When to configure airplane for landing during precision approach?

[MacFlier]

I've started my IFR training and I'm at the phase of learning to shoot approaches.
I've done a few RNAVs and ILS and love the challenge of keeping the needles centered.

Now, when I'm flying them, I'm usually in clean config, approach speed, all the way to minimums. Then, I slow down, deploy some flaps and land (when not going missed).
I feel that the process is "rushed": I break out (or pull the foggles out) then have to slow, deploy flaps, fix any misalignment to the runway and land.

Should I be configured at the FAF, say flaps 20, 75 knots or is it too early? Plane I'm using is a C172 and a PA28.

 

[Tantalum]

I've started my IFR training and I'm at the phase of learning to shoot approaches.
I've done a few RNAVs and ILS and love the challenge of keeping the needles centered.

Now, when I'm flying them, I'm usually in clean config, approach speed, all the way to minimums. Then, I slow down, deploy some flaps and land (when not going missed).
I feel that the process is "rushed": I break out (or pull the foggles out) then have to slow, deploy flaps, fix any misalignment to the runway and land.

Should I be configured at the FAF, say flaps 20, 75 knots or is it too early? Plane I'm using is a C172 and a PA28.

I got my instrument ticket also in a pa-28. That does sound a little rushed, I was taught to be at 90 knots with one nach of flaps by the FAF

In the Cirrus, which is a little faster, I still go one notch of flaps but I maintain 110 kts instead

 

[asicer]

I've started my IFR training and I'm at the phase of learning to shoot approaches.
I've done a few RNAVs and ILS and love the challenge of keeping the needles centered.

Now, when I'm flying them, I'm usually in clean config, approach speed, all the way to minimums. Then, I slow down, deploy some flaps and land (when not going missed).
I feel that the process is "rushed": I break out (or pull the foggles out) then have to slow, deploy flaps, fix any misalignment to the runway and land.

Should I be configured at the FAF, say flaps 20, 75 knots or is it too early? Plane I'm using is a C172 and a PA28.

Flaps 10 at the FAF helps me with speed control. Also, going to flaps 10 results in a greater change of control inputs than 20 or 30/40 which translates to more manageable work load. The flap switch is also in the path of my FAF flow check so it's a good time to manipulate it.

 

[Kelvin]

I was trained to have the airplane completely configured at the Final Approach fixed. Your mileage may vary.

 

[IK04]

Aspire to fly the approaches, not shoot them.

 

[jordane93]

What profiles has your instructor given you?

 

[Rgbeard]

I was trying to have the airplane completely configured at the Final Approach fixed. Your mileage may vary.

+1 for this.

For flying an approach, speed isn't your best friend.

I've got the gear down and a notch of flaps by the FAF. I don't have a desire to reconfigure on the way down.

 

[olasek]

Should I be configured at the FAF, say flaps 20, 75 knots or is it too early? Plane I'm using is a C172 and a PA28.

Ask your instructor how to do it, it may depend on the airplane, in the Cirrus that wouldn’t be the right technique, also if you break out of clouds at lower than 500 AGL I was always taught that (in Cirrus) it is too late to start deploying flaps, you are too low and flaps deployment is highly destabilizing maneuver, it can shoot you back in the clouds. So you land with 50% that that you had through the whole approach. But you fly slower airplanes - use the recommended technique for your airplane, don’t invent anything new.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[benyflyguy]

I’m configured at the FAF trimmed for 90mph with 20deg flaps in a 182. Usually prop in as well.
Unless circle to land.

 

[midwestpa24]

Speed set, gear down, approach flaps (whatever that may be for your aircraft type) at the FAF. Most light airplanes will land fine with approach flaps anyway, so isn't 100% necessary to change configuration at the last moment when you break out.

