The Zen of the Flare: 3-point landing question

alfadog

alfadog

Final Approach
Joined
May 3, 2010
Messages
5,057
Location
Miami
Display Name
Display name:
alfadog
Well hello, fellow pilots.

Looking for some feedback from y'all that fly taildraggers.

Flew the Luscombe a bit yesterday. It has been about six weeks and I was seriously rusty. Trying to get my 3-pointers down (I tend to like wheel landings better). This is what I experience.

I have my sight picture for 3-point in mind and round out maybe 5 - 8 feet over the runway, no power, after 70 mph on the approach (this is a Luscombe, not a Cub :))

I start to hold it off but nowhere near my 3-point attitude. I continue to raise the nose and think I am holding it off. Sometime before I reach the correct attitude my wheels touch. Now I am in that in-between attitude, again, that my instructor did not like. I pull the tail down.

Is it just that I am crap at holding it off (edit: too afraid of ballooning)? Or is there something else going on - round out too low, should hold some power, etc.?
 
Last edited:
The tail should touch at the same time or a little before the mains in a normal 3-point.
 
A wee tad of power will allow you to put the airplane in the attitude you want and hold it there prior to touchdown.

alfadog said:
Well hello, fellow pilots.

Looking for some feedback from y'all that fly taildraggers.

Flew the Luscombe a bit yesterday. It has been about six weeks and I was seriously rusty. Trying to get my 3-pointers down (I tend to like wheel landings better). This is what I experience.

I have my sight picture for 3-point in mind and round out maybe 5 - 8 feet over the runway, no power, after 70 mph on the approach (this is a Luscombe, not a Cub :))

I start to hold it off but nowhere near my 3-point attitude. I continue to raise the nose and think I am holding it off. Sometime before I reach the correct attitude my wheels touch. Now I am in that in-between attitude, again, that my instructor did not like. I pull the tail down.

Is it just that I am crap at holding it off (edit: too afraid of ballooning)? Or is there something else going on - round out too low, should hold some power, etc.?
Click to expand...
 
I don't know squat about Luscombes, but 70 mph seems fast on approach. I read a 44mph stall speed for this plane. 1.3Vso would be a 57mph approach. IMO, excess speed on approach makes a 3-pointer more difficult, since you are more likely to either balloon or bounce, due to the excess speed.

I would try approaching a little slower, still power off, and maybe start breaking your glide a little earlier and try for a slow, smooth pull aft of the stick so that by the time you've gotten down to a few inches off the runway, you're pretty close to 3-point attitude, without much energy left for bouncing or ballooning. I see lots of folks fly it all the way down to the runway at their approach speed and then float a long way, either bouncing or ballooning while trying to 3-point. Get most of your airspeed bled before you get this close to the runway. Obviously adjust when the air is unstable so that a gust doesn't drop you hard early.

Practice, practice! What you describe is the reason lots of folks just opt for wheelies...you don't have to be precise with your attitude or airspeed doing wheelies. :D ....just descent rate. A good 3-pointer requires all of these things to occur simultaneously, which is why I think a perfect 3-pointer is more challenging than a perfect wheelie. I like the minimum speed associated with 3-pointers.
 
Last edited:
RoscoeT said:
I don't know squat about Luscombes, but 70 mph seems fast on approach. I read a 44mph stall speed for this plane. 1.3Vso would be a 57mph approach. IMO, excess speed on approach makes a 3-pointer more difficult, since you are more likely to either balloon or bounce, due to the excess speed.

I would try approaching a little slower, still power off, and maybe start breaking your glide a little earlier and try for a slow, smooth pull aft of the stick so that by the time you've gotten down to a few inches off the runway, you're pretty close to 3-point attitude, without much energy left for bouncing or ballooning. I see lots of folks fly it all the way down to the runway at their approach speed and then float a long way, either bouncing or ballooning while trying to 3-point. Get most of your airspeed bled before you get this close to the runway. Obviously adjust when the air is unstable so that a gust doesn't drop you hard early.

