landing technique B737NG
As long as he impacts in the touchdown zone on the center line
Ooooh! I hate that word IMPACT.....could we use something a little more politically correct - like GREASE It
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK Ashling … I was about to let this go as it appears that for you (and at least several others here) I am wasting my time and yours trying to describe what I’ve been saying; but, ...
Here’s what you said in your post, #45:
I’ll take your comments from your quoting of my statement: “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.”
You say “that attitude it is too high,” and then provide the example. A calm day on a 3-degree glide slope, at a constant Vref+5 knots. What information you do not provide is the pitch attitude originally necessary to maintain that situation. As I am sure you are aware, maintaining a 3-degree glide slope does not mean an airplane pitch attitude of 3 degrees. Also, as I’m sure you’re aware, flight inside ground effect is not quite the same as flight outside of ground effect. For example, if you were able to trim the airplane to maintain the glide slope exactly centered and didn’t touch the controls or the power you would see the airplane “flare” itself to some degree upon entering and descending through ground effect. It will not be enough to make a nice landing but it will change the flight path angle at which the airplane will hit the ground. Level flight attitude inside and outside of ground effect are not necessarily the same – and more often than not, “inside” requires less than “outside.”
You say “now we raise the nose 3 degrees in order to flare and we will have selected the straight and level attitude for that configuration at Vref +5.” What is it that makes you believe that if you added 3 degrees to the pitch you were holding on final you would arrive at the level flight attitude for that gross weight, airplane configuration, and a speed of Vref+5 knots? Does Boeing say that? Is that supposed to be a level flight attitude inside of or outside of ground effect? What pitch were you holding on final?
Without trying to sound terribly offensive or critical, might I suggest that the next time you are on final you check the attitude as you describe it? With landing flaps; moderate gross weight; centered on, trimmed for, and maintaining a 3-degree glide slope; calm day; and at Vref+5 knots … I’ll say that you’ll be between 1.5 and 2.5 degrees of pitch during final. Recall that in one of my earlier posts, I said that with landing flaps, moderate gross weight, initiating the flare at 15 feet above the runway with the airspeed still at Vref+5 knots, depending on when you start throttle reduction and the speed with which you make that reduction, if you bring the nose of the airplane up to what would hold level flight, you would be between 1.1 and 1.2 times Vstall and depending on how aggressive you were with the flare you would likely be between 3 and 10 feet above the runway. At moderate gross weights you would likely be between 4 and 5 degrees of pitch to hold level flight at those airspeeds. Of course, without adding power or increasing pitch you will not be able to maintain level flight – you will descend. If you were somewhat lighter, you probably would be closer to 4 degrees … heavier, and you would be closer to 6 degrees of pitch - maybe up to 7 degrees if very heavy, but I would think that would be very unusual – and anything above that, personally, I’d just accept the harder touchdown. If you HOLD that level flight attitude – do not raise the attitude, do not let the nose fall – all the way to touchdown – there is very little chance of you striking the tail and you will have adequate airflow across the vertical stabilizer/rudder to maintain directional control.
You have a lot of control of the descent rate … with both elevator and power controls … and, if you’re only 3 to 5 feet above the runway the use of power will not terribly affect (negatively) the amount of runway you use. My preference is to use power, leaving the pitch at the attitude I’ve selected, primarily because screwing around with pitch attitude that close to the runway is the best way to make something worse out of whatever you have.
One main difference between what you advocate and what I’m advocating is that the amount of pitch added to whatever attitude you had during final is going to be different for each pitch attitude flown on final (affected by whether or not there is a crosswind, tailwind, or headwind). I am advocating level flight attitude at the end of the flare – regardless of what you were doing on final approach. What I’m advocating is not a mechanical response to a set of circumstances. What I’m advocating will require some practice while understanding what is being practiced. This is because the pilot has to learn to recognize when the airplane is in an attitude from which level flight can be achieved with very little added thrust - the definition of "level flight attitude."
