Today I was landing after a stretch without flying into Aspen, my home airport KASE. ATIS everyday says beware of rapidly changing wind conditions but today the ATC had me change my route in case a large jet had to go around as he was landing tail with 4 current and gusts to 27. I was planning on landing into the wind but larger planes cannot, often having to divert.
I got the pucker factor even into the wind with 6 gusting 27 but it was almost straight down the runway toward me. I always do the same thing, use 100% flaps and add half gust but a sudden shift of 21-23 knt could be really bad. I probably landed a little hot and "landed’ 2-3 times but not really a porpoise. I came home and read some and kicked myself in the ass for not coming in half flaps or considering dropping flaps over the fence (this is an 8000 foot runway and I am in a turbo (SR22T) so I floated on purpose 20 feet above to "feel " what the wind was doing.
As you know the instant winds the ATC reports are 20-40 feet high sometimes the windsock is limp.
I wanted to share what I read tonight from a GURU. In the book TIPS TO FLY BY SECOND EDITION by the LATE Richard L Collins:
pAGE 68: " A form of cheating with flaps is rather common. Use full flaps for a steep approach, regardless of wind and turbulence. When the airplane is in the ground cushion, and the landing has started, slowly retract the flaps and increase the rate of up-elevator application as necessary. " It goes on to explain why and this is in his chapter on landing. It is almost shameful the way some on the COPA site feel there is only one way to fly. Read and study and practice. I for one am guilty of being a few knots fast on landing…but let’s be civil to each other.
I think Richard Collins has more experience than most of you…
All I can say is that what you described above is not what Cirrus recommends and, as it turns out, all planes are different in how they land in winds with various degrees of flaps used.
But your last quote is what really got my attention. Dumping flaps before the airplane touches down is a distinctly bad idea unless you are in an emergent situation with no go around as an option and a very short field in front of you. The sudden change in wing camber that close to the ground is a recipe for a hard landing and extreme unpredictability because your airspeed and other factors will determine how quickly the behavior of the airplane changes when you do that. It is also non-standard and the safest way to fly an airplane is to use a standardized approach.
That is a side affect of Cirrus pushing standardization as hard as they do.
To be, and to remain, a Cirrus Standardized Instructor you have to agree to teach their way.
In general this standardization has been a good thing for Cirrus fleet safety.
Richard Collins was highly experienced and a great writer. He also wrote some things others called nonsense. Early on he was quite critical of the Cirrus. Later he apologized for that so he was open to change. I liked his writing and miss him. But I didn’t always agree with him.
I find the idea to pull some flaps while late in the landing cycle without some real practice concerning. While I can visualize the idea pretty well and it sounds good in theory, in practice the difference in stall speed between full and half flaps in a Cirrus is significant. You are asking to drop it in hard (or worse). Seems to me the real reason some might want it is because they don’t fly target speeds, which you acknowledge. That is like using a screwdriver to drive in a nail. It might work but there are better tools.
I am with Brian. Not a good idea in a Cirrus. It might have been in my Tiger that had a minor difference in stall speed between full and half flaps. In that plane landing half flaps was pretty effective.
Kirk, I’m with Brian and Roger. I strongly suggest you avoid flap shenanigans during landing. They should be extended to the 100% position for virtually all landings and kept there until the aircraft has exited the runway.
As far as being “a few knots fast on landing” goes, there have been literally dozens of loss of control and PIO accidents in the Cirrus that were a direct result of landing too fast, and there have been NO accidents as a result of being too slow (with an operating engine). Choose which side of this range you want to be on carefully.
Richard Collins had thousands of hours… in old high-wing Cessnas. CSIP’s and experienced COPA members have hundreds of thousands of hours in this specific aircraft. Choose your mentors carefully, too.
I will add just a couple of comments. First I agree with Brian & the others that advocate a standardized landing process. Second, I don’t know exactly why Collins makes this point but you cannot “slowly” retract the flaps in a Cirrus. They are either 100%, 50% or UP. Some airplanes have continuously adjustable flaps, but the Cirrus does not. Lastly, I probably have more flying experience than Richard - I just haven’t written about it for many years.
Stick with the Cirrus iFOM & you will be a better pilot.
I fly a 20… about 800 hours… transitioned after 70 hours in a 172.
Have never had any trouble landing either plane. I find the 20 to be great in crosswinds (5 years with it on a single runway Illinois airport and plenty of gusty crosswinds).
I basically fly the POH numbers in the pattern. In the flare I adhere to the philosophy (For GA Piston aircraft) that you should try to stall the plane 1 inch off the runway (hold it off as long as possible)… this is more figurative than literal, and often you actually touch without a stall… but this approach has stuck the landing every time. (OK, maybe an occasional 3 inch hop on the mains.
If the plane quits flying (insufficient speed/energy), it cannot bounce very high from a couple of inches off the ground! Generally, carrying extra speed on short final is just counter productive and makes this a lot more work, while eating up additional runway!
