Would someone explain to me how anyone can, using the Kacars system, land consistently at -0 feet per seccond for every flight? I personally find it hard to believe but I know a guy who does so. When questioned he muffs any genuine answer. So, to all you heavy metal captains, real world flyers: is this possible or is there some sort of "cheat". On the other hand, I know an ex military guy who's landings vary with each flight - mind you, his landing rates are consistently low.My own landings vary each time I touch down, but are nowhere near -0 ft, so maybe I should take up knitting?

Would someone explain to me how anyone can, using the Kacars system, land consistently at -0 feet per seccond for every flight? I personally find it hard to believe but I know a guy who does so. When questioned he muffs any genuine answer. So, to all you heavy metal captains, real world flyers: is this possible or is there some sort of "cheat". On the other hand, I know an ex military guy who's landings vary with each flight - mind you, his landing rates are consistently low.My own landings vary each time I touch down, but are nowhere near -0 ft, so maybe I should take up knitting?

Don't know about kACARS in detail, but... I suppose it's theoretically possible to land with a recorded vertical speed of -0 fps, if you accept that any recording system has limitations and may round to the nearest 10fps or whatever. But common sense dictates that immediately before an object (aircraft, ball, Frisbee, meteorite, whatever) strikes the ground it must have some vertical component to its motion - otherwise it wouldn't strike the ground. Unless you want to get into hypothetical territory involving the Earth being a spheroid and an object striking it at a tangent, thus having zero 'downward' velocity.Back in reality, while gentle landings minimise loading on the gear and keep passengers comfy, really really gentle ones aren't necessarily desirable. For one thing they tend to involve holding the aircraft off the runway for longer than might be safe; for another, they're positively dangerous on contaminated (wet / icy) runways where landing too flat can mean skidding. Anything under, say, -500fps is perfectly OK, depending on a/c type; landing at a very low vertical speed isn't necessarily anything to aim for or boast about.

Its defiantly possible to do in the flightsim world. You would use up considerable amount of runway trying to accomplish that so I wouldnt worry about it. In REAL LIFE airlines touch down between 150-300fpm. Trying to make a super super SOFT touch down and make it all pretty is when you end up floating down the runway.

Thank you both for taking time to reply. I am now a little wiser and my grey cell area has been updated with the facts provided. This knowledge will make me smile next time I hear of someone "boasting" of their -0 fpm landing rate.:(

All of the advice here is correct - a good landing is one in which the wheels touch down exactly where you wanted them to touch on the runway - safely in from the threshold but giving you plenty of runway to roll out on. You want to be set up so you don't float but also don't slam onto the runway either. (Unless you're a carrier pilot!) :( But I can tell you that in the real world, when everything goes just right, you put it on the spot AND touch down with a gentle kiss and the PAX all applaud. It's a nice feeling and helps make up for all the other times when you've clunked the poor airplane onto the ground and they all gasp in terror. In those cases you pretend to stay busy in the flight deck until all the PAX have deplaned so you don't have to let them see your red face! Been there, done that! Or if you are really nasty, you make the First Officer go to the door and greet them all so he/she gets the blame while you sit and "do the paperwork." :( CheersIan

I don't know anything about kACARS but... at my VA we use FSACARS and there I have occasionally (but very rarely) seen a landing rate of 0. The factors that determine the rate recorded seem to be both the actual rate of descent at the point where the sim put up the 'SIM_ON_GROUND' tag and the frame rate of the simulation at that time. That means that some one with a really high FPS is likely to record a very soft landing if they make one. It also meabs that someone with a really poor FPS might record a really high landing rate even when the actual rate was much lower.I don't really know how anyone could 'cheat' the system to get a consistent -0 ft/min landing rate but I suppose they must be coming in /really/ shallow - not always such a good thing, as already mantioned above. Our VA also produces a google map of each flight (and speed analysis etc) where the point of landing is recorded - so if someone was always getting half way along the runway before touchdown then this would be noticable!Personally I aim for a soft touchdown but not to float along too far. By using the speedbook / working out the correct Vref etc and also taking note of altitude callouts, I have become fairly consistent and land between 80 and 150 ft/min most times, apart from in dodgy weather where one tries to get safely on the ground that little bit quicker...Geoff

0 rate touch downs are easy in FS. The acars system records fpm descents. If you actually landed (in FS) with a real 0 rate descent on a down sloping runway, you would show a fpm descent in acars. However, you can actually crash into an upsloping runway at level flight, and show a 0 fpm descent. Don't believe me? Check it out, like in some of the Alaskan airpòrts.

However, you can actually crash into an upsloping runway at level flight, and show a 0 fpm descent.

AFAIK FS does not feature sloped runways. I agree with the aforementioned opinion that it depends on a variety of different factors, what touch down rate your ACARS will show. As it was already said, a touch down rate of 0 FPM is nothing to aim for, as it would be dangerous to do in reality. Anyway, an old saying goes: any landing you can walk away from is a good landing!

Hi. You can have a runway for yourself in a field or on open ground at any angle but you won't be able to pave it. All the airport components have to be at the same elevation so you're correct in that respect. I have several farm fields with nominal runways only a few feet in length. I can't get AI in there on account of the unfeasibly short runways but there's a parking spot, start spots, (very) short runway, taxiway (0 feet width) and farm buildings & hangars. Some of the strips are in flat fields, some are on a hump and some on slight inclines. I ought to add these are with photoscenery otherwise I wouldn't have a chance of finding them when I was in the air! Regards,D

Landing rate, you have to use 3 deg aprox. glide slope. Check VASI/PAPI indicators at the threshold two whites / two reds means you are on the correct GS but don't always go by the lights they there only for reference. If all white lights means you are high , all reds means you are low.

AFAIK FS does not feature sloped runways. I agree with the aforementioned opinion that it depends on a variety of different factors, what touch down rate your ACARS will show. As it was already said, a touch down rate of 0 FPM is nothing to aim for, as it would be dangerous to do in reality. Anyway, an old saying goes: any landing you can walk away from is a good landing!

It can be done. An outstanding example is the Aerosoft Lukla scenery. I remember at least one other scenery of a similar airport in the French alps. It's rare but "doable."