What I’m advocating, at least I believe, will provide you better control of the airplane between the end of the flare and having all three wheels on the runway – and will do so whether you’re dealing with wet, snow covered, or dry runways and whether you’re dealing with headwind, tailwind, or crosswind. I also believe it will give you better control of the airplane if you have to recover from a bounced landing, and it will give you better control if you elect to go around. Why? You will not have to worry about what pitch attitude to hold. You will already have achieved it and will have practiced maintaining it.
As I suggested earlier … don’t take my word for it. Give it a try the next time you’re in the simulator. Deliberately see if you can land the airplane on the tail and see what attitude it takes and how far beyond level flight it really is. Try flying down the length of the runway at a constant airspeed of 1.1 to 1.2 Vstall at a constant altitude of 3 to 5 feet. Try doing it with tailwinds and crosswinds – and make sure they’re pretty stiff crosswinds. Land out of each. Go around from each. Try to bounce the landing. Try it. Don’t take my word for it.
Here’s what you said in your post, #45:
Originally Posted by Ashling
You have still not addressed my observation about your definition of the straight and level attitude. In your first post you said.
If you select that attitude it is too high. Why ?
Remember Boeing ask you to flare 2-3 degrees from your approach attitude.
Take a calm day. 3 degree glide at a constant Vref +5, constant power and landing config. Now we raise the nose 3 degrees (max Boeing recommend) in order to flare and we will have selected the straight and level attitude for that config at Vref +5. However in reality we know the speed will have decreased in the flare so our nose attitude will in reality be too low for straight and level if we only raise it 3 degrees. Boeing assume Vref at the end of the flare so we have lost 5kts of speed which Boeing equates to 1 degree of nose attitude. So if we want the straight and level attitude at the speed at the completion of the flare, as you recommend, we will have to raise the nose by another degree. That will mean we will have raised the nose 4 degrees overall, from the approach attitude, which is too much.
Why is this significant.
a. its nice to get it correct
b. tailstrike. In a 800 the tail bangs at just over 9 degrees oleos extended. Boeing assume a landing attitude of anywhere between 4 and 7 degrees depending on weight, flare etc. So if you flare 4 degrees you may have just over a degree of grace or put another way just over 5kts of grace. Not so much then.
I would appreciate it if you could address this concern over your definition of the attitude.
Cheers
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.
Remember Boeing ask you to flare 2-3 degrees from your approach attitude.
Take a calm day. 3 degree glide at a constant Vref +5, constant power and landing config. Now we raise the nose 3 degrees (max Boeing recommend) in order to flare and we will have selected the straight and level attitude for that config at Vref +5. However in reality we know the speed will have decreased in the flare so our nose attitude will in reality be too low for straight and level if we only raise it 3 degrees. Boeing assume Vref at the end of the flare so we have lost 5kts of speed which Boeing equates to 1 degree of nose attitude. So if we want the straight and level attitude at the speed at the completion of the flare, as you recommend, we will have to raise the nose by another degree. That will mean we will have raised the nose 4 degrees overall, from the approach attitude, which is too much.
Why is this significant.
a. its nice to get it correct
b. tailstrike. In a 800 the tail bangs at just over 9 degrees oleos extended. Boeing assume a landing attitude of anywhere between 4 and 7 degrees depending on weight, flare etc. So if you flare 4 degrees you may have just over a degree of grace or put another way just over 5kts of grace. Not so much then.
I would appreciate it if you could address this concern over your definition of the attitude.
Cheers
You say “that attitude it is too high,” and then provide the example. A calm day on a 3-degree glide slope, at a constant Vref+5 knots. What information you do not provide is the pitch attitude originally necessary to maintain that situation. As I am sure you are aware, maintaining a 3-degree glide slope does not mean an airplane pitch attitude of 3 degrees. Also, as I’m sure you’re aware, flight inside ground effect is not quite the same as flight outside of ground effect. For example, if you were able to trim the airplane to maintain the glide slope exactly centered and didn’t touch the controls or the power you would see the airplane “flare” itself to some degree upon entering and descending through ground effect. It will not be enough to make a nice landing but it will change the flight path angle at which the airplane will hit the ground. Level flight attitude inside and outside of ground effect are not necessarily the same – and more often than not, “inside” requires less than “outside.”