Have always used full flaps (except for some factory training an the like). Plenty of control, and lowest energy. Plus not much risk of a tail strike at stall speed.
I certainly find this mentality fully compatible with the POH etc.
Maybe one day if I found I had a HUGE gust factor with some solid headwind component, I might consider half flaps… I am not completely closed minded and it is something that is taught (half and no flap landings incase they are in-op, etc)… but I have never encountered that and don’t expect too.
I would not recommend changing the aircraft configuration on short final or in the flare.
One other thing to mention about some of the ideas presented here… less than 100% flaps has a significantly higher chance of a tail strike. For my plane at typical CG’s, I feel like it is almost not possible to get a tail strike with 100% flaps if one is fairly smooth and not oscillating things.
Good points Brian. I am continuing to think a few knots fast is the number one error in landing most planes and find being spot on the numbers for speed seems to always have the smoothest landings. i wasn’t advocating additional speed only admitting it is likely my greatest error.
You’ve gotten a lot of good advice from a lot of folks more experienced than me, but I’ve had my SR20 closing in on 400 hours now and because I do a lot of local flying those 400 hours have more takeoffs and landings than most with that same number of hours. What I’ve learned about doing the landings well is that to think about 2 things, energy management and directional control. When I read your description of how you’re landing what I take away is that you’re using aircraft configuration to compensate for a less disciplined approach to energy management.
There are lots of tools to use in the cockpit for energy management of course (airspeed, AoA to name 2), so pick your approach, but note that if you continue to use flaps (which in the Cirrus are a pretty blunt instrument) to compensate for lack of energy management it will bite you sooner or later. I’ll note, even in your quote from Mr. Collins book it is noted that the use of flaps is “a form cheating”. You have to ask yourself who or what you’re cheating and what you realize is that you are cheating because you didn’t manage the energy of the aircraft when landing.
I hope you’ll consider following SOP recommended by Cirrus.
And I am def open to advice. I actually attempt to always use SOP when landing but then have kicked myself in the A@@ a few times thinking that i need to be more flexible. I am 100% all the time full flaps. Now as to energy management Aspen Airport is tricky in that if I come form the south I sometimes have to be 100% flaps for 4 miles as I don’t want to shock cool my cylinders from the 14-16K cross over the mountains to the runway so close at 8000.
I appreciate your respectful tone and advice and I am all ears. I am probably biased by a Cirrus friend who comes in steep as his logic is that then if the engine fails he has an out. I do see Collins says a “form of cheating” and he is often repeating how every type of aircraft, even YOURs or MINE, may be slightly different and I think he teaches flexibility.
An example for comment, once I was getting closed in by weather and turned to the sun. My saving grace is my flexible schedule and we headed to Santa Fe only to see storms I have never seen from the air. So went to Albaquerque to find the main runway was out of service due to some minor repairs at the very end of it (I just needed 1/5 of the runway) . So I did my SOP and was full flaps with a HUGE cross win on the smaller runway. It was beyond the capabilities of the plane. I didn’t have enough rudder control to land straight. Thankfully went back to SF and had an easy landing as snow storm approaching.
My take home points: SHould I have just declared an emergency and taken the easy runway or should I have been no flaps (which one could argue is SOP for cirrus as it is in tht POH) to see If I could get enough rudder control at a faster speed? )
I think I should have more tools in my toolchest with more practice at 0%flaps but frankly I don’t I am full flaps all the time. Didn’t even dawn on me to ,maybe do a low by and see how she flew on that high cross wind airplane. Cant remmeber but like 20 gusting to 45-50 KNots cross… not fun.
Again, thanks for your personal experiences and the respectful way you communicated, which is something we all should strive for in a community designed to enjoy and better our skills…Kirk
I think you’re hitting on a few interesting questions but I’d like to try and parse them out a bit if you don’t mind.
So my question is why do you need the flexibility? What conditions did you plan on trying to land in that required the flexibility? Now if you tell me that it was unexpected, then fine, that’s an emergency and you should practice emergency procedures but I think it’s dangerous to confuse emergency procedures (no flap/partial flap landing in a Cirrus is considered an emergency procedure) to accommodate a situation where you were exceeding the rated performance of the aircraft (cross winds in your example)
As a side note, Cirrus does not say no flap or 50% flap landings are an emergency procedure but in the POH do say the below so you can infer that they are a procedure designed to be used in related emergency situations vs a general purpose tool.
" Caution •Landings should be made with full flaps. Landings with less than full flaps are recommended only if the flaps fail to deploy or to extend the aircraft’s glide distance due to engine mal function. Landings with flaps at 50% or 0%; power should be used to achieve a normal glidepath and low descent rate. Flare should be minimized."
Now I won’t tell you that I’m perfect in this decision making process, there are definitely times where I’ve thought in my planning that my flight would be fine, but then when I get there it’s right on the edge and I’ve landed or had to go somewhere else. I would suggest in those situations that we should treat those as our own personal safety incidents and review what convinced us to attempt the trip in the first place and whether that decision chain was sound. I don’t have to tell you the problem with normalizing the behavior of thinking those landings on the edge are normal.
