This does not mean you be at that airspeed at 500 feet AGL and maintain that speed all of the way until you begin your flare – few of us fly a constant speed approach from that height. This speed often changes with aeroplane weight (because weight changes change stall speed) you may apply small airspeed corrections to account for wind gusts. Most pilot operating handbooks (POHs) publish a recommended 50-foot speed that is around 1.3 times stall speed in the landing configuration (1.3 VSO). You are at the correct airspeed that will result in passing through the final approach or 50-foot speed as you cross the runway threshold. What criteria should you be looking for on final approach? Beginning at about 500 feet above aerodrome elevation – about the height at which you turn onto finals in a visual circuit and often about where you’ll make your final landing flap selection – purposefully check whether you are meeting all of these landing criteria. Going around is as natural a part of flying as landing itself. If the need for correction is too great or you’re too close to the ground to correct in time, you can detect this and begin your go-around sooner. Your trend is to descend steeply and land short.Įvaluating your aircraft’s state and trend means that if you are not meeting the landing success criteria, you can make corrections before getting too close to the runway. But, if the aircraft is too slow you’ll descend more steeply than the glidepath calls for. You are looking both for your aircraft’s current state, that is, how close it is to performance targets (which we’ll review in a moment), but also gauging the aeroplane’s trend, that is, whether it will continue to stay on performance targets as you get closer to the ground or will diverge.įor example, you may be precisely on a visual glidepath when you glance at the red-and-white PAPI lights. This in turn suggests a set of objective and measurable criteria not only in the landing flare, but also to predict the quality of your upcoming landing as you come down final approach. Whether you have such a system in your aeroplane or, like almost all of us, you do not, the idea of narrowing tolerances that lead to a good landing – being what is sometimes called ‘in the slot’ on final approach – is still useful. HITS was all the rage around the turn of the century but the concept never really took off. The HITS windows are fairly wide in cruise, but they grow progressively narrower as an aircraft descends funnel-like toward a runway. With synthetic vision, this turns instrument flight into an electronic ‘visual’ process. This so-called ‘Highway in the sky’ (HITS) system seeks to simplify flight path management by giving the pilot an easy target for even complex manoeuvres – simply keep the aircraft inside the boxes like a video game. There’s an option that’s still included in some glass cockpit avionics – depiction of the desired flight path as a series of rectangles or ‘windows’ projected ahead of the aircraft on a primary flight display. How can we quantify the advisability of a go-around? In the slot Yet failing to go around or delaying a go-around decision until the safe completion of the manoeuvre is in doubt, is a common contributor to hard landings, runway excursions and overruns. Outside of training and evaluation, unless it’s something obvious – an animal on the runway or an aircraft taxiing past the hold line – if we go around at all, we tend to do so only when it’s almost too late. Almost universally we perform a go-around on command – when an instructor or examiner tells us to. We learn how to go around while preparing for a pilot examination and may practice them on flight reviews. When do you fly a go-around? If you’re like most pilots your answer may be, ‘when the instructor or examiner tells me to’. Go-arounds should be a routine exercise for pilots, but getting them right needs practice
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |