And 3. it can result in a shorter landing distance
I see no way how to make a SHORTER landing in a Warrior from a steeper approach than if you arrive at the numbers low and at minimum speed. The flaps are simply not effective enough. For the Cirrus i can’t say, have to fly and practice more to find out.
Yes,
most films are MUCH too long! Mine from yesterday was 2 GB big … because I didn’t bother to care about the camera.
My idea is to make some instructional videos with the GoPro, like a short checkout for each maneuver and phase of flight. Once I am more proficient in the SR22 maybe I will offer checkouts for pilots who want to rent one but don’t want to spend a week learning to fly it when they’re in Florida for vacation. We’ll see …
What next,
hey, I have trend vectors in the SR22 .. but i have not really learned how to use it YET. Any ideas?
The argument for a steep approach is that…
And 3. it can result in a shorter landing distance because your touchdown point will not be so far away from the threshold (one of the reasons why London City has a steep approach – the other is noise abatement). But this only works if you get your speed exactly right, don’t dive for the numbers and don’t flare (too much).
Sure aviation videos are mostly boring…
Unfortunately, and this is why I don’t watch many of them. People usually forget to edit their videos. Cut boring stuff away, rather more of it then less! And please don’t bother to add music, we pilots (I at least) vastly prefer engine and wind noise and ATC chatter! One to two minutes per clip should be sufficient for 99 percent of all flying videos unless there is something truly spectacular happening.
Hi Peter,
yes, I have heard that one before … at one point the school at our field changed their operations completely to power-off glider landings to protect their students from “engine failure”. I find that a bit silly (sorry). It is very, VERY rare that an engine will quit when the power is low like in the final approach and also I would probably not fly at all, or only in gliding distance from the field if THAT was a valid argument.
As I said:
- this approach looks flatter than it was because of the wide angle (listen to the audio and you will hear, or not hear, that i wasn’t “dragging it in”, the engine was almost at idle on short final)
- I prefer a little (little!) flatter approaches.
What speaks for the flatter approach is:
- that the round out is much easier
- that in airplanes with less effective flaps speed control is much easier
- that it’s much better for short fields (and I fly 650 m fields quite often)
As long as there are no obstacles or other (good) reasons for a steep approach, it’s mostly a matter of taste to me.
but I guess with jets, and especially with the big turbofan ones where the engines need 5 or 7 seconds to develop power it’s a little different.
This is why in most jet operations, a little power is added in the last stage of the approach (against a lot of drag so there will be no increase in speed) to shorten spool-up times. But to me, this is more an excuse for being too fast. Almost every passenger jet in operation now has a glass cockpit. There is always a trend vector in the speed tape that indicates the value in the next five seconds, which is your spool-up time. So if you keep an eye on your speed trend, you will have plenty of time to adjust power without getting below your intended approach speed. It needs some conversion time when you come from the propeller world, but it is not rocket science.
The argument for a steep approach is that
Point 2 can be a runway incursion, or extreme wind shear / turbulence. For example I would fly this approach very steeply, just in case I find something horrible (a downdraught) on final. And a downdraught is virtually assured because one is landing into wind, and that wind is sure to turn downwards as it comes off the cliff.
Sure aviation videos are mostly boring. I don’t know of a solution. I did one Shoreham-Barcelona last year (on vimeo) which was speeded up 16x and it’s almost OK. I didn’t have a straightforward way to speed up more than that (using Vegas v11 – even that video took a week to render) and I think it needs some clever frame interpolation to produce a smooth effect.
Unfortunately one is always quality-limited with any internal camera (unless you have a special glass window) and all external options are a bit complicated – both on a TB20 and on an SR22.
I just watched it again and reailzed that the WIDE ANGLE does not only make it look faster but also much lower. Interesting but somehow logical.
Yes,
but I guess with jets, and especially with the big turbofan ones where the engines need 5 or 7 seconds to develop power it’s a little different. Our “piston shakers” ;-) (translated from german expression) if you have your hand on the throttle and know how to use the trim and have (ever) learned that it’s the elevator and trim that set the speed and that the throttle controls the sink rate … an undershoot is unlikely, although (of course) there’s some guys who will manage to undershoot in the Warrrior.
The Asiana crash is probably more about PSYCHOLOGY, hierarchies and other stuff than about flying. I am SURE that each of these guys could have landed that 777 no problem had he been in the cockpit ALONE.
Peter
(as a photographer) it was my intention to have a part of the cockpit in the field of view, because a film without any reference to the airplane makes it quite boring, believe me. It is it true though that the set angle is a little too wide, i will change that when i test it the next time.
The approach was actually only a little lower and I did not have to use any power to make the runway. But it’s also true that i TEND to fly flatter approaches than other pilots. I guess it’s just a personal preference, but since I used to fly to many 400 m places with my Warrior i found speed control much easier with a lower approach. In places like Helgoland (no obstacles in the approach) it’s a good strategy to “drag it” it in…. in the Warrior I could make it stop within 150 m.
The SR22 is, of course different. Its flaps are more effective than the Piper’s but of course speeds are higher too. While it’s no problem to touch down with 50 in the Warrior you better not try THAT in the SR22. 70 is my absolute minimum, and only when the plane is very light. We’ll see if i can still ower that when I have more experience, but I doubt that it’s safe,
Flying critique is SUPER, as long as it’s not the testosterone drenched bla-bla in the Airport cafe :-) There’s always something to be learned and to improve!
