Landing w/ a little power
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
logicaldisaster
- Rank 0
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:55 pm
-
co-joe
- Rank 11
- Posts: 4784
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:33 am
- Location: YYC 230 degree radial at about 10 DME
I don't think anyone is saying that they "have" to land the King Air with power on, but that that if you are confronted with unlimited runway, and you want the softest possible greaser, power on will help.
I'f I'm landing on 3000' of gravel, there's no question about power to idle in the flare, but if I'm landing on 10,000' of 200+' wide pavement with no winds, I'll keep 400 pounds on and greeeeeeeeaaaaaase it.
If you want to smack it on bang every time, that's your business. But don't tell me it can't be done. And don't say that power on = Ref +20 automatically cause I can hit ref easily with some residual power on.
And of note, the best landing I ever experienced in an airplane (Dash-8) as a pax was coming back into YYZ from Windsor and it was definitely power on. I watched the wheels spin up and still felt nothing. Sweeetness!
I'f I'm landing on 3000' of gravel, there's no question about power to idle in the flare, but if I'm landing on 10,000' of 200+' wide pavement with no winds, I'll keep 400 pounds on and greeeeeeeeaaaaaase it.
If you want to smack it on bang every time, that's your business. But don't tell me it can't be done. And don't say that power on = Ref +20 automatically cause I can hit ref easily with some residual power on.
And of note, the best landing I ever experienced in an airplane (Dash-8) as a pax was coming back into YYZ from Windsor and it was definitely power on. I watched the wheels spin up and still felt nothing. Sweeetness!
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
As long as we are still disecting power handling on landing, lets examine this one.
" All I remember is hearing the props disk-up, watching the VSI fall through 1,500fpm, and me taking the power back! "
So lets carefully reduce power to arrive at one foot off the runway proper landing attitude, airspeed and zero thrust what effect would the above have on the touchdown?
" All I remember is hearing the props disk-up, watching the VSI fall through 1,500fpm, and me taking the power back! "
So lets carefully reduce power to arrive at one foot off the runway proper landing attitude, airspeed and zero thrust what effect would the above have on the touchdown?
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
" And of note, the best landing I ever experienced in an airplane (Dash- as a pax was coming back into YYZ from Windsor and it was definitely power on. I watched the wheels spin up and still felt nothing. Sweeetness! "
Conversely I have done the same thing thousands of times power off..
And probably in airplanes some here have never ever seen flying....
So where is this going?
Conversely I have done the same thing thousands of times power off..
And probably in airplanes some here have never ever seen flying....
So where is this going?
Last edited by Cat Driver on Wed Mar 01, 2006 9:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
logicaldisaster
- Rank 0
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:55 pm
At the expense of everyone thinking I'm a bad pilot for not being able to do that 100% of the time? Why make my job harder than it actually is, when I can keep a bit of power on and just land normally. Instead of having to 100% bang on your airspeed, alititude and power setting for every landing. I don't care how good you are, your going to smack it on a lot more than if you keep a bit of power on.So lets carefully reduce power to arrive at one foot off the runway proper landing attitude, airspeed and zero thrust what effect would the above have on the touchdown? Rolling Eyes
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
logical..
It's not about who thinks who is a bad pilot, it is only about which method you are more comfortable with.
For me I know power is there should I need it..
I'm just programmed to generally touch down power off..
That does not make me better or worse that you..
Just different methods.
And practice makes the difference...for me anyhow..
Cat
It's not about who thinks who is a bad pilot, it is only about which method you are more comfortable with.
For me I know power is there should I need it..
I'm just programmed to generally touch down power off..
That does not make me better or worse that you..
Just different methods.
And practice makes the difference...for me anyhow..
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
sky's the limit
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 4614
- Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 11:38 am
- Location: Now where's the starter button on this thing???
These discussions are always good for a laugh... especially when the math comes out... Just fly the damn thing.
If people learned to fly planes properly from the start, ie. not landing 172's at 80mph, this discusison would not be nessesary every few months...
There are many ways to land an airplane, depending on the a/c in question, the type of surface you're landing on, wind conditions, and how the a/c is loaded. Who's right? Guess those guys/gals who haven't crashed on landing can all say they are.
STL
If people learned to fly planes properly from the start, ie. not landing 172's at 80mph, this discusison would not be nessesary every few months...
