Jump to content

Strong crosswind landing video CTSW


GravityKnight

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 167
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Here's that video. Best on HD and full screen.

 

 

It should start at about 4:25 - if not feel free to fast forward to that point for the relevant part.

 

Notes:

 

The bottom of the white arc is at 39k (Vso) so the large numbers on the airspeed indicator are at 40k and 60k.

 

The flaps are controlled by the little lever on the left of the panel - my habit is to go to full flaps on base (that's another discussion), but in any case they're at the full 30º throughout the video. 10º is what the POH calls for on takeoff, which you'll see if you watch it through the touch and go.

 

It looks like I start the roundout at about 55k and arrive in ground effect at about 45k and land very close to the 39k stall speed with minimal float.

 

30º flaps on one plane may be very different than 30º flaps in another. In the Sky Arrow they're not real effective. In a Cessna with "barn door" flaps, the same degree of flaps may have a much greater effect. Others can chime in on where the CT flaps fall on that spectrum.

 

Take a look at these two approach types (from Kershner):

 

8165493386_80444ea3cf_c.jpg

The top one I would describe as "zooming" into ground effect. You would arrive there with most of your approach speed and float would be invevitable. The bottom one is closer to what I aim for.

 

Next time I'm at the airport, I may try an approach and landing more like the top one and video it. I think it will show a much increased "float".

 

One final note: notice I do not touch anything (other than the finger brakes) on the final landing until clear of the active. That's a good habit to get into from early on.

 

Again, maybe show this to your instructor and see what he or she thinks. If they differ on any point, by all means listen to them over some random guy posting to an internet forum!

 

Because I have been getting good at keeping it close to the ground, i've been rounding out close to the ground initially... I see what your saying here, thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't generally get into these discussions but I would like to congratulate you on very nice xwind landings and I think your instructors have given you great advice.

I thank you for sharing your video and look forward to more.

I would be careful about taking the advice of all the posts on this forum. Some of them are great and some not so much. I think you are ahead of the game right now - stay with it.

 

Appreciate that very much! Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was a very well controlled landing. It showed very good understanding and use of proper cross wind technique. Bravo. As your hours increase in the CT and you expand your knowledge of the planes operating limits you will find this a most capable aircraft. It is obvious that you were we'll schooled in proper technique, bravo.

 

 

The below quote is a clear indication that the student did not grasp the correct concepts of flight or aerodynamics.

 

Thank you sir

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GN, good job on the landing. This talk of landing faster or slower in a crosswind has been around long before the CT was even a dream. When these conditions exist just land the airplane in a way that works well for you and let others land the way they want. The exception to the rule is if it is someone elses airplane try and land it the way they want it landed. Tom

 

Makes sense to me, thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many people on this forum with considerable experience in many aircraft including the CT. Someday you may want to try some of the options discussed here. Someday when you are licensed and own your own. But, for now, follow the training and advice of your instructor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I took the written yesterday... took about 15 min got a 90%... I should be more excited but this means now I have to do the checkride :lol:

 

Conratulations! Based on your video I can't imagine the checkride causing you much difficulty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GNight - good luck on the checkride. If your instructor is good with taking it you probably won't have a problem. I know it is still a little scary, but the reward makes it worth it. Remember though, your certificate is really only a license to learn, and the reality is that you'll never know it all...and perfect landings usually don't come in bunches. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conratulations! Based on your video I can't imagine the checkride causing you much difficulty.

Let's hope not :)

 

GNight - good luck on the checkride. If your instructor is good with taking it you probably won't have a problem. I know it is still a little scary, but the reward makes it worth it. Remember though, your certificate is really only a license to learn, and the reality is that you'll never know it all...and perfect landings usually don't come in bunches. :)

 

Good outlook on it. Guess that's one of the things that makes the world of flying so great. You can spend a lifetime trying to "master" it. No lack of challenges here...

 

Thinking of trying to schedule my checkride on the 3rd. I'd like to take a mountain flying course with my instructor since next to the rockies. Figured I'd might as well do that before my checkride instead of after. 1 day of ground to prepare for the oral part, and a couple short flights from now until then to stay sharp....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took my check ride decades ago in Yerrington NV. There local mountains did not bring up any mountain flying issues but the flight planning did. The DPE had me plan a flight to the Bay area and I had to explain my choice of routes in crossing to the west.

 

If I was your examiner I would make you plan a flight that included crossing or going around the mountains to your west but due to time constraints you wouldn't have to fly it. Do you know the preferred routes? Is there one that aligns with the prevailing or current winds? What about crossing altitudes? Will you need to exceed 10,000' and if so can you explain the altitude exception? The altitude exception is ambiguous, I might point that out as a reason for a more conservative route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took my check ride decades ago in Yerrington NV. There local mountains did not bring up any mountain flying issues but the flight planning did. The DPE had me plan a flight to the Bay area and I had to explain my choice of routes in crossing to the west.