You say “now we raise the nose 3 degrees in order to flare and we will have selected the straight and level attitude for that configuration at Vref +5.” What is it that makes you believe that if you added 3 degrees to the pitch you were holding on final you would arrive at the level flight attitude for that gross weight, airplane configuration, and a speed of Vref+5 knots? Does Boeing say that? Is that supposed to be a level flight attitude inside of or outside of ground effect? What pitch were you holding on final?
Without trying to sound terribly offensive or critical, might I suggest that the next time you are on final you check the attitude as you describe it? With landing flaps; moderate gross weight; centered on, trimmed for, and maintaining a 3-degree glide slope; calm day; and at Vref+5 knots … I’ll say that you’ll be between 1.5 and 2.5 degrees of pitch during final. Recall that in one of my earlier posts, I said that with landing flaps, moderate gross weight, initiating the flare at 15 feet above the runway with the airspeed still at Vref+5 knots, depending on when you start throttle reduction and the speed with which you make that reduction, if you bring the nose of the airplane up to what would hold level flight, you would be between 1.1 and 1.2 times Vstall and depending on how aggressive you were with the flare you would likely be between 3 and 10 feet above the runway. At moderate gross weights you would likely be between 4 and 5 degrees of pitch to hold level flight at those airspeeds. Of course, without adding power or increasing pitch you will not be able to maintain level flight – you will descend. If you were somewhat lighter, you probably would be closer to 4 degrees … heavier, and you would be closer to 6 degrees of pitch - maybe up to 7 degrees if very heavy, but I would think that would be very unusual – and anything above that, personally, I’d just accept the harder touchdown. If you HOLD that level flight attitude – do not raise the attitude, do not let the nose fall – all the way to touchdown – there is very little chance of you striking the tail and you will have adequate airflow across the vertical stabilizer/rudder to maintain directional control.
You have a lot of control of the descent rate … with both elevator and power controls … and, if you’re only 3 to 5 feet above the runway the use of power will not terribly affect (negatively) the amount of runway you use. My preference is to use power, leaving the pitch at the attitude I’ve selected, primarily because screwing around with pitch attitude that close to the runway is the best way to make something worse out of whatever you have.
One main difference between what you advocate and what I’m advocating is that the amount of pitch added to whatever attitude you had during final is going to be different for each pitch attitude flown on final (affected by whether or not there is a crosswind, tailwind, or headwind). I am advocating level flight attitude at the end of the flare – regardless of what you were doing on final approach. What I’m advocating is not a mechanical response to a set of circumstances. What I’m advocating will require some practice while understanding what is being practiced. This is because the pilot has to learn to recognize when the airplane is in an attitude from which level flight can be achieved with very little added thrust - the definition of "level flight attitude."
What I’m advocating, at least I believe, will provide you better control of the airplane between the end of the flare and having all three wheels on the runway – and will do so whether you’re dealing with wet, snow covered, or dry runways and whether you’re dealing with headwind, tailwind, or crosswind. I also believe it will give you better control of the airplane if you have to recover from a bounced landing, and it will give you better control if you elect to go around. Why? You will not have to worry about what pitch attitude to hold. You will already have achieved it and will have practiced maintaining it.
