Indeed.

Shades of Monty Python as some seek to divide the already tiny UK flying community up on the basis of choice of discussion forum into something akin to The People's Front of Judea and The Judean People's Front.

Good plan! :rolleyes:

Joke
 

Hi all

(BTW - I am a lady....)

However I put the question on this forum because I did want some help....

However I noted some comments as being quite direct....:sad:

This thread is a geniune thread on my part.

I was not joking.

So for all who have commented/given advice, thank you.

:ok:

OK - Back to basics.

You need to see the 'shape' of the runway environment in order that you might start to remember the correct aspect. Ask for your instructor to demo this - at your stage I'd suggest that as much as 1/3 of your time in the circuit should be in the form of (immaculately flown), well pattered demos.

I'd also ask for the PAPIs to be switched off.

You instructor should also demo being above the glide slope and below the glide slope (not the instrument slope necessarily!) and teach you both how to recognise and how to correct these situations.

Constant or fixed aspect priciples work well as something to hang your hat on - if your desired touchdown point is not moving in your windshield you will hit (land!) it. If it's moving up you are going low (undershooting) if it is moving down you are going high (overshooting)

At the touch down point - can I suggest some golden rules:

A good landing rarely follows a bad approach

Three main sections of the touchdown phase are quite clearly defined as; Flare - to stop the rate of descent; Fly level a foot or two above the runway as the speed decays; Settle onto the mainwheels. Note - It is not possible to go from step one to step three missing step two!!!

Finally, once you have mastered Biggin get your instructor to take you to other runways (shorter, narrow, wider etc) so that you can get the feel of how runway shape can affect your perception of vertical positioning on the final approach.

Have fun...

I've done some nice landings and some crap landings, but having read the article posted by Kingy, I'm now prompted to admit a bit of confusion. :confused:

All this about the touch down point being where the perspective doesn't move up/down the windscreen, doesn't seem to work for me. :{

The non-moving point is not where your (my?) wheels touch, but the point where I commence the flare. By the time I've lost the excess speed (1.3 * stall), got the nose high (when I really get it right, gulp), then I've floated a good chunk down the runway (maybe 100 metres, plus?), before that gentle squeak from the tyres annnounces the fun's over.

So if I want to touch down at a specific point, then I have to aim a bit before my desired touch down point, i.e. undershooting slightly.

Having said this, I'm sure someone will now explain what I'm doing wrong. :)

GB,

I think from what you write you actually are doing it right!

No need for selfdeprication!

FD

Flying Spice,

I orginally learnt to fly at Bristol, where the PAPI's are always on, to be honest, you've got to get them switched off, as a GA pilot you need to be able to land at runways that have no visual aids. I'm sure the Tower will oblige if you ask.

The all 'long and thin' too high and 'short 'n fat' too low, works for me! :)

GB

I do it the same way. As you say your aiming point will be your flaring point unless you adjust you aiming point when very short finals.

To land on numbers I aim for them all the way down the approach and then over the threshold when i am sure i will make the flaring point i lower the nose slightly (more a thought than a movement) and reduce power to keep speed. Flare at the appropriate height touch down on numbers! (sometimes)

Don't know how correct that is but works for me and a few other i know.

Flying spice, Get those papi's switched off if you can.

papi's in general are not for light aircraft use. The reason and there seems to be some confusion here, is because they are calibrated to take you down to the touchdown point on the runway not the numbers. If you want to land on those big white rectangular markings further up the runway then the papis will take you there however you should be aiming for the numbers with your mark one eyeball. To be honest your instructors let you down here.

FS -

I'm another who learnt at Bristol (PAPI's nearly always on unless you ask) and at the time I really couldn't tell whether I was relying on the PAPI's or not, although with hindsight I think I was drawn to the slightly low approach that they tempt you into. I certainly shared the concerns you mentioned in your original post.

For what it's worth, as soon as land aways started, the absence of PAPIs just wasn't a problem. So in my opinion, yes it's a legitimate concern, but no it probably won't give you a problem when they aren't there.

Hi again,

I find pprune can be a bit scary from time to time and do try to watch what I say here, but I think that came from the right kind of culture initially - sharing things that help keep safe. It's just that it overspills into preachiness sometimes, I think. Basically they're nice here.

One thing to add to the idea of keeping a point (the numbers) in the same place on the windscreen (which has saved my bacon getting high or low many times, including on my first solo! :) ) is don't do what I used to do from time to time and get so fixated on the point and airspeed that you catch yourself growing or shrinking in your seat to keep it there!

