I am an unashamed aircraft driver, as far as I'm concerned an aeroplane is a car with wings. I use whatever technique works and mostly I'm happier to transition to wing down after I switch off the autopilot on the ILS at about 150ft :E

Robin. I'd be happy to let you land my Jodel in a crosswind.

Pace. Sorry mate. Nothing personal.:)

FlyingMac

Don't worry :ok: One of my most memorable flights in a Jodel was in one without wheels :E
it was on Skis on a mountain course out of Meribel in the french Alps! Amazing

Look I am not bothered what technique anyone wants to use as with women whatever lights your fire :E

Dear John classifies himself as an aeroplane driver not a pilot :E autopilot everywhere! If John buys a cirrus he will not even have to land, just pull the chute (sorry john only in jest) ;)

if the slip was soooo good it would be the majority method used across the board in aviation! sorry but it is far from the most used method which must say something especially as the stalwarts of the slip claim it is easier and safer :ugh:

My concern is anyone using a system to make up for lack of basic handling skills! If a pilot is competent in both methods and chooses the slip then fine! As I said whatever lights your fire.

We should all be confident near the ground in any winds within reason and instinctively put in the right control movements to play the aircraft like a violin.
If we use methods to cover up holes in our abilities that would worry me!

Maybe we are asking the wrong question regarding the slip? maybe that question should be that if it is better and safer why it is not the majority method of use in aviation bottom to top?

Pace

Tehe.
I second that Pace.

Except for those types which are designed to be actually landed with crab angle, the truth is that both methods are employed, the crab transitioning to the wing down before touchdown. The debate is at what point one transitions.

What Chuck was getting at was why some people would WANT to transition as early as it seems many do. This is also my suspicion, as Pace writes above, that this 'forward slip' is employed to cover up for lack of ability.

I like to use the wing down method too. But then it is an approach angle technique.

I think it is a shame that instruction does not include flying level along the runway at 10' or so, varying the amount of bank and rudder to see and feel the effects. That way the mystery and pressure of crosswind landings would be reduced and a higher level of confidence gained rather than the very short learning opportunity which exists because of the impending touchdown.
It would also demonstrate that the decision time for a baulked landing can be extended. Understand correctly. If you can't fly straight along the runway with full rudder, then the crosswind is exceeding the aircaft's actual limits, if you get my drift. Pun intended.

There is a third method that no-one has mentioned yet, and that is the slight application of rudder on final, reducing the crab by about a half, then a full push on that pedal when landing.


As I find the use of rudder is counter-intuitive... i.e. you push forward on the left pedal, and the left wing goes backward. ( And perhaps because I have chosen the wrong pedal at the wrong time.) I like to have my correct foot pushing slightly on the correct pedal before the full effort is required, that way I don't use the incorrect input.


Some of this I learnt when flying gliders... For a winch take-off, whilst hooking up the cable, you look at the wind-sock and push the pedal which the wind-sock (or yaw string) is pointing to. This ensures that your run down the runway is wind corrected before the tail gets blown around.

Well, in my case I don't have to worry about scraping a jet engine cowling down the runway.

plus one for the crabbing technique, when i started 25 years ago my instructor said just do what was easier for me and what i felt comfortable with. Never mastered "wing down", it always felt very un-natural to me. With a bit of practice using the rudder to "kick off the drift" during the flare works fine every time and this method has the advantage that you dont need to do anything different when you get on to the big fast equipment. Its a bit risky to do wing down X-wind correction on a big aircraft with big engines under the wings...

This is absolutely not an "either or" discussion and anyone who says they "never" use one of these techniques is not deploying a full range of piloting skills. Each method has its advantages and its disadvantages and so one should be equally capable to use either and should then deploy the most appropriate in any particular situation.

Beagle; I agree with most of what you say and, of course if you fly the published speed the aeroplane will behave as intended in the flare and will sit down nicely just as you align it with the landing direction. But, and it's a big but; what happens on a gusty windy sort of day? Suppose you have flared at the correct speed, aligned your low wing loading taildragger with the landing direction when along comes a gust increasing your airspeed by 5 to 10 knots? what then?

