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

[skiandsurf]

huh??? This demonstrates what? You want to up their confidence, Can their motor at 700 feet when climbing straight out. IF they remember to turn around and can make the runway safely, buy them a steak dinner. I would actually do this in the simulator with the weather at 1/2mile and 100ftovc. The sharp ones were able to intercept the backcourse and actually make the runway. The rest of the sheep just crashed straight ahead into the abyss.

Well, being that I taught for over 1700 hrs (more than your total time), I can assure you that if my student can recover from a bad approach and put it down nicely, we are both satisfied.

As far as doing a 180 back to the runway after an engine failure, I think that is the wrong thing to be teaching. back when I was a student and an instructor, we never taught to come back. Lose too much lift and altitude. much better off going straight ahead the safest place....street, field. Remember we are talking 152's not 737's.

 

[pilotyip]

Yea I teach 1000" AGL 180 OK, 500' AGL 90 OK, less than 500' straight ahead, make your decisions in advance so you don't waste time in a critical situation. Have a plan stick to it.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

On thing to mention regarding a 180 after departure with a failed engine. Always turn into the wind if a crosswind exists. This will allow you to remain more aligned with the departure runway should you need to turn back. A tailwind behind you will put you further away and require more manuevering. Since many airports have multiple runways which intersect, sometimes a 180 back to the same runway isn't always necessary. In terms of banking, I recall a study done which showed that an approximate 45 degree bank was safe and provided a better return on altitude during the turn than did a shallower bank. The shallower bank took longer to get turned around and left you further from the runway.

 

[avbug]

I can assure you that if my student can recover from a bad approach and put it down nicely, we are both satisfied.

Bad approaches tend to lead to bad landings, though not always. The best salvation to a bad approach is a go-around. Setting the example of attempting to salvage bad approaches is setting a bad example. Far better to teach a student to be conservative and go around...then teach the student to make a good approach.

 

[skiandsurf]

Bad approaches tend to lead to bad landings, though not always. The best salvation to a bad approach is a go-around. Setting the example of attempting to salvage bad approaches is setting a bad example. Far better to teach a student to be conservative and go around...then teach the student to make a good approach.

This is a very good point. But what I am trying to see, is that the student has "control" of the airplane. The student has the skills to add a little power, maneuver the plane to where he wants it, and can finish with a nice landing. This is after doing slow flight, steep turns, stalls, touch and gos and go-arounds. This is the last confidence builder for both of us, to ensure that the student is flying the plane and not the plane flying the student.

This was my technique and may not be one for you.

 

[DCAinstructor06]

Cessna 152, I demo the 180 at NIGHT and at 500AGL. Believe me, superstick I am NOT! It only takes practice, given the options of sitting on my thumb and riding it into the trees in the dark or turning it around, I'll make the field.

 

[DCAinstructor06]

Bad approaches tend to lead to bad landings, though not always. The best salvation to a bad approach is a go-around. Setting the example of attempting to salvage bad approaches is setting a bad example. Far better to teach a student to be conservative and go around...then teach the student to make a good approach.

I agree, if it smells like pooh, guess what? It is. I'll let someone take me around ALL day until they get the approach correct. Only when they feel comfortable should they be allowed to land. Allowing anyone to continue a crappy approach to landing will only teach bad habits. Monkey see monkey do, or will 16000 hours cause one to forget this basic CFI tool. FOI.

 

[chitownflyer]

The Cessna 172 is a good plane, the only thing that irks me about it is there are supposedly a million different techniques to land the thing. That's what I like about Piper & Cirrus.....there is ONE way to land, that's it. Fly by the numbers.

What I have found that works (I learned in a 172R, and my flight school is just retiring 172Rs now) is fly the approach by the numbers according to the POH. About twenty feet off the ground, start reducing power to idle and about ten feet off, begin your round out. As the bottom starts to sink, slowly raise the nose. Shouldn't have a problem.

 

[minitour]

I realize this is just a bit on the late end of things but I'll chime in with my two pennies.

To land a 172:
Whatever it takes to be on final (~600 AGL) at 65kias slowing to 61kias at 50' (roughly over the threshold) with full flaps as this is the "short field" technique. Once at the threshold, smoothly reduce power to idle. Notice the word "smoothly". Nothing in flying needs to be done knee-jerk...no yanking the throttle out so bad that the entire control comes out of the panel...just smoothly reduce it to idle. At this point, the nose starts to drop (it helps if you trim slightly nose up on final, but not necessary) and the natural reaction is to pull back...don't! FLY THE PLANE to ground effect, then you start the flare.

IMHO, the flare is a two part process. It's a "level off" and a "flare". In the "level off" phase, you are going from descent with the nose low, into ground effect and leveling off in ground effect. At this point, your view should be down to the far end of the runway so you can see yourself sinking. As you start to sink (which should be pretty soon if you're 61KIAS at 50' with full flaps and go to idle throttle), you just raise the nose enough to keep it in the same spot relative to the horizon. In other words, when you "level off" in ground effect, the nose is in a particular position...during the "flare" you simply keep it in that position by applying back pressure and letting the aft end of the aircraft (including the mains) sink onto the runway. Keep the back pressure in as the mains touch down until you can no longer keep the nose up. Let the nosewheel drop on its own as the airspeed deterioriates and the elevator loses any authority to keep the nose up.

Now, for the 180 to the runway...I'm going to abstain from that comment as the only "experience" I have with that is "simulated" at 3,000'. At that altitude, it just simply didn't work. I tend to teach small turns to avoid obvious obstacles below 600' such as a 20 degree turn to avoid a radio antenna and typically 600' on up to TPA I will let the student make a 90 degree turn. But then, I also teach upwind to 600', turn crosswind, downwind at 1000' (or TPA in which case, I adjust the upwind leg also except in the cases of noise sensitive areas), so that has a lot to do with it.

Good luck with the landings! It gets better and easier with practice.

-mini

 

[Dizel8]

The 180 back may work, but to many stall/spin accidents have shown more often than not, that it doesn't.

 

[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"!!!!!!