"The Flare"

[dmccormack]

I had a discussion post-pattern with a student yesterday. He said his previous instructor described the "flare" but he didn't quite understand.

I told him to forget he ever heard the term, and that landing was simply a transition from descent to level slow flight about a foot above the runway, with the object to hold it off as long as possible.

Then I demonstrated and never used the term "flare."

He said that made more sense to him and seemed less complicated.

We practice slow flight, stalls, transitions from descents to level at various airspeeds, but in no other maneuver do we "flare."

Quite frankly, I think it's a holdover term that fails to convey the proper landing technique.

So here's my question/challenge/pot stirring -- Why do we even use the term "flare" when it has no application in any other regime of flight?

 

[MauleSkinner]

So here's my question/challenge/pot stirring -- Why do we even use the term "flare" when it has no application in any other regime of flight?

Because "Transition from descent to level slow flight about a foot above the runway, with the object to hold it off as long as possible, *#(@(*&%!, transition from descent to level slow flight about a foot above the runway, with the object to hold it off as long as possible!" just doesn't have the ring to it?

 

[dmccormack]

Because "Transition from descent to level slow flight about a foot above the runway, with the object to hold it off as long as possible, *#(@(*&%!, transition from descent to level slow flight about a foot above the runway, with the object to hold it off as long as possible!" just doesn't have the ring to it?

"Ring" none...true.

But, any PPL aspirant should understand that (more convoluted) sentence by the time he/she is practicing landings.

He/she has done transitions, slow flight, and stalls, so it's a matter of stringing them all together.

 

[mikea]

...

So here's my question/challenge/pot stirring -- Why do we even use the term "flare" when it has no application in any other regime of flight?

Because birds do flares?

I was never confused by the term, I pretty much imagine the attitude in the decent stays the same (even though you're really constantly making adjustments) until you back it off with the flare to make the touchdown slow and light.

 

[sba55]

When I think of the flare, I think of only two things: How high above TDZE I am, and what my angle of attack is.

Rod Machado had an interesting article on this subject about a year ago in AOPA's magazine where he described why he _didn't_ teach full stall landings. I'll see if I can find it. All I want to teach on landing is attitude and _when_ to flare.

I had a lot of trouble doing the full stall to landing thing in primary training, and it became a lot easier when I changed to an instructor who didn't think that slamming on the runway in a full stall was necessary.

Flare: Altitude and attitude. That's all.

IMO.

-Felix

 

[dmccormack]

I had a lot of trouble doing the full stall to landing thing in primary training, and it became a lot easier when I changed to an instructor who didn't think that slamming on the runway in a full stall was necessary.

I remember that article, but as long as the logic used is not an excuse to come in hot, I agree with his conclusions.

But....

If you were "Banging the runway" because of a "full stall landing" you were dropping it in. The idea behind a "full stall landing" is that you're arriving with minimal airspeed, and that is verified by the stall warning horn, not the bottom dropping out.

 

[dmccormack]

Because birds do flares?

I was never confused by the term, I pretty much imagine the attitude in the decent stays the same (even though you're really constantly making adjustments) until you back it off with the flare to make the touchdown slow and light.

Some do... But ducks and geese are more like a managed impact.

 

[sba55]

I remember that article, but as long as the logic used is not an excuse to come in hot, I agree with his conclusions.

But....

If you were "Banging the runway" because of a "full stall landing" you were dropping it in. The idea behind a "full stall landing" is that you're arriving with minimal airspeed, and that is verified by the stall warning horn, not the bottom dropping out.

Right. This was early on in my primary training. I don't think my landing technique at that point was spot on

In any case, I think this stuff is a lot easier to learn if we just talk about attitude and altitude. I think all this 'holding it off until the last second', etc., is perfectly fine, but it's not easy to do and it's not something most students can consistently turn into a good landing. In my limited experience, most low timers flare too high and then drop the last two feet onto the runway. Personally, I flare very, very low (inches, usually) and my pitch change is very minimal, just enough to hold the nose wheel off. I've tried this approach with some people whose landings were rather rough before and it really helped.

Felix

 

[kevin47881]

Some do... But ducks and geese are more like a managed impact.

You've never seen a wild turkey attempt to land when going to roost have you? Not a pretty sight and definitely no flare or managed impact

 

[PHXAvi8tor]

Ever heard a CFI say, "Flare! Flare, Flare! Awww, shoot, I have the plane!" ????

Flare is quicker to say when time is of the essence.

Your point is well-taken, though. Landing is a controlled stall, where the stall happens just when the wheels are touching the earth. Nothing more graceful. Just wish we could kiss the ground, but the wheels are doing that for us.

 

[rottydaddy]

I've always thought of it as a shorthand term for "transition from descent to level slow flight about a foot above the runway"... but I think some students get confused because it is described to them as if it is some other thing that happens in addition to descending and leveling off.

