Getting a "feel" for the approach

[RJM62]

This may be a stupid question, but...

Does anyone have any suggestions for developing a better "feel" for managing descent rate?

I can manage my descent if I keep one eye on the altimeter and VSI while doing math in my head. But if I try to do it purely by visual reference to the ground, I'm almost always high when I turn final. I'm able to correct on final and haven't truly botched a landing in a long time (though some have been less pretty than others), but it seems that after almost 200 landings, I should have a better feel for a proper descent from downwind through touchdown.

I suspect some of this may have to do with confidence level. Another reason may be that my former CFI had a habit of coming in high and then slipping every landing, and I think I picked up some of that habit. And of course, a lot of it is just the need for more experience.

I've asked my CFI to specifically work on this with me for a few lessons, starting tomorrow morning. But any suggestions from the folks here would also be appreciated.

Thanks,

Rich

 

[Everskyward]

I can manage my descent if I keep one eye on the altimeter and VSI while doing math in my head. But if I try to do it purely by visual reference to the ground, I'm almost always high when I turn final.

I would suggest having your CFI demonstrate an approach from downwind for you while you try to observe what it looks like. Honestly, when doing a visual approach I rarely look at either the altimeter or the VSI after leaving pattern altitude. I can say for sure I've never done mental math in my head while in the pattern. Maybe if you concentrate on trying to look outside rather than at the instruments you will have better success. But that is only my 2 cents.

 

[qbynewbie]

I would suggest having your CFI demonstrate an approach from downwind for you while you try to observe what it looks like. Honestly, when doing a visual approach I rarely look at either the altimeter or the VSI after leaving pattern altitude. I can say for sure I've never done mental math in my head while in the pattern. Maybe if you concentrate on trying to look outside rather than at the instruments you will have better success. But that is only my 2 cents.

Do you glance at the airspeed indicator while on approach? (I'm not asking what you teach but rather what you do yourself.)

 

[Everskyward]

Do you glance at the airspeed indicator while on approach? (I'm not asking what you teach but rather what you do yourself.)

Yes, I glance at it but I don't focus on it.

 

[tonycondon]

after getting my glider add on and getting a little experience in that realm of flight i started to really develop the feel for what you are talking about. by judging the angle of the airport wrt to the horizon and feeling the airspeed i manage to do a fair job of knowing when i should be lower or if i should level off.

having VNAV on the 396 helps too

 

[nddons]

My instructor used to ask this outloud, which I still say to myself to this day, "Am I high? Am I low? Am I fast? Am I slow?" This helped me get a gut feel for where I should be on base and final, and it has really helped me smooth out that part of my pattern.

The other think I have learned is to learn my aircraft. In the 172SP that I rent, if I'm at pattern altitude abeam of my landing spot and at 80kts, and pull the power to 1500 rpm and put in 10 degrees of flaps, keep the power setting and put in 20% of flaps on base and slow to 70kts, then turn final, still keep the power in until very short final, slow to 65 kts and put in 30 degrees of flaps when and if necessary on final, I will have a very stable pattern and a smooth landing. The key is to believe in a power setting, and try not to play with the power during that phase of the landing.

 

[tonycondon]

My instructor used to ask this outloud, which I still say to myself to this day, "Am I high? Am I low? Am I fast? Am I slow?" This helped me get a gut feel for where I should be on base and final, and it has really helped me smooth out that part of my pattern.

i do that a lot with my primary students. as we are turning base at 400 AGL over the highway i make a subtle comment like "how are you feeling about this approach?" and that usually prompts them to make some sort of correction to avoid premature impact.

 

[rottydaddy]

It basically takes time, although looking less at the instruments and more at the sight picture is something I recommend highly.
Another thing more important than the instruments is really using the "45 degree" rule... when I am careful to not turn base sooner or later than the point where the intended landing spot is 45 degrees behind me, I never end up too high or close at the top of final, or too low and/or far away.

Also, I like to use the "500 AGL minimum" rule for my base leg, with 500 as a target as well as a minimum. Keeps me from flying too shallow a base leg.

