Look Outside

[lownslow]

I haven't fully developed the "feel" for centering the ball... I am getting better but still need that instrument.

You can feel it primarily with your butt, just apply a little more rudder on whichever cheek is feeling more pressure against the seat. This is exactly where the term, "Flying by the seat of your pants," comes from.

Having said that, I've found if an airplane has an extra cushy seat it can be easier to judge slips and skids by feeling which way your hips roll in the turn. Once again, whichever way they go just apply a little more rudder until the feeling goes away.

Neither one of the methods above work unless you're relaxed.

LnS.

[coreydotcom]

I haven't fully developed the "feel" for centering the ball... I am getting better but still need that instrument.

You can feel it primarily with your butt, just apply a little more rudder on whichever cheek is feeling more pressure against the seat. This is exactly where the term, "Flying by the seat of your pants," comes from.

Having said that, I've found if an airplane has an extra cushy seat it can be easier to judge slips and skids by feeling which way your hips roll in the turn. Once again, whichever way they go just apply a little more rudder until the feeling goes away.

Neither one of the methods above work unless you're relaxed.

LnS.

Thanks, I'll try that!

[Colonel Sanders]

I haven't fully developed the "feel" for centering the ball

Pretty much what LnS said.

The problem is that you are all tensed up, and you can't
feel when the ball is out of the center because your back
muscles are so tight. You're probably exhausted at the
end of an hour flight, correct?

As you get some more time in the cockpit, and become
more relaxed, it's quite easy to tell when the ball is out.

What I do is tighten up my lap belt so that my @ss is
securely bolted to the airframe. When I am doing acro
(and especially negative G) I know when my lap belt is
tight enough, that I burst blood vessels where the lap is
in contact with my upper legs.

You probably don't need it that tight for upright straight
and level, but you get the idea.

When the ball is not centered, your shoulders will shift
back and forth on top of your hips which are securely
belted to the seat. If my right shoulder is painfully pushed
to the door on the right side, it's probably time for a little
right rudder.

The Pitts doesn't even come with a ball, let alone any
gyroscopic flight instruments. It doesn't need them.

[iflyforpie]

The ball in my 206 is about a 1/4 out from level. One day I am going to level it, but I don't really look at it; I can feel when the plane is uncoordinated.

As for airspeed, we usually lose an ASI every year or two to mud daubers. We have the automatic pitot covers, but sometimes they don't fall right back over the pitot opening. I don't have any problems flying without because if I do all of the same stuff I normally do, the plane flies the way it normally does.

Not too many planes I know of will stall or spin without a pilot yanking back on the stick. For landing, you shouldn't be looking at the ASI anyways. Those that keep even a proper approach speed all the way to touchdown will still find themselves landing flat or floating.

Of course, look outside. That's why you wanted to become a pilot in the first place, right?

[Rookie50]

I haven't fully developed the "feel" for centering the ball

Pretty much what LnS said.

The problem is that you are all tensed up, and you can't
feel when the ball is out of the center because your back
muscles are so tight. You're probably exhausted at the
end of an hour flight, correct?

As you get some more time in the cockpit, and become
more relaxed, it's quite easy to tell when the ball is out.

.

Well; I've learned something today. Awhile back I did an eval - testing me - flight with someone, low level, in terrain; in a much bigger and more powerful
AC than I'm used to; needing a lot more rudder. They toasted me in my report for the ball being way out of center.....but I was so focused and tense trying to learn to fly this big single in terrain properly; I did'nt even notice; and wondered why. Too many new inputs to relax!

[Cat Driver]

Awhile back I did an eval - testing me - flight with someone, low level, in terrain; in a much bigger and more powerful
AC than I'm used to;

I am curious about this.

What exactly do you consider low level in terrain?

And why would you be doing this?

[Rookie50]

Let's put it this way, to answer your concern. It was a standardized test by very experienced people within safe parameters, for a service opportunity. Learned a lot.

[Cat Driver]

So what you are saying is some company did a low level flying evaluation on you before you were able to properly fly the airplane you were being tested on?

[habs.fan]

For landing, you shouldn't be looking at the ASI anyways. Those that keep even a proper approach speed all the way to touchdown will still find themselves landing flat or floating.

I feel like if you keep your approach speed all the way to touchdown, you're either doing magic or the earth is going to throw you back up in the air...the plane is still able to fly at the approach speed, when you touchdown in a small plane you should be at a speed where the plane is having difficulty flying or has stopped flying, no? Unless you slam the thing down and lose all that energy you had while in the air through your landing gear, but that'd just be ugly.

[Colonel Sanders]

For most light trainers, I find that if you precisely fly the
correct approach speed on final - and don't let it decrease
on very short final, a common error - pull the throttle to
idle as you pass over the runway threshold.

Gently and slowly flare to the landing attitude, position it
6 inches above the runway, and try to maintain that
height - try to stop it from landing.

Of course, a constant speed prop has more drag than a
fixed pitch prop, and the idle RPM setting can make a
huge difference, too.

Hell, that's how I do a short-field landing in the L39. But
I wouldn't recommend it in a 300/400 series Cessna without
VG's.

