Which is easier to land?

[wabower]

Could also be the adjustment of the vane. Some never even chirp, some start squealing at the fence.

If you're not hearing the stall horn, you're getting lazy with trim or holding it off. Work, lady, work!

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Could also be the adjustment of the vane. Some never even chirp, some start squealing at the fence.

Dumb question, what is this "at the fence" thing. There are no fences at some airports. I know it is a pilot saying. Is this before the numbers? Is this when you pull the power?

 

[Clark1961]

The Six has adequate ability to absorb vertical speed at touchdown but IMO it's not in the same class as the Bonanza in that regard and they tend to be pretty nose heavy so holding the nosewheel off can be difficult and AFaIK (no personal experience with this) firewall damage is a definite possibility if you're lazy when pulling back on the wheel. I also remember a tendency for the airplane to dart off to the side if your holding rudder against a crosswind when you let the nosewheel touch.

Firewall damage? Hmmm, why do you say that when the load is distributed to four attachment points rather than directly to the firewall as on the Cessna's?

As for "dart off to the side," well it may twitch that way but you'd have to hold the rudder on to get a dart. Relax the pressure and rollout is uneventful. Learning to relax the rudder pressure just prior to nosewheel touchdown is no big deal.

 

[N801BH]

Dumb question, what is this "at the fence" thing. There are no fences at some airports. I know it is a pilot saying. Is this before the numbers? Is this when you pull the power?

Kim... you can basically figure the fence line exists on larger airports at about the same place smaller airports have the grass mowed too..

You should be adjusting power through out the entire landing phase as needed, ie. downwind, base and final.. if you wait till the "fence" to slow down a botched approach chances are the plane is about 2 minutes in front of you.. IMHO.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Kim... you can basically figure the fence line exists on larger airports at about the same place smaller airports have the grass mowed too..

You should be adjusting power through out the entire landing phase as needed, ie. downwind, base and final.. if you wait till the "fence" to slow down a botched approach chances are the plane is about 2 minutes in front of you.. IMHO.

Understood. Hired a CFI on Sunday (yesterday) to practice approaches. He, and I, and our passenger (a pilot) were happy. I joked "why did I hire you then?" because it went so well. Guess I was just brushing off the rust or something. We didn't get to go to the "hard" airports due to turbulence, cross winds, and other things (yes, I know, some would argue this would be great practice but the crosswind was the worst we've seen and we agreed to re-visit in June).

 

[poadeleted21]

Cirrus, hands down, just pull this:

I have to get me some Cirri, 182 and Bo time if they're easier to land than a 6.

 

[poadeleted20]

I have to get me some Cirri, 182 and Bo time if they're easier to land than a 6.

Easier to land, and easier to land well are two different things.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Cirrus, hands down, just pull this:

I have to get me some Cirri, 182 and Bo time if they're easier to land than a 6.

What happened to the cover with the instructions? He showed me all the instructions and called it the "oh **** handle." There were like 6 things to do, a lot for a non pilot pax to pull off if he became incapacitated IMHO.

 

[poadeleted21]

What happened to the cover with the instructions? He showed me all the instructions and called it the "oh **** handle." There were like 6 things to do, a lot for a non pilot pax to pull off if he became incapacitated IMHO.

I don't know, I just googled the image and posted it to be goofy.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

I don't know, I just googled the image and posted it to be goofy.

Oh sorry then. I thought the instruction cover was ugly, but useful. Carry on.

 

[Jaybird180]

What happened to the cover with the instructions? He showed me all the instructions and called it the "oh **** handle." There were like 6 things to do, a lot for a non pilot pax to pull off if he became incapacitated IMHO.

1-5 are nice to do but only #6 (pull handle) is a must do.

 

[bbchien]

Darn it I was afraid you would say so. Back to training then. We couldn't go to the tiny airport as planned, due to weather issues, so I will work on this next month when I see him. I plan to fly the 150 sooner than that, and I'll try then too.

Make sure your stall horn works. We had a check ride over here in whcih the stall horn was ots...so it was done in a local flight school a/c, not the one from Indiana State in Terre Haute. Turns out NONE of the stall horns in the Ind. State fleet work (they're all on leaseback).

This one is going to be very interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Make sure your stall horn works. We had a check ride over here in whcih the stall horn was ots...so it was done in a local flight school a/c, not the one from Indiana State in Terre Haute. Turns out NONE of the stall horns in the Ind. State fleet work (they're all on leaseback).

