CTSW - landing mishaps

[Tom Baker]

1 hour ago, Roger Lee said:

Wrong. We’re not talking about an approach, just the landing. You can cross the numbers at 100 and still land at the same slow speed and a soft touch. No one here says the landing must be within a specified distance. 

When landing you are trying to increase the pitch attitude without ballooning, with the hopeful; outcome of being near stall speed a fraction of an inch above the ground. That pitch attitude is the sight picture that a student needs to develop from the beginning. By using 15° flaps for a new student they are able to develop this sight picture from the beginning. If you are landing 5-7 knots above stall speed you will not have that that sight picture. Later when you start doing landings that require a higher degree of skill, like 30° or more flaps, you will already have the basic sight picture that you need.

[FlyingMonkey]

3 hours ago, Ed Cesnalis said:

No, it prioritizes primacy. as more important than skill level.

The problem is that with new pilots is if you try to teach them out of their depth, they won't get it right anyway and then when the chips are down they will revert to POOR technique.  I think it's better to teach them a technique that they can master and lock into muscle memory so if they do revert, they do so to something they can do well.

[Tom Baker]

11 minutes ago, Roger Lee said:

You can fly 100 mph 12" above the runway and let the speed bleed and touch at stall if you wanted. So in truth numbers are nice for some, but not necessary for others.  Speed and approach is just a pilots setup. Someone that is highly skilled which is many here do not need numbers. They could fly any approach, high, low slow or fast and still make a nice landing and many could still hit a target area without a lot of difficulty.

If you have good sight picture  skills then numbers aren't important to make a good landing. I can make my panel dead and make landings all day long.

Roger, when I am talking about sight picture I am talking about the view out the front of the airplane at touchdown. I am not talking about the view on approach. If you touch down near stall speed your pitch attitude at touch down will be the same if your approach was at 100 or 60. That pitch attitude is what a student needs to learn.

I am not a numbers guy. I teach that you figure out what pitch attitude gives you the number you want for a particular configuration, and then fly that pitch attitude.

[WmInce]

58 minutes ago, Ed Cesnalis said:

Are we not generally referring to the picture framed within the wind screen frame and how it changes?  

Yes.

"Sight picture" is just that . . . what the pilot sees in front of him/her. But realistically, during the landing phase, there are so many other parameters taking place, sight picture is the least of my concern. If all of those other parameters are managed well, that "sight picture" will look just fine and pretty consistant.

[WmInce]

11 minutes ago, FlyingMonkey said:

The problem is that with new pilots is if you try to teach them out of their depth, they won't get it right anyway and then when the chips are down they will revert to POOR technique.  I think it's better to teach them a technique that they can master and lock into muscle memory so if they do revert, they do so to something they can do well.

Concur.

[WmInce]

20 minutes ago, Tom Baker said:

When landing you are trying to increase the pitch attitude without ballooning, with the hopeful; outcome of being near stall speed a fraction of an inch above the ground. That pitch attitude is the sight picture that a student needs to develop from the beginning. By using 15° flaps for a new student they are able to develop this sight picture from the beginning. If you are landing 5-7 knots above stall speed you will not have that that sight picture. Later when you start doing landings that require a higher degree of skill, like 30° or more flaps, you will already have the basic sight picture that you need.

Concur mostly.

But regarding the 5-7 knots, it can be taught, just to be patient and let that speed "bleed off," untl that sight picture appears normal (good landing attitude) and a normal landing finish takes place. As proficiency increases, the 5-7 knots above stall should disappear, but inthe meantime, I see nothing wrong with starting out that way. I think most CFI's teach it that way.

[WmInce]

22 minutes ago, Tom Baker said:

I am not a numbers guy. I teach that you figure out what pitch attitude gives you the number you want for a particular configuration, and then fly that pitch attitude.

I like that, but you certainly should be a "numbers guy," until over the thresold or at least when the runway is made. Concur?

[sandpiper]

9 minutes ago, WmInce said:

I like that, but you certainly should be a "numbers guy," until over the thresold or at least when the runway is made. Concur?

I am a numbers guy once on final. Before that I just fly the plane. I may have different speeds in the pattern depending on traffic. Do I need to be faster or slower. Those of us who have flown for a while can do that. A newby, however, needs structure until they have the necessary experience to deviate

[Tom Baker]

15 minutes ago, WmInce said:

I like that, but you certainly should be a "numbers guy," until over the thresold or at least when the runway is made. Concur?

I use numbers to establish my pitch attitude, but after it has been established I use mostly pitch. I do take an ocasional glance at the airspeed. If after one of the glances the speed needs adjusted I change the pitch by looking outside the airplane, then take another glance. I know this wouldn't work well with the stuff you used to fly, but it has served me well flying light aircraft over the past 40 years.

[WmInce]

9 minutes ago, Tom Baker said:

I use numbers to establish my pitch attitude, but after it has been established I use mostly pitch. I do take an ocasional glance at the airspeed. If after one of the glances the speed needs adjusted I change the pitch by looking outside the airplane, then take another glance. I know this wouldn't work well with the stuff you used to fly, but it has served me well flying light aircraft over the past 40 years.

Nah . . . we're the same . . . your're a numbers guy. . . . 

By the way, that's not much different than anything I have flown.

