Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ed Cesnalis

30° flaperon landings - can be fun - or not

Recommended Posts

FlyRatz   

Excuse me for jumping into this topic.

Recently I had some lessons in the Lockheed Super Constellation which is based in Zürich/Switzerland. At high angle of attack this bird develops more drag, than all the six engines are able to overcome. If you would flare this animal, it wont be able to do a go around. I tried it in their training simulator.....and crashed!

My lesson learned: Different birds require different techniques when it comes to landing.

In Germany we have a lot of short runways (~1000ft). Our acres are much smaller in size than in your country and our roads/highways are crowded and curvy. For an emergency landing you definitely want to be able to do landings at stall speed to have as less energy as possible at touchdown. This is why I teach it similar to Tom. The students learn to land at 15° with the stick all the way back. If they conquer this, I teach them to do the same at 30° and 40°.  Later in their career, I have no problem if they do landings with a little more energy in the system as Roger prefers. But they need to be able to do stall landings if necessary. In an simulated emergency I only accept landings at 40° with the stick all the way back (exception: heavy wind with gusts)

A good and safe 2018 to all of you, regardless your landing technique :-)

Markus

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"My lesson learned: Different birds require different techniques when it comes to landing.

But they need to be able to do stall landings if necessary. In an simulated emergency I only accept landings at 40° with the stick all the way back (exception: heavy wind with gusts)"

YES

It all needs to be learned and learn there is just not one way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Roger Lee said:

"The knowledge learned over the past 100 plus years of aviation"

You're right better knowledge over time and not just one way.

Tradition just means thinking in the box and old ways. 

If stall is the right way why don't all aircraft land at stall? 

Roger, if you are going to quote me, why not quote the whole thing? I never said full stall landing was the only way. Those are words you keep trying to say I said, but that is not the case. What I said is a student should be taught the right way first. By the right way, I mean in line with what the FAA teaches. That is why I included the quote from the Airplane Flying Handbook. If you are flying an airplane like the CT that can be easily and safely landed that way, then it should be taught first. This style of landing will work with almost every small airplane a pilot will fly throughout their lifetime. Yes, there are airplanes that are an exception to the rule. Yes there are times where other than a full stall landing can and should be made. Wheel landings in a tailwheel airplane comes to mind. Just because a CT can be landed at a speed higher than stall speed, doesn't mean it should be landed that way. My experience with the CT is the faster you are while on the ground the more unstable the ground handling becomes. Why would you want to put your self in situation where the airplane is less stable on the ground?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Duane hit the nail on the head, pilot proficiency is the key.  Not just for the airplane, but for the conditions and configuration in a given situation.  You can get very proficient with landing a CT at 15° flaps in calm winds, to the point that you can do it in your sleep.  But that does *not* translate directly into proficiency in gusty crosswinds at 30° flaps.  Same airplane and pilot, but a different technique and set of skill requirements.  I think what Roger and JohnnyBlackCT are saying is that you need to build up and work all those proficiencies into your bag of tricks, so you can pull out the appropriate one for whatever you are facing.  I agree with that.

When my CT instructor first released me into the wild on my own after I bought my CTSW, I made a lot of marginal landings.  I mean a LOT.  I was scared of crosswinds, 30° flap landings (forget about 40°), and lots of situations.  But I kept at it and spent a great deal of my flying time working on landings.  Over time I figured out what worked and what didn't, and why.  I received a lot of confirmation and correction from this forum, but hearing "if you round out too high you will run out of speed and drop it in" doesn't really get your attention like doing it a few dozen times.  :D

Now I've got close to 1000 landings in my CT, I have a pretty good handle on it.  That's not to say I never make a marginal landing, I still do occasionally.  But now I know what I did wrong, often as I'm doing it.  And "marginal" to me now means something different and less scary than it did when I was first learning.    The trick is to keep working on it, trying things a little differently, see what works, and build up to more challenging techniques like 30°/40° flaps on short or narrow runways.  In other words, build and maintain proficiency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Yes there are times where other than a full stall landing can and should be made. "

See you never said this before.

"Just because a CT can be landed at a speed higher than stall speed, doesn't mean it should be landed that way. "

Why not? I would bet most of the 1800+ worldwide do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I think what Roger and JohnnyBlackCT are saying is that you need to build up and work all those proficiencies into your bag of tricks, so you can pull out the appropriate one for whatever you are facing.  I agree with that."

I agree to because this is a more sensitive plane than a station wagon 172.

