Page 2 of 4
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:45 am
by Merlinspop
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.
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 10:03 am
by Wm.Ince
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.
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 5:10 am
by Jim Hardin
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.
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 5:17 am
by Jim Hardin
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!
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 6:30 am
by FastEddieB
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 8:32 am
by MrMorden
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".
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 8:44 am
by 3Dreaming
When Bill says, "Retired Heavy Equipment Operator", he's not talking about excavators.
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:58 am
by Wm.Ince
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 touch down, 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 initiated. For one reason or another, once a go-around is started, 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 encounter 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 touch down 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!
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 7:11 am
by Jim Hardin
Sorry I haven't been able to get back sooner!
'Heavy equipment operator' is a bulldozer operator to me
Cute but misleading.
Next question, have you personally ever done a go around in an A330, at or near 400,000 lbs, from 50 feet in actual (not simulated) conditions?
Not being a smart a__ but I can claim a go around in a glider when most would not consider it impossible. Only did it once and not enough energy left for second one...
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 9:03 am
by drseti
Bob Hoover used to demonstrate not just go-arounds, but a full blown touch-and-go, followed by a traffic pattern and landing, with both props feathered in a Shrike Commander biz twin! It was part of his Energy Management airshow act. I once saw him do his (1970s) in California. The airshow announcer was Chuck Yeager. As Hoover rolled to a stop at airshow center, stepped onto the wing and doffed his famous straw hat, Yeager said over the PA "ladies and gentlemen, let's have a round of applause for the world's second-greatest pilot!"
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 9:11 am
by rsteele
drseti wrote:Bob Hoover used to demonstrate not just go-arounds, but a full blown touch-and-go, followed by a traffic pattern and landing, with both props feathered in a Shrike Commander biz twin! It was part of his Energy Management airshow act. I once saw him do his (1970s) in California. The airshow announcer was Chuck Yeager. As Hoover rolled to a stop at airshow center, stepped onto the wing and doffed his famous straw hat, Yeager said over the PA "ladies and gentlemen, let's have a round of applause for the world's second-greatest pilot!"
I've read about this. It would have been great to see. Bit about Yeager is precious.
The Bealton Va. Flying Circus is near where I live. The last time I went there someone did an energy management routine in a Cub. It was great to watch, but the thing that really struck me was the sound. You could clearly hear the wind blowing through the rigging. It was quite loud actually and something you would never hear (hopefully!) in the normal course of flying.
Ron
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 9:12 am
by rsteele
drseti wrote:Bob Hoover used to demonstrate not just go-arounds, but a full blown touch-and-go, followed by a traffic pattern and landing, with both props feathered in a Shrike Commander biz twin! It was part of his Energy Management airshow act. I once saw him do his (1970s) in California. The airshow announcer was Chuck Yeager. As Hoover rolled to a stop at airshow center, stepped onto the wing and doffed his famous straw hat, Yeager said over the PA "ladies and gentlemen, let's have a round of applause for the world's second-greatest pilot!"
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:20 pm
by CharlieTango
I used to feel a need to play chicken with the ground in my CTSW but have gone back to a more gradual, less rushed round out that starts sooner.
With 30* and idle its a steep approach, add in speed at @ 1.3 and they are mostly short / soft with full aft stick.
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2017 5:56 pm
by Wm.Ince
CharlieTango wrote:. . . "have gone back to a more gradual, less rushed round out that starts sooner." . . .
How sooner?
Re: Flare and Touchdown
Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:24 pm
by FastEddieB
There are two landings in the video posted below.
My Sky Arrow stalls at about 40kts. 1.3 times that would be 52kts. If you watch the airspeed on the left, it appears I gravitate to about 55kts or a little more on final - I honestly am not watching it much if at all on final.
You can judge for yourself when I begin the roundout - it would be when the airspeed starts inching down to approximately stall speed. It appears to me to be a bit less than one wingspan, but I think the GoPro flattens out the perspective a bit, making the approach seem lower than it really is.
https://youtu.be/hDCb9dMFlB4