Manual Flare technique...to hold or not to hold wheel with both fists
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Lat..x Long..y
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Manual Flare technique...to hold or not to hold wheel with both fists
What is the ideal manual flare technique for turboprops of length such as ATR72...OTHER THAN THE MANUFACTURER SOP ofcourse...
1)To hold power levers with one palm and wheel with the other all the way to nosewheel touch down(irrespective of crosswinds)
2)hold one palm on PL and other on wheel till mains touch down...then maneuvre wheel with both hands till nose-wheel touches down and one palm back on PL for Reverse as necessary
3)hold wheel with both palms after retarding PL at the recommended RA height
4)with one palm hold alternately PL and wheel as circumstances dictate.
And comparatively, what is demanded of heavy jets?
Thanks
1)To hold power levers with one palm and wheel with the other all the way to nosewheel touch down(irrespective of crosswinds)
2)hold one palm on PL and other on wheel till mains touch down...then maneuvre wheel with both hands till nose-wheel touches down and one palm back on PL for Reverse as necessary
3)hold wheel with both palms after retarding PL at the recommended RA height
4)with one palm hold alternately PL and wheel as circumstances dictate.
And comparatively, what is demanded of heavy jets?
Thanks
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO the type of a/c is not too important. In most cases it is still possible to make a G/A from the flare and even after touchdown. Thus it is necessary to keep one hand on the thrust/power levers or throttle until you decide that you want to stay on the ground. Then apply whatever stopping systems you have. At touchdown speed the rudder should give enough directional control and then once slowing down any manual nose wheel steering device can be used as necessary.
On jets I see many F/O's with their hands on the Thrust Reversers in the flare before the wheels have touched, especially if they are floating. You can sense their nervousness and wanting to stop as fast as possible, yet they have made the possibility of a G/A more difficult.
On jets I see many F/O's with their hands on the Thrust Reversers in the flare before the wheels have touched, especially if they are floating. You can sense their nervousness and wanting to stop as fast as possible, yet they have made the possibility of a G/A more difficult.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Lat..x Long..y
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what does IMHO mean?
I concur...but what exact point can the palm be released from PL to the other to assist in mechanical advantage sometimes required for a nose heavy flare?
Thrust reverse ideally should not be activated till after nose wheel has also landed but frequently this is not complied with...especially if the runway length or target exit taxiway is an issue.
Go Around after touch down should only be the Commander's authority I believe.
Please elaborate your answer as per the options I provided...to help answer my question more precisely.But thanks all the same RAT
I concur...but what exact point can the palm be released from PL to the other to assist in mechanical advantage sometimes required for a nose heavy flare?
Thrust reverse ideally should not be activated till after nose wheel has also landed but frequently this is not complied with...especially if the runway length or target exit taxiway is an issue.
Go Around after touch down should only be the Commander's authority I believe.
Please elaborate your answer as per the options I provided...to help answer my question more precisely.But thanks all the same RAT
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the Camel's back
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never ever take your hands off the power levers until reverse in cancelled and they are at idle for the taxi. Why would you need 2 hands on the control column anyway? Time to go to the gym maybe? 
IMHO - in my humble opinion
IMHO - in my humble opinion
Mistrust in Management
Vc10Tail
"Thrust reverse ideally should not be activated till after nose wheel has also landed but frequently this is not complied with...especially if the runway length or target exit taxiway is an issue"
Not so on any of the Boeings or Airbuses I've flown - application of reverse as soon as mainwheel touchdown is achieved is the norm.
Our airline SOP is that reverse is applied by the handling Pilot which can at times result in a delayed reverse application (more common after a 'difficult' landing - say in crosswind conditions). Other airlines SOP's call for the non-handling Pilot to apply reverse upon mainwheel touchdown allowing the handing Pilot to concentrate his attention on the landing rollout. Here lies the real debate and in my view the latter SOP is safer as well as being more efficient with less brake wear.
I've tried to get my current airline to change with no luck so far.
Regards
Exeng
Not so on any of the Boeings or Airbuses I've flown - application of reverse as soon as mainwheel touchdown is achieved is the norm.
Our airline SOP is that reverse is applied by the handling Pilot which can at times result in a delayed reverse application (more common after a 'difficult' landing - say in crosswind conditions). Other airlines SOP's call for the non-handling Pilot to apply reverse upon mainwheel touchdown allowing the handing Pilot to concentrate his attention on the landing rollout. Here lies the real debate and in my view the latter SOP is safer as well as being more efficient with less brake wear.
I've tried to get my current airline to change with no luck so far.
Regards
Exeng
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew the 42 and 72, and now fly the NG 737 I find the landing technique for all types fairly similar.
Unless you're a tad on the weak side, there's no reason you can't land the aircraft the recommended way, ie retarding PL's while simultaneously flaring the aircraft, with the levers hitting the idle stop the same time the wheels touch down.
More importantly on the 72 is not try and land it like a Cessna by strectching the flare in order to gain a smooth touchdown, as this can (and has) result in a tailscrape.
