Manual Does not Cover This Procedure

[Budbud 227]

Hi Simon, 

You perfectly described what I meant to say in a much better way. So based on that my question is whether the same technic is applied on both the GA and airliners because though I start to master relatively well the landing with the 747, I caught myself the other day pulling a bit too much on the yoke because I felt I was going down too quickly. I tried not to release the yoke so kept a minimum of back pressure and did no allow the pitch to decrease. I ended up landing approx 1000m down the runway with the aircraft floating for quite some time. I was right at VF+5 when I started the flare with A/T engaged.

Obviously my first mistake was to flare too much. But then either I was wrong keeping the pitch up or the throttle closed too slowly but in either case it took a long time to get the aircraft on ground.

Off course the key to get a smooth and quick landing is to manage the descent rate before the flare and a correct flare. 

[berts 97]

The landing technique I described to Ken in my earlier post here is actually used on the real B744 for the majority of manual landings and the automatic radio altimeter callouts are normally used as an aid in this process.  However, there is no substitute for training and experience on the actual aircraft, because the B744 will handle slightly differently at different landing weights and at high altitude airfields when compared to sea level. For example, at an airfield such as Nairobi the flare should be started slightly earlier than 30ft, but the technique of looking down the runway to judge your landing attitude and reduced rate of descent is fundamentally the same in the vast majority of aircraft (not applicable to aircraft like the AV8B, Space X etc!). 

If you over-rotate during the flare simply relax the back pressure slightly to lower the nose to the correct attitude and allow the aircraft to sink onto the runway.  If you are going to float too far down the runway then it is usually safer to throw the landing away and Go Around.   The obvious difference here is that in a jet everything happens that much faster when compared to a GA (prop) aircraft, so you will need to react sooner rather than later if you misjudge the landing.  Unlike a GA aircraft there is no extra lift being generated by the slipstream from the propeller(s).  A jet aircraft relies on its airspeed for lift to get you out of trouble in this situation          

Incidentally, Simon is correct about the crosswind technique used on the B744; i.e. maintaining wings level and crabbing to compensate for the drift angle so that the cockpit is slightly upwind of the centreline at the start of the flare.  During the flare just squeeze the rudder to straighten the nose at the same time keeping the wings level and if you have judged everything correctly you will touch down on the centreline with the wings level.  The landing is not complete until you are at a safe taxy speed, so as the speed decays keep the aircraft straight using rudder and adjust the aileron input as necessary to keep the wings level.  Reverse thrust can sometimes aggravate a crosswind landing, so if you find yourself drifting off the centreline with Reverse Thrust applied you should either select Reverse Idle or even cancel it to regain control. When you are back on the centreline and under control you can then re-apply Reverse Thrust.

It is interesting to note that during an autoland the autopilots will cope with a crosswind (max 25kts) in a different manner.  Runway alignment starts at 500ft RA when the drift angle is reduced to 5 degrees or less with up to 5 degrees of bank by 200ft RA.  The wings are then levelled during the flare.

Bertie Goddard   

[Orlaam 306]

12 hours ago, kevinh said:

I don't have any trouble landing 747v3 either, but I don't agree that it's too easy. I never found landing a 744 FFS difficult at all. Of course that isn't necessarily exactly the same as the real thing but it is close.

i don't know why you expect it to land like the NGX.

I haven't encountered the tipping issue you mention, but I haven't had to deal with a strong crosswind yet. Obviously it is possible for the aircraft to tilt, which is why you would use into wind aileron. You may have put too much wheel in without realising and pushed the sim into an area where the ground handling model isn't that realistic. Bear in mind the aircraft is still partially flying so what appears to be impossible could actually be possible 

When you say "the right mains" do you mean the wing gear, or both wing and body gear? 

It's easy compared to a lot of add ons.  The Majestic Dash 8 or A2A are way harder to land. I can come in pretty sloppy and still land like a boss in the 744.  Same for the 737.  Keep in mind I've been flying add ons with study level simulation since 2002 or earlier. My first was the Dreamfleet B737-400.  I've owned so many from top developers.  

