Landing distance

[Don]

I am flying an RV-9A with a O-320 (160 hp), with a fixed pitch prop. I've got better than 120 hours in it. Van's states the take-off and landing distance with this plane solo is 300'. At gross he says they're 475 and 450. It's also generally agreed that Van's numbers are very close to reality as opposed to some companies that are rather optimistic. I also note that other RV's have similar or shorter landing distances.

When it comes to the take-off, I believe I'm coming pretty close to Van's numbers by just using full flaps, getting the nose wheel barely off the runway until I rotate as I pass 50 knots. I've never actually measured it but I'm always startled at how fast it happens and I'm positive it's well under 1,000'.

Landings are a different story. I can fairly consistently land in 1,000' by reducing my speed over the fence to 57-58 knots and keeping a bit of power on until the flare. I landed once at 55 knots with the engine idling in calm conditions and when I rolled out parallel to the runway and started the flare - there wasn't enough energy left for ANY float and the mains touched down. I don't know what that landing distance was but it was more than 500'.

I'm curious how to land this plane in 500'?or 600 or 700'. Is the trick to break really hard? While I'm not opposed to braking, I'm not keen on standing on the breaks. I figure there's something else I'm missing. I also find it interesting that when folks here ask about using short fields, say 1,000' on a regular basis, a lot of people advise against it because the margin for error is low.

The shortest airport I've landed at so far was 1,534' (x 24') and it wasn't an issue but I'm guessing I used 1,100' of it with modest braking. The fact that it was up hill in spots helped limit the landing distance.

In closing, I'm sure folks will want to know stuff I failed to mention and I'll try and answer questions. My indicated stall speed at gross, with flaps down is 44 knots (Van's says 50 mph, so I think I'm real close). My intent for doing this isn't to make every landing this short but I want to be able to fly the 9 to its limits when I want or need to do so. I would also like to generally shorten my landings to under 1,000' if I can do so with no more than gentle braking.

My standard approach speed for a landing where distance is not limited is 65-67 knots over the fence. With moderate braking I'll get the plane stopped in 1,500 to 1,800'. If I'm landing at an airport that's between 2,000 and 2,400' I'll reduce the approach speed to 60 knots, which is limiting me in gusty conditions. These figures are all for paved runways.

So my questions are: Can you land your RV in under 500'? If so, what's your technique?

[Russ McCutcheon]

The numbers Van?s publishes are the absolute best they could get from the airplane (maximum effort) it is also the distance from the touch down point to the stopping point, not from the end of the runway to the stopping point, these numbers are just ?specks? and don?t reflect normal landings by normal pilots on most days.

Back in the day Van had a video where he demonstrated landing and taking off his RV-4 on his family farm with a passenger, I think that strip was 680? long, this proved his numbers where real. For us guys with nothing to prove, if you?re comfortable landing on a 1500? strip you can go most anywhere you want.

[luddite42]

Don, there are no secrets whether you're in an RV or any other airplane. The shortest landings involve touching down as close to a selected point as possible (without coming up short), as slow as possible. Then it's a matter of braking as much as is safely possible. You need to carefully think about how hard you really want to get on the brakes on grass in a tricycle gear RV. Watch how the bush pilots do it. They're generally approaching dirty in the 1.1Vso range with power, and pulling power off for a precise touchdown on a point. Then they are braking as hard as possible. You will likely drag the tail in your RV-9A touching down at absolute minimum speed from a power-on approach. Keep in mind that if you indicate 44kts at the dirty power-off stall, 1.3Vso is 57 kts. This number should work perfectly well even for power off landings. 65-67 kts seems pretty fast for the RV-9. With a little power, you should be able to very comfortably fly in the 1.2Vso range (53kts). Like any other aspect of flying, getting very good takes a lot of careful, dedicated practice.

[Rupester]

... My experience (performance?) with my 9A is just like yours. Taking off in very short distances is easy, but no way can I land it in those Vans numbers.

[Mel]

To match Van's landing numbers, you have to drag it in with power.
At least that's been my experience.

I have 1500' with clear approaches and a Catto 3-blade. My only "white knuckle" moments come with a direct cross-wind.
My runway is 20' wide.

[Don]

Originally Posted by Mel

To match Van's landing numbers, you have to drag it in with power.
At least that's been my experience.

I have 1500' with clear approaches and a Catto 3-blade. My only "white knuckle" moments come with a direct cross-wind.
My runway is 20' wide.

Hi Mel,

Any suggestions about how to sneak up on dragging it in with power to keep things safe? When I get much below 60 knots in the 9 I usually carry a little power - may 1,100 rpm and kill it just before I start the flair. My sense is you're suggesting more power and maybe a slower speed. I think I'd practice that at altitude first.

I'm starting to get the sense that 500' landings isn't within the scope or comfort level of many RV pilots.

[RWoodard]

Unless there are other extenuating circumstances, a short field landing should include a moderate amount of power when stabilized on the approach.

Pitch for airspeed and adjust your power to control your descent rate. This is frequently referred to as "flying on the backside of the power curve."

The approach will be steeper than a "standard" long-runway approach so it'll take some getting used to.

