Flare and Touchdown

Finally, a place for sport pilot instructors and/or wannabees to talk about instructing.

Moderator: drseti

Merlinspop
Posts: 943
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 2:48 pm
Location: WV Eastern Panhandle

Re: Flare and Touchdown

Postby Merlinspop » Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:45 am

Jim - Absolutely different set of circumstances. I was just referring to the visual effect (illusion, possibly) when watching the heavier aircraft come in. Gravely Point used to be a great place to have lunch. One day I was watching the airliners using the main N-S runway with my binoculars (sadly, I forget my scanner), when I noticed the fire trucks rolling across. I panned over to what is now Rwy 22 and saw a Cessna 210 that had just performed a wheels-up landing. The pilot was literally jumping up and down, clearly displeased with the situation.
- Bruce

Wm.Ince
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:27 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL

Re: Flare and Touchdown

Postby Wm.Ince » Mon Jul 17, 2017 10:03 am

Jim Hardin wrote:
Merlinspop wrote:. . . "In fact somewhere between 50 and 100 feet above touchdown elevation, an airliner cannot make a go around without hitting the runway." . . .

That is absolutely and unequivocally not true.
Bill Ince
CTSW
Retired Heavy Equipment Operator

Jim Hardin
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:33 pm

Re: Flare and Touchdown

Postby Jim Hardin » Tue Jul 18, 2017 5:10 am

Merlinspop wrote:Jim - Absolutely different set of circumstances. I was just referring to the visual effect (illusion, possibly) when watching the heavier aircraft come in. Gravely Point used to be a great place to have lunch. One day I was watching the airliners using the main N-S runway with my binoculars (sadly, I forget my scanner), when I noticed the fire trucks rolling across. I panned over to what is now Rwy 22 and saw a Cessna 210 that had just performed a wheels-up landing. The pilot was literally jumping up and down, clearly displeased with the situation.


Sorry if my reply sounded harsh, it was not meant to be that way!

What you described was an interesting observation and something I will have to look for when I get the chance.

Jim Hardin
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 1:33 pm

Re: Flare and Touchdown

Postby Jim Hardin » Tue Jul 18, 2017 5:17 am

Wm.Ince wrote:
Jim Hardin wrote:
Merlinspop wrote:. . . "In fact somewhere between 50 and 100 feet above touchdown elevation, an airliner cannot make a go around without hitting the runway." . . .

That is absolutely and unequivocally not true.


Depends on the circumstances and by that I mean the aircraft and any local variables.

I have never flown anything that heavy, 12.5 was my max but this is what was taught by a couple of airline pilots who taught my ATP class and something I have heard mentioned by at least 2 FAA inspectors on check rides.

If you know some Heavy Drivers that dispute that, I am always open to discarding old myths!

User avatar
FastEddieB
Posts: 2036
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:33 pm
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA

Re: Flare and Touchdown

Postby FastEddieB » Tue Jul 18, 2017 6:30 am

A single data point:

https://youtu.be/MW7AbEwxmTw
Fast Eddie B.
Sky Arrow 600 E-LSA • N467SA
FastEddieB@mac.com

User avatar
MrMorden
Posts: 1638
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:28 am
Location: Athens, GA

Re: Flare and Touchdown

Postby MrMorden » Tue Jul 18, 2017 8:32 am

Jim Hardin wrote:
Wm.Ince wrote:
Jim Hardin wrote:

That is absolutely and unequivocally not true.


If you know some Heavy Drivers that dispute that, I am always open to discarding old myths!


You just heard from one, and he was "unequivocal". ;)
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW

3Dreaming
Posts: 1818
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:13 pm
Location: noble, IL USA

Re: Flare and Touchdown

Postby 3Dreaming » Tue Jul 18, 2017 8:44 am

When Bill says, "Retired Heavy Equipment Operator", he's not talking about excavators.

Wm.Ince
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:27 pm
Location: Clearwater, FL

Re: Flare and Touchdown

Postby Wm.Ince » Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:58 am

Jim Hardin wrote:Depends on the circumstances and by that I mean the aircraft and any local variables.
I have never flown anything that heavy, 12.5 was my max but this is what was taught by a couple of airline pilots who taught my ATP class and something I have heard mentioned by at least 2 FAA inspectors on check rides.
If you know some Heavy Drivers that dispute that, I am always open to discarding old myths!

First off, we're not talking about "light twins" here (MTOGW =<12,500 lbs.).

Secondly, it is standard practice and company policy that turbo-jet engines be "spooled up" at an absolute altitude of no less than 500' agl. If any one of those 4 references (2 "airline pilots" or 2 FAA inspectors) were implying anything different than that, then they were putting out misleading information.

If a go-around maneuver was started at 50-100 agl with unspooled engines, the airplane may touchdown, but that would be the result of gross error and goes against established procedures. There is a good reason Boeing, Airbus and McDonnell-Douglas published procedures for spooled up engines at 500'. That reason is to ensure immediate engine response when a go-around maneuver is selected. For one reason or another, if a go-around is initiated, a commercial airliner should be able to complete the maneuver without contacting the runway surface (even at 50'). An exception, of course, would be unintentional flight into a microburst (windshear) event.

All the heavy aircraft I have flown, DC-9 up to A-330 (14,000+ hrs), have been capable of a touchdown free, go-around maneuver below 50', some well below that.
Engines spooled up, as per established/required procedures, make it a non-event . . . as long as all engines are turning!
Last edited by Wm.Ince on Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bill Ince
CTSW
Retired Heavy Equipment Operator


Return to “Instructors' Corner”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest