Page 3 of 4
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:10 pm
by pelmet
5x5 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:21 am
pelmet wrote: ↑Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:23 pm
Talked to the owner of a flight school today with 9 C172's about tailstrikes. He says that they get them on a very regular basis in terms of a scrape of some sort on the tiedown ring. That being said, he did also stated that structural damage was rare, although they change the tiedown ring regularly.
I suggest you talk to him again and see if perchance most of the "tailstrikes" aren't in fact encountered during a poorly executed soft field takeoff? Poorly prepared students who add full power with the yoke pulled all the way back are often surprised when the nose rears up and if back pressure isn't released somewhat right away it doesn't take long for the tail ring to skid on the runway. It's not hard enough to damage the aircraft but sure chews through rings. I'd bet that's why he's replacing tiedown rings and not from actual landing strikes which would be accompanied by much higher forces.
Thanks,
He stated that they were happening on both takeoffs and landings. Landings are what I have been discussing on the thread.
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:48 pm
by digits_
Well looks like aviation is really in trouble if tail strikes in a 172 are becoming a real concern.
I wish that was a joke, but I don't think it is...
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:46 pm
by photofly
The best way to reach the right attitude is to try to hold it off as long as possible.
Of course you need to do it smoothly, and at an appropriate height above the runway. If you do that, then no tailstrike.
If you bounce wildly and overrotate rapidly, then sure, anything could happen. Airplanes have angular momentum and will briefly continue to rotate nose up past a normal stalling attitude if you yank back on the yoke. Also if you drop it in from a height, the undercarriage will compress, as it is designed to do. But really it’s not tricky to avoid doing those things. And videos of people doing those things don’t really have much to offer.
BTW your flightschool owner needs a better CFI if he or she has regular tail ring repairs because of both lousy takeoffs and landings. I wouldn’t put up with it so nonchalantly.
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2019 5:17 pm
by ghazanhaider
I would keep the 'hold it off as long as possible' advice intact. I kept getting bouncy landings and porpoised 2-3 times in my grumman before I realized keeping the nosewheel at about 2-3 feet above runway makes for good landings. The grumman is much more pitch-sensitive than cessnas. I've never had tail strikes and the last few hundred hours have all been great landings on a lot of new runways all over north america.
I might modify it and say 'dont get too crazy', and fly the airplane for the student so the student knows what attitude to expect, and maybe overshoot right away if its getting close to a tailstrike, but I'd definitely give the 'hold it off' advice over any other techniques.
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:02 am
by PilotDAR
maybe overshoot right away if its getting close to a tailstrike
Oooo, I don't know about that. If you've got yourself to a point during your flare where tailstrike is a risk, applying go around power will probably worsen your predicament, rather than improve it'. You're going to be hanging on the prop with high power, counteracting torque, with a risk that the nose may go higher, and you may still be settling. If your spidy senses are telling you that the nose is too high, and tail strike is a risk, stop pulling back. Don't push forward, just stop pulling back. The plane will slow ('cause you have the power off - right?) and settle on in its own time, very likely without a tailstrike.
If your main wheels are on the runway, and
then you tailstrike, what were you doing!?!
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2019 10:05 am
by 5x5
pelmet wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:10 pm
5x5 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:21 am
pelmet wrote: ↑Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:23 pm
Talked to the owner of a flight school today with 9 C172's about tailstrikes. He says that they get them on a very regular basis in terms of a scrape of some sort on the tiedown ring. That being said, he did also stated that structural damage was rare, although they change the tiedown ring regularly.
I suggest you talk to him again and see if perchance most of the "tailstrikes" aren't in fact encountered during a poorly executed soft field takeoff? Poorly prepared students who add full power with the yoke pulled all the way back are often surprised when the nose rears up and if back pressure isn't released somewhat right away it doesn't take long for the tail ring to skid on the runway. It's not hard enough to damage the aircraft but sure chews through rings. I'd bet that's why he's replacing tiedown rings and not from actual landing strikes which would be accompanied by much higher forces.
Thanks,
He stated that they were happening on both takeoffs and landings. Landings are what I have been discussing on the thread.
Sure, you can choose what you'd like to discuss on any thread. The rest of us can contribute as we see fit and don't need your approval. Ask your contact that provided the info you related about the percentage that are takeoff vs landing. I bet the t/o scrape is much more common than the landing (although neither should ever be frequent), so let's not make something rare the focus of the conversation. And if landings are the big part of their problem then they have real serious issues with the training they're providing.
photofly wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:46 pm
BTW your flightschool owner needs a better CFI if he or she has regular tail ring repairs because of both lousy takeoffs and landings. I wouldn’t put up with it so nonchalantly.
No kidding!!
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:46 am
by digits_
ghazanhaider wrote: ↑Fri Feb 01, 2019 5:17 pm
I might modify it and say 'dont get too crazy'
The goal of the "try to keep it flying" is to give new students an easy way to land an airplane with a short single verbal command. There is no need to further complicate it with "don't get too crazy". Students are generally pretty shy and would instinctively land too flat. The majority need encouragement to raise the nose to have a nice touchdown.
By the time you are teaching landings, they should be able to handle the airplane smoothly, and they won't have the desire to be rough or violent with the controls. And if they do, that's what the instructor is there for.
The examples mentioned here about a tailstrike are when practicing short field landings and over rotating on take-off. None of those are applicable for the pre solo student learning how to do his first landings.
Keep it simple.
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2021 9:14 pm
by pelmet
photofly wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:46 pm
The best way to reach the right attitude is to try to hold it off as long as possible.
Of course you need to do it smoothly, and at an appropriate height above the runway. If you do that, then no tailstrike.
