Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest onurozdi

Landing Angle

Recommended Posts

Hi. Maybe my question is so stupid but I just want to ask.I'm using FSX with Wilco's products. In real life, I realized that while landing the aircraft touches the runway with a very low angle. A soft touch I mean. Moreover, last month my flight has delayed for 2,5 hours in Ankara Esenboga Airport. And I watched lots of landings during that time. All planes touched the ground very gently. In FSX, I made lots of ILS landings with default and Wilco's aircrafts. All approaches are good but the landing seems so harsh when compared with real life touches. Aircraft does not crash but just a harsh landing. Now my question: Is there a landing/touching angle control to set in FSX?If that's a very simple question for forum im so sorry.Thank's in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Your goal is to land at an acceptable sink rate. Actual angle does not matter, as it would change with speed.-400+:Hard landing-300: Acceptable-200: Smooth-100: Greaser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your goal is to land at an acceptable sink rate. Actual angle does not matter, as it would change with speed.-400+:Hard landing-300: Acceptable-200: Smooth-100: Greaser
Thanks for the answer. Am I able to set that values to the AP before landing. I think you say Vertical Speeds. Can I set that from vertical speed selector?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The autopilot doesn't land the planes the pilots do. There are very few aircraft that have autoland capability. One aircraft that does it well is the LDS 767.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The autopilot doesn't land the planes the pilots do. There are very few aircraft that have autoland capability. One aircraft that does it well is the LDS 767.
Oh. Thanks for answer. I think 300 or 200 before landing, pilots take control of the plane, don't they? That means I must buy a flight controller for smooth landings. :( I tried setting VS selector to -200 just before landing but nothing happened in Wilco's PIC 737-400. Thanks anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh. Thanks for answer. I think 300 or 200 before landing, pilots take control of the plane, don't they? That means I must buy a flight controller for smooth landings. :( I tried setting VS selector to -200 just before landing but nothing happened in Wilco's PIC 737-400. Thanks anyway.
You cant use V/S to land the aircraft because the A/T will increase the throttle to keep up with the MCP speed making it the loooooongest flare of your life. Instead, disconnect the A/P at the MDH and hand fly her in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Good controls are helpful in landing. A good joystick or yoke with a good throttle (either part of the joystick or yoke, or separate unit) are, in my opinion, essential equipment for flight simulator. All take-offs and nearly all landings are performed without auto-pilot. In the real-world, auto-pilot landings require an aircraft with the proper equipment and certification, a pilot with the proper training and certification, and an airport with the proper equipment and certification. Without all three of these, an auto-land cannot be performed.The Wilco/fT 737PIC will do auto-lands provided it is set-up correctly. It requires properly setting up the FMC, knowing the approach speed, having the ILS frequency in both Nav1 and Nav2, and both autopilots to be engaged (CMD A and CMD :(. To be honest, of all the hours I've spent with the Wilco and PMDG 737s, I've only performed a handful of auto-landings. A few for training and currency in the VA I flew with, and the rest when the weather dictated it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, let me put it like this... (Mis-)Using the autopilot for "learning" how to land aircraft is not exactly a very great approach to achieve the goal to grease it. I'd take a small prop and learn fly and land first, simply ignoring the A/P. The neccessary experience to master landing doesn't really come from twisting the thumb wheel of the V/S part of the A/P. But for that you definately should get some decent flight control hardware. There's no way around it, the keyboard simply does not work. Period. :(Good luck!Etienne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should probably be added that jets don't normally "grease it" as you do not want them floating long distances down the runway in flare and possibly ballooning up for a stall. A 10 foot drop to the runway in a 4-seat Piper Cherokee will break the wing spar and leave the impressions from the bolts on top of the nose gear in the skin under the fuselage and it only ways around 1500 pounds. You can imagine what a jet weighting tens of thousands of pounds will do if it stalls only a few feet above the runway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It should probably be added that jets don't normally "grease it" as you do not want them floating long distances down the runway in flare and possibly ballooning up for a stall. A 10 foot drop to the runway in a 4-seat Piper Cherokee will break the wing spar and leave the impressions from the bolts on top of the nose gear in the skin under the fuselage and it only ways around 1500 pounds. You can imagine what a jet weighting tens of thousands of pounds will do if it stalls only a few feet above the runway.
