Extra airspeed on final for safety (on 5000 ft rnwy)

T

Tracey

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
825
Display Name
Display name:
tracey
Hey Everyone-

I just found this board and I'm glad to be here and get people's opinions & advice. I have a question about extra airspeed.

I soloed last week (!) and kept my airspeed on final the same as when my instructor is with me and as a result, floated longer than I was used to. (I've since learned that the stall speed will decrease with decreased weight in the plane, so my airspeed should have been slower).

The head CFI told me today (when I asked him about this) that that is ok for a first time solo student to carry some extra speed (5 or so kts), because it acts as a bit of a safety buffer for the inexperienced pilot. (I hope I'm not butchering what he told me, this is how I understood it).

I'm just curious what everyone else's experience was and what their thoughts are on extra speed being a "safety buffer."

I fly a 172.

Thanks!
Tracey
 
For a solo and I assume you have trained/covered recovery from a balloon, or not enough power, or hitting a spot landing etc as well as when to go around.

That being said, I may carry extra speed on tough crosswinds or any wind shifts etc that I am expecting due to conditions. At the end of the day however, I try and have the appropriate speed based on weather, wind and conditions... Then generally everything works out.

Landing faster does not necessarily enhance safety, but usually results in a longer landing run.


More importantly.... congrats on the SOLO!!!
 
If you have plenty of runway, and don't mind the increased wear on the wheels, tires and brakes, then it is probably safer to be a bit too fast than a bit too slow. But you should try to get more proficient in hitting exactly the "right" approach speed. You'll develop a feeling for what that speed is and how it varies with different airplane weights - really what you are trying to hit is a target angle of attack, but your aircraft is probably not equipped to measure that directly so you have to estimate it from the airspeed, deck angle, descent rate, control feel etc.

In a gusty wind or with windshear conditions it can be a good idea to carry a little extra speed so you don't drop out of the sky if you suddenly lose some airspeed due to a gust. In those conditions there is probably a pretty good overall headwind so using too much runway is less likely to be an issue.
 
Been there, done that.

I think you should strive for maintaining the proper airspeed, +/- a couple of knots on final. Not only will you land slower, the consistency will help you nail those soft field and short field landings.
 
Old Geek said:
the consistency will help you nail those soft field and short field landings.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he said that when I start doing those landings (coming up soon, I think), that I will be more precise with particular airspeed (with regard to weight and balance), since there won't be extra runway for a safety margin.
 
OzPilot said:
For a solo and I assume you have trained/covered recovery from a balloon, or not enough power, or hitting a spot landing etc as well as when to go around.

That being said, I may carry extra speed on tough crosswinds or any wind shifts etc that I am expecting due to conditions. At the end of the day however, I try and have the appropriate speed based on weather, wind and conditions... Then generally everything works out.

Landing faster does not necessarily enhance safety, but usually results in a longer landing run.


More importantly.... congrats on the SOLO!!!
Click to expand...
Yes, we did do recovery training, so that was factored in as well. Thank you for the congrats and the advice!
 
Tracey said:
Hey Everyone-

I just found this board and I'm glad to be here and get people's opinions & advice. I have a question about extra airspeed.

I soloed last week (!) and kept my airspeed on final the same as when my instructor is with me and as a result, floated longer than I was used to. (I've since learned that the stall speed will decrease with decreased weight in the plane, so my airspeed should have been slower).

The head CFI told me today (when I asked him about this) that that is ok for a first time solo student to carry some extra speed (5 or so kts), because it acts as a bit of a safety buffer for the inexperienced pilot. (I hope I'm not butchering what he told me, this is how I understood it).

I'm just curious what everyone else's experience was and what their thoughts are on extra speed being a "safety buffer."

I fly a 172.

Thanks!
Tracey
Click to expand...
What speed were you flying? Just as a point of reference you really never have any business on short final being above 65 knots in a 172, regardless of the conditions (because that airspeed is already fast).
 
pericynthion said:
But you should try to get more proficient in hitting exactly the "right" approach speed. You'll develop a feeling for what that speed is and how it varies with different airplane weights
Click to expand...
Yes, I think that's what I'll be concentrating on next. At least, that's what I'd like to concentrate on next-- surprises are not something I like in aviation! (And floating for a bit was a surprise to me).
 
jesse said:
What speed were you flying?
Click to expand...
Final approach speed for my 172 (and maybe all 172s?) is 65 to 70. I kept it at 70, which I think, was pushing it.
 
jesse said:
What speed were you flying? Just as a point of reference you really never have any business on short final being above 65 knots in a 172, regardless of the conditions (because that airspeed is already fast).
Click to expand...
Typically I'm anywhere between 65 and 70, as I said in the above post-- but I was 70 when I soloed, obviously FAR too fast. But he said today that it was ok as a safety buffer. I will be far more diligent in keeping it at 65 for my next solo.
 
