Mxsmanic wrote:


You don't need to stall the aircraft to descend. It can fly and
descend at the same time. If you do this above a runway, you end up
landing. If the rate of descent is gentle, you land very gently.

It's easy to "land" with a minimum rate of descent by carrying extra
power. This is however, not advisable. As I pointed out earlier
you're going to have to disapate that energy (and may not be able to
before you run out of runway). Further, you'll have a lower pitch
attitude and in most planes it's the mains you want to take the
brunt of the landing force with, not the nosewheel.

Flying into the ground with excess energy is *NOT* good technique.


As I understand it, a stall is a sudden change in the aerodynamics of
the aircraft.

Your understanding is as usual, incorrect.
This would be all the more true
under rough landing conditions, when you need to have precise control
of the aircraft at all times. Y It doesn't sound like something you'd want when you are
only a few feet above the runway. es, I can see how you'd need a longer
runway, but if you're in a small aircraft, very often you have runway
to spare, anyway.

Again you persist to think that stalls somehow destroy controllability,
which is not the case.

I don't know if my techniques are valid, but I seem to be having more
luck with safe landings since I started watching airspeed carefully to
avoid anything like a stall.


No you have had good luck playing games on the computer. You have
not demoonstrated squat with regard to airplanes.