Practice, practice! What you describe is the reason lots of folks just opt for wheelies...you don't have to be precise with your attitude or airspeed doing wheelies. :D ....just descent rate. A good 3-pointer requires all of these things to occur simultaneously, which is why I think a perfect 3-pointer is more challenging than a perfect wheelie. I like the minimum speed associated with 3-pointers.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with this. 70mph seems a bit fast, especially for a 3 point. 70 might work well when you are first learning wheel landings, but even in the 170, I like to be no more than 65 on short final if I am going to 3 point. I would imagine the Luscombe would be even slower.
 
Whatever airspeed you are at is only going to affect how much runway is going to be behind you when you finally do touch down with all 3. So while reducing the airspeed will help....you need to concentrate on not letting it touch longer to overcome your touching down too soon, that is the solution to your problem. Hold it off longer, just dont get too close to the other end of the runway.

Now to talk about airspeed, what might be hurting you is that the airplane is trimmed for 70mph while your on final. So when you get into the flare you might be feeling stick forces that you dont want to overcome while flaring. Try trimming for 65 or 60 once comfortable. That will get you to the 3-point attitude more comfortably.

Once you sort out both of these items you should be able to make an approach that allows you to set it down in the 3pt attitude and in the touchdown zone.
 
If you are consistently landing on the mains, I see two possibilities. One is that you are letting the airplane get too low too soon - before you get the nose up as far as you need. The other is that you think you are in a three point attitude when you are not.

In either case, hold it off just a bit more than you have...
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
If you are consistently landing on the mains, I see two possibilities. One is that you are letting the airplane get too low too soon - before you get the nose up as far as you need. The other is that you think you are in a three point attitude when you are not.

In either case, hold it off just a bit more than you have...
Click to expand...
I doubt the option one is happening as that will almost always result in a bounce unless you cram the stick forward at touchdown. The latter seems very likely though and the usual issue is simply not pulling back far enough and/or long enough. A higher than desirable approach speed makes that more likely because we tend to stop increasing stick pressure at some point and approaching with excess speed means that the stick force will be higher at touchdown (assuming neutral stick force on approach) in the three point attitude.

So my recommendations are:

1) start out at a slower speed and make sure you're trimmed for it
2) Force yourself to keep moving the stick aft (with increasing pressure) while holding the airplane off the runway until you start touching tail first, then back off a tiny bit on the next landing.

I also find it helpful to carefully note the location of the visible horizon on the forward structure of the airplane before taking off when I haven't flown the airplane for a while. This makes it much easier to visualize the proper attitude the airplane should achieve before touchdown. If you keep pulling back until you get the same sight picture while holding the wheels a few inches above the runway you'll get a decent 3-point touchdown every time.
 
All the above advice is more or less useful, but the key here is you are letting the airplane get too low.

Two things will help.

1) Try to hold the airplane at a distance above the runway that you think is a little too high.

2) Get the mind set that you are not going to let the airplane touch down.
Currently you are trying to land when you should be trying to make the airplane stay in the air until it will no longer fly. No matter what, you are not going to let the wheels touch. With that mind set you will hold it off until it quits flying. If you don't reach the aft stop on the elevator control you are not holding it off long enough.

On a related note, if you are comfortable with a 70mph approach and don't want to go slower, start reducing your speed at about 15 feet instead of 5-8 feet. That will allow you to bleed off the excess speed before you get into ground effect.

Gratuitus aircraft porn.

Citabria2turnsRecovery.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the replies and please keep them coming!

OK, went up and did another two hours of so today. First to the practice area to see how she stalls. Power on, still flying at 40 mph and power off not much more than 40 mph so no need to hold the 70 mph as I was taught. Changed to 65 on short final and 60 - 65 over the numbers.

Seems that if I do not hold some power, then I do not have a lot of excess momentum to round out level but fall through and land a bit hard. In other words, if I round out at six feet, put it in the 3-point position (and I do know my sight picture for 3-point) then I am now going to fall about four feet. :goofy:

Adding power definitely helps. I add until I can hear the prop working through the open windows but it works out to maybe 1100-1200 rpm.

