Asking HELP about Flare Technique

[Blip]

Hello haughtney1

I am not assuming anything. As I have said I have personally transfered the technique from a C152 to a B737 to a B767. I have used it when a B737-800 weighed 66 tons, and I have used it when it weighed 50 tons.

If you don't have 500ft/1000ft markers, you use something else such as counting the centreline markings (30m long with 30m spacing).

Of course you use what ever landing aids are available to you, but my point is if the rad alt callouts are MEL'd, that shouldn't have any affect on your ability to land an aeroplane. I'm sure on the day the guy/girl would find a way of putting it down but there might be an unnecessary increase in stress levels.

I'll leave it at that. I'm not wanting to pontificate and I acknowledge that there are many ways of flying an aeroplane, it's just that I get a little annoyed when people dismiss this technique when I KNOW it works. It has allowed me to never doubt myself below 50 ft. I have heard of people's careers in airlines be destroyed because they had a problem in the last 50 ft for whatever reason and it simply does not have to be that way.

It is simply a template to work from when you are low in experience, and it is something to fall back on when the conditions are tough where most of the other visual cue's are either missing or misleading. It has "saved" me numerous times when landing on 30 metre wide runways (rather than the usual 45 m) where you feel like you are higher than you think. When I see the point on the runway pass underneath the glareshield, I think for a split second "well it sure doesn't feel like I should be flaring yet, but geometry doesn't lie." I start the flare manoeuvre and sure enough it goes on nicely just beyond the 1000 ft markers.

I'm not saying I'm a sh#t hot pilot or anything, I'm just saying it works for me time and time again and it should not be dismissed by people who demonstrate to me they don't understand what it is about and just how adaptable and flexible it is. It is not a "one size fit's all" because it is not one size to begin with. It fits C152's and it fits B737's and B747's.

OK that's all I will say. Thank you. I hope ALL the contributions on this thread helped the people who asked for it.

[Ashling]

Why get wrapped up overly on whether Jacobson is hoop or a revelation. It has helped many find the correct point to flare and no doubt those people swear by it. For others it is overcomplicating an essentialy basic skill. Neither is wrong. For someone struggling to find their feet it may be enough to give them something to hang their hats on and is worth a try.

I have never come accross Jacobsons technique before but it has some merit in my view. Promoting a constant approach angle all the way to the flare is correct technique as is achieving a consistent point to flare which is what Jacobson is about.

What I would say is that the flare point and technique needs to be as the manufacturer recommends. If not your doing it wrong so know that advice for your type.

The 2 most common errors I see on the line day to day are people shallowing off their approach in the last 100 ft especially the last 50 ft taking them long and flat and initiating the flare too high. Many do not even realise they do it.

Essentialy people lack the confidence to bring the aircraft all the way into the flare point and become ground shy. Encouragement from colleagues is needed alongside discipline, courage and determination from the individual to drive the aircraft into the flare point. If Jacobson helps someone find that point then good for him.

[esreverlluf]

Just use the force!!! The more you think about it, the harder it gets.

May the force be strong with you.

[stator vane]

monkey see monkey do!

when i was in the right seat, i would observe the captains that flew like i wanted to fly---and watch their every move. and i mean every move.

and the US had a rostering system that would put a crew together for a month at a time.

and of course, due to the rapidity of the approach, and my duties, i could only study one aspect or the other at any certain time, but over the several flights together, i was able to watch every thing he would do, even watching where he would look. and the best was Wayne Carter in Alaska. and the truth is they all are doing things that they can't really explain but you will be able to observe. it is true that there is a feel that is developed over time that cannot be explained. like playing the guitar or like Wayne, playing the drums.

and over time, i didn't do too bad myself.

and like earlier mentioned, we all go through phases to where we can't make it pretty regardless of the conditions.

and whatever you do---NEVER NEVER say, "let me show you how to do it"

the runway has ears!!! and will come up to meet you and show you who your daddy is!!!

[john_tullamarine]

i would observe the captains that flew like i wanted to fly

I hark back to my first couple of jet months on the line (722). With an abundance of F/O seniority at the time, I bid for a lovely English gentleman (who is no longer with us, unfortunately).