That might explain how many beginners do OK "rounding out" (there's another term for the same thing) but then either pull back too much and balloon or wind up pranging the nosewheel (or both!), because they have this notion that there's something else you need to do besides level off at the right height and airspeed and hold that slightly nose-high attitude until the plane settles. The mysterious "flare"...

 

[MauleSkinner]

I've always thought of it as a shorthand term for "transition from descent to level slow flight about a foot above the runway"... but I think some students get confused because it is described to them as if it is some other thing that happens in addition to descending and leveling off.

That might explain how many beginners do OK "rounding out" (there's another term for the same thing) but then either pull back too much and balloon or wind up pranging the nosewheel (or both!), because they have this notion that there's something else you need to do besides level off at the right height and airspeed and hold that slightly nose-high attitude until the plane settles. The mysterious "flare"...

Just make a note of how many times you read "the roundout and flare" in magazine articles...no wonder it's confusing.

 

[dmccormack]

Just make a note of how many times you read "the roundout and flare" in magazine articles...no wonder it's confusing.

The Airplane Flying Handbook uses the terms interchangeably:

"ROUNDOUT (FLARE)
The roundout is a slow, smooth transition from a normal
approach attitude to a landing attitude, gradually
rounding out the flightpath to one that is parallel with,
and within a very few inches above, the runway. When
the airplane, in a normal descent, approaches within
what appears to be 10 to 20 feet above the ground, the
roundout or flare should be started, and once started
should be a continuous process until the airplane
touches down on the ground." (Page 8-5)

The interchangeability of the two terms means a lack of precision --all the other important words concerning landing (stall, attitude, angle of attack, ground effect, etc) are very well defined and practiced repeatedly, as they ought.

I think it's jargon with greater potential to obfuscate than enlighten.

 

[write-stuff]

Semantics have been giving us all problems from day one. And it get's even more confusing because different instructors teach landings in different ways.

Excerpted from "The Art and Science of Better Landings":

The FAA​

​

Airplane Flying Handbook, defines the roundout/flare as a single
entity and describes the pilot actions needed in a mere two sentences. Since
these final few seconds of the landing process traditionally contain the most
difficult control issues for new students, an abbreviated breakdown in two
sentences is less than helpful.

A study published in The International Journal of Aviation Psychology in
2005 recognized that “Transitioning . . . from the approach attitude to the
landing attitude is one of the first obstacles that confront new students.” The
study indicated that the process is “poorly understood and underreported.”
Depending on the source, the final phases of flight are often listed:​

•​

​

Descent, Roundout/Flare​

•​

​

Descent, Roundout, Flare​

•​

​

Descent, Leveloff, Roundout, Flare​

•​

​

Descent, Roundout, Float, Flare​

•​

​

Descent, Roundout, Holdoff, Flare​

•​

​

Descent, Flare
​

There is no consensus about the exact definitions of “roundout” and “flare”.
Talk to three pilots and you’ll likely get three explanations of where the
roundout ends and the flare begins.

During interviews for this book, one pilot commented, “The problem is that
you are looking for names for discrete parts of the landing process. In
actuality, it is one continuous process where each of your ‘parts’ blends into
the next with no finite boundary. It is one continuous slow pull on the yoke.”
The​

​

IJAP study found that pilots regarded the roundout (their definition) to
be more difficult when presented with a diagram and less difficult when
presented with a textual definition. The study went on to conclude that “60%
of expert pilots attributed roundout difficulty to difficulty in perceiving
altitude AGL. This difficulty is symptomatic of the leveloff, not the
roundout.” The more likely conclusion is that the pilots were unclear of the
definitions begin used.

This problem of definition is indicative of the wider problem – too much
emphasis is put on the indeterminate art of landing. Pilots and instructors​

have not developed a standard model of the landing process.

 

[dmccormack]

Ever heard a CFI say, "Flare! Flare, Flare! Awww, shoot, I have the plane!" ????

My primary instructor used the term rarely.

Rather, I remember him repeatedly saying "hold it off, it off, hold it off, hold it off..." until the chirp.

The CFI I used for an hour when I returned to flying after a 5 year lapse said -- about 15' off the deck -- "OK, now flare!" which made absolutely no sense to me and was more distracting than anything.

After a couple of stop and gos I said on the next downwind, "How about you just watch this one and don't say anything?"

 

[bobmrg]

My primary instructor used the term rarely.

Rather, I remember him repeatedly saying "hold it off, it off, hold it off, hold it off..." until the chirp.

The CFI I used for an hour when I returned to flying after a 5 year lapse said -- about 15' off the deck -- "OK, now flare!" which made absolutely no sense to me and was more distracting than anything.

After a couple of stop and gos I said on the next downwind, "How about you just watch this one and don't say anything?"

I heard the same thing from my oldest student (he was 83). I did, and he did just fine.

Bob Gardner

 

[Baron 55]

I cannot recall anyone ever being confused or otherwise about the term "flare" in all my flying. Not that I really care whether one uses the term or not.