An easier way to land?

I personally use this in real-life and in the Sim. Different to how I originally learnt. What do you think? Cheers.

 

https://www.jacobsonflare.com/

Please do not think you need to buy the App - just read this:

 

https://www.jacobsonflare.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2015-03-04-australian-flying-article-optimised.pdf

Like learning to drive, it's best to learn the correct way, THEN fly your way ha, Happy crash and burns lol

Like learning to drive, it's best to learn the correct way, THEN fly your way ha, Happy crash and burns lol

 

Yes, take some REAL flying lessons would be my advice, too.

 

I fly for REAL and Sim, a lot!

See YouTube of Captain Jacobson explaining it. Very entertaining video including his description of his career.

There is not an easy way.

 

Study the theory and practice, practice, practice

I didn't look at the video itself, though I did see something about various angles. So my quick comment on the flare:

 

The landing flare is largely about WHERE you are looking while trying to flare, because that is what makes the most difference in judging your height. Looking at the far end of the runway once you're next to the ground gives the best perspective, and your peripheral vision should take care of the rest. It doesn't have to be complicated, so I'll let it go for now.

As the author of this thread, I should say that the main takeaway I got from the Jacobson flare is elevator for height control (ie keeping the spot on the windscreen on the aiming spot on the runway) and throttle for speed control. This is the reverse of what I was taught, and I personally find it more natural/intuitive. As for the flare, I agree with the previous post from Top Gun, ie eyes down the end of the runway and peripheral vision. I only fly a C172 IRL. Cheers.

As the author of this thread, I should say that the main takeaway I got from the Jacobson flare is elevator for height control (ie keeping the spot on the windscreen on the aiming spot on the runway) and throttle for speed control. This is the reverse of what I was taught, and I personally find it more natural/intuitive. As for the flare, I agree with the previous post from Top Gun, ie eyes down the end of the runway and peripheral vision. I only fly a C172 IRL. Cheers.

 

Please accept my humble apologies, I misread this original post....

Please accept my humble apologies, I misread this original post....

 

Thanks, but I don’t think you needed to apologise. Cheers.

Hi.

 

Well, I just read this article and have a couple of questions, more or less the same thing. From a non-flying perspective and ignorant of reasons for the way things are done, using the controls' primary characteristics on final seems more sensible.

 

So, considering the basic: a normally aspirated engine & fixed pitch prop...

 

First, aside from history & tradition, why *are* the secondary effects of controls used on approach? Is it just a carry-over from the cruise where a plane is trimmed for the preferred speed and then a more easily adjusted throttle is used to control vertical speed?

 

Second, in the section 'Getting practical', the author writes "... flying final approach like you're on an ILS, that is, holding speed with throttle and height with pitch" so, if it really is normal practice on instrument approaches, why isn't it also done on visual approaches? What difference in circumstances requires one method in preference to the other?

 

D

I think it is an historic hang-over from the early days of aviation when normal landings were glide-in landings, with engines of, and aircraft with no flaps, so you only had elevators to control speed and side-slipping for height. Also, engines in the early days were very unreliable, so when they failed, the above applied. This was the situation for quite a few years. Cheers.

As I read through this I came to this statement. "It’s my considered opinion that pilots who learn to apply Jacobson’s techniques can make consistently good landings, provided they know how to configure their aircraft and fly a stable approach at the appropriate airspeed.’ "

 

"provided they know how to configure their aircraft and fly a stable approach at the appropriate airspeed"

 

This is the most important factor in making consistently good landings. The correct glide path, correct speed, and correct rate of descent. What makes for hard landings? To high rate of descent caused by incorrect pitch angle and speed or both. I assume you would know where to look to judge your position in relation to the runway.

 

Sometimes one of the flight instructors would send a student pilot to me because they could not land the plane. I would have them fly the plane down the runway and have them reduce power and demand they not let the plane touch the ground. Of course, the plane would land itself. This relates to GA aircraft. Stop trying to land the airplane and fly the airplane. You can stop flying the airplane when the engine is off and the parking brake is set.

 

Landing an airplane is no more difficult than any other phase of flight with normal weather.

 

When I had 200 hours I thought I knew how to fly. When I had 2000 hours I thought I was a pretty good pilot. When I had 6000 hours I realized how little I knew and how totally unformed I was at 2000 hours. At 8000 hours things became a little more dangerous because I did know how to fly and pushed the plane and myself closer to the limits. At 10,000 hours I stopped making approaches down to minimums and flying into known icing conditions and stopped flying Part 135.

 

Nothing about flying is difficult until you put yourself into conditions that exceed your ability to deal with them. It is truly amassing how quickly one can find themself in over their head....lol

 

Billy