Now, Stan was a good, honest, workmanlike piklot type of chap (as well as being one of Nature's loveliest gentlefolk) but, try as I could, I could not work out how the devil he landed the bird. He would drive it into the flare and then, just as I made ready to scream out in terror (722 pilots will understand precisely what I mean), the aircraft would (somehow) just run gently along the ground. In the five years or so I had on the 72 I flew with Stan for a good few months in total .. and his worst landing was better than my second best (my best was an absolute artefact of smoke and mirrors and had very little to do with my inputs .. the aircraft kissed the ground without sound or vibration ... quite an unnerving sensation as the only indication of ground roll was the decreasing airspeed. However, being young and very cocky I was quite prepared to take credit for it while having no idea how it had happened and, hence, little chance of repeating the experience ...)

Oh, how I envied that man's manipulative and management skills ....

the runway has ears!!! and will come up to meet you and show you who your daddy is!!!

isn't that just the awful truth ...

[Centaurus]

What desperate state has aviation come to, that a young enthusiastic pilot has to ask advice on a basic flying skill on internet

Sadly true. One suggestion is to buy yourself an hour in the simulator. It may be expensive unless you can get a company discount but it will work wonders in the end. You can do an awful lot of landings in one hour including strong crosswinds. Set the simulator up at 3-500 ft on final to save time and get more landings in. Re-position the simulator back to 300 ft shortly after each touch-down. Importantly, make sure you get a good quietly spoken simulator instructor - not one that talks incessantly so much that your concentration is destroyed. You should get at least 20 landings in one hour and if you find still no improvement you may seriously need glasses.

[Phil.Capron]

Can we have a debate about when to close the thrust levers because although I never flew an Airbus,on some a/c closing the thrust levers B4 flaring is not a good idea.

[TopBunk]

Phil

The difference with the Airbus A319/20/21 etc, is that making the approach with the A/thrust engaged means that the T/Lvrs are in the 'Climb' detent, whereas the thrust being produced is at the approach level.

When the voice says retard for the flare, the first 75% of the movement of the T/Lvrs has no effect, as the thrust is below the lever angle. By the time you get them back to the stop/idle position it is where you want them, ie just before/at touchdown. In effect, at about 20ft you can smoothly and quickly close the T/Lvrs and all will be well.

I agree, trying this in a B737/747 will usually result in an 'arrival' due in addition to the power off/pitch down tendency of the older Boeings, which of course the Airbus doesn't have.

Regards

[stator vane]

desparate state aviation has come to????

i don't think so.
hard to beat the equipment we have now.
yes, the terms and conditions have changed, but it still beats being unemployed.
and looking at it from another perspective, the opportunity for young, low hour in-experienced pilots to strap on a transport category aircraft--could be worse.
perhaps it is an added plus that the internet is here by which we can ask all sorts of questions.
we flew with bastard captains back then as they must do now. but when i flew with a good one, i wasn't too proud to ask all sorts of questions.

a definite sign of increased disposable income to even consider renting a simulator to practice landings. and i have never seen a simulator that came close to real airplanes for landings. definitely artificial.

[javelin]

To the original poster -

Has anyone discussed the different techniques between engine fits on the 320 ?

CFM technique doesn't work on V2500 and vise versa due to different flap setting in CONF full and different thrust off characteristics between the engines.

Briefly -

CFM, thrust comes off quickly, leave until 30', start the flare at 20', if you haven't touched within, say 1/2 a second, relax the backpressure on the sidestick to start derotating. You preserve the speed and don't rotate the mains into the runway.

V2500, thrust comes off slowly, tends to float. Check Vapp against Vls below 100', provided you have the 5 knot margin, close the thust levers after the 50' call, start the flare at 20', derotate if you haven't touched in 1/2 a second.

PM me for more - I have about 8,000 hours on 320,321 and 330

[FlexibleResponse]

V2500, thrust comes off slowly, tends to float. Check Vapp against Vls below 100', provided you have the 5 knot margin, close the thust levers after the 50' call, start the flare at 20', derotate if you haven't touched in 1/2 a second.

Are you sure that the FCOM says this?

[Reel Marine]

Hello

Remember, the Airplane has to BLEND the Laws and this happens at 50 feet where the airplane takes a picture and progressively drops the nose which forces the pilot to flare and pick up the nose. The flare isnt much, usually at average weights the A/C is comming in at 2 1/2 degrees nose up and the flare is at about 5 degrees nose up at Config full.

So starting the flare at 30 feet and reducing the power concurrently will provide a good landing.

[LLuke]

I think your speed drops below Vref, after that the ground effect is not compensating enough.

