Where do you land?

[PilotjohnS]

I currently fly out of a towered airport with instrument approaches.

The runway has a VASI showing glide slope with colored lights.

I have been using the VASI on landings out of habit, but it seems to set me up for a touch down a ways down the runway. Then the controller jumps on the radio asking me to expedite turn off.

But I kind of set him up for failure because I invariably get handed off to tower from flight following 20 miles out while I am doing 130 Kts. But at 5 miles out, I am in approach mode with flaps down doing 65 Kts (RV9a). So buzzing in at 130, then 65 on final; Cessnas dont do this.

I tried to avoid jamming on the brakes to save the pads ( since I am paying for them now), but then I run long and wont make the recommended turn off.

So do y’all land on the numbers, or 1000’ down on the offical “ touchdown” point?

 

[plehrke]

On the numbers. That is where tower is expecting me to land.

 

[Kyle Boatright]

So do y’all land on the numbers, or 1000’ down on the offical “ touchdown” point?

I select my intended touchdown point based on the turnoff I want to make without anything beyond minor braking. On the RV-10, that's probably 2,500', and the RV-6 needs about 1,500'.

 

[Girraf]

Depends

Day VFR, my default is a tight power off 180 approach to the numbers from the pattern. Doesn't always work but every attempt is another rep to play with the variables and learn what me and the aircraft are capable of. Even if circumstances don't permit that kind of visual approach during the day (traffic/tower instruction etc.), once on final I typically aim at the threshold and plan to land on or just beyond the numbers.

For night ops, I'll honor any VGSI, power A/R, and take the longer landing.

 

[kenpilot]

None of the above? I think of the entire landing (including the turnoff at a reasonable taxiway) as a maneuver. I select a touchdown point that gets me to the intended turnoff point with minimal braking, and with an appropriate amount of extra runway in case of unexpected brake failure. If that means I'm landing halfway down the runway (especially on a 10,000-foot runway), then so be it.

In similar fashion, if you asked me what approach angle I use.... whatever angle allows me to get to the runway with close to idle power from the base-final turn to touchdown. And if that means I'm holding white-over-white on the VASI, then so be it.

These markings/lights are helpful in training, but in practice they are just guides.

 

[Taltruda]

On the numbers. That is where tower is expecting me to land.

They do? With transport category planes, we aim for the “Aiming” markers, which are 1000 feet from the threshold, and accept a touchdown between there, and up to the 3000 foot marks. I don’t think I ever heard that the tower “expects” you to land on the numbers.. that being said, I typically aim for the numbers myself, or even the piano keys in my RV, but anywhere in the first 1/3rd is acceptable.

 

[Taltruda]

I currently fly out of a towered airport with instrument approaches.

The runway has a VASI showing glide slope with colored lights.

I have been using the VASI on landings out of habit, but it seems to set me up for a touch down a ways down the runway. Then the controller jumps on the radio asking me to expedite turn off.

But I kind of set him up for failure because I invariably get handed off to tower from flight following 20 miles out while I am doing 130 Kts. But at 5 miles out, I am in approach mode with flaps down doing 65 Kts (RV9a). So buzzing in at 130, then 65 on final; Cessnas dont do this.

I tried to avoid jamming on the brakes to save the pads ( since I am paying for them now), but then I run long and wont make the recommended turn off.

So do y’all land on the numbers, or 1000’ down on the offical “ touchdown” point?

I personally think following the VASI in day VFR conditions is way too low and shallow. If the engine quit anytime on final, you are not making the airport. I only follow the PAPI or VASI with a multi engine aircraft, or in instrument conditions.. otherwise, I’m white over white, power to idle somewhere on base, and I’m guaranteed to make the runway if the engine quit. Typically I’ve got the field made anywhere from 5 miles out incase the engine quits.. I try to plan my descent at 15 to 18 inches, 145 knots or more.. the CHTs are usually cooled off to 290 or so by the time I get to the pattern.. then 15 inches, raise the nose to level at the traffic pattern, as the speed decays towards 90 knots, I can go to idle and not set off the CHT alarm (set at 50 degrees/min)

 

[Majorpayne317641]

And with some runways you want your wheels touching down as close to the start of the pavement as possible! All depends on the length of runway, obstructions, if any. Don’t ever let a tower rush you. They are there to help you not the other way around.

They do? With transport category planes, we aim for the “Aiming” markers, which are 1000 feet from the threshold, and accept a touchdown between there, and up to the 3000 foot marks. I don’t think I ever heard that the tower “expects” you to land on the numbers.. that being said, I typically aim for the numbers myself, or even the piano keys in my RV, but anywhere in the first 1/3rd is acceptable.

