Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By StratoTramp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912236
Edit: mentioned TopCat by mistake! @lobstaboy The more I write on here the more i think why didn't you just do X, Y, Z :lol: but also maybe overthinking things.

I think I am describing the cloud at Leicester wrong it was more of a timing issue I think, factored with not anticipating Leicester QFE would be a lot lower. It's there causing me problems earlier nut then later on in the circuit I can't see what was causing me 'problems'.

It was scattered cumulus, but it was obscuring my view of the field and not sure how far back it extended away from my view point. (generally could fly at 1800-2700). Thinking: A. Ensure you are on dead side, B. 'Should' not go lower than 1200 feet on dead side, heli circuit at 700 (although flying the plane is foremost). C. Do not enter cloud.

In the end I ended up about 1100 on the deadside. Might not be a huge drama, an improvement could have been to ask about any helicopters but hadn't heard anything on radio.

So passed message and received field QFE of 1004 (which is about right given it's elevation). Surprise surprise I'm 460 odd feet lower than "expected". D. May struggle to get above cloud

The silly thing is now I'm thinking is why not just go to the south (left around the cloud)? I could have just hang around a bit, had plenty of endurance. It's not like I was committed to anything telling them I was inbound. :lol: Like a pigeon outrunning a car thinking up and down are the only options.

@PA28

For me this is 1.3*37 =48. So deffo too fast at fenland. I think I was about 60 and 50-55 nearer the ground. This was probably made worse by me being on my own - an instructor does make a lot of difference, it's almost 1/3 of the aircraft weight.

That said not sure why i did that either, very last bit of Sackville I always come in at 50 - What is going on!
Last edited by StratoTramp on Sat May 21, 2022 9:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
PA28 liked this
User avatar
By StratoTramp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912238
Steaming shameful pile of Carp here. :clown:

Will do a longer, overproduced video later with too much music but more context. This one is unlisted that means only people with the link can play. :lol:

The thumbnail doesn't work because of this but the link should

Last edited by StratoTramp on Sun May 22, 2022 6:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Milty
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912239
I can't really add a lot to what others have said, but concur that you need to remember that you're still a student pilot. You have my full sympathy though. On one of my early solo nav's I dropped a landing in from too high and landed with a bit of a thump. By definition, I walked away and the aircraft flew again so not a bad landing. However, it took me a while to get over it and I started to convince myself that I would never be able to land well. This was of course not true and whilst I still struggle to be 100% sure when to level and flare, it's getting a bit better every time and I certainly know now from experience when is too early. So today, you have learned and recognised what not to do and this is a good reference point. No people or aircraft were injured (bar a bit of irrelevant pride). Crack on with it from here and chalk it up to experience (although I speak from my own experience that this is easier said/written than done).
T6Harvard, StratoTramp liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912245
Any pilot who claims they can land the same way every time is a liar, everyone of us has off days, sometimes it's lack of currency/recency or sometimes it's just an off day.

The other point to note is that it is job of airfields to hide from pilots and some are VERY good at it.

I might have mentioned that before :oops:
#1912247
Well, I’ve looked at the video and I think you’re beating yourself up over nothing. It probably felt worse than it really was. Crack on, nothing to see there.

PS: I see far too many people landing fast (I watch them while mowing my patch of grass at Sandown). Nosedraggers end up landing flat or sometimes on the nosewheel and then using the rest of the runway to just stop in time (especially the genius a few days ago who landed with nearly 15 kts up his tail because he can’t tell 05 from 23). Taildraggers end up bouncing back into the air and going around (if they have any sense). It’s not until you fly with an AoA gauge that you realise just how fast some of the POHs/instructors will have you over the hedge. Fly the POH speeds as a maximum and don’t start adding knots for ‘Mum’.
StratoTramp, T6Harvard, Milty and 1 others liked this
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912260
[quote="PaulSS"][b]Fly the POH speeds as a maximum[/b] and don’t start adding knots for ‘Mum’.[/quote]
Hear hear.