In your case I would try aim for almost level flight below 5 feet (why not aim for 0 feet) and close thrust levers a bit later. Floating sounds too passive. Don't worry if you land positively at the end of the flare it won't be hard anyway. You must have felt the gear, to know next time where it is. I always disconnect A/P and A/T early to get the feeling.

This worked for me on the Fokker 50 and the B737 (-3/4/8/900). On the 74 it is more or less the same, Making sure that shortly after the 10 feet call I am in level flight. Close thrust near the end of the flare.

Not sure, but I hope this will help you on 'the Bus'

[SRover40]

Thanks for your replies....

I sincerely appreciate you fellow pilots' advices.....
I really do....

I now try to get a "PICTURE" while landing maneuver...,
which is difficult yet....
I think I have to get this picture thing first for most importantly..

But I still got a hard time to have the useful reference to tell
my height when doing roundout-flare ..
Of course I try to see runway end .. but seems like THAT is not enough
reference for me... unfortunately....

...
....

Hoping to become a pilot who can GIVE advices to other pilot.....

[LLuke]

It is not only about height, but also about terrain closure rate. That's what you see by looking at the end of the runway. After the 10 feet call has passed, at your guessed 0 feet, you want the terrain closure rate to be (nearly) 0.

You can only guess the aircrafts height if you're looking around, or down over the nose, but then you don't see the closure rate anymore.

You should be looking at the end of the runway, to see what the aircraft is doing. When you get more experienced, you will be able to do it with height/looking nearby, i.c.w. muscle memory.

Hope this helps...

edit: typo

[hpcock]

My 2 pence.....

Remember, at 50ft, the bus will push it's nose down by 2 degrees. What I tend to do is, depending on wt & config - on appr keep a/c attitude at approx 2.5deg nose up. At 50ft, pitch upto 5 degrees and hold that attitude. Generally gives a good, stable transition to flare without too much float.

Secondly, where you look is where you land in the 320.

Good luck & happy landings

[AirRabbit]

I know, and I recognize, that “landing an airplane” is everyone’s point of pride – and everyone has their own technique for getting to that point. So, without trying to step on anyone’s technique (or their pride) I thought I’d offer my version of 2 cents (or pence) on the things that pretty much have to go right as a result of whatever technique applied.

Almost everyone knows about and understands the term, “flare,” when talking about landing an airplane. However, not everyone understands this term in the same way. Basically, the flare is pulling back on the elevator controls to raise the nose (increase the pitch attitude) to “break” or “reduce” the rate of descent prior to touchdown. But, where is that you want the nose to go? Can you put it anywhere? No, certainly not. Well, if that’s true, then you want it to go to some specific spot. What is that spot? It is whatever attitude that is the “level flight” attitude for that airplane, in that configuration, and at that airspeed. What airspeed? The airspeed you have upon completing the flare. What height above the runway should you be at the completion of the flare? Well, the closer to the runway the better, as long as you don’t drive it into the runway before completing the flare. Most people believe that something between 2 and 5 feet above the surface is a good target to shoot for at the end of the flare, just to help ensure that you don’t land before you are ready to land.

By deflecting the elevator and rotating the airplane to the flare attitude, kinetic energy is dissipated – the airplane slows down – in fact, it slows so much that the “level flight attitude” will not keep the airplane in level flight; it WILL descend – unless you increase the attitude to something higher OR you add power. The fact is that if you flared to the level flight attitude and left the power alone (i.e., kept what you had to maintain airspeed on final), the airplane would descend – just not as fast and you’d be much farther down the runway by the time you actually touched down – but you WOULD touch down. If you pushed the power up a bit, you could maintain that level flight attitude AND airspeed and fly at that altitude and airspeed. If you pulled the power OFF, you would descend a bit more quickly than you would without the power reduction, but at a significantly less rate than what you had on final – and this is precisely what you’re trying to do – descend the airplane at a rate that will allow a firm but satisfactory touchdown.

An aside: why you might need or want to I wouldn’t know, and I would never recommend doing this in a transport category airplane, but if you had the runway necessary, you could keep the nose attitude coming up to keep the airplane from descending (because you would need a higher and higher angle of attack to compensate for the slower and slower forward speed) until you get to that point where the wing would stall. If you did this correctly you would have landed the airplane with the least amount of forward velocity. Of course your nose position would be really high and you very well may not have enough forward velocity to keep the elevator effective, and, as a result, the nose would likely fall.