 

[Full Throttle]

Looking at the airport diagram you posted, it looks to me its pretty obvious where most of the traffic is landing. At or beyond the aiming point...

 

[Taltruda]

And with some runways you want your wheels touching down as close to the start of the pavement as possible! All depends on the length of runway, obstructions, if any. Don’t ever let a tower rush you. They are there to help you not the other way around.

Agreed! It depends on the situation.. for the runway pictured by the OP, if I wanted the first turnoff, I would land close to the numbers on speed. Following the VASI puts you too shallow on final, and too far down unless you wanted to exit further down. Never let the tower make you feel rushed.. I know of several pilots recently that rushed off the runway and hit the prop or wing on runway lights!

 

[kenpilot]

I also have never heard of a tower "expecting" anything in particular. It's always been my impression that controllers are primarily concerned with sequencing and safety, not landing technique. I'd bet that from way up in the tower, it's hard to even tell where an aircraft touches down. So if you select a touchdown (and a final approach airspeed) that minimizes your overall ground roll distance/time, I'm sure they'd appreciate the effort, regardless of which runway markings you use.

Back to my former comment about landing halfway down the runway... That would definitely be a factor in sequencing, and could easily cause concern in the control tower. If I was intentionally choosing a touchdown point halfway down the runway (and I've done that when the FBO I was parking at was on the far end), I'd probably give the tower a short courtesy explanation.

About "recommended turn off" and "expedite turn off", I would add that only *you* are the pilot in command. I've received a "turn right at Echo" instruction while I was still rolling at 30kt+ and had to respond with "Unable, I'll catch Foxtrot". The controller cannot tell how much extra speed you have at that moment. Don't let any tower controller pressure you into taking a fast turnoff if you aren't fully ready to do so.

Lastly, you know you can chat with the tower controllers by phone, right? If you feel there's a disconnect in the communication, have an offline chat and figure out what they're really expecting. If you catch them in a less busy time, I've found that controllers welcome these conversations.

 

[Taltruda]

Looking at the airport diagram you posted, it looks to me its pretty obvious where most of the traffic is landing. At or beyond the aiming point...

That’s because that’s where you’re supposed to touch down! It’s called the touchdown zone for a reason! (Full disclosure, with GA airplanes, I land short of it too..)

 

[rv8ch]

On the picture you posted, assuming your hangar is in the top right corner, I'd be landing long on runway 9, and short on runway 18.

I used to fly into a rather busy airport (LSGG) with over 12k feet of runway, and the AIP and the controllers there were pretty clear about where they wanted you to land and where they expected you to turn off. If you dilly-dally, the JAL cargo 747 arriving behind you from Tokyo would not be too happy about the go-around.

I second the advice of talking to the tower to see what they want, and then decide if you can safely give it to them.

 

[kiwipete]

Work backwards

I start with, where do I, OR ATC want me to vacate? then work backwards from there. Plan touchdown say 1500 (depending upon wind, weight, temp, braking etc) before where I want to turn off then aim for that point. Sometimes for fun I might fly the vasi then fly down the runway at a couple of feet to make it to my touch down point. I find having an accurate touchdown point makes for better landings.
As long as you don’t touchdown before the threshold you’re fine.

Don’t let ATC pressure you to do something you’re uncomfortable with.

Often for example if I’m ferrying an empty jet I let ATC know in advance that’ll be much slower than normal inside 4 miles.
Of course airline flying, it’s the touchdown markers on the runway, then brake settings and reverse as necessary to make the correct turnoff. A whole different ball game.

 

[nohoflyer]

When I got my single engine add on (previously all jet time) and was attempting my first landing in a 177, I was aiming for the “captains bars”. My CFI asked “where the heck are you aiming for”? When I told him he said “that’s not how we do it in little airplanes, we aim for brick one”.

That’s how I was taught.

 

[Desert Rat]

I don't think this is a one size fits all answer. As far as I know, for general aviation operations there's nothing requiring you to follow the VASI or land on the aim points as long as the approach is stabilized. So my opinion and what I teach my students is that this is a situational decision.

Assuming nothing like weather or wake turbulence is a factor, I give myself enough room that I can land and roll out to where I want to go without smoking the brakes. If you have to do the back taxi of shame it clogs things up even worse, so I err on the side of caution and leave plenty of margin, but don't get ridiculous about it.

If I were going to touch down on say the last 3,000' of a 10,000' runway because thats where my turnoff was I'll advise tower I'd like to land long and roll out to A2 or whatever. I don't recall anybody ever having a problem with that.

