Jump to content

Another Food Fight


Recommended Posts

It appears the question is your on base leg, quite high and fast, first depends on how high and fast, could be a nonevent if 100 knots and 1200 ft., or 170 knots and 2000 ft no chance go around. 

I will assume 120 knots and 500 ft high. Extend gear, full flaps nose over using the donut on my AOA , idle, aim for the numbers. Basically I'm doing both trying to get on the proper path, pitching full trim up thereby slowing down to minimal controllable airspeed.

Thats quite a bit of stick and rudder skills in a short period of time and distance.

Wonder why there's so many prop strikes, GO AROUND  KISS 

Those not in Mikes camp of using the AOA or not? This is where the AOA shines situations like these 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because boats don't have altitude, one of the variables is eliminated.

I have always believed that getting the altitude right is easy. Getting the speed right is easy. Getting to the airport is easy. Getting all three of  those to happen at the exact same time is more problematic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Combination of idle, full flaps, gear out, speed reduction etc.  I'll slip if absolutely necessary to get it all to come together but have only done it once. I've only done a couple of go arounds and I don't force landings. One of the go arounds was a landing soon after transition training where I thought I would do the porpoise Shamu bouncy thing.

IMG_4241.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Danb said:

It appears the question is your on base leg, quite high and fast, first depends on how high and fast, could be a nonevent if 100 knots and 1200 ft., or 170 knots and 2000 ft no chance go around. 

I will assume 120 knots and 500 ft high. Extend gear, full flaps nose over using the donut on my AOA , idle, aim for the numbers. Basically I'm doing both trying to get on the proper path, pitching full trim up thereby slowing down to minimal controllable airspeed.

Thats quite a bit of stick and rudder skills in a short period of time and distance.

Wonder why there's so many prop strikes, GO AROUND  KISS 

Those not in Mikes camp of using the AOA or not? This is where the AOA shines situations like these 

 

 

Dan, why do you nose over, then counter with full Up Trim? Just reduce throttle (how much depends on how high), add flaps and trim for hands off descent.

I've slipped a few times, but that's not a good idea in your long body (works better in a Cessna than in my short body Mooney, too). Lengthening downwind gives time for more descent on both downwind and final legs; if it's still questionable, go around and try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm back from camping.  Here is my answer.

Glidepath first, then speed.  This is assuming I'm already on base (so I cannot delay the turn) and I'm already dirty (gear and full flaps), and I'm already at idle.  And assuming I'm going to get both just in time to be at idle for the flare.

The reason I say that is if I go for the glidepath first and then speed, assuming I'm successful, I'll arrive at the threshold on a normal glidepath and on speed.  I just got there at the last second instead of earlier.  Instead of needing to pull the power to idle, I'm already there.  Everything else looks normal.

If I go for speed first, and do as most people do, pull the nose up to lose speed, I just got even higher.  Now that I'm on speed I need a really steep final to get to the numbers.  In this case I arrive at the threshold with a very high sink rate (as opposed to a normal sink rate if I'm on glidepath).

And remember, 90 KIAS is about best glidespeed for a J in the CLEAN configuration.  With gear and flaps hanging, higher speed means higher drag which means better descent.

Just my $.02 worth.

Bob

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speed first! Get slow, 65-70kts (short body)  Raise the nose if needed. Fully configured. Take the elevator down to 500 ft. At 500 feet check that all stablized approach criteria are met. Shouldn't even need to slip.

Or just fly an overhead approach. I've always had them approved when asked. Not the shine ass type, just really smooth. 

I had 2 long versions typed up, I deleted both. Lol.

-Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glide path first. If just after my base and am high would rather keep airspeed up for better control and knowing I can make a safer turn to final with wings unloaded (no AOA) on board and once lined up I know there will be no problem getting speed right by the time I am at the threshold.. Any runway more than 3000 there is plenty of room for a little float. Speed first means I have given up energy and I prefer to have more on tap if needed for control on base to final especially if it's windy. As for docking a boat true it's two dimensional but over many years of boating I can sure tell lost of funny stories of operators that really have a hard time with it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Altitude and speed are easily configured 5 miles from the airport. (As military pilots flying heavies are taught)

In the pattern, hmm , not so easy.

Sometimes you just have to use that six letter word  (unable) when asked to keep your speed up.

Of course this can rapidly change to (able) if threatened with a holding pattern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Hank said:

Dan, why do you nose over, then counter with full Up Trim? Just reduce throttle (how much depends on how high), add flaps and trim for hands off descent.

I've slipped a few times, but that's not a good idea in your long body (works better in a Cessna than in my short body Mooney, too). Lengthening downwind gives time for more descent on both downwind and final legs; if it's still questionable, go around and try again.

Having a long body versus a short body even on normal short final were inputting constant trim up, I had two J's for 20 years they handle differently in the approach to landing phase

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glidepath first.  I'd actually cut throttle and INCREASE speed to near Vfe (115 KIAS) to maximize my descent rate.  Once I'm on glidepath, it's trivial to bring the nose up and slow down to approach speed, and only takes about 20-25 seconds.  Of course, if I'm under 500 ft AGL by the time I'm on glidepath, there's not enough time unless I'm suicidal.  In practice, I know that if I cut the throttle and feed in full flaps at minimums on an ILS approach at 200' AGL, I can slow from 95 KIAS to 70 KIAS over the numbers (no slips required), and I'm trying to do all landings that way so that I'm being consistent.