So with some power and a slower approach, I can settle it down in a 3-point.

I do seem that I am controlling it with power. It is not like landing a Cessna - hold off, hold off, hold off. If I do that then I will end up with the nose much higher than three point. I guess you would call that a full stall landing where the tailwheel touches first. So if I stop raising the nose when it reaches the 3-point attitude then I fall if a bit high and no power or I control the final descent rate with power.

Is that correct?
 
Yes. Sounds about right to me. I notice that my 3point landings are much nicer if I have the throttle just cracked as if for starting... So, both stick and throttle come back at touch down
 
Sounds like too much approach speed, and rounding out too low. The roundout should start higher so that the airplane arrives at the surface without enough speed to float. Floating makes landing difficult every time and increases the risk of ballooning.

Dan
 
Jeanie said:
Yes. Sounds about right to me. I notice that my 3point landings are much nicer if I have the throttle just cracked as if for starting... So, both stick and throttle come back at touch down
Click to expand...
I disagree. Using power to smooth out the touchdown is a crutch you won't have handy if you ever need to land without the engine running and you should be able to do that on a normal landing in almost any airplane. It may be OK to get things to work initially but once you've gotten consistent you should work towards having the throttle closed during the roundout. This does shorten the time from your initial pull up into the flare until your touchdown and that means you have to perform the roundout more quickly but it's still possible to do so smoothly.
 
gismo said:
I disagree. Using power to smooth out the touchdown is a crutch you won't have handy if you ever need to land without the engine running and you should be able to do that on a normal landing in almost any airplane..
Click to expand...

Yep +1
 
Thank you for all the responses. I will take some time later to respond to them individually.

I phrased this question as "Zen" which implies an art that cannot be taught but must be experienced.

Or as the Tao teaches

"The way that can be spoken of. Is not the constant way"

Meaning that we teach but teaching only opens the door; it is for the student to walk through it.

But aviation is both art and science. So to aid my understanding of the process, I am reviewing the science of it below.

Below is the standard lift equation where A is the reference area; we often use S in place of A to refer to wing surface area.

eq1.gif


It is obvious that for the airplane to continue in level flight we must hold L constant and equal to the weight of the airplane. The physics of how a wing generates lift, the effect of flaps, or the influence of ground effect are not really relevant once we are leveled out in ground effect in the landing configuration.

Since we are landing, it is a given that we have reduced power below that needed to overcome drag at our given approach speed. That is why we are descending at that power setting; the descent increases the AOA vis-a-vis relative wind until we again have lift equal to weight; the component of weight in the direction of travel offsets drag and we are at steady state, equilibrium.

Once we round out, we now longer have the forward component of weight contributing to the offset of drag and the airplane begins to slow. As it slows, less lift is generated as a result of velocity and we must do something if we do not want to descend so we raise the nose, increase AOA and, thus CsubL and lift. If we continue to increase lift by raising the nose at the exact rate needed to compensate for the continuing reduction in velocity then we are "holding it off". Increase too slowly and we settle in; increase too fast and we balloon.

For me, I am very averse to ballooning so I tend to settle in.

Since we raise the nose as a response and are therefore at least a fraction of a second behind the airplane we can expect to lose some altitude during this process. I imagine some will say they can raise the nose at the exact rate needed and do not lost a few feet in the flare but I am not them, I guess.

If we time the pull-back exactly so that we reach 3-point attitude in a taildragger or stall horn in a Cessna just as we have the wheels a few inches off the ground then we have executed reasonably perfectly if we also have the airplane lined up with the centerline and have accompished this in the first 1/3 or less of runway.

Adding power does not change the dynamics of this process, it still happens the same way. Power slows the process down as now we have some thrust to offset a portion of the drag so deceleration is reduced and we have more time to execute the flare; that could lead to using up too much runway before touchdown if fast on approach.