As I suggested earlier … don’t take my word for it. Give it a try the next time you’re in the simulator. Deliberately see if you can land the airplane on the tail and see what attitude it takes and how far beyond level flight it really is. Try flying down the length of the runway at a constant airspeed of 1.1 to 1.2 Vstall at a constant altitude of 3 to 5 feet. Try doing it with tailwinds and crosswinds – and make sure they’re pretty stiff crosswinds. Land out of each. Go around from each. Try to bounce the landing. Try it. Don’t take my word for it.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Airplane
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blip
Have you read the last post? It is ridiculous to think that all that information is going to help some Pilot who is in training and trying to get used to a new airplane. I am not disputing what it is saying, I am disputing the idea that it will help someone who is learning to land a new type. You mention people have failed because of the last 50ft before touchdown. I say if things were kept simple they would have a better chance of passing, after all they are allready pilots. People just need some simple tips, practice, and confidence.
All this complicated and theroetical talk is fine, but it my opinion it should be meant to help fine tune someone who aready has experience's technique. It will not help someone who is still trying to pick out where the N1 indicator is.
7
I know of good people who's airline career was ruined (promotion training terminated or self funded jet endorsement failed) because for whatever reason they just couldn't make it happen in the last 50 ft.
They were otherwise smart and co-ordinated people. All they needed was some guidance or framework to work off while they got the experience you talk about.
They were otherwise smart and co-ordinated people. All they needed was some guidance or framework to work off while they got the experience you talk about.
All this complicated and theroetical talk is fine, but it my opinion it should be meant to help fine tune someone who aready has experience's technique. It will not help someone who is still trying to pick out where the N1 indicator is.
7
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Over the Moon
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AirRabbit
Thanks at last for answering my query, it took a while so maybe I didn't ask clearly enough.
I just said maintaining a 3 degree glide I did not define the attitude needed to maintain that glide. The point was to show you would need to raise the nose more than 3 degrees to maintain level if the speed decreased as it does in a flare. If you lower the nose three degrees from a level attitude you will follow a 3 degree slope provided you maintain your speed. If we make it specific to a 737 then the attitude will be anywhere from 2.5 to 3.5 at Vref +5, thats my guess as the QRH figures apply to Vref +10.
Look at the velocity vector when you are level, it will sit at 0 degrees irrespective of the actual nose attitude. Now, maintaining your speed, lower your attitude 3 degrees from that level attitude and you will see the velocity vector sit on 3 degrees nose down, you are now on a 3 degree glide, very usefull for non precision approach's. Raise the nose 3 degrees maintaining the speed and you'll be back at level. If the speed reduces, as it would in a flare, you will have to raise your nose more.
How much will ground effect alter that, to be honest I don't know and it will vary depending on a number of the factors you mention but then I guess you don't really know the answer to that either and lots of other factors will play their part, thermals, wind etc which is why you have to keep flying all the way down. Its also why your level attitude will be different each time and therefore not repeatable. My thought was to take the unquantifiable out of the equation with my example. My view would be that unless you flare early, too much, don't close your thrust levers or are hot the effect will be minimal at best and certainly not compensate for the speed lost in the flare. But as I say I don't really know how big an effect it has in terms of altering your attitude.
Certainly mentioning ground effect has helped me understand your point of view on this and perhaps why you feel you don't actually have to raise the nose as much as you otherwise would to achieve a straight and level attitude. So thanks for that. Did you mention it earlier or were you just assuming it as I can't recall reading it in your posts ?
Still don't like it though I'm afraid.
Take care, safe flying and happy landings.
Thanks at last for answering my query, it took a while so maybe I didn't ask clearly enough.
I just said maintaining a 3 degree glide I did not define the attitude needed to maintain that glide. The point was to show you would need to raise the nose more than 3 degrees to maintain level if the speed decreased as it does in a flare. If you lower the nose three degrees from a level attitude you will follow a 3 degree slope provided you maintain your speed. If we make it specific to a 737 then the attitude will be anywhere from 2.5 to 3.5 at Vref +5, thats my guess as the QRH figures apply to Vref +10.
Look at the velocity vector when you are level, it will sit at 0 degrees irrespective of the actual nose attitude. Now, maintaining your speed, lower your attitude 3 degrees from that level attitude and you will see the velocity vector sit on 3 degrees nose down, you are now on a 3 degree glide, very usefull for non precision approach's. Raise the nose 3 degrees maintaining the speed and you'll be back at level. If the speed reduces, as it would in a flare, you will have to raise your nose more.