This one is going to be very interesting to see how this plays out.

Thanks, it does work, I recorded the audio (on a small voice recorder) and played it back today. Heard the horn for only a second on my recorder. The CFI and I then agreed my first landing (no horn) was better.

 

[DouglasBader]

Firewall damage? Hmmm, why do you say that when the load is distributed to four attachment points rather than directly to the firewall as on the Cessna's?

182's are a little more nose heavy, and pilots do tend to drop them on the nose more. I've seen quite a few with wrinkled firewalls.

 

[denverpilot]

182's are a little more nose heavy, and pilots do tend to drop them on the nose more. I've seen quite a few with wrinkled firewalls.

The key is trim and airspeed control. If you're all over the place with the airspeed and don't have the nose-up trim cranked in, it feels very heavy.

 

[gismo]

Firewall damage? Hmmm, why do you say that when the load is distributed to four attachment points rather than directly to the firewall as on the Cessna's?

I said I wasn't sure and from what you say it sounds unlikely that abusing the nosewheel on a Six could damage the firewall.

As for "dart off to the side," well it may twitch that way but you'd have to hold the rudder on to get a dart. Relax the pressure and rollout is uneventful. Learning to relax the rudder pressure just prior to nosewheel touchdown is no big deal.

I guess it was just the surprise nature of the experience when landing a Six in a strong crosswind the first time that left me thinking it wanted to exit the runway. I do agree that it's not only controllable but if you anticipate it and center the rudder at the point in time when the nosewheel touches there's no misbehavior at all. But for someone accustomed to landing a Bonanza (like I was) your first encounter with an offset rudder during touchdown could be exciting.

 

[gismo]

The key is trim and airspeed control. If you're all over the place with the airspeed and don't have the nose-up trim cranked in, it feels very heavy.

IME even when properly trimmed for approach speed it takes a hefty pull to touch down with the right attitude in a 182, especially with two big guys up front and nothing in the back. I know some pilots roll in more nose up trim during the landing but IMO if you're not strong enough to hold the nose off during landing without excess nose up trim, you're probably not strong enough to hold the nose down with all that trim dial in if you abort the landing.

 

[spinfire]

The stall horn in my Cardinal definitely works but I'd say the trigger point is pretty far down there compared to other airplanes I've flown (all Cessnas). I know it works because I've gotten it into some nice deep stalls intentionally. I very rarely hear it on landing and I am landing at the lower end of the speed envelope. I learned to fly in a 172K with a mechanical stall warning horn (ie, the actual air flow actuated horn that whines in increasing pitch). I miss that, both the Cutlass and the Cardinal have the electric vane type stall warning which is either on or off. It still gives plenty of warning and as long as you have the right reaction to hearing the warning beep there is more than enough margin from the stall.

 

[Clark1961]

I said I wasn't sure and from what you say it sounds unlikely that abusing the nosewheel on a Six could damage the firewall.


I guess it was just the surprise nature of the experience when landing a Six in a strong crosswind the first time that left me thinking it wanted to exit the runway. I do agree that it's not only controllable but if you anticipate it and center the rudder at the point in time when the nosewheel touches there's no misbehavior at all. But for someone accustomed to landing a Bonanza (like I was) your first encounter with an offset rudder during touchdown could be exciting.

The Cherokee nose gear support is part of the engine mount so the firewall attachment is not like the Cessna design. Just a little surprised and thought maybe you had some insight since you're on top of so many aspects of aircraft.

One the steering, I'm used to it but have heard others complain. No biggie and I usually like the more positive steering in the Piper. Mine does have a spring assembly that has some give to it when taxiing at higher speeds.

 

[spiderweb]

Lance, thanks for this great write-up! Really thorough; and it reminds me of a decade ago when people like you and Ron were helping me through my baby steps!

A couple of notes:

I chose these airplanes more on their landing speeds pitted against their very different designs. The landing speeds are all pretty close.

For the Saratoga, the book says 75 KIAS short final (very similar to the SR20), but that is a real tightrope walk if you fly that slow. I fly finals at 90, gradually slowing to 80 over the fence. Touchdown was as slow as I could get it, of course, but that might have still been near 70.

I find Saratoga landings difficult because I can't see! If you can see the end of the runway at touchdown, you're about to land flat.