Looking at it this way, coupled with the good advice here, helps me to see better what I need to do in the flare.
 
RoscoeT said:
I don't know squat about Luscombes, but 70 mph seems fast on approach. I read a 44mph stall speed for this plane. 1.3Vso would be a 57mph approach. IMO, excess speed on approach makes a 3-pointer more difficult, since you are more likely to either balloon or bounce, due to the excess speed.

I would try approaching a little slower, still power off, and maybe start breaking your glide a little earlier and try for a slow, smooth pull aft of the stick so that by the time you've gotten down to a few inches off the runway, you're pretty close to 3-point attitude, without much energy left for bouncing or ballooning. I see lots of folks fly it all the way down to the runway at their approach speed and then float a long way, either bouncing or ballooning while trying to 3-point. Get most of your airspeed bled before you get this close to the runway. Obviously adjust when the air is unstable so that a gust doesn't drop you hard early.

Practice, practice! What you describe is the reason lots of folks just opt for wheelies...you don't have to be precise with your attitude or airspeed doing wheelies. :D ....just descent rate. A good 3-pointer requires all of these things to occur simultaneously, which is why I think a perfect 3-pointer is more challenging than a perfect wheelie. I like the minimum speed associated with 3-pointers.
Click to expand...


That was my first thought as well, 70MPH? I don't know the Luscombe, but that seems REALLY fast to me.

That said, I'm a rank rookie myself, with only something like 350 tailwheel landings.

Alfa, have you been doing predominantly wheel landings or three point. My wheel landings are terrible, but I naturally put it into a three point attitude. Maybe if you've been doing wheel landings, the three point attitude is unnatural for you.

I wish I could offer more help.
 
alfadog said:
Thank you for all the responses. I will take some time later to respond to them individually.

I phrased this question as "Zen" which implies an art that cannot be taught but must be experienced.

Or as the Tao teaches

"The way that can be spoken of. Is not the constant way"

Meaning that we teach but teaching only opens the door; it is for the student to walk through it.

But aviation is both art and science. So to aid my understanding of the process, I am reviewing the science of it below.

Below is the standard lift equation where A is the reference area; we often use S in place of A to refer to wing surface area.

eq1.gif


It is obvious that for the airplane to continue in level flight we must hold L constant and equal to the weight of the airplane. The physics of how a wing generates lift, the effect of flaps, or the influence of ground effect are not really relevant once we are leveled out in ground effect in the landing configuration.

Since we are landing, it is a given that we have reduced power below that needed to overcome drag at our given approach speed. That is why we are descending at that power setting; the descent increases the AOA vis-a-vis relative wind until we again have lift equal to weight; the component of weight in the direction of travel offsets drag and we are at steady state, equilibrium.

Once we round out, we now longer have the forward component of weight contributing to the offset of drag and the airplane begins to slow. As it slows, less lift is generated as a result of velocity and we must do something if we do not want to descend so we raise the nose, increase AOA and, thus CsubL and lift. If we continue to increase lift by raising the nose at the exact rate needed to compensate for the continuing reduction in velocity then we are "holding it off". Increase too slowly and we settle in; increase too fast and we balloon.

For me, I am very averse to ballooning so I tend to settle in.

Since we raise the nose as a response and are therefore at least a fraction of a second behind the airplane we can expect to lose some altitude during this process. I imagine some will say they can raise the nose at the exact rate needed and do not lost a few feet in the flare but I am not them, I guess.

If we time the pull-back exactly so that we reach 3-point attitude in a taildragger or stall horn in a Cessna just as we have the wheels a few inches off the ground then we have executed reasonably perfectly if we also have the airplane lined up with the centerline and have accompished this in the first 1/3 or less of runway.

Adding power does not change the dynamics of this process, it still happens the same way. Power slows the process down as now we have some thrust to offset a portion of the drag so deceleration is reduced and we have more time to execute the flare; that could lead to using up too much runway before touchdown if fast on approach.

