperative in a microlight 'plane.
These are still 'real' a/c but (obviously) with very little inertia, landing speed when power off, even quite late in the round-out, can rapidly drop below stall & you drop horribly. Add in even small wind variations and their very sensitivity can make life exciting - if rather slow.
The one size fits all landing method propounded by experienced instructors who are used to heavier 'light' a/c needs modulating (IMHO) for the lighter end of the GA spectrum.
mike hallam
Power on right through to touch-down IS more or less imperative in a microlight 'plane.
These are still 'real' a/c but (obviously) with very little inertia, landing speed when power off, even quite late in the round-out, can rapidly drop below stall & you drop horribly. Add in even small wind variations and their very sensitivity can make life exciting - if rather slow.
The one size fits all landing method propounded by experienced instructors who are used to heavier 'light' a/c needs modulating (IMHO) for the lighter end of the GA spectrum.
mike hallam
Power on right through to touch-down IS more or less imperative in a microlight 'plane.
Historically microlights were trained with power-off approach and landing as the norm, and offhand I'd say that 80% of my (guessing) 1200 or so microlight landings were power off. The same proportion is probably true of most other traditionally trained microlight pilots:
All microlights are specifically designed and tested to have excellent low speed handling.
The fact that many have very high profile drag does mean that you need rather higher than the classical 1.3Vs on final combined with a very low initiation of the roundout compared to a typical light aeroplane, otherwise you'll bleed too much speed off and stall in the roundout - but that's just handling technique. That should in the vast majority of microlights will have been properly tested, and an appropriate approach speed shown in the POH: a few vintage and LAA aeroplanes missed out here, but it's not hard to still work out the speeds and fly them properly - typically somewhere around 1.5-1.7Vs, depending upon type.
The time to use power in a microlight approach and landing is when you're deliberately trying to fly a flat approach - which is only normally wise in low cloud, or where the approach is over very safe flat ground where an engine hiccough puts you onto a landable surface.
G
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
It doesn't matter what aircraft you fly you have two energy sources. Even in a single engine plane I always think of two throttles the conventional engine throttle and the Elevator throttle which can tap into the potential energy in the airframe.
Even a glider has the Elevator throttle and on a still lift free day all you have is trading altitude for energy.
Obviously in a high drag aircraft you will have to trade more altitude to combat that extra drag so your approach will be steeper.
The only way you can flatten that approach is using the engine energy as well as the airframe energy.
That does not mean you cannot land a draggy aircraft without engine power it does mean you may have a steeper descent path in doing so.
Changing from that descent path to a flare will mean that the airframe energy will reduce while the drag will play a part.
If you are running out of energy to the point of stalling maybe rework your VREF to 1.35 the stall or whatever makes it more comfortable.
1.3 times the stall in a given configuration is just a number if you need more energy for the round out add to it or as you said add engine power
Its all energy and drag management
Pace
It doesn't matter what aircraft you fly you have two energy sources. Even in a single engine plane I always think of two throttles the conventional engine throttle and the Elevator throttle which can tap into the potential energy in the airframe.
Even a glider has the Elevator throttle and on a still lift free day all you have is trading altitude for energy.
Obviously in a high drag aircraft you will have to trade more altitude to combat that extra drag so your approach will be steeper.
The only way you can flatten that approach is using the engine energy as well as the airframe energy.
That does not mean you cannot land a draggy aircraft without engine power it does mean you may have a steeper descent path in doing so.
Changing from that descent path to a flare will mean that the airframe energy will reduce while the drag will play a part.
If you are running out of energy to the point of stalling maybe rework your VREF to 1.35 the stall or whatever makes it more comfortable.
1.3 times the stall in a given configuration is just a number if you need more energy for the round out add to it or as you said add engine power
Its all energy and drag management
Pace