 

[Tantalum]

I was trying to have the airplane completely configured at the Final Approach fixed. Your mileage may vary.

you sort of have to be careful with this, if you get used to doing that in a 172 or Archer then I don't think it's a great idea to be flying a whole approach passed the final approach fix at 65 knots. If it's actual conditions you could potentially really mess up the flow of faster planes behind you

if you break out of clouds at lower than 500 AGL I was always taught that (in Cirrus) it is too late to start deploying flaps

This is also what I was told. I'm just going to add that it's a bit of a judgment call, because if you're not used to landing with half flaps your speeds will be faster and float will be longer and if you're looking at a runway with less than 3000 ft with a cirrus at only half flaps you really have to be on your game. I recently broke out at minimums flying into Santa Maria and had no problem going to full flaps.. I wouldn't ordinarily have tried it but it was very easy IFR, in other words, the layer was maybe only 2K feet thick and I had another instrument-rated Cirrus pilot with me

 

[MacFlier]

What profiles has your instructor given you?

Pardon the ignorance, but what do you mean?

 

[MacFlier]

Ask your instructor how to do it, it may depend on the airplane, in the Cirrus that wouldn’t be the right technique, also if you break out of clouds at lower than 500 AGL I was always taught that (in Cirrus) it is too late to start deploying flaps, you are too low and flaps deployment is highly destabilizing maneuver, it can shoot you back in the clouds. So you land with 50% that that you had through the whole approach. But you fly slower airplanes - use the recommended technique for your airplane, don’t invent anything new.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That's the way he does it. It is doable, as I was able to land to quickly configure it and land, but I think it's a rushed process.

 

[champ driver]

I've started my IFR training and I'm at the phase of learning to shoot approaches.
I've done a few RNAVs and ILS and love the challenge of keeping the needles centered.

Now, when I'm flying them, I'm usually in clean config, approach speed, all the way to minimums. Then, I slow down, deploy some flaps and land (when not going missed).
I feel that the process is "rushed": I break out (or pull the foggles out) then have to slow, deploy flaps, fix any misalignment to the runway and land.

Should I be configured at the FAF, say flaps 20, 75 knots or is it too early? Plane I'm using is a C172 and a PA28.

Shooting an ILS down to minumums, 200 and 1/2 mile vis in real life is a world of difference than taking the foggles off at minimums in VFR conditions. 1/2 mile vis is an eye opener at 200', not at all like breaking out of a defined overcast and having decent vis underneath.

And at that point you want to pull some power, add flaps, re-trim, and fly the rest of the approach.
Talk about having your hands full at a critical phase of flight.
Can your technique be done, yes, but it's more work that's unnecessary.
Do yourself a favor, configure just before the FAF, or at it, and fly that all the way down the slope.
There's a reason the big boys do it that way, configure and get it stabilized and fly that all the way down the ILS. You'll be able to hold the GS all the way down without getting all screwed up at the end.

And no, I don't mean full flaps at the FAF either.

 

[olasek]

with less than 3000 ft with a cirrus at only half flaps you really have to be on your game.

I was actually surprised when I looked at performance landing data for an SR22 - 100% or 50% flaps the difference in required landing distance is minimal - 10% or even less.

 

[luvflyin]

I've started my IFR training and I'm at the phase of learning to shoot approaches.
I've done a few RNAVs and ILS and love the challenge of keeping the needles centered.

Now, when I'm flying them, I'm usually in clean config, approach speed, all the way to minimums. Then, I slow down, deploy some flaps and land (when not going missed).
I feel that the process is "rushed": I break out (or pull the foggles out) then have to slow, deploy flaps, fix any misalignment to the runway and land.

Should I be configured at the FAF, say flaps 20, 75 knots or is it too early? Plane I'm using is a C172 and a PA28.

In a nutshell, no. You’ve already said you can land just fine by throwing out the flaps on short final and slowing down. The only question I’ve ever had in flying a 172 was to put in 10 degrees or not before Glideslope intercept and after experimenting with it, settled on flying it clean and deal with the landing at minimums. I say again, a 172. You are going to be asked to keep your speed up on final, you are flying in a ‘community’ so to speak. I wouldn’t get my head wrapped around 20 degrees of flaps and 75 knots as my ‘norm.’

 

[tspear]

When others tell you to apply lessons from the airlines make sure to understand why the airlines do it. Just do not apply the method blindly.
Same goes for why your instructor does it this way, clean config and rush at the end.
Next consider the IR checkride versus reality.

A DPE I used for an IPC flat out stated to the poor IR student meeting to schedule his exam. If he flies the approach clean and goes full flaps on final he fails. And to tell his so and so instructor to get his head out of his a**.

One other point. Flying the approach slow in some planes is easier. In others it just makes the plane wallow and hard to stay on the needles.

In the Cirrus, one notch of flaps when speed stable at a 100, usually before the FAF. Then full flaps when landing is assured. That is my mentality.

Two last points.
1. Try a go around with each flap config and see how the plane handles. Most light planes will struggle with full flaps. Especially when at higher altitude airports.
2. If you fly a correct VFR pattern per the FAA Aim. You will find the distance from where you are abeam the numbers on downwind to the runway are very close to many FAF for ILS/LPV approaches. This should make sense when you consider both are based on a 3 degree downslope... therefore, try to be consistent. How and when do you deploy flaps when VFR?

Good luck,

Tim

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk

 

[texasclouds]

20 hrs IR student here. ATC always seems to tell me to keep speed up at our Delta. Only once did I get to use approach speed there.

My instructor taught me 2400 rpm trimmed, 2100 rpm one roll up trim approach speed, then 1800 rpm same trim for precision descent or 1600 rpm same trim dive and drive descent. We put down flaps at the runway sighting. If you dont see it, full throttle same trim and she climbs out 75 kts just like you want. C-172SP

 

[jordane93]

Pardon the ignorance, but what do you mean?

Your instructor should have given you an approach profile so that you know when to be configured and on speed depending on where you are along the approach.

 

[Clip4]

I've started my IFR training and I'm at the phase of learning to shoot approaches.
I've done a few RNAVs and ILS and love the challenge of keeping the needles centered.

Now, when I'm flying them, I'm usually in clean config, approach speed, all the way to minimums. Then, I slow down, deploy some flaps and land (when not going missed).
I feel that the process is "rushed": I break out (or pull the foggles out) then have to slow, deploy flaps, fix any misalignment to the runway and land.

Should I be configured at the FAF, say flaps 20, 75 knots or is it too early? Plane I'm using is a C172 and a PA28.

You are in an area of personal technique. I like 15 degrees and 80 in both airplanes.

 

[Bill]

FWIW, I fly the Mooney clean at 90kts to the FAF. At the FAF I drop the gear and put in takeoff flaps. It usually goes right down the GS with very little adjustment to throttle or pitch.

 

[TimRF79]

In a 172, my CFII and agreed to slow down to 70knts and have 20degrees of flaps at or around the FAF.
Then glide to min's and when coming out at mins (200ft) you can land the plane as is, or put in last notch of flaps and adjust as needed.

 

[jsstevens]

I’m signed off for the check ride now. In the PA-28 I’m flying I go 1 notch of flaps at the FAF, do the pre-landing checklist 1000’ above minimums. It’s a technique thing not a procedure though. With the Cherokee or a C-172 I can get configured, slowdown and land pretty easily after breaking out but it’s a bad habit if I want to fly higher performance aircraft, which I do.

 

[chemgeek]

Common question. Answer is highly dependent on the aircraft and your comfort level with it. Partial flaps in an AA-5 don't do that much, and the gear is already down and welded. To not be a clusterbonk for planes behind me, I fly the approach at 90 knots (sometimes ATC wants faster if possible) with no flaps deployed. If necessary, it is quite possible to land without flaps in an AA-5, especially on a long runway, but if breakout occurs in time, flaps can be quickly deployed and power decreased for a normal landing. If necessary a little bit of forward slip can kill speed if runway vis permits. (Did exactly that on my last LPV into the home field.) This way, there is no cleanup required for a missed approach. But an AA-5 is a simple plane.

