VASI

Guest Discussion
1

I make better landings in the A36 when I come in low and flat . . . lower than red over white, but not quite red over red. (My home airport is Palo Alto, whose short 2500-foot runway demands a first-third landing.)

Question: What is the experience of SR20 pilots flying final?

The reason I ask is because one of my CFIs is an absolute VASI Nazi. We make terrible landings . . . floaters, nose-firsters, balloons, bouncers . . . flying VASI just right and, to my eye, diving to make the runway with all the subsequent problems. On days when I’m soloing, I go back to low and flat, and I land much better.

Question 2: Are all planes to be flown on a “one-glideslope-fits-all” final approach, or are there, in fact, real differences among planes that should dictate difference glideslopes? The SR20 sounds like a “low and flat” plane.

FYI, I have about 65 hours and am just starting to fly cross country soloes.

2

Rich,

While I’m not a CFI, low and flat is dangerous. By the time you are on short final, you should have enough glide to insure you make it to the numbers. VASI is your friend.

I fly out of Palo Alto all the time (my Archer is based at SQL). I’ve actually landed a SR20 demo plane at Palo Alto. 80knts over the pond, high seventies at the numbers and off the runway mid-field. This has nothing to do with VASI (angle) and everything to do with airspeed. Fly the airspeed the book tells you to fly and fly the VASI… (every single time you fly!)

“floaters, nose-firsters, balloons, bouncers” are ALL airspeed problems. By the time I’m in ground effect with my Archer - with the stall horn on - it’s not possible to balloon or bounce. If you want to fly with me sometime, I’ll prove both issues to you - a good CFI should be able to do this, too.

Chris SR20 #672 & SR22 &70

I make better landings in the A36 when I come in low and flat . . . lower than red over white, but not quite red over red. (My home airport is Palo Alto, whose short 2500-foot runway demands a first-third landing.)

Question: What is the experience of SR20 pilots flying final?

The reason I ask is because one of my CFIs is an absolute VASI Nazi. We make terrible landings . . . floaters, nose-firsters, balloons, bouncers . . . flying VASI just right and, to my eye, diving to make the runway with all the subsequent problems. On days when I’m soloing, I go back to low and flat, and I land much better.

Question 2: Are all planes to be flown on a “one-glideslope-fits-all” final approach, or are there, in fact, real differences among planes that should dictate difference glideslopes? The SR20 sounds like a “low and flat” plane.

FYI, I have about 65 hours and am just starting to fly cross country soloes.

3

My SR20 experience is almost nonexistent, but I’ve been learning to fly a Baron, and I imagine your A36 is pretty similar in terms of wing loading.

My Baron experience is that it requires power to fly a standard 3 degree glideslope while maintaining approach airspeed (it’ll come in even steeper at idle power). Nailing the airspeed is everything; if I hit the airspeed right and use power to maintain the glideslope, all I need to do when it gets close to the ground is to bleed off power and keep holding it off. When it’s done flying, it thumps right down and stays there.

In order to fly a lower approach, you’re using even more power than is already necessary (and you sure don’t want to be one of those folks that every once in awhile hit the berm at the end of the runway). Fear of stalling is a good fear to honor, but not at the expense of good landings. I’m guessing that you’re coming in too fast, and when you come in flatter your excess airspeed will bleed off more quickly than on a steeper descent.

Pretty much every airplane has to be able to fly a good 3 degree slope, or ILS approaches would be much harder.

The SR20 is a high wing loading aircraft, so I imagine that it probably sinks like a stone with no power, much like what you’re flying now (though a lot lighter.)

For comparison, I usually land my 172 starting well above the glideslope, with the power at idle. It’s got so much wing that you really can’t get it to sink until you’re down close to the stall. It’s much harder to land than a heavier plane.

4

Question: What is the experience of SR20 pilots flying final?
I like it steep - about 4 degrees, with just a little power. It comes down very nicely at 80 kts, flare quite late and don’t touch the power until the wheels are on the ground. You will grease it every time.
I have not found a way to make a smooth touchdown with no power. If you chop the power all the way before the wheels are on it drops and bounces - not very heavily, but not a nice landing at all.
For a short field landing (not that it’s ever required) it’s a bit flatter, 75 knots, ease the power back in the flare but again don’t chop it completely.
If you have to make a forced landing with no power, just accept that it will not be smooth. Nobody will care.
If I have to make a really steep approach, a slip helps, with the power at idle, but I will add power in the flare (just a tad) to smooth the touchdown.

