172driver
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2002
- Posts
- 744
The currently accepted practice in flight training is to teach the powered, stabilized approach to landing. In Cessnas, we chop the power to 15"MP or 1500 RPM abeam the numbers and add flaps abeam, base, and final. To carry this much power to the runway and be stabilized at the recommended approach speeds, we must come in fairly low compared to a power-off approach.
There is a definite period of time on downwind, base, and final where the a/c would never make it to the runway in the event of power failure. Even flying the tightest pattern possible and adding flaps at the last possible moment, if you're carrying that much power to the runway, you won't make it if the engine goes. You have to extend too far to get down in time with power. Especially true when practicing those landings on the numbers. Furthermore, Cessnas glide fairly well compared to other GA airplanes. At least you'd have a shot at it... but there's definitely a point of no return out there.
Do we just accept this risk in order to stabilize the approach? How would the FAA feel if we lost power turning final and didn't make the runway? Would they care that we were following their recommendation of a stabilized, powered approach? How do/did you teach it?
BTW, I am a big fan of teaching the power-off approach too but it is not used in day to day operations. More of an emergency or an abnormal procedure. It used to be the standard but I guess since engines became more reliable and too many pilots drove off the end of runways, we abandoned it.
Penny for your thoughts.
There is a definite period of time on downwind, base, and final where the a/c would never make it to the runway in the event of power failure. Even flying the tightest pattern possible and adding flaps at the last possible moment, if you're carrying that much power to the runway, you won't make it if the engine goes. You have to extend too far to get down in time with power. Especially true when practicing those landings on the numbers. Furthermore, Cessnas glide fairly well compared to other GA airplanes. At least you'd have a shot at it... but there's definitely a point of no return out there.
Do we just accept this risk in order to stabilize the approach? How would the FAA feel if we lost power turning final and didn't make the runway? Would they care that we were following their recommendation of a stabilized, powered approach? How do/did you teach it?
BTW, I am a big fan of teaching the power-off approach too but it is not used in day to day operations. More of an emergency or an abnormal procedure. It used to be the standard but I guess since engines became more reliable and too many pilots drove off the end of runways, we abandoned it.
Penny for your thoughts.