Is every touchdown a stall?

Peter Duniho writes:

Neil's original statement was simply "if the aircraft is flying, it is not
landing". This is not true. As near as I can tell from the quoted thread,
this was the point Mxsmanic was addressing. There is nothing fundamentally
incorrect about the statement "If the aircraft is flying and descending, it
is landing" (assuming we're talking about airplane flight near a runway,
which seems like a reasonable inference in this context...obviously aircraft
fly and descend without landing all the time in other contexts).

Yes.

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.

I'm unclear as to the official definition of "with good flying speed up your
sleeve", the phrase you use.

I'm not sure what that means, either, but in my case, "flying speed"
means perhaps five or eight knots above stall, depending on many
things. I'm not talking about high-altitude cruise speeds, but a
speed high enough to avoid an accidental or deliberate stall above the
runway.

As I understand it, a stall is a sudden change in the aerodynamics of
the aircraft. It doesn't sound like something you'd want when you are
only a few feet above the runway. This would be all the more true
under rough landing conditions, when you need to have precise control
of the aircraft at all times. Yes, 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.

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.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In article ,
says...
Peter Duniho writes:

Neil's original statement was simply "if the aircraft is flying, it is not
landing". This is not true. As near as I can tell from the quoted thread,
this was the point Mxsmanic was addressing. There is nothing fundamentally
incorrect about the statement "If the aircraft is flying and descending, it
is landing" (assuming we're talking about airplane flight near a runway,
which seems like a reasonable inference in this context...obviously aircraft
fly and descend without landing all the time in other contexts).

Yes.

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.

I'm unclear as to the official definition of "with good flying speed up your
sleeve", the phrase you use.

I'm not sure what that means, either, but in my case, "flying speed"
means perhaps five or eight knots above stall, depending on many
things. I'm not talking about high-altitude cruise speeds, but a
speed high enough to avoid an accidental or deliberate stall above the
runway.

As I understand it, a stall is a sudden change in the aerodynamics of
the aircraft. It doesn't sound like something you'd want when you are
only a few feet above the runway. This would be all the more true
under rough landing conditions, when you need to have precise control
of the aircraft at all times. Yes, 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.

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.

There is an excellent manual, IIRC, in MSFS, and I'd suggest you read
it, in particular the pattern work - flying by the numbers in MSFS is
definately the way to go (as you have little to 'feel' by).

--
Duncan

Dave Doe writes:

There is an excellent manual, IIRC, in MSFS, and I'd suggest you read
it, in particular the pattern work - flying by the numbers in MSFS is
definately the way to go (as you have little to 'feel' by).

The problem with the documentation in MSFS is that you can't read it
and fly at the same time. Even looking at a map requires that the
simulation be halted.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

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.

A normal approach is at 1.5 Vs until on final approach to
allow for maneuvering flight. Once on final, where bank
angles will be less than 15 degrees, with little effect on
stall speed/load factor, speed will be 1.3 Vs until
beginning the flare or round out. Actual touchdown will
happen at 1.1 to 1.01 Vs. On really short fields that are
not "soft" actually stalling at 1 to 2 feet AGL and dropping
it in is well within the design limits of the landing gear
and wing.

Real airplanes and real simulators "care" about such
details, desktop PC games and simulators don't, which is why
you can log take-offs and landings in an airplane or a $20
million full motion/visual sim.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
...
| 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.

"Jim Macklin" writes:

Real airplanes and real simulators "care" about such
details, desktop PC games and simulators don't, which is why
you can log take-offs and landings in an airplane or a $20
million full motion/visual sim.

PC simulators do, too.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.