Landing stall speeds

[Hank]

19 minutes ago, William Munney said:

Gusty winds?  Add 1/2 the steady state HW and all the gusts up to 15 knots.

I've always heard half the gusts. So if  the  wind is 20G35, I'll add 7 mph to my speed, not 27 mph.

 

[Pinecone]

Stablished approaches are nice and make things easier, but they are not the only way to skin a cat.

You need to know how to get it on the ground when the approach is not stabilized.  You have not have a choice.

[AIREMATT]

On 4/2/2024 at 5:50 PM, rturbett said:

I feel good about my pattern work....but need help on the landings.  

I was given this advice:  Be on speed when crossing the threshold, 1.2 Vso for your given weight

But in looking up the stall speed in the POH for my 1980 m20 J, this was all I found:

 

Landing weight of 2740      There were no other pages that address different weights.  Any thoughts. or solid sources of information that can be trusted?

Thanks,

Rob

 

 

This might answer your questions. I found to be very easy to use and edit to suit any model or Weight.

[Z W]

I had a very good initial PPL flight instructor.  We did a lot of practice where he let me come into the airport at different heights, speeds, directions, etc., then his instructions were "Look out the window, and make the airplane do what you want." and "Keep your aim point centered in the windshield and get your speed right, and the plane will land itself."  That was all in a 172 but you can do it in a Mooney too.  

I am still most comfortable landing that way. I glance at the airspeed indicator but most of my focus is visual, outside.  If you come in too fast you'll float, but you can feel that in the controls, and in the seat of your pants, and see it in your attitude - if you're too nose low for your flap setting, you're too fast, usually.  Basically what an AOA indicator would be telling you (wish I had one).

Another pilot I know and fly with learned only stabilized approaches.  His CFI was an airline pilot.  He does math in his head in the pattern, calculating his descent on downwind and base, checking AGL on final, compensating wind speed with altitude.  Would stress me out.  But to each their own.

I have wondered how those pilots handle situations where a stabilized approach is not possible.  Slam-dunked by ATC.  Last minute pattern changes from tower.  Flying the FISK arrival at Oshkosh.  Landing at Gaston's. Circle to land ops. For the pilot I know, those are very stressful situations.  I've encouraged him to go get some VFR practice and instruction. I think it should be taught more than it seems to be.

[rturbett]

11 hours ago, AIREMATT said:

This might answer your questions. I found to be very easy to use and edit to suit any model or Weight.

Thank you!  

[PT20J]

On 4/5/2024 at 9:54 AM, Hank said:

I've always heard half the gusts. So if  the  wind is 20G35, I'll add 7 mph to my speed, not 27 mph.

 

I use a method suggested by Richard Collins. If it’s gusty, the airspeed bounces around. Just adjust pitch so the lowest airspeed indicated as it bounces around is your normal approach speed for your weight.

[William Munney]

On 4/5/2024 at 11:54 AM, Hank said:

I've always heard half the gusts. So if  the  wind is 20G35, I'll add 7 mph to my speed, not 27 mph.

 

This what I was taught and have used my entire career.  Nearly every airline does it this way.

[Bigdaddie]

On 4/7/2024 at 5:53 PM, William Munney said:

This what I was taught and have used my entire career.  Nearly every airline does it this way.

In most airliners (Airbus is a different animal) our company uses half the steady state and all the gust up to 15kts.  15kts is a lot in a Mooney.  I like the previous reference to Richard Collins; I'll have to check that out.  Landing any airplane is easy using the following technique:  minimum rate of decent at touchdown.  No, I'm just being a smart a**. 

[Shadrach]

2 hours ago, Bigdaddie said:

 15kts is a lot in a Mooney.  

No doubt. Extra energy is nice while bouncing down final but can become a liability as one enters the runway environment if there is any significant X wind component. I think using raw numbers is a boondoggle. 15 Kts is likely well under 10% of Vref for an airline, but it’s quite a bit more than 20% of threshold speed for the heaviest of Mooneys at MGW and over 25% of threshold speed for me when typically loaded.

I have landed in god awful gusting winds sometimes into sub 2000’ strips. I add an extra 5kts if it’s gusting heavily otherwise 1.3Vso is plenty of margin (I use ~1.2Vso in calm to light winds).  I have yet to fall out of the sky. Have had some uncomfortable low level, wind shear experiences but then low level, wind shear is going to be uncomfortable at any practical approach speed.

[William Munney]

To be more specific.  We use 1/2 the steady state HEADWIND and all of the gusts up to +20 knots on top of Vref.  In a small airplane 20 knots is a lot.  Maybe 10-15 depending on the day.  On the Ovation 74-76 is suggested as an approach speed.  So, I would say max is 90 KIAS with gusty winds.

[Hank]

48 minutes ago, William Munney said:

To be more specific.  We use 1/2 the steady state HEADWIND and all of the gusts up to +20 knots on top of Vref.  In a small airplane 20 knots is a lot.  Maybe 10-15 depending on the day.  On the Ovation 74-76 is suggested as an approach speed.  So, I would say max is 90 KIAS with gusty winds.

True, but I've landed after 90 knot instrument approaches. It's a little different, flying the plane onto the runway.

Typically I ignore the steady state wind and add half the gust factor. But a strong steady wind makes for a long approach since groundspeed goes way down. Then again, rollouts are pretty short too.