How much will ground effect alter that, to be honest I don't know and it will vary depending on a number of the factors you mention but then I guess you don't really know the answer to that either and lots of other factors will play their part, thermals, wind etc which is why you have to keep flying all the way down. Its also why your level attitude will be different each time and therefore not repeatable. My thought was to take the unquantifiable out of the equation with my example. My view would be that unless you flare early, too much, don't close your thrust levers or are hot the effect will be minimal at best and certainly not compensate for the speed lost in the flare. But as I say I don't really know how big an effect it has in terms of altering your attitude.
Certainly mentioning ground effect has helped me understand your point of view on this and perhaps why you feel you don't actually have to raise the nose as much as you otherwise would to achieve a straight and level attitude. So thanks for that. Did you mention it earlier or were you just assuming it as I can't recall reading it in your posts ?
Still don't like it though I'm afraid.
Take care, safe flying and happy landings.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Ashling – I think we’ve broken the ice here. When you mentioned “velocity vectors,” I understood that you’re describing flying with an operational HUD system – at least some of the time. I don’t know the specific system you use, but I’ll bet it has a “flare cue,” and when you follow it, by placing the flight path vector in proper relation to that cue, it will put you on the runway pretty nicely all the time. I believe it will also give you a different flare attitude for differing weight conditions; but I also believe that if you follow it, it will initially take you a level flight attitude for a specific airspeed. However, because your airspeed will be decaying, you won’t fly at a level height above the runway, even though you keep the FPV in the proper reference to the flare cue. I also suspect that the flare cue will have you keep your pitch attitude constant through to the touchdown.
Again, I’m not sure how your HUD system works – you describe a velocity vector – I’m going out on a limb here, but I think I would call that the flight path vector … where the airplane is actually heading. It is not the “boresight” (the nose of the aircraft), but actually where the airplane is headed – the vector of the airplane’s flight path at that moment. If you put the FPV on the horizon, you’ll be flying level with the horizon (or level). If you place that FPV at 3 degrees down, you’ll be flying a path that is 3 degrees below level – but you’ll be doing that at whatever airspeed you have – and you can increase or decrease the airspeed, keeping the FPV on that 3 degree reference and you’ll still be flying a flight path that is 3 degrees below level – and you’ll be changing your rate of descent as you change your airspeed.
Your statement …
…is accurate, but you are descending on an angle that is 3 degrees below “level” – and while you say you should “maintain your airspeed,” I think it is true that you will be on a 3 degree angle regardless of your airspeed; resulting in varying rates of descent depending on that airspeed. A 3-degree ILS glide slope is a hard 3 degree angle – irrespective of speed flown on that angle. You can come down that angular glide path at any airspeed you choose, but your rate of descent will be different as you adjust your airspeed; shallower at slower speeds, and steeper at higher airspeeds all while maintaining that 3-degree glide slope.
Additionally, I would suspect that if you pay attention to where that flare cue is directing the FPV, and associate that with what the airplane “feels” like each time you do that, regardless of the aircraft gross weight, you will become quite adept at being able to “feel” that same thing at differing weights on your own. Being able to “feel” that level flight attitude is what I’m describing. THAT attitude that the flare cue initially takes you to is the level flight attitude I am describing. You won’t fly level because your airspeed is decreasing. But you hold that attitude anyway. Using a HUD system is probably the very best aid in helping pilots learn this. Of course, if you use the HUD all the time, and it never fails, you won’t ever have to depend on anything other than following the flare cue. But … show me something that never changes and never breaks and always works correctly.