Ok now to that I can add something in return again :(. The 'better' jet landings are the firm ones, no matter what the pax say. You are correct that you absolutely do not want to stall a jet before touchdown. The landing techniques for jets and props differ somewhat. You really flare the prop out, pull, pull, and just pull even a little more... You might stall the prop (not too early LOL) just before touchdown. Then again, you might not really stall aerodynamically but just hear the stall warning. I've done it numerous times in real life and some of these landings were the smoothest I have ever had, I guess not only because of the really low touchdown speed. Ok you really do not want to do that in a jet, so you don't flare the jet out like a prop. The one reason for that John already gave, the other one is that you want to make positive contact with the ground, because you first want the tires to get a good grip quick and not rub for too long on the runway surface, second you need that positive landing to activate quite a few systems, for example automatic spoiler deployment, automatic braking, and to be able to unlock the reversers.Be advised that in real life, especially with wet runways, greased landings can get a little dangerous. First of all, there is something called rubber reversion hydroplaning, which is not exactly something you are looking for in order to get your aircraft slowed down. Next is that your gear struts might not get compressed enough. There is an air-ground sensor inside that checks if the plane is on the ground, but in case the struts are not compressed enough the logic won't switch to 'ground' state and won't activate the above mentioned systems. Also not really helpful.So yes, the jets will retard their thrust at, say, 30 to 20 feet above ground and pull back on the yoke/stick to initiate a slight flare, then just let it settle down in the TDZ. Recently I was told that a touchdown speed of around 180 FPM was optimum. You can say that is not exactly a greased landing. But it will do the job. And that's what counts. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case you're all wondering, the mention of the wing spar is from an incident at our flight school just before I entered in. It had to be flown, with special permission, back to Grand Forks, North Dakota for repair with the wing spar (thick metal support beam that runs from wingtip to wingtip) pretty well in two pieces. The damage was caught by the next student afterward who noticed that the wings did not appear right, as they had a slight anhedral instead of the pronounced dihedral a Cherokee has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In case you're all wondering, the mention of the wing spar is from an incident at our flight school just before I entered in. It had to be flown, with special permission, back to Grand Forks, North Dakota for repair with the wing spar (thick metal support beam that runs from wingtip to wingtip) pretty well in two pieces. The damage was caught by the next student afterward who noticed that the wings did not appear right, as they had a slight anhedral instead of the pronounced dihedral a Cherokee has.
It had an anhedral and they still flew it?! They must have been desperate for flight hours!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It had an anhedral and they still flew it?! They must have been desperate for flight hours!
Maybe they thought the strut was just compressed.... :( L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe they thought the strut was just compressed.... :( L.Adamson
Haha! Quite the opposite for those Pipers. It always seems to be stuck extended from flight. You know you had a good landing when the two mains would be stuck fully extended and then you go around a corner and they would pop back in place!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All approaches are good but the landing seems so harsh when compared with real life touches. Aircraft does not crash but just a harsh landing
as long as you keep your VS between -750 and -1000 ft/m (depending on your aproach speed and glideslope angle) on Aproach and make sure to raise the nose a bit at about 20/30 ft RAD you should be fine.I'm not too familiar with the WILCO 737, but I read that real world 737 pilots sometime give a bit of extra thrust just before touchdown to smoothen the landing.with most aircraft however you should retard the throttles at 10 ft RAD to avoid floating.also for Boeing aircraft an flight deck angle of about 2-3 degrees nose up on aproach is normal, provided again you are travveling at the right aproach speed for your weight and flap angle, Airbus aircraft usually have a deck angle somewhat larger then Boeing planes and the Lockheed L-1011 has an deck angle of 7 degrees nose up during approach and landing.
I think 300 or 200 before landing, pilots take control of the plane, don't they?
they can take controll as soon as they reach the OM (as I do in FS) or at the decission altitiude, which is most often used in real world ops.however the pilot is free to fly the entire landing him/herself if he/she pleases, which is also a lot more fun to do in my opinion
It should probably be added that jets don't normally "grease it" as you do not want them floating long distances down the runway in flare and possibly ballooning up for a stall
A well timed flare will get you a greaser without floating down the runway.However you shouldn't grease it when the runway surface is wet, but that is explained already.also if you stall during the flare you've probably done something wrong on your aproach, as most jets will have some margin for error if you aproach and land at the correct speeds
You can imagine what a jet weighting tens of thousands of pounds will do if it stalls only a few feet above the runway
probably less then with the Piper, the landing gear on a transport catagory aircraft has much more travel and dampening then that of a Piper or any other small aircraft, so it will dampen the impact somewhat more.however I do agree that it isn't a good Idea at all to Stall on landing.anyway, just my (late) 0.02$ as a flightsim enthusiast with limited real world experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It had an anhedral and they still flew it?! They must have been desperate for flight hours!