Telling someone new that use only stall landings is the only way or even the best way to learn I think is wrong. In this plane it is an experienced pilot in a CT maneuver.  I've had countless students call me because their instructor always says 30 flaps and stall. They don't have that kind of experience or feel yet. They should work up to that level. I advise them to have their instructor to use 15 flaps and a little rpm to touch. Most of them calls back and says their landing problems are solved.

So my issue has always been when our top experienced CT pilots telling a newbie to  do full flaps and stall landings or you'll damage the plane  or lose control and crash into something just isn't right.

This aircraft needs to be learned in steps and should be from the bottom up in skill level and not the top down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tom,

"Why would you want to put your self in situation where the airplane is less stable on the ground?"

We are talking about 5-7 knots over full stall. That's not an unstable speed in anyone's book on a CT. You are that on the take off roll and you're controlling just fine. Not to mention you have brakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tom Baker said:

You certainly have full control authority at 60kt.

Yes you do.  My point is: at that speed you can totally loose control even with all of that authority because you have 3 wheels on the ground.

Its a perfect storm.  Gusts that make parked planes go flying are rare but gusts that disrupt a light sport that is landed but still at or above 60kts is a totally different story.  It can happen.

If you only have 1 wheel down at 60kts your prolly good but when the other main and then the nose come down you are suddenly unable to counter.  3 tires bouncing and skidding sideways is too disruptive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Duane Jefts said:

For someone like Ed that flies often, 30 flap proficiency is easy.  For Joe pilot that flies once every one, two, or three weeks, 30 flap proficiency will not be there for him.

Duane,

You are right about currency not doubt. And  you might be right that its needed or for routine 30*.  But you might be wrong, this issue might be all about primacy.  I favor that one.

This morning Jeremy McGregor flew me home in my CT and I observed the landing carefully.  I did comment  'ah you favor the left side of the runway' and he was immediately able to drift to the center line and then touched down at 35kts IAS.  Plus it was perfectly smooth.  Primacy could explain that and currency doesn't currently exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

Speed on the ground isn't about anything other than stick and pedal control. You can taxi this plane at 60 knots on the ground all day. The stick will determine if that plane leaves the ground not speed alone. The pedals determine if you allow it to veer off the runway not speed alone. You can steer off a runway at 10 knots. You can cross the numbers at 100 knots and still land at your normal landing speed.

Roger you always hear me wrong and that causes us to argue 2 different things.  I didn't say speed alone makes you leave the ground.  My point is that a gust that makes you leave the ground when parked will do so much more easily when your doing 60kt.  With rubber down and a disagreeable direction you are at the mercy.

I've seen this happen and I have had it happen to me and it cause me to avoid being on our runway tires down at 60kts.  

I can't understand how this problem isn't common in AZ.  You do have to tie down your planes there right?  If so why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

That's my point, you are the one in control so whether it's 45 knots or 60 knots you're doing the same You're in control or at least supposed to be until it stops.

Problem is that is not always true.  When you are most likely to get bitten is when you decided to land fast which sets you up.

I'm pretty sure I have heard you advise a higher rotation speed when its gusty.  You do that for the same reason that I advise minimum speed landing.  You do that because you know the sideways skidding is hard to control.  If you can get vulnerable on take off you can be vulnerable on landing or taxi.  Unwanted gusts can come at the worst time from the worst heading and with all the juice necsarry.  This can't be disputed and you are in agreement with your take-off advice.  The take off vulnerability is more commonly experience and many of us avoid it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

"Something I don't really see discussed is level of proficiency."

 

Exactly. Newbies lack this and telling a newbie to be at stall on a landing may set them up for a smacked gear.

Full stalls have their place, but not for new people or in all situations. So proclaiming this is the only way is a good education for new people.

You are arguing against 'proclaiming its the only way but no one is doing that.

If its correct that the rule of primacy outweighs the benefits you seek then you are not only wrong but strongly advising to avoid what is best.

I have well over 1,000 30* landings in my CT and have never been able to figure out what you are talking about, smacked gear.?  2006 was the record for smacked gear and the scenario that caused that was the Bonanza pilot using 40* and a Bonanza sight picture.  These types are not used to running out of energy.

A CT doesn't drop its nose it mushes.  Vertical speed control is what is lacking not the wrong config.

 

The big danger in a CT is running out of energy before you are landed.  Managing energy in our design when you are getting gusted is challenging and with 30* you can get there more suddenly.  