Try something … the next time you’re in the simulator (as I don’t recommend doing this in the airplane, ha) …as you approach to land, using the HUD, follow the flare cue to the attitude it directs – but just a scant whisper before you get to that flare attitude, engage the autothrottles (or advance the power slightly) to maintain THAT airspeed. See what happens at that airspeed and at that “flare attitude.” I don’t know what the flare cue will do – increase, decrease, go away – I don’t know … but maintain the FPV at the attitude the flare cue directed you to achieve initially – and maintain that attitude and airspeed. I’d be curious to know what happens to the airplane … Climb? Descend? Fly level?
Ashling, my friend, I also hope your days are uneventful, full of sunshine, and nothing more than calm winds.
I recognize that some here are way too over-taxed to learn to do this. Fine. Don’t attempt it.
Different instructors attempt to do different things with their students. I know what I do with mine … please feel free to do what you, your company, and your regulatory authority deem to be appropriate with yours. Aside from the fact that I’m confused about trying to teach someone about landing when they can’t find the N1 indicator, my question would be, is there any appropriate time to provide a “new” student with an understanding of what is going on in the airplane – or do we let him or her pick that up individually, by themselves? Forgive me, I was taught that flying isn’t necessarily supposed to be “easy.” I’m not interested in simply getting the pilot to “pass” the check. I want to make sure that when that student heads to the airplane, we’ve given him, or her, the very best opportunity to understand how the airplane performs and handles. It’s complicated and demanding. Of course anyone may argue with me (many do, in fact) but I believe that the more a student understands about the “why” and “how,” the better he or she will be able to handle the “what” and “when.”
Again, I’m not sure how your HUD system works – you describe a velocity vector – I’m going out on a limb here, but I think I would call that the flight path vector … where the airplane is actually heading. It is not the “boresight” (the nose of the aircraft), but actually where the airplane is headed – the vector of the airplane’s flight path at that moment. If you put the FPV on the horizon, you’ll be flying level with the horizon (or level). If you place that FPV at 3 degrees down, you’ll be flying a path that is 3 degrees below level – but you’ll be doing that at whatever airspeed you have – and you can increase or decrease the airspeed, keeping the FPV on that 3 degree reference and you’ll still be flying a flight path that is 3 degrees below level – and you’ll be changing your rate of descent as you change your airspeed.
Your statement …
Originally Posted by Ashling
Look at the velocity vector when you are level, it will sit at 0 degrees irrespective of the actual nose attitude. Now, maintaining your speed, lower your attitude 3 degrees from that level attitude and you will see the velocity vector sit on 3 degrees nose down, you are now on a 3 degree glide…
Additionally, I would suspect that if you pay attention to where that flare cue is directing the FPV, and associate that with what the airplane “feels” like each time you do that, regardless of the aircraft gross weight, you will become quite adept at being able to “feel” that same thing at differing weights on your own. Being able to “feel” that level flight attitude is what I’m describing. THAT attitude that the flare cue initially takes you to is the level flight attitude I am describing. You won’t fly level because your airspeed is decreasing. But you hold that attitude anyway. Using a HUD system is probably the very best aid in helping pilots learn this. Of course, if you use the HUD all the time, and it never fails, you won’t ever have to depend on anything other than following the flare cue. But … show me something that never changes and never breaks and always works correctly.
Try something … the next time you’re in the simulator (as I don’t recommend doing this in the airplane, ha) …as you approach to land, using the HUD, follow the flare cue to the attitude it directs – but just a scant whisper before you get to that flare attitude, engage the autothrottles (or advance the power slightly) to maintain THAT airspeed. See what happens at that airspeed and at that “flare attitude.” I don’t know what the flare cue will do – increase, decrease, go away – I don’t know … but maintain the FPV at the attitude the flare cue directed you to achieve initially – and maintain that attitude and airspeed. I’d be curious to know what happens to the airplane … Climb? Descend? Fly level?
Ashling, my friend, I also hope your days are uneventful, full of sunshine, and nothing more than calm winds.
I recognize that some here are way too over-taxed to learn to do this. Fine. Don’t attempt it.
