Judging The Flare
Guest
Posts: n/a
Chuck,
TT ~150hrs
I do not profess to talk from the expert point of view though I do find this rather fascinating.
My instructor (I have alluded to him in other threads so I apologise to continue canonising the chap), his resume could read almost identical to yours though with more emphasis on military flying.
The method of judging the flare (using peripheral vision to keep track of the horizon as the plane sinks) is the way I was taught and is the method which works best for me. It is quite difficult for the human eye to judge height based on a visual reference directly in front of the canopy regardless of focus (incidentally I would suggest the end of the runway is not the same as focusing on infinity). This is principally because of the minimal shift of your point of focus in relation to a fixed point of the canopy.
Therefore, as taught, I prefer to use my peripheral vision to assess the rate at which the horizon is creeping up the canopy to the sides of the aircraft, which consequently is an excellent guide to the rate of descent.
You made reference to the use of peripheral vision in a previous post, so I think you would agree the use of the whole field of vision is extremely important for flying (or indeed any activity which requires a fair degree of spacial awareness).
I may well be reading your posts incorrectly however.
TT ~150hrs
I do not profess to talk from the expert point of view though I do find this rather fascinating.
My instructor (I have alluded to him in other threads so I apologise to continue canonising the chap), his resume could read almost identical to yours though with more emphasis on military flying.
The method of judging the flare (using peripheral vision to keep track of the horizon as the plane sinks) is the way I was taught and is the method which works best for me. It is quite difficult for the human eye to judge height based on a visual reference directly in front of the canopy regardless of focus (incidentally I would suggest the end of the runway is not the same as focusing on infinity). This is principally because of the minimal shift of your point of focus in relation to a fixed point of the canopy.
Therefore, as taught, I prefer to use my peripheral vision to assess the rate at which the horizon is creeping up the canopy to the sides of the aircraft, which consequently is an excellent guide to the rate of descent.
You made reference to the use of peripheral vision in a previous post, so I think you would agree the use of the whole field of vision is extremely important for flying (or indeed any activity which requires a fair degree of spacial awareness).
I may well be reading your posts incorrectly however.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Feet Dry,
Do you get the feeling that Chuck enjoyed answering your question
Chuck,
I never felt particuarly comfortable staring up ahead just when my brain says "WTF are you looking up yonder for? You are about to hit the deck look down...now...please!" Anyways, I could grease my landings prior to and just after solo. They have gone off a little now but I think I have it sussed for then next time.
However, all these methods seem a little too mechanical too me. I suspect all these prescriptive methods serve to teach you how to land on your home runway but not at a narrower, uphill, shorter one with different features around-and-abouts.
I get the feeling that it will click soon. Is it like learning to use the clutch in a car for the first time? There is no text that can describe exactly when to do what, you just learn how and when so that it eventually becomes instinctive instinctive.
Actually, maybe it is a lot like a good golf swing - trust your instincts and hit the fairway, think about it and take a provisional
Anybody else concure with my limited observations thus far?
Do you get the feeling that Chuck enjoyed answering your question
Chuck,
I never felt particuarly comfortable staring up ahead just when my brain says "WTF are you looking up yonder for? You are about to hit the deck look down...now...please!" Anyways, I could grease my landings prior to and just after solo. They have gone off a little now but I think I have it sussed for then next time.
However, all these methods seem a little too mechanical too me. I suspect all these prescriptive methods serve to teach you how to land on your home runway but not at a narrower, uphill, shorter one with different features around-and-abouts.
I get the feeling that it will click soon. Is it like learning to use the clutch in a car for the first time? There is no text that can describe exactly when to do what, you just learn how and when so that it eventually becomes instinctive instinctive.
Actually, maybe it is a lot like a good golf swing - trust your instincts and hit the fairway, think about it and take a provisional
Anybody else concure with my limited observations thus far?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
feet dry:
It is important that all pilots understand the safest method of judging the flare height.
So once again I must go back to your description.
Quote:
" as the aim point is approached transfer the focus to the end of the runway using your perepheral vision to guage the rate of descent in the final stages"
Here is what I suggest you do.
The most demanding flying for accurate height judgement in the flare is crop dusting ( agricultural flying ) there are some chemicals that must be applied almost touching the crop, such as fungacides.