 

[EdFred]

Well the last one I flew they wanted me best forward speed so configuration was late. But you SHOULD be able to make a small configuration change in the last half mile (last notch of flaps). I generally dont start making configuration changes from cruise (other than throttle and trim) until the last 2 miles or so.

 

[EdFred]

A DPE I used for an IPC flat out stated to the poor IR student meeting to schedule his exam. If he flies the approach clean and goes full flaps on final he fails. And to tell his so and so instructor to get his head out of his a**.

Unless I'm misreading this it sounds like the DPE is the one in need of a rectocraniectomy.

 

[geezer]

The item that seems to be overlooked here, is the runway being approached.

At an airline airport, the runway is very long, and a training plane can safely be flown down to flare at relatively high speeds, and still touch down with plenty of runway in front of it. Keeping up your speed there is usually important to those behind you.

At small airports with shorter runways, getting into a suitably slow approach speed, and configured to land should be done further out, to assure that when the runway comes in sight, the landing may be made at the numbers without forcing it on. There is rarely another plane behind you.

Going into BWI in a 172 or PA 28 200 R, I fly at 90 K, 10 degrees of flaps, and gear down, trimmed for hands off. GUMP check right after the outer marker. All the flaps and slow down to 70 K at 200 feet, set down on main gear, brake hard, and off at first taxiway that is reasonable for my speed, often 20 to 30 K if it is wide. That clears the runway for following aircraft. Floating down the runway, waiting for the speed to bleed off and touch down ties the runway up much longer than adding all the drag you can, in the air, as soon as you can.

Landing at many small, 2000 to 3000 foot runways, at the outer marker, I have 20 degrees of flaps and gear down, plane trimmed to 5 or 10 above stall for the weight of the plane, GUMP check done. The drive to visible and landing is then done with no configuration changes needed for a touchdown at the very beginning of the runway. The short runways that I have landed on IFR, as short as 2400 feet, the Cessna flaps go to 40 as soon as the runway is in sight, and a go around is unlikely. Trim is not changed for the 40 flaps, to reduce to workload if a go around does take place.

If the minimum descent is 200 AGL, the configuration change for a go around is easily done, and although the climb rate is initially slow in the Cessna with 20 flaps, you are climbing as you retract the flaps. The retractable Arrow, get the gear up fast, that improves climb dramatically, the flaps are less of an issue on Arrows.

I enjoy a completely stable and trimmed plane as I concentrate on flying the approach, and the cross checks and regular scan is not interrupted by configuration changes, especially the very expensive gear forgotten due to a hairy turbulent approach with a crosswind. I normally flew without a co pilot. Having flaps down is less important if you have a strong head wind, so wind does change the plan.

 

[EdFred]

The item that seems to be overlooked here, is the runway being approached.

At an airline airport, the runway is very long, and a training plane can safely be flown down to flare at relatively high speeds, and still touch down with plenty of runway in front of it. Keeping up your speed there is usually important to those behind you.

At small airports with shorter runways, getting into a suitably slow approach speed, and configured to land should be done further out, to assure that when the runway comes in sight, the landing may be made at the numbers without forcing it on. There is rarely another plane behind you.

Going into BWI in a 172 or PA 28 200 R, I fly at 90 K, 10 degrees of flaps, and gear down, trimmed for hands off. GUMP check right after the outer marker. All the flaps and slow down to 70 K at 200 feet, set down on main gear, brake hard, and off at first taxiway that is reasonable for my speed, often 20 to 30 K if it is wide. That clears the runway for following aircraft. Floating down the runway, waiting for the speed to bleed off and touch down ties the runway up much longer than adding all the drag you can, in the air, as soon as you can.