Tracey said:
Final approach speed for my 172 (and maybe all 172s?) is 65 to 70. I kept it at 70, which I think, was pushing it.
Click to expand...

It really depends on the model and if there are any STCs. 70 is defiantly too fast. 65 is appropriate if you're at gross.

What speed is Vs0 in the 172? Take that value and multiply it by 1.3 and that's about where you'll want to be at gross.

If you're floating at all then you're too fast. Done right you'll come down to the runway, round out, and touch down immediately thereafter. Some people seem to develop the idea in their head that floating for 500 ft or more is how you land. It's not.

If I am solo in a 172 I'm going to be somewhere around 50 knots on short final.
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
It really depends on the model and if there are any STCs. 70 is defiantly too fast. 65 is appropriate if you're at gross.

What speed is Vs0 in the 172? Take that value and multiply it by 1.3 and that's about where you'll want to be at gross.

If you're floating at all then you're too fast. Done right you'll come down to the runway, round out, and touch down immediately thereafter.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is what I've learned since my floating... floating... floating... will this thing ever go down....experience!

I'll find out the Vso speed. (This is probably something I should know off the top of my head- yikes! I don't).
 
Tracey said:
Final approach speed for my 172 (and maybe all 172s?) is 65 to 70. I kept it at 70, which I think, was pushing it.
Click to expand...

What that means is that you probably want to be at 70 as you complete the base to final turn, and have slowed to 1.3 times your stall speed in your landing configuration as you descend on final, with speed at 10 feet above the runway at 1.2 times stall speed, and you bleed off that 20% in the flare.

So if you are at 65 at 1/2 mile out, and maybe 60ish once you're over the threshold and starting the flare, you'll be golden.

All this assumes light winds. In significant crosswinds you may fly faster and with less flaps, and in gusty winds you will add some extra (1/2 the gust factor normally) speed.

I notice when I give BFRs that pilots who may have been religious about full flaps and slow speeds when they took their checkrides have let their speeds creep up over the years, and they come in too fast. Makes for nice, smooth, but LOOOOOOONG landings. So we go around again until they make consistently slow and safe landings, even if they're a little firm.

Someday something will happen and you'll either need to land as slowly as possible (short field) or be glad you landed with minimal energy (deer runs out and hits you). So get in the habit and stay in it.
 
TMetzinger said:
So get in the habit and stay in it.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I want to do-- get the "muscle memory" of good habits and then keep them!

Thank you for your response, I really appreciate it.
 
So, a lesson was learned today.

It's been quite a while since I flew a 172, but as best I recall 70 is too fast. As you learn the plane, you'll learn to adjust for conditions.

I've got mods (Vortex Generators) on my Commander that lower the stall speed, so I tend to land on the slower side & make the first turnoff. That said, I do adjust for cross-wind conditions & the occasional request from ATC to keep my speed up on final for traffic. That's not "normal" flying by any means.

The best way to learn good airspeed control is to use short runways. If you can land on a short runway, you can land on a long one.
 
Tracey said:
Yes, this is what I've learned since my floating... floating... floating... will this thing ever go down....experience!
Click to expand...

Yea. That's the problem with 172's and the like. With a 170 you could have just done a wheel landing, but that is not an option when the tailwheel is on the wrong end.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Yea. That's the problem with 172's and the like. With a 170 you could have just done a wheel landing, but that is not an option when the tailwheel is on the wrong end.
Click to expand...
The wrong end-- that's funny. I kinda like it where it is, although it'd be fun to learn how to fly a tail dragger. I've been told that if you can learn to fly those well, you're a much better pilot.
 
jesse said:
What speed were you flying? Just as a point of reference you really never have any business on short final being above 65 knots in a 172, regardless of the conditions (because that airspeed is already fast).
Click to expand...