[coreydotcom]

Yeah, I was taught trim for 60-65 (depending on conditions, adding more if it's gusting, etc.) and when you are trimmed for the speed just keep the same "assiette" (picture out the front) and the speed will stay the same - I must admit I do cheat and look at the ASI a little bit but I wouldn't say I'm focused inside at all. I am very much aware of outside.

The thing I had the hardest time with prior to soloing was that whereas CS keeps it level at 6 inches off the ground I was probably doing that at 50 feet because I found that the "assiette" would change when close to the runway because the runway just looked like it was charging at you.... by looking further down the runway, and just with a little more experience, I would say this is no longer a problem... I wouldn't say I do it at 6 inches just yet... maybe 5-10 feet. My instructor said to aim for 5 feet... I guess I can do better and one day do 6 inches... we'll see.

I am also very happy that from landing #1 I was taught that the yoke was your speed and the throttle your altitude. I can easily someone coming in short and pulling back, stalling, and crashing. I am happy this isn't even in my thought process.

[akoch]

For most light trainers, I find that if you precisely fly the
correct approach speed on final - and don't let it decrease
on very short final, a common error - pull the throttle to
idle as you pass over the runway threshold.

Gently and slowly flare to the landing attitude, position it
6 inches above the runway, and try to maintain that
height - try to stop it from landing.

I was taught that we are done with the throttle when we turn to base. The rest of the approach is power-off. That's what I've been doing ever since. Unless there is someone in front of me flying x-country circuits.

So just I'm clear - should I be keeping some power and then pull it off over the threshold, or...?

6 inches would have been cool I guess I need to go practice.

[Colonel Sanders]

I was taught that we are done with the throttle when we turn to base

That is a more advanced technique, and as you point
out, can only be done when there is no one ahead of
you in the circuit - otherwise you're going to cut them
off.

FWIW that's exactly how I land the Pitts - throttle to
idle on downwind abeam the runway threshold, and
a continuous, descending U-turn. Staying slightly
high to avoid being power dependent. It's a wonderful
thing, and is continually being flunked by CPL candidates
on their flight test.

For student pilots just learning to land ... I teach them
that once we turn onto final:

1) bank left or right as required to position the aircraft
on the extended runway centerline

2) push up or down to position the aircraft on the correct
glidepath (vasi/papi helps)

3) power/sideslip/flaps as required to maintain the correct
airspeed.

4) throttle to idle at runway threshold

5) slow, gradual flare to landing attitude at 6 inches

[tiggermoth]

Cool thread!!

I find when I am flying that I only take quick glances at airspeed, altitude, and engine instruments. But there is probably too many of those quick glances. I find I sometimes have to force myself to quit fixating on the altitude. I mean, its one thing on a cross country where there is more traffic and holding a reasonably accurate altitude is more important, but on "fun" flights around the area with friends, I am usually one of only 2 or 3 airplanes in the air within a 100 mile radius.

For landing, I was taught to close throttle on downwind just past "abeam" the threshold, and trim for 70mph (as per my flight manual) From there, watch the runway and adjust the approach as necessary with only occasional glances at airspeed. Lately, I have been flying a different airplane than I am used to, and I find myself actually watching out front more than usual and less at the gauges, and guess what, I can land on the numbers damn near every time. And, I don't know if it is just luck or the different technique, but I have not once "bounced" this different airplane a single time either. Greaser on or within 50 ft of the numbers, every landing so far has got me seriously thinking about my landing technique in the other airplane, especially after reading this thread and the advice here.

The thing I had the hardest time with prior to soloing was that whereas CS keeps it level at 6 inches off the ground I was probably doing that at 50 feet because I found that the "assiette" would change when close to the runway because the runway just looked like it was charging at you

I have taken a couple guys for rides that had never flown in small airplanes before, only in airlines....and helicopters. One was a fellow helicopter AME, and the other was a helicopter pilot with the company I work for. You want to talk about someone getting tense on short final, you take someone who is use to approaching at only around 20-30kts for their first small airplane ride!! I even warned them both that the picture was going to be different than they were used to and that as we went through about 200ft on final they would get that "runway charging at them" sensation. The one guy was even started for the controls before he stopped himself and grabbed the seat bottom instead

[Colonel Sanders]

I have not once "bounced" this different airplane a single time

Most of the time, a bounce in a light aircraft is a result
of excessive speed on final, and the pilot not holding it
off - or even worse, trying to force it onto the ground.

If you approach at the correct speed (generally 1.3 x Vso)
and pull the throttle to idle, and try to stop it from landing
at 6 inches, it will touch down at minimum speed.

Remember, lift is a function of velocity squared, so the
less speed you have at touchdown, the better - for a
bunch of different reasons, including minimal lift.

[Shiny Side Up]

For student pilots just learning to land ... I teach them
that once we turn onto final:

2) push up or down to position the aircraft on the correct
glidepath (vasi/papi helps)

3) power/sideslip/flaps as required to maintain the correct
airspeed.