I will say that in doing 141 prog check flight and other stuff where I see how other people fly, I think it's becoming more common for instructors to teach that you should always go for the aim points no matter what. When people learn that way they tend to carry it forward. That makes sense when you're just learning how to land, but I find it a little stressful and frankly, lacking in situational awareness when somebody wants to leave themselves a 1/2 mile rollout at parade float speed when there's another plane right behind you.

It's pretty easy to pick a touchdown zone that will have you rolling out to specific taxiway if you just know that each stripe/space pair is 200'

edit; I just looked at the picture in post 1. If that were me, in most singles I'd plan to touch down abeam the second turnoff, which would leave me about 2,800' for a nice easy rollout to the 3rd turnoff and a relatively short taxi to the ramp.

 

[jcarne]

Aiming point for me is the second centerline stripe or the first TDZ marker and usually fly it on about the aiming point. Unless it's a short field I see no reason to use every piece of gravel. Seen at least 1 airplane miss the mark and clip the gear and threshold lights. I'm sure you can guess what that cost to fix.

 

[PhatRV]

we aim for brick one.

That’s how I was taught.

What is this? I never heard of this term before.

 

[DanH]

... at 5 miles out, I am in approach mode with flaps down doing 65 Kts (RV9a).

Which explains why the local controllers want you off the runway ASAP.

Try 130 to 2 miles, use a mile to slow, and be 65 at a mile or less.

 

[Snowflake]

I currently fly out of a towered airport with instrument approaches.
...
Then the controller jumps on the radio asking me to expedite turn off.

A busy towered airport with commercial traffic is used to sending aircraft on a go-around. Don't be rushed by a perception of urgency that isn't there. Traffic behind can always go around if they haven't declared an emergency.

 

[Sam Buchanan]

What is this? I never heard of this term before.

I recall reading in Chuck Yeager's biography about how back in the day it was an indication of a sharp pilot if you landed on the first foot of runway (first brick). I've tried many times to do this, nearly always end up floating past first brick, pretty tricky technique to pull off.....but fun trying.

But this practice comes in handy for short, turf runways.

The instructors from HSV that use our 6100' runway for pattern practice teach their students to aim for the touchdown marks, those C172's usually land about 2500' down the runway. We don't have to worry about those new pilots (or their instructors!!) attending the cool breakfast at Moontown's 2100' turf runway.

 

[Mel]

I learned to fly off a 1900' runway with a church at one end and a school at the other. No problem! I flew my -6 off my 1500' runway for over 25 years. Again, no problem.

IMO, Part of the problem now days is that students are trained to land not on the numbers.

 

[Ed_Wischmeyer]

There's an element of cooperation in all traffic patterns.

At my Class C home airport, the controllers like me because, just like Dan Horton, I fly fast to fit in with jet traffic and make adjustments on short final. ADS-B and listening to the radio give me clues on when to fly faster. And it's lots easier to slow down since I put the constant speed prop on the RV-9A. Similarly, at non-towered airports, fly a pattern to fit in with other airplanes. That's easy to do in RVs.

As for the aiming point, that is for instrument approaches.

"Unstable approach" was espoused by the Flight Safety Foundation decades ago. They changed their tune about three years ago. For more information on stable approaches for us GA types, check out https://airfactsjournal.com/2022/12/unstable-final-approaches-history-fiction-and-fact/

 

[nohoflyer]

What is this? I never heard of this term before.

Brick one is the very front of the runway.

 

[Desert Rat]

The instructors from HSV that use our 6100' runway for pattern practice teach their students to aim for the touchdown marks, those C172's usually land about 2500' down the runway. We don't have to worry about those new pilots (or their instructors!!) attending the cool breakfast at Moontown's 2100' turf runway.

I see this a lot too, I don't know how they get through a check ride which requires a touchdown on the selected landing point (Not necessarily the aim point markers) +400'-0' for a normal landing and +200'-0' for a short field landing.

When I teach or evaluate, I just tell people it's a lot like playing 8 ball. you have to call your shot; runway numbers, 2nd stripe, aim points, whatever the situation dictates, but I expect you to be within allowable tolerance of where you told me you were going.

 

[rocketman1988]

landing

This discussion is going about how I'd expect, from a bunch of pilots!

My 2 cents:

It is courteous to try and fit in with the local traffic.

Trying to land on the "first brick" every time increases the odds of coming up short, which is bad.

If you plan to land long, advise the tower, or local traffic, as this is generally NOT expected. It falls into the courteous category.

