Learning to fly, or thinking of learning? Post your questions, comments and experiences here

Moderator: AndyR

User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1845894
TopCat wrote:
lobstaboy wrote:The idea is to de-mystify stalling and to remove the fear.

Then why do so many people land nosewheel aircraft way too fast and flat?


Good question. It makes me wince every time I see it. I think it's because either they aren't taught properly in the first place, or they've got lazy.
I hadn't considered the possibility that they might be frightened of stalling, but I suppose that could be so too.
The add 5knots for the wife and kids thing should be drummed out of people. Trying to land too fast means
- floating for ages giving any cross wind a chance to blow you off the side of the runway, or
- touching down too fast and flat so the aeroplane is still flying even though it's in contact with the ground - the brakes don't work well like that...
rogerb liked this
User avatar
By David Wood
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1845902
TopCat wrote:
lobstaboy wrote:The idea is to de-mystify stalling and to remove the fear.

Then why do so many people land nosewheel aircraft way too fast and flat?

Because they are badly taught. It’s as simple as that.
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1845905
David Wood wrote:
TopCat wrote:
lobstaboy wrote:Thowe idea is to de-mystify stalling and to remove the fear.

Then why do so many people land nosewheel aircraft way too fast and flat?

Because they are badly taught. It’s as simple as that.


I didn't want to be quite that blunt. But, yes usually it is that simple :(
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1845906
David Wood wrote:
TopCat wrote:
lobstaboy wrote:The idea is to de-mystify stalling and to remove the fear.

Then why do so many people land nosewheel aircraft way too fast and flat?

Because they are badly taught. It’s as simple as that.

I think that does account for much of it, for sure. But that carries some huge implications.

I watch the landings just about everywhere I go. Well over half, possibly 70% of the trike landings I see are like this. If not actually three pointers then it's mains only just before nose, so still pretty flat.

Almost never do I see an obvious main gear landing, followed by an obvious main gear roll, followed by the nose settling down.

So what does that say about general teaching standards?

To be fair, I don't think it's entirely about the teaching. People do get sloppy over time if they're not very motivated to be as good as they can be, all the time, and I'm no exception. Now that I'm flying more frequently again, I've noticed some areas of my own flying that I need to tighten up on. I'm not even remotely close to landing on the nosewheel, but I could certainly hold off a bit longer, and as I discovered today, my steep turns were good but my slow flying was a bit rubbish.
User avatar
By David Wood
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1845910
I think that a lot depends upon where a student was taught, in terms of runway type. If the student (or indeed the FI) was taught on a grass airfield then they are much more likely to have understood the value of the hold-off.

I used to teach at a grass airfield frequently visited by training aircraft from a nearby large commercial airfield. The visiting aircraft were invariably two-up but sometimes one could only gaze open-mouthed at the landings and take-offs demonstrated by these aircraft, and deduce from them the standard of instruction occurring within. I remember once watching in disbelief as a visiting aircraft ploughed round the circuit with an FI on board (I hesitate to say Instructing) for half a dozen circuits or more. Each and every landing was flat and fast with no attempt to hold-off; and each and every take-off was flat and fast with no attempt to lift off the nose wheel until about 70kts. I then overheard the instructor discussing the performance with the student as they headed off for a coffee before departing. He suggested airily that the 'bouncy' landings were due to an uneven runway. Yeah right.....
lobstaboy liked this
By Crash one
#1849920
All flight training should be done on tailwheel aircraft from grass runways no longer than 650 metres.
If the student has never seen anything other than that they won’t learn flat, long, fast approaches nor bomber command circuits.
Rant mode to standby!
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1849932
Crash one wrote:All flight training should be done on tailwheel aircraft from grass runways no longer than 650 metres.
If the student has never seen anything other than that they won’t learn flat, long, fast approaches nor bomber command circuits.
Rant mode to standby!

In fairness, which end has the little wheel has no bearing on the speed of the approach, or the size of the circuit. And you can fly the approach as fast and flat as you like providing you get the speed off by the time you get to the hedge, which also is unaffected by the position of the little wheel.

But it was a good rant, if a little on the short side. Rants should be longer than that really, and build up to a proper crescendo.

If you're just working up to a more frothingly ranting rant, it wasn't bad for a trial run. :wink:

I haven't done a real rant for quite a while. I might see if I can put one together. Although the lawn needs doing, and there's a fair bit more flying to do this weekend, so it may have to wait a bit. :pirat: :pirat:
By Crash one
#1849945
I must agree it was a rather watered down rant. By long flat approaches I meant the 3degrees from 4 miles out onto a two mile runway knowing it will eventually roll to a standstill. General ground handling, take off and landing on a short strip should produce better performance?
I could rant about the syllabus content including proper stalls rather than the 152 mush and fully developed spins. I once kicked in a fair bit of sideslip to lose some height on final, “We don’t teach asymmetric flight anymore”. I came from gliders and a go around was a bit difficult!
Also, all this numbers thing best climb rate, best angle, best glide. Maybe I’ve picked up bad habits flying by feel.
It’s prob me but I hate doing anything by the skin of my teeth, just knowing enough to scrape by, not knowing how close is disaster.
User avatar
By VRB_20kt
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1850099
Landings are perhaps the hardest part of gaining a PPL. No two are even in the same conditions as each other. There are however some things that can assist in getting a good outcome and IMHO one of the more important is getting the approach right. A nice stable approach seems to create time to get the rest right. Once the aiming point is fixed in the windscreen all the way down final, the rest will start to come together.
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1850103
Crash one wrote:I once kicked in a fair bit of sideslip to lose some height on final, “We don’t teach asymmetric flight anymore”.

:shock: :shock:

Really?
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1850104
VRB_20kt wrote:Landings are perhaps the hardest part of gaining a PPL.

I think this is something of a generalisation. Do you mean it was for you?

It wasn't remotely the hardest part of it for me. It took me a while to get them consistently right, but navigation was far harder, and it was a long time after I'd cracked nav that I was really confident on the radio.

There are however some things that can assist in getting a good outcome and IMHO one of the more important is getting the approach right. A nice stable approach seems to create time to get the rest right. Once the aiming point is fixed in the windscreen all the way down final, the rest will start to come together.

I think this is true in the early days, since repeatability is such a key to learning.

But once you've got a bit more experience, why would you need a stable approach? Once you're a foot or two off the ground, with the speed coming back towards the stall, what difference does it make what you were doing half a mile away or more?

In any case, a sudden gust or windshear can destabilise any approach. Yes, I know that you can go around, and of course I would never discourage anyone from going around if really necessary, but is that really the first choice?

Much better to actually learn to fly it close to the ground as well as up at altitude.
By Fellsteruk
#1850116
Everyone is different and some get landings quicker than others but for me landing well, consistently and having the experience to land “ok” regardless of what happens on the approach took me the longest of anything to learn, much to my and my instructors frustration. I was defo his worst student for sure.

Even today my approach wasn’t what I’d call stable but I got down on the aiming point I wanted. I turned final and was a high got trimmed in landing config and pulled the power, started dropping to correct position then captured it by adding a bit of power, then glided n touched down on the piano keys nice and smooth was actually one of my better landings of past few weeks.

Took me ages to get the “feel” for this and spent literally months of flat landings and floaters.

Still have landings I’m less than proud of but I can not at least get down safely.
By Crash one
#1850129
TopCat wrote:
Crash one wrote:I once kicked in a fair bit of sideslip to lose some height on final, “We don’t teach asymmetric flight anymore”.

:shock: :shock:

Really?


Yes, and she wasn’t pleased! Nearly jumped out of her skin, felt like she had never seen it before.
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1850145
Fellsteruk wrote:Even today my approach wasn’t what I’d call stable but I got down on the aiming point I wanted. I turned final and was a high got trimmed in landing config and pulled the power, started dropping to correct position then captured it by adding a bit of power, then glided n touched down on the piano keys nice and smooth was actually one of my better landings of past few weeks.

We call this 'flying'. Approved! :thumleft:

Bear in mind that if you needed power in the late stages, you could have left it a bit later getting the flaps down. Aim to judge it so that once you close the throttle, you don't need to open it again. This might mean lowering the flaps earlier or later, or even a little late side-slip if you're still a bit high.

Especially if there's woods or houses in the immediate undershoot, being a little high on final is absolutely a good thing providing you know how to get rid of the height and speed by the time you come over the hedge. If the engine stutters late in the approach and you continue the glide to a successful landing on the runway, all is well.

If you need power to make the runway, and suddenly you don't have it and end up in someone's garden, you'll be on the national news.

I know which option I prefer.
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1850157
TopCat wrote:
Crash one wrote:I once kicked in a fair bit of sideslip to lose some height on final, “We don’t teach asymmetric flight anymore”.

:shock: :shock:

Really?


Really Yes.

I was practicing for the french precision flying competition 10 years or so ago and on landing had the then aeroclub CFI start to ball me out as he had seen me sideslipping on final as he cycled to the club... Luckily the then President (ex FAF) wandered in and came to my defence or I would have been turfed out "for deliberately flying with crossed controls which is not allowed under the JAR syllabus, so we dont do this at our aeroclub either"....

hmmm...

Crash one wrote:I could rant about the syllabus content including proper stalls rather than the 152 mush


Have you tried stalling a Ralleye... :wink:
(Hint: they dont!)

Regards, SD...