[sandpiper]

6 minutes ago, Tom Baker said:

I use numbers to establish my pitch attitude, but after it has been established I use mostly pitch. I do take an ocasional glance at the airspeed. If after one of the glances the speed needs adjusted I change the pitch by looking outside the airplane, then take another glance. I know this wouldn't work well with the stuff you used to fly, but it has served me well flying light aircraft over the past 40 years.

Tom, you are right. Exactly what I do. I guess I don't even think about it anymore.

[Ed Cesnalis]

A CTSW is a pitch attitude airplane.  No numbers or panel required.  1.3 x Vso = level drooped wing tip.   

 

My airspeed indicator went TU on one of my first flights.  I had less than 10 hours but wasn't uncomfortable approaching without numbers even then.

[sandpiper]

Just now, Ed Cesnalis said:

A CTSW is a pitch attitude airplane.  No numbers or panel required.  1.3 x Vso = level drooped wing tip.   

True, but I still like to verify. I keep my cross check moving until I flare. Then I no longer care what the airspeed shows. Same on take off. I don't look at airspeed until climbing when I use it to verify my pitch is correct.

So, everyone is right!!

[WmInce]

3 minutes ago, sandpiper said:

True, but I still like to verify. I keep my cross check moving until I flare. Then I no longer care what the airspeed shows. Same on take off. I don't look at airspeed until climbing when I use it to verify my pitch is correct.

Right on! . . . 

[Roger Lee]

Your right speed isn't always the culprit, but if it was dropped at all then speed was an issue and may be combined with height issue. That boils down to just height off the runway. 6" no harm no foul, 6' cost lots of money.

 

This still boils down to telling newbies in a CT to attempt full stall full flap landings right up front with no advanced knowledge or skills in a CT. All most all have had issues trying to learn this aircraft this way. Doing it this way was one of the leading factors in the early CT days that caused so many crushed gear and for LSA insurance to climb.

There must be a learning curve to advanced skill sets or you aren't doing anyone any favors. 

You could count the full stall full flap landers here on one hand.

[Tom Baker]

1 hour ago, Roger Lee said:

Your right speed isn't always the culprit, but if it was dropped at all then speed was an issue and may be combined with height issue. That boils down to just height off the runway. 6" no harm no foul, 6' cost lots of money.

 

This still boils down to telling newbies in a CT to attempt full stall full flap landings right up front with no advanced knowledge or skills in a CT. All most all have had issues trying to learn this aircraft this way. Doing it this way was one of the leading factors in the early CT days that caused so many crushed gear and for LSA insurance to climb.

There must be a learning curve to advanced skill sets or you aren't doing anyone any favors. 

You could count the full stall full flap landers here on one hand.

Where did you come with the idea that someone wants to teach full stall full flap landings to someone who is learning to fly the airplane?

What I teach is touching down near stall speed for the configuration. I start someone new with 15° flaps. I don't even use any other flap setting until they are almost ready to solo. Then I will do a lesson of landings with the different flap settings, so they would know what to expect if they select the wrong flap setting. This has worked well for all of my students in any aircraft including the CT.

One thing I don't teach is touching down with the speed 5-7 knots above stall speed, except for wheel landings in a tail wheel aircraft. My standard statement to students is get as close to the ground as you can and hold it off as long as you can.

 

[Ed Cesnalis]

3 hours ago, Roger Lee said:

Your right speed isn't always the culprit, but if it was dropped at all then speed was an issue and may be combined with height issue. That boils down to just height off the runway. 6" no harm no foul, 6' cost lots of money.

 

This still boils down to telling newbies in a CT to attempt full stall full flap landings right up front with no advanced knowledge or skills in a CT. All most all have had issues trying to learn this aircraft this way. Doing it this way was one of the leading factors in the early CT days that caused so many crushed gear and for LSA insurance to climb.

There must be a learning curve to advanced skill sets or you aren't doing anyone any favors. 

You could count the full stall full flap landers here on one hand.

Rog,  you repeat without considering the opposing point of view.

Another point of view is that min speed landings are not really advanced.  They never have been historically and our CTs haven't broken that mold.

 

[Runtoeat]

Although i understood pitch controlled speed and power controlled altitude, my initial training never included practice with this to REALLY understand how important this relationship was to the final phase of landing.  My description of my friend working with me to use power to hold me off the runway and pitch to control my speed was a watershed moment for me, years after I had received my LS certificate.  His method of not touching down but just having me stabilize my speed and height off the runway worked really well.  This slowed everything down to a point where I could finally understand how pitch and power controlled my height and speed during the final stage close to the ground.  Initially, I just approached the runway and practiced keeping a stable height of about 10' off the runway and a speed of 50kts and then increased power and departed without landing.  After a number of approaches and stable runs down the runway without landing, I then practiced reduced power to slowly reduce height and worked with back pressure to bleed off speed and keep the nose raised off the runway and landing.  Funny that after making hundreds of landings, I felt that I was basically learning how to land.  All was slowed down and controlled and with the important factor to spend as much time as needed, as Tom mentions.  Question for the CFI's:  How do you work with pitch and power with your students? 

[Tom Baker]

1 hour ago, Runtoeat said:

 Question for the CFI's:  How do you work with pitch and power with your students? 

I typically introduce the pitch and power relationship about lesson #3, but I don't normally teach it as you described right above the runway.

[Runtoeat]

Tom, understand about "right above runway" for a new student.  Phil knows me and knows my capabilities and he felt comfortable working with me down low.