Originally Posted by airbus757
Have you read the last post? It is ridiculous to think that all that information is going to help some Pilot who is in training and trying to get used to a new airplane … I am disputing the idea that it will help someone who is learning to land a new type … I say if things were kept simple they would have a better chance of passing, after all they are already pilots … People just need some simple tips, practice, and confidence ... All this complicated and theoretical talk is fine, but it my opinion it should be meant to help fine tune someone who already has experience's technique … It will not help someone who is still trying to pick out where the N1 indicator is.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Over the Moon
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AirRabbit
Your right, I think Boeing call it a Flight Path Vector (FPV), Velocity Vector came from my whizz jet days. As you say if you hold the FPV on 3 degree down you will follow a 3 degree glide irrespective of speed its just that to do that you will have to alter the nose attitude as the speed alters. Thats one reason its so usefull on non precision approach's. I was just using constant speed to simplify things.
Sadly no HUD, though the FPV is displayed head down on the PFD if you select it on the EFIS control. Otherwise its just the datum locked to the aircrafts nose position relative to the horizon. Shame as I'd love to have a HUD.
As I said last post at least I understand better were your coming from. Although I think its too complicated for normal training (I see no reason to express the basic technique differently from the FCTM) remedial flying is a different thing and then it may indeed become worthwhile trying a few different things in order to unlock the key and help the student progress. Always assuming you've tried the obvious fix's first. Provided your still teaching the same technique, albeit expressed differently, there is no reason not to if it might help someone. In fact its your job as an instructor to do just that.
I might even try it in the sim one day for a giggle but I wouldn't hold your breath
Anyway I'll bow out for now, I'm glad we seem to have reached some kind of mutual understanding if not agreement and the discussion has made me think which can only be good. Sadly in the UK days full of sun and calm winds are rather rare but I appreciate the sentiment.
Good luck to you, if you put in the same effort with your students as you have done with your posts I am sure they will appreciate and benefit from your instruction.
P.S. No ground effect at Malaga today, thankfully a burst of power sorted things nicely. Guess I lack finesse.
Your right, I think Boeing call it a Flight Path Vector (FPV), Velocity Vector came from my whizz jet days. As you say if you hold the FPV on 3 degree down you will follow a 3 degree glide irrespective of speed its just that to do that you will have to alter the nose attitude as the speed alters. Thats one reason its so usefull on non precision approach's. I was just using constant speed to simplify things.
Sadly no HUD, though the FPV is displayed head down on the PFD if you select it on the EFIS control. Otherwise its just the datum locked to the aircrafts nose position relative to the horizon. Shame as I'd love to have a HUD.
As I said last post at least I understand better were your coming from. Although I think its too complicated for normal training (I see no reason to express the basic technique differently from the FCTM) remedial flying is a different thing and then it may indeed become worthwhile trying a few different things in order to unlock the key and help the student progress. Always assuming you've tried the obvious fix's first. Provided your still teaching the same technique, albeit expressed differently, there is no reason not to if it might help someone. In fact its your job as an instructor to do just that.
I might even try it in the sim one day for a giggle but I wouldn't hold your breath
Anyway I'll bow out for now, I'm glad we seem to have reached some kind of mutual understanding if not agreement and the discussion has made me think which can only be good. Sadly in the UK days full of sun and calm winds are rather rare but I appreciate the sentiment.
Good luck to you, if you put in the same effort with your students as you have done with your posts I am sure they will appreciate and benefit from your instruction.
P.S. No ground effect at Malaga today, thankfully a burst of power sorted things nicely. Guess I lack finesse.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lotlwc
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying B737-800. Maintain 3 degree slope. Where you look you land! Wait until 10' then check back so nose raises 2-3 degrees and close the thrust levers. Don't get slow.
Another guy I used to know (very experienced on -800s) used to close the thrust levers and flare about 15' then used to check forward slightly so the mains touched more gently.
More than one way to skin a cat!
