As many pilots (including CFIs who should know better) have discovered, "carrying a little power" through the flare and touchdown can make for more consistently smooth landings. IME this concept is often introduced when the pilot transitions from a trainer to something a bit heavier with higher landing speed and greater elevator control forces. There is a perception that this type of airplane "glides like a manhole cover" because the sink rate (at the same glide angle) is higher due to the faster landing speed but the reality is that until you actually reach the critical AoA you can trade airspeed for vertical speed to make a reasonably soft touchdown with the engine idling.
JOOC, why are you not "ready" to land when the airspeed has decayed sufficiently? Are you behind the airplane due to unfamiliarity or you just uncomfortable compressing the roundout to the time the airplane requires with power off? Another possibility is that you're not willing to raise the nose sufficiently towards the end of your flare to use all the energy left (if you're truly stalling and dropping onto the runway full deflection of the elevator is probably not your problem). Or perhaps you're simply starting to flare too high above the ground. I find I get the most consistent landings when I begin to pitch up at or below 10-15 ft AGL depending on the descent angle and wing loading. A common landing mistake is to begin a very gradual pitch up (with associated slow reduction in airspeed) as high as 100-200 AGL. The correct technique is to maintain a constant descent angle and speed during the last few hundred feet until the roundout is purposely initiated close to the ground.
With a bit of practice you can make wheel landings with power off but it is easier if you leave some on until you stick it. I've flown with some pilots who can consistently make a wheel landing at idle from an approach flown at the same 1.2-1.3 Vso used for a three-pointer while managing the energy so well that the airplane was very close to stall as the wheels touched (and no, I'm not there yet).
I was responding to you, not the OP and expanding on what you wrote. No intention to be critical of your abilities, just typical thread drift.
I'm not seeing why that should work but I'm willing to try it and see if it helps. But it seems to me that if you cross the threshold faster you just end up further down the runway when you've decelerated to the speed you want when the wheels touch.
I was just looking at a copy of a 172M POH. Under Section 2 is states that "Normal landings are made power-off with any flap setting desired."
That's pretty much what most everyone flying a 172 does, although I'd make a smooth reduction to zero throttle rather than "chop the power" -- makes life a lot easier on the crankshaft counterweights.
And that is probably what most folks do in a Cirrus, which is a very different plane from a 172 and must be flown equally differently.
That's right -- normal landings. However, in a 172, the normal approach to a landing is best made in a partial-power stabilized approach with throttle reduced to idle when the landing is assured.
I would say the 172 has more windmilling drag and a dirtier airframe, so it loses speed faster than the DA-20 when you cut power. Keeping a bit of power merely makes the plane a better glider, it doesn't make the pilot a slob. During the lion's share of the flare, it keeps the airflow over the elevator nice and smooth, for better control, but other planes are far more likely to benefit from the technique.
Not me. I like slow touchdowns at or near the stall. A touch of power can help you land slower, too, because the airflow over the wing/tail is less disturbed by the prop wash. Think "zero thrust" instead of "zero throttle".