Of course, all of this depends on correct (and consistent) power, trim and configuration- even if I'm going to add more flaps on final, I like to be more or less set up on base for the final descent: the airspeed and descent rate should be plugged-in by that point (for most landings).

All of this is perhaps arguable to a point, but I know for a fact that every lousy landing (from the pattern) that I've ever made first went wrong on the base leg (or the turn from downwind, if I'm doing a 180-type approach for engine-out practice or whatever)... and likewise every really good one "went right" at the same point.

So in summary: turn base at the right point and configure immediately for final, and your final will be better.

 

[RJM62]

Maybe if you concentrate on trying to look outside rather than at the instruments you will have better success. But that is only my 2 cents.

That's exactly the 2 cents I'm talking about. If I ignore the altimater and VSI and pay attention only to the sight picture and airspeed, I invariably wind up high when turning final. A proper descent feels low to me. I continue to have to refer to the altimeter and VSI and mentally calculate against my remaining distance to touchdown to reassure myself that I'm where I need to be and won't experience "premature impact," as Tony kindly puts it. "Crashing into the trees" would be another way to say it.

My first 15 hours or so (this time around, anyway; I actually took my first lesson 32 years ago, which I think may be a record), I was in a Cub at a towered airport that was somewhat busy. My CFI at the time had a habit, because of the slowness of the Cub compared to the rest of the traffic, of turning base early and high, barely past the numbers and only a couple hundred feet below pattern altitude. He then continued the turn into short final into a slip on every landing.

I understand that what was appropropriate in that airplane, at that airport, under those circumstances, was not "normal;" but I think I nonetheless based my visual picture and my "feel" for the pattern and approach on that set of circumstances, and I need to unlearn it.

The other think I have learned is to learn my aircraft. In the 172SP that I rent, if I'm at pattern altitude abeam of my landing spot and at 80kts, and pull the power to 1500 rpm and put in 10 degrees of flaps, keep the power setting and put in 20% of flaps on base and slow to 70kts, then turn final, still keep the power in until very short final, slow to 65 kts and put in 30 degrees of flaps when and if necessary on final, I will have a very stable pattern and a smooth landing. The key is to believe in a power setting, and try not to play with the power during that phase of the landing.

Yes, I've done that, too. I have a pretty good mechanical understanding of what I should be doing and actually do it pretty decently if I concentrate on simply doing it, and check to convince myself that I'm where I should be. But I have to do it mechanically: If I just try to do it visually, I end up high on final.

It basically takes time, although looking less at the instruments and more at the sight picture is something I recommend highly.

Another thing more important than the instruments is really using the "45 degree" rule... when I am careful to not turn base sooner or later than the point where the intended landing spot is 45 degrees behind me, I never end up too high or close at the top of final, or too low and/or far away.

Also, I like to use the "500 AGL minimum" rule for my base leg, with 500 as a target as well as a minimum. Keeps me from flying too shallow a base leg.

Of course, all of this depends on correct (and consistent) power, trim and configuration- even if I'm going to add more flaps on final, I like to be more or less set up on base for the final descent: the airspeed and descent rate should be plugged-in by that point (for most landings).

All of this is perhaps arguable to a point, but I know for a fact that every lousy landing (from the pattern) that I've ever made first went wrong on the base leg (or the turn from downwind, if I'm doing a 180-type approach for engine-out practice or whatever)... and likewise every really good one "went right" at the same point.

So in summary: turn base at the right point and configure immediately for final, and your final will be better.

Thank you. Very practical and understandable advice, especially the "45-degree rule." Seems so simple that I swatted myself on the forehead, actually. Sometimes I guess I think too much.

In the end, what it all basically comes down to is that I'm hesitant to point my airplane at the ground when there's no runway in front of me unless I reassure myself by referring to the instruments. Once I'm on final, I feel more comfortable. I just have to get it through my thick Italian skull that landing starts on downwind, not final.

I'll work on the suggestions here, and the "tricks" my CFI says he has in his bag for me, this morning and for another few lessons. This is the first time in my 32 years of trying to learn to fly when adequate time and adequate money have converged, so I may as well do it right.