They got permission from the FAA. I'm guessing it's cheaper for them to get them repaired over there than it is in Spokane. They have large fleet of them there and probably get a deep discount, if not their own repair shop. We just have four here. It wasn't flown by anyone looking for hours. Plane slammed down, parked, and the next student scheduled went out noticed the problems. Then someone got to fly it clear to UND for the repair job.
A well timed flare will get you a greaser without floating down the runway.However you shouldn't grease it when the runway surface is wet, but that is explained already.also if you stall during the flare you've probably done something wrong on your aproach, as most jets will have some margin for error if you aproach and land at the correct speeds.
It is possibly, but I've yet to see an airline that encourages attempting it as it often comes down more to luck than skill since wind tends to play into it. The only benefit the greaser has is passenger comfort, but the cons are the possibility of squat switches not engaging, the possibility of floating or ballooning (that's hairy enough in a piston plane when throttle response is almost instantaneous), and other factors I'm sure I'm neglecting to remember at this moment. Even our flight school wasn't too keen on students trying to grease it on since the likely hood of getting drifted sideways or ballooning it out weighed the bragging rights. You don't slam in so hard that it jars, but neither do you land so soft that no one's sure you've landed.
probably less then with the Piper, the landing gear on a transport catagory aircraft has much more travel and dampening then that of a Piper or any other small aircraft, so it will dampen the impact somewhat more.however I do agree that it isn't a good Idea at all to Stall on landing.
The larger jets don't have as much travel as many think, They just generally have more pressure to dampen with. Working around 767, 757s, and A300s for a living, I was actually surprised by how little travel they have. The Piper Warriors also happen to have generous struts on them as they are specifically designed for flight-training. You can hit pretty hard as I had one landing early in my training that was just about a carrier landing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you say, the undercarriage struts on airliners have quite considerable damping strength, I'm sure most of us have seen the footage of a 747 (pretty sure it was Korean Air) landing at Kai Tak some years ago where it gets caught in a crosswind just before touchdown and the left main landing gear takes all the impact from landing whilst skewed over at about thirty degrees. It's a great demonstration of how tough the landing gear is on a 747.Oddly enough, most airlines prefer their pilots to make what might be described as 'firm' landings, because it means the wheels spin less and that cuts down on tire wear. Personally, I used to grease my landings in real life until one day when I mis-timed it and whacked down really heavily, fortunately I didn't do any damage to the aircraft, but it made me change the way I land, no more greasers for me in real life, although I do it all the time in FS!Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally, I used to grease my landings in real life until one day when I mis-timed it and whacked down really heavily, fortunately I didn't do any damage to the aircraft, but it made me change the way I land, no more greasers for me in real life, although I do it all the time in FS!
That's what got me to stop trying to grease it in real-life with our Warriors. That's what I was going when I had my "carrier landing". The wind let up or something or picked up and ballooned me, but either way, in the matter of half a second we hit the runway so hard that instead of doing the touch-and-go, my instructor wrenched the brakes and we pulled off to make sure I hadn't done major damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oddly enough, most airlines prefer their pilots to make what might be described as 'firm' landings, because it means the wheels spin less and that cuts down on tire wear. Personally, I used to grease my landings in real life until one day when I mis-timed it and whacked down really heavily, fortunately I didn't do any damage to the aircraft, but it made me change the way I land, no more greasers for me in real life, although I do it all the time in FS!Al
It has nothing to do with tire wear. There are three reasons why airlines train to make firm landings. The first is so that pilots don't try to grease the planes onto the ground and waste runway while they land long working on their greaser. Airlines pay out much in lawsuits and suffer from disrupted operations if a plane wrecks by going off the far end of the runway in a long landing. The second reason they want a firm touchdown in the touchdown zone is so that you reduce the risk of going off the far end of the runway from a long landing. The third reason is so that you don't go off the far end of the runway.There is also a fourth by product of landing firmly. It is so that an immediate and definite release of the weight on wheels signal can happen. This is important so that things like ground spoilers or thrust reversers can operate. A greased landing may not put enough weight on wheels to signal the airplane systems that it is on the ground and make available those necessary systems for stopping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think someone might have left out that a "firm" landing means the plane has quit flying and is safely on the ground. A 'dirty' plane naturally has a pitch-up attitude. Also in FS and real life the voice warnings are 30, 20, 10. Retard. Close the throttles so that on touchdown when the nose wheel touches the ground the spoilers will deploy and you can invoke the reversers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also in FS and real life the voice warnings are 30, 20, 10. Retard.