I haven’t flown an A36, but it’s probably no different to any other plane. The most important element of a good landing is airspeed control, too fast or too slow and it just won’t work out.

But in the flare, different aircraft need quite different techniques, in my experience. Cessnas need the power off, and nose high (quite hard in a 172); Grummans need the power off and the attitude held at the right angle, then you just wait. Arrows like a little power on.

Practice makes a big difference, but so does a good instructor. You can easily develop bad habits on your own, and wonder why you just can’t make it work right, until you get a couple of little tips from an instructor.

Anyway, have fun on those solo cross countries. My first solo x-country flight was, for me, a much bigger blast than my first solo circuit.

5

Oh, I forgot to say about the VASI - try forgetting it (maybe you need to try a different instructor) - you do not need a VASI to make good approaches and landings - get the speed right and make the runway threshhold stay in the same place on the windscreen, and you have a good approach, which will lead to a good landing. Control speed with pitch, descent rate with power. Aiming point moving up the windscreen - add power; moving down - reduce power; too fast - nose up; too slow ; nose down. It becomes automatic after a while.

6

I make better landings in the A36 when I come in low and flat . . . lower than red over white, but not quite red over red. (My home airport is Palo Alto, whose short 2500-foot runway demands a first-third landing.)

Rich: Part of your difficulty may be that PAO’s VASI (now PAPI) has an unusually steep approach angle, more than 4 degrees (maybe even 4.4 degrees). What seems “low and flat” to you is probably very similar to the usual 3 degree glideslope and is indeed a “normal” approach.

7

I make better landings in the A36 when I come in low and flat . . . lower than red over white, but not quite red over red. (My home airport is Palo Alto, whose short 2500-foot runway demands a first-third landing.)

Question: What is the experience of SR20 pilots flying final?

The reason I ask is because one of my CFIs is an absolute VASI Nazi. We make terrible landings . . . floaters, nose-firsters, balloons, bouncers . . . flying VASI just right and, to my eye, diving to make the runway with all the subsequent problems. On days when I’m soloing, I go back to low and flat, and I land much better.

Question 2: Are all planes to be flown on a “one-glideslope-fits-all” final approach, or are there, in fact, real differences among planes that should dictate difference glideslopes? The SR20 sounds like a “low and flat” plane.

FYI, I have about 65 hours and am just starting to fly cross country soloes.

Don’t forget that the VASI helps insure obstacle clearance. As someone else pointed out, altitude is your friend if the engine goes. As a fairly low hours instrument rated pilot (350 hours) I never fly below the lower of the VASI or the glideslope. If I do, it’s at my peril!

8

One of the reasons you may be finding the low and flat approaches easier, is that a steeper approach requires a greater pitch change when flaring. This is also true when using flaps: the greater the flaps increments used, the steeper the approach, and the greater the pitch change during the flare. I have read that there is a difference of opinion among CFIs as to whether to teach students full flap landings initially, due to this increased pitch change required.

I make better landings in the A36 when I come in low and flat . . . lower than red over white, but not quite red over red. (My home airport is Palo Alto, whose short 2500-foot runway demands a first-third landing.)

Question: What is the experience of SR20 pilots flying final?

The reason I ask is because one of my CFIs is an absolute VASI Nazi. We make terrible landings . . . floaters, nose-firsters, balloons, bouncers . . . flying VASI just right and, to my eye, diving to make the runway with all the subsequent problems. On days when I’m soloing, I go back to low and flat, and I land much better.

Question 2: Are all planes to be flown on a “one-glideslope-fits-all” final approach, or are there, in fact, real differences among planes that should dictate difference glideslopes? The SR20 sounds like a “low and flat” plane.

FYI, I have about 65 hours and am just starting to fly cross country soloes.

9

Chris —

You make a good point about the PAO berm. Low flat . . . and a last-minute wind shear . . . would be a bummer.

Everybody talks about gluing the airspeed, and of course that is the key. The A36 numbers are identical to the SR20 . . . 80 short final and 75 at the fifty foot mark. At PAO that means you start to pull power, a bit, and raise the nose, a bit, while over the pond, to get your 75 over the threshold.