Many thanks,

Rich

 

[dmccormack]

This may be a stupid question, but...

Does anyone have any suggestions for developing a better "feel" for managing descent rate?

I can manage my descent if I keep one eye on the altimeter and VSI while doing math in my head. But if I try to do it purely by visual reference to the ground, I'm almost always high when I turn final. I'm able to correct on final and haven't truly botched a landing in a long time (though some have been less pretty than others), but it seems that after almost 200 landings, I should have a better feel for a proper descent from downwind through touchdown.

I suspect some of this may have to do with confidence level. Another reason may be that my former CFI had a habit of coming in high and then slipping every landing, and I think I picked up some of that habit. And of course, a lot of it is just the need for more experience.

I've asked my CFI to specifically work on this with me for a few lessons, starting tomorrow morning. But any suggestions from the folks here would also be appreciated.

Thanks,

Rich

First, you need a session or two in the pattern with the gauges covered -- Your CFI can do that for you.

Next, you need to be able to determine the aim point -- the spot on the ground you are heading towards in a descent. While this is stressed more in the commercial training, all pilots need to be able to look to the left (on left downwind), and on base and determine where the airplane is heading in the current power setting, airplane attitude, and airplane configuration (flaps, gear, etc).

Finally (as has been mentioned already) know the airplane's power setting. So if the C172 you fly descends 500 FPM at 90 KIAS with 1500 RPM and 10 degrees of flaps -- it will do that every time.

Students and some experienced pilots often are guilty of doing too much -- sawing away on the throttle, adding flaps here, then not, pitching up or down severely -- when all that's required is knowledge of the proper power setting and configuration.

You will find that reading the airplane attitude (nose up/down) will come to you very quickly when those other two steady-state controls are applied.

Good luck and let us know how you progress!

 

[Maxmosbey]

Most of this came from Ron Fowler's book on making perfect landings, and works every time for me. That book is like the bible to me when it comes to landing. Sometimes I get sloppy, and I struggle with my approach, both altitude and airspeed, and that just manifests itself when I actually flare and touch down. When I start having trouble, I go home and re-read the book. First off, I pull carb heat and drop the rpms down to 1500 when I am on the down wind leg and even with the threshold. At this point, I know that I want to turn on final, 1/2 mile out from the runway, and at 400 ft AGL. Everything I do from the point that I pull carb heat and drop the rpms, is toward that goal. Flaps, airspeed, everything. As soon as I turn on final, if I am 1/2 mile out at 400 ft, I'm set. Then I can concentrate on three things, lining up on the runway for the wind, getting my airspeed exactly where I want it by adjusting the pitch, then controlling descent with the throttle. Whatever flap setting I have when I turn from base to final is what I'll use from there on out. The only time I add the rest is if I'm way high. This is what works for me.

 

[AdamZ]

Rich this is a great question. I'll relate my experience, In getting my PP we were always taught to approach at 80kts, yes 80kts. Keep in mind that I trained in an AA1C. Everything was 80kts to us. I flew at a class D field then. I was told this was kind of a school policy. The Delta Field had wide loooong runways and I guess they felt that they rather have us make the runway than land short. I can still recall pushing the nose over and screaming down the glide slope. It wasn't till later in my IR training that someone taught me decent speed management.

Now I mostly fly a Cherokee which is very easy to manage speed in. I don't worry so much about Alt or VSI, I mostly use sight and the ASI and use trim to control speed and deccent under the old adage " Power for Altitude-Pitch for Speed. Its a matter of practice practice pratice

 

[poadeleted20]

Does anyone have any suggestions for developing a better "feel" for managing descent rate?

It's all about angles. You have to learn the visual picture of where the aim point should be (and stay) vertically in relationship to the nose when the aircraft is trimmed up for approach in the landing configuration. Then just use throttle to keep it there.

I can manage my descent if I keep one eye on the altimeter and VSI while doing math in my head.

I don't think I can do that, especially since the VSI lags so badly.

But if I try to do it purely by visual reference to the ground, I'm almost always high when I turn final.

OK, we're talking about before turning final...sorry, didn't understand that at first. My technique is to visualize 800/400 AGL windows at the downwind-to-base and base-to-final corners, and then fly the plane through those windows using power to control sink rate. Because of the lags in the VSI, I'll peek at the altimeter, but not the VSI to do that.

 

[dmccormack]

Rich this is a great question. I'll relate my experience, In getting my PP we were always taught to approach at 80kts, yes 80kts. Keep in mind that I trained in an AA1C.

Adam -- what is landing configuration stall speed in that airplane?

 

[AdamZ]

Adam -- what is landing configuration stall speed in that airplane?

Mmmm Dan its been a while since I flew that plane I'd have to go back to my training files and check. Ron Levy may however be able to answer the question as he is pretty involved with the AYA and once owned an A1 himself.

edit: Just did some quick online checking 53kts is Stall Dirty.

Horsepower: 108Gross Weight: 1560 lbsTop Speed: 120 ktsEmpty Weight: 975 lbsCruise Speed: 108 ktsFuel Capacity: 24.00 galStall Speed (dirty): 52 ktsRange: 348 nm

TakeoffLandingGround Roll: 890 ftGround Roll 410 ftOver 50 ft obstacle: 1590 ftOver 50 ft obstacle: 1100 ft

Rate Of Climb: 705 fpm Ceiling: 12750 ft

 

[dmccormack]

Mmmm Dan its been a while since I flew that plane I'd have to go back to my training files and check. Ron Levy may however be able to answer the question as he is pretty involved with the AYA and once owned an A1 himself.

edit: Just did some quick online checking 53kts is Stall Dirty.

OK, so 1.3 * Vso is 68...

You sure were coming in fast!

 

[bobmrg]

At the risk of repeating myself...

Select a spot on the windshield...make one with a grease pencil if no bug has sacrificed his life in the right place...as you turn final, put that spot on the touchdown point (straight line from your retina through the spot to the touchdown point). If the spot moves up the runway (away from you), you will be high; if the spot moves toward you, you will be low. You should know, through experimentation during airwork, the combination of pitch attitude and RPMs that results in the desired airspeed. Your instructor should be able to cover the airspeed indicator while you maintain this attitude and power setting and only uncover it once in awhile to bolster your confidence in maintaining airspeed without an airspeed indicator. Keep the touchdown point in view over the cowling at all times until you flare/roundout/level off.

Ignore the VSI.

I never soloed a student who couldn't fly the pattern without an airspeed indicator.

I sense in this thread a feeling that flaming death is the fate of anyone who does not use the airspeed indicator to avoid the dreaded stall but who knows for purposes of the knowledge exam that stall is based on angle of attack, not airspeed.

Bob Gardner

 

[dmccormack]

I sense in this thread a feeling that flaming death is the fate of anyone who does not use the airspeed indicator to avoid the dreaded stall but who knows for purposes of the knowledge exam that stall is based on angle of attack, not airspeed.

Bob Gardner

Bob...

There's been alot of threads about the Airspeed indicator as the one thing that will keep you from the dreaded flaming death.

Keep the airspeed just so and all will be well...

Are we not teaching stall buffet, mushy controls, reduced noise -- the works -- as impending stall indications anymore??

 

[2256Q]

At the risk of repeating myself...

Select a spot on the windshield...make one with a grease pencil if no bug has sacrificed his life in the right place...as you turn final, put that spot on the touchdown point (straight line from your retina through the spot to the touchdown point). If the spot moves up the runway (away from you), you will be high; if the spot moves toward you, you will be low. You should know, through experimentation during airwork, the combination of pitch attitude and RPMs that results in the desired airspeed. Your instructor should be able to cover the airspeed indicator while you maintain this attitude and power setting and only uncover it once in awhile to bolster your confidence in maintaining airspeed without an airspeed indicator. Keep the touchdown point in view over the cowling at all times until you flare/roundout/level off.

Ignore the VSI.

I never soloed a student who couldn't fly the pattern without an airspeed indicator.

I sense in this thread a feeling that flaming death is the fate of anyone who does not use the airspeed indicator to avoid the dreaded stall but who knows for purposes of the knowledge exam that stall is based on angle of attack, not airspeed.