What I mean by landing like the NGX is that the NGX comes in at Vapp nose high.  It easily flares with little back pressure as you idle the thrust.  It's just the easiest plane I have right now to land.  I can come in like garbage and recover to land like a pro.  The 747v3 will touch all wheels flat and I find that's it's harder to nose up to avoid that.  It's just different.  Plus the NGX will sometimes float just a tad (-800/-900 variant especially) at higher speeds and you can push the yoke forward but still land on the mains without the nose wheel coming down.  The 747 will typically nose down if you push it down resulting is a nose first or flat landing.  I know for a fact that pilots put forward pressure on the yoke during landings.  All pilots do this. Controls are pulled back, pushed forward and turned to correct for wind and such.  Make sense?

I think the tipping issue was due to the ground modeling.  I do not wing down on approaches, I crab.  Only wing down I do is to correct for heading but I prefer to crab and that's what you'd do in a large plane anyhow.  I was on all wheels (mains and nose) and keeping my aileron into the wind.  Probably not necessary in a sim but I can never tell if it helps for crosswinds.  Next thing I know I'm leaning and outside view reveals my wheels on the right side are off the ground and only the wheels on the left are on the ground, along with the nose gear.  I quickly dropped my aileron and it leveled out. 

I know people hate YouTube videos, but this one shows the pilot putting forward pressure on the yoke, like nearly all I've seen through the years. The QOTSII will totally level out and lose its flare.  And I'm not too fast.  I idle at like 50 feet and always do the right speed. 

 

Edited May 22, 2017 by Orlaam

[skelsey 765]

7 hours ago, Orlaam said:

I know for a fact that pilots put forward pressure on the yoke during landings.  All pilots do this. Controls are pulled back, pushed forward and turned to correct for wind and such.  Make sense?

Small point of order:

In your video, I would say that the PF relaxed the backpressure briefly during the flare -- which is not quite the same as pushing forward! Relaxing backpressure is OK: pushing forward in the flare in any aircraft is a recipe for a hard/nosewheel-first landing.

When you reduce power in the flare, the aeroplane will nose-down due to the thrust-pitch couple - most of the backpressure is going to counter this. As Bertie mentioned, the change in attitude in the flare in the B747 is very small -- only two degrees (I'm not sure what the B737 manual says as it's not a type I'm familiar with, but the A320, by comparison as a similar-sized aircraft to the B737, has a typical pitch change in the flare of up to four degrees -- twice as much as the Jumbo).

Two degrees is a very tiny movement -- when you are looking out at the far end of the runway, the very moment you detect the glareshield moving up (i.e. the pitch attitude increasing), that is more than enough. It is literally just barely enough to be perceptible as a change in attitude.

14 hours ago, Budbud said:

I was right at VF+5 when I started the flare with A/T engaged.

And there is part of your problem ;). The B747 was not designed to be hand-flown with A/T engaged: I'm not even sure that it will (or should) reduce the power to idle in this situation. It's something that would need to be confirmed by someone with type experience (Bertie?) or checked in a 'big sim', but the FCOM says:

Quote

Flare
The flare maneuver brings the airplane to a smooth automatic landing touchdown.
The flare mode is not intended for single autopilot or flight director only
operation.
Flare arms when LAND 3 or LAND 2 annunciates. At approximately 50 feet radio
altitude, the autopilots start the flare maneuver. FLARE replaces the G/S pitch
flight mode annunciation.

During flare:
• at 25 feet radio altitude, the autothrottle retards thrust levers to idle
• IDLE replaces the SPD autothrottle flight mode annunciation
• at touchdown, the FLARE annunciation no longer displays, and the nose
lowers to the runway

(My emphasis)

My reading of that is that the IDLE A/T mode is itself a submode of the FLARE mode. If you are hand-flying then you will not get LAND 2 or LAND 3, therefore you will not get FLARE mode. If you do not get FLARE, you will therefore not get IDLE and the A/T will sit there quite happily maintaining Ref + 5!

Edited May 22, 2017 by skelsey

[vc10man 732]

3 hours ago, skelsey said:

A/T engaged: I'm not even sure that it will

I have hand-flown several approaches now with the A/T engaged, and it has bled the IAS to the speed designated at the flaps selected, and had no problems, making clean ever so- slightly flared landings irrespective of it was not designed to do so..