All that I do, and find easy to do, albeit flying slightly low. When I’m on the steeper VASI, it’s somehow becomes difficult, especially given the rather small target of the first third of PAO’s 2500 feet. But I guess it’s just a matter of practice, and worth the practice, given the remote but real threat of a shear.

By the way, I find it takes two more inches of manifold to hold 80 knots on final at San Carlos, just because of the constant afternoon wind shears.

Thanks, guys. This is a great website.

RK

Rich,

While I’m not a CFI, low and flat is dangerous. By the time you are on short final, you should have enough glide to insure you make it to the numbers. VASI is your friend.

I fly out of Palo Alto all the time (my Archer is based at SQL). I’ve actually landed a SR20 demo plane at Palo Alto. 80knts over the pond, high seventies at the numbers and off the runway mid-field. This has nothing to do with VASI (angle) and everything to do with airspeed. Fly the airspeed the book tells you to fly and fly the VASI… (every single time you fly!)

“floaters, nose-firsters, balloons, bouncers” are ALL airspeed problems. By the time I’m in ground effect with my Archer - with the stall horn on - it’s not possible to balloon or bounce. If you want to fly with me sometime, I’ll prove both issues to you - a good CFI should be able to do this, too.

Chris SR20 #672 & SR22 &70

I make better landings in the A36 when I come in low and flat . . . lower than red over white, but not quite red over red. (My home airport is Palo Alto, whose short 2500-foot runway demands a first-third landing.)

Question: What is the experience of SR20 pilots flying final?

The reason I ask is because one of my CFIs is an absolute VASI Nazi. We make terrible landings . . . floaters, nose-firsters, balloons, bouncers . . . flying VASI just right and, to my eye, diving to make the runway with all the subsequent problems. On days when I’m soloing, I go back to low and flat, and I land much better.

Question 2: Are all planes to be flown on a “one-glideslope-fits-all” final approach, or are there, in fact, real differences among planes that should dictate difference glideslopes? The SR20 sounds like a “low and flat” plane.

FYI, I have about 65 hours and am just starting to fly cross country soloes.

10

It comes down very nicely at 80 kts, flare quite late and don’t touch the power until the wheels are on the ground. You will grease it every time.

I have not found a way to make a smooth touchdown with no power. If you chop the power all the way before the wheels are on it drops and bounces<

I second these observations. Also, you barely flair – certainly compared to Cessnas, it feels like a flat landing.

11

I second these observations. Also, you barely flair – certainly compared to Cessnas, it feels like a flat landing.

It does - but it’s not. If you watch the plane from outside, the nose is actually reasonably high. It looks flat from inside because of the good visibility over the nose. I was quite surprised the first couple of landings because it looked flat, but when the nose was lowered, it came down a long way.

12

One of the reasons you may be finding the low and flat approaches easier, is that a steeper approach requires a greater pitch change when flaring. This is also true when using flaps: the greater the flaps increments used, the steeper the approach, and the greater the pitch change during the flare. I have read that there is a difference of opinion among CFIs as to whether to teach students full flap landings initially, due to this increased pitch change required.

I agree with Janice. A problem many new or low time pilots have with with landing is finding the proper pitch and hight above the runway to bleed
off airspeed. If you are overcorrecting pitch just prior to landing or if you tend to stop flying the airplane when you get over the runway, you may find it easier to use a powered low approach and drive it on. This is not a good solution, however. Keep making nomal approaches, nail the airspeeds and learn to manage the pitch changes just prior to touchdown.

Bill Graham, CFII

I make better landings in the A36 when I come in low and flat . . . lower than red over white, but not quite red over red. (My home airport is Palo Alto, whose short 2500-foot runway demands a first-third landing.)

Question: What is the experience of SR20 pilots flying final?

The reason I ask is because one of my CFIs is an absolute VASI Nazi. We make terrible landings . . . floaters, nose-firsters, balloons, bouncers . . . flying VASI just right and, to my eye, diving to make the runway with all the subsequent problems. On days when I’m soloing, I go back to low and flat, and I land much better.

Question 2: Are all planes to be flown on a “one-glideslope-fits-all” final approach, or are there, in fact, real differences among planes that should dictate difference glideslopes? The SR20 sounds like a “low and flat” plane.

FYI, I have about 65 hours and am just starting to fly cross country soloes.