Here's a little story to emphasize Kurt's recommendation not to use the numbers for practicing short field landings. I have the classified and illegally obtained series of pictures to prove the story, tucked away in a box. A friend of my Daddy was in the tower and took the pictures for official purposes, but then made copies as a "favor".

My Daddy was training in B-25s at La Junta, CO, in 1944. La Junta was one of those sleepy little towns that became a major training base, and the Army created the traditional triangle shaped airfield with extremely long runways. Today, one of them has been closed, and the other two have been shortened, but they're still pretty lengthy. But of course, the young pilots had to learn what we call short field landings, and what the Army Air Corps called "assault landings". I guess from my observations when I was learning to fly at Elmendorf AFB back in 1972-3, that's still the military jargon.

So on the day of this event, my Daddy was assigned as the aircraft commander. Always the show-off, he decided that he'd make the shortest landing of the day. Problem: he landed a few feet before the runway, the mains caught the lip of the concrete and were ripped off, and the airplane skidded down the runway, making 2 complete rotations before coming to a stop. Fortunately, no one was hurt. Whether the airplane was fixed, I don't know, although the damage was extensive from what I could see in the pictures (it's been at least 10 years since I last looked at them). Ultimately, he was cleared by the Review Board and returned to flight status--the contractor was blamed for failing to infill the areas at either end of any of the runways per the contract, which left an approximate 7" lip on all of them.

Because of subsidence of the turf at the edges of runways, you could run into the same problem if you land short at many paved airports. If you're relying on power to make sure that doesn't happen, remember that engines quit now and again. Many of us here have had engines fail completely--not fun! But even a hiccup when applying throttle as you realize you're not going to quite make it can be disastrous.

And that happens. I had the engine stop on short final to Merrill Field's 34 in a 150 when I was a student pilot in January 1973. I had forgotten to add carb heat, and when I thought I needed a little power to make the field, instead of responding, the engine just stopped altogether. Fortunately I was wrong--I didn't need power to make it, and I landed. But it was a typically busy day, and several airplanes had to go around because I hadn't been able to coast off the runway at the nearest taxiway, and it took me a few minutes to move the airplane by hand. So I had the ignominious "pleasure" of clogging up the airport for a time--not my proudest student pilot moment.

So it's much better to choose a spot that is farther down the runway as your touchdown spot. The thousand foot markers on an instrument runway are good. Sometimes there will be something to the side of the runway, like a bush or a light or somesuch, that you can use as a reference.

The only other piece of advice that I would offer that hasn't already been offered is don't rely on your brakes any more than necessary. I've watched a couple airplanes nose over at OSH, when the pilots were trying to show off their short field prowess, and there are all sorts of videos on YouTube that show that, too. There are, of course, pilots who have the incredible skill to feel the airplane begin to nose over at just the right split second that they can release the brakes in time, but don't count on developing that skill for awhile--and sometimes developing that skill seems to mean dinging an airplane or two in the process.

Cary

Airplaneflyer wrote:...Aim a little short of “spot” and transition a little further behind the power curve, and then to really cut the power when I get to my touchdown spot. What I’ve been doing is waiting for the mains to touch and then I’d milk out power. This did come with the caveat that it’s a good way to break your tail wheel in the backcountry, so I guess only use when absolutely necessary.

Good to see that you went up and figured out just where YOUR airplane stalls, and not just go by the book figures.
Hard to tell from the video exactly what you're doing, but here's a technique to try if you haven't already.
Fly a steep approach. Nail the airspeed at about 10 or so mph above your full-flaps power-off stall (aka approach stall) speed.
Power off, you will have an extreme sink rate- moderate it as required using power.
Or push the nose down to increase airspeed and flatten out the glideslope.
But generally speaking, keep that nose up- even if a 170, you should be peeking over the nose to see the runway.
As you come over the runway, assuming the sink rate is easing off from ground effect,
pull the nose up a bit more into your 3-point attitude, then ease the power off to allow the airplane to touch down.
Once it does, power comes all the way off and the brakes can come on.
This is a steep power-on approach, NOT a flat power-on drag-it-in approach.
If the engine sputters or quits, you should be able to push the nose down to increase airspeed
which will flatten out the glideslope enough to be able to make your landing spot.

Besides short landings, this technique works well to salvage a too-high approach.
In this case power is all the way off.
It is counter-intuitive to pull the nose up to go down, so it can be amazing to see how much of a descent rate you can develop.
Just remember with the power off and low airspeed, you have very little energy left to flair with.
You can pull the nose up, which will change the attitude, but it won't do much to stop the sink.
So push the nose down to re-gain a little airspeed as you come over the end of the runway, then you'll be able to flair.