ATR's stop on a dime, so I wouldn't be too fussed about getting reverse pitch in asap, as invariably the discing of the props will provide plenty of drag before worrying about stopping the thing . . . (unless LDA is a serious issue!)
Unless you're a tad on the weak side, there's no reason you can't land the aircraft the recommended way, ie retarding PL's while simultaneously flaring the aircraft, with the levers hitting the idle stop the same time the wheels touch down.
More importantly on the 72 is not try and land it like a Cessna by strectching the flare in order to gain a smooth touchdown, as this can (and has) result in a tailscrape.
ATR's stop on a dime, so I wouldn't be too fussed about getting reverse pitch in asap, as invariably the discing of the props will provide plenty of drag before worrying about stopping the thing . . . (unless LDA is a serious issue!)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
application of reverse as soon as mainwheel touchdown is achieved is the norm.
Other airlines SOP's call for the non-handling Pilot to apply reverse upon mainwheel touchdown allowing the handing Pilot to concentrate his attention on the landing rollout.
What is the ideal manual flare technique for turboprops of length such as ATR72...OTHER THAN THE MANUFACTURER SOP ofcourse...
But never, ever, try to outsmart manufacturer's test pilots on your own. Very costly damage and/or grave injuries may result.
While I have never flown 72, single handed flare, with left hand on power levers till 60kt on 42 never seemed to be a problem.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: EARTH
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
basics are same all a/c
all a/c lands on the runway
maintain centreline and donot miss the TDZ.
if you miss be ready for GA.
try to feel the pleasure of flying as a flyer.
look at far end of the runway to fly it down nicely.
maintain centreline and donot miss the TDZ.
if you miss be ready for GA.
try to feel the pleasure of flying as a flyer.
look at far end of the runway to fly it down nicely.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,098
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One reason why it should only be reverse idle until the nose wheel is on the runway is that, on aircraft with rear mounted engines, if full reverse is applied when the nose wheel is still off the ground it is possible, under certain conditions, to sit the a/c on its tail!
Mistrust in Management
Rananim
You mean idle reverse right?
Ooh,I dont like this.Too many cooks.One pilot flies the plane,the other monitors.Can you tell me how selecting reversers would interfere with your concentration on rollout?
Our airline SOP is that reverse is applied by the handling Pilot which can at times result in a delayed reverse application (more common after a 'difficult' landing - say in crosswind conditions). Other airlines SOP's call for the non-handling Pilot to apply reverse upon mainwheel touchdown allowing the handing Pilot to concentrate his attention on the landing rollout. Here lies the real debate and in my view the latter SOP is safer as well as being more efficient with less brake wear.
BTW watch any BA aircraft at any destination landing and you will see the application of reverse on mainwheel touchdown. Watch others and you 'might see some delay'. Having sat at car park 'X' at LGW for countless hours over the years (waiting for a bus) I have observed the different landing techniques (including application of reverse). BA get reverse in on touchdown generally, other operators (including my own) can experience a delay of some time (including a delay of no reverse applied at all in some instances - generally observed in Xwind conditions).
Worthy of debate I think.
Regards
Exeng
exeng, one problem with the NHP looking after reverse during the landing would occur on a slippery runway with a crosswind. If it gets a bit sideways, who is flying the thing now? And what technique is used in a rejected takeoff?
I know of one operator which had the NHP pull reverse in the RTO as well as on landing. With a combination of engine-out, crosswind and wet/slippery runway, it all conspired to really make life difficult for whoever had nominal control of the aeroplane. And at that point, the control was pretty bloody nominal.
Most SOPs call for one pilot to fly, the other to monitor. In the RTO case, the Captain usually takes control, therefore then becomes the handling pilot and the F/O reverts to monitoring.
These procedures are not universal, but almost so - and for good reason. Most times they work.
I know of one operator which had the NHP pull reverse in the RTO as well as on landing. With a combination of engine-out, crosswind and wet/slippery runway, it all conspired to really make life difficult for whoever had nominal control of the aeroplane. And at that point, the control was pretty bloody nominal.
Most SOPs call for one pilot to fly, the other to monitor. In the RTO case, the Captain usually takes control, therefore then becomes the handling pilot and the F/O reverts to monitoring.
These procedures are not universal, but almost so - and for good reason. Most times they work.
Adding to the above, whether reverse is initiated at mains touchdown or nosewheel touchdown - it's not that critical on a normal runway. A slight delay in selection of reverse should be of no consequence on any normal landing. For the reason for this statement, go to certification requirements.
Adding to the original question on whether one or both hands should be on the stick at touchdown. I know of no post WW2 aeroplane that needs two hands at the flare - unless maybe in manual reversion. That then becomes a separately-briefed and planned exercise. But I am sure someone out there may have flown some Russian monster that does require a different technique.
Adding to the original question on whether one or both hands should be on the stick at touchdown. I know of no post WW2 aeroplane that needs two hands at the flare - unless maybe in manual reversion. That then becomes a separately-briefed and planned exercise. But I am sure someone out there may have flown some Russian monster that does require a different technique.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: taking up the hold
Age: 53
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATR's stop on a dime, so I wouldn't be too fussed about getting reverse pitch in asap, as invariably the discing of the props will provide plenty of drag before worrying about stopping the thing . . . (unless LDA is a serious issue!)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: B.F.E.