Find your instructor to fly as a safety pilot and then make your approach to the runway at a height of one hundred feet above the start of the runway.
At that point you lower the nose to at least a thirty degree angle to reach the flare point in the shortest space possible.
The flare must be smooth and accurate to arrive at two feet above the runway in the level attitude.
Note:
You must hold thirty degrees nose down until you start the flare.
If you do try this you must judge the flare height as described in your previous post....... you must raise your focus to the end of the runway before you start the flare.
Show this to your instructor and if He /She feels this to be to dangerous, then find an ag. pilot to fly with you to prevent you from flying into the runway.
Be extreemly careful and do this by degrees, start off with a very shallow dive to the runway, gradually working to the thirty degree nose down dive.
Normally I would not advise such an exercise, however with a competant instructor to prevent you hitting the runway this will be safe.
Let me know how accurately you could judge flare height by looking ahead at the end of the runway before you commence the flare.
Be careful. Be very, very, very careful and most important your safety pilot instructor "MUST" understand how to judge height or you will hit the runway....
For Gods sake do not try this all by yourself,....
Cat Driver:
It is important that all pilots understand the safest method of judging the flare height.
So once again I must go back to your description.
Quote:
" as the aim point is approached transfer the focus to the end of the runway using your perepheral vision to guage the rate of descent in the final stages"
Here is what I suggest you do.
The most demanding flying for accurate height judgement in the flare is crop dusting ( agricultural flying ) there are some chemicals that must be applied almost touching the crop, such as fungacides.
Find your instructor to fly as a safety pilot and then make your approach to the runway at a height of one hundred feet above the start of the runway.
At that point you lower the nose to at least a thirty degree angle to reach the flare point in the shortest space possible.
The flare must be smooth and accurate to arrive at two feet above the runway in the level attitude.
Note:
You must hold thirty degrees nose down until you start the flare.
If you do try this you must judge the flare height as described in your previous post....... you must raise your focus to the end of the runway before you start the flare.
Show this to your instructor and if He /She feels this to be to dangerous, then find an ag. pilot to fly with you to prevent you from flying into the runway.
Be extreemly careful and do this by degrees, start off with a very shallow dive to the runway, gradually working to the thirty degree nose down dive.
Normally I would not advise such an exercise, however with a competant instructor to prevent you hitting the runway this will be safe.
Let me know how accurately you could judge flare height by looking ahead at the end of the runway before you commence the flare.
Be careful. Be very, very, very careful and most important your safety pilot instructor "MUST" understand how to judge height or you will hit the runway....
For Gods sake do not try this all by yourself,....
Cat Driver:
Guest
Posts: n/a
I think this will continue....
Chuck,
With respect the subject of the thread is how to judge the flare, the crop duster analogy is for judging height above the ground so as not to hit it.
The above do not (to me) really imply the same thing i.e. in the flare you are intentionally making contact with terra firma - the aim/intention of the pilot is to accurately judge the rate of sink.
Out of interest, when instructing level turning where do you tell your instructees to maintain focus?
Chuck,
With respect the subject of the thread is how to judge the flare, the crop duster analogy is for judging height above the ground so as not to hit it.
The above do not (to me) really imply the same thing i.e. in the flare you are intentionally making contact with terra firma - the aim/intention of the pilot is to accurately judge the rate of sink.
Out of interest, when instructing level turning where do you tell your instructees to maintain focus?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: europe
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dry Feet
The flare and the following moments are also taken up in trying to prevent the plane from landing, or hitting the ground, until it is ready to .
That does not, I think, apply to wet landings, when a firm arrival is considered better.
As far as focussing on the end of the runway, on some types the end of the runway will not be visible.
Having said all that, I am not sure where I look, so I will check on my next flight, and probably thump in as a result.
The flare and the following moments are also taken up in trying to prevent the plane from landing, or hitting the ground, until it is ready to .
That does not, I think, apply to wet landings, when a firm arrival is considered better.
As far as focussing on the end of the runway, on some types the end of the runway will not be visible.
Having said all that, I am not sure where I look, so I will check on my next flight, and probably thump in as a result.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feet Dry:
When turning I have my students look at the horizon, either natural outside the airplane (VFR ) or mechanical / electronic inside the airplane ( IFR )
I believe you and I have a problem with semantics, the flare is that point in the approach to a landing where the attitude is changed from the approach attitude to the level attitude to parrallel the runway, from that point we have passed the flare and are now in the holdoff portion of the landing proceedure.
My analogy of the steep approach used in Ag. flying to the flare to parrellel the ground is exactly the same manouver as the flare to land. ( only steeper and requiring a far more accurate and faster attitude change. )
When judging the point of flare we must be able to accurately judge closure rate with the target ( the point on the runway where you plan to flare ) proper judgement of closure rate at a constant attitude and speed will result in height judgement.
To be profficient in this exercise requires two factors.
(1) Proper instruction.
(2) Practice through repetative approaches and flare judgement of time, & distance to go before impact with the runway. Once burned into the memory receptors it will remain there forever.
The real problem we are having here is poor instructional techniques in ab initio training.
Otherwise I would not be here wearing out my key board for nothing.
Except the satisfaction of helping others because I care.
Cat Driver:
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
When turning I have my students look at the horizon, either natural outside the airplane (VFR ) or mechanical / electronic inside the airplane ( IFR )
I believe you and I have a problem with semantics, the flare is that point in the approach to a landing where the attitude is changed from the approach attitude to the level attitude to parrallel the runway, from that point we have passed the flare and are now in the holdoff portion of the landing proceedure.
My analogy of the steep approach used in Ag. flying to the flare to parrellel the ground is exactly the same manouver as the flare to land. ( only steeper and requiring a far more accurate and faster attitude change. )
When judging the point of flare we must be able to accurately judge closure rate with the target ( the point on the runway where you plan to flare ) proper judgement of closure rate at a constant attitude and speed will result in height judgement.
To be profficient in this exercise requires two factors.
(1) Proper instruction.
(2) Practice through repetative approaches and flare judgement of time, & distance to go before impact with the runway. Once burned into the memory receptors it will remain there forever.
The real problem we are having here is poor instructional techniques in ab initio training.
Otherwise I would not be here wearing out my key board for nothing.
Except the satisfaction of helping others because I care.
Cat Driver:
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Croydon (but really from Barnsley)
Age: 64
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The helpful thing my instructor told me to help me judge the height of the flare was to imagine sitting at the front of the top deck of a double-decker bus, and to flare at that height.
He also told me to switch my focus to the end of the runway, but the double-decker analogy really helped give me a concrete idea of how high to be.
The real problem I had with the flare was overdoing it and having to go-around. I still tend to be a bit twitchy on the flare, having to make very small adjustments following each pull back on the yoke.
He also told me to switch my focus to the end of the runway, but the double-decker analogy really helped give me a concrete idea of how high to be.
The real problem I had with the flare was overdoing it and having to go-around. I still tend to be a bit twitchy on the flare, having to make very small adjustments following each pull back on the yoke.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DOP:
Exactly at what point in the flare or hold off were you told to look at the end of the runway?
By the way the height of a double deck bus is a good example of where to start the flare.
Also go back and read all the explinations I have given here with regard to looking at the far end of the runway.
I have no idea of where such rubbish as this came from, but I can guarantee it makes for sloppy landings due to poor height judgement.
Cat Driver:
Exactly at what point in the flare or hold off were you told to look at the end of the runway?
By the way the height of a double deck bus is a good example of where to start the flare.
Also go back and read all the explinations I have given here with regard to looking at the far end of the runway.
I have no idea of where such rubbish as this came from, but I can guarantee it makes for sloppy landings due to poor height judgement.
Cat Driver:
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone said earlier, this thread just goes on and on..........
But I think there's good reason for that.
I'm another instructor putting in my twopence worth. Chuck's postings make a lot of sense. I agree that, for many students, the "double decker bus" or "looking out of your first floor window" method gives them the required picture and they get the flare height quite quickly.
For others, this doesn't work as easily. I was one of those students myself. What I do, and what I teach, is to keep focusing on the aiming point whilst using peripheral vision to clock when the surface at the edge of the runway stops being blurry and starts to have texture. This is, for people with normal vision, the "double decker" height. It's difficult to explain in writing but has brought an enormous grin of understanding onto the faces of many students who were struggling to judge the height. When the blurry green at the side starts to look like grass, we level off.