Landing at many small, 2000 to 3000 foot runways, at the outer marker, I have 20 degrees of flaps and gear down, plane trimmed to 5 or 10 above stall for the weight of the plane, GUMP check done. The drive to visible and landing is then done with no configuration changes needed for a touchdown at the very beginning of the runway. The short runways that I have landed on IFR, as short as 2400 feet, the Cessna flaps go to 40 as soon as the runway is in sight, and a go around is unlikely. Trim is not changed for the 40 flaps, to reduce to workload if a go around does take place.

If the minimum descent is 200 AGL, the configuration change for a go around is easily done, and although the climb rate is initially slow in the Cessna with 20 flaps, you are climbing as you retract the flaps. The retractable Arrow, get the gear up fast, that improves climb dramatically, the flaps are less of an issue on Arrows.

I enjoy a completely stable and trimmed plane as I concentrate on flying the approach, and the cross checks and regular scan is not interrupted by configuration changes, especially the very expensive gear forgotten due to a hairy turbulent approach with a crosswind. I normally flew without a co pilot. Having flaps down is less important if you have a strong head wind, so wind does change the plan.

You (should) only need a half mile to slow down from Vno+ and still hit the numbers at book speed in most spam can singles. Doesn't matter if it's a 10k runway or a 3k runway. The numbers are the numbers. If you can't, you should go practice it (not in the soup though)

Once you find out how close to the threshold you can slow down, you'll realize you don't need to be configured 8 miles out.

 

[Dave Theisen]

For the check ride, go by the ACS. In the wild, you may have to adapt for conditions.

 

[tspear]

Unless I'm misreading this it sounds like the DPE is the one in need of a rectocraniectomy.

Not really. The DPE was adamant that newbie pilots have stable approaches. The CFI taught a much more free wheeling style based on the DPE complaints.
If I was the student, I would prefer the DPE set expectations ahead of time.

Tim

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk

 

[EdFred]

Not really. The DPE was adamant that newbie pilots have stable approaches. The CFI taught a much more free wheeling style based on the DPE complaints.
If I was the student, I would prefer the DPE set expectations ahead of time.

Tim

Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk

Well if the caveat is on newbies, then I can go along with it...maybe. I still somewhat disagree. I never go full flaps on approach until I break out. You can add flaps and still be stable.

 

[geezer]

Ed, the original poster described himself as a student. He is uncomfortable with the hurried configuration changes just before landing.

I intended to give him a choice that worked for me, a higher time IR pilot, with relatively few approaches per year, who adapts my style to the airport that I am approaching. As far as hitting the numbers, the airport where I trained was so short, with high obstructions both ends (30 feet and 60 feet), none of the local flight schools allowed their students to land there, even with instructors. I learned to always hit the numbers.

I have made an approach and broke out at 225 feet, 90 K, no flaps down, fully expecting a go around, and continued to a no flaps landing, no problem, and used much less than half the runway.

Choices for configuration change with conditions, and experience. In my first year of instrument flight, I would not have embarked on that flight, the forecast would have stopped me, on a judgement basis. The original poster needs to be comfortable with his approaches, and add to his skills and technique with experience.

PS, one of my favorite airports is the grass strip at Northport, Michigan.

 

[IK04]

One of the biggest lessons of my high performance (and retractable, back in those days) training was configuring a slick airplane during an ILS to minimums. It was a real eye opener and came in handy years later when I took my ATP multi-engine checkride!

For most airplanes, gear at the marker is a pretty safe assumption. I forget which one it is, but there is a turbine airplane that has no gear extension limitation...

 

[MacFlier]

In a nutshell, no. You’ve already said you can land just fine by throwing out the flaps on short final and slowing down. The only question I’ve ever had in flying a 172 was to put in 10 degrees or not before Glideslope intercept and after experimenting with it, settled on flying it clean and deal with the landing at minimums. I say again, a 172. You are going to be asked to keep your speed up on final, you are flying in a ‘community’ so to speak. I wouldn’t get my head wrapped around 20 degrees of flaps and 75 knots as my ‘norm.’

