25kts Landing

[SportPilot]

.......

[BrianL99]

I was always taught that a stabilized approach was the proper way to land. All that playing with the throttle seems unnecessary and counter productive. Just my opinion, but tI don't think there should be more than 2 throttle adjustments ... one abeam the numbers and one more when you're on short final. Any other adjustments are a result of not being properly stabilized, with a constant and appropriate descent rate and speed.

That's my preference also, although I know a lot of people flying LSA's like to chop the throttle abeam the numbers and glide all the way in. Whatever works and delivers good results.

Bill Canino who owns SportAirUSA is of that mind and he's got plenty of experience flying. That said, I think he's wrong. I'm far from a high time pilot, but like everyone else, I have an opinion. Cutting the power abeam the #'s, puts you into a position of being less than stabilized on the approach, if for no other reason, than you may have wind to contend with. In other words, your "distance to landing" is variable, therefore your rate of descent/glide path, has to be an ad hoc decision on every landing. With a stabilized approach with a "traditional" final, you have the opportunity to establish a rate of descent that's consistent with the distance you have to travel.

I think that makes sense?

[SportPilot]

.......

[FastEddieB]

I'm not sure there is a wrong answer, just different piloting styles, each with pros and cons.

Agreed.

That said...

There are certainly planes that need power to stabilize their approaches - carrier aircraft, jets, probably most turboprops.

But note that small, piston, single engined aircraft are not on that list.

And it's not "wrong" to use power in an approach. A few of my videos show me still jockeying a bit of power to arrive at the key position on final where it will almost invariably come back to idle.

But I will hold that anyone flying their own pattern in such a way as to NEED power to make the field is putting themselves at some additional risk, albeit a small one.

My students were trained in such a way that anywhere in the pattern they could lose power and still make the field. I still think that's an admirable goal.

And I do not agree that a power off approach is, by definition, unstabilized - it's not.

[SportPilot]

.......

[drseti]

Any other adjustments are a result of not being properly stabilized, with a constant and appropriate descent rate and speed.

In gusty winds, you can be properly stabilized one minute, and highly unstable the next. So, you react accordingly.

[drseti]

I know a lot of people flying LSA's like to chop the throttle abeam the numbers and glide all the way in.

That's my style under normal conditions, and what I teach (just so the student is prepared for that inevitable power failure some day). But, in gusty winds...

Whatever works and delivers good results.

Bingo!

[BrianL99]

I'm not sure there is a wrong answer, just different piloting styles, each with pros and cons.

And I do not agree that a power off approach is, by definition, unstabilized - it's not.

I'll bite Eddie.

How do stabilize an approach, without using power or being less precise with your landing point?

[FastEddieB]

I'll bite Eddie.

How do stabilize an approach, without using power or being less precise with your landing point?

Well, using flaps, slips and/or off-optimum glide speed.

I guess we could quibble whether adjusting/using any of the above "destabilizes" an approach, but I'd say as long as the pilot is planning ahead and using the tools available to him, it can still be viewed as a stabilized approach. Or at least no more unstable than futzing with the power all the way down.

Remember, every Commercial applicant has to demonstrate:

1. Exhibits satisfactory knowledge of the elements related to a power-off 180° accuracy approach and landing.
2. Considers the wind conditions, landing surface, obstructions, and selects an appropriate touchdown point.
3. Positions airplane on downwind leg, parallel to landing runway, and not more than 1,000 feet AGL.
4. Completes final airplane configuration.
5. Touches down in a normal landing attitude, at or within 200 feet beyond the specified touchdown point.
6. Completes the appropriate checklist.

Commercial Pilot or not, it's a good skill to have and maintain.

[BrianL99]

I'll bite Eddie.

How do stabilize an approach, without using power or being less precise with your landing point?

Well, using flaps, slips and/or off-optimum glide speed.

I guess we could quibble whether adjusting/using any of the above "destabilizes" an approach, but I'd say as long as the pilot is planning ahead and using the tools available to him, it can still be viewed as a stabilized approach. Or at least no more unstable than futzing with the power all the way down.

Remember, every Commercial applicant has to demonstrate:

1. Exhibits satisfactory knowledge of the elements related to a power-off 180° accuracy approach and landing.
2. Considers the wind conditions, landing surface, obstructions, and selects an appropriate touchdown point.
3. Positions airplane on downwind leg, parallel to landing runway, and not more than 1,000 feet AGL.
4. Completes final airplane configuration.
5. Touches down in a normal landing attitude, at or within 200 feet beyond the specified touchdown point.
6. Completes the appropriate checklist.

Commercial Pilot or not, it's a good skill to have and maintain.

I'm not disputing it's a good skill. Bill Canino's position when we talked about it, was that doing it every time you land, is great practice for the day you need to land without an engine!

Maybe I just don't have enough LSA experience yet. I just find the airplane very difficult to "stabilize". Of course, when flying my Cirrus, I was just flying by the numbers ... easy game. With the way the Rotax/LSA operates, minor pitch adjustments that wouldn't even effect the Cirrus, can cause significant speed variations.

[MrMorden]

Great video, you got it on the ground with grace. Which is all that matters.

[MrMorden]

Maybe I just don't have enough LSA experience yet. I just find the airplane very difficult to "stabilize". Of course, when flying my Cirrus, I was just flying by the numbers ... easy game. With the way the Rotax/LSA operates, minor pitch adjustments that wouldn't even effect the Cirrus, can cause significant speed variations.

I agree, at least with my CTSW. I can make very minor pitch changes on approach and change the airspeed 5 knots in a second or so. I am often constantly altering pitch in tiny increments to stay on speed. But my airplane's trim needs to be adjusted to allow me to trim for my 55kt approach speed (currently full nose up trim will set speed about 62-65kt power off). It still feels "stable" coming down, I just make tiny pitch adjustments to keep it that way.

In a plane that will let you trim correctly for your approach speed, you'd probably have to fiddle less in pitch than I do.

[CharlieTango]

It takes big power adjustments to change your approach speed but small pitch changes, to me that adds up to pitch over power for LSA approaches.

You can always change your pitch but sometimes the throttle is already at the stop which again adds up to pitch over power.

Thermals on approach cause me to use the biggest pitch adjustments, in a Cirrus it would be far more stable. A stable approach with shear or thermals is a different thing in an LSA than it is in an airplane that weights 3xLSA.

[MrMorden]

It takes big power adjustments to change your approach speed but small pitch changes, to me that adds up to pitch over power for LSA approaches.

Very well put.

If I'm high at the start of my final, but not enough to justify a slip, I will sometimes pitch back a little and let the plane slow to around 50-52 knots, which gives a nice sink. Then I can just pitch down back to 55kt or so and arrest the sink and continue the approach.

[dstclair]

Brian,

Bill is the one who talked me into chopping the power abeam the numbers and landing without adding power. He also convinced me to target my landing point a few hundred down the runway as opposed to hitting the numbers.

My home airport is a bit challenging in a crosswind situation since it has a tree line close to the east side of the runway and hangars equally close on the west side. Unless the winds are gusty, I don't find the Sting difficult to trim for 55kts on final with either 1 or 2 notches of flaps.

I think it took me several committed months of practice to get comfortable with the technique, though.