There are many ways to land an airplane, depending on the a/c in question, the type of surface you're landing on, wind conditions, and how the a/c is loaded. Who's right? Guess those guys/gals who haven't crashed on landing can all say they are.
STL
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Yeh, Skys the limit you are correct, and I do believe there is a vacuum of capable instructors in the FTU's resulting in a generation or two of pilots who do not practice different proceedures so as to seamlessly change from one procedure to another.
For instance what happens when a pilot who always lands using the power crutch if that pilot is faced with a real difficult short runway, or God forbid landing off airport in the Arctic?
Cat.
For instance what happens when a pilot who always lands using the power crutch if that pilot is faced with a real difficult short runway, or God forbid landing off airport in the Arctic?
Cat.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
tripleseven
- Rank 4
- Posts: 266
- Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 9:56 am
I think the problem is that too many people put way too much importance on a greaser, as if their ego will deflate if you bang it on. I grease on about as many (probably less 
) than I bang on. But my landings are consistant, which I feel is fine. I've greased 185's on floats with power off, but I've also bounced them like a duck just learning to fly. I hate it when people think they are smarter than the engineers who designed the machines we make a living in. Just follow the book. You can't be faulted for that.
) than I bang on. But my landings are consistant, which I feel is fine. I've greased 185's on floats with power off, but I've also bounced them like a duck just learning to fly. I hate it when people think they are smarter than the engineers who designed the machines we make a living in. Just follow the book. You can't be faulted for that.
So the lowest end of the white band is the end way up high on the guage at the 1 o'clock position? The other end of it is physically lower at the 4 to 5 o'clock position, so when somebody is told to land at the low end of the white...well, you can see where the confusion could come in.sky's the limit wrote:.....If people learned to fly planes properly from the start, ie. not landing 172's at 80mph.....
-
complexintentions
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2186
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
- Location: of my pants is unknown.
Or, what happens when a wing-low crosswind technique is used by a newbie on the Boeing?! heheh not pretty...Cat Driver wrote:For instance what happens when a pilot who always lands using the power crutch if that pilot is faced with a real difficult short runway, or God forbid landing off airport in the Arctic?
Cat.
So much of our job consists of being adaptible eh?!
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.
-
Intentional Left Bank
- Rank 5
- Posts: 319
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:31 am
I use two different techniques when landing the 3-bladed King Air.
On gravel without a serious crosswind, I always bring the power to idle (with condition levers at low idle) at 50 ft and flare before the threshold and keep on bringing the nose up to land quite nose high. At touchdown (preferably in the first 300 ft), I keep the nose up and bleed off speed, then bring it down under control. It is rare that I cannot bring it to taxi speed without using any braking or reverse in less than 1500 ft.
If it's a 20kt+ crosswind and gusty, I maintain Vref with power on and do not flare at all, just drive it onto the runway. The first time someone showed me that technique, I damn near sucked the cushion up my ass, thinking it would be a hard landing, but it works without fail.
The drive-it-on method is preferred by the company, but it doesn't require any skill so it gets boring.
On floats, the only time I land with idle (flight idle) power is for an obstacle short-field landing.
On gravel without a serious crosswind, I always bring the power to idle (with condition levers at low idle) at 50 ft and flare before the threshold and keep on bringing the nose up to land quite nose high. At touchdown (preferably in the first 300 ft), I keep the nose up and bleed off speed, then bring it down under control. It is rare that I cannot bring it to taxi speed without using any braking or reverse in less than 1500 ft.
If it's a 20kt+ crosswind and gusty, I maintain Vref with power on and do not flare at all, just drive it onto the runway. The first time someone showed me that technique, I damn near sucked the cushion up my ass, thinking it would be a hard landing, but it works without fail.
The drive-it-on method is preferred by the company, but it doesn't require any skill so it gets boring.
On floats, the only time I land with idle (flight idle) power is for an obstacle short-field landing.
I'm no expert but for the aircraft I fly you leave a touch of power all the way down to just prior to touchdown, if you pull to idle at that point you better simultaniously be pulling back on the stick to counter the instant sink your going to get from the discing and pencil like wing performance. So yes you can land power off, if your within a foot or so of the runway. Any thing greater than say a few feet and you better have a good 10 or 15 knots on the ref as a buffer to trade in the flare for the downward stoppage of metal.
