Only ten poll choices allowed so pick the closest one--you can select more than one. So, if you normally land at 75 you can choose 74, 76 or both 74 & 76.
Last edited:
Assuming no short field etc, I like to come across the numbers with the speed decaying below 70, touchdown as it decays to about 60.
Ditto, more or less.
Only ten poll choices allowed so pick the closest one--you can select more than one. So, if you normally land at 75 you can choose 74, 76 or both 74 & 76.
You actually can't land the aircraft without stalling the wing. If the wing is not stalled, the wing is still flying and the brakes are not very effective until the wing is stalled.
The RV9 group eventually figures this out. And then they can enjoy their short landing capability.
So based on Van's chart, at 2200# you will be close to 57mph (49kts).
And at 2700# about 63mph (54kts). Land your aircraft based on YOUR stall speeds during phase 1.
You actually can't land the aircraft without stalling the wing. If the wing is not stalled, the wing is still flying and the brakes are not very effective until the wing is stalled.
1.
Not true. The wing does NOT need to be in a stalled condition to land…and in cases where there is any type of gust, you do not want to be right at stall speed, especially on approach.
Typical approach speeds are around 1.3 Vs, at gross approximately 72 knots, slowing over the fence to something less than that. If it’s gusty, add a few knots to increase the margin. I prefer half flap landings in my -10 and use about 76 knots on approach, give or take.
I definitely agree that your speeds should be predicated on your specific airplane; each one is just a bit different.
Sorry for the confusion..... I expected that everyone understood needing adjusting approach speed based on conditions.
You will notice, I was not talking about approach speeds.
Sorry for the thread drift….
The above statement is simply not true. Not saying that landing at minimum possible speed is not desirable. But it’s not a necessary condition. Remember a stall - a disruption of smooth airflow attached to the wing - is a function of angle of attack, only. When all three wheels of a nose gear airplane are on the runway, the angle of attack is near zero, so little lift is generated. But the wing is not stalled. Same thing for a TW airplane doing a ‘wheel’ landing.
You are correct! I should have said..... no longer creating lift.
…and you need to understand that landing with a wing in a stalled condition is neither required or recommended in most cases.
Also, every landing is preceded by an approach; that approach is an important part of the landing.
You are correct! I should have said..... no longer creating lift.
The OP was not talking about approach speed.
In order to "have landed" the wing must be producing less lift than the weight. It is not necessary that it create zero lift. Obviously braking is reduced when there is residual lift.
But the normal Van's mantra for landing tricycle airplanes is to hold the nose wheel off as long as possible. In doing so, the wing is making "some" lift. For a good touchdown, the wing is producing lift essentially equal to weight. Hold the nose there as you decelerate and the lift decays with reducing speed.
How about.... no longer creating enough lift to sustain flight.
I pulled data on 150+ landings in my RV-10 over the last year on IAS at 50 feet and at touchdown to provide some empirical data. The graphs are attached below. Obviously, these can be swayed one way or the other by conditions of the day, loading, etc. Viewing it as a range and histogram to give directional guidance, not anything down to the knot.