Looking at it this way, coupled with the good advice here, helps me to see better what I need to do in the flare.
Click to expand...


John,

Maybe you're getting too wrapped up in theory. Just bring it in at 1.3 Vso, and when you get low, look WAY down the runway and round out. Don't go low and try to assume the three point attitude all at once. Round out.

As you say, Zen might be the key and the only way for you to do it is just practice. Maybe humming while practicing would help.:D

I remember enjoying your videos a few weeks back, but I don't remember if you were wheeling or three pointing. I was quite impressed at your handling of a Luscombe. I know there are lots of similarities between it and my 140, but I've been told that the Luscombe is much more challenging. That said, it doesn't seem to make sense that the handling of the airplane would have much to do with the attitude at flare.

Best of luck with it, and keep us posted.
 
dillardrg said:
All the above advice is more or less useful, but the key here is you are letting the airplane get too low.

Two things will help.

1) Try to hold the airplane at a distance above the runway that you think is a little too high.

2) Get the mind set that you are not going to let the airplane touch down.
Currently you are trying to land when you should be trying to make the airplane stay in the air until it will no longer fly. No matter what, you are not going to let the wheels touch. With that mind set you will hold it off until it quits flying. If you don't reach the aft stop on the elevator control you are not holding it off long enough.

On a related note, if you are comfortable with a 70mph approach and don't want to go slower, start reducing your speed at about 15 feet instead of 5-8 feet. That will allow you to bleed off the excess speed before you get into ground effect.

Gratuitus aircraft porn.

Citabria2turnsRecovery.jpg
Click to expand...


So Ron. Did you post the picture as an example of the correct three point attitude?:D:dunno:
 
MBDiagMan said:
John,

Maybe you're getting too wrapped up in theory. Just bring it in at 1.3 Vso, and when you get low, look WAY down the runway and round out. Don't go low and try to assume the three point attitude all at once. Round out.

As you say, Zen might be the key and the only way for you to do it is just practice. Maybe humming while practicing would help.:D

I remember enjoying your videos a few weeks back, but I don't remember if you were wheeling or three pointing. I was quite impressed at your handling of a Luscombe. I know there are lots of similarities between it and my 140, but I've been told that the Luscombe is much more challenging. That said, it doesn't seem to make sense that the handling of the airplane would have much to do with the attitude at flare.

Best of luck with it, and keep us posted.
Click to expand...

Actually, the theory is recent. I do not tend to get wrapped up in theory.

But the theory does tell me something important (and it does align with your advice):

The airplane will only maintain altitude for a brief instant in the 3-point configuration unless you are holding gobs of power and basically doing slow flight. Any less power than that and the airplane will slow, and drop, as you hold 3-point and do not raise the nose higher. So this idea I somehow picked up that at some point I would be in 3-point attitude, flying level, and working my way down is a total fallacy. It does not happen that way and that is why I wanted to look at the theory.

What will happen is that at some point you will be in the 3-point attitude and then you want to be close enough to the ground that settling in is a non-event. The trick is to start the round-out high enough and be alert enough on the stick that, for me, I do not touch down before reaching 3-point. I tend to start with a round-out too low and maybe be a hair behind on pulling back so now, oops, I'm down and halfway between wheel and 3-point.

Practice!
 
MBDiagMan said:
As you say, Zen might be the key and the only way for you to do it is just practice. Maybe humming while practicing would help.:D

I remember enjoying your videos a few weeks back, but I don't remember if you were wheeling or three pointing. I was quite impressed at your handling of a Luscombe. I know there are lots of similarities between it and my 140, but I've been told that the Luscombe is much more challenging. That said, it doesn't seem to make sense that the handling of the airplane would have much to do with the attitude at flare.

Best of luck with it, and keep us posted.
Click to expand...

Thanks! :yesnod:
 
Your problem is that you fear the bottom of the envelope, 70mph is way to much energy to be carrying in a Luscombe and you're afraid to slow down and lose your forward vision.