I don’t know Aspen, I’ve never been. That said, I can confidently say that shock cooling on our 20 engines is a myth, we don’t run them that hot. You’re talking about descending 6-8K ft over 10 miles or so (per the GPS approach) and you should be able to do that very capably in that short period without any issue, but I’ll let the folks who know Aspen better comment on how they do it.
Finally to your point about more tools in your tool chest, absolutely agree 100%. The trick in my book is knowing when to use which tool you have and when not to.
Great situation to discuss. Definitely real life and definitely not covered by the normal transition training syllabus.
I generally don’t buy into shock cooling on our engines. Most engine experts consider it a myth. But being in cold air and trying to come down that much is a challenge. Kudos to be mindful of it.
I agree that being kind to the engine will result in it being kind to you over time, so regardless of shock cooling being real or not I still try to manage and respect it. I reduce power slowly. No more than 2 inches of MP every couple of minutes. That means start the slowing process farther out and in small increments.
Have you considered a forward slip? It can reduce a Cirrus altitude quickly without speeding up. And Cirri slip very well. I recommend you practice it (hopefully with an instructor) at high altitudes before you try it at ASE. It also slips well half or full flaps. Try it. But in VMC only. Passengers seems to dislike it, especially if you have not briefed them. Make sure you cover it well with them.
New to this conversation and have only one other consideration to add. Even if you touch down with higher groundspeed with the no flap setting in a crosswind, you will still have to slow down through that same speed where you do not have enough rudder authority to control the xwind component. This can be a very dangerous proposition.
Good points. We practiced no flap and 50% so much I actually didn’t recognize that landing as an emergency procedure. (Again I always use 100%–but was questioning if I should do so due to lack of rudder authority. I know the says normal cross wind landings are made full flap but if you are pushing the limits of demonstrated xwind is that not a possible reason to also modify the approach? I get all the "how did you find yourself in that situation stuff i am just talking about the aerodynamics now.)
However rapidly shifting tail winds or lack of rudder authority is close to an emergency and all I can tell you is that with mountain flying you will learn that no matter how much planning, wind and weather can change FAST–of course an alternate airport should always be in the back of one’s mind.
So I think we’re agreed on the SOP piece. I’m interested in your point about lack of rudder authority in a landing. My 1st answer is don’t land and go to your alternate (which you pointed out). Why take a high risk scenario driven by wx and make it higher risk by doing something that you probably don’t and won’t do that often, you probably won’t or don’t do in the difficult wx conditions, and that isn’t a recommended approach? I know you say you do a lot of 50% flaps, but if you say SOP is 100% flaps then either your training as much as you fly regularly or 100% flaps isn’t really your SOP.
Exceptions to this line of thinking certainly are a true emergency that requires you to land as soon as possible, but in that case you really have no choice and you’re making the best of a bad situation.
Not to expand the conversation, but in a real world emergency the other option is to consider CAPS long before you’re committed to landing. Now I’m not saying use CAPS for difficult wx, but if you buy into the premise that you’d only consider the no flap/50% flap option in a true emergency then CAPS should be considered too if the emergency warrants.
Finally, let’s say you are in a bind and you’ve elected to land, if at all possible I’d land using SOP, but if you were concerned about flap extension or the conditions exceeded the POH limits (21 kts x-wind), then I’d do what I felt best given the conditions. Personally in a very high x-wind situation that exceeded the limits I might consider 50% flaps if I couldn’t maintain directional control, but now we’re in the realm of choices that no one probably likes and we’re choosing the best of the worst options.
I think you misread me when you said : " I know you say you do a lot of 50% flaps, but if you say SOP is 100% flaps then either your training as much as you fly regularly or 100% flaps isn’t really your SOP." I just meant that BEFORE I had my license I feel like my CSIP made me practice it alot. I am truly 100% flaps every time and was questioning whether I was beeing too rigid.
The question about pushing things was close a “PAN PAN” for me and I legally had lots of fuel but the dang perspective beeping low fuel (when I still had an hour) and WX closing in all around made me consider if I should have used less than full flaps. Now I realize that would have been stupid as once I slowed I would again have no rudder authority. However, I am not so sure because once in ground effect often mother nature is kinder due to friction of ground effects.
I think the gusting HEAD winds I quoted in my original post still are not satisfactorily answered to me if it is 4 gusting 28 full head wind. I almost diverted. Might I be better off coming in less flaps? Wind shear is common in Aspen and you hear commercial airlines reporting it all the time. I do think there is something to be said for flying in a certain place before one becomes dogmatic (not that you are being so.) It’s just these mountains are squirrely. Tower can report gusts 25 and a dead wind sock, thus the consideration for the low by.
Also the:" conditions exceeded the POH limits (21 kts x-wind)" is the best demonstrated. It probably is my limit but not necessarily for the plane and is complicated by those issues where wind tends to settle down under 50 feet AGL. For the record, I went to an alternate on the cross wind story…
