Exactly. In fact it is not "a more flexible and self correcting technique", it is "the only technique" you instructor will teach you.Talk to ANY pilot, commercial or not and they'll confirm the basic mantra : once the plane is in the final landing configuration, you control airspeed with power and rate of descent with the stick.Notable - and well known - exceptions are : - gliding approach (as you mentioned, I suppose you mean throttling down the engine to flight idle in short final). Some ultralight instructors recommend this method be used at all times. - carrier landing approach - when angle of attack controls airspeed and power (together with direct lift control in some planes) controls the descent rateBruno

Your exceptions are well known. First because an ultralite is in effect a powered glider, and carrier landings are more like controlled crashes. The exception for commercial jets and GA is in bad weather where depending on a/c type the usual rule is to fly it onto the ground. In other words no throttling back and a smaller flare (as said both dependent on a/c type and what is specified in the flight manuel). People talk about "greasers". I have rarely performed one. My concern is more about getting the a/c safely and permanently on the ground. Doing so in wet and windy conditions is far more important than pleasing the deadheads!vololiberista

Well, despite your discussion, suprisingly I find myself performing better when I disconnect both autopilot and autothrottle somewhere at 2000 feet. Suprisingly, because then the throttle is one more factor to be controlled manually. But it makes up for the distraction caused by disabling A/T just on short final, when you need to stay really focused. It might be due to FSX nature as well as some addons. In CS 757 for example I am not able to assign A/T switch to any joystick button. Therefore I need to take my hands off the joystick and disable A/T using mouse in virtual cockpit. I find it very uncomfortable.I am still not confident whether it is correct procedure or not, in real life. But since you say some airlines do it exactly in this manner, I think it's acceptable.Cheers

Your exceptions are well known. First because an ultralite is in effect a powered glider, and carrier landings are more like controlled crashes. ...//...vololiberista

?????Vololiberista,Some ultralights can be considered powered gliders but most 3-axis ULs have the same Cx as a GA plane. Unpowered approches are (or were initially) recommended by ultralight instructors because ULs don't use certified engines and the idea was to be able to reach the runway in case of failure or engine stall - especially in the beginnings, when reliabiliy was often an issue. Ultralights now use very reliable engines (Rotax mainly), which are used - in a certified version for GA planes as well. Nowadays many 3-axis UL pilots land like regular GA planes, with the added benefit of better visibility to and from others (being in the same 5% plane as the other a/c). For carrier landing, it is true that, because of the nature of carrier landing, it is desirable to reduce landing speed to the minimum. But speed is controlled by AOA mainly because of the flight regime as the plane is flying very near the stall (2nd regime). Incidently (pun not intended), visual Angle of Attack indicators - both in the cockpit and on the landing gear leg - help both the pilot and landing signal officer monitor very closely any speed deviation. When reading this and the rest of your post, I am beginning to wonder if we are talking about the same thing. Are you only talking about the flare while I was talking about trajectory control during the entire approach? Still, I don't know what your experience is about planting the a/c firmly into the groud (and I understand that, especially on a wet runway, better a firm landing than an attempted greaser with subsequent hydroplaning) but, whatever the weather, reduced flare - and especially no throttling back - can have a nasty effect on your landing gear. The only time we are told not to throttle back - or to throttle back but add power at the flare - is for a mountain-type landing, on a highly sloped runway. Bruno

Of course one flares otherwise there is the risk of a nosewheel landing which isn't helpful. And of course in normal quiescent weather conditions to close the throttle. However, it isn't a good idea to be always searching for a "greaser" especially when the LDA is limiting. UK pilots are taught to always make "positive" landings.vololiberista

Deleted. Don't feel like arguing about pitch vs. power after all :)

On the topic, I think people get wrapped around the axle regarding what controls airspeed and descent rate (pitch vs. power) on approach. They are completely interrelated. Whichever mental model you use, if you make the right adjustments to pitch and power you'll have the right airspeed and descent rate to follow the glideslope to touchdown.