[donkaye]

Landing in gusty conditions with a strong headwind component is one thing, landing in gusty crosswind conditions with no headwind component is quite another.  In the "Proficient Pilot" by Barry Schiff he discusses one method that has worked well for him in a Piper.  I prefer another that I use but haven't seen published anywhere.  It isn't for anyone unexperienced in large crosswinds or on short runways.  Using that method I have landed in direct crosswinds in excess of 40 knots with no headwind component.  It does involve flying the airplane onto the runway at speeds in excess of 100 knots and gradually slowing the plane down, with more and more aileron added into the wind.  At any time if directional control is unable to be maintained, then full power can be added and a go around immediately initiated.  Except for several go arounds at Oceano, L52, a 2,360 foot runway when there was a strong gusty crosswind, I have not had to go around using this technique.  I went around twice and told myself that if another go around was required, it was time to go to another airport.  The winds cooperated the third time and I was able to make the landing.  However, never "force" a landing.

[Fly Boomer]

30 minutes ago, donkaye said:

 It does involve flying the airplane onto the runway at speeds in excess of 100 knots

Are you flat?  That is, all three tires down at the same time?

[donkaye]

2 hours ago, Fly Boomer said:

Are you flat?  That is, all three tires down at the same time?

While I'm a proponent of the 3° slope stabilized approach, this is the one instance when you need to come in flat and "grease" the landing on 3 wheels.  That's why I say it is not for the inexperienced pilot because you have to touch down with no vertical motion and control the rate of slow down such that if you can't hold the runway, you initiate a go around immediately.

[Will.iam]

On 4/4/2024 at 6:06 AM, Schllc said:

I read these questions and answers regularly, but I don’t really understand how it could be applied in any consistent fashion at my home base. I am consistently held between 4 and 6k until I am within 5 miles.  If this wasn’t challenging enough, I am alternately stuck behind 150’s or big iron, with a smattering of 360’s and short approaches. 
anyone who has flown an ovation or acclaim know if you have to drop 5k in three miles you are going to get low, or slow, but not both. 
short of pulling to complete idle, not even speed brakes, flaps and gear can get me to 70knots sometimes.  
Below 100’ in vfr there is a lot of “feel” happening, and I have gotten to where I can choose which wheel touches first so I’m pretty dialed in. But I still can probably count time times on one hand that atc directions would permit the “perfect” approach as described above.  
how is this done with all of their meddling, do you just go around until they let you do it?

Well that’s the beauty of an Tower controlled airfield as i have never seen one that wasn’t at least 3000ft long and the more busy ones that have jets requiring you to keep your speed up are mostly 5000ft and up.  One time going into dfw at 13,400ft runway, i needed Z taxiway at almost the end of the runway and they wanted me to keep my speed up, i said no problem if you let me land past midfield. They approved and i was 160kts over the threshold and still got slowed down gear extended and no flaps landing as that would be too slow rolling to the next highspeed exit if i put in flaps. I didn’t even use my brakes and had to keep the power up to not delay on the runway while exiting on to the  taxiway. 

[N201MKTurbo]

Rolling down the runway at 100 KTS with a 40 KT crosswind doesn’t sound like a good idea to me.I like to get stopped as soon as I can in conditions like that.

[donkaye]

39 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Rolling down the runway at 100 KTS with a 40 KT crosswind doesn’t sound like a good idea to me.I like to get stopped as soon as I can in conditions like that.

For a pilot who hasn't done extensive crosswind training I completely agree. The speed was necessary to have the rudder control to align with the runway prior to touch down.  Once touched down you can't rush the slowdown.  You CANNOT be passive.  You MUST be PIC and not let the plane fly you or you're going to be in trouble.  If at any time you cannot hold the runway, you are right at the speed where you can add power and safely go around.

For purposes of getting good at crosswinds or keeping up skills, whenever there are challenging winds in my area, I'm out there practicing.  Most people aren't.  For example in my area, Byron, O83, on the lee side of the Livermore Valley hills often has challenging crosswinds when no other place does.  They have 2 runways, 23 and 30.  Serious winds often come off the mountain at 90° to RWY 30.  Most people will land on 23.  I'm landing on 30 where, when the wind is blowing, it's often 20G28 direct crosswind.  Good practice.

[donkaye]

It bothers me that most people I do transition training with aren't comfortable with crosswind landings.  They are actually the most fun landings.  They're relatively easy if you just think "rudder for alignment", "aileron for drift", both done simultaneously.  It's the "both done simultaneously" that creates the issue for most people.

[midlifeflyer]

8 hours ago, donkaye said:

It bothers me that most people I do transition training with aren't comfortable with crosswind landings.  They are actually the most fun landings.  They're relatively easy if you just think "rudder for alignment", "aileron for drift", both done simultaneously.  It's the "both done simultaneously" that creates the issue for most people.

I like that you said “rudder for alignment" before "aileron for drift". I hear it described the opposite way, "aileron for drift", “rudder for alignment". It may be a small difference  but my tail wheel excursions have taught me that giving alignment priority helps enormously, and I use it when teaching crosswind landings in any airplane. Great satisfaction a few weeks ago when a pilot I worked on landings with last year nailed a 15-16 KT gusting crosswind at the end of a mock instrument checkride I gave him,

And I absolutely agree they are the most fun.