With this type of performance in an aircraft why not just let it settle the last foot or two with a touch of power, not alot, just enough to prevent the discing? It makes it easier than the ritual of cutting the throttle and flareing again as you drop to the pavement.
Maybe a coincidence but the MU-2 post sounds about the same. By the way the pencil like thing I work with is the other garrett equiped noise maker, the tube, aka flying dildo, aka lawn dart, you get the hint.
This is of course under most ideal conditions, I am not saying you can't land it power off, but to cross the threshold at 50 feet and bring the power to idle makes for a longer and more unstable approach.
Don't shoot the messenger.
With this type of performance in an aircraft why not just let it settle the last foot or two with a touch of power, not alot, just enough to prevent the discing? It makes it easier than the ritual of cutting the throttle and flareing again as you drop to the pavement.
Maybe a coincidence but the MU-2 post sounds about the same. By the way the pencil like thing I work with is the other garrett equiped noise maker, the tube, aka flying dildo, aka lawn dart, you get the hint.
This is of course under most ideal conditions, I am not saying you can't land it power off, but to cross the threshold at 50 feet and bring the power to idle makes for a longer and more unstable approach.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Propane, propane
Well I didn't think this was going to be such a big pissing match, but I guess that is what you get when you have to many people with bigger egos than they can handle! I fly the 90's and 200's, some 3 some 4 blade!
I really don't get why some people keep on refereing to ref+20! Once in a blue moon a person might not be on top of his game and come in a little fast, but landing with a touch of power doesn't mean your always over the fence at ref+20!
One more thing is under normal conditions is there people that catch ref at 400' or 1/2 mile back! According to abramin this is a normal technique to catch ref a 1/2 mile back, have never seen any captains do this in my co-pilot days. To me ref is over the threshold, assuming a longer runway!
I really don't get why some people keep on refereing to ref+20! Once in a blue moon a person might not be on top of his game and come in a little fast, but landing with a touch of power doesn't mean your always over the fence at ref+20!
One more thing is under normal conditions is there people that catch ref at 400' or 1/2 mile back! According to abramin this is a normal technique to catch ref a 1/2 mile back, have never seen any captains do this in my co-pilot days. To me ref is over the threshold, assuming a longer runway!
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Considering all the exclamation marks in your last post lowlevel you seem to be quite upset for no good reason.
As to egos, I don't think discussing how to vary your flying techniques should be interperted as ego.
My advise to you is don't take any of this personal, it is only pilots giving their opinions.
Cat
As to egos, I don't think discussing how to vary your flying techniques should be interperted as ego.
My advise to you is don't take any of this personal, it is only pilots giving their opinions.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
bob sacamano
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1680
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:26 am
- Location: I'm not in Kansas anymore
Another technique that works is to fly the ILS at ref and watch the co-pilot. When she stiffens up, eyes bug out and she tries to croak, flare.
Like the Navy pilots say about Air Force pilots. "Flair to land, squat to pee"
Like the Navy pilots say about Air Force pilots. "Flair to land, squat to pee"
The average pilot, despite the somewhat swaggering exterior, is very much capable of such feelings as love, affection, intimacy and caring.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
-
AntiNakedMan
- Rank 6
- Posts: 445
- Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:52 pm
- Location: In the bush
While I don't fly a King Air, and maybe that invalidates my whole way of thinking, I was taught during my PPL to land with power on. Or rather, no one corrected me when I was doing it. I found it was the smoothest way.
First flight after finishing my PPL was with a good friend who has been flying for 20+ years...... I now know how to land with the power off, and unless I'm doing a soft field the throttle is idle when the wheels touch. Even dragging a BN-2A onto a 1500' sandbar, the nose is up and the throttle is chopped just before touch down. But I might just be rambling about piston machines....
Anti
First flight after finishing my PPL was with a good friend who has been flying for 20+ years...... I now know how to land with the power off, and unless I'm doing a soft field the throttle is idle when the wheels touch. Even dragging a BN-2A onto a 1500' sandbar, the nose is up and the throttle is chopped just before touch down. But I might just be rambling about piston machines....
Anti
"It's not the size of the hammer, it's how you nail" - Kanga
-
Flying Low
- Rank 8
- Posts: 928
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:22 pm
- Location: Northern Ontario...why change now?
OK...another view from an MU2 driver!