Interesting. I just did a checkout in a 172 a few days ago (though it was the 180hp conversion).

The instructor said "63 knots final approach but 65 is easier to see on the dials".

Kimberly
 
Sometimes on really long runways, I'll land long on purpose to reduce taxi times.
 
The logic of carrying extra energy into a landing where extra energy is the primary destructive factor and calling that a 'safety margin' is eluding me at the moment.
 
kimberlyanne546 said:
The instructor said "63 knots final approach but 65 is easier to see on the dials".
Click to expand...
I've always done 65 to 70 on final, but maybe they teach that to pre-solo students (which I'm not anymore!) for that "buffer of safety" that he mentioned. With the extra weight in the plane it worked well. Sounds like 65 even with my CFI is better than 70. But certainly after losing 200 lbs in about 1 minute (when my instructor got out, fastest weight loss ever), my approach needed to be much slower. I had just never heard of the safety buffer factor with regard to airspeed (in calm winds) before.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
The logic of carrying extra energy into a landing where extra energy is the primary destructive factor and calling that a 'safety margin' is eluding me at the moment.
Click to expand...
Which is why I posted my question, it eluded me too, but then- I'm used to that. :rolleyes:
 
Tracey said:
I've always done 65 to 70 on final, but maybe they teach that to pre-solo students (which I'm not anymore!) for that "buffer of safety" that he mentioned. With the extra weight in the plane it worked well. Sounds like 65 even with my CFI is better than 70. But certainly after losing 200 lbs in about 1 minute (when muy instructor got out, fastest weight loss ever), my approach needed to be much slower. I had just never heard of the safety buffer factor with regard to airspeed (in calm winds) before.
Click to expand...

Next time you are there look in the POH for that exact plane and see what it says for normal landing / approach speeds. 70 seems high since I did my primary training in a 152 and on some of the "advanced" landings we were in the 50's on base. (He likes me to get all set up on base so final is "perfect" / no changes)
 
kimberlyanne546 said:
Next time you are there look in the POH for that exact plane and see what it says for normal landing / approach speeds. 70 seems high since I did my primary training in a 152 and on some of the "advanced" landings we were in the 50's on base. (He likes me to get all set up on base so final is "perfect" / no changes)
Click to expand...
Exactly what I was taught as well (set up on base for an "easy" final). And yes, I will (look in the POH that is). The POH should say the Vso speeds too, right?
 
Henning said:
The logic of carrying extra energy into a landing where extra energy is the primary destructive factor and calling that a 'safety margin' is eluding me at the moment.
Click to expand...

You know the more speed you have, the further you are from a stall right? :D :stirpot:

I only flew a 172 one time (2 up), and I came down final at 60kts, full flaps, power-off, and still felt like it floated more than I would have liked. I don't get all the extra speed that is being taught. 1000' floats are a frequent sight at my airport. :sigh:
 
Last edited:
kimberlyanne546 said:
Wow, neat idea, however, taxiways confuse me. I'd probably end up at the wrong end and have to go all the way back.
Click to expand...

To save Hobbs time, at an uncontrolled airport with no other planes active, I'll shut 'er down as soon as I can, hop out of the "152", whip out the tow bar, and tow it into a parking spot. It's good excercise if you tug the plane >1000ft! :rofl:

I put "152" in quotes cause I only would do that for a 152 or if I had a willing passenger to help me, a Citabria. I wouldn't tug a heavier plane than that. :D
 
RoscoeT said:
You know the more speed you have, the further you are from a stall right? :D :stirpot:

I only flew a 172 one time (2 up), and I came down final at 60kts, full flaps, power-off, and still felt like it floated more than I would have liked. I don't get all the extra speed that is being taught. 1000' floats are a frequent sight at my airport. :sigh:
Click to expand...

Short approach speed is 1.2 Vso. 38 + 8 = 46kts.
 
Agreed that 70 is probably too fast in a Skyhawk.

I also want to make it a point to say we're talking in KNOTS right? Since no one asked...

(Plenty of old Skyhawks out there with Airspeed Indicators labeled as delivered from the factory, in MPH not knots.)

And... if you ever get a chance to step up to the 182, 70 is way way WAY too fast.

Always gives me a chuckle when folks transition to the bigger, heavier bird and think it needs to fly faster.