Airplaneflyer wrote:

RKTX wrote:Looks great to me.

Just trying to be like you... literally

Hope things are well man.

LOL Thanks. You're going to need bigger tires to get away with landing as shitty as I do.

Things are great, you?

hotrod180 wrote:...Fly a steep approach. Nail the airspeed at about 10 or so mph above your full-flaps power-off stall (aka approach stall) speed. Power off, you will have an extreme sink rate- moderate it as required using power. ....

"Manipulate the throttle and elevator both proactively and reactively in such a fashion as to maintain the longitudinal pitch axis of the airplane as required. Also manipulate the ailerons & rudder both proactively and reactively to maintain the logitudinal roll and yaw axis as required. Use reserve of zoom airspeed should throttle and elevator prove inadequate for control of descent rate, or should the engine fail."

hotrod180,

Evanr42 uses your very good steep approach technique except that he arrests the apparent speed up on very short final with more elevator and more power. Your explanation was much easier for most pilots to understand. A number on a gauge is very clear and finite. Apparent rate is not even real and certainly not finite. It is therefore very controversial. It does help him get in a bit shorter and still allows him to touchdown slowly and softly. It allows him to use the same apparent brisk walk rate of closure with any small airplane. It's not for everyone, but it has worked well for me and many others for many landings.

Thanks for your comments. I truely appreciate them. Absolutely no sarcasm intended. None. You are in the majority and I am in the minority. I know that. I have known it all along.

Airplaneflyer,

Did we answer your questions?

Contact

contactflying wrote:Airplaneflyer,

Did we answer your questions?

Contact

You guys did great! Didn't expect anything less. I have a few more things to think about for tomorrows flight.

Thank you all!

Two questions. What are flaps, and what's the story behind breaking tail wheels as indicated below?

Aim a little short of “spot” and transition a little further behind the power curve, and then to really cut the power when I get to my touchdown spot. What I’ve been doing is waiting for the mains to touch and then I’d milk out power. This did come with the caveat that it’s a good way to break your tail wheel in the backcountry, so I guess only use when absolutely necessary.

Is it from a chop and drop touchdown? If you're carrying any power when the mains touch (as your next sentence implies) it should be a pretty good landing. In my flapless Citabria 1100 rpm will give me a great start on a wheel landing.

If it is truely short and we have to chop power to make the desired touchdown spot, this is an indication we are going too fast. Yes, we will make it. Yes, we could have done better.

On short final when we appear to be speeding up and we anticipate that we will go long without chopping power, we could pitch up a bit more. This will cause us to descend faster requiring more power. Good. Now we are more likely to touchdown slowly and softly on the spot.

It is extremely helpful, when moving to very short fields, to move from airspeed to apparent speed. To get full disclosure of kinetics, relative wind noise, buoyancy, etc, we need to completely trust our senses. The airspeed indication will cause us to not trust our senses.

The perfect apparent brisk walk rate of closure approach is when we touch down slowly and softly on the spot with power. Aftcg, it is good to touch down with power, if slowly and softly.

When we practice slow flight at altitude, it should not be an instrument maneuver. Making it an instrument maneuver doesn't help us that much down low where there are better indications. We need to get comfortable with how slowing down as much as possible while being reasonably safe rather than extra (speed) safe. In short field work, extra speed safe turns out being unsafe on the other end.

I got a float rating in a C-170B w/180 but never been in one or a straight 170 on wheels or skis. So I'm ignorant about how they handle low and slow. In most other aircraft I like to configure the plane to watch the chosen touchdown spot just over the cowl top throughout a stabilized approach and landing.

Most time for me that's a main gear landing...main wheels or skis on the spot and tail down if and when winds or terrain allow. At least that way I'm on the landing area where I've chosen to touch down. Once planted I can deal with rollout behavior, slowing via braking or tail down, or go around if I'm unexpectedly a potential passenger.

Approach, plant, steer, and stop.

Gary

Hotrod, Man, you describe my favorite approach perfectly.
LOVE showing people how dramatic you can increase the descent rate, while under control with a few MPH/knot decrease.

I had to scratch my head just the other day, someone posted on the SC site asking how well a SC slips after the new-fangled compound (double-slotted) flaps are installed. Unless you really like slipping, I can't imagine why you would need to do so with that set-up.
Similarly, I hear about (and see) people slipping a barn-door-flap Cessna. They're usually carrying plenty of airspeed, nowhere near the slower approach speeds I'm talking about.

hotrod180 wrote:I had to scratch my head just the other day, someone posted on the SC site asking how well a SC slips after the new-fangled compound (double-slotted) flaps are installed. Unless you really like slipping, I can't imagine why you would need to do so with that set-up.
Similarly, I hear about (and see) people slipping a barn-door-flap Cessna. They're usually carrying plenty of airspeed, nowhere near the slower approach speeds I'm talking about.