I demonstrate it by firstly flying along the runway at this height and then getting the student to fly along the runway. When this is all ok, we fly a third circuit and flare again. Immediately, we cut power and look at the end of the runway......thereafter see other posts. It seems to work for many students who are passed on to me for "tweaking" when other instructors say that they can't sort out the flare. Hope this helps some of you who may be finding it difficult.
Another thing that seems to help my students is to understand that there are three distinct phases - the approach, the flare and the hold-off - and that we look at different places as we change from one to the other. I belive that if taught well, this will mean that students will learn to judge any runways, not just land on the one they have memorised !
Like Chuck, I'm not saying that I'm right and everyone else is wrong - just explaining what has worked for a lot of people. It will come good for you too in the end - if you persevere. Happy landings.
But I think there's good reason for that.
I'm another instructor putting in my twopence worth. Chuck's postings make a lot of sense. I agree that, for many students, the "double decker bus" or "looking out of your first floor window" method gives them the required picture and they get the flare height quite quickly.
For others, this doesn't work as easily. I was one of those students myself. What I do, and what I teach, is to keep focusing on the aiming point whilst using peripheral vision to clock when the surface at the edge of the runway stops being blurry and starts to have texture. This is, for people with normal vision, the "double decker" height. It's difficult to explain in writing but has brought an enormous grin of understanding onto the faces of many students who were struggling to judge the height. When the blurry green at the side starts to look like grass, we level off.
I demonstrate it by firstly flying along the runway at this height and then getting the student to fly along the runway. When this is all ok, we fly a third circuit and flare again. Immediately, we cut power and look at the end of the runway......thereafter see other posts. It seems to work for many students who are passed on to me for "tweaking" when other instructors say that they can't sort out the flare. Hope this helps some of you who may be finding it difficult.
Another thing that seems to help my students is to understand that there are three distinct phases - the approach, the flare and the hold-off - and that we look at different places as we change from one to the other. I belive that if taught well, this will mean that students will learn to judge any runways, not just land on the one they have memorised !
Like Chuck, I'm not saying that I'm right and everyone else is wrong - just explaining what has worked for a lot of people. It will come good for you too in the end - if you persevere. Happy landings.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dorset
Posts: 902
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who learnt at Bournemouth with a certain club, all I have to add to this is think 'Elephant Height' 
Trouble was, when learning, I could never get consistency between whether they were babies or fully-grown elephants!!
Trouble was, when learning, I could never get consistency between whether they were babies or fully-grown elephants!!
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with 'Feet Dry' on this one.
Chuck......calm down, it's only a forum fercrisakes ,I do agree with 'Feet Dry', you do seem to place youreslf on a pedestal and everyone else is wrong
How about this.......point at the ground until you think you are about to crash unless you do something about it..........then look further along the runway and try to defy physics and not land (but with out going up again)...........Hey Presto...you've landed
Dunno what all the fuss is about...it aint rocket science
JWF
Chuck......calm down, it's only a forum fercrisakes
,I do agree with 'Feet Dry', you do seem to place youreslf on a pedestal and everyone else is wrong How about this.......point at the ground until you think you are about to crash unless you do something about it..........then look further along the runway and try to defy physics and not land (but with out going up again)...........Hey Presto...you've landed
Dunno what all the fuss is about...it aint rocket science
JWF
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Croydon (but really from Barnsley)
Age: 64
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuck:
I was told to look to the end of the runway just as I started the flare - start to pull back and look long as I do so.
Circuit Basher:
Are those African Elephants or Indian Elephants?
I was told to look to the end of the runway just as I started the flare - start to pull back and look long as I do so.
Circuit Basher:
Are those African Elephants or Indian Elephants?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Home
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Juswonnafly - it maybe ain't rocket science, but a lot of people seem to get it consistently wrong even when they've got a reasonable number of hours experience.
I haven't noticed Chuck trying to "put himself on a pedestal". He knows a lot more than most of us here, and has thought about it a lot more as well. I think most of us value his insights, even if he does have to repeat himself a few times.