Matt, Wrong, I am afraid, as anyone who has been through flight training will tell you.I don't want to sound like a bore, but what your instructor will teach you from the beginning is (apart from the exceptions mentioned above in the thread), to control precisely - and separately each parameter :- speed with the throttle- descent rate with the stickMany beginners, or non-flyers, imagine that, because they are interrelated, any of these actions can be used to control the other parameter but that's not the way to learn to fly precisely.And, if you think of it, that makes sense : you want to be on top of each parameter (speed and height/altitude) at all times and there is no way you are going to manage both if you don't use consistently the same control device : throttle for speed and stick for glide slope.Finally, that's also the way the autopilot and autothrotlle will control your plane : two separate control loops, each with it's own setpoint.BrunoPS : This discussion (and I apologize if I sound patronizing) illustrates the fact that there are probably many things we can learn in a simulator, without being in a real plane, as long as :1- we have learned - and understood - the correct technique 2- we have an instructor looking over our shoulder to correct our mistakes.In the end, of course, nothing replaces real flying for validation ...and for fun !

Matt, Wrong, I am afraid, as anyone who has been through flight training will tell you.I don't want to sound like a bore, but what your instructor will teach you from the beginning is (apart from the exceptions mentioned above in the thread), to control precisely - and separately each parameter :- speed with the throttle- descent rate with the stickMany beginners, or non-flyers, imagine that, because they are interrelated, any of these actions can be used to control the other parameter but that's not the way to learn to fly precisely.And, if you think of it, that makes sense : you want to be on top of each parameter (speed and height/altitude) at all times and there is no way you are going to manage both if you don't use consistently the same control device : throttle for speed and stick for glide slope.Finally, that's also the way the autopilot and autothrotlle will control your plane : two separate control loops, each with it's own setpoint.BrunoPS : This discussion (and I apologize if I sound patronizing) illustrates the fact that there are probably many things we can learn in a simulator, without being in a real plane, as long as :1- we have learned - and understood - the correct technique 2- we have an instructor looking over our shoulder to correct our mistakes.In the end, of course, nothing replaces real flying for validation ...and for fun !

Bruno -I have taken flight training (40 hours and about 100 landings in Cessna 172s). With my limited real world experience and after hundreds of hours in the sim I find myself making the right pitch and power inputs to control speed and descent without really thinking about which controls speed or descent. I guess what I'm saying is that once you understand the relationship between airspeed and descent rate and the effects that pitch and power have on them you make the right control inputs simultaneously, get the aircraft trimmed properly at the right power setting and not have a lot of work left to do on final approach. For all I know I may be doing what you advocate as the 'correct method'.To use an example, let's say that you're at the correct airspeed but high on the glideslope (not sinking fast enough). The correct course of action will be to lower the nose and reduce power. - From one school of thought, you can see it as "I'm pitching down to increase my descent rate and decreasing power to keep my airspeed from building".- From the other school of thought you can see it as "I'm reducing power to increase my descent rate and pitching down to keep my airspeed up."EIther way, there is only one combination of inputs that results in the desired airspeed and descent rate. So it doesn't matter what you're thinking as long as you're making the right inputs.

Matt, Wrong, I am afraid, as anyone who has been through flight training will tell you.I don't want to sound like a bore, but what your instructor will teach you from the beginning is (apart from the exceptions mentioned above in the thread), to control precisely - and separately each parameter :- speed with the throttle- descent rate with the stickMany beginners, or non-flyers, imagine that, because they are interrelated, any of these actions can be used to control the other parameter but that's not the way to learn to fly precisely.And, if you think of it, that makes sense : you want to be on top of each parameter (speed and height/altitude) at all times and there is no way you are going to manage both if you don't use consistently the same control device : throttle for speed and stick for glide slope.Finally, that's also the way the autopilot and autothrotlle will control your plane : two separate control loops, each with it's own setpoint.Bruno

This is one of the reasons why a US pilot's licence is invalid in the UK! It is the complete opposite. Accept the facts of aerodynamics. To help you, look at the stall: Imagine you are fortunately at a high altitude say 3,000ft. Your a/c stalls. If you do nothing your a/c nose drops reducing your angle of incidence and guess what your airspeed increases. You can of course reduce your angle of incidence with your stick or control column. (surprise surprise!).If on the other hand you try to recover from a stall just by using your throttle you will have to hold the nose down otherwise your airspeed will not increase. In otherwords it will actually reduce your airspeed even further. It is perfectly possible to maintain an a/c in a stalled configuration even with full throttle applied!scientific facts are facts. vololiberista

- From one school of thought, you can see it as "I'm pitching down to increase my descent rate and decreasing power to keep my airspeed from building".- From the other school of thought you can see it as "I'm reducing power to increase my descent rate and pitching down to keep my airspeed up."EIther way, there is only one combination of inputs that results in the desired airspeed and descent rate. So it doesn't matter what you're thinking as long as you're making the right inputs.