So yesterday, my CFII and I planned to slow down to flap speed and throw flaps right before FAF. This is what happened:

- We ballooned a little bit and had to chase the glideslope for a few minutes.
- Speed control was easier in my opinion
- As we got back on glideslope, tower came back asking us to "keep speed up"...

In the end we came back and shot the approach in clean config and reverted back to cleaning up at the end. After breaking out, we slowed to flap speed and deployed full flaps and were able to land on centerline and before first exit, so it worked out ok. I think I'll keep this technique until flying something faster that requires pre-config like a Cirrus or Arrow.

 

[PaulS]

This is how cirrus wants you to do it. 120 knots by the IAF, or before you intercept the final approach course if VTF. For non precision at 2 miles from the FAF, set 50% flaps and slow to 100 knots by the FAF. Reduce power at the FAF and maintain 100 knots on descent ( obviously increase power to maintain 100 knots on steps) until you break out. If you break out at under 500 ft AGL, DO NOT change flaps, slow to final approach speed for 50% flaps (85 knots) and land. Confirm that you have enough runway (this should be done as part of the brief).

For precision approaches, again slow to 120 knots as per the non precision. When glideslope comes alive, apply 50% flaps and slow to 100 knots by the glideslope intercept. Reduce power to maintain 100 knots on glideslope. If you breakout above 500 ft agl, you can use 100% flaps and slow to final approach speed (80 knots) below 500 ft agl, DO NOT change flaps, slow to final approach speed for 50% flaps (85 knots) and land. Again confirm you have enough runway.

This works well for me. I think the reason for no configuration changes below 500 feet is too many pilots were screwing it up. Cirrus pistons have a definite pitch up when flaps are applied, which can launch you off the glideslope and get you too slow quickly if you aren't paying attention.

This method is recommended for the 20s and 22s.

 

[EdFred]

This is how cirrus wants you to do it. 120 knots by the IAF, or before you intercept the final approach course if VTF. For non precision at 2 miles from the FAF, set 50% flaps and slow to 100 knots by the FAF. Reduce power at the FAF and maintain 100 knots on descent ( obviously increase power to maintain 100 knots on steps) until you break out. If you break out at under 500 ft AGL, DO NOT change flaps, slow to final approach speed for 50% flaps (85 knots) and land. Confirm that you have enough runway (this should be done as part of the brief).

For precision approaches, again slow to 120 knots as per the non precision. When glideslope comes alive, apply 50% flaps and slow to 100 knots by the glideslope intercept. Reduce power to maintain 100 knots on glideslope. If you breakout above 500 ft agl, you can use 100% flaps and slow to final approach speed (80 knots) below 500 ft agl, DO NOT change flaps, slow to final approach speed for 50% flaps (85 knots) and land. Again confirm you have enough runway.

This works well for me. I think the reason for no configuration changes below 500 feet is too many pilots were screwing it up. Cirrus pistons have a definite pitch up when flaps are applied, which can launch you off the glideslope and get you too slow quickly if you aren't paying attention.

This method is recommended for the 20s and 22s.

Are Cirrus pilots unable to compensate for the pitch up by reducing throttle at the same time? Or does CISP expect all of their pilots to be nothing much more than trained monkeys? Not a dig on the pilots, more a question of the training, I am asking seriously because I've made changes below 500' since my private training - final setting of flaps.

 

[PaulS]

Are Cirrus pilots unable to compensate for the pitch up by reducing throttle at the same time? Or does CISP expect all of their pilots to be nothing much more than trained monkeys? Not a dig on the pilots, more a question of the training, I am asking seriously because I've made changes below 500' since my private training - final setting of flaps.

My experience is that reducing the throttle does not compensate for the pitch up in a Cirrus, it's pretty pronounced. That said, on my engine outs I don't use any flaps until runway is made, then they go in, no problems yet.

