Landing

[Covoxer]

Also, your pitch was too high to flare this thing out at all in an attempt to correct it.

I suppose, that this landing situation is a result of early flare.
Though, 6 degree is far from stall - it happens somwhere around 15.
Well, what can I say... [brad mode on] practice, practice, practice...[brad mode off]

[Shady]

I would suggest to wait with flying with bigger aircrafts before having the touchdown speed brought down to -300ft/min (with FSP in use).
I admit, the first plane I was trying to fly as I got the FS2000 was the Concorde. You can imagine what happened there.
Dude, practice with Cessna, Fokker, B737 and so on. There is no point in flying huge machines if you cannot handle them. And please don't
come to Warsaw until you get it right, I don't want to fall into a hole that you hard landing may cause And think about the pax and their
stomachs

Greetings :LOL:

[Dynamo]

Also not mentioned here, check flap settings. Not enough flaps will make your nose pitch higher for slower speeds, hence a heavy hit,
because of the attitude giving you a higher sink rate. Don't be affriad to make a landing at 140, the aircraft can handle it, and the higher
speed gives a lower vertical force component.

Also on big jets you are trying to fly the aircraft to the threshold, a different feel to floating down a cessna.

[pagir]

If it's the POSKY 757-200, landing at 119 is possible without fear. But it's not realistic... Personnally, I land within 100-200 ft/m with a final
approach speed of 125-130 knts with this posky.

At 119, the nose is too high, you can't flare without risking a tail strike (11 deg.)

Pagir

[Jetflyer]

You can land a 757 at 119kts but not at 215,000lbs! That's where you're probably going wrong. A good approach speed is 135-140kts and when you hear
the 20ft callout on the flare cut the power and lift the nose to 4 degrees above the horizon with flaps at 30 degrees and you should have about 200fpm
touchdown. I've done 160+ hours in the Posky 757 and that alwas works for me but it's second nature now!

[Lt. Grullon]

Wow, we are sounding like real pilots here. Cool keep up the go work guys and always take it to the next level.

[DeCarvalho]

Flight BO272 flight report log Date January 19 2006

Flight ID: BO272
Pilot: DeCarvalho
Company: BEONAIR
Aircraft: ATR72-500
Flight Date: January 19 2006
Departure: 08h37 (06h38 GMT)
Arrival: 09h27 (07h28 GMT)
From: FQNP - Nampula - Mozambique
To: FQPB - Pemba - Mozambique
Nbr of Passengers: 60

Incident Report:

One engine was damaged by small arms fire coming from the ground and ceased to function. The vacuum system was hit by a ground shot. There was an
exceptional pilot on board and despite the dire situation he was able to land the aircraft safely. The Captain has also declared an emergency before
landing.


Report:

Flight Distance: 145 Nm Landing Speed: 108.93 kt
Time Airborne: 00h40:58 Landing Touchdown: -186.92 ft/m (nice)
Flight Time (block): 00h50:22 Landing Pitch: 2.72°
Time On Ground: 00h09:35 Landing Weight: 43510 lbs
Average Speed: 213.61 kt Total Fuel Used: 1504 lbs
Max. Altitude: 7004ft Fuel Not Used: 4689 lbs
Climb Time: 00h02:59 Climb Fuel Used: 235 lbs
Cruise Time: 00h29:02 Cruise Fuel Used: 1076 lbs
Average Cruise Speed: 245.13 kt (M0.37) Cruise fuel/hour: 2223 lbs (calc)
Descent Time: 00h08:57 Descent Fuel Used: 192 lbs


Passenger Opinion: Exceptional flight (100%)
-Were pleased by the music on ground. A very nice addition to their flying experience.
-Were anxious because they flew over a war risk zone.
-Were terrified because of the problem during flight.
-Were relieved to land safely after an emergency.

Financial Report:

Ticket Income: +$5,189 (145 Nm)
Cargo Income: +$950 (2583 lbs)
Services Income: +$0 (0 sandwich 0 hot food 1 drink)
Services Cost: -$80 (41% quality)
War Area Bonus: +$2,332 (19% max war level)
Emergency Bonus: +$1,348 (1100 failure point)
Fuel Cost: -$568 (1504 lbs Jet-A1)
Airport Taxes: -$64 (Large Aircraft)
Insurance Costs: -$366 (5.96% rate)
Total Real Income: $8,741
Total Income: $437,050 (real x50)
Fleet Bonus: $151,036 (3 aircraft)
Total Sim Income: $588,086 (total income+fleet bonus)

Company Reputation:

Considering that the flight was perfect the ticket price good, the service price free and the service quality good, passengers on this flight think
that your company's reputation should be 100%
Your company reputation is now: 87% (+1.22 increase)


Overall Flight Result: Perfect

Pilot Bonus points: 1380 points
You made a very nice landing. (+50)
There was a problem aboard and you declared an emergency. (+150)
You landed at the scheduled airport. (+30)
A serious problem occurred during flight but you landed safely, nice job. (+1100)
Flying in a dangerous area and a safe landing. (+50)




This was my last flight and the best score ive ever made look at all the adversities with an ATR lost the left engine completly still managed to land
safely with a nice touchdown rate...weather was very good, i think it was the only thing on my side that day!!!