It's odd though. Instructors all over must be teaching students to fly faster than this.

I'd have to go back through the threads to prove it, but I've read quite a few examples from students here in recent times that strongly imply it, and one or two that state it explicitly.

I'd bet actual money that this is the tip of the iceberg.

Either the instructors are poor, or they think the students are. Yet it's no more difficult to fly at X knots on the approach than it is to fly X+5, or 10.

I'm going to speculate without evidence here - feel free to shoot me down - but I've often wondered if the schools out there have grown, over the years, into a culture of 'just good enough'. Especially where the training aeroplane of choice is the PA28, which is possibly the most forgiving of fast landings of all.
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912261
PA28 wrote:
PeteSpencer wrote:Congratulations on finding Fenland ! :lol:

Since the invention of GPS you no longer get the 'I found Fenland' sticker they used to hand out!


When I started flying, before everyone (- er, I guess I mean 'I' :wink: ) could afford a GPS , it was the car breaker's yard and the NDB (yes, really code was FNL-401KHz) that got me there............. :lol:
#1912284
add knots for gusts, but not for mum :D


@johnm Care to expand on this, John? With the normal 1.3 * Vs you’ve already got a 30% safety factor. Also, with a piston-engined aircraft you have almost instant response to a headwind reduction when a gust subsides. This is all quite different to a heavy jet, which is slow to respond and for that response to take effect and, therefore, gust adjustments are made to Vref.

If one is that concerned about controllability with gusty winds, then maybe due consideration should be given to a flapless approach but still using the POH flapless speed and not adding ‘factors’ (landing distance performance obviously being taken into account as wel, of course).

I can say that even in gusty conditions my AoA gauge is telling me I’m nowhere near the stall when flying speeds without any gust additions. I can’t imagine why an aircraft without an AoA gauge would be any different.

As ever, I’m very happy to learn from scientific proof and not because that’s what’s always been done or what was heard from the bloke in the flying club cafe.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912293
Could be folklore but I was taught to add half the gust component up to a max of 10 kts. I don’t actually do it these days otherwise I’d never land in the TB 20 so my remark was a bit tongue in cheek :oops:
User avatar
By Milty
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912303
@topcat - I was one who explicitly referred to higher speeds.

I spoke to my instructor and we clarified a few things. Basically, his preference is 70kts on the final turn and final approach as a bit of safety factor in what he lovingly calls the ‘death turn’. Then 65 over the fence. Also, in the early phases of student learning, especially at an airfield with plenty of room, I believe his logic is that a bit of extra speed is likely not to hinder and also get students used to keeping a bit of speed up if needed at a busy airfield. Later in training comes the finessing and understanding of different techniques. Personally, I’m comfortable with this approach but I can see there are other ways too.
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912304
PaulSS wrote:
add knots for gusts, but not for mum :D


@johnm Care to expand on this, John? With the normal 1.3 * Vs you’ve already got a 30% safety factor. Also, with a piston-engined aircraft you have almost instant response to a headwind reduction when a gust subsides.

I've never added anything for gusts.

If I'm in lazy mode, I might bowl up at the airfield boundary a few knots fast if it's windy, but that's because I know that in the slip, flare or hold-off, I'm going to use up less runway while the aircraft loses whatever speed it needs to, due to my reduced ground speed.

If I'm not being lazy, I'll aim at the part of the runway that lets me get off it where I want to. Or I'll land super short just for grins and then taxy at about 30-40 kt with the nose off the ground down to wherever the vacate point is.

None of which has anything to do with gust strength.

I literally never pay any attention at all to how they call the wind, if they do. I'm simply not interested, as a) the anemometer isn't where I'm going to land, and b) the wind will have changed by the time I get to the ground.

If there's a gust, I'll remove power, if there's a lull and I sink, I'll add it - the response is virtually instantaneous as @PaulSS says.

Predicating my approach speed on some forecast issued ages ago, or an actual called from the tower where the anemometer is on a building, 15 feet off the ground, possibly hundreds of yards from the runway threshold has always seemed utterly pointless.