[adamant365 28]

10 hours ago, Orlaam said:

The 747v3 will touch all wheels flat and I find that's it's harder to nose up to avoid that.  

If your normal approach comes in with the "wheels flat" you are either coming in too fast or too steep. At 50' you should be at ~2 degrees nose up and at main wheel touchdown, 4-5 degrees nose up. That's per the FCTM. And you definitely should not be chopping the throttle at 50' like you said earlier. The best technique is to begin flare at 30' and AFTER beginning the flare, bring the power back smoothly to idle. Why after?? If you pull the power back first, the natural tendency for engines mounted below a low mounted wing is to cause nose down pitch. That's the last thing you want when close to the ground. Starting the flare first counters some of the pitch down tendency. 

When you hear the RA anounce "30" just gently pull back the yoke and immediately after applying back pressure, smoothly bring the throttle back. Shoot for a 2-3 degree increase in pitch. The mains should settle down at 100-150 FPM (less or more depending on the Gods of Landings). Since doing it that way, my landings have become much better. 

Edited May 22, 2017 by adamant365

[kevinh 409]

11 hours ago, Orlaam said:

It's easy compared to a lot of add ons.  The Majestic Dash 8 or A2A are way harder to land. I can come in pretty sloppy and still land like a boss in the 744.  Same for the 737.  Keep in mind I've been flying add ons with study level simulation since 2002 or earlier. My first was the Dreamfleet B737-400.  I've owned so many from top developers.  

What I mean by landing like the NGX is that the NGX comes in at Vapp nose high.  It easily flares with little back pressure as you idle the thrust.  It's just the easiest plane I have right now to land.  I can come in like garbage and recover to land like a pro.  The 747v3 will touch all wheels flat and I find that's it's harder to nose up to avoid that.  It's just different.  Plus the NGX will sometimes float just a tad (-800/-900 variant especially) at higher speeds and you can push the yoke forward but still land on the mains without the nose wheel coming down.  The 747 will typically nose down if you push it down resulting is a nose first or flat landing.  I know for a fact that pilots put forward pressure on the yoke during landings.  All pilots do this. Controls are pulled back, pushed forward and turned to correct for wind and such.  Make sense?

I think the tipping issue was due to the ground modeling.  I do not wing down on approaches, I crab.  Only wing down I do is to correct for heading but I prefer to crab and that's what you'd do in a large plane anyhow.  I was on all wheels (mains and nose) and keeping my aileron into the wind.  Probably not necessary in a sim but I can never tell if it helps for crosswinds.  Next thing I know I'm leaning and outside view reveals my wheels on the right side are off the ground and only the wheels on the left are on the ground, along with the nose gear.  I quickly dropped my aileron and it leveled out. 

I know people hate YouTube videos, but this one shows the pilot putting forward pressure on the yoke, like nearly all I've seen through the years. The QOTSII will totally level out and lose its flare.  And I'm not too fast.  I idle at like 50 feet and always do the right speed. 

Ah, I see. You are equating "difficult to land" with "realistic". Landing a Dash 8 is very different to landing a 737 or 747. Every power change in the Dash 8 causes reactions in pitch roll and yaw. In a jet it's just a pitch change. I find the A2A GA addons very easy to land. Maybe it's your technique that is the problem?

Have you flown a 747 in real life? If not you aren't really qualified to comment on its landing characteristics. I've only flown a 747 Full Flight Sim, not the real thing, but it feels "right" to me. Bear in mind PMDG used real world pilots to evaluate this wonderful sim. Using a youtube video as a guide and trying to copy the pilot's inputs is useless since you aren't flying through the same disturbed air that pilot is. That push forward would be in reaction to something the aircraft did. Not something to replicate every time you land. Similarly, only feed in enough aileron to counter the into wind wing rising. If it isn't rising, don't put any wheel input in.

I'm away from home, so not able attempt to replicate what you saw in terms of being able to get the wheels to lift off the ground by using an into wind wheel input. That may well be an issue to be addressed.

[Iceman2 110]

Hello PMDG 747 drivers,

I enjoy reading stuff like this where the SIM community strives for reality. Keep it up as long as you keep having fun. Flying is meant to be enjoyable whether it be real or simulated. 

