You will never get consistently short, or accurate, landings using power off gliding approaches. At the risk of offending all the CFI types here, that is an amateurish way to fly if you're going into short, rough strips.

Listen to one of Coyote Ugly's or Highlander's off road landings on video. They have airspeed bled off to nothing, and have that throttle working constantly to control rate of descent to put the wheels EXACTLY where they want them. They are backside of that power curve big time, and feeling that wing make lift. And once close to the ground, ground effect allows the airplane to be flown even slower before touching the ground.

It's not that hard to do once you understand it, and once you have someone who knows what they're doing show you. But, if you want to play with the big boys it's something you need to learn to get the most out of your airplane.

Gump

I think the S-turn is highly underrated.

GumpAir wrote:You will never get consistently short, or accurate, landings using power off gliding approaches. At the risk of offending all the CFI types here, that is an amateurish way to fly if you're going into short, rough strips.

Listen to one of Coyote Ugly's or Highlander's off road landings on video. They have airspeed bled off to nothing, and have that throttle working constantly to control rate of descent to put the wheels EXACTLY where they want them. They are backside of that power curve big time, and feeling that wing make lift. And once close to the ground, ground effect allows the airplane to be flown even slower before touching the ground.

It's not that hard to do once you understand it, and once you have someone who knows what they're doing show you. But, if you want to play with the big boys it's something you need to learn to get the most out of your airplane.

Gump

I agree with that.

Today I was practising slow flight, was doing 40 mph and even less .
So then flew at 50mph easy, level flight no drama at all.
And thought.
Can you come a bit steep (not too much) at 50mph with some power, never reduce power until touchdown?
So that way there is little flare and easier to get the landing at the spot you want?

Just thinking, there's some posters here saying that "hanging on the prop" is somehow not safe or optimum for controlling your airplane's final approach to landing, and somehow violates the notion of "getting the most performance from your airplane."

Seems backwards to me. Are we glider pilots, or airplane pilots?

If you want to get the most performance from your airplane in a situation that calls for maximum performance, then you should be using all that the plane offers ... and an engine and prop are essential to achieving maximum performance ... otherwise we'd all be glider pilots.

Most of my flying the last couple of years has been in a Cherokee, not C-birds ... although I did initial pilot training 34 years ago, and refresher training a couple of years ago, in C-150s and C-172s. Anyway, the Cherokee "hershey bar" wing doesn't like any kind of approach to landing without power ... the sink rate is way too high at idle, and the wing doesn't float once the power is pulled back to idle, period. That took some getting used to for me when I transitioned from C-birds that did tend to float even with idle power if you were even a little hot on short final. I had to learn to control power simultaneous with roll, pitch, and yaw in the final approach to touchdown.

Anyway, I'm now firmly entrenched in the "carry at least some power until you're down to the last foot above terra firma" in your flare, and use power adjustments to control descent rate (and DON't use pitch, as long as your airspeed is stable) ... and what I've found is by doing so it' really really easy to pick a landing spot and consistently hit it within a couple of tens of feet of runway length, every time. Period.

And if a low level wind shear happens, it's just as easy - and safer, in my humble opinion - to pour on the power as it is to start messing with your pitch in an effort to recover.

Is this technique adaptable to the more "floaty" C-birds, and not just the hershey-bar Cherokees? I dunno ... but as Gump points out, it sure makes basic aerodynamic sense.

As gump mentions...work your throttle a the way down until landing to make certain you nail your mark. Slow slow slow. Dont worry so much about what your speed says...its all about your feel when you get down low. Glance at your speed when making your turns around the corners or on final but once your established and say 200' or less to touchdown its all about your touch and feel.

Your an airplane with a good engine. Hanging on the prop is an ok thing.

Sure, try it. Find whatever works for you.

As mentioned more than once, if you need max STOL performance (at the expense of some safety), drag it in with power and roll the dice. Seems kinda risky to me, especially if you need to do it all the time... the odds of the engine coughing or a bird strike add up over time.
NMflyguy, if glider thinking and glider training was good enough for the Wright Bros. all the way to each and every graduate of the AF or Navy test pilot schools to this day... maybe it's not beneath any of us

EZFlap wrote: the odds of the engine coughing or a bird strike add up over time.

Actually, they don't. They're the same every time, save for the varied environmental conditions unique to each landing. Your engine likely sees an envelope of reliability that reaches maximum somewhere in its mid-life with minimums right after and just before complete overhaul. Any factor that will contribute to loss of power is likely isolated and unique (bad gas, no gas, carb ice.) The factors from yesterday don't apply today, unless you count that prop strike.

I guess that's all to say that your chances are equally poor (or good) every time to start out. Then season with attacking seagulls, wind shear, and pissed-off pax to taste.

The other thing in a hershey-bar wing Cherokee, if you're in a situation where a really steep approach is necessary, such as dropping in over a steep ridge or a tall treeline near the approach end of the runway, if I need to I can pull the power back to idle and it's like I'm on an express escalator at the football stadium, coming down to ground level from the cheap seats ... the Cherokee drops like a rock, and then maybe 25 feet above the runway landing point, add in a little power and you can make a spot-on, greaser landing right on the threshhold.