"The book don't say 'dat! It just ain't so!" ;)

Get out the book, calculate your speeds for your new weight without that heavy instructor taking up precious useful load in the right seat, and work on nailing that number.

If the load changes and that pesky instructor climbs back aboard later to work on your cross-county skills, adjust as needed.

Wait 'til you fill the back seat someday. That first fully loaded flight is also an eye opener.

Now you're heavier yet, and the CG is further aft. That flare will seem "too easy", since the nose will come up with lighter pressure from your trimmed approach speed trim setting.

Fun stuff! Congrats on solo! Bust out that POH and start calculatin'!
 
denverpilot said:
Fun stuff! Congrats on solo! Bust out that POH and start calculatin'!
Click to expand...
I will! (Especially since I reckon that pesky instructor is going to climb back in for x-countrys). Yes, very fun stuff. And thanks!
 
denverpilot said:
Agreed that 70 is probably too fast in a Skyhawk.

I also want to make it a point to say we're talking in KNOTS right? Since no one asked...

(Plenty of old Skyhawks out there with Airspeed Indicators labeled as delivered from the factory, in MPH not knots.)

And... if you ever get a chance to step up to the 182, 70 is way way WAY too fast.

Always gives me a chuckle when folks transition to the bigger, heavier bird and think it needs to fly faster.

"The book don't say 'dat! It just ain't so!" ;)

Get out the book, calculate your speeds for your new weight without that heavy instructor taking up precious useful load in the right seat, and work on nailing that number.

If the load changes and that pesky instructor climbs back aboard later to work on your cross-county skills, adjust as needed.

Wait 'til you fill the back seat someday. That first fully loaded flight is also an eye opener.

Now you're heavier yet, and the CG is further aft. That flare will seem "too easy", since the nose will come up with lighter pressure from your trimmed approach speed trim setting.

Fun stuff! Congrats on solo! Bust out that POH and start calculatin'!
Click to expand...

My landings weren't that great and I had a pax in the back (which is rare). Then again, it was night, I've only flown that plane twice before, and the guy in the back was light. I hope to get better and the CFI who did my checkout made me do many landings until she was happy so I know they didn't just let me off easy. I'm sure I'm safe but I miss greasing my landings in the 152. Oh well.
 
POH under normal conditions section 172N
Normal landing 55 - 65kts
Short field 40degrees flaps 60kts.
Emergency landing no engine 60kts.
 
kimberlyanne546 said:
I'm sure I'm safe but I miss greasing my landings in the 152. Oh well.
Click to expand...
I flew in a 152 once and I loved it. I wish we had one of those at my flight school so I could fly in it again. It felt more... responsive, maybe.
 
TripleZ said:
POH under normal conditions section 172N
Normal landing 55 - 65kts
Short field 40degrees flaps 60kts.
Emergency landing no engine 60kts.
Click to expand...
I'm flying a 172 SP- I wonder if there is that much of a difference between the N and SP models?
 
TMetzinger said:
True, but check the table for CAS vs IAS. At slower speeds you may be flying at 46 CAS while your airspeed indicator reads higher.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

With the STOL kit my Skylane will come off the ground at around 35 knots INDICATED at Flaps 30.

It looks, feels, and sounds, and probably is... completely insane. Robinson labeled it an "emergency" procedure in the POH addendum.

There's zero margin for loss of power if you can muster up the courage and upper arm strength to yank it aloft at that speed. It also won't climb until you lower the nose slightly to accelerate.

Great demonstration of ground effect. 50' obstacle clearance distance actually goes UP.

It's intended for exactly what it says, "Short Takeoff Or Landing". Nothing in the moniker STOL about climb capability. ;)

It has almost no real-world practical application unless you're regularly departing from a 1000' runway with zero obstacles ahead.

Or... You're about to hit the trees after an engine out and want a lot less energy transmitted to your noggin by that branch about to come through the window. :(
 
TripleZ said:
POH under normal conditions section 172N
Normal landing 55 - 65kts
Short field 40degrees flaps 60kts.
Emergency landing no engine 60kts.
Click to expand...

Right, and those speeds are for max gross weight. Any reduction in weight comes with a reduction in stall and approach speed.
 
Henning said:
Right, and those speeds are for max gross weight. Any reduction in weight comes with a reduction in stall and approach speed.
Click to expand...
Cheez, then at 70 I should have been pulled over and given a ticket. That was WAY too fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top