There is ALWAYS an aiming point.

I am a fan of a stabilized approach, however, in GA aircraft the stabilized portion may be very short.

If your approach looks wrong, it is easier to fix it early than late.

When cleared to land, it is your runway until you leave it.

Be courteous, we are all on the same team!

 

[Webb]

On the colored dot the OSH controller tells me to.

 

[Roadjunkie1]

Where to land....

It is courteous to try and fit in with the local traffic. If you plan to land long, advise the tower, or local traffic, as this is generally NOT expected. It falls into the courteous category.

If I am landing long I always say that as part of my "where I am" announcements. 'SuzieQ turning final for 34; landing long....' I almost always land long as the turn off for where I need to go is about mid-point of a 4600 foot runway. I fly to get there rather than drive. That said, I have never heard anyone else announce that and most pilots land well past where I usually touch down....

There is ALWAYS an aiming point.

Indeed! And that can change with the circumstances. On the home field, it is (nearly) always the same spot!

I am a fan of a stabilized approach, however, in GA aircraft the stabilized portion may be very short.

Ditto! The key to a good landing is a good approach. Even on the short ones, everything should be well-established early for your impending landing. One quick glance at my ASI at the beginning of my final approach is usually sufficient. I have had people ask what speed SuzieQ lands and, I must admit, I have no exact idea as I am not looking at the panel at that point. Too much else going on. What is the airplane telling me?

Aside: what do the Olympics have to do with you? Those athletes are precise in what they do and do the same thing consistently repeatedly to be that good. My patterns are as precise as I can make them and are consistently the same with adjustments made for the circumstances.

If your approach looks wrong, it is easier to fix it early than late.
When cleared to land, it is your runway until you leave it.
Be courteous, we are all on the same team!

Exactly! We are a small community that needs to work together. I am sometimes amazed at what I hear on the radio! Go home and yell at the refrigerator, not your fellow aviators....

 

[jbDC9]

But at 5 miles out, I am in approach mode with flaps down doing 65 Kts (RV9a). So buzzing in at 130, then 65 on final; Cessnas dont do this.

Which explains why the local controllers want you off the runway ASAP.

Try 130 to 2 miles, use a mile to slow, and be 65 at a mile or less.

Yep, that’s what I was thinking; flaps down and 65 knots from 5 miles out, that’s just painful. Cessnas do that. Use Dan’s technique, it works fine.

 

[GrahamF]

Firstly, the VASIs are set up for large transport category aircraft where the pilot's eye position is a long way above the landing gear. If you follow the VASIs all the way down in an RV then you're going to be needlessly long.

On a long final the VASI will also give you a very shallow approach, in the context of flying with a single piston engine. If you lose the engine on final, you won't make the field.

Secondly, why are you slowing to 65 knots at 5 miles out? If the controllers are frustrated, I'd guess that it comes from this rather than exactly where you put it down.

Overall I would stay much higher and much faster for much longer. Exactly where you put it down probably doesn't matter much, and I would usually choose that based on my planned exit.

 

[rocketman1988]

Vasi

Firstly, the VASIs are set up for large transport category aircraft where the pilot's eye position is a long way above the landing gear. If you follow the VASIs all the way down in an RV then you're going to be needlessly long.

On a long final the VASI will also give you a very shallow approach, in the context of flying with a single piston engine. If you lose the engine on final, you won't make the field.

Secondly, why are you slowing to 65 knots at 5 miles out? If the controllers are frustrated, I'd guess that it comes from this rather than exactly where you put it down.

Overall I would stay much higher and much faster for much longer. Exactly where you put it down probably doesn't matter much, and I would usually choose that based on my planned exit.

A standard vasi provides a standard 3 degree glidepath, and it doesn’t matter how far out you are; if you are on the vasi, you are on a 3 degree path (normally).

True, where you put it down is your business but try to remember to be courteous to any local traffic…

 

[Draker]

I aim to land on the aiming point or otherwise where I feel is safest. I don't care about getting a trophy for exiting the runway at the first taxiway. If I have to taxi a long way to get to my destination, I'd rather just do that than alter my approach and landing. If the tower wants me to do something I'm not comfortable with, it's "unable" or a go-around.

 

[Cumulo]

Dragging it in

"5 out and 65 Kt" Bingo.

I saw the prob from the OP's post. How to bug ATC. Drag it in for 5 miles and it is likely that you will have traffic closing behind you making tower nervous as you land and roll out.
Bad manors to hog the approach/runway making the guy behind you go around if it is not necessary. If just landing the plane safely is a challenge, then OK. Do that. But with more skill comes the objective to fit in and be expeditious.