We have 2 different models (actually 3 but 2 have the same props), one with four blade and one with three blade props.
You can get away with reducing power in the three blade model to idle but only if you carry extra speed into the flare. As for the four blade model...if you reduce the power through 50 feet you will end up with a MU2 shaped hole in the runway. The disc of the props covers such a large frontal area of the wing that not only do you get the braking effect from the prop but you loose the airflow over those large flaps (which are the only things keeping you in the air at slow speed).
Our company procedure is to set up a decreasing speed approach such that we hit our Vref of 105 knots through 50 feet. The speed continues to decrease to the flare with the aim of touching down at 90-95 knots. This is very effective and we can achieve ground roll outs of less than 1500 quite easily. In the 3 blade models this usually equates to a power setting of 15-20% torque while in the 4 blade it is more like 20-25%.
We have 2 different models (actually 3 but 2 have the same props), one with four blade and one with three blade props.
You can get away with reducing power in the three blade model to idle but only if you carry extra speed into the flare. As for the four blade model...if you reduce the power through 50 feet you will end up with a MU2 shaped hole in the runway. The disc of the props covers such a large frontal area of the wing that not only do you get the braking effect from the prop but you loose the airflow over those large flaps (which are the only things keeping you in the air at slow speed).
Our company procedure is to set up a decreasing speed approach such that we hit our Vref of 105 knots through 50 feet. The speed continues to decrease to the flare with the aim of touching down at 90-95 knots. This is very effective and we can achieve ground roll outs of less than 1500 quite easily. In the 3 blade models this usually equates to a power setting of 15-20% torque while in the 4 blade it is more like 20-25%.
"The ability to ditch an airplane in the Hudson does not qualify a pilot for a pay raise. The ability to get the pilots, with this ability, to work for 30% or 40% pay cuts qualifies those in management for millions in bonuses."
-
Dust Devil
- Rank 11
- Posts: 4027
- Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 10:55 am
- Location: Riderville
What does the POH call for in the MU2?Flying Low wrote:OK...another view from an MU2 driver!
We have 2 different models (actually 3 but 2 have the same props), one with four blade and one with three blade props.
You can get away with reducing power in the three blade model to idle but only if you carry extra speed into the flare. As for the four blade model...if you reduce the power through 50 feet you will end up with a MU2 shaped hole in the runway. The disc of the props covers such a large frontal area of the wing that not only do you get the braking effect from the prop but you loose the airflow over those large flaps (which are the only things keeping you in the air at slow speed).
Our company procedure is to set up a decreasing speed approach such that we hit our Vref of 105 knots through 50 feet. The speed continues to decrease to the flare with the aim of touching down at 90-95 knots. This is very effective and we can achieve ground roll outs of less than 1500 quite easily. In the 3 blade models this usually equates to a power setting of 15-20% torque while in the 4 blade it is more like 20-25%.
//=S=//
A parent's only as good as their dumbest kid. If one wins a Nobel Prize but the other gets robbed by a hooker, you failed
A parent's only as good as their dumbest kid. If one wins a Nobel Prize but the other gets robbed by a hooker, you failed
Come on Doc be nice...Doc wrote:logicaldisaster....you dont fly many different types do you? Why, pray tell could you not land every King Air power off????? I'd kind of like to see an example of an aircraft that is not landed power off?? (MU2, could be one?) Pull out your POH's and give me an example...please. Other than an F104 etc. that is, something some of us has actually flown??
Cat, you're right.....some of these guys cant fly!
I have flown different types of King Air's... straight 200 with Raisbeck/4 bladed props and B200's with 3 bladed props...
The B200s you can slowly pull the power to idle at Vref over the threshold and it settled nicely for a smooth landing. In the straight 200 I flew if you pulled the power at Vref it would drop like a rock and abrubtly yaw left. We held power until just before the wheels touched down on that machine.
2 different types of 200s and they felt like 2 entirely different airplanes in handling and performance.
You aren't flying CGT are ya?logicaldisaster wrote: Could it be a rigging problem? Maybe... I don't have the luxury of knowing how to rig a pt6 to my liking. So I can only fly it according to the planes liking, which is to keep a little power on.
As far as stopping. Even with power on, at the same airspeed over the fence, this airplane will not float as much as a 3 bladed king air and if I do need to "get down" I can yank the power and I will have a positive landing.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
