That Smooth Landing

This forum has been developed to discuss flight instruction/University and College programs.

Moderators: Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister, North Shore, ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia

AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by AuxBatOn »

aeroncasuperchief wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 10:46 pm With minimum or no wind, I have practiced landing a taildragger and taxiing to my tiedown on 2 wheels and also landing a C-150 and taxiing to the tiedown on 2 wheels ( Hint: you need an aft C of G, ask DAR ) !

It is perfectly acceptable to 2 point a TD at stall times 1.3 or a tricycle gear A/C at stall times 1.3 IF there is no undue weight on the nosewheel! The determination to land a tricycle A/C at max safe speed or min safe speed ( which is BELOW the normal stall speed ) on the backside is based upon the CONDITIONS ! We land a tri-gear craft at lower speeds in calm wind, normally due to field length and the fact we have to pay for expensive tires and brake pads !
In some conditions it is foolish to be at or near stall upon landing and also foolish in other conditions NOT to be near stall or at stall when touching down ! CWE can explain that to yall !
Min safe speed is never below stall. Below stall, well you are stalled and do not control your sink rate anymore.

On every landing, you should be on the backside.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
User avatar
5x5
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1484
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:30 pm

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by 5x5 »

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.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Being stupid around airplanes is a capital offence and nature is a hanging judge!

“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”
Mark Twain
gwagen
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 7:30 am

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by gwagen »

pelmet wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:23 pm

Still some here have stuck to their blind hold it off as long as possible idea.
Funny you say blind.

The whole point is attitudes. Looking out the window, comparing the nose/cowl/windshield to the horizon. First you’re going to be nose below the horizon pitching for airspeed. In the flare you’re going to bring the aircraft level and begin disipatting speed. As you start to sink you begin holding it off raising the nose above the horizon. This image has been burnt into your mind by your first rate instructor..... you then HOLD IT OFF by maintaining this attitude or image out the window and before you know it and as if by magic you’ll be on the runway safe and sound.

Every airplane landed with some semblance of dignity has been held off whether you know it or not. Even a heavy jet With its nose up is being held off.

If tailstrikes are happening. It’s poor instruction. Plain and simple.
---------- ADS -----------
 
aeroncasuperchief
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:54 pm

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by aeroncasuperchief »

Min safe speed is never below stall. Below stall, well you are stalled and do not control your sink rate anymore.

If a no power full flap INDICATED stall speed is 44 mph ( book value ) on A/C X , then showing an indicated airspeed of 38 mph on the backside with power , would be below the "book value" stall speed and perfectly safe to be executed, given the appropriate conditions!
On every landing, you should be on the backside.
WHY?
Every airplane landed with some semblance of dignity has been held off whether you know it or not. Even a heavy jet With its nose up is being held off.
The most dignified landing IMO is when the approach speed is such that a gentle and continuous flare results in the 2 point landing ( trigear) at the appropriate speed for the conditions without any ("holding it off ) technique. IF the approach is in 0 wind, most approach speeds these days, are too high and therefore, an immediate flare to landing would have you wheel-barreling down the runway!
Spending time a few feet above the runway, slowly bleeding off excess approach speed, while maintaining centreline, altitude and the end of the runway in sight is a move that should only be allowed in SCHOOL !

Larger A/C go off the ends of runways, hydroplane and scrape their wings/engines when they pooch the approach, ( too fast/ high ) and try to bleed the speed off before touchdown!
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3347
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by PilotDAR »

most approach speeds these days, are too high and therefore, an immediate flare to landing would have you wheel-barreling down the runway!
:?:
Spending time a few feet above the runway, slowly bleeding off excess approach speed, while maintaining centreline, altitude and the end of the runway in sight
describes nicely my preferred landing technique - maybe not a few feet, but a foot is nice. I would rather bleed off speed from the recommended approach speed to the near stall touchdown speed over the runway, rather than along final approach.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Schooner69A
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:17 pm
Location: The Okanagan

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by Schooner69A »

"...it is perfectly acceptable to 2 point a TD at stall times 1.3..."

aeroncasuperchief: Did you really mean 1.3 Vso? In my aircraft, that means touching down at about 65 knots which is 15 knots over the stall. Can be done, but too fast.

I can see having a Vref of 1.3 Vso on final approach slowing to a Vt of 1.15 Vso across the threshold. This me 7 or 8 knots with which to play prior to touching down above the stall.

PS The key to good landings is quantity: thousands of them...
---------- ADS -----------
 
aeroncasuperchief
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:54 pm

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by aeroncasuperchief »

At a short field landing you use a bit of power to get a slower approach speed, but you have to cut the power to actually touch down. And that might very well be a bit of a rougher touchdown, that's perfectly fine.
It may be more than a "bit" of power ( but wisdom should say to hold the last 25% in reserve) AND the touchdown need not be rough but on occasion it may be firm if the runway is 900 feet- 1 way !

I am a proponent of safe landings ! With high/gusty winds, the approach is maybe + 1.4 Vso when the wind is calm, the approach should be below 1.3 Vso
When aproaching a 1 way 800 ft strip in the mountains, If you are not on speed ( most likely the backside with ample power ) you will be off the end of the runway ! Your flare is an afterthought and it may involve shoving the throttle to full power to attain a successful landing safely !
---------- ADS -----------
 
Schooner69A
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:17 pm
Location: The Okanagan

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by Schooner69A »

aeroncachief: what would be your recommendation for approach/landing speeds for normal, everyday flight? From 172s to RVs to Cessna Citations...
---------- ADS -----------
 
aeroncasuperchief
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:54 pm

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by aeroncasuperchief »

aeroncachief: what would be your recommendation for approach/landing speeds for normal, everyday flight? From 172s to RVs to Cessna Citations...
Use the book value! In gusty/ shear conditions , use the what is it ? Add 1/2 the gust to the approach speed? You CAN approach a little slower in CALM conditions to a short runway to prevent an extended amount of time eating up runway.
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4966
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post by pelmet »

gwagen wrote: Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:50 am
pelmet wrote: Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:23 pm

Still some here have stuck to their blind hold it off as long as possible idea.
Funny you say blind.
What's funny about it?
gwagen wrote: Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:50 am As you start to sink you begin holding it off raising the nose above the horizon. This image has been burnt into your mind by your first rate instructor..... you then HOLD IT OFF by maintaining this attitude or image out the window and before you know it and as if by magic you’ll be on the runway safe and sound.

Every airplane landed with some semblance of dignity has been held off whether you know it or not. Even a heavy jet With its nose up is being held off.

If tailstrikes are happening. It’s poor instruction. Plain and simple.
Hold it off by "maintaining this attituse" is a much different technique than holding it off as long as possible. In the latter case, the attitude is changing and that is where the tailstrike risk comes from.
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4966
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post 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.
---------- ADS -----------
 
digits_
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3190
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post 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...
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8384
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: engaged in another pointless discussion to nowhere

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post 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.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Strike me down with all of your hatred & your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
ghazanhaider
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 11:37 am
Location: CZBA

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post 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.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3347
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post 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!?!
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
5x5
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1484
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:30 pm

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post 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!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Being stupid around airplanes is a capital offence and nature is a hanging judge!

“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”
Mark Twain
digits_
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3190
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: That Smooth Landing

Post 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.
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Post Reply

Return to “Flight Training”