FWIW I flew the 4 holer for a few years before large twin engines became popular and compared to other Boeings the queen will hold the top spot in royalty for many more years to come. Remember folks she's very complicated and can get very cranky if not treated well particularly below 1000' during the landing. However she's surprisingly easy to fly and that's because it's a fly by numbers aircraft. If she's setup well by 1000' on final, chances are the landing will go well.

The FCTM is where you'll find the most helpful stuff. If you want to learn how to land her without reading pages and pages of manuals, first set her up with an ILS autoland and watch how Mr Boeing does it. Watch the flare pitch, watch when the thrust levers move to idle and finally have ago manually.

During the initial type rating training some instructors would get the pilots to watch an autoland along with the go-around  to illustrate how it should be done.

IM

[kmanning 12]

Hi all,

I've been reading all the posts about landing the 747. I already knew the techniques for landing the 747 from previous versions of the PMDG 747s I had, but this latest version has a totally different landing characteristics than the previous versions. I got to thinking about it and thought I would set the aircraft up for an auto-land and observe how the 747 reacts. Guess what? It was very sloppy. The airplane literally was SLAMDED onto the runway, and I know something had to be wrong. I was using runway 24 at KBHM, or Birmingham Shuttlesworth International. I know 747s make a firmer landing when doing an auto-land, but they DO NOT slammed it onto the runway. I also observed the auto-land from the control tower view, and when I watched it touch down, it was a VERY hard landing. I got to thinking about some of the things that I will discuss shortly that may play a part in why it's landing so hard and sloppy on that runway when I use the auto-land.

I tried runway 6, performing the same auto-land, and it was perfect, just like what I've seen in videos of 747s performing an auto-land. I even tried landing the 747 myself, with the auto-pilot and auto-throttles disconnected and my landing was much better. But I'm still on occasions landing too long, especially if I wait until the 20' or 30' callout to cut the throttles rapidly as the pilot did in the video above. I start my flare at 30 ft. After flaring the airplane, the PFD shows that the nose up attitude is about 4 or 5 degrees, which means I should have flared the airplane 2 or 3 degrees. If I start to cut the power at 50 ft, but at a slower rate, it seems to land much better. Is that how the real 747 performs?

Now, to discuss the situation about runway 24. The airport file I'm using is a modified file, because I made some changes that were not correct in some of the AFCAD files I was using. The taxi way locations were not correct as well as the PAPI lights and the localizer and glideslope. These should be right on the money because I used a satellite image to place these in their correct locations. The other thing is that the scenery used for this area is the Alabama Scenery file put out by Mega Scenery Earth. Also, just to the N.E. of runway 24, there's a hill that rises about 100 ft above the runway threshold of 650 ft, over a distance of 5,100 ft. And lastly, runway 24 may not be certified for auto-lands, but I'm not sure on that. I remember reading the requirements that certifies a runway for auto-land but I don't remember now. Does anyone know where I would look that up for any airport?  

And one more question. When approaching the airport runway, do real 747 pilots maintain their Vref 30 + 5 all the way down to the runway when they begin the initial flare, or do they reduce speed slightly as they're approaching the runway, say for example, Vref 30 + 0?

Ken Manning

[Orlaam 306]

On 5/22/2017 at 8:30 AM, kevinh said:

Ah, I see. You are equating "difficult to land" with "realistic". Landing a Dash 8 is very different to landing a 737 or 747. Every power change in the Dash 8 causes reactions in pitch roll and yaw. In a jet it's just a pitch change. I find the A2A GA addons very easy to land. Maybe it's your technique that is the problem?

Have you flown a 747 in real life? If not you aren't really qualified to comment on its landing characteristics. I've only flown a 747 Full Flight Sim, not the real thing, but it feels "right" to me. Bear in mind PMDG used real world pilots to evaluate this wonderful sim. Using a youtube video as a guide and trying to copy the pilot's inputs is useless since you aren't flying through the same disturbed air that pilot is. That push forward would be in reaction to something the aircraft did. Not something to replicate every time you land. Similarly, only feed in enough aileron to counter the into wind wing rising. If it isn't rising, don't put any wheel input in.

I'm away from home, so not able attempt to replicate what you saw in terms of being able to get the wheels to lift off the ground by using an into wind wheel input. That may well be an issue to be addressed.

