How to Properly Land a C-172.....

[SSMOWS6]

I agree with DCAinstructor. Sometimes I use 1600 RPMS instead of 1700.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

I agree with DCAinstructor. Sometimes I use 1600 RPMS instead of 1700.

There's not too much difference between 1600 and 1700 RPM. Obviously, you will see a difference by adjusting between the two power settings, but from day to day, the power setting will vary slightly based upon atmospheric conditions. One day 1600 will be enough, on another, 1700 RPM. Also, between planes of the same model, you will notice variance between what power settings will hold what speed with various ptich angles.

 

[beefcake33]

its not this complicated. First you should use what RPMs work and never have to look at the RPMs. Aprroachspeed doesn't matter at all, you should hold the 172 off until it makes the decision it doesn't want to fly anymore (unfortunately very few people get this b/c they over control a 172), which is completely different than "driving on" a piper. Last and most important, tell those F'n DCA instructors to stop going to MESA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Jmajoris]

Don't sweat it. You only have 11.5 hours, and it will come. Practice slow flight and stalls so that you have more confidence in your approach speeds. After that, it's just practice....

Hi...

Just how is it done??? How do you properly land a C-172???
This week I went for my lesson. It was my first time in a C-172 SuperHawk....Big difference. This thing just wanted to haul A$$!

It begs to get off the ground! Anyways, I had trouble getting it back to the ground... I was told or have heard several times to land a C-172 that you have to stall it...Is this true? I have found this difficult in all the other Cessnas I've flown...which is why I do not like them....They all seem to float down the runway....I normally use the Piper warrior....my favourite...But it was in the hangar for 100Hr maintenence...

So how is it done? I keep bouncing my landings and this is extremely embarrasing and dangerous...I hold 65-70 Kts all the way to the runway,
but I bounce everytime!

My instructor likes the speed control but seems to think that I'm concentrating on a single spot to land on the runway rather than looking at the opposing end....I look further away but bounce anyways...Sigh...

Once I landed a c-172 fine without a bounce, and with that aircraft I have not been able to do it again.....Any advice helpful. Thanks.

 

[DCAinstructor06]

tell those F'n DCA instructors to stop going to MESA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What happened? You go to the interview and all the DCA weeines get hired and you got the door? This was a thread about landing a damn airplane. Atleast they worked for the hours in their logbook instead of buying them at gulfstream. 'nough said.

 

[FLYHY]

First off, what model of 'Superhawk' are you talking about? The SP I assume?

 

[FLYHY]

I forgot to finish ~ sorry... I noticed you were flying a C172M which flies about 5 kts slower than the newer models. 65-70 kts is a bit high and 172s don't like being fast on final. Try 60-65 kts and that should help out.

I agree with an earlier comment that you may be landing nosewheel first "wheelbarrowing", which could be caused by you focusing on your aiming point throughout the flare rather than focusing at the end.

Try flying a long final 3-4 miles in the morning with the VASI or PAPI on. Set up for your final approach with 30 degrees flaps and the power setting to maintain 65 kts. Get it all trimmed out - if you let go and the plane doesn't do anything, that is perfect. Maintain this profile until you get closer and closer to the runway keeping the extended centerline through your legs and right on the VASI 'red over white, you're alright'. Relax as you get closer and don't focus too much on any particular point on the runway. As the bottom VASI turns red, slowly and smoothly reduce the throttle, shift your focus to the very very far end of the runway and continue to 'fly' the plane to the far end. This means that as you begin your flare, you have to pitch up just as slow as when you rotate, perhaps even slower, and just use your diminishing lift to smoothly land on your main tires first. GOOD LUCK!

 

[unreal]

Maintain this profile until you get closer and closer to the runway keeping the extended centerline through your legs and right on the VASI 'red over white, you're alright'.

A good 1500-1600 RPM approach in a C172 at 60-65 knots will yield about a 5 degree glideslope, which will show all white on a VASI/PAPI system anyway. Sure, a 3 degree glideslope can be flown, but it'll be at an unnecessarily high power setting. The nice thing about the 5 degree glideslope is that your point of touchdown will be nicely set at around the 90 knot level pitch attitude. It's a good attitude in that students already know where it is.

Relax as you get closer and don't focus too much on any particular point on the runway.

See, I disagree with that. I get my students to look for the "zone of no-movement," which is the point on the runway that isn't moving up or down in the windscreen as you approach the runway. If you were to maintain the same pitch and power settings all the way down, that's where you'd hit the ground. A good place for the student to reduce power is right when that point starts to slide backward towards your nose. Looking for a PAPI or VASI at that point is only going to get them to look to the side of the runway, not at the runway.

Also, what are they going to look for when they go to an airport without such a system?

Just my two cents.

 

[JettBoii]

If you are looking to grease it on then here is the trick. Yes cross the fence at ref but at the same time keep rolling the trim nose up intil almost or full up; (on short final) that way you will not use so much back pressure and inevitably smack the mains down. Then just practice. Works every time. BUT; be ready on the trim if you have to go around; just shove the nose forward and start rolling the trim forward if that time comes! Let me know how it works.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

First off, what model of 'Superhawk' are you talking about? The SP I assume?

Superhawk???? There has never ever been a 172 that should have the word "Super" in it's title!!!!!

That is like saying that I just bought a really nice "Super Yugo"!!!!!!