I think it depends on what is meant by "easier to land". I've had enough landings in all the choices that I feel I'm at least minimally qualified to describe the differences but "easier" could have different meanings.

In order of my experience with them:

A Bonanza is definitely one of the easiest airplanes to land in a crosswind and the combination of long stroke, soft spring force that increases with compression, and very good damping tends to produce more greasers and fewer "arrivals" than something with a flexible fixed gear like a Cessna or Cirrus. The nosegear of a Bonanza will tolerate flat or even nose first landings far better than any of the other airplanes in the poll and the relatively wide stance of the mains coupled with a fairly low CG makes it more resistant to side loads than the 182. I've also found that it's common to experience a significant reduction in turbulence as the low wing gets close to the ground making it easier to control during the most critical part of the landing just before touchdown. The stick force required to properly flare a Bonanza is less than half what's needed in a 182 or Cherokee Six (I don't recall how it compares with the SR22) making it easier to finesse the plane onto the runway if you can manage to avoid overcontrolling. Probably the only vices it has WRT landing are the potential to do so with the wheels in the well and the tendency for the tail to wag making it a little more difficult to determine if it's pointed down the runway.

The 182 is very stable and pretty tolerant of landing in a crab, IMO the main detriment it has WRT "easy" landings is that it requires a pretty hefty pull on the wheel to touch down in a sufficiently nose high attitude and it reacts very badly to a flat or worse yet nose first touchdown. The high wing does tend to catch gusty winds more, probably just because gusts tend to be strengthen rapidly within 5-10 feet of the ground. The high wing and CG coupled with a relatively narrow stance (IIRC the wheelbase was widened in later models) does make it feel a bit "tippy" in a tough crosswind but there's plenty of aileron authority to deal with this even well below stall speed. The landing gear will absorb significant vertical speed at smashdown without damage but the legs are fairly stiff and lack any sort of damping so it's not all that difficult to generate a bounce.

The Six has adequate ability to absorb vertical speed at touchdown but IMO it's not in the same class as the Bonanza in that regard and they tend to be pretty nose heavy so holding the nosewheel off can be difficult and AFaIK (no personal experience with this) firewall damage is a definite possibility if you're lazy when pulling back on the wheel. I also remember a tendency for the airplane to dart off to the side if your holding rudder against a crosswind when you let the nosewheel touch.

The SR22's wing seems to run out of lift fairly abruptly compared to the others and the "sidestick" gave me some trouble with roll control at low speeds (that might have been due to my lack of experience with it although I've flown other side and center sticks without that feeling). It seemed to me that asymmetrical braking was often required during the later stages of the rollout in significant crosswinds and that's another thing I never got quite comfortable with. Finally, I believe the landing speed of the SR22 is a bit higher than the others and I think it's less forgiving of high or low airspeed than the others.

So bottom line, I think the 182 and Bonanza are pretty close unless you are in a big crosswind (I've landed a Bonanza in 25G35 conditions many times without sweating it) or you don't have strong arms. I'd rank the Six and the SR22 about equal to each other but well below the 182 and Bo except that I believe it's less likely that you'll get as many attaboys for smooth landings in the Six as you would in a SR22.

 

[spiderweb]

I have only flown a V-tailed, V35B Bonanza, which is a very nice plane to fly and land. Do the straight tailed Bo's handle crosswinds the same? I would imagine they may be better in a crosswind.

Never flown a V, but I have flown the Deb. Such a nice-handling bird, and really fast for the engine it has. I never landed it in anything much more than 10 kts crosswind component, so I can't say how it would compare in something extreme. But anyway, it was easy to land!

 

[spiderweb]

What happened to the cover with the instructions? He showed me all the instructions and called it the "oh **** handle." There were like 6 things to do, a lot for a non pilot pax to pull off if he became incapacitated IMHO.

No, there's one thing to do.

 

[Skylane81E]

Olnly have a few landings in a v tailed bo, it was quite controllable.

Cirrus also easy.

But my 182 is the easiest to stick exactly where I want it, even if it takes more effort to be graceful with the landings.

 

[Fearless Tower]

They're all about the same; none are difficult to land, but like any aircraft, one should fly them until they're in the tie downs. A cub is the easiest thing in the world to fly, but it will hurt you just as much as anything else. Make a good approach, and nearly anything lands nicely.


Expander tube brakes...not really touchy, especially when warm. If you want to try touchy, try carbon brakes when they're hot.