From my limited experience, he's right about the uselessness of looking to the end of the runway during the flare. It might work after a bit if you always fly the same aircraft from the same runway, but if the runway slopes (or has a bump, or dip), or if you change from a nosewheel to tailwheel aircraft.... you're not going to land predictably and consistently.
Chuck's technique described on page 2 of this thread works well for me (unless I'm in a Piper Cub, in which case I'll often touchdown too early and bounce... :o ). The "20ft" point is when I'm about 3 seconds away from impacting the aiming point - this helps if there's a bit of a slope, and you need to start the flare when you height above the ground is more than 20ft.
I haven't noticed Chuck trying to "put himself on a pedestal". He knows a lot more than most of us here, and has thought about it a lot more as well. I think most of us value his insights, even if he does have to repeat himself a few times.
From my limited experience, he's right about the uselessness of looking to the end of the runway during the flare. It might work after a bit if you always fly the same aircraft from the same runway, but if the runway slopes (or has a bump, or dip), or if you change from a nosewheel to tailwheel aircraft.... you're not going to land predictably and consistently.
Chuck's technique described on page 2 of this thread works well for me (unless I'm in a Piper Cub, in which case I'll often touchdown too early and bounce... :o ). The "20ft" point is when I'm about 3 seconds away from impacting the aiming point - this helps if there's a bit of a slope, and you need to start the flare when you height above the ground is more than 20ft.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dop:
Try reading and thinking about what I have tried to explain here, then very carefully experiment with the method I have suggested.
Once you get it figured out you will be a far better pilot.
And all the best in your future flying.
Juswonnafly:.
I am always very calm, although I occasionaly get annoyed when I see people who paid a small fortune to learn to fly not knowing what in hell they are doing.
I do not have the need to elevate myself on a pedestal, when I wish to elevate myself I get in an airplane or helicopter, both of which I pride myself in understanding the physics of correctly operating.
For the sake of comparison please read all the comments on this thread that I have taken the time to write, trying to help total strangers in the private pilot community. Then read your advise in your last post.
I would with respect suggest that maybe you should reassess your thoughts and maybe put some rocket science in your thinking, it may improve your understanding of the subject.....which I feel to be very important, what good is flight training if they can't land the damn thing after flying it?
Cat Driver:
Try reading and thinking about what I have tried to explain here, then very carefully experiment with the method I have suggested.
Once you get it figured out you will be a far better pilot.
And all the best in your future flying.
Juswonnafly:.
I am always very calm, although I occasionaly get annoyed when I see people who paid a small fortune to learn to fly not knowing what in hell they are doing.
I do not have the need to elevate myself on a pedestal, when I wish to elevate myself I get in an airplane or helicopter, both of which I pride myself in understanding the physics of correctly operating.
For the sake of comparison please read all the comments on this thread that I have taken the time to write, trying to help total strangers in the private pilot community. Then read your advise in your last post.
I would with respect suggest that maybe you should reassess your thoughts and maybe put some rocket science in your thinking, it may improve your understanding of the subject.....which I feel to be very important, what good is flight training if they can't land the damn thing after flying it?
Cat Driver:
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just my point......this thread goes on and on and on and..........................................
OK OK.....a bit harsh.....I do apologise Chuck. However I would suggest that perhaps it is a case of 'what works for some' and all that............
JWF
OK OK.....a bit harsh.....I do apologise Chuck. However I would suggest that perhaps it is a case of 'what works for some' and all that............
JWF
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
juswonnafly:
I see you are an instructor.
Go to my post of Jan. 29 at 16:36.
You experiment with the exercise I suggested, then come back and let me know how it went.
Chuck
I see you are an instructor.
Go to my post of Jan. 29 at 16:36.
You experiment with the exercise I suggested, then come back and let me know how it went.
Chuck
Guest
Posts: n/a
A thought for the instructors here then....
As I think more on this subject it occurs I spent a great deal of time with my instructor ensuring the approach to the flare was spot on. It follows that if the aircraft is properly set-up and trimmed on the approach, I will cross my aim point to commence the flare everytime. Being able to land on the numbers every time, at several different fields, does not make me big-headed but it does highlight the quality of my instruction.