So, as we said, you have to pull back on the elevator control to arrest your rate of descent – the flare. OK. You pull back on the controls to raise the nose to the level flight attitude. THIS is the attitude in which you want to touch down. However, from this point the airplane is going to slow – and more so as you pull the throttle(s) to idle. This will cause the airplane to want to pitch down. Why? Because you would have had the airplane trimmed for the final approach – configuration, airspeed, power, and rate of descent. You’ve now changed this. You now are at the level flight attitude and probably beginning to reduce power (if you haven’t started already). The airplane will want to pitch down, but you must not let it. To keep the airplane from pitching down, you would need to pull back on the elevator control. Notice, this “pull” is to keep the nose of the airplane in the level flight attitude; it is NOT to bring the nose any higher than what is necessary to maintain level flight. If you do bring the nose any higher, while you may continue to descend, you will increase the likelihood of touching down and “skipping” back into the air – sometimes before the signal to deploy the spoilers is generated; and sometimes just after – meaning that you might get airborne a bit, have the spoilers deploy – and drop whatever distance you’ve managed to skip to! Not very pleasant!

This may seem to be a rather small point, but it is significant in landing the airplane. Normally, it should take a pilot between 1½ and 3 seconds to flare the airplane – and the airplane should not be held in the flare (off the ground) for more than 3 seconds … this means reaching the level flight attitude and saying “thousand one, thousand two, thousand three, touchdown” (uh … I’d do this to myself or in a whisper if there is someone else on the flightdeck with you). This is true in no wind, headwind, tailwind, and crosswind conditions. And, also importantly, at the end of that 3 seconds, I’d recommend PUTTING the airplane on the ground, now! You chew up a good deal of runway while in the air, giving you less and less concrete on which you can count for good surface contact and good brakes to get you stopped.

There are several techniques regarding the retardation of the throttles – and each airplane requires that you become familiar with the technique that best fits the way you fly and how the airplane responds. Some pilots will start retarding the throttles over the runway threshold; others will wait until level flight attitude is achieved. The speed at which the throttles are retarded will be directly dependent on where you start to reduce power and how quickly the airplane will decelerate in this configuration and in ground effect. The throttle(s) should be in idle at, or just prior to, touchdown.

Every airplane I have flown lands best from the level flight attitude. When I teach, to help my students to understand, for themselves, what this attitude really is, I have often asked them to make an approach to land the airplane, except that when they complete the flare, I ask them to continue to fly down the entire length of the runway AT THAT ALTITUDE and AT THAT AIRSPEED, without climbing or descending; and without accelerating or decelerating. The height I ask them to shoot for is something less than 5 feet. As you would understand, no doubt, in order to do this, the pilot MUST achieve, and keep, the airplane at “the level flight attitude;” or the height would not be maintained. This practice helps to “fix” the level flight attitude picture for them. If we are fortunate enough over a several-day period to have varying weather conditions, I’ll ask them to do the same thing in each of those different conditions. This allows them to see that level flight attitude is the same (as long as the weight and configuration of the airplane is the same) regardless of the weather conditions; and, most importantly, it allows them to find what cues they want to use to determine that the airplane IS in that level flight attitude; i.e., they are not dependent on what someone else has used and likes … they can “do it for themselves.”
(This can also be done very satisfactorily in a properly qualified flight simulator with sufficient motion, sound, and visual cues.)

Why do I recommend this approach? It’s my opinion that landing an airplane is anything BUT a mechanical exercise. In my years of doing this, I have found that by asking my students to do something “the way I do it” works only for a small fraction of my students. But when I describe what I want as an “outcome,” and let them determine, on their own, “how” to do what I’ve asked them to do, they normally learn it better and learn it faster, because it’s something with which they feel comfortable, and it seems more “natural” for them. Therefore when I say, “flare the airplane to achieve a level flight attitude a small distance above the runway surface,” it makes little difference to me what technique they use to achieve that specific goal (within reason, of course) – as long as that goal is achieved.

The biggest reason landing “mechanically” won’t work, is that none of us humans are as precise and as capable of repeatable performance as we would like to think we are. Remember, when we depend on the autopilot to land, we usually rely on 3 of them, at least two of which must be in agreement – and as you all know, “George” is a lot better at doing things precisely and repeatably. The only thing that shouldn’t change from landing to landing (and the thing that “George” gets right all the time) is that the airplane lands from the level flight attitude – for that configuration and that airspeed and that gross weight.