angle of approach or landing range question

An ILS approach glide slope is 3° and the aircraft will be
flown so that is reduced in the flare to nearly zero.


"Tim923" wrote in message
...
|I don't have an aviation background. What is the typical
angle of
| landing/approach for commercial airliners? There's an
illusion for
| novices, and it seems like the angle is much greater, even
30 degrees
| or more, but I remember hearing it is much less, like
under 10. At
| what angle would the passengers complain of a rough
landing.

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote

...and occasionally they don't flare at all!

Oops, we must be on the ground.

Though, if you are a navy pilot, you go BAM.. we're on the ground! g
--
Jim in NC

I don't have an aviation background. What is the typical angle of
landing/approach for commercial airliners? There's an illusion for
novices, and it seems like the angle is much greater, even 30 degrees
or more, but I remember hearing it is much less, like under 10. At
what angle would the passengers complain of a rough landing.

ILS approach slopes are around 3 degrees, and I don't recall ever hearing of
any greater than 3.5 degrees or less than 2.5 degrees. I presume that PAPI,
and the earlier VASI, lighting systems conform to the same approach angle
that is (or would be) used for each runway. Instrument traffic and nearly
all multi-engine traffic uses the ILS and PAPI approach slope.

Single engine traffic, when using a power-off approach will typically have a
gliding approach between 5 degrees and 10 degrees depending upon wind and
flap setting. This is frequently done in training, and also as an expedited
arrival procedure, in addition to the obvious usefulness in the even of an
engine failure.

Credible, and occasionally impassioned, arguments have been advanced on all
sides regarding which is the correct normal procedure for single engine
aircraft under visual conditions...

Peter

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article ,
Tim923 wrote:

I don't have an aviation background. What is the typical angle of
landing/approach for commercial airliners? There's an illusion for
novices, and it seems like the angle is much greater, even 30 degrees
or more, but I remember hearing it is much less, like under 10. At
what angle would the passengers complain of a rough landing.

They follow a three degree glideslope to landing. They do, however,
flare for landing, which raises the deck angle at touchdown.

The deck angle isn't the same as the glideslope during a lot of
the approach (and the same goes for takeoff). That's a common
misconception that non-pilots have...that the airplane is always
flying along it's longitudinal axis.

In article ,
Ron Natalie wrote:

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article ,
Tim923 wrote:

I don't have an aviation background. What is the typical angle of
landing/approach for commercial airliners? There's an illusion for
novices, and it seems like the angle is much greater, even 30 degrees
or more, but I remember hearing it is much less, like under 10. At
what angle would the passengers complain of a rough landing.

They follow a three degree glideslope to landing. They do, however,
flare for landing, which raises the deck angle at touchdown.

The deck angle isn't the same as the glideslope during a lot of
the approach (and the same goes for takeoff). That's a common
misconception that non-pilots have...that the airplane is always
flying along it's longitudinal axis.

I wasn't sure what the poster wanted -- whether he meant glide angle (as
seen from an observer on the ground) or the deck angle (as seen by a
passenger aboard). I think that he meant deck angle.

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
My airliner experience is somewhat limited to say the least. I did put a
stretch DC8 down once as a "guest of the line", but that's about it :-))
Although the glide slope angle is correct, the deck angle for a normal
approach should be somewhat higher than the 3 degree glide slope and will
be
related to angle of attack on the wing, which for an airliner should be a
function of the GW, airspeed, and configuration for the approach.

Most airliner pax will feel their seats tipped back between 2 and 10 degrees
on downwind, -1 to 6 degrees on final, and 2 to 10 degrees at touchdown.
Airspeed is usually adjusted to maintain a similar deck angle for each
approach, however, individual techniques of pilots and/or autopilots will
vary.

If you land a stretch -8 and hit anywhere near the runway environment, you
are doing good ;-)

D.

"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
My airliner experience is somewhat limited to say the least. I did put a
stretch DC8 down once as a "guest of the line", but that's about it :-))
Although the glide slope angle is correct, the deck angle for a normal
approach should be somewhat higher than the 3 degree glide slope and will
be
related to angle of attack on the wing, which for an airliner should be a
function of the GW, airspeed, and configuration for the approach.

Most airliner pax will feel their seats tipped back between 2 and 10
degrees
on downwind, -1 to 6 degrees on final, and 2 to 10 degrees at touchdown.
Airspeed is usually adjusted to maintain a similar deck angle for each
approach, however, individual techniques of pilots and/or autopilots will
vary.

If you land a stretch -8 and hit anywhere near the runway environment, you
are doing good ;-)

I have to admit; that bird was about the laziest airplane on approach I've
ever been in :-)) About halfway down the slope I managed to get ahead of it
somewhere in the vicinity of where I had to be to satisfy the FD109. It was
the flattest touchdown I've ever made. Had the chief pilot of the line in
the right seat. (Just a crew on board for a ferry flight) At least he didn't
seem all that scared :-))
Dudley Henriques

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
I wasn't sure what the poster wanted -- whether he meant glide angle (as
seen from an observer on the ground) or the deck angle (as seen by a
passenger aboard). I think that he meant deck angle.

I think I meant treating the plane as a point source at its center of
mass (as done in physics class). I didn't have a glide angle and deck
angle distinction in mind, and I wasn't clear about that.

I always thought the angle was much greater before I heard about it
from a pilot. I think I had 30 degrees in mind. Tell me I'm not the
only one.

I always thought the angle was much greater before I heard about it
from a pilot. I think I had 30 degrees in mind. Tell me I'm not the
only one.

Some years back I measured the "acceleration G angle" on takeoff on a
commercial jet and found it to be about 30 degrees. What I did was hang
a weight from a protractor and held the protractor level with the floor.
On the takeoff run the weight was lagging back 30 degrees (half a g
acceleration) and then when climbing out it remained at that angle
(combination of forward acceleration and deck angle). When the forward
acceleration stopped (climbing at a constant airspeed) the actual deck
angle would be indicated, and that was also 30 degrees.

I did not do this on landing. Perhaps I should have.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
. com...
When the forward acceleration stopped (climbing at a constant airspeed)
the actual deck angle would be indicated, and that was also 30 degrees.

How were you able to tell that the acceleration had stopped?

--Gary