Trained monkey?? Cirrus has gone from one of the worst accident rates to one of the best accidents rates because of it's training, so it's hard to argue with success, especially when it works well.

I know I'm much smarter than them, but I figure what the heck, fly it like they say to fly it.

 

[EdFred]

My experience is that reducing the throttle does not compensate for the pitch up in a Cirrus, it's pretty pronounced. That said, on my engine outs I don't use any flaps until runway is made, then they go in, no problems yet.

Trained monkey?? Cirrus has gone from one of the worst accident rates to one of the best accidents rates because of it's training, so it's hard to argue with success, especially when it works well.

I know I'm much smarter than them, but I figure what the heck, fly it like they say to fly it.

Well yeah, if you train everyone to stay at the absolute center of the envelope and don't ever stray more than 0.5% from it, then yeah. I mean hell, I could start an aircraft company and train everyone to leave the plane in the hangar and sit at home and have the best accident rate in the world!

Now I'm not saying everyone should be out seeing how far they can push the edges, but if the training is don't do anything except push in the throttle, engage autopilot, and pull the red handle...yeah, trained monkey. Yes, I am hyperbolizing here, but I get the impression that they just want to you sit there and do as little as possible.

 

[mryan75]

Remember, they call the first notch “approach flaps” for a reason. I like to put in the first notch once I’m established on the final approach course OR when given the 30-degree intercept while being vectored (if that doesn’t make sense to you yet, if you’re getting vectors from the controller, the last vector they will give you is almost always 30 degrees off your final approach course; in other words if your final approach course is 330, the last vector they will give you will be a heading of 300 or 360, depending on which side you’re coming from).

This is one of the best tips I ever got: I flew with an instructor once who told me I was in good shape at the final approach fix, but I wasn’t ready to descend. I would get to the FAF, then put in the second notch, and by that time i was above glideslope. He recommended 2 notches and on speed (90mph in the Cherokee) 2 miles from the FAF (think 2 and 2), and then upon reaching the FAF/glideslope intercept, you just pull the power back and start the descent. Getting high on the approach makes airspeed and rate of descent control a chore.

I will also say this: if I’m reading your comment correctly, flying down to DA on an ILS and configuring the airplane for landing after breaking out at 200 feet AGL is not something I would ever do.

 

[PaulS]

Well yeah, if you train everyone to stay at the absolute center of the envelope and don't ever stray more than 0.5% from it, then yeah. I mean hell, I could start an aircraft company and train everyone to leave the plane in the hangar and sit at home and have the best accident rate in the world!

Now I'm not saying everyone should be out seeing how far they can push the edges, but if the training is don't do anything except push in the throttle, engage autopilot, and pull the red handle...yeah, trained monkey. Yes, I am hyperbolizing here, but I get the impression that they just want to you sit there and do as little as possible.

And that's an absurd argument EdFred. Staying at 50% flaps on an instrument approach below 500 feet is hardly the middle of the envelope and I am no less a pilot for following the recommendation. There are too many pilots who think they know better or think they are better than they really are. I see them all the time, cutting corners or doing things they think are better than what the plane manufacturer thinks. The bottom line is the procedure works well, landing with 50% flaps is NBD as long as it isn't your first time doing it.

The Cirrus training syllabus and checkout syllabus is probably one of the most thorough I have experienced. It includes exploring and getting comfortable at the edges of the envelope, all done, "gasp", without using probably the best autopilots in a piston single to date. More over if you follow the currency recommendations like most of the Cirrus pilots I know do, you are probably a better and more current pilot than most who don't benefit from that type of support and only do the minimum training required by the FAA. On top of that Ed, they, CSIPs, go over situations where the parachute ISN'T THE ANSWER!!

Training is good for pilots Ed, following recommendations is good too, accident reports are full of pilots who thought they were rebels and anti authority.

Damn, you are making me sound like a Cirrus marketer, lol.