My "New and Improved" Landings, Right on the 1000-Foot Bars

[Bonchie]

Okay... So let's say you see lights at 200', then runway at 100'. You start adding flaps and slowing at that point? Again, not second guessing, it just seems odd.

Also, if you're VFR at 65 knots, is there a huge need to level and accelerate on a go around? I thought Vx/Vy was right in that ballpark.

Thanks for taking the time to clarify...

At 200' seeing the lights, I'm at the DA I assume for your example. If I go below the DA, I'm slowing then, not at 100 feet. But until I decide to descend below a DA or MDA, I'm 90kts. It's pretty standard for slow four seaters to hold 90kts, both because it helps the tower out with traffic and because 90kts is calculated on NP approach procedures that need timing. If I start slowing early, I'm not gonna define the MAP properly with time.

I've already got one notch of flaps at the FAF so once the power goes and I dump the flaps, it slows quick.

 

[FastEddieB]

Has no one brought up that one of the three most useless things to a pilots is...

...the runway behind them?

I know this is probably meant to apply mostly to takeoff situations, but has some relevance here.

Yes, those markers are there for a reason. But I don't think that reason applies to small, GA aircraft, except on a precision approach.

In any case, if an instructor or examiner wanted a student or applicant to imagine the bars were the end of an imagined shorter runway, he or she should communicate that clearly.

Anyway, in my Light Sport, I often aim to put her down on, or even before the numbers, if the approach is unobstructed and especially if there's a displaced threshold. In what must be well over 10,000 landings, I recall coming up short exactly once - on 9R at Opa Locka I touched down a foot or so short and kicked up some gravel. Lesson learned, and now I'm better at energy management and it hasn't happened in ages.

In any case, here's an example of some landings I did in the Sky Arrow when comparing GoPro fields of view:

I know some find that risky - I really don't.

 

[jspilot]

I'm reminded of the phrase, " the two most useless things to a pilot are the fuel left on th ground and the runway behind you." I'll plant in far before the 1,000 feet markers every time it's safe to do so. No use not using that runway. It's perfectly good.

Edit: I just saw Eddie's response above me after I posted mine. I guess we are literally thinking the same thing!

 

[MAKG1]

You guys would really be concerned about landing in 5000 feet instead of 6000?

I've never seen a 1000 foot TDZ marker on a 2000 foot runway.

Just how much runway does that Sky Arrow heavy need?

 

[FastEddieB]

I'm reminded of the phrase, " the two most useless things to a pilot are the fuel left on th ground and the runway behind you." I'll plant in far before the 1,000 feet markers every time it's safe to do so. No use not using that runway. It's perfectly good.

Edit: I just saw Eddie's response above me after I posted mine. I guess we are literally thinking the same thing!

Great minds.

The third is "the altitude above you"!

 

[Kritchlow]

I can think of many reasons not to land on the numbers, one of which is wake turbulence.

Remember... Carrier aircraft aim for the second wire..

 

[jspilot]

You guys would really be concerned about landing in 5000 feet instead of 6000?

I've never seen a 1000 foot TDZ marker on a 2000 foot runway.

Just how much runway does that Sky Arrow heavy need?

I'm not worried on a 6,000 foot runway but aim for the 1,000's approach too fast, float for another 1,000 then catch a gust that send you another few hundred feet and on a 4,000 foot runway you've quickly eaten into your safety net. A 172 like plane takes about 550-950ish feet to slow down to a stop depending on many factors. Plus if I'm going to grease it on there I need my space!


My only point is why even bother taking the chance. Land on the runway as close to the start of flying but, that's what I say.

 

[FastEddieB]

Belated answer to the Sky Arrow query:

SL, standard day, 30º flaps: 360' or 660' with a 50' obstacle.

BTW, it's not beyond me to aim 5,000' down a 6,000' runway if it will save taxi time. Not every landing has to be on the numbers. I just enjoy doing it fairly often and I still hold its good practice for those times you might need every inch of a runway/field/parking lot.

 

[Kritchlow]

I'm not worried on a 6,000 foot runway but aim for the 1,000's approach too fast, float for another 1,000 then catch a gust that send you another few hundred feet and on a 4,000 foot runway you've quickly eaten into your safety net. A 172 like plane takes about 550-950ish feet to slow down to a stop depending on many factors. Plus if I'm going to grease it on there I need my space!


My only point is why even bother taking the chance. Land on the runway as close to the start of flying but, that's what I say.