Ok, I got to ask you about 2 and three because that's not the coorelation I use. Assuming with push up or down you're referring to pitch attitude, that's what changes your airspeed, power and slips to maintain the correct glidepath. Of course its not that simple, we're talking about messing around with the whores here as my old instructor would say.

[tiggermoth]

Most of the time, a bounce in a light aircraft is a result
of excessive speed on final, and the pilot not holding it
off - or even worse, trying to force it onto the ground.

Like those videos you posted in another thread a while back of those C-172's bouncing down the runway at high speed

I have luckily never been one to try and force it down and always try and hold it off as long as possible. Probably partly due to good instruction, and partly due to being an engineer and having to fix a few nosewheels in my time I have still bounced my 172 a few times, I suspect that maybe fixating on final approach speed rather than the overall approach would be part of the reason. There was the odd "flare too high and too soon: kerthump type bounce earlier on too, but with a bit more practice I have gotten better at judging my flare to avoid those. Of course I was pretty fresh license when I did most of my bouncing, over the last while it seems like my landings have gottem considerably smoother. Like I mentioned in my earlier post, probably looking outside more has helped.

You know, my instructor never did do the "cover instruments" trick to me. Sounds like it is a neat teaching tool though. I do remember though a lot of emphasis early on about watching the nose, and the horizon.

[Colonel Sanders]

Assuming with push up or down you're referring to pitch attitude, that's what changes your airspeed, power and slips to maintain the correct glidepath

Heh. People have been arguing which controls which:

pitch or power for airspeed or glidepath

since before both of us we're born. I'm not going to
touch that with a ten foot pole

Of course its not that simple

No kidding. What people have to have on final, is the
correct amount of energy.

For example, someone is fast on final, on the correct
glidepath. If they pull up to get rid of their airspeed, they
end up too high but with the correct airspeed. If they
push down to get back on the correct glidepath, they
are now too fast again. All they're doing is converting
kinetic energy to potential energy and back to kinetic
energy again. What they need to do, is reduce the total
amount of energy that they have.

Considering (and trying to control) airspeed and altitude
in isolation is silly.

[Shiny Side Up]

Considering (and trying to control) airspeed and altitude
in isolation is silly.

Just keeping you on your toes. I was pretty sure we were on the same page. I just start differently, but we need for the student to get to this point where they realise that controlling both, not just one, is the purpose of the approach and that they're linked together. Add the third whore into the equation, directional control, and the average neophyte has a handful. We could add into your explanation like so:

For example, someone is fast on final, on the correct
glidepath. If they pull up to get rid of their airspeed, they
end up too high and the airplane yaws but with the correct airspeed. If they
push down to get back on the correct glidepath, they
are now too fast again and the airplane yaws. All they're doing is converting
kinetic energy to potential energy and back to kinetic
energy again. What they need to do, is reduce the total
amount of energy that they haveand maintain directional control while they're doing it.

This is where of course if the student hasn't spent some time managing energy and controlling direction at the same time they'll be behind the ball at this stage. Not enough people spend enough time really exploring the relationship between the manipulation of power, the aircraft's movements and responses in all its axis before they start taking stabs at landing the airplane with needless frustration that follows.

[Trematode]

2) push up or down to position the aircraft on the correct
glidepath (vasi/papi helps)

Honest question about this one... The approach indicators: I'm pretty surprised you mention them.

Since I am certain you have more experience than I do, let me share my thought process: My issue with referencing them is that they are almost always calibrated for IFR flying, and usually for larger aircraft -- ie. a 3 degree slope down to the touchdown markers 500' into the runway.

I can't remember who, so I might as well blame TC, but I was told to teach students they should be turning final in a nice square circuit at about 500' feet AAE and a mile out (which works out to be more like a 5 degree glidepath). Not to mention, touching down 500' feet into a runway seems pretty excessive for a small aircraft.

Now, I realize some smaller airports may employ a different set of criteria for calibrating their vasi or papi installations -- but wouldn't it be better to teach the student how to actually judge their glidepath with their eyes, and leave out the lights altogether? Wouldn't the mere mention of the lights at that stage only add unnecessary complexity to something they are already struggling with, given the discrepancies I mentioned?

Most of my experience is relegated to papis at fairly larger airports, though, so if there are smaller ones calibrated for 5 degrees right down to the numbers all over the rest of the world, consider my foot in my mouth.

[Colonel Sanders]

The approach indicators: I'm pretty surprised you mention them

They're just another tool that a student can use, to orient himself.

All vasi/papi, unless specifically stated otherwise in the CFS, are
going to be calibrated for red/white at 3 degrees.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/p ... #aga-7-6-1

Once the student learns to correctly visually estimate his
height by looking at the runway, he won't need the lights
for daytime ops at his home runway. Sort of like training
wheels on his first bicycle.

However, I tell students that whenever they fly to another
airport, to use the vasi/papi in case there are any illusions
that might fool them - wider/narrower runway, upslope/
downslope.

The vasi/papi are really only useful on long/medium final.
Once you get in close, the runway is what you should
be looking at - you don't need to slavishly follow them
to a touchdown far down the runway.