I fly an AX2000 microlight - which has a VERY steep approach, with a VERY late flare. The way I find works for me is to get the picture as right as possible on the turn to final, then peg the right speed once on final, which creates a given glideslope, which allows you to see where you would land if you were to make no further adjustment. Easy then to see if you are too high or too low. If I need to drop my approach a bit, a touch of sideslip is nice, if I need to extend a bit, a bit of power sorts this out. We microlight boys are taught to land with no power - (which has to be the safe way to do it) - so my mindset is "better too high than too low" on final.
Re the comment on light a/c needing a steeper glideslope, the lighter the a/c, the less the inertia, the greater the susceptibility to changes in wind/air forces. Also the slower the approach - so any wind changes are a far greater percentage of airspeed than for a big plane - which can lead to a bigger & quicker loss of height - too shallow a glideslope can see a light one in the boonies with an amount of shear etc that a biggie wouldn't notice much. That's why I like my approach high and slopy!:ok:

Just a comment as to why 3.5 degree glideslope PAPIs are not suitable for light aircraft. All airfields have a degree of windshear assocaited with the approach to a runway. You have probably noticed that between about 100 and 300 feet the aircarft sinks a little (or a lot on a windy day). The degree of sink will depend upon the time you spend in the windshear zone. A heavy ( and thus fast) aeroplane transits the zone quickly and is less affected by the sink. A light aerplane doing a groundspeed of 50-60 knots will stay in the zone for longer and will be affected by it for longer...causing more sink. End result...potential undershoot and the need to add power...and destabilise the approach.

Much better to fly an a steeper approach or to land further into the field (if this is an option). As an instructor I have taught many people to master the approach...and one of the first things I always say is ignore the PAPIs, stabilise the approach and look to see that you aiming point remians constant in the window. Also as the wind and windshear increseas, aim further into the runway for touchdown. There is currently a discussion about this on the instructors forum at the moment.

Hi Flying Spice.

I had a lot of problems getting the set up right on finals - a certain amount of a good approach is getting an "eye" for the correct approach.

As you probably realise by now (11 hours) every landing is different than the previous one because of flight path, wind direction, wind speed etc.

After about 15 hours of circuit bashing I was getting frustrated with my lack of progress and changed instructors - the new instructor gave 2 pieces of very good advise:

1) Set up the final approach so that the bottom of the windscreen is along the start of the runway, varying power and speed to maintain this picture.

2) At about 10/20 feet above runway change your gaze from the runway in front of propeller to the end of the runway,

.............................works every time for me!!


Mixturelean.

Mixturelean :

Did your instructor mention to flare before you look up at the end of the runway?

To what ???????:confused:

Mixturelean

Mixturelean :

To " flare "

An approach and landing requires several difinitave attitudes.

(1) The stablized approach attitude to the height at which you.....

(2) ...... Flare or round out, to the level attitude.

(3)......The hold off segment where speed decays and height above the runway decreases as you progressively raise the nose to the landing attitude...

The above is for nose wheel airplanes.

It is very important to learn the best method in all your flying so you will not need retraining after you get your license. :ok:

Chuck

Flippin Landings
 

Well I excelled myself today at Rochester:{

I landed my first circuit too fast (80 knots).

So the speed didn't decay before the ridge.... and bounced, x 3 times.....:(

We had to pull off and check the front wheel and suspension....:eek:

Anyway after this suffice to say I landed very delicately.... at the right speed (v paranoid)...

No PAPI or anything, so I have learned a valuable lesson...

I hope this gets easier....:rolleyes:

Ah, now, there was a thread on this not very long ago.

At the point where you realised you were too fast you had the option of going around - why did you choose not to?

After the first bounce you had the option of going around - why did you choose not to?

After the second bounce you had the option of going around - why did you choose not to?

I would guess that the answer might be that you were not, in fact, actively considering whether to go around at each of these points, and didn't, in fact, make any such concious decision. That's understandable, at your stage, as it's one of the things you have to learn to do. What's less easy to guess is why the instructor (you say "we" so I assume you weren't solo) didn't (a) remind you to consider the option of going around, or (b) tell you to go around, or (c) take control and go around. (Of course the instructor might very well have had perfectly good reasons, all I'm saying is that I can't guess what they were from what you've posted.)

PS: We've all done it.

Going Around
 

I agree.

I haven't learn't this yet but didn't think it was managed as well as it could have been....

Wasn't my normal FI so... lesson learned anyway...

FS

Keep pressing ahead - it's easy to get hung up on landings (we all do during our PPL and sometimes afterwards too), but in a 100 hours or so, the technique will become unconscious and automatic (you'll still do the odd 'arrival' amongst your greasers.)

At this stage you need to be safe rather than perfect and your FI will have a handle on this level.

It comes with practice ;)