Another guy I used to know (very experienced on -800s) used to close the thrust levers and flare about 15' then used to check forward slightly so the mains touched more gently.
More than one way to skin a cat!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Dark side of the moon
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite an interesting thread to us NG operators and a lot of the comments and tips have been of value to us all I'm sure.
Just a personal observation, but I find that the "mechanics" of the flare technique remain similar whether it's a flaps30/40 landing. When winglets are thrown into the equation it mixes things up further still!!
But the ball park figure of flare once the 20 call has left your ears is what I apply whatever the flap setting or whether I'm flying with winglets or not.
What I vary, sometimes to a large degree, particularly in differing weather, is the point at which I start reducing power. Flaps 30 in a winglet aircraft with an element of tailwind means I'm reducing the power substantially earlier than I would when landing flap 40, non winglets with a 10 kt headwind!!
Just a personal observation, but I find that the "mechanics" of the flare technique remain similar whether it's a flaps30/40 landing. When winglets are thrown into the equation it mixes things up further still!!
But the ball park figure of flare once the 20 call has left your ears is what I apply whatever the flap setting or whether I'm flying with winglets or not.
What I vary, sometimes to a large degree, particularly in differing weather, is the point at which I start reducing power. Flaps 30 in a winglet aircraft with an element of tailwind means I'm reducing the power substantially earlier than I would when landing flap 40, non winglets with a 10 kt headwind!!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting comment Bonernow ... not having had the pleasure of attempting to slip the surly bonds with a machine having winglets, do I understand that those additions make the airplane a bit more slippery and want to keep airspeed longer?
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A B73-800 is a longer aeroplane than a B73-700. They have slightly different flare techniques. The B737 can be flared slightly stonger but if you do the same with the B738 it'll be a firmer landing. Either way, the important thing is not to let the nose drop when you close the thrust levers; maintain the attitude you adopted at the entrance to the flare. The other important item, especially on the B738, is not to make a double flare. That will just increase the ROD of the gear and be even firmer.
At the beginning, the advice I read in earlier posts of starting to do things gently after 30' is sound. I'm assuming that in the early days you'll be landing on the longer runways in your network. As experince builds confidence and judgement you'll find that you will delay things by 10' or so. Try to be too chique in the beginning can be a real confidence and runway denter.
At the beginning, the advice I read in earlier posts of starting to do things gently after 30' is sound. I'm assuming that in the early days you'll be landing on the longer runways in your network. As experince builds confidence and judgement you'll find that you will delay things by 10' or so. Try to be too chique in the beginning can be a real confidence and runway denter.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Dark side of the moon
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Rabbit,
From my own personal experience, it took some "adjustment" to the landing technique when our fleet was retro fitted with winglets. Get the flare just right and everything was great. But a little too much aggression in the flare, flaps 30 with a slight tail wind element and weight in the region of 55 tons meant you were eating up a hell of a lot of runway (Two guys got caught out on short fields and had to go around as a result).
There was a lot of discussion in the crew room on how best to adjust the technique as the FCTM doesn't stipulate a technique that differentiates between winglet and non winglet aircraft.
But it is fair to say that the winglets do add a significant amount of efficiency to the wing and (early) adjustments in power settings dependant upon your weight, flap setting and landing distance available can prove prudent.
Safe Landings!
From my own personal experience, it took some "adjustment" to the landing technique when our fleet was retro fitted with winglets. Get the flare just right and everything was great. But a little too much aggression in the flare, flaps 30 with a slight tail wind element and weight in the region of 55 tons meant you were eating up a hell of a lot of runway (Two guys got caught out on short fields and had to go around as a result).
There was a lot of discussion in the crew room on how best to adjust the technique as the FCTM doesn't stipulate a technique that differentiates between winglet and non winglet aircraft.
But it is fair to say that the winglets do add a significant amount of efficiency to the wing and (early) adjustments in power settings dependant upon your weight, flap setting and landing distance available can prove prudent.
Safe Landings!