You have three options ...

1 Let the aeroplane land anyway - not recommended unless you want to demonstrate a ground loop!
2. Go around
3. Roll on some into wind bank to keep the aeroplane tracking down the centreline, use opposite rudder to keep the nose aligned with the landing direction. In other words transition to the "wing down" method!

If you don't have the skills and the confidence to adapt your only safe option is to go around and hope for kinder winds on your next landing attempt.

Private Jet; A crabbed approach and then a transition to wing down in the flare is exactly what the Airbus autoland mode does and it has pretty big engines under the wings! You can't make blanket statements about what techniques may or may not be appropriate to whole groups of aircraft; types are all different and frequently demand different techniques.

Final example. This morning I flew in a light aeroplane with significant dihedral, a low wing loading and a soft, narrow track landing gear. Crosswind was 15Kt and the wind was pretty gusty (+/- 15mph on finals). I flew the approach using the crab technique down to the flare then transitioned to wing down as the speed reduced to the appropriate number for landing. Due to the gusty headwind it was impossible to anticipate the speed reduction with sufficient accuracy to judge when to straighten and let the aeroplane land on both mainwheels together. Only option is to transition to wing down and wait for the upwind wheel to land followed by the other then the nose.

There are advantages of either technique and a fully rounded pilot is skilled and confident with either, choosing the most appropriate one in the prevailing circumstances.

Happy landings

3 Point

3 point with all due respect I do not think this thread was about handling in the flare close to the ground and techniques to use near the ground to deal with gusts, up and down draughts and strong crosswinds.

Yes! My point exactly that a pilot should be confident near the ground in any wind conditions within reason and be able to play that aircraft like a violin.
but that has little to do with a cross control approach and landing and smacks of changing the goal post in this discussion.:E

.

THAT IS NOT THE ONLY OPTION in which case what have i been doing for the past 28 years in all manner of ****e? also I would reverse your statement!
I would also stress that in some wind the conditions the last thing you want is to be holding off but would be better " flying it on" which you should know about looking at your profile? especially in jets where you want to be on the numbers and not floating halfway down the runway or off the side or off the end of the runway because you do not have enough distance to stop:ok:


Pace

Hi Pace,

OK, agree that the thread started off considering the earlier part of the approach and that it may be less appropriate to use wing down too early. The discussion has however developed to include comments on how to handle the flare and touchdown in all sorts of aircraft.

The quote you picked out from my remarks is valid in the context I was using although I will concede that it would have been more complete if I had said that

"The only option, other than going around, was..."

Once again I would say that one can not generalise about a particular technique and claim that it is the best choice (or even a valid option) for all circumstances. What you have been doing for the past 28 years I hope, is choosing the best option from a range of available techniques to optimise the outcome of many dynamic and different situations. Sometimes varying those choices in response to unexpected changes outside your immediate control.

Your remark about playing a violin is exactly what I am getting at so I know you understand what I mean.

If you know that the wind conditions or perhaps your lack or familiarity with the type you are flying, will make it difficult to anticipate the exact moment to straighten the crab before touchdown, might it not be wise to transition to the wing down technique at 100 feet rather than being forced to do so in the flare? As I say, different techniques for different circumstances!

3 Point

3 point I know you know what you are talking about too :ok:sometimes its this faceless text ;)

Pace

Good morning fellow Ppruners, I see the conversation has become polite again and the insulting comments have disappeared, maybe it is a time zone thing and we are back in a culture that can show some respect for others?

Anyhow this poster has correctly identified the intent of my reason for this discussion.



For instance why would you want to increase your workload coming up on what could be a landing that may require increased workload?

Is it runway anticipation?


This conversation is meant to be about control input during the final approach.

The flare and landing is a whole different subject.