[DeCarvalho]

And ive noticed that is when i make smooth pitch landings that i get good nice touchdown rates...when im over the edge with a 5/7º pitch i always
strugle for a good landing its like a forced landing...when i touch it feels hard and most of the times its a bad calculation and i dont even touch at
first flare i have to do a 2nd one...normaly it happens on bad weather...but ive come to a conclusion after these 50 hours of experience...in bad
weather its better sometimes to "throw" the airplane into the ground then to be carefull...sometimes with hard gusts and unstable weather a -350
ft/min doesnt hurt anyone and saves alot of worries about safety...cause instead of wobling around like a toy you make a nice hard landing fixing the
aircraft to the ground even with cross wind and sideslope landings with one wheel...just one more thing what do you guys think about the crooswind
techniques...do you use always crab or sideslope or a combination of the two?From these what do you think its safer?...Normaly i use a combination
doing the final ina crab and the touchdown in a side slope but ive eard that the sideslope is very forgiving and works perfectly...i know that the
crab one gives some nice photage but when it comes to flying Safety comes first!!!

[DeCarvalho]

??!?!?No one wants to continue this topic??!??!i would be very keen on knowing your feedback about landings!

[Cydon Prax]

Well, Might I add that Flight Simulator is bad for those wanting to go into RL aviation? I learned this the hard way--

Landing in RL and FS is, opposite, nearly. In reality, to loose altitude you'd cut the throttle alittle; and to loose or gain speed you'd raise or
lower the Yoke. (I suppose this works with Jets too since both have wings, low and high pressure). In FS, You pull on the yoke to gain
altitude and increase throttle to gain speed for landings (Realistic to take-off though).

So, for those whom wish to go into RL aviation soon.. erm.. use auto-land?

Also, on FS I notice most panels block the runways on approach; since computer screens are infact in 2D view, using the Virtual Cockpit
view for landing would be the best way to do it... mainly because it gives more perspective for such 2D views. Heh, did you know the
Human eye does'nt see in 3D? That it only see's in two dimensions? But both eyes being slightly apart gives depth and diffrent views for
objects which causes.. 3D view. Which is why anything on a screen unless seen by 3D glassess (Which block out the relative color of
light to use two diffrent frames as two diffrent perspective views) is impossible?

As real as it gets nothing!!

[DanSteph]

Cydon Prax wrote:
Well, Might I add that Flight Simulator is bad for those wanting to go into RL aviation? I learned this the hard way--

That's only because almost everyone learn by himself to fly in FS using "trial and crash" method, it's not Fs's fault.
Anyway even if my flight teacher ranted about my supposed "bad habit" taken from flight simulation he allowed
me to do my first solo after 6h30 only, might not be so bad finaly

Cydon Prax wrote:
Landing in RL and FS is, opposite, nearly. In reality, to loose altitude you'd cut the throttle alittle; and to loose or gain speed you'd raise or
lower the Yoke.

Using the real procedure learned in flight school and the model of aircraft I have flown
I saw that FS is really accurate, all real procedure worked perfectly, I would say the main
things that I find different or surprised me are:

1-In real plane you don't have a great "front look down" view because (at least on the model I flown)
the panel and engine hide you everything that is below the straight line.

2-In simulation you have a restricted side vision, this don't help at all near ground. You can't also turn head
as easily as you do in real aircrafts. (I didn't try "track ir" but from what I've heard it's not really great ? )

3-Lack of sensation, in reality you feel immediately what's happening, even litle change. (even if without eyes (IFR)
you can be easily fooled by your sensation)

4-the famous "humain" factor, as your live is in your hand you care really much and you "think different"
in a real aircraft. (this is mainly why I created FsP, to compensate the lack of this feeling)

I would say on the final that at least on a school plane, flying is more easy on real aircraft
than in simulation because you have a far better feeling and view of the situation.

My two...

Dan

[Jetflyer]

I agree with Dan really, having flown C152 aircraft. The flight simulator replicates pitch+power = performance quite accurately. It just feels
very difficult. You might simply be using a bogus technique in flight simulator because there's no instructor to yell at you to do it properly. It
is very accurate and gets a bad press for "poor flight dynamics".



Post Edited ( 02-01-06 10:47 )

[Cydon Prax]

You might simply be using a bogus technique in flight simulator because there's no instructor to yell at you to do it properly.

What type of bad maneuvers would I be using? I have now 3k hours logged total with all the FS simulators!


But your right about Dan being right, ive definatly thought of all four of those before! Hmm, Id hope after this much training, knowledge,
and learning into aviation im not doing it wrong.. all those books since second grade and all that simming and reality flying has to give
me something; Nice responce Dan!

Also, did anyone notice how there is no Carb heat in the cessna's?



Post Edited ( 02-01-06 14:31 )

[SaVas]

Dan, I have heard fantastic things about Track IR4, the latest head tracking software.

[DeCarvalho]

...hey i always thought that the correct way of flying a glideslope path was with thrust corrections, and not stick corrections,....so in that matter
i think flight sim is realistic...