If you bounce wildly and overrotate rapidly, then sure, anything could happen. Airplanes have angular momentum and will briefly continue to rotate nose up past a normal stalling attitude if you yank back on the yoke. Also if you drop it in from a height, the undercarriage will compress, as it is designed to do. But really it’s not tricky to avoid doing those things. And videos of people doing those things don’t really have much to offer.
BTW your flightschool owner needs a better CFI if he or she has regular tail ring repairs because of both lousy takeoffs and landings. I wouldn’t put up with it so nonchalantly.
Had some spare time at a different flight school the other day with several 172's. They have good maintenance and are quite meticulous about making appropriate logbook entries. I decided to look through all the logbooks for interesting events and noticed about ten tailstike entries with 80% on landing. None had structural damage(just evidence of a scrape), but tailstrikes do happen. Holding off the touchdown as long as possible is not necessary.
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2021 2:20 pm
by PilotDAR
If you've closed the throttle on a Cessna, and aren't jerking it around, it'd be hard to strike the tail. So, yes, if you've hit the tail, you're doing it wrong. 172's can be easily misloaded (like carrying the parents in the back, and the eager kid in the front, and you can scrape the tail if you power on and flare too much
). That's probably a sign that you were at or aft of the aft C of G limit.
I do agree with Photofly, a nice landing in a tricycle is accomplished by holding it off just above the runway, to the point of a stall. Power off, you won't get the nose high enough to bang the tail. Remember, that as the plane slows, it'll take more and more up elevator just to hold the nose up, so as you flare, and continue to steadily apply up elevator, the pitch attitude should remain pretty constant as the plane slows and settles. Over rotating is not needed.
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2021 11:11 am
by PilotY
This has been a pretty interesting thread to read. Lots of good points as well. A good read considering my flight school is dealing with a sharp increase in tailstrike incidents on their training aircraft recently. They are all 172s. P R and S models. Most of the incidents occurred with PPL licensed pilots, and even a few CPL pilots. Generally. The incidents mostly occurred on XC flights either off base or when the pilot was returning. Only a small number of incidents were actually caused by student pilots performing solo circuit or practice area flights.
To me this was quite surprising at first. But upon thinking of it more closely. It does make sense. Renters often take passengers with them to participate in City tours, visit airport restaurants, etc. And this usually means there are rear passengers, creating a rear CG. Most training flights take place on the forward CG limits, so it’s reasonable to suggest that the pilots were simply not used to having the kinds of control forces felt in aft CG scenarios.
Another point to bring up is the effect of runway illusions. Going to different airports you are bound to see environments unlike that found at your base. Quite a few of our flight school incidents occurred at airports with wider runways. The pilots were flaring early, and then got caught up with continually raising the nose up waiting for the ground.
As for my own practices. I don’t really know how to convey them into words frankly. I’m not good with that sort of thing. But what I can say is I prefer knowing my VREF speed and changing it based on the presence of gusty conditions. I’d rather have positive airplane control all the way to touchdown instead of giving up the last couple feet to falling in a stall.
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2021 4:38 pm
by nutlord
C.W.E. wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:08 pm
2. Keep your heels off the floorboards
Why?
Can someone explain this to me?
Anyone?
I know you asked a couple years ago, but this is a really important point for me actually. I have big feet, so if I have my heels on the floor and try to use rudder or NWS, then the heel acts as a pivot point and makes me inadvertently apply brakes. If I rest my feet fully on the rudder pedals, then I am far less likely to accidentally apply the brakes.
Also, my biggest learning point in making a smooth landing is: when you start to feel the "ground rush" as you get over your aimpoint, transition your gaze to the far end of the runway, almost as if you are driving a car down the highway. This technique, though I assume is taught to everyone, wasn't told to me until halfway done my first lesson on landings, and when I was told it it made a massive difference immediately.
Re: That Smooth Landing
Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2021 4:56 am
by pelmet
PilotY wrote: ↑Wed Jul 14, 2021 11:11 am
This has been a pretty interesting thread to read. Lots of good points as well. A good read considering my flight school is dealing with a sharp increase in tailstrike incidents on their training aircraft recently. They are all 172s. P R and S models. Most of the incidents occurred with PPL licensed pilots, and even a few CPL pilots. Generally. The incidents mostly occurred on XC flights either off base or when the pilot was returning. Only a small number of incidents were actually caused by student pilots performing solo circuit or practice area flights.
To me this was quite surprising at first. But upon thinking of it more closely. It does make sense. Renters often take passengers with them to participate in City tours, visit airport restaurants, etc. And this usually means there are rear passengers, creating a rear CG. Most training flights take place on the forward CG limits, so it’s reasonable to suggest that the pilots were simply not used to having the kinds of control forces felt in aft CG scenarios.
Another point to bring up is the effect of runway illusions. Going to different airports you are bound to see environments unlike that found at your base. Quite a few of our flight school incidents occurred at airports with wider runways. The pilots were flaring early, and then got caught up with continually raising the nose up waiting for the ground.
As for my own practices. I don’t really know how to convey them into words frankly. I’m not good with that sort of thing. But what I can say is I prefer knowing my VREF speed and changing it based on the presence of gusty conditions. I’d rather have positive airplane control all the way to touchdown instead of giving up the last couple feet to falling in a stall.
Hi,
Didn’t happen to see your interesting post until now. I would suggest avoiding the idea of trying to hold off and hold off the touchdown unless very experienced on type. And then…..be ready with a momentary burst of power(as required) if there is any detection of the aircraft dropping in(ie significant sink rate) to ‘cushion’ the landing.