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.
You need to be working with a fairly high calibre of person (or an experienced pilot) before an instruction of “keep the speed up around cruise but judge the descent and deceleration so you’re at Vref over the hedge” is going to yield results.
It’s exactly the same as the golf swing. In theory, none of what you do with the club (or your hands, shoulders, hips, etc) on the way back, at the top, or on the way down matters a damn so long as the clubhead arrives squarely behind the ball with a direction of travel matching the intended direction of the shot. In practice, it is very difficult (even impossible) to teach the correct impact without regimenting what comes before it. So you end up with a textbook swing, just like you have a textbook circuit.
If I am current I tend to keep the speed up and fly tight circuits with deceleration to Vref over the hedge. If I’m out of practice then I have the tendency to revert to flying as I was taught – by the numbers.
Ibra wrote:
Even the tight & high with engine off ?
Good point. If you practice PFLs, you can indeed disregard the circuit completely. PFLs will usually be done by crossing the runway at a right angle, towards the deadside, at 2000 ft. Then engine to idle, Vbg and fly whatever circuit you think is best to reach the threshold without touching the throttle lever.
Obviously, a circuit flow at idle or even engine off will not disturb the noise-sensitive Germans in the same way as a normal circuit…
MedEwok wrote:
Obviously, a circuit flow at idle or even engine off will not disturb the noise-sensitive Germans in the same way as a normal circuit…
It’s not about the noise, it’s about the airplane!
Clipperstorch wrote:
It’s not about the noise, it’s about the airplane!
I think I can guess what you mean, but can you elaborate?
MedEwok wrote:
I think I can guess what you mean, but can you elaborate?
Not too infrequently it is not primarily the noise which bothers people but the appearance of the aircraft in the sky.
In my home airport we have a house under the short final to a secondary runway. The people there are not bothered by the noise, but they object to landing aircraft flying right on top of their house at low level.
It seems that PFLs are taught differently in Germany to how they are taught here.
At 2000 ft we cross the runway at right angles but then we descend the live side.
France doesn’t really use a dead side in VFR circuits.
gallois wrote:
It seems that PFLs are taught differently in Germany to how they are taught here.
At 2000 ft we cross the runway at right angles but then we descend the live side.
France doesn’t really use a dead side in VFR circuits.
Every country does it differently is seems. In Sweden we start abeam the threshold at 1000 ft.
That’s interesting, I didn’t realise PFLs were taught from set heights and positions. I seem to recall in my training they were just thrown in and if we happened to be over the airfield there would be a bit of radio chatter about it but I never knew exactly when the power reduction was going to come.
The biggest approach speed problem I have seen is with the professional training schools who are trying to teach the students to fly the next aircraft they will ( hopefully ) fly.
The DA42 flight manual quotes speeds for approach and the schools have taken the max landing weight speed and then start adding speed increments for all sorts of things so as to be just like the airlines.
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.
As most landings of a training school aircraft are conducted well below MAX landing weight the speed is excessive and the aircraft floats half way along the runway before touching down with too much speed and consequently not much weight on the wheels , the tyro now seeing the end of the runway rapidly approaching hit s the brakes and the lightly loaded wheels lock and flat spot.
At £200+ a tyre and the labour to jack the aircraft and do the mandatory gear swing on the DA42 this is an expensive way to play act at being jet airliner pilot.
Off_Field wrote:
That’s interesting, I didn’t realise PFLs were taught from set heights and positions. I seem to recall in my training they were just thrown in and if we happened to be over the airfield there would be a bit of radio chatter about it but I never knew exactly when the power reduction was going to come.
You are confusing two things (which many do): PFLs and spot landing exercises. They are two very different execises, even though they share some common elements.
PFL are done “in the field” and are real emergency exercises, i.e. what has to be done when the engine quits enroute.
Those spot landing exercises initiated above airfields (which are a bit of a fetish of German PPL training only) are mere “proficiency” maneuvers, not emergency maneuvers. Means: the student shall demonstrate that he knows the glide characterics of the aircraft and knows how to influence it. It is NOT a PFL.