That is only in an airbus where they call you a retard. All other airplanes they assume the pilot is smart enough to know when to reduce the thrust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A greased landing may not put enough weight on wheels to signal the airplane systems that it is on the ground and make available those necessary systems for stopping.
Very true, it has happened before.BTW, may I ask a question to the real pilots in here, are you able to fully control how much you grease it upon touchdown, and if yes, how many landings did it take you to get to such a level? I am mostly talking about GA aircraft here, not heavy iron. I might be mistaken but I would not be surprised if greasing a heavier plane was easier to do than a light PA28. IRL I've only landed small single/multi props so far, and twin/tri-jets only in full flight sims (I will leave MSFS out here). That is why I cannot really tell, but I felt the simulated jet landings to be at a extremly close to 100% grease rate vs. a lucky-or-maybe-not-lucky rate on real life props. Tell me your experiences. I am just saying I feel there is still a good portion of luck for me if a real life landing will be a greaser or not. I think it could be the inertia or something that really changes the flare feeling, but also gear strut travel/compression on touchdown (think about C152 'dampening' vs. several feet gear strut travel on a jet).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very true, it has happened before.BTW, may I ask a question to the real pilots in here, are you able to fully control how much you grease it upon touchdown, and if yes, how many landings did it take you to get to such a level? I am mostly talking about GA aircraft here, not heavy iron. I might be mistaken but I would not be surprised if greasing a heavier plane was easier to do than a light PA28. IRL I've only landed small single/multi props so far, and twin/tri-jets only in full flight sims (I will leave MSFS out here). That is why I cannot really tell, but I felt the simulated jet landings to be at a extremly close to 100% grease rate vs. a lucky-or-maybe-not-lucky rate on real life props. Tell me your experiences. I am just saying I feel there is still a good portion of luck for me if a real life landing will be a greaser or not. I think it could be the inertia or something that really changes the flare feeling, but also gear strut travel/compression on touchdown (think about C152 'dampening' vs. several feet gear strut travel on a jet).
I can only speak for the single GA/light twin/light cabin class aircraft. It does seem like the bigger the aircraft the better I can grease it. Even going from the 152 to the 172 RG I seem to be able to grease it better. The 340 I have not had a firm landing yet. I did have one problem though on one of my first flights and an introduction to the plane where I flared a little to hard and got close to a tail strike while I tried greasing it. My skills were erroded away because I was teaching all day and this was a last minute late night/early morning repositioning flight the chief asked me to come along on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can only speak for the single GA/light twin/light cabin class aircraft. It does seem like the bigger the aircraft the better I can grease it. Even going from the 152 to the 172 RG I seem to be able to grease it better. The 340 I have not had a firm landing yet. I did have one problem though on one of my first flights and an introduction to the plane where I flared a little to hard and got close to a tail strike while I tried greasing it. My skills were erroded away because I was teaching all day and this was a last minute late night/early morning repositioning flight the chief asked me to come along on.
Thanks for sharing your obvervations, this tells me I am not completely mistaken. :( I have not flown the 340, but the C152/172, as well as PA28 and -34, and during the first PA34 flares sometimes I thought, uh, this is gonna be a hard one (that moment I was thinking about how a hard landing in the PA28 looked like), and surprise, it was just like *smoooch*, not necessarily intended that moment, but definately made me think this plane has noticably more weight and also the gear does not seem to be that stiff. This has happened quite some times now, although I did also have a firm landing in it... shame on me! Then again, I'm no CFI lol. Just gotta practise a little more and get used to it. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites