Vindication for the Pinnacle TVC Crew

[Crossky]

At ASA we use ref + 5 for approach, but "over the fence" we are supposed to be at ref. Power reduction at 100ft with power to idle by 50ft (I believe) under normal conditions.

Exactly the same for Air Wisconsin. If you carry approach thrust all the way to 50 ft before reducing for flare, you're already 5 kts fast in the flare. You're begging to float unless you can fly it on using perfect technique. And then you've touched down 10 kts or more faster than you could've if you had started reducing thrust for the flare at the 100 ft call.

BTW 2,300 ft down the RWY is still in the 'touchdown zone'; 1,300 feet past the 1,000 foot markers. At about 120 kts that's about six seconds of float past the 1,000 ft markers. Must have been very slick.

 

[PUNISHER]

Good post,

I've always wondered why 9E Rjs usually landed long. I used to flight instruct in TVC, seen a lot of landings on 28 and very rarely did I see a 9E RJ touchdown within the first 1500 feet. They usually looked like nice smooth touchdowns, but long. Not sure what the Blue Ridge/AirWis guys did different but they were considerably more consistent at hitting the mark.

Just an observation.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Everybody does it the same... they all carry thrust to the 50ft call and beyond... bleed the energy off in ground effect as they sail down the runway and past the first and second turn off.... so they can get a smooth landing... it is the human desire to "look good" under the pretense that THAT is what defines a good landing...

IOW that is the perceived cultural value within pilot groups of a "good stick"....

 

[Oakum_Boy]

Yeah. All correct. You actually have to start reducing thrust well before the 100' call. More like at 200' to get the speed back to Vref. Try telling that to a newhire who has been told by the training dept. to make a mindless landing. Then they look at you like WTF are you talking about. "But the training department told me to do it this way..."

 

[BoilerUP]

...I wonder how many RJs have landed nosewheel first because the pilot flying carried too much speed, floated too far, and decided to just put the airplane on the runway so they could get it stopped.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

A Dude did that on Rwy 33 at DCA back on 2000. He was yanking the TR's to deploy all while doing the "wheelbarrow". Finally got it stopped at the end... the jumpseater chewed him out... the FO was speechless...

 

[Stifler's Mom]

I saw one in CLT land nosewheel first. I thought for sure the nosegear would collapse, but it didn't.

 

[SSDD]

Extra speed is also dangerous in a strong x-wind condition. Newbys start rocking the wings back and forth while they bleed the speed off. Most of the wing strikes have been on the downwind side.

 

[CA1900]

... the jumpseater chewed him out...

I'd have paid good money to see that! :laugh:

 

[Rook]

. I always started a power reduction at 100 ft, but even then you had to be pretty aggresive in pulling power to arrive over the threshold at 50 ft and land within the first 1500 ft of the runway.

Which is the technique I always taught my IOE newbies regardless of 'sim technique'. They were always surprised that it worked.

Inconceivable, thanks for the post. The CA in question and I interviewed together and we were roomies during new-hire ground school.