The only way I know to replicate that performance in a Cessna is to do a forward slip, cross-controlling the heck out of the airplane to get the same steep descent profile at low approach airspeed. And severe cross-controlling the last few feet down to terra firma can be a bitch if you get a sudden low-level wind shear!

And as I recall (someone correct me if I'm wrong), some C-birds are placarded against slips when full flaps are deployed, due to blanking of the tail feathers by those big barn-door flaps.

EZFlap wrote:NMflyguy, if glider thinking and glider training was good enough for the Wright Bros. all the way to each and every graduate of the AF or Navy test pilot schools to this day... maybe it's not beneath any of us

EZ - not knocking glider pilots or glider experience ... I just subscribe to the simple notion the World War II infantry "joes" used:

"Smoke'em if ya got'em".

If ya got an engine and a prop, use'em.

Short with needed Aileron control at slow speed

Short / Soft and hanging on the prop to hit the spot..no exceptions




No matter how you choose to land...keep practicing. Maybe one day in the after life, we will be perfect. I try to fly everyday and I learn something new every day. Today I learned that Lowrider still gets sweaty palms....

motoadve wrote:Can you come a bit steep (not too much) at 50mph with some power, never reduce power until touchdown?
So that way there is little flare and easier to get the landing at the spot you want?

The trick is to flare with the throttle. You flare it in ground effect with power. Your ASI will be reading nothing. Feel the wing. Then you're making your airplane do what you want it to do.

Gump

aktahoe1 wrote: Skylane get out your popcorn!

Matt is the popcorn guy.

I'm the cheeseburger guy That's why I'm a fat lardazz and Matt is the skinny guy.

aktahoe1 wrote:Here we go again....

Seems like you guys are discussing a side slip and not a forward slip.

In the 182 and the 180 I like the wing low and nose slightly low for the forward slip. Also having the aircraft trimmed out to the feel you like. Of course then we get into configuration. Flaps, no flaps, etc. The side slip I prefer for X wind landings. Almost like a crab. Again trimmed out etc. You can keep the speed you like in both slips with proper trim and throttle reduction.

As said, here we go. This one is going to get interesting. Skylane get out your popcorn!

Good discussion.

If I'm reading your post right, You have it backwards.

The forward slip is more like "crabbing", albeit while being cross controlled.

The "side slip" holds the windward wing low while keeping the nose aligned along the center line.

aktahoe1 wrote:Here we go again....

I admit I never really tested the short capabilities of my 170 where short field skills would have made the difference between life and death, but I stuck it on short once or twice with 40 deg flaps and power just 'cuz. The uphill short landings are the most fun.

Last year at JC I returned after a short midday outing and found myself high...on life of course. I went around. It's actually kind of fun just flying the pattern in that canyon at JC. Anyway, next time around, same thing. High as a kite. Right about now you should be asking yourself why you're reading flying technique volunteered by this guy.

Anyway...JC is like the mountain equivalent of Portland International so short field technique not remotely necessary, but I was sick of going around with everyone watching so I deployed my Paradrag system to FULL and yarded back on the stick to around 55 mph. At about 200 under max gross, that thing sinks with an alarming rate, and your feet wake up as the controls begin to take more input deflection to get results. Juice a little power on as the grass blades come into focus and soften that descent rate, because there is no airspeed to flare with.

So anyway, this looks cool from about :45 to 1:23, right up until I turned what could have been a nice 3-pointer into a slapstick tail-up rollout.

http://vimeo.com/13111773

As for "hanging on the prop", I suggest going up to altitude and configuring yourself for this type of approach, get stabilized in slow flight with that power on, attitude set, then pull the power off and see what happens and how quickly, what it takes to recover or maintain altitude. Try the same thing in a climb.

At least you know what I meant WSH. YES!

I am know tech guy trust me...I just fly the plane as to what feels correct. Seems like my hand is always on and off the throttle when making a spot landing.

Flying the plane to AK this winter...anyone want to go? February 1st.

aktahoe1 wrote:
Flying the plane to AK this winter...anyone want to go? February 1st.

Want a co-pilot? Not sure if I can get time off work, though.

Slips are in the tool bag but pax don't like them. I will agree with Gump. The shortest place I go into is a fishcamp on the inlet, it is a gravel bar 725' long, I can put 4 pax plus gear into it, but because of lack of wind, and gravel the size of your fist (we have 29" tires on the mains), usually have to ferry two pax, gear and fish out to an airstrip about 2 minutes away and return for the other two. I am hanging on the prop and can put the plane within 5 feet of where I want, I am really not worried about the engine quitting. Having said that I will give the 'glider technique a try because I am always looking for something that will make me be a safer/cooler/more efficient/better-looking pilot.

also, a c-206 don't float, power off, full flaps it glides like a homesick anvil.

4000 hours and still willing to try new things and learn.