The WWII era airplanes with castering nosewheels (B24, B25, etc) aren't difficult to taxi at all. Just a little braking on one side, then release. With a little wind over the rudders, it can be taxied without much brake at all, so long as there's not a strong crosswind.

Ya know Doug, if you are going to start quoting me and making contrary replies, at least do some research so that you can actually have an appearance of some kind of credibility.

If you had ever flown a B-25, you would be the ONLY one (and I know several -25 pilots, myself included) who didn't think the brakes were somewhat 'grabby'.

But you obviously have never spent any time around them.....unlike many other WWII large aircraft, they do not use expander tube brakes.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[John Collins]

In my experience, I would rank them from easiest to requiring the most skill: Bonanza, C182, Saratoga, SR22. The SR22 should probably be higher on the list, but all my experience in the Cirrus is with the SR22TN which is very very nose heavy and there is a small margin of error on the flare. It landed much better when we put 50 pounds of ballast in the rear. A very common area of damage found in the C182 is the firewall, due to bad landings. The SR22 is easy to get into a PIO and damage to the nose wheel fairing is very common. The Bonanza landing accidents are mostly due to one of two causes, lack of proper maintenance on the landing gear system or failure to lower the landing gear. The third common cause on the Bonanza is overshoot caused by landing way too fast.

 

[Henning]

For me Bo is easiest to look good landing under the widest variety of circumstances.

I've done well over half of my 2000+ hrs in Beech products from Skippers to Sierras, 33, 34, 35 and 36 series "Bo wing" singles, 95 (Owned a Turbo Normalized 1958 Travel Air for 10 years and 1000+ hrs starting at around month 5 and 60 hrs after my first real lesson. I had owned an Eiper Quicksilver, the original with weight shift seat w/ rudder cables attached for automatic coordination. There were no ailerons or upper camber spoiler devices on the wing as now. The only instrumentation was watching and listening to the leading edge ripple for sign of stall. It had the HP 25 hp Chrysler engine and a 5 gallon tank of gas that would get you 120 miles in a slight 10-15 kt headwind and was easily refilled at rural airports and gas stations), 95-55, 56TC, 58 and 58P same wing design fuse series (minor differences in fuselage as well as wing dimensions were made within the 1 door and back door cabins and tank configurations as well as flap sizes and wing lengths/lifts with -A & -B versions, but none of that had a significant impact on the overall handling characteristics within the lines. A purist who really has time in all the Bonanzas Will always take the small body earlier 'straight' non A-B wing for flying (like an E-33C or even T-34B for people like me who go solo or with one 99% of the time and have a twin for traveling) and a big body, big wing for traveling. Tere have been 2 BE 50 Twin Bonanzas, one an over wing with left and center controls with IIRC GO-435s (unsupported engines with unobtanium parts) and one an Airstair with left and right controls and a conversion to IGSO 480 engines which IMO rock seriously. I flew the same engines on a BE 65 Queen Air, The 88 Pressurized Queen Air with the IGSO 540 which is the epitome of Lycoming small engines IMO This was a good solid 340hp LOP all day long, 380 maximum T/O hp, set of engines with as best as I recall with a 2 1/2+ year run of perfect dispatch reliability and no engine work, just accessories and such. This is an operators engine series. If you know what you are doing the reward you greatly with both performance and reliability. If you run them rich and hard you'll see valve problems (mostly hanging open and some burned valves/seats) early and often. There was also an Excalibur Queen Air which is an A65 with 8 cyl IO 720s on it. Finally there have been a few Beech 18s along the way starting with lesson 3 and culminating to this point last August where I got my first experience taxiing it on wheels lol. The August before I was in one on floats.

Then there was of course Dean's Duke. I don't care, I will own a Duke one day if it's just to put in the yard and look at, she's a pretty plane, only thing that competes with mine on style, sheer, and beauty points, but I still think the 310D takes the overall with a solid win in the fine curves department.

Not once do I recall a 'bad landing' or ever sweating a result even when I drove mine on at 170kts full throttles and boost carrying more ice than have have ever seen or heard of a small plane carrying. Once I got out of the build up still flying I had hope of survival, once I got the nose down towards the runway with over 7500' I knew I'd be okay.