Edited by jaylw314
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, daver328 said:

" ... on glide path and on speed just as you arrive at threshold." 

SMH

Anyone ever heard of that "stabilized approach concept" stuff?

500' above touchdown zone:  fully configured, on speed, on glidepath ... if not go around. 

Unless you are Chuck Yeager .., or Bob Hoover? ... are you?

(yes, that's how to do it, get the stuff hanging out and go as fast as the limits let you to get to glidepath, then adjust speed ... but better be stable by 500' or go around)

I agree, but since I'm not Bob Hoover, I occasionally make mistakes and find myself high and fast instead of stabilized.  I will still try to salvage the landing if I can but always have the option to go around if needed.

This was just an exercise in 'how do I fix this' to get people to think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, daver328 said:

" ... on glide path and on speed just as you arrive at threshold." 

SMH

Anyone ever heard of that "stabilized approach concept" stuff?

500' above touchdown zone:  fully configured, on speed, on glidepath ... if not go around. 

Unless you are Chuck Yeager .., or Bob Hoover? ... are you?

(yes, that's how to do it, get the stuff hanging out and go as fast as the limits let you to get to glidepath, then adjust speed ... but better be stable by 500' or go around)

My normal pattern has me turning final at 500 agl . . . . On a long instrument approach, stable by 500 sounds like a good idea.

So I stay ready to go around, because you just never know. I haven't been cut off on the ground (yet), but I've had the wind do strange things at 150-200 agl, and I just level the wings, feed in power and try again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, daver328 said:

" ... on glide path and on speed just as you arrive at threshold." 

SMH

Anyone ever heard of that "stabilized approach concept" stuff?

500' above touchdown zone:  fully configured, on speed, on glidepath ... if not go around. 

Unless you are Chuck Yeager .., or Bob Hoover? ... are you?

(yes, that's how to do it, get the stuff hanging out and go as fast as the limits let you to get to glidepath, then adjust speed ... but better be stable by 500' or go around)

I had all that in my novel post prior that I deleted. It was too long winded.  It all applies, I think GA accidents would drop in half if it was taught at the PPL level. 

-Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, daver328 said:

" ... on glide path and on speed just as you arrive at threshold." 

SMH

Anyone ever heard of that "stabilized approach concept" stuff?

500' above touchdown zone:  fully configured, on speed, on glidepath ... if not go around. 

Unless you are Chuck Yeager .., or Bob Hoover? ... are you?

(yes, that's how to do it, get the stuff hanging out and go as fast as the limits let you to get to glidepath, then adjust speed ... but better be stable by 500' or go around)

Stabilized approaches are overrated.  Yes, the idea of not requiring any significant power or control changes on final is a crucial skill.  But they are crucial only in turbojets which have a long lag-time (several seconds) between control adjustment and engine response.   They can also land in close to zero ceilings.  For most of us, I think we are okay making major configuration changes on short final as long as they are deliberate and planful, e.g. not to rescue a bad approach.

On the other UNSTABLE approaches are bad.  I agree we should not be flailing around at the controls after 500' AGL.  Not that I do any flailing before that :rolleyes:

Edited by jaylw314
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

Stabilized approaches are overrated.  Yes, the idea of not requiring any significant power or control changes on final is a crucial skill.  But they are crucial only in turbojets which have a long lag-time (several seconds) between control adjustment and engine response.   They can also land in close to zero ceilings.  For most of us, I think we are okay making major configuration changes on short final as long as they are deliberate and planful, e.g. not to rescue a bad approach.

On the other UNSTABLE approaches are bad.  I agree we should not be flailing around at the controls after 500' AGL.  Not that I do any flailing before that :rolleyes:

really?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RLCarter said:

really?

Yes, like slowing down from 100 KIAS after an instrument approach on short final so that we don't turn into another Mooney runway overrun statistic?

Why the sarcasm about "unstable approaches are bad"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I said "stabilized approach", I mean one where no major configuration changes are made (or necessary) until the transition to level flight

When I said "unstable approach", I mean one where you are not where you want to be or at the speed you want (flailing around).

If I"m where I want to be and as fast as I want to be, but making major configuration changes, that's neither.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/25/2017 at 3:59 PM, jaylw314 said:

Stabilized approaches are overrated.  Yes, the idea of not requiring any significant power or control changes on final is a crucial skill.  But they are crucial only in turbojets which have a long lag-time (several seconds) between control adjustment and engine response.   They can also land in close to zero ceilings.  For most of us, I think we are okay making major configuration changes on short final as long as they are deliberate and planful, e.g. not to rescue a bad approach.

On the other UNSTABLE approaches are bad.  I agree we should not be flailing around at the controls after 500' AGL.  Not that I do any flailing before that :rolleyes:

A 2013 study of unstabilized approaches was pretty dumbfounding.  (  http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Go-around_Decision_Making )  The gist of it was that the absolute "written-in-stone" stabilized appraoch criteria of commercial operators almost never resulted in go-arounds.  In a huge percentage of flights where stabilized approach criteria were not met, the "professionals" ignored the go-around requirement and proceeded to (successfully) land out of the bad approach.

Draw your own conclusion, but this tells me the stabilized approach criteria may need to be reviewed.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.