To practice, first practice slow flight at altitude. It's imperative that you are comfortable in this airspeed regime. In a Cessna, I'd tell you to slow to the point where the stall horn starts to squawk, but the plane doesn't quit flying. Practice turns and get used to how the controls feel. Trim the plane. Reduce power 500rpm while maintaining the airspeed. Note the descent rate. Continue reducing power to sample varying descent rates.

You'll inevitably stall the plane in this learning process, but that's a learning experience, too. Make sure you've got enough altitude to recover from the stall with a minimum of fuss and panic. The best thing you can learn from an inadvertent stall at altitude is how the controls felt just before the stall.

Once you've accumulated significant experience at altitude, take the exercise to the runway. For heaven's sake, don't pick the end of the runway for this portion of the learning experience. That gives you an error margin of plus 4000 feet and minus ZERO feet. Not necessary or advisable.

Depending on the airframe, your indicated POWER ON stall speed in landing configuration might be significantly different than the POWER OFF stall speed in the landing configuration.

I once flew a friend's Cub... He's got a ~1200 foot grass strip here in Colorado (5100' MSL). We practiced just as I have described at altitude and I found that with the power on, we could get the indicated airspeed to settle on ZERO. Now we can assume that the actual airspeed was something above zero, but the point is that the stall speed was significantly lower than the 30-something indicated with the power off.

Nobody should be embarrassed about asking for advice regarding short field landing technique. I watched a training partner fail his initial CFI checkride 15 years ago when I took my CFI checkride. Lucky for me, I had Champ and Cub experience and a healthy dose of advice from a good friend and some practical experience flying into his farm strip. [Thanks, Bill!]

Hope this helps!

Rod

[Russ McCutcheon]

There is no way to instruct you over the internet as to how to safely drag an airplane in using power over the fence and plunk it on the numbers, with that said your using power to enable you to fly at an increased angle of attack and lower then power off stall speed, check this video out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuE2cW8NMx8 The guy in the C-150 right at the beginning did a great job.

Now after you drag your A model -9 in on power and touch the mains you then need to slam on the brakes to stop in 500’ this will slam the nose wheel down hard, not a practical idea for someone who wants to be kind to their airplane, on my tail dragger -4 this would mean dragging it in and touching the tail wheel on the ground while the mains are still 2 or 3 ‘ in the air and letting them slam down and then stand on the brakes, I have no interest in trying to land/stop in 500’ in my RV. What this 500’ number actually tells me is that if I touch down on the first 25% of a 1000’ runway I’ll be in good shape, so long as the grass is dry!

[Russ McCutcheon]

Originally Posted by RWoodard

Unless there are other extenuating circumstances, a short field landing should include a moderate amount of power when stabilized on the approach.

Pitch for airspeed and adjust your power to control your descent rate. This is frequently referred to as "flying on the backside of the power curve."

The approach will be steeper than a "standard" long-runway approach so it'll take some getting used to.

To practice, first practice slow flight at altitude. It's imperative that you are comfortable in this airspeed regime. In a Cessna, I'd tell you to slow to the point where the stall horn starts to squawk, but the plane doesn't quit flying. Practice turns and get used to how the controls feel. Trim the plane. Reduce power 500rpm while maintaining the airspeed. Note the descent rate. Continue reducing power to sample varying descent rates.

You'll inevitably stall the plane in this learning process, but that's a learning experience, too. Make sure you've got enough altitude to recover from the stall with a minimum of fuss and panic. The best thing you can learn from an inadvertent stall at altitude is how the controls felt just before the stall.

Once you've accumulated significant experience at altitude, take the exercise to the runway. For heaven's sake, don't pick the end of the runway for this portion of the learning experience. That gives you an error margin of plus 4000 feet and minus ZERO feet. Not necessary or advisable.

Depending on the airframe, your indicated POWER ON stall speed in landing configuration might be significantly different than the POWER OFF stall speed in the landing configuration.

I once flew a friend's Cub... He's got a ~1200 foot grass strip here in Colorado (5100' MSL). We practiced just as I have described at altitude and I found that with the power on, we could get the indicated airspeed to settle on ZERO. Now we can assume that the actual airspeed was something above zero, but the point is that the stall speed was significantly lower than the 30-something indicated with the power off.

Nobody should be embarrassed about asking for advice regarding short field landing technique. I watched a training partner fail his initial CFI checkride 15 years ago when I took my CFI checkride. Lucky for me, I had Champ and Cub experience and a healthy dose of advice from a good friend and some practical experience flying into his farm strip. [Thanks, Bill!]

Hope this helps!

Rod

Very good description!

[flyboy1963]

Don, I have a similar experience. 150 hp FP -9a.
I generally glide to landing, of course carry power when I have to adjust for poor glidepath control.
But what I think I have observed, not scientifically, is when i have a stable approach at about 65 kts IAS, and hold that, when I flare, I bleed off speed to the stall and settle on the mains as expected.
When I am high on approach, I slow to more like 60, and the rate of sink increases dramatically! When I flare from this high energy descent, there seems to be a 'zoom' forward in ground effect, and it seems I float at least as far, if not farther, before actually touching down!
This kind of agrees with the true, 'drag it in with power' short field approach that we all practiced in spam cans.
a couple extra knots of forward speed may be easier to dissipate that 1500 lbs coming down at 1500 fpm!