Those last five knots....

[round_peg]

I've got about 20 hours in the CT now and am finally starting to feel comfortable with landing it (transitioning from a C-172). One thing still vexes me however. Normally I turn base at 65, final at 60 and aim for 55 over the fence, 15° flaps for most occasions. Normally little or no throttle from abeam the numbers gets it done. Usually this works great. But sometimes I find those last five knots impossible to shed and I'm heading into the round-out with 60, which is too fast if you're actually planning on landing. Adding pitch doesn't seem to be effective quickly enough and I lose my glide path. I've also tried slips but this doesn't seem to help me bleed off those last five knots.

 

The mystery to me is why shedding those last five knots is a problem only some of the time. I don't see what I am doing differently to cause this.

[josjonkers]

The CT is prettey slippery. Try backing off on your power sooner, extend your downwind or try 30 flaps.

 

 

 

With these options it will allow you to add power to keep on the numbers on get your speeds right during the last part of your approach.

[Runtoeat]

Agree with Josjonkers, especially the use of flaps. You might even consider going to 40 flaps (if you have a CTSW). Before using higher flap settings, if you haven't done this much in the CT, I'd recommend that you get some time with someone who knows the right way to use them, especially in gusty or cross wind conditions. The higher flaps aren't for everyone and you may or may not decide to use them. I have found that using 30 and 40 flaps gives me a lot of control over when and where I will set the plane down by using a squirt of throttle when needed. Once down, cutting power keeps the plane on the runway due to the high drag.

[Roger Lee]

I think too many get worried about numbers too much. It's just a reference point. The more time you accumulate the more comfortable and skilled at control you will get. I have over 1K+ landings in every flap and power configuration you can think of and in all runway lengths.

I approach at 60, round out at 60 (55 is okay too) and touch around 50. 15 flaps for a normal lower wind condition is a good flap setting and when comfortable any flap setting on lower wind days. A nice safety margin to keep control of the craft and not get behind the flight characteristic curve. Speed has nothing to do with it. So what if you glide an extra 75'. Speed is your friend and too slow has cost many a smashed gear so don't get hung up on trying to be too slow. I can land all day long in 1000' with 2800 rpm. Your throttle does not control altitude, your stick does. Too many people here with a slick plane get hung up on numbers. Remember to get your head out of the cockpit and fly/land the plane. Numbers are for test. Stay away from a lot of flaps in high winds. The more wind the less flaps has always been the rule. A lot of flaps in high wind can get you in trouble you don't want and may not be able to fix. High winds get zero flaps and leave some throttle to touch. I can land all day in 20-30's with that setup without any issues. Know the plane and its feel and not just a set of numbers.

I have crossed the numbers at 100 mph and just leveled off and just wait until the speed bleeds. No big shake except the touchdown was farther down the runway, but who cares on an 5'K runway.

 

Don't worry about the few miles per hour difference just let the speed bleed which happens fairly quick. Don't try and set a CT down before it is ready or you bounce or flare back into the air. Just hold it nice and relaxed and steady stick.

 

Quit worrying over 5 knots of speed at round out. Just fly the plane, relax and have fun learning. It all comes with time.

20 hrs. is nothing compared to where you will be at 100 and you look back at this conversation.

[coppercity]

Sounds like you may be coming in a little high which is not terrible you just have to be patient in the flare as the CT will float a while in ground effect if your at 60 or a little faster. Over the numbers at 55 is right on with 15 flaps. Try extending your downwind slightly to get a little lower on the gllideslope so you can better control the speed. Then try some full power off approaches and see if you can target the same speeds by pitch alone.

[Jim Meade]

Everyone is going to have their own opinion on an issue like yours. It sounds like you're seeking consistency, which I think is a good objective. You'd like it to be the same way each time. Subject to some wind variables, it should be possible to replicate an approach pretty consitently.