Just my opinion, but those who feel a need to slip a Cessna with all of the flaps hanging out have screwed up their approach already. Not that it can't be done, and it's a skill that must be shown during various checkrides according to the older PTS and the current ACS, but to use slips in a barn-door equipped Cessna as a regular method of getting down shows poor planning. Slips are not just uncomfortable to passengers, but they can be darn right scary to them. OK, so in any crosswind we're doing a slip at the end of the approach, but that doesn't make them de rigueur for every day approaches. Nail the approach airspeed, start the final descent appropriately, aim correctly for the touchdown spot, and it won't ever be necessary to use slips to get in.

Cary

Slips are a excellent tool for most any small plane. Ya nice to have your act together, but stuff happens . I have not been able to fly the double slotted flaps yet but in a stock super cub, or pacer you can get that nose high enough on approach that you really can't see the touchdown or flare. In the pacer a steep approach with full flaps and slip allowed me a much better view of the runway, people, planes, or critters trying to come under me. I will occasionally slip the cub a bit for a better view or if too high, With crosswinds I never crab the cub/Cessna I do a forward slip all the way to landing that gives me a better ideal of what I have to deal with once I am on the ground, the wind is usually a bit less so if I can hold it on approach I should be able to hold it on the ground. In a light cub or cessna you don't have a lot of time to get both wheels on the ground so you can brake before the wind overcomes the forward motion of the plane and starts to overpower the tail. If I can't hold it on approach best to go somewhere else or land in another direction. Most are trained to crab and kick to forward slip at touchdown so many disagree with my technique. I have stalled a great lakes in a hard forward slip with extreme nose up. It was a non event high wing dropped level and then it went back into a slip. I plan to try it with the cub after the skis are off.
DENNY

I spent a 1/2 hour typing up a pontification on tailwheel damage and it went away. Short version is if you are REALLY slow your tailwheel is below the mains. That will hit first, usually not that big a deal on smooth stuff but a rut or rock off field can make for a bad day.
DENNY

Good point Denny. A good reason to level for wheel landing. The tail is also low in a slow groundspeed downwind approach. Maintaining an apparent brisk walk rate of closure all the way down, at least, causes this really slowness only at very short final where we are beginning to enter ground effect.

Regardless, short or short and downwind, not having to be really slow further out on final is comforting. And it is helpful, being really slow on very short final, in that level before touchdown tailwheel first can happen without speedup.

This spring I am going to try the Cessna MAF procedure more with the cub. Bill White talked about letting off the flare just prior to touchdown and rolling onto the mains. I know a heavy pilot that does the same with a MD 11 for a soft landing. For the original poster: Do a search on MAF procedure lots of great info for a Cessna driver.
DENNY

Here's a link to that Bill White article about the MAF wheel landing technique.

https://bwifly.com/aircraft-insurance/w ... e-numbers/

I have a copy of the original article written by Bill back in 1999.
Unfortunately, it has been added onto and/or otherwise revised since then, I think more than once.
The current version has you setting up and flying a two mile final, which is definitely not required.
I have a photocopy of the original article, from the resources section of the old skywagons-r-us website.
The whole technique boils down to one papragraph, here's a scan of it.

DENNY wrote:This spring I am going to try the Cessna MAF procedure more with the cub. Bill White talked about letting off the flare just prior to touchdown and rolling onto the mains. I know a heavy pilot that does the same with a MD 11 for a soft landing. For the original poster: Do a search on MAF procedure lots of great info for a Cessna driver.
DENNY

This is how I did most of my landings with my citabria and 180. Come in just like I'm gonna land TW first, as slow as I can get, and just before touchdown I'd roll it onto the mains. Worked great for most stuff.

hotrod180 wrote:Here's a link to that Bill White article about the MAF wheel landing technique.

https://bwifly.com/aircraft-insurance/w ... e-numbers/

I have a copy of the original article written by Bill back in 1999.
Unfortunately, it has been added onto and/or otherwise revised since then, I think more than once.
The current version has you setting up and flying a two mile final, which is definitely not required.
I have a photocopy of the original article, from the resources section of the old skywagons-r-us website.
The whole technique boils down to one papragraph, here's a scan of it.

I tried this today and it was very smooth. A bit of a departure for me as I always land power off but it's fun to try new things. Nice to have options.