Ahhh.... But you should also have a safety net before your touchdown point.

 

[woodchucker]

Okay... So let's say you see lights at 200', then runway at 100'. You start adding flaps and slowing at that point? Again, not second guessing, it just seems odd.

Also, if you're VFR at 65 knots, is there a huge need to level and accelerate on a go around? I thought Vx/Vy was right in that ballpark.

Thanks for taking the time to clarify...

Concerning the VFR standpoint, it was drilled into me on a go-around (1) full power, (2) establish positive rate before raising the first notch of flaps.

 

[Fearless Tower]

At 200' seeing the lights, I'm at the DA I assume for your example. If I go below the DA, I'm slowing then, not at 100 feet. But until I decide to descend below a DA or MDA, I'm 90kts. It's pretty standard for slow four seaters to hold 90kts, both because it helps the tower out with traffic and because 90kts is calculated on NP approach procedures that need timing. If I start slowing early, I'm not gonna define the MAP properly with time.



I've already got one notch of flaps at the FAF so once the power goes and I dump the flaps, it slows quick.

Yes. We are talking small piston aircraft not jets. Jets are usually fully configured at the FAF. I know very few light piston guys who put out full flaps at the FAF.

 

[MAKG1]

Concerning the VFR standpoint, it was drilled into me on a go-around (1) full power, (2) establish positive rate before raising the first notch of flaps.

Good luck on a hot day with a 2300 lb 172N. You'll fly into the next county prior to climbing with full flap.

The POH says to go to 20 flaps immediately, and THEN establish a climb. Then milk the remainder off as you say.

 

[DesertNomad]

or even further down a real long runway if you want to avoid a long taxi.

When my wife and I were landing at Harare, Zimbabwe's 15,000' runway we landed on the 1,000' markers. Our friends flying behind us obviously had a better plan and flew 10,000' down the runway at ten feet off the ground before landing... we caught up to them after a long taxi.

 

[OkieAviator]

You'll be at 90 knots (probably), not 60.

I do it wrong then. I slow down about a half mile from FAF, get 10 degrees of flaps in and slowly work down to a stable 60. If I break out I put the flaps at 30, throttle, pitch as needed and land.

 

[MAKG1]

I do it wrong then. I slow down about a half mile from FAF, get 10 degrees of flaps in and slowly work down to a stable 60. If I break out I put the flaps at 30, throttle, pitch as needed and land.

If your speed is changing, how do you time a localizer MAP?

 

[OkieAviator]

If your speed is changing, how do you time a localizer MAP?

So the initial slowdown I try to get about 75 or so, and use that as the time. I can try to keep it at 90 but that's going to make for some really abrupt attitude changes before landing.

 

[SkyDog58]

When my wife and I were landing at Harare, Zimbabwe's 15,000' runway we landed on the 1,000' markers. Our friends flying behind us obviously had a better plan and flew 10,000' down the runway at ten feet off the ground before landing... we caught up to them after a long taxi.

Wow, that would be a long way to taxi. 20R/02L at DPA is only 7500' but when landing 2L, I try to land as long as possible as our hangar is at the north end of the airport just west of the 20R threshold. I'd prefer not to taxi for an additional mile plus. Coming the other way to land on 20R, I try to get it planted, slowed down and on a taxiway as soon as possible. The point is my target landing point changes depending on the circumstances. No sense in aiming for the same point every time.

 

[Bonchie]

I do it wrong then. I slow down about a half mile from FAF, get 10 degrees of flaps in and slowly work down to a stable 60. If I break out I put the flaps at 30, throttle, pitch as needed and land.

I won't say it's wrong. As long as you can accurately do your timing to MAP, whatever works I guess.

I think most (including me) are taught 90 knots with 1 notch of flaps until runway in sight for a variety of reasons. Timing, traffic, further from a stall in IMC, etc. That's what the DPE wanted to see from me as well and he specified 90 knots.

I would say it's a good idea to at least practice doing that a few times because some towered airports are gonna want you to keep your speed up and if you can't they may stick you in the penalty box until the faster traffic are out of the way.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

I do it wrong then. I slow down about a half mile from FAF, get 10 degrees of flaps in and slowly work down to a stable 60. If I break out I put the flaps at 30, throttle, pitch as needed and land.

We're talking about doing this in IFR conditions, so wind shear is a possibility, how much margin of error do you have at 60 with 10 flaps?
Think what would happen if you encounter modest wind shear of 20?