 

When I was doing a lot of instructing, I would say that a bad landing started on downwind. It is useful to try to establish yourself at the same altitude, stand-off distance and airspeed on each pattern. You mentioned that you sometime used a little power and sometimes not. Perhaps you can try to stabilize the procedure a bit. Turning base and final and applying flaps and setting power at the same relative position (have to factor in wind) lets you reduce variables to the minium.

 

Little airplanes are pretty responsive, but when I was flying jets and we set Vref for final we tried to get right on the numbers, not 5 knots up or down. We flew AOA, though, more than numbers in the final analysis. There is nothing wrong with being interested in flying consistent numbers.

 

The CTLS manual suggest flying final with a tiny bit - perhaps 10% power which you remove at 3 feet above the runway then flare and land gently. You're probably used to landing with no power. Leaving even a little power on on final might cause you to float more than you expect. It would seem to me that if that is the case, slipping while a ways up on final is what I'd do. It's how I land gliders when I end up coming in high and hot.

 

The way to reduce speed is to increase pitch. Add pitch to to the slip and you can come down pretty abruptly. Transistion out while you have time to get comfortable. It's good to be set up where you want to be by the time you turn final, so that any adjustments have already been made. Trust your eyes and act positively sooner rather than later and you avoid having to make adjustments when you're too close to the ground for safety or comfort.

 

 

[round_peg]

Thanks for all the thoughts and suggestions.

 

I'm pretty sure the difference in when it works well and not so well is the altitude when I turn base to final. A little higher makes it more difficult to get rid of the excess airspeed. I prefer the higher approach, so this is why I was trying some slips on short final. In the Cessna this always worked to burn off altitude without increasing airspeed, but I'm not finding this to be the case with the less draggy CT. I think I need to practice slipping in the CT (at altitude) to get a better feel for slips with the CT's much lighter controls. When I come in a little hot, I don't worry too much about using up more runway to burn off the airspeed (or going around). But the goal is to get it right, as often as possible, and it seems like a controlled speed over the fence makes the most difference to the results.

 

After trying a number of things, I've settled on adding 15 flaps on downwind, power to idle abeam the numbers, one turn of trim and turn base at 65 (two more turns of trim on short final). I've tried some landings in calm/near calm with 30 flaps but only a few with 40 (rarely required, is my feeling). Naturally you have to be responsive to the situation so sometimes a bit of power is needed in base and final. I often did power-on landing in the Cessna (a couple hundred RPMs added in the flare to keep the nose up), but I'm not totally comfortable doing this yet in the CT, due to this airplane's tendency to want to take off again.

 

For Roger Lee: I'm not worried, just trying to hone my technique, break some old habits, and learn some new ones!

[Desconhecido]

In general, if you're not flying at the best glide speed, any greater deviation from best glide speed should make you land shorter. Am I correct on this?

 

So, if best glide is 63kts, you will land shorter if you pitch for 55kts than if you pitch for 60kts. It might appear to take longer to descend at the slower airspeed but you'll do it in a shorter distance.

 

Am I correct on this?

 

If I am, it seems that the solution which may give you the results you want is to transition from the 60kts (that you want on the start of your final) to the 55kts (that you want when you pass the threshold) a bit earlier. If you find that you appear to be descending in too short a distance by pitching for 55kts earlier, can't you add some power to slow your descent?

[Tad Olmsted]

What is your idle speed on the ground? It may be too high causing a longer landing

[wlfpckrs]

At what altitude agl do you typically make your turn to final? My rule of thumb is 15 degrees of flaps, 500' agl from 1.5 miles out, 2800-3000 rpm. This little bugger likes to fly. (The 1.5 miles out is on the GPS --- from the middle of the runway.)