Specifically for the instructors, which sector of the landing cycle do you feel is most important and what are your criteria for telling the instructees to bin an approach?
As I think more on this subject it occurs I spent a great deal of time with my instructor ensuring the approach to the flare was spot on. It follows that if the aircraft is properly set-up and trimmed on the approach, I will cross my aim point to commence the flare everytime. Being able to land on the numbers every time, at several different fields, does not make me big-headed but it does highlight the quality of my instruction.
Specifically for the instructors, which sector of the landing cycle do you feel is most important and what are your criteria for telling the instructees to bin an approach?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now you're all going to say that this is a cop-out but .......
As all our instructors told us, I'm sure, "If you fly a controlled (or even perfect) circuit you have a much better chance of a making a controlled (or even perfect) approach. If you fly a controlled (or even perfect) approach you have a much better chance of getting the flare right. If you fly a controlled (or even perfect) flare you have a much better chance of getting the hold-off right. And if you fly a controlled (or even perfect) hold-off, you have an excellent chance of completing a perfect landing."
So I'm not sure that any phase is more important than any other phase but they do all rely on each other (as feetdry has pointed out). Of course the nearer the ground you get, the less margin for error. Which is why I prefer to see a student make an early decision to go around rather than trying to "rescue" what we both know is turning into a messy approach. But I'm only one of a million instructors so let's wait and see what the others think !
As all our instructors told us, I'm sure, "If you fly a controlled (or even perfect) circuit you have a much better chance of a making a controlled (or even perfect) approach. If you fly a controlled (or even perfect) approach you have a much better chance of getting the flare right. If you fly a controlled (or even perfect) flare you have a much better chance of getting the hold-off right. And if you fly a controlled (or even perfect) hold-off, you have an excellent chance of completing a perfect landing."
So I'm not sure that any phase is more important than any other phase but they do all rely on each other (as feetdry has pointed out). Of course the nearer the ground you get, the less margin for error. Which is why I prefer to see a student make an early decision to go around rather than trying to "rescue" what we both know is turning into a messy approach. But I'm only one of a million instructors so let's wait and see what the others think !
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuck........
I have re read your posts and have to say
I am much more inclined to agree with you (ouch, that hurt to say!).
As a matter of interest I had a student yesterday morning who was on his first 'proper' circuit session. We discussed this very topic before and after the lesson. I can see that principally we are all more than likely saying the same thing but in different (confusing?) words. Analizing how I do it I would say that I keep the initial aiming point in view until about 20 ft or so (point out to student to look down to left of a/c as well) then when starting the flare I would say I look ahead about 100 to 200 yards, this provides depth perception as the a/c sinks closer to the ground. Looking at the far end is not so much a consious thought but the far end is in peripheral vision and provides good referance for lateral aim.
Also my next student was learning glide approaches and during one of these (when he was clearly too high/close) I took over and demonstrated a max flap VFE dive to the aiming point, this naturally required good judgement ( ) when at the flare and it was at this moment that I realised exactly where I do look for height reference.
Lastly I do wish to apologise for previous remarks, they were sharp and non productive (best excuse I can come up with is I was having a bad hair day!)
Happy Landings
JWF
I have re read your posts and have to say
I am much more inclined to agree with you (ouch, that hurt to say!).As a matter of interest I had a student yesterday morning who was on his first 'proper' circuit session. We discussed this very topic before and after the lesson. I can see that principally we are all more than likely saying the same thing but in different (confusing?) words. Analizing how I do it I would say that I keep the initial aiming point in view until about 20 ft or so (point out to student to look down to left of a/c as well) then when starting the flare I would say I look ahead about 100 to 200 yards, this provides depth perception as the a/c sinks closer to the ground. Looking at the far end is not so much a consious thought but the far end is in peripheral vision and provides good referance for lateral aim.
Also my next student was learning glide approaches and during one of these (when he was clearly too high/close) I took over and demonstrated a max flap VFE dive to the aiming point, this naturally required good judgement (
) when at the flare and it was at this moment that I realised exactly where I do look for height reference.Lastly I do wish to apologise for previous remarks, they were sharp and non productive (best excuse I can come up with is I was having a bad hair day!)
Happy Landings
JWF