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't speak for the ATR, but the Dash-8 lands pretty consistently (though not consistently pretty) without ever bringing the throttle hand up to the yoke. For Flaps 15, stabilized at Vref plus modifiers (15-20% torque) to about the 20 foot callout, we start a gradual power reduction aiming to reach a point just above Flight Idle (5-10%; where the props first start to get quiet, but before they get loud again) right at touchdown. Usually start actually pulling through to flare around the 10 foot callout, target landing attitude about 5 degrees at touchdown.
Flaps 35 takes about 5-10% more power initially, requiring a more drawn-out power reduction. The timing of the flare is more critical as well, as the speed bleeds off quickly with all the extra drag. Too late and we'll send astronauts into outer space on the other side of the world from the impact, too early and we'll float for a half-mile.
That all changes, of course, depending on CG and weight, aft & light requiring a finer touch and less power. Small variations in descent rate prior to flare between landings due to different conditions of wind, thermal action, approach angle, etc will all change exactly how everything lines up, as well. In the end, it's all just energy management; we ideally try to make each approach the same, but every single one is just a little bit different. All good reasons to have the power levers in our hands and to have a good and intuitive understanding of the relationship between our aircraft's attitude, power, and current energy state at any given moment during a landing.
For crosswinds it seems to work fairly well to start gently de-crabbing and dipping the wing at that same 20 foot call at about the same pace as the power reduction, aiming to be established in our landing attitude a foot or 2 prior to touchdown. Ridiculous winds require a bit earlier initiation of this process. If we have any sideways drift at all on touchdown, even the tiniest little bit, the Dash will tell us. Positively.
Disc / beta can be used as soon as the mains are down. However, if on a normal runway (e.g. longer than 3000 feet) we have to be overly aggressive with the use of brakes or disc, or have to use reverse at all, barring good ATC reasons we have either landed too long or too fast.
Also, the spoilers don't engage in the ground mode until all three gear are down, so it's best not to hold the nose off excessively long for aerodynamic braking.
And the last 5 feet is witchcraft, plain and simple.
Flaps 35 takes about 5-10% more power initially, requiring a more drawn-out power reduction. The timing of the flare is more critical as well, as the speed bleeds off quickly with all the extra drag. Too late and we'll send astronauts into outer space on the other side of the world from the impact, too early and we'll float for a half-mile.
That all changes, of course, depending on CG and weight, aft & light requiring a finer touch and less power. Small variations in descent rate prior to flare between landings due to different conditions of wind, thermal action, approach angle, etc will all change exactly how everything lines up, as well. In the end, it's all just energy management; we ideally try to make each approach the same, but every single one is just a little bit different. All good reasons to have the power levers in our hands and to have a good and intuitive understanding of the relationship between our aircraft's attitude, power, and current energy state at any given moment during a landing.
For crosswinds it seems to work fairly well to start gently de-crabbing and dipping the wing at that same 20 foot call at about the same pace as the power reduction, aiming to be established in our landing attitude a foot or 2 prior to touchdown. Ridiculous winds require a bit earlier initiation of this process. If we have any sideways drift at all on touchdown, even the tiniest little bit, the Dash will tell us. Positively.
Disc / beta can be used as soon as the mains are down. However, if on a normal runway (e.g. longer than 3000 feet) we have to be overly aggressive with the use of brakes or disc, or have to use reverse at all, barring good ATC reasons we have either landed too long or too fast.
Also, the spoilers don't engage in the ground mode until all three gear are down, so it's best not to hold the nose off excessively long for aerodynamic braking.
And the last 5 feet is witchcraft, plain and simple.
Last edited by hikoushi; 7th Jul 2008 at 06:45.
Other airlines SOP's call for the non-handling Pilot to apply reverse upon mainwheel touchdown allowing the handing Pilot to concentrate his attention on the landing rollout. Here lies the real debate and in my view the latter SOP is safer as well as being more efficient with less brake wear
The question was about handling of a manual reversion approach and landing in the 737. Some operators demand CRM be called into action by having one pilot operating the thrust levers while the "handling" pilot has both hands on the wheel flying the aeroplane.
In those cases the pilot handling the flight controls either directs what N1 he needs (lots of talking as he directs thrust changes) or handballs the task of maintaining the required airspeed with thrust to the man who has the thrust lever responsibility. In other words share the task.
The Boeing instructor was astonished that such a procedure was even contemplated when he heard about this and replied that Boeing has no procedure requiring two pilots to land the aircraft. If such a procedure was needed, the aircraft would have to be crewed by three pilots in case one pilot became incapacitated or otherwise not be able to take his part in the landing.
There is no valid operational reason for "sharing" a landing task such as those described. . It should be perfectly within the capabilities of a competent pilot to operate a Boeing with one hand on the wheel and the other operating the thrust levers whether on approach and landing or a rejected take off. Policy-makers should avoid using the catchword of CRM as a perceived justification for splitting duties that don't need to be split.