I used to deliver small AOG items into LAX in a Bonanza frequently, and ATC treated me like a VIP because I would keep 140 Kt to near the MM.

DanH up thread said the same I see.

ron

 

[lndwarrior]

Don't consider it..

I land where ever the wind conditions and my airplane feels like landing that day.

I never even consider what a tower controller may "want", nor a specific turnoff to hit.

The OP's question, in itself, seems strange to me, though I get that some commercial pilots/mil pilots may consider these things.

On the other hand I rarely land at 7000+ foot runways, so that may be part of the issue.

 

[FL Flier]

Slowing to 65 five miles out gives you what, four and a half minutes on final? Do you really need more than 20 seconds or so locked in on speed to land where you need to?

 

[SwimmingDragonfly96]

I'm a pretty low time pilot, but I've never really picked my touchdown point. I just keep it at 75kts and point towards the numbers. I then round out and wait 'til I can pitch for the sweet spot and descend onto the runway. I figure just because I'm ready to land somewhere doesn't mean the plane is? Should I be aiming to touchdown somewhere??

 

[rocketman1988]

land

I'm a pretty low time pilot, but I've never really picked my touchdown point. I just keep it at 75kts and point towards the numbers. I then round out and wait 'til I can pitch for the sweet spot and descend onto the runway. I figure just because I'm ready to land somewhere doesn't mean the plane is? Should I be aiming to touchdown somewhere??

I see this quite a bit with students. Remember who is flying the plane. You need to know what you want the aircraft to do and then make the airplane do what you want...

Your example would not end well if you were flying into Airventure.

Granted, you admit to being a low time pilot but now is the time to build good habits...

 

[jrs14855]

Touchdown

The expectation of the tower controller is in the vicinity of the touchdown zone. On a long runway with a tower a long landing should be requested and permission received.
With my taildragger I tell the tower I will be slow exiting the runway. Rather than trying to beat some jet I will volunteer to follow the faster airplane if I have established that there is room behind the faster airplane.
At Oshkosh when a non responsive Cessna cleared on 36 right went to the left my response was I'll take the right side. Cleared to land 36R.
My first time flying into Oshkosh in years. Once I got close to the airport I actually enjoyed it. Not so much on the arrival where people were wandering all over the place and no maintaining speed.

 

[SwimmingDragonfly96]

I see this quite a bit with students. Remember who is flying the plane. You need to know what you want the aircraft to do and then make the airplane do what you want...

Your example would not end well if you were flying into Airventure.

Granted, you admit to being a low time pilot but now is the time to build good habits...

I think I need to understand why it's a good habit in the first place. I feel like my plane, even at a consistent 75kt, will float to a different degree based off numerous factors including weight, winds, OAT, altitude, flap settings, etc. What is the point of artificially picking a landing spot when there are numerous variables that make choosing that landing spot a terrible guess at best? I could hold power and hover over the runway until I reach my landing spot if it's downstream of where the plane wants to land, or aim at the threshold or somewhere else upstream then hold power above the runway if necessary to get myself right on the numbers in a short field scenario. Or I can put the plane down when it's not ready to land to get to my landing spot. What exactly is correct?

I've had a lot of CFIs, two of them more or less dedicated to teaching in RVs (I know many people on this board did their transition training with my current IFR instructor), and nobody has said anything about picking my landing spot since my PPL days. I've been consistently taught to point towards the numbers, maintain a certain airspeed, and wait 'til I get that proper pitch of 8 degrees or so for the plane to settle onto the runway. If I follow the advice of my CFIs, it's basically impossible to pick my landing spot. If I do the above and haven't landed 1/3 of the way down the runway, I'm going around.

On a side note, I do not plan to ever fly into air venture. Seems like a giant S show ball of stress if you ask me lol.

Not being antagonistic, and I appreciate your comments.

 

[2theskyy]

I think I need to understand why it's a good habit in the first place. I feel like my plane, even at a consistent 75kt, will float to a different degree based off numerous factors including weight, winds, OAT, altitude, flap settings, etc. What is the point of artificially picking a landing spot when there are numerous variables that make choosing that landing spot a terrible guess at best? I could hold power and hover over the runway until I reach my landing spot if it's downstream of where the plane wants to land, or aim at the threshold or somewhere else upstream then hold power above the runway if necessary to get myself right on the numbers in a short field scenario. Or I can put the plane down when it's not ready to land to get to my landing spot. What exactly is correct?