Bob Gardner

This is the one I leaned in AvCads. Instead of a bug on the windscreen, we picked a rivet or some other feature on the nose. Same thing. VSI is useless. Airspeed, I still give that a half-second glance every once in a while, but that's due to the plane I fly. When my 411 decides to quit flying, it quits flying. Always at the exact same airspeed, though. After a while, the whole thing becomes a sight-picture that you don't think about, you just do. Math? Never give it a thought beyond the 1.3, and that's well established in my mind.

 

[poadeleted20]

Mmmm Dan its been a while since I flew that plane I'd have to go back to my training files and check. Ron Levy may however be able to answer the question as he is pretty involved with the AYA and once owned an A1 himself.

80 knots is way too fast for final approach in an AA-1C. You're begging for a balloon, float, and/or porpoise, as well as landing 1500 feet down the runway, not to mention a frustrating experience trying to make a good landing. The approach speeds recommended in the book and by the AYA for the AA-1C are 70 knots normal, 65 knots short field, reduced as appropriate for less than max gross weight.

edit: Just did some quick online checking 53kts is Stall Dirty.

Horsepower: 108Gross Weight: 1560 lbsTop Speed: 120 ktsEmpty Weight: 975 lbsCruise Speed: 108 ktsFuel Capacity: 24.00 galStall Speed (dirty): 52 ktsRange: 348 nm

TakeoffLandingGround Roll: 890 ftGround Roll 410 ftOver 50 ft obstacle: 1590 ftOver 50 ft obstacle: 1100 ft

Rate Of Climb: 705 fpm Ceiling: 12750 ft

These numbers are for the AA-1B (which I did own) -- the AA-1C (which I didn't) has a bigger engine, greater max gross weight, and larger horizontal stab, as well as different numbers for stall, Vx, Vy, etc.

 

[AdamZ]

80 knots is way too fast for final approach in an AA-1C. You're begging for a balloon, float, and/or porpoise, as well as landing 1500 feet down the runway, not to mention a frustrating experience trying to make a good landing. The approach speeds recommended in the book and by the AYA for the AA-1C are 70 knots normal, 65 knots short field, reduced as appropriate for less than max gross weight.

Yeah thats exactly my point. They had us screaming down the final we had really really long runways there, problem of course is that it didn't translate into shorter fields. I sure am not saying its the way to go. I was trying to give an example of how being incorrectly taught can lead to major frustration

These numbers are for the AA-1B (which I did own) -- the AA-1C (which I didn't) has a bigger engine, greater max gross weight, and larger horizontal stab, as well as different numbers for stall, Vx, Vy, etc.

I trained on both the B and C the only thing I could find quickly on line was the "B" regardless 80 is to fast for either.

 

[poadeleted20]

I trained on both the B and C the only thing I could find quickly on line was the "B" regardless 80 is to fast for either.

Keep in mind that in addition to the aerodynamic and weight differences, the B's ASI's are mph-denominated, while the C's are in knots. 80 mph is not a bad speed in the B, but 75 mph is recommended. 80 knots, of course, would be blazing fast in either the B or C.

 

[RJM62]

Sorry I couldn't get back online yesterday. A friend of mine had a personal emergency he needed some help with yesterday evening.

I spent about an hour and a half doing pattern work yesterday morning, and things went much better. My CFI had me pick the landing point while still on downwind, as some here have suggested. He also had me work on some of the visualization exercises people here have mentioned. I found myself visualizing an inclined ramp extending from the landing point up through the legs, and then just trying to stay on that ramp. (I think Capt. Ron's "windows" are a better visualization, though, because airplanes fly through the air, not ride on ramps. I'll try that one next time.) I also ignored the VSI altogether.

I also realized that I was paying too much attention to the stick and too little attention to the nose. In other words, I was thinking more along the lines of, "How much pressure should I be applying right now," and too little to, "Where is the nose pointing right now?" Picking a reference point helped, as some here have mentioned, as did loosening my grip on the stick.