Chuck

Yes I think maybe a thread on different types of landing techniques and methods for dealing with winds in the flare might be useful :ok: and will probably be equally entertaining ;) but be prepared to be called a Sky God :ugh: don't think any exist

Pace

No doubt that it would. :O

Some years ago I wrote a in depth explanation of how to land, it has to be in the arcives somewhere.....if we could find it it would save me a lot of time re-writing it.

I seem to remember a King video filmed from the touchdown end of a runway where the aircraft flies level along the runway moves from side to side with the use of rudder and ailerons.

I wondered why this exercise was not included in the sillytrainingbus.

In fact, I used to demonstrate this on the ATR when cleared a long landing. Just a slight increase of power at 20' and it would fly level for ages until the speed decayed and this provided a slow motion flare and touchdown. Unsurprisingly, this technique was easier than a normal landing.
The ATR was great for crosswinds with its 45kt take-off and 38kt landing demonstrated components.

On that sideline, one can often see and feel commercial aircraft 'feeling' for the ground with one wing down and a little opposite rudder.
The reason being that the sudeen drag of all the main wheels touching down at the same time can feel like a firmer arrival than it actually was.

PS. Chuck. How to land? Isn't landing as simple as flying level with the ground with the power off until the aircraft won't? Most places require one to fly in a straight line too.

Not Chuck but just to expand the discussion :E Landing is not as closely associated to stall as imagined. Yes stall will give the slowest speed and hence the shortest landing distance but there the connection almost stops.

A Jet Jockey friend of mine landed a Citation at Edinburgh at a radar estimated speed of 200 KTS stopped on the runway with I believe the tyres intact although way over their limiting speeds. He had perceived handling problems. A typical VREF for that aircraft is 105-110 KTS. So more than double the normal touchdown speed.
I am obviously not suggesting that anyone emulates that or any way near that but use that example to disassociate stall and landing in pilots minds

Landing has little to do with stall or a VREF of 1.3 times the stall in a given configuration but obviously has when stopping to the book values.

Be precise enough and you could land at higher speeds. the determining factor here is the distance ratio between the nose wheel and mains. The bigger the distance between the nose and mains and the more likely you are to keep the nose from touching at higher speed. short coupled the harder a higher speed is possible.

Just threw that snippet in the pot as another consideration point :E and more a consideration of why you can fly it on rather than thinking you have to be hanging there in strong winds trying to land at the stall.

Pace

You know I kind of go along with that. While I'm an avid reader of all the experience on here I do think that sometimes we overcomplicate issues. Flying isn't hard, landing in a crosswind isn't hard, nothing about flying is hard otherwise there would be an awful lot of dead pilots and it would no doubt have been banned by now. Plus a dullard like me wouldn't be able to do it. You wouldn't get a multipage thread on how to park a car (maybe you would I don't know).

Actually before one can consistently land properly one must be able to judge the height of the wheels above the runway ( Or any landing surface ).

There are two specific heights one must be able to accurately judge.

(1) ..... the height at which you change the approach path to the flare portion that will position the airplanes path from the approach angle to parallel with the landing surface.

(2) .... the height at which the wheels will contact the landing surface in the proper attitude for the device you are flying / driving / at that moment.

Over the decades I was in the flying skills upgrading business the inability to accurately judge these heights was the most frequent issue I found across the spectrum of pilots.

It is actually quite easy to re-teach them as long as the person you are teaching has normal vision and situational awareness. ( And an IQ above room temperature. ) :ok:

I admire your skill in teaching people that, I haven't a clue how I judge how high I am, I just sort of do it correctly through the grace of God I think. It works, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Thing. some might say your faith in god is misplaced what with the lack of evidence for their existance. Back to flight school with you!

Ok. 'Won't' might be an over-simplerization. Should read, 'doesn't want to'.

Thus we are all covered. If I further modify to read 'fly level over the intended landing area at an inch or so until the aircraft no longer wants to', I think we can say this goat is clipped!

Now. About this parking business. Backwards is my answer. Perhaps a new thread for this one.