I've had a lot of CFIs, two of them more or less dedicated to teaching in RVs (I know many people on this board did their transition training with my current IFR instructor), and nobody has said anything about picking my landing spot since my PPL days. I've been consistently taught to point towards the numbers, maintain a certain airspeed, and wait 'til I get that proper pitch of 8 degrees or so for the plane to settle onto the runway. If I follow the advice of my CFIs, it's basically impossible to pick my landing spot. If I do the above and haven't landed 1/3 of the way down the runway, I'm going around.

On a side note, I do not plan to ever fly into air venture. Seems like a giant S show ball of stress if you ask me lol.

Not being antagonistic, and I appreciate your comments.

I’d say Bob is correct. You get to know your plane in different situations( tail/head/cross winds and different weights) then you fly that thing and land on a particular spot on the rwy. Very few get it exact but build good habits now. The key is to make a plan and make it happen. You are correct, the plane will land when it wants to. Your goal is to make it want to at the same spot you plan to.

 

[Ironflight]

I think I need to understand why it's a good habit in the first place. I feel like my plane, even at a consistent 75kt, will float to a different degree based off numerous factors including weight, winds, OAT, altitude, flap settings, etc. What is the point of artificially picking a landing spot when there are numerous variables that make choosing that landing spot a terrible guess at best? I could hold power and hover over the runway until I reach my landing spot if it's downstream of where the plane wants to land, or aim at the threshold or somewhere else upstream then hold power above the runway if necessary to get myself right on the numbers in a short field scenario. Or I can put the plane down when it's not ready to land to get to my landing spot. What exactly is correct?

I've had a lot of CFIs, two of them more or less dedicated to teaching in RVs (I know many people on this board did their transition training with my current IFR instructor), and nobody has said anything about picking my landing spot since my PPL days. I've been consistently taught to point towards the numbers, maintain a certain airspeed, and wait 'til I get that proper pitch of 8 degrees or so for the plane to settle onto the runway. If I follow the advice of my CFIs, it's basically impossible to pick my landing spot. If I do the above and haven't landed 1/3 of the way down the runway, I'm going around.

On a side note, I do not plan to ever fly into air venture. Seems like a giant S show ball of stress if you ask me lol.

Not being antagonistic, and I appreciate your comments.

There’s a reason that you practiced landing on a spot in your PPL days - it was about learning to control the airplane and making it do what you want it to do, not being along for the ride. Why? Someday you might have a forced landing, or have to land on a very short strip because of weather, fuel, or some other emergency - and you need to be able to put the airplane where you want it.

I don’t know the current test requirements for private, but for check rides I have taken in the past ten or twenty years, I needed to be able to put the airplane down within 100 feet of a spot I picked in advance. And the reason for that being in the test is to prove that the pilot is controlling the airplane.

Paul

 

[rocketman1988]

sorry

I think I need to understand why it's a good habit in the first place. I feel like my plane, even at a consistent 75kt, will float to a different degree based off numerous factors including weight, winds, OAT, altitude, flap settings, etc. What is the point of artificially picking a landing spot when there are numerous variables that make choosing that landing spot a terrible guess at best? I could hold power and hover over the runway until I reach my landing spot if it's downstream of where the plane wants to land, or aim at the threshold or somewhere else upstream then hold power above the runway if necessary to get myself right on the numbers in a short field scenario. Or I can put the plane down when it's not ready to land to get to my landing spot. What exactly is correct?

I've had a lot of CFIs, two of them more or less dedicated to teaching in RVs (I know many people on this board did their transition training with my current IFR instructor), and nobody has said anything about picking my landing spot since my PPL days. I've been consistently taught to point towards the numbers, maintain a certain airspeed, and wait 'til I get that proper pitch of 8 degrees or so for the plane to settle onto the runway. If I follow the advice of my CFIs, it's basically impossible to pick my landing spot. If I do the above and haven't landed 1/3 of the way down the runway, I'm going around.

On a side note, I do not plan to ever fly into air venture. Seems like a giant S show ball of stress if you ask me lol.

Not being antagonistic, and I appreciate your comments.

If that is what your CFI's are telling you and you can't pick a spot and be reasonably assured of hitting it, you may want to look for a different CFI.

Precision landings are taught at the private pilot level. It is a skill that needs to be practiced and refined.

The go-around call is a good one. Yes, Airventure can be a S show; I used it as an example because you NEED to be able to fly precisely. Consider this, though, if people were able to fly precisely and execute precision landings with a reasonable success rate, do you think it would still be a S show?

On a side note, I did not notice what you are flying but if you consistently float down the runway, your approach speed is likely too fast.