If the guy wasn't willing to use his flaps in his Cessna he isn't going to change when he gets a CT.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

What makes a full stall the right way? Many planes don't land at stall.

Extra speed on the ground doesn't make the plane veer off the runway either. Full stall doesn't mean a wind gust can't pick it up enough to smack a gear.

 

It all boils down to aircraft control to a stop. It isn't about speed alone.

changed the subject again. 

 

Full stall the right way in our design has a full aft stick. 

Many planes don't land at stall - they are adding risk overcoming quirks we don't have.

No one argues extra speed makes you veer off, the argument is that you are more vulnerable to being gusted with extra speed.

Full stall doesn't mean a wind gust can't pick it up enough to smack a gear. -  full stall is your best protection but there are wind sheer events that are beyond the extra margin as well.

+It all boils down to aircraft control to a stop. It isn't about speed alone. - I say over and over its about how many tires are rolling at that high speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

This is a no win for the full stall only guys

You have a closed mind and don't hear what we say.  Physics say its a no-win for you fast guys.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FlyingMonkey said:

I think Duane hit the nail on the head, pilot proficiency is the key.  Not just for the airplane, but for the conditions and configuration in a given situation.  You can get very proficient with landing a CT at 15° flaps in calm winds, to the point that you can do it in your sleep.  But that does *not* translate directly into proficiency in gusty crosswinds at 30° flaps.  Same airplane and pilot, but a different technique and set of skill requirements.  I think what Roger and JohnnyBlackCT are saying is that you need to build up and work all those proficiencies into your bag of tricks, so you can pull out the appropriate one for whatever you are facing.  I agree with that.

 

Andy your argument is logical but if primacy rules than it is wrong.

I learned to land with flaps and at minimum speed and guess what?  When I lost my engine on a gusty day and no field I was able to land on a steep slope.  There was never any discussion in my mind, it was full flaps to minimize energy because I didn't have a runway or a field.

Even earlier I had an emergency where one of my main landing gear departed the plane and I had to land on 1 gear that was on the left side not in the middle.  Again, the flaps question was automatic - when I get alarmed primacy rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

Hi Tom,

"Why would you want to put your self in situation where the airplane is less stable on the ground?"

We are talking about 5-7 knots over full stall. That's not an unstable speed in anyone's book on a CT. You are that on the take off roll and you're controlling just fine. Not to mention you have brakes.

5-7 knots with 15° flaps puts you at 47-49 knots on touch down. For the CT what safety advantage or benefit does that offer? Sure you can do it, but what in your mind makes it right?

BTW I have ridden with some who try to land with speeds closer to 10-15 knots over stall.

Also I don't like to let the airplane get that fast before lifting off either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

So my issue has always been when our top experienced CT pilots telling a newbie to  do full flaps and stall landings or you'll damage the plane  or lose control and crash into something just isn't right.

Another straw man.  Its pointed out that certain risks increase at speed and you turn it into if you do it you will crash.  Very frustrating to have your words turned around again and again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FlyingMonkey said:

Roger was using 60kt taxi as an example.  He was not advocating taxi at 60kt.  Does anybody really think that?  We are arguing the wrong points here.

We have mostly discussed landing roll outs but take off rolls, fast taxi, normal taxi and even parked but not tied down all apply.   I have brought up all 4 in this context because the physics doesn't care which you are doing just that you are currently on the ground and light enough to wreak havoc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, JohnnyBlackCT said:

If you think your method of landing is the correct one, you are wrong. Key word here is ONE.

no-one is arguing that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

Not to mention you have brakes.

when wind sheer causes loss of control brakes help you wheelbarrow and nose over or at the minimum are the wrong control.  Before final control is completely lost the throttle not the brake is you savior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

"Yes there are times where other than a full stall landing can and should be made. " Wheel landings in a tailwheel airplane comes to mind.

See you never said this before.

"Just because a CT can be landed at a speed higher than stall speed, doesn't mean it should be landed that way. "

Why not? I would bet most of the 1800+ worldwide do.

You really should use the whole quote, so it doesn't lose context. I added the sentence you left out .

Just to be clear on the landings, I am not advocating full flap, full stall landings. I said landing near stall speed for the configuration. My normal landing is with 15° flaps, Approach flown at 60, and touch down speed is in the low 40's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, JohnnyBlackCT said:

If you think your method of landing is the correct one, you are wrong. Key word here is ONE.

You used to instruct, did you use the FAA's Flight Training Handbook as a guide for teaching landing? Did you ever teach a new student to land anyway other than to touch down near stall speed?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×