[Roger Lee]

I don't quite understand why anyone is so worried about landing as short or as slow as possible in normal circumstances unless you have a really short field or engine out. The whole idea is to be smooth for a new person and not dead on and this may make his learning more frustrating until he gets more time. You guys are going to put him in the loony bin over 5 knots. Be smooth, relaxed, in full control of the plane in all landing configurations and sure of yourself first, then learn to hit the spot or control a few knots. 5 knots isn't a big concern and many gauges are off some anyway. If I was trying to always put my wheels dead on a specific mark on the runway then this would be a good discussion, but the majority of us aren't trying to win a competition when we touchdown.

Idle speeds don't cause longer landings. The stick controls the speed. The farther you pull back the slower you go. You have to forget the throttle at landing causing you extra speed. The stick controls the speed and if you pull back farther the speed decays and the rate of decent at the those slow speeds will increase. I can come in at 55 with 2600 rpm. Just pull the stick back.

Our friends in the UK a few years back challenged me to land in 300m (about 1000') with throttle. I set down consistently at 2700 rpm in a 1000'. The stick controls the speed. They said you had to be at 1600 rpm to land in 300m. Plus when you are in a glide at 55-60 knots the wind is turning the prop along with the engine and you will never get to a static idle rpm. Carrying a little power to the ground also gives the CT a more solid feel and better slow speed flight surface control with the prop wash.

 

It isn't the throttle, use the stick to control speed. The plane will land itself if you just pull the stick back, let it slow and hold the stick steady with a very slight movement back on the stick.

[Jim Meade]

What we're all talking about here is what the big training outfits and big airplane manuals call a descent profile.  There is a profile for every aspect of flight.  There are a number of factors in a descent profile and they are all worthy of attention.

 

Anyone who want to be a top pilot and especially anyone who wants to progress on to heavier and faster airplane is well advised to learn things the right way early so you don't have to relearn them when you step up.

 

As Roger and I have pointed out, pitch is the controlling factor for airspeed in the descent.  To slow down, pull the stick back.  Do that too late and you induce a change in pitch which can alter your aiming point and touchdown point.  To reduce altitude, pull power.  FD says go into the flare with a little power.  Do it the book way all the time until you are an expert and can become a test pilot.

 

Practicing at altitude can show the settings needed to achieve a given rate of descent and airspeed.  Then apply that to the pattern and landing.

 

Consistency and reducing the number of variables helps one isolate and then address the one issue at a time needed to cause a desired change in the landing.

 

I'm not sure who the "you guys" is that Roger is referring to. I don't consider it to be me. And, I will maintain my point that a few knots makes a big difference in how the CT lands. I am not addressing spot landings here, but a consistent touchdown at or near gross with normal winds. That should follow as a result of doing the other parts of the descent profile.

 

As you can see, there are a number of different perspectives. Take them, including mine, with a grain of salt and when in doubt refer to the manufacturers book and the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook. We have to address different aspects of airplanes just as we do if we transition from a crop duster to a jet, but the basics of flying are the same. Let's not reinvent the wheel.

 

 

 

 

[Jim]

I'll give you another good reason for consistency. Soft field landings. He's going to have to be able to demonstrate one on the checkride. How many of you can go out today and demonstrate a PTS-acceptable soft-field landing the first time? I couldn't and neither could my instructors. I can now because I fly final at 55 knots +/- 1 knot. That gives me the same exact sight picture and the same feel, roundout and flair each time. I believe, at least on the CT, you need this consistency to touch down gently, nose high every time.

 

Being able to nail a soft-field landing on demand might make the difference between a non-event and an accident someday.

[round_peg]

I appear to have started a bit of a debate!

 

I'm aware (and certainly was taught) to pitch for airspeed. I suppose the heart of my question is how to get this to work as effectively on the CT as it did for me in the Cessna. I think a lot of this comes down to feel; the CT is so much lighter on the controls and less draggy than even the C-150s I flew in training. This is especially a factor in the flare when even small stick inputs can have dramatic effects. I am concentrating on making small incremental inputs.

 

Since I'm generally attempting to make a dead-stick landing from abeam the numbers, my final is probably shorter than what most of you are attempting at your airports. At SZP we don't extend downwind further unless traffic requires. Accordingly the final is nothing close to 1.5 miles. We are typically turning final approximately 1,500 feet from the threshold, from about 500-600 AGL. That's a fairly steep approach by most standards but much lower than that and you get too close a look at the telephone poles. Again not a problem in the Cessna -- a slip on short final takes care of any extra altitude. I'm not finding that this works with the CT, not yet anyway.

 

Roger: Trust me, I'm not trying to win any spot landing contests. I'm trying to keep my airspeed controlled on final. I'm sure you'll agree that this has an impact on landing performance (especially in the CT). Sometimes I find that airspeed is increasing on short final when it should be holding steady or decreasing, and the CT doesn't seem to bleed it off quickly by raising the nose.

[Jim]

Mitch, if you go to 30 degrees of flaps on base you'll have no problem pitching for 55 knots and adjusting your roundout point with throttle on final.

[round_peg]

I'll give you another good reason for consistency. Soft field landings. He's going to have to be able to demonstrate one on the checkride. How many of you can go out today and demonstrate a PTS-acceptable soft-field landing the first time? I couldn't and neither could my instructors. I can now because I fly final at 55 knots +/- 1 knot. That gives me the same exact sight picture and the same feel, roundout and flair each time. I believe, at least on the CT, you need this consistency to touch down gently, nose high every time.

 

Being able to nail a soft-field landing on demand might make the difference between a non-event and an accident someday.

 

No checkride needed for me. I'm a PP flying Light Sport. These are transition issues. Having read a lot on these boards I know I am not alone in finding the transition from conventional GA airplanes to the CT to be more challenging than expected. But in principle I agree. I'd sure like to be able to execute a soft field (and short field) landing with consistency and competency, even if I don't have to prove anything to an examiner, and probably will never have to do either one.

[sandpiper]

Mitch,

 

Every time the subject of how to land comes up, there is always a big debate so don't feel bad about starting another one. BTW, the CT slips really well. Just need to practice.

[Jim]

No checkride needed for me. I'm a PP flying Light Sport. These are transition issues. Having read a lot on these boards I know I am not alone in finding the transition from conventional GA airplanes to the CT to be more challenging than expected. But in principle I agree. I'd sure like to be able to execute a soft field (and short field) landing with consistency and competency, even if I don't have to prove anything to an examiner, and probably will never have to do either one.

 

You may have to do one on your BFR, and once you get the hang of them you'll be doing them every time conditions allow them. There's nothing quite like setting your CT down gently in a 15 knot headwind with 15 knots of groundspeed.

[round_peg]

Mitch,

 

Every time the subject of how to land comes up, there is always a big debate so don't feel bad about starting another one. BTW, the CT slips really well. Just need to practice.

 

I can see that Good discussion, and I appreciate the diversity of viewpoints. The CT does seem to slip well I just need to work on getting the feel for it.

 

You may have to do one on your BFR, and once you get the hang of them you'll be doing them every time conditions allow them. There's nothing quite like setting your CT down gently in a 15 knot headwind with 15 knots of groundspeed.

 

Good point, though a BFR is a non-pass/fail situation. Mine is nearly two years away, so I'm feeling confident that my ability to demonstrate these techniques will be there when the time comes.

[coppercity]