 

[Desert Rat]

I don’t know the current test requirements for private, but for check rides I have taken in the past ten or twenty years, I needed to be able to put the airplane down within 100 feet of a spot I picked in advance. And the reason for that being in the test is to prove that the pilot is controlling the airplane.

Paul

The current standard for a PPL checkride for a normal landing is; touchdown at selected landing point +400' -0'. For a short field landing it's +200' - 0'. Two runway strips and one runway stripe respectively.

 

[SwimmingDragonfly96]

Appreciate the advice, dudes. I will talk to my CFI about this.

 

[Steve Crewdog]

Ask for a Tower visit. Bring treats. Plan to spend about an hour getting to know them. Ask them What ifs? Offer them a ride.

Surprising how few pilots have been up in their local tower, and how few controllers have been up in planes and have no idea about what they can/can't do.

Maybe that's something for a local EAA Chapter? Controller (Airport staff, too?) Outreach/Appreciation Fly Day. Remember Operation Raincheck?

 

[swjohnsey]

'Bout 1,000 before the turn-off I plan to use.

 

[Roadjunkie1]

Spot landing....

If that is what your CFI's are telling you and you can't pick a spot and be reasonably assured of hitting it, you may want to look for a different CFI. Precision landings are taught at the private pilot level. It is a skill that needs to be practiced and refined.

JD Finley: did you want to jump in here? www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOPHb1WDXOo&t=8s

Every day, and especially reading posts like these, I am convinced I had the best instructor anyone could have had. He is/was an oil pipeline survey pilot and was not taking on students to 'build hours'. He didn't need that! He probably had 10,000 hours when I first met him (he still flies at age 87! I can't imagine how many tube-and-fabric hours he has!). He took on students to learn more about flying: students get you into situations you could never dream of getting yourself in! Our first hour out, we landed in a wheat stubble field!

Off-airport landings were routine when I flew with him. We need to go check with Ernie about an engine. Land there next to the combine... Spot landing with Larry was routine in our Cubs and I thought that was just how it was done. If you don't land where you want the airplane to go, you will either hit the fence at this end of the field or hit the fence or go into the ditch at the other side of the field. My bookshelf is littered with mostly first place trophies from power on and power off spot-landing contest at local fly-ins with a few second places thrown in. My favorite was when I beat Larry; he placed second! That's what I get for teaching someone everything I know! This is not to blow my own horn; the point is that to me, it was just normal flying, using the skills I had been taught. Didn't everyone do that? Thanks, Larry!

That carried over to flying SuzieQ. Initially, I had trouble putting her where I wanted because she tended to float. That low wing ground-effect thing. I finally figured out it was a matter of being precise in my approaches, nailing my approach speeds to get her to touch down where I wanted her to, not where she wanted to. Is that a skill? Yes. Does it take practice? Yes. It is also a matter of pride in the skills it takes to make SuzieQ do what I want her to do. We are flying together as a team; I am not 'out for a ride'. It is a respect for the airplane as well. She has amazing capabilities. I would like to take advantage of those and put them to good use! Watch some of JD's videos to see practical application of those skills. Is it for everyone? It should be. Developing skills that make one a better pilot is always a good thing!

The go-around call is a good one. Yes, Airventure can be a S show; I used it as an example because you NEED to be able to fly precisely. Consider this thought: if people were able to fly precisely and execute precision landings with a reasonable success rate, do you think it would still be a S show?

Don't get me started about what I have seen at OSH! An excellent example of application of that skill. Practice practice practice. What is the objection to developing skills that make one a better pilot??

 

[SwimmingDragonfly96]

JD Finley: did you want to jump in here? www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOPHb1WDXOo&t=8s

Every day, and especially reading posts like these, I am convinced I had the best instructor anyone could have had. He is/was an oil pipeline survey pilot and was not taking on students to 'build hours'. He didn't need that! He probably had 10,000 hours when I first met him (he still flies at age 87! I can't imagine how many tube-and-fabric hours he has!). He took on students to learn more about flying: students get you into situations you could never dream of getting yourself in! Our first hour out, we landed in a wheat stubble field!

Off-airport landings were routine when I flew with him. We need to go check with Ernie about an engine. Land there next to the combine... Spot landing with Larry was routine in our Cubs and I thought that was just how it was done. If you don't land where you want the airplane to go, you will either hit the fence at this end of the field or hit the fence or go into the ditch at the other side of the field. My bookshelf is littered with mostly first place trophies from power on and power off spot-landing contest at local fly-ins with a few second places thrown in. My favorite was when I beat Larry; he placed second! That's what I get for teaching someone everything I know! This is not to blow my own horn; the point is that to me, it was just normal flying, using the skills I had been taught. Didn't everyone do that? Thanks, Larry!