I never said I was a real pilot at all.  I also never criticized the PMDG 744 either.  I simply said it was easy to land IMO, in the sim.  People are reading between the lines with my comments.

[kmanning 12]

My post still has not been answered so I'm reposting it again:

Hi all,

I've been reading all the posts about landing the 747. I already knew the techniques for landing the 747 from previous versions of the PMDG 747s I had, but this latest version has a totally different landing characteristics than the previous versions. I got to thinking about it and thought I would set the aircraft up for an auto-land and observe how the 747 reacts. Guess what? It was very sloppy. The airplane literally was SLAMDED onto the runway, and I know something had to be wrong. I was using runway 24 at KBHM, or Birmingham Shuttlesworth International. I know 747s make a firmer landing when doing an auto-land, but they DO NOT slammed it onto the runway. I also observed the auto-land from the control tower view, and when I watched it touch down, it was a VERY hard landing. I got to thinking about some of the things that I will discuss shortly that may play a part in why it's landing so hard and sloppy on that runway when I use the auto-land.

I tried runway 6, performing the same auto-land, and it was perfect, just like what I've seen in videos of 747s performing an auto-land. I even tried landing the 747 myself, with the auto-pilot and auto-throttles disconnected and my landing was much better. But I'm still on occasions landing too long, especially if I wait until the 20' or 30' callout to cut the throttles rapidly as the pilot did in the video above. I start my flare at 30 ft. After flaring the airplane, the PFD shows that the nose up attitude is about 4 or 5 degrees, which means I should have flared the airplane 2 or 3 degrees. If I start to cut the power at 50 ft, but at a slower rate, it seems to land much better. Is that how the real 747 performs?

Now, to discuss the situation about runway 24. The airport file I'm using is a modified file, because I made some changes that were not correct in some of the AFCAD files I was using. The taxi way locations were not correct as well as the PAPI lights and the localizer and glideslope. These should be right on the money because I used a satellite image to place these in their correct locations. The other thing is that the scenery used for this area is the Alabama Scenery file put out by Mega Scenery Earth. Also, just to the N.E. of runway 24, there's a hill that rises about 100 ft above the runway threshold of 650 ft, over a distance of 5,100 ft. And lastly, runway 24 may not be certified for auto-lands, but I'm not sure on that. I remember reading the requirements that certifies a runway for auto-land but I don't remember now. Does anyone know where I would look that up for any airport?  

And one more question. When approaching the airport runway, do real 747 pilots maintain their Vref 30 + 5 all the way down to the runway when they begin the initial flare, or do they reduce speed slightly as they're approaching the runway, say for example, Vref 30 + 0?

Ken Manning

[pete_auau 1,153]

if  it  works  on  other  airports   and doesn't  work on your modified  version of the  airport could  be  your  issue

[Orlaam 306]

On 5/25/2017 at 8:35 PM, kmanning said:

And one more question. When approaching the airport runway, do real 747 pilots maintain their Vref 30 + 5 all the way down to the runway when they begin the initial flare, or do they reduce speed slightly as they're approaching the runway, say for example, Vref 30 + 0?

Ken Manning

Final approach speed is Vapp + wind factor maintained all the way into the threshold or slightly sooner.  Vref is just your reference landing speed at 1.3 VSO.  You would be at Vref around 50 feet AGL, but if your Vapp is only a few knots higher than you would likely touchdown at Vref or just below. Ideally you don't want to be below Vref above 50 feet AGL.

[skelsey 765]

On 2017-5-22 at 2:16 PM, vc10man said:

I have hand-flown several approaches now with the A/T engaged, and it has bled the IAS to the speed designated at the flaps selected, and had no problems, making clean ever so- slightly flared landings irrespective of it was not designed to do so..

It may well be possible but in the real aeroplane there is quite a strong pitch-power couple that makes it uncomfortable at best.

I presume you must be disconnecting the A/T at some point before the flare in order to bring the thrust back to idle? The real thing will stay in SPD mode if you are hand-flying.

[vc10man 732]

48 minutes ago, skelsey said:

disconnecting the A/T

Yes, at about 50-feet before touch down.

And I follow all your points and take them onboard, never having flown one in real-life re:pitch-power couple