I don't understand this type of landing.

[minitour]

then change instructor. if that was a good landing for him then he is probably milkin ya for money/time. has he not taught you how to use a VASI/PAPI??

And really, who needs those? Just aim at a point on the runway.

If the point goes up, you're going down.
If the point goes down, you're going up.
If the point doesn't move and gets bigger...you're headed right for it.

-mini

 

[nosehair]

Conventional gear aircraft are landed both two point and three point, with two point being just as good as three, and often preferable. When two point, they're not landed nose up, but nose flat, often with forward pressure on the stick.


Three point landings, generally speaking, for nosewheel airplanes are destructive and poor airmanship.

...aahh, I see. You are taking the term "3-point" to mean, as in a tail wheel 3-point landing with both mains and tailwheel touching down at the same time; and you are thinking we mean "3-point" in a tricycle to mean touching the mains and nosewheel at the same time....No,No,No, that is not the dialogue here. We all (I think) are talking about the "attitude" of the nose. The tricycle is landed with the nose up AS IF it were a tailwheel, hence, the term "3-point" attitude.
​

 

[avbug]

"Point" with respect to landing, assuming you aren't going for style points, refers to the number of points that touch down at the same time, or that are intended to touch down at the same time.

A nose high two point landing on the mains is NOT a three point landing. It is a two point landing. A three point landing in a nosewheel aircraft means you land on the nosewheel and the mains.

If you land three point with your nose in the air in a nosewheel airplane, you've just dragged the tail.

 

[nosehair]

you are thinking we mean "3-point" in a tricycle to mean touching the mains and nosewheel at the same time....No,No,No, that is not the dialogue here. We all (I think) are talking about the "attitude" of the nose. The tricycle is landed with the nose up AS IF it were a tailwheel, hence, the term "3-point" attitude.

​

What part of the word "attitude" don't you understand?
​

 

[avbug]

I see unanswered is not the only one who lacks understanding here.

A three point attitude in a tricycle gear airplane is the same as the taxi attitude. A two point normal landing attitude with the nose high and the nosewheel not in contact with the landing surface, is not the same as a three point conventional gear attitude.

In Oklahoma I gave an aviation merit badge class to some boy scounts. As I've always done, I offered each one who completed the merit badge an airplane ride. I borrowed a Cessna 150, and met them at a local grass airstrip. One boy was too short to reach the rudder pedals, and was very exicted about flying. It was the troopmaster's son. I explained to him, as I did each one that I would do the takeoff, and once in flight, he could fly the airplane.

During the takeoff, rolll, he leaned forward, wrapped both arms around the yoke, and then sat back quickly. The nose came up, the tail went down, and we dug a little channel down the runway as sod was scraped up between the empennage and the rudder. I cut the power and we stopped. No damage, but a little rut in the soft runway. After an inspection and a quick talk about our proceedures, we went flying.

If we had been landing, that would have been a three point landing in a tricycle gear airplane.

The tricycle is landed with the nose up AS IF it were a tailwheel, hence, the term "3-point" attitude.

Your terminology is incorrect.

Further the nosewheel airplane may be landed with the nosewheel off the ground, but seldom landed as if it "were a tailwheel."

Funny how insurance companies, rental facilities, and even the FAA distinguish between someone trained in conventional gear, and someone not. If merely having the tail down and the nose up on a typical tricycle gear landing were enough to be the same as a conventional gear landing, what purpose would there be in having any training in conventional gear...folks would be flying one or the other without difficulty.

In the real world, however, that's not the case.

 

[FN FAL]

In Oklahoma I gave an aviation merit badge class to some boy scounts.

I don't know why, but for some reason, that Alec Baldwin SNL Boy Scout skit came to mind when I read that line.

 

[Kream926]

And really, who needs those? Just aim at a point on the runway.

If the point goes up, you're going down.
If the point goes down, you're going up.
If the point doesn't move and gets bigger...you're headed right for it.

-mini

ya but he still should know how to use them if hes hangin on the prop each time he comes in

 

[jknight8907]

Or the instructor could simulate an engine failure...fun stuff there, boys. I doubt if he'd forget it. Of course, the insurance company probably wouldn't forget it either.......okay, bad idea.

 

[UnAnswerd]

ya but he still should know how to use them if hes hangin on the prop each time he comes in

Once thus far, not "each".

 

[nosehair]

Your terminology is incorrect.

Further the nosewheel airplane may be landed with the nosewheel off the ground, but seldom landed as if it "were a tailwheel."

Yep, you are right, Avbug, we are technically incorrect in calling it a "3-point atiitude". Your description of dragging the tail in the dirt is a very-well-done graphic of the consequences of a literal interpretation of the term "3-point attitude" when refering to a tricycle gear airplane. It is meant as an exaggeration of the necessary attitude, which is somewhere a little short of a true tail-wheel-touching attitude.

Using this phrase is an instructing technique to get students to stop landing in a too-flat-attitude...but,wait, you knew that didn't you?
​