Another mistake I had been making was overcontrolling on downwind, both leveling off and transitioning to landing speed too abruptly. I'm flying an LSA right now (Evektor SportStar Plus) that really likes to glide, and I was trying to force her down before she was ready, which caused all kinds of inconsistencies from one landing to the next; so I really couldn't get a good feel for a more "natural" approach, for lack of a better word, because I was making too many corrections due to my clumsiness and overcontrolling, starting while on downwind.

What I did this time was basically put her in idle when abeam of the numbers on downwind, bleed off the speed, and just take a few moments while scanning for traffic to observe her natural descent rate (through the windshield, not the VSI) while forcing myself to resist the urge to do anything more than that.

Then once my airspeed was stabilized, while at 45 degrees to the numbers, I looked left, picked up my landing point again, stretched the approach into an imaginary ramp, and rode it to the landing point. I was only off by more than one stripe once, on the last landing, which may have been partially due to fatigue by that point.

This was very gratifying. As I said previously, my landings hadn't been horrible, but they didn't feel natural, either. They were mechanical and felt like I was having to constantly correct and fight the airplane. But my fighting and overcontrolling were a result of my never having taken the time to sit back and learn what the airplane wanted to do.

So I was flying my airplane with a death-grip on the stick, trying to force her to do what she was perfectly willing to do naturally, if I would only give her the chance. Once I lightened up on the controls and enjoyed the view, I got a feel for how she wanted to glide; and then the need for corrections became less frequent, and my control movements more gentle.

So all in all, it was a very good lesson, and I thank all of you for your input and help. I'm looking forward to next time, which unfortunately won't be until late in the week due to work and scheduling conflicts.

-Rich

 

[Dudley Henriques]

Bob...

There's been alot of threads about the Airspeed indicator as the one thing that will keep you from the dreaded flaming death.

Keep the airspeed just so and all will be well...

Are we not teaching stall buffet, mushy controls, reduced noise -- the works -- as impending stall indications anymore??

I sure hope we are ) Pilots who are taught airspeed control to avoid stall end up with not nearly enough knowledge concerning accelerated stall. Angle of attack is the ONLY correct way to deal with stall. Knowing the 1g stall speed both clean and dirty is fine, but is just peripheral information for a pilot who has a good understanding of what actually causes stall.

 

[Ted]

Getting in on this a bit late, and perhaps not offering the most constructive answer as some would see it...

Does anyone have any suggestions for developing a better "feel" for managing descent rate?

The same way you get to Carnegie Hall: practice!

Not saying the techniques others have mentioned are bad, but like with most things that require a "feel" (which pattern work and landings certainly do), it's a matter of not overthinking. With enough practice, this will just become so natural that you won't have to think about it at all. When I first started learning, I know my patterns were pretty terrible, and they were better sized for a 747 than a 172. Now they're at the very least a lot better, and I dont need to constantly think about things, it just comes pretty naturally.

I do glance at the airspeed indicator, but I know when the plane's getting slow due to the noise and the controls starting to get sloppy. Like I said, practice is key. A lot of times when I was allowed to go out and solo, I would just go do touch-and-gos and work on my pattern work. I found that I didn't really start to get happy with my pattern work until about 80-100 hours total time, well past the 45 I had when I took my check ride. And by no means is my pattern work perfect! There is lots of room for improvement, as with every aspect of my flying.

 

[RogerT]

This may be a stupid question, but...
Does anyone have any suggestions for developing a better "feel" for managing descent rate?
Thanks,
Rich

I'm coming in a little late here .. but here's what I've always done. For
me control pressure and feel is a key. I don't have my eyes camped
out on the airspeed or vsi .. but if I use a consistent power setting,
configuration, and attitude, the decent rate will be around 500 fpm and
the airspeed around 1.3vso. Like Ron suggests .. I use an 800 ft
window at the turn to base and a 400 ft one for the turn to final. I
add a 3rd one at about 100 ft on short final where I'm in landing
config and at about 1.2vso. When judging your descent on final ..
keep in mind the spot on the ground that stays in the same place
on the windscreen is where you're going to touch down. I think
attitude and power setting are key.

RT