A_and_C wrote:
The problem is that when flying an airliner you calculate these speed additions based on your actual landing weight, the training schools base the additions on the speed for the MAX landing weight.
I can’t believe that is the sole reason for C152 at 65kts, stall speed with 2 pob & 1h fuel vs stall speed at MOTOW is what 3kts?
I see in DA40, the POH has approach speed vs weight, it’s 10kts range from MTOW to EMPTY, although I wonder how they manage to test the empty weight value (tiny test pilot with 15min fuel 
), most GA aircraft have tight useful load, I think weight contribution to Vs and Vref is a max of 5kts, but it could be higher on twin?
But yes some will add load of extra to Vref approach speed depending on “conditions” and the intellectual exercise looks like calculating approach minima (where PEC debated between 12ft and 32ft while student flies +/-20kts accuracy )
Ibra.
This practice seems to start when the budding airline pilot reaches the dizzy heights of the IR & multi engine training, launching the DA42 takes on the complexity of a space shot.
Hence the airline style approach speed additions to the Max landing weight speeds. If the DA42 was flown at Max landing weight speeds at the normal training landing weight this would give sufficient safety margin for any sort of weather suitable for training and not result in the destruction tyres on a regular basis.
A_and_C wrote:
If the DA42 was flown at Max landing weight speeds at the normal training landing weight this would give sufficient safety margin for any sort of weather suitable for training and not result in the destruction tyres on a regular basis.
Got it, and yes definitely “training weather” is way more docile to throw many layers of adjustments and the made up complexity is what ATO wants to sell (setting aside that DA42 is one of the easiest machines to land out of all aircrafts and it is claimed an easy to fly out of all twins 
)
But the tradition goes for PPL as well, I recall just on C152, you do 65kts on full flaps then you go to practice flapless, wisdom suggest on to add extra speed up, the bill now is at 75kts-80kts threshold speed and that makes fun landings in a calm training day
I think I can guess what you mean, but can you elaborate?
I think we had discussed that elsewhere but currently can’t find it.
What I meant that the noise may often play a role but sometimes only in the first place. Like when two neighbors hate each other to death and after 20 years don’t even remember why. At my home field we often get noise complaints but always from the same village which we don’t even overfly. We would take off, cut the corner to crosswind to avoid the village and when turning base we get a complaint relayed over the radio. This can happen several times a day. If you come close to that village you will get a complaint no matter what airplane you fly. There is another village a few 100 meters closer to the runway whose borders we sometimes clip (at 150ft lower and in avoidance of the other one) but I’m not aware of any complaints from there. I can only speculate here but there must be one grumpy guy, telephone in hand, who does nothing else but watching for airplanes close to his house.
And then you have rich pricks flying their expensive toys over the garden which someone earned by a lifetime of hard and honest work (that can be fixed by showing him an actual airplane :-D. Also people might not exactly be pleased by the idea of airplanes flying 400ft above their dinner table. And then, again noise aside, a bunch of fully armed Apaches (not the sweet potatoes) regularly doing a 500ft AGL shortcut over my garden to the nearby VRP are not exactly a peaceful sight. To sum it up, I think noise is often used as the target of a complaint because it is socially accepted to complain about noise when in fact it’s not the real, underlying reason.
Funny anecdote: I once lived in a place where several times a week I would experience a very brief but sudden solar exclipse in the living room caused by approaching airliners. That can make you jump if you are not used to it.
Back to topic: With still not much experience in slow flight I feel more safe with a little more speed on final and don’t have any problems of slowing down the beaten planes I fly. On a bad day when I fly a sloppy approach this usually ends in a bad landing but I wouldn’t say that this is caused by the approach. I believe it’s caused by my bad day.
Graham wrote:
I would tend to the view that flying the whole approach at Vref is the only practical way that ab initio students can be taught unless they are of fairly high aptitude.
I think that is true.
Flying an approach that is slowing down requires re-trimming. For a student just learning to get things right, the constant change in attitude (even small) following by re-trimming is probably too much. Far easier for them to set up an approach where you just have to set it up right and keep it stable.
dublinpilot wrote:
Flying an approach that is slowing down requires re-trimming
Well, not always… I sometimes entertain myself in my 150, trimming at about 80 MPH, then hands off the control wheel, and gently adjusting power and flaps all the way down final, so as to arrive to the threshold at about 60 MPH, without having used elevator nor elevator trim at all. It’s a design requirement for GA planes that this must be possible, though it’s a bit more on the advance skills side of things….
Many Cessna POH’s describe the procedure.
Pilot_DAR wrote:
gently adjusting power and flaps all the way down final,
changing flaps is like changing trim
Pilot_DAR wrote:
It’s a design requirement for GA planes that this must be possible, though it’s a bit more on the advance skills side of things….
What exactly is the requirement?
Clipperstorch wrote:
To sum it up, I think noise is often used as the target of a complaint because it is socially accepted to complain about noise when in fact it’s not the real, underlying reason.
Many years ago the Motorcycle Industry Council in the US used the slogan “Less Sound More Ground” to pacify people who didn’t like off road motorcycling. It was obvious to me then as now that this was nonsense, the reality was that the opposition didn’t like motorcycles in principle, had a completely different and awful world view that would like to eliminate them, and that zero sound would not be enough reduction. I suspect the MIC knew that too, and that this was just propaganda in parallel with direct efforts against people who opposed their interests. At some point you realize that life unavoidably involves conflict with people with views you fundamentally oppose, and who would like to eliminate what you hold dear. You might disarm them with slogans like that, but you have to fight them if you want to maintain your position. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty – because there are some people whose genuine preference is for all to ‘live’ in a way that is not much better than being dead, and who are intolerant of those who have a better attitude towards life.
Pilot_DAR wrote:
I sometimes entertain myself in my 150, trimming at about 80 MPH, then hands off the control wheel, and gently adjusting power and flaps all the way down final, so as to arrive to the threshold at about 60 MPH, without having used elevator nor elevator trim at all
It’s hard to understand how that is done with both power reduction and flaps provoking a nose down trim change.
How trim change and yoke forces shift with flaps & power is usually hard to understand, as it depends on where you are vs min drag speed and which side of the drag curve you are? I think if you trim on min-drag speed cruise, 1/ if you go bellow min-drag speed then as you add power & drag flap the aircraft will naturally slow down and increase it’s ROD if you keep min-drag speed trim, 2/ if you go above min drag speed then as you add power & clean flap the aircraft will naturally accelerate and increase it’s ROD if you keep min-drag speed trim, 3/ to move between one or other you need a firm pull/push on the stick
Pilot_DAR wrote:
Many Cessna POH’s describe the procedure.
Cessna 172S:
LANDING WITHOUT ELEVATOR CONTROL
Trim for horizontal flight with an airspeed of approximately 65 KIAS and flaps set to 20° by using throttle and elevator trim controls. Then do not change the elevator trim control setting; control the glide angle by adjusting power…..
