Jump to content

How to bend your CTSW gear legs

Ed Cesnalis

By Ed Cesnalis
in Landing and Flying

Recommended Posts

Ed Cesnalis

Ed Cesnalis

Posted
Posted

Roger told us that it doesn't come from him it comes from the whole industry, CTSW gear gets damaged from landing too high and slow. Obviously that in itself can't be right, you have to add to it a resulting stall or at least a high rate of sink causing contact and bent gear.

 

Lets compare 2 things:


  1. FAA AFH 8-5,6 'TOUCHDOWN' when the wheels are within 2 or 3 feet off the ground, the airplane will still be settling too fast for a gentle touchdown; therefore, this descent must be retarded by further back-elevator pressure.

  2. Roger's landing instruction to Doug as an example of 'fly it on' technique: try just flying it to the ground. Just get parallel to the tarmac at 2'-3' and hold the stick steady and as the plane slows and starts to settle just slightly easy the stick back, but you'll find it doesn't have to come all the way back. If you do this and keep the hand steady the CT will have nice smooth landings consistently.

There we have 2 mindsets and both work but which of the 2 mindsets lead to the un-arrested sink and bent gear? #1 requires the pilot toe actively retard the descent. #2 has the expectation of flying it on and not dealing with rapid sink.

 

#2 rely's on the 5 extra knots mentality but as I explain here http://ctflier.com/index.php?/topic/1889-5kts-over-stall-can-it-be-done-in-a-ct/ our pilots are not landing 5kts over stall but 5kts over some value that doesn't represent the current stall speed.

 

Mindset #2 is flawed when it comes to margin and the expectation of flying it on as opposed to actively retarding the descent and sets you up to fail to retard when damage is imminent.

 

The mindsets begin to diverge on downwind, the fly it on mindset might:

  • select less flaps for approach
  • select a higher speed for approach
  • use less flaps and higher speed for final
  • use less effort and expectation to get the stick all the way back
  • expect to fly it on instead of retarding descent in last 3 feet

Flying it on mentality hopes to not run out of energy ( and usually doesn't ) due to extra speed (and open throttle) but the exact stall speed is unknown. Full stall technique expects to arrest sink and actively does and depends on the airplane to know where stall speed is.

 

The answer to how to bend your gear? A=Fail to control your vertical speed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim

Jim

Posted
Posted

I'll answer a question with a question. Can the readers make a textbook Practical Test Standard soft field landing on the first try?

 

If you can, I'll bet that even your normal landings are more like Ed than Roger.

 

Carrying any extra speed into the roundout and flair greatly increases the chance of a balloon. After many, many hours I finally mastered landing the CT by flying consistent airspeed down to the numbers and maintaining the same sight picture every time. Now I *know* when I'm 2 feet over the runway and I can control the flair accurately. Nail your airspeed on final and keep your sight picture as close to the same each time and everything else will fall in place. We also have small alignment marks on both the windshield and top of the panel to aid runway alignment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roger Lee

Roger Lee

Posted
Posted

Soft field landings are easy. I never said I can't do full stall landings, I said they aren't my first choice nor my only choice. I didn't say not to ever land that way or practice them. I said it isn't the best way all the time or even for your normal landing for some people. I have well over 1000 hrs. in the CT and well past that in landings. Just because someone likes a certain style of landing doesn't mean they can't perform all others. You only balloon with extra speed when you make a mistake with the stick and sight picture. No different than dropping a full stall landing on the tarmac. Just because you carry extra speed doesn't imply you will balloon. A mistake is a mistake no matter what style. Any smooth controlled landing with any style is a good landing. I see the one style fits all and only landing by regimented numbers as mentally limiting for emergencies practice. Anyone can land when it's routine because its routine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kentuckynet

kentuckynet

Posted
Posted

Wow... i had never even flown a ctsw when i got in mine (no training dint need any)....came from a remos g3.

You guys just brow beat a subejct to death...i bet many of you disect the word on the"stop" sign.

If you cant figure out how to approach the land the ct sofltly just pull the chute on each landing and other seems to think thats what its for,

 

Good Grief

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Baker

Tom Baker

Posted
Posted

Wow... i had never even flown a ctsw when i got in mine (no training dint need any)....came from a remos g3.

You guys just brow beat a subejct to death...i bet many of you disect the word on the"stop" sign.

If you cant figure out how to approach the land the ct sofltly just pull the chute on each landing and other seems to think thats what its for,

 

Good Grief

 

That's not right because you came and flew mine, and then took me for a ride in your remos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ed Cesnalis

Ed Cesnalis

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The PTS does now say what flap or speed or even that you need to stall to meet the short or soft field landings. Hitting the numbers and taking a short roll is the main goal. That can be done in the faster approach with less flaps just as it can by slowing to stall speed with too much flap. Its been demonstrated over and over again in checkrides in Las Vegas.

 

The PTS does address flaps ( configuration ) and speed ( 1.3 Vso +- ) and stalling (Touches down smoothly at minimum control airspeed.)

 

Guess your 0 for 3? But you did mention 'Las Vegas'

 

F. TASK: SHORT-FIELD (CONFINED AREA—ASES) APPROACH AND LANDING (ASEL and ASES)

REFERENCES: FAA-H-8083-3, FAA-H-8083-23; AFM/POH.

Objective. To determine that the applicant:

1. Exhibits knowledge of the elements related to a short-field (Confined Area—ASES) approach and landing.

2. Adequately surveys the intended landing area. (ASES)

3. Considers the wind conditions, landing surface, obstructions, and selects the most suitable touchdown point.

4. Establishes the recommended approach and landing configuration and airspeed/attitude; adjusts pitch attitude and power as required.

5. Maintains a stabilized approach and the recommended approach airspeed/attitude, or in its absence not more than 1.3 Vso, +10/-5 knots.

6. Selects the proper landing path, contacts the water at the minimum safe airspeed with the proper pitch attitude for the surface conditions. (ASES)

7. Touches down smoothly at minimum control airspeed. (ASEL)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
josjonkers

josjonkers

Posted
Posted

Wow... i had never even flown a ctsw when i got in mine (no training dint need any)....came from a remos g3.

You guys just brow beat a subejct to death...i bet many of you disect the word on the"stop" sign.

If you cant figure out how to approach the land the ct sofltly just pull the chute on each landing and other seems to think thats what its for,

 

Good Grief

 

:):):)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doug G.

Doug G.

Posted
Posted

I am surprised no one has mentioned the CTLS Training Supplement in these discussions. There are suggested flaps and airspeeds for "Typical" large and small traffic patterns there with the caveat - "In gusty conditions the given airspeeds have to be enhanced with suitable reserves."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...