Walter Beech was just an artist when it came to designing control harmony. You just ask it with what feels easy and right and it does it and works. The 36 and 58 series airframes are still good and better for cruise stability hand flying IFR but just don't give one that same confidence in finesse. Too bad he left a non steerable/free castering tailwheel on the BE-18. Once you unlock the tailwheel from it's centered pinned locked position, that is the last vestigial thing he gave in to bad behavior on airplanes, similar to ground handling issues with the Staggerwing. Once pointed down the runway with the tailwheel locked though she is just a pretty baby, same on landing.

Cirrus comes in #2 because it has such a range of control-ability with regards to low speed maneuvering.


PA-32 series will never land pretty, just fuggedaboudit, keep the nose up and plop it on, it ends up doing the same in any conditions.

182 is the easiest out of the bunch to break on landing if you don't trim at the bottom of final.

 

[Skylane81E]

FWIW the easiest I've ever flown is a toss up between a chieftain and a duchess, the piper will plop hard if you get slow but is otherwise cake, the trailing link on the beech soaks up what ever and makes you look like a hero.

 

[Henning]

Make sure your stall horn works. We had a check ride over here in whcih the stall horn was ots...so it was done in a local flight school a/c, not the one from Indiana State in Terre Haute. Turns out NONE of the stall horns in the Ind. State fleet work (they're all on leaseback).

This one is going to be very interesting to see how this plays out.

What planes are they using? Her 150 is a simple reed, just suck on it and it should sound off, Or If you have runway to spare you can always over rotate below flying speed and test it real quick.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

No, there's one thing to do.

Here are the six things I was telling you about:

 

[Henning]

The only one they needed was step 3; I hope they figure out to pull the handle hard.

 

[j1b3h0]

Some really nice pilot told me on Saturday that if I can land a 150 that is tougher than most of the other planes (to land it well). They were all flying Beechcraft, they are called the Beech Boys. They flew 4 ship formations, precise flying, loads of experience, what a fun day.

Late to the party, sorry. Kim, I agree with the Bonanza pilot about the 150...it's harder to land really well than the others mentioned. But if you're a pilot, they're all pretty easy. When I say really well, I mean in the touchdown zone, almost fully stalled, tracking exactly over the centerline, with the stick back. As an aside, my younger brother is one of the Beech Boys.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Late to the party, sorry. Kim, I agree with the Bonanza pilot about the 150...it's harder to land really well than the others mentioned. But if you're a pilot, they're all pretty easy. When I say really well, I mean in the touchdown zone, almost fully stalled, tracking exactly over the centerline, with the stick back. As an aside, my younger brother is one of the Beech Boys.

I wonder if I met him on Saturday. There were at least 12 pilots there, might have been closer to 20 total, not all Beech Boys though. At one of the de-briefs I asked where the Beech Girls were. I was the only female pilot there that I could tell.

 

[j1b3h0]

I wonder if I met him on Saturday. There were at least 12 pilots there, might have been closer to 20 total, not all Beech Boys though. At one of the de-briefs I asked where the Beech Girls were. I was the only female pilot there that I could tell.

His name is Bruce and he flies 51C. He's also a most skillful formation pilot.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

His name is Bruce and he flies 51C. He's also a most skillful formation pilot.

I'll find out. (I'm bad with names and I met a lot of pilots, I'll ask my friend if I met Bruce or not.)

 

[Jaybird180]

Here are the six things I was telling you about:

I thought they were sequential. There's actually only 2 steps you HAVE to do, which is remove cover and pull handle. I was breifed that engine cutoff will be automatic and secure restraints...well if you're not buckled in by now it aint gonna happen. Master off - maybe, maybe not...I'd leave it on if I wanted to make a mayday call, but that's just me.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

I thought they were sequential. There's actually only 2 steps you HAVE to do, which is remove cover and pull handle. I was breifed that engine cutoff will be automatic and secure restraints...well if you're not buckled in by now it aint gonna happen. Master off - maybe, maybe not...I'd leave it on if I wanted to make a mayday call, but that's just me.

Dunno, the pilot himself told me mixture and power both to off (pull both levers) then pull cover off then pull handle.

 

[Jaybird180]

Anyone with a Cirrus POH know if the engine will cutoff when the handle is pulled?

 

[Henning]

Anyone with a Cirrus POH know if the engine will cutoff when the handle is pulled?

I don't believe it does because people have been able to alter their T/D with power.

 

[Jaybird180]

I flew a new G3 with a Cirrus rep and he strongly implied that it will.

 

[Skylane81E]

Ask yourself how would such a system work?

Wouldnt a failure mode be an engine crap out?