First off go spend an hour or so at MCA and get comfortable with that view using your peripheral vision and how the plane handles at low speeds around stall.

Then you just have to trust that things will remain where they were a moment ago when you are in the flare and the panel comes into view. DON'T stretch around to change your view, just keep your eyes pointed on your same point looking 'through the panel' picturing what you are seeing ahead in your mind and keep on easing the stick back to keep your perspective in you peripheral vision from rising or falling and suddenly the tailwheel will tag and she'll plop down onto the mains and sit there unable to fly or bounce.
 
Last edited:
gismo said:
I disagree. Using power to smooth out the touchdown is a crutch you won't have handy if you ever need to land without the engine running and you should be able to do that on a normal landing in almost any airplane. It may be OK to get things to work initially but once you've gotten consistent you should work towards having the throttle closed during the roundout. This does shorten the time from your initial pull up into the flare until your touchdown and that means you have to perform the roundout more quickly but it's still possible to do so smoothly.
Click to expand...


I'll work on it :D....
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Your problem is that you fear the bottom of the envelope, 70mph is way to much energy to be carrying in a Luscombe and you're afraid to slow down and lose your forward vision.


First off go spend an hour or so at MCA and get comfortable with that view using your peripheral vision and how the plane handles at low speeds around stall.

Then you just have to trust that things will remain where they were a moment ago when you are in the flare and the panel comes into view. DON'T stretch around to change your view, just keep your eyes pointed on your same point looking 'through the panel' picturing what you are seeing ahead in your mind and keep on easing the stick back to keep your perspective in you peripheral vision from rising or falling and suddenly the tailwheel will tag and she'll plop down onto the mains and sit there unable to fly or bounce.
Click to expand...

Cough fear cough. Obviously you have never driven with me; or flown for that manner. :yikes:

I was taught 70; it had nothing to do with fear unless it was my instructor's fear. Based on advice here, I lowered that to 60 - 65 yesterday.

What I "fear" is breaking the airplane. I consider myself extremely fortunate that a fellow I met in a bar has given me the keys to his vintage Luscombe. I do not abuse trust like that. So I am leery of hitting hard and I have hit hardish a few times.

Like I said, yesterday I first did stalls and flying just above stall to get an idea of where I should put the approach speed. I decided to drop it to 65 and 60 over the numbers to allow for the gusts and to keep the speed up a bit as there are others in the pattern.

Yes, my 3-point attitude has the top of the dash just above the horizon so I gauge it by a point further down the side of the cowl. I will try to notice a bit more where I am gazing.
 
If you're not reaching your three point attitude, you're not flaring fast enough or deep enough. If you find yourself floating long, you're too fast. Get on the proper approach speed, begin your flare before getting much into ground effect, and keep the flare going. If you balloon, you're flaring too fast or you hit a gust, but otherwise, don't simply hold it off. Rotate right through the point where you arrest the descent.

If you simply level off and hold it, you'll settle in when the airplane is ready, not when you want it to land. You can think of a two point as a late flare, rolling it onto the mains, and a three point as an early flare, and from there, it's all finesse.
 
Well, for the most part, you've gotten some pretty good advise: 70 is too fast. I mean you can approach at 90 - as long as you're at Edward AFB and have enough runway. So, experiment with slower speeds until you find one that provides the best for flaring out without consuming miles of runway. Question: What model of Luscombe are you flying? Remember, the 8 series started out with a very lightweight engine and a gas tank behind the seats, and as the design matured, heavier engines and wing tanks moved the CG forward. Are you usually at the full up stop on the trim for landing? If so, that may have something to do your tendency to like 70.
One can always remind themself of what the 3-point attitude is supposed to look like by just looking over the nose while on the ground. So, I only have two minor points, briefly touched on already: 1) While you maybe shouldn't use power as a crutch, (to cover for otherwise poor technique) power is a very useful tool to adjust sink rate - if used well, can spell the difference between an okay landing and a great one. I mean, the 3-point attitude being fixed, the only variables left are the excess speed on appoach and power. 2) I disagree with Mr. Henning only slightly...DON'T try to look through the panel, that really would be zen; you,re correct to look along both sides of the cowling, where the horizon (or runway ahead of you) meet it.
 