Hey Matt,Try flying an approach in a PMDG a/c with autopilot OFFand autothrotlte ON, then the other way around (AP ON and AT OFF) and you'll understand my point (and understand why there is really one "school of thought"). By the way this is a good answer to the original poster : you can learn a lot by setting up the plane for a full autoland in a no-crosswind situation and just watching what happens. And, if I may make a suggestion, do talk about this with your instructor. You may be surprised. BrunoPS : Congratulations on your 100 hours. I have more than 600 (mainly in ultralights) but I usually don't mention it because we all know good pilots with low hours and terrible pilots with thousands of them. And I still talk as often as possible with instructors and professional pilots. You always learn a lot from these guys, including on subjects you thought you had already mastered.

This is one of the reasons why a US pilot's licence is invalid in the UK!

Dont go there. And like I said before, stalls are a factor of the angle of ATTACK. ATTACK and INCIDENCE are two very different things.

This is one of the reasons why a US pilot's licence is invalid in the UK! It is the complete opposite. Accept the facts of aerodynamics. To help you, look at the stall: Imagine you are fortunately at a high altitude say 3,000ft. Your a/c stalls. If you do nothing your a/c nose drops reducing your angle of incidence and guess what your airspeed increases. You can of course reduce your angle of incidence with your stick or control column. (surprise surprise!).If on the other hand you try to recover from a stall just by using your throttle you will have to hold the nose down otherwise your airspeed will not increase. In otherwords it will actually reduce your airspeed even further. It is perfectly possible to maintain an a/c in a stalled configuration even with full throttle applied!scientific facts are facts. vololiberista

Yeah, I guess we just have no idea what we are doing over here in the United States when it comes to aviation.Seriously, thanks to everyone else who has shared their knowledge and viewpoints without turning it into the usual "Mine is bigger than yours" that you see on aviation forums. To Bruno - thanks for the kind words, unfortunately I'm grounded these days...I like to say that I ran out of time, money and talent all at the same time :) so flightsim is as good as it gets for me now!

Dont go there.

And I agree. Claiming that pilots in US are improperly trained or have flawed understanding of aircraft controls hence their licenses are invalid elsewhere is such an utter nonsense (on many levels) that one can only scratch eyes in disbelief that something like that can be written on these forums.

Matt, Wrong, I am afraid, as anyone who has been through flight training will tell you.I don't want to sound like a bore, but what your instructor will teach you from the beginning is (apart from the exceptions mentioned above in the thread), to control precisely - and separately each parameter :- speed with the throttle- descent rate with the stickMany beginners, or non-flyers, imagine that, because they are interrelated, any of these actions can be used to control the other parameter but that's not the way to learn to fly precisely.And, if you think of it, that makes sense : you want to be on top of each parameter (speed and height/altitude) at all times and there is no way you are going to manage both if you don't use consistently the same control device : throttle for speed and stick for glide slope.Finally, that's also the way the autopilot and autothrotlle will control your plane : two separate control loops, each with it's own setpoint.BrunoPS : This discussion (and I apologize if I sound patronizing) illustrates the fact that there are probably many things we can learn in a simulator, without being in a real plane, as long as :1- we have learned - and understood - the correct technique 2- we have an instructor looking over our shoulder to correct our mistakes.In the end, of course, nothing replaces real flying for validation ...and for fun !

I'm sure you know the facts but mistyped...Speed is controlled by pitchAltitude (climb/descent rate)is controlled by thrustBest Regards,Bert Van Bulck

- speed with the throttle- descent rate with the stickIs certainly NOT the method taught in Australia, or should I say, anywhere where I have flown in AustraliaDavid

Speed is controlled by pitchAltitude (climb/descent rate)is controlled by thrust

This is all aircraft dependent.What you wrote applies mostly to smaller aircraft in which we trained and this is how we were taught by our instructors, when you get into bigger airplanes (airliners) this tends to be reversed.