Consistancy is certainly the key to success, but as we all know there are so many factors that effect the landing approach every landing ends up being different. This is especially true with very light airplanes, they are disrupted so much easier than a heavier faster aircraft. As you gain more experiience in your CT you will be able to see/feel things happen very quickly and you will be able to react quicker and more accuratly. Generally I agree that pitch is the most effective method of controlling speed on an approach but its really a combination of pitch and power that does the trick. You have taken the power out of the equation by doing power off appraoches which does make you work a little harder in the fact when your high you are getting back on glideslope by pitching the nose down. The CT will gain speed really quick when the nose is down so although your descent rate is a little greater your getting to the runway faster, have to recover from a steeper descent and have extra airspeed at the bottom, all lead to a long float or worse a balloon to a go around. Slips work well in the CT but they do de-stablize your approach by adding more work to your already busy realm of flight until they become second nature. The CT does land easier with some power on the approach and into the flare as long as the speed is consistant, power shallows the descent so the flare is not as drastic and is easier. If your restricted to a short approach try starting your descent a little sooner then abeam the numbers, or a lower downwind altitude. Go to idle a couple stripes before abeam in the downwind. With 15 flaps try to stay at 60 knots all the way from that point down to short final. At that point as you shallow the descent you should be able to hit 55 right over the numbers. If you end up high try slowing down a bit to 54 instead of diving at the runway, your descent rate will still be about the same but it will take a little longer to get to the runway giving you time to lose some more altitude. Worse case you go around and try again starting the descent a little sooner. Just something to try, youll find a technique that works for you, its really just more practice!

[Runtoeat]

If you're thinking of trying to slip your CT and find that this isn't working, it because the CT is just about as slippery going sideways as forward. If you want to add drag during landing to quickly scrub off altitude, use the 30 and 40 flaps which FD provided us with for this purpose. This will bring the CT down as quickly and effectively, if not more so, than what you experienced with the 172. Plus, it gives one a very good view of the runway! Sorry, I know I'm not popular by advocating flaps but I couldn't stiffle myself

[Roger Lee]

Hi Dick,

 

I'm an advocate for flaps just not in high winds or for beginners learning the CT.

[sandpiper]

Dick,

 

I use 30 flaps frequently and even use 40 if needed. (Don't tell anyone!!) I prefer the flaps over a slip. That's what they are there for and that keeps the approach more "stable" as opposed to throwing in a slip. I go power off and flaps at least 15 next to the touchdown point and maintain 60K until wings level on final then 55K with flaps 15 and 50K with flaps 30 or 40. Power off at 55K gives me about 1900 RPM which then gives me an idle on the ground of about 1600 except that I manually keep it at 2000 for taxi. At the landing flare I bump in a couple hundred RPM especially with flaps 30 to 40. This gives me more to play with at the bottom and usually stops it from doing that abrupt sink it likes to do. All of this assumes "normal" conditions. Unless I get sloppy the above easily results in making the first turnoff at homeplate (800 ft) even with no wind and a little float. Being sloppy with no wind means I need to hit the brakes pretty good so often I just let it roll.

 

So, Dick, I'll probably be joining you on the "unpopular" side!!:huh:

[Runtoeat]

Hi Roger. Your point is well taken. Cross winds or gusts can test your reflexes when usng extended flaps. My standard disclaimer applies to new CT pilots: Regardless of wind conditions, do not use extended flaps until you've flown with someone who knows how to use these.

 

Hi John. I can relate to what you say. Reflexes AND throttle must be used with flaps. Sometimes due to being either lazy or slow to react with some throttle during those times when I'm near stall and still a few extra feet off the runway, I will let the plane down a little more "abruptly" than wanted. Even after hundreds of landings, I'm still learning and get mad at myself for not bringing in some throttle when I should have. On the other hand, when everything comes together with full flaps, it is really nice. I'll add that I still also like to come in with 15 flaps and just let it settle in as many of the others prefer to do. All of this is what makes flying our CT's so much fun.

[round_peg]

Eric, I think you've put your finger on it. Many times I seem to have the approach nailed, 60 turning base, 55 over the fence, only to find that I've added those five knots back in seconds within the last couple hundred feet to the numbers. I must be increasing my glide angle at that point, probably (subconsciously?) trying hit my selected point on the runway when I'd do better controlling airspeed and touching a bit further down the runway. It's amazing how quickly the CT wants to build up airspeed. I will experiment with the two suggestions, going to idle a bit sooner and making the pattern a bit tighter, and using some power into the flare. Not mutually exclusive techniques of course.