That carried over to flying SuzieQ. Initially, I had trouble putting her where I wanted because she tended to float. That low wing ground-effect thing. I finally figured out it was a matter of being precise in my approaches, nailing my approach speeds to get her to touch down where I wanted her to, not where she wanted to. Is that a skill? Yes. Does it take practice? Yes. It is also a matter of pride in the skills it takes to make SuzieQ do what I want her to do. We are flying together as a team; I am not 'out for a ride'. It is a respect for the airplane as well. She has amazing capabilities. I would like to take advantage of those and put them to good use! Watch some of JD's videos to see practical application of those skills. Is it for everyone? It should be. Developing skills that make one a better pilot is always a good thing!



Don't get me started about what I have seen at OSH! An excellent example of application of that skill. Practice practice practice. What is the objection to developing skills that make one a better pilot??

I really appreciate what all you experienced dudes are sharing here, y'all may have just saved my future life. But, I cannot for the life of me understand how you can pick a touchdown point and hit it every time with so many variables associated. If you're coming in with the same IAS and I'm guessing similar aiming point on your stabilized approach, how do you account for all the variables to put it down where you want? For example, on your approach with a 20kt headwind at sea level vs winds calm at 8000 DA, I would assume your landing point would vary by a vast margin using similar IAS and approach profile. Do you take into account all these variables during your approach and adjust your aim point based off of this?

 

[DanH]

Do you take into account all these variables during your approach and adjust your aim point based off of this?

Simple answer, yes, absolutely.

I feel like my plane, even at a consistent 75kt, will float to a different degree based off numerous factors

The key factor is being too fast. Work on reducing approach speed to a stable 65 knots at 100 AGL and hold that speed to the flare.

 

[Roadjunkie1]

Spot landing....

I really appreciate what all you experienced dudes are sharing here, y'all may have just saved my future life. But, I cannot for the life of me understand how you can pick a touchdown point and hit it every time with so many variables associated. If you're coming in with the same IAS and I'm guessing similar aiming point on your stabilized approach, how do you account for all the variables to put it down where you want? For example, on your approach with a 20kt headwind at sea level vs winds calm at 8000 DA, I would assume your landing point would vary by a vast margin using similar IAS and approach profile. Do you take into account all these variables during your approach and adjust your aim point based off of this?

Every approach, regardless of where you are in the pattern, is going to be different, even if you just departed and are coming around again to land. When I spot-land the Cub, the key to getting her to touch down where I wanted her to is slipping. Sometimes a monster slip, followed by a lesser one, then another one, then a small one just before touchdown. I can micromanage where we land by doing that and maintaining what I want the airplane to do with throttle inputs. It has allowed me the skills to put that airplane in some insanely tight places! A tiny spit of a field next to the Yellowstone River to watch the river float comes to mind! Did you build that airplane there??

In SuzieQ, it is similar. Slipping will make her come DOWN! I use 40 degrees of flaps on final ("two notches") and might adjust what is happening with slipping and throttle input, as needed, when necessary. You can "see" where your touchdown point will be from the parallax of the runway in front of the point moving towards you, and the runway ahead of it moving away, as we were all (should have been) shown in training. Is that the exact place you touch down? Maybe; maybe not.

The key here is to go out and PRACTICE. Find out how to get to your "spot" in various conditions. I do not do "touch-and-goes". Mine are STOP-and-goes. The airplane is set up for landing when I land (duh) and I stop and reconfigure her for departure: trim, flaps, carb heat, attitude (mine!). I have no problems going out and practicing things I want to be good at doing and landings/departures are one of them. Do I care what people might be thinking? Um....no. You can frequently see me out doing turns around a point or S turns on a road, chandelles, 360 degree turns looking for the "bump". Basic things that keep my skills up.

A Howard DGA is a large, complex airplane that is rather blind when the nose comes up. I have flown one and they keep you on your toes. I always remember what a Howard owner/pilot once said: 'If you want to learn how to fly a Howard, go out and fly every day.' Same goes with any airplane. Get used to ALL the variables you might encounter. Practice practice practice. You will be, after all, FLYING!!

I cannot tell or even show you how to put your airplane where you want it to go. You have to figure that out yourself as all pilots are different and all airplanes are different. Things that work in the Cub or SuzieQ might not be what works for you. You have to discover those skills. And have FUN learning about your airplane....and yourself! Just have FUN doing it!