 

If I was your examiner I would make you plan a flight that included crossing or going around the mountains to your west but due to time constraints you wouldn't have to fly it. Do you know the preferred routes? Is there one that aligns with the prevailing or current winds? What about crossing altitudes? Will you need to exceed 10,000' and if so can you explain the altitude exception? The altitude exception is ambiguous, I might point that out as a reason for a more conservative route.

 

I have an "idea" of one of the preferred routes just from listening to some of the CFI's chatting about flying west. But we don't fly west unless they are doing a mountain training course. I would be over 10k MSL if I go that way (Pikes Peak is 14,xxx for example, not that we fly over it, but it's possible to get up 9500ft or higher ground level without breaking a sweat. One of the major airports they fly to on a mountain training course is Leadville (lake county airport) which is the highest airport in the US at 9900ft).

 

From what I have been told, the examiners don't take you anywhere near the mountains for a sport/private check ride here. But I don't think that is some notion that is set in stone, so who knows. I just want the experience and training so I'll fell comfortable about taking a mountain flight sometime.. I'm sure a great deal of it is common sense, but I know he will have some tips for me I don't know.

 

Figured more stick time now will pay off on the check ride too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why everyone cares about float. It's just round out and wait a few seconds to touch. If you look at it that way then most all aircraft float because none touch at the exact moment of round out except helicopters. We all round out or flare and then wait the second or two until touch. So you go any extra 75'. If it gives you time to get things settled down or under control then who would care. It also allows you time to control the decent to touch. So who cares if one lands in 400' or the other in 475'? If it is a nice touch down and or you're not trying to make a short field landing then what difference does 75' make? Either person can have a nice touch or smack the gear so the extra distance to touch in reality makes no difference. I have crossed the numbers at 6' off the deck at 100 mph and just let the speed bleed and still touched at 42-45 knots. So since it wasn't for a short field and it was a nice landing who cared? If touching down at the exact moment of the round out was that important we would all have bad landings under that definition because anything past that would be float. If you land once in 400' and the next in 425' what difference did it really make? (And for this arguement we are not including a short field landing)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GravityKnight,

 

About that checkride...

 

Bear in mind that the examiner will assume you are competent - the fact that a CFI endorsed you in itself shows you should meet the requirements for the rating.

 

Don't take it lightly, of course, but just demonstrate that the CFI's judgment was correct. Examiners are not in the habit of failing applicants without due cause. Just study and review any areas you missed on the written and fly to the same standards that convinced your CFI that you were ready.

 

And even worst case scenario you screw something up, its not the end of the world - you then get a bit more training and nail it the next time around - in the long run its nothing more than a hiccup!

 

Relax and enjoy and good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Ed,

We all have float because we don't touch down at the exact moment of round out. We all float some distance. It might be 30' or 200', but we all float before the wheels touch and it varies every single flight. The more speed, yes the longer the float.

When you set the CT down like they do in the Alaskan short take off and landing competion you'll have my vote that we don't float.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why everyone cares about float.

 

Not everyone does.

 

With our planes it really makes not a whit of difference on the runways most of us use. It may prolong the landing process a tad, but so what?

 

But one concern is that every year numerous aircraft manage to somehow float themselves right off the end of a runway. Pilots may get a lackadaisical attitude about speed carried into ground effect and end up floating and floating and floating and, well, you get the idea.

 

The other concern is that some pilots going into a runway shorter than they're used to will react to excessive floating by forcing the plane onto the ground. This has had tragic consequences if the plane bounces and/or starts porpoising. Check the Mountain Air Columbia accident I posted before for an example of this.

 

But, as I said, in day to day operations, who cares. Most times I try to land on the numbers, which means judging my float accurately to that point. Practice makes perfect. But sometimes I'll fly 4,000' down a 5,000' runway to land nearer the FBO.

 

So its all good!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Floating is a artifact of too much lift and too little speed.

Trying to slow to near the point of stall before flaring or landing or both often with too much flaps is extra risky..

Dropping the plane rather than flying the plane onto the runway is the gist of the whole argument.

Landing above stall speed is preferable if you want a margin of safety in wind, gusts, or crosswind. Landing near stall speed requires more precision in order to save the gear and a possible bounce and porpoising.

In either case, a flair is required in order to touch the main gear first followed by the nose gear.

Flaring at or near stall has little room for error and may even be more hazardous if a go around is needed. Flaring with a little extra speed works just dandy provided the glide slope is made and the flare is done at the right level off the runway.