j1b3h0 said:
Well, for the most part, you've gotten some pretty good advise: 70 is too fast. I mean you can approach at 90 - as long as you're at Edward AFB and have enough runway. So, experiment with slower speeds until you find one that provides the best for flaring out without consuming miles of runway. Question: What model of Luscombe are you flying? Remember, the 8 series started out with a very lightweight engine and a gas tank behind the seats, and as the design matured, heavier engines and wing tanks moved the CG forward. Are you usually at the full up stop on the trim for landing? If so, that may have something to do your tendency to like 70.
One can always remind themself of what the 3-point attitude is supposed to look like by just looking over the nose while on the ground. So, I only have two minor points, briefly touched on already: 1) While you maybe shouldn't use power as a crutch, (to cover for otherwise poor technique) power is a very useful tool to adjust sink rate - if used well, can spell the difference between an okay landing and a great one. I mean, the 3-point attitude being fixed, the only variables left are the excess speed on appoach and power. 2) I disagree with Mr. Henning only slightly...DON'T try to look through the panel, that really would be zen; you,re correct to look along both sides of the cowling, where the horizon (or runway ahead of you) meet it.
Click to expand...

1946 8A (see my YT). A-65, hand prop, wing tanks. Full up trim gives 70, yes. Is that what you meant? I don't so much prefer anything but was taught 70.
 
Yes. If the Luscombe you're flying has wing tanks, the the cg is considerably forward from an original - fuselage-tanked 8A: hence you're full up trim at 70. Maybe that's why your instructor suggested 70 on approach - because there was insufficient trim for any slower. You could experiment with a little lead taped to the tail (a fishing weight) to fix that. Once you found the correct oz weight, have an A&P make it permanent and modify the W&B paperwork. Luscombe owners have applied lots of crafty W&B measures to make their airplanes fly better - usually they move the aircraft battery further aft...but since you have no battery, well, fishing weights!
 
dillardrg said:
Doc, that is what happens if you slip with flaps without having filed a flight plan.:wink2:
Click to expand...


Come to think of it, a few weeks ago I came into a controlled airport pretty high and slipped it down with full flaps. I wonder if that's how I looked to the casual observer?:confused::D
 
alfadog said:
The airplane will only maintain altitude for a brief instant in the 3-point configuration unless you are holding gobs of power and basically doing slow flight. Any less power than that and the airplane will slow, and drop, as you hold 3-point and do not raise the nose higher. So this idea I somehow picked up that at some point I would be in 3-point attitude, flying level, and working my way down is a total fallacy. It does not happen that way and that is why I wanted to look at the theory.

What will happen is that at some point you will be in the 3-point attitude and then you want to be close enough to the ground that settling in is a non-event. The trick is to start the round-out high enough and be alert enough on the stick that, for me, I do not touch down before reaching 3-point. I tend to start with a round-out too low and maybe be a hair behind on pulling back so now, oops, I'm down and halfway between wheel and 3-point.

Practice!
Click to expand...
IME, starting to flare (roundout) too high is a more common problem than starting the flare too low. OTOH, failing to finish flaring high enough (aka allowing the wheels to touch before attaining the proper attitude) is even more common and strange as it may sound starting too soon often leads to finishing too late.
One other tidbit: As you pull back to flare there's a subconscious expectation that each movement of the elevator will have the same effect on attitude and altitude but the reality is that as you're holding the plane off both the rate of pitch change and elevator movement will have to increase just about the time when your brain is screaming "freeze". IOW, early in the flare it doesn't take much of a pull to balloon but by the time the nose is above the horizon that same small elevator movement or force increase will have a much smaller effect. Unfortunately your subconscious remembers the unwanted excess effect found early in the flare and inappropriately applies it when the plane is slow enough that ballooning is far less likely than touching down too soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top