Forward yoke during flare to 'grease' !
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Near sheep!
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forward yoke during flare to 'grease' !
I have read many opinions on this technique during the flare to raise the tail and the MLG enough to grease onto the runway.
Poorly timed it could be chatastrophic, so does anyone actually use this technique in large jets such as 757 etc?
Cheers..
Poorly timed it could be chatastrophic, so does anyone actually use this technique in large jets such as 757 etc?
Cheers..
Last edited by WindSheer; 26th Jul 2012 at 20:52.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because of the orientation of the body gear and the tilt mechanism on the 747, it is indeed possible to "grease" the tires onto the runway with a timely bit of forward yoke. I can't speak for any other types.
Just in from pub so treat post with that in mind.
I believe that this technique is most suited to rear engine jets.
Tried it once on, IIRC, a B757 and it worked - NEVER AGAIN!
The consequences of stuffing up are too great - well, for me at any rate
I believe that this technique is most suited to rear engine jets.
Tried it once on, IIRC, a B757 and it worked - NEVER AGAIN!
The consequences of stuffing up are too great - well, for me at any rate
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hostage to geographical fortune.
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think of it as slightly relaxing the back pressure rather than pushing forward. Works well on a 767 when the power is kept on late with limited flare. Don't try it though if you're a landing with power off and nose high type of person.
If 411A were still with us he'd now chime in to state that it doesn't work on an L1011 due to DLC. And he'd be right.
If 411A were still with us he'd now chime in to state that it doesn't work on an L1011 due to DLC. And he'd be right.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Kerikeri, New Zealand or Noosa Queensland. Depending on the time of year!
Age: 83
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worked well for me on Boeing 747, 727(200) and Airbus A-300(B4). More a matter of relaxing the back pressure on the control column followed by slight forward movement.
Not a matter of standard procedure for every landing, but I always knew instinctively when to use it with good results.
Not a matter of standard procedure for every landing, but I always knew instinctively when to use it with good results.
Last edited by Exaviator; 27th Jul 2012 at 03:26.
Check and roll
Always did it on the B727-200, because the main wheels were so far aft, one would check close to the ground ( a wee bit of backstick, then relax the back pressure, this would bring the nose down a little, thereby reducing the downrate on the main wheels.
It took very little time to get the body attitude and flare height sorted out.
It took very little time to get the body attitude and flare height sorted out.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Telstar
I wonder had he been reading some old bolleaux on 'proon instead of following the FCTM?
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the 727-100, it was more of releasing some of the back pressure. On the -200, as others have posted here, more of a forward pressure should be applied. Timing was a little more important on the -200 as well.
With the -100 on short runways (5,000 feet or less) I had mostly surprisingly smooth touch downs with flaps 40. But if on speed, when you pulled the power off with flaps 40, it would stop flying right then. So you really needed to have the height above the runway nailed. Also, the sight picture out of the cockpit was different as well with flaps 40. I never landed a -200 with flaps 40. If the runway was short, we used a -100.
For some bizarre reason, I nearly always got smooth landings on relative short, narrow runway. But on runways like McDill, 14,000 feet and very wide, those landings were more in line of the typical Boeing 727 crash landing. But I never dumped the O2 masks or the life rafts. Rode with a couple of guys that did.
With the -100 on short runways (5,000 feet or less) I had mostly surprisingly smooth touch downs with flaps 40. But if on speed, when you pulled the power off with flaps 40, it would stop flying right then. So you really needed to have the height above the runway nailed. Also, the sight picture out of the cockpit was different as well with flaps 40. I never landed a -200 with flaps 40. If the runway was short, we used a -100.
For some bizarre reason, I nearly always got smooth landings on relative short, narrow runway. But on runways like McDill, 14,000 feet and very wide, those landings were more in line of the typical Boeing 727 crash landing. But I never dumped the O2 masks or the life rafts. Rode with a couple of guys that did.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC, as you have no knowledge of that incident or of the pilot involved it is YOU who are the d1ckhead for making that appallingly insensitive, unprofessional and ill- judged remark and I trust you will make an appropriate apology lest the poor fellow involved comes across this thread.
Telstar, you come a close second in that category for an almost equally idiotic and unprofessional post.
Shame on you both.
Telstar, you come a close second in that category for an almost equally idiotic and unprofessional post.
Shame on you both.
Last edited by Agaricus bisporus; 27th Jul 2012 at 18:48.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Euroville
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AB,
I suppose it's easier to call people names than make a decent point. My point was that you should just follow the manufacturers guidance and not encourage others to make up or adopt alternate techniques as they end in tears. Nothing unprofessional about that. No shame felt here.
I suppose it's easier to call people names than make a decent point. My point was that you should just follow the manufacturers guidance and not encourage others to make up or adopt alternate techniques as they end in tears. Nothing unprofessional about that. No shame felt here.
It's more like releasing back pressure. Instead of a technique used every time consistently, its more an instinctive thing used when everything is just right. Not unsafe or dicey at all. With enough time in the airplane you will know when it's right.
Its called the "Modified Roll-on" technique.
Its called the "Modified Roll-on" technique.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 6 hours away from home
Age: 44
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
With the MD82, it works a lot. As said by someone in a previous post, it works cause the main gear is far aft the lateral axis, so that the landing rate of the main gear (and the landing) can get in contact with a lesser vertical rate.
I'm used to landing that way almost always, and by the way, it saved me from hard landing inspections several times. Obviously, this fly technic is not forbidden on MD82, and you should be careful doing that: a wrong sequence or a forward pressure applied too soon could lead to a bounced landing, a hard landing up to a crash landing as well.
Maybe it's obvious for most: the best grease effect can be had only if you touch the runway with no drift or crab (no side force on the gear structure), much more important than a low vertical rate during contact of main gear. Moreover, some aircrafts are disigned to land with crab, such as B747 (that's another story).
Just my 2 cents.
Cheers,
Luca
With the MD82, it works a lot. As said by someone in a previous post, it works cause the main gear is far aft the lateral axis, so that the landing rate of the main gear (and the landing) can get in contact with a lesser vertical rate.
I'm used to landing that way almost always, and by the way, it saved me from hard landing inspections several times. Obviously, this fly technic is not forbidden on MD82, and you should be careful doing that: a wrong sequence or a forward pressure applied too soon could lead to a bounced landing, a hard landing up to a crash landing as well.
Maybe it's obvious for most: the best grease effect can be had only if you touch the runway with no drift or crab (no side force on the gear structure), much more important than a low vertical rate during contact of main gear. Moreover, some aircrafts are disigned to land with crab, such as B747 (that's another story).
Just my 2 cents.
Cheers,
Luca