 

Air Force or Navy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Floating is a artifact of too much lift and too little speed.

 

.............................................

 

In either case, a flair is required in order to touch the main gear first followed by the nose gear.

 

........

 

Perhaps you need to read up on some aerodynamics?

 

The relevant equation is

 

L = Cl * A * .5 * r * V^2

 

Lift = (Coefficient of Lift x Velocity squared x Wing Area x Density)/2

 

You are floating because lift is still being generated - lift is a function of velocity, so to say there is "too little speed" is complete nonsense

 

I agree though that some flair is needed to flare correctly ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Ed,

We all have float because we don't touch down at the exact moment of round out. We all float some distance. It might be 30' or 200', but we all float before the wheels touch and it varies every single flight. The more speed, yes the longer the float.

When you set the CT down like they do in the Alaskan short take off and landing competion you'll have my vote that we don't float.

 

The contests that you refer to require you to drag it in behind the power curve heavily dependent on power and at a minimum speed. Simply cutting the power in that configuration gives a short landing, it works in a CT too.

 

I'm not trying to get your vote that we don't float, floating is an option, float if you want. If you want to see that you don't have to float just subtract 5 kts from the speed that you would otherwise enter round-out at. If you still float subtract 5 more knots, it won't take long subtracting 5 knots at a time to find a speed where there is no float available.

 

Floating is really the lesser of 2 evils, on the other side of the spectrum you have rapid sink, most prefer float to rapid sink, with the latter you have to advance the throttle or land hard. With float you have to deal with excess energy. If you don't manage the float well you can have both float and rapid sink.

 

In the middle is the perfect speed for current weight where there is no float but there is enough energy to bring your sink to near zero by full aft stick deflection. You can't be perfect but you can decide if you want to error on the fast or slow side. I don't look for a lot of margin so I have to be ready to either float or sink or .... just right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

flighttraining dot aopa dot org says:

 

If you’re able to make a nice roundout from a too-fast airspeed, you will float, which means that you’ll be in a level or slightly nose-high attitude, waiting for airspeed to dissipate as you cruise down the runway. Floating eats up runway quickly. It’s also bad form. So either go around or practice landings at a space shuttle landing strip.

 

Being too slow on final approach has consequences as well. Usually it means a somewhat hard landing, as the little bit of available energy is scrubbed off quickly in the roundout. In extreme cases it can mean landing short. Knowing this, a common reaction early in the flight training process is to fly too fast.

 

Turn from base to final

 

THE TURN from base to final is one of the most critical, as getting off speed or altitude here can be hard to recover from (top left). It can also be unsafe if the runway is overshot (bottom right).

One of the reasons the roundout is so challenging is because many airplanes allow for a fairly steep descent angle with full flaps. That means the transition from descent to level flight can be a big pitch change, which is hard to do with finesse. An easier way to go from descent to flare is by trying no-flap landings. Without flaps, the sight picture on the approach is much more shallow, and the transition much less abrupt. It’s not an ideal way to initially practice landings, but it can be a nice way to take the difficulty of the stark contrast of full-flap transitions out of the equation.

 

The landing. You’ve made it through the approach and roundout and now you’re ready to bring the flight to a close. This is the point where we get rid of the rest of the energy and touch down softly in a full stall with the nosewheel off the ground. If you’ve done everything right up to this point, this will be easy. Gradually bring the yoke or stick back to transition from a level flight attitude to one that is nose-high. If you judged the roundout height correctly, the wheels will be a few inches above the ground, and they will gently touch as the wings stall. Power-off stalls that you practiced will feel almost exactly the same.

 

If you’re on speed and at an appropriate height above the ground, the time from roundout to touchdown should be no more than a few seconds. If you’re too fast, you will float and that time will be extended. Too slow and you’ll clunk down quickly after the roundout, if not during. Arrive right on speed and there won’t be too much excess energy to make the airplane float or balloon, meaning that even a somewhat ham-fisted flare will bring acceptable and safe results.

 

http://flighttraining.aopa.org/magazine/2012/February/feature-perfect-landings.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, as I said, in day to day operations, who cares. Most times I try to land on the numbers, which means judging my float accurately to that point. Practice makes perfect.

 

Eddie -- I used to target the numbers before I started flying LSA. Hitting the numbers was ingrained from birth but given the short landing distance of the typical LSA, this started me thinking that picking a point farther down the runway adds a bit more safety factor (assuming we aren't constrained by a true short field). Basically, since I believe both you and I land at idle, wouldn't a target a couple hundred feet be a more prudent option and not rely on power if you misjudged decent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...