FLYING LESSONS for April 18, 2024

FLYING LESSONS uses recent mishap reports to consider what might have contributed to accidents, so you can make better decisions if you face similar circumstances.  In most cases design characteristics of a specific airplane have little direct bearing on the possible causes of aircraft accidents—but knowing how your airplane’s systems respond can make the difference in your success as the scenario unfolds. So apply these FLYING LESSONS to the specific airplane you fly.  Verify all technical information before applying it to your aircraft or operation, with manufacturers’ data and recommendations taking precedence.  You are pilot in command and are ultimately responsible for the decisions you make.     

FLYING LESSONS is an independent product of MASTERY FLIGHT TRAINING, INC.

This week’s LESSONS:

Have you ever been asked by Air Traffic Control to “keep your speed up” or to “make best speed” during approach and landing? How do you reconcile complying with this request with the desirability of flying a stabilized approach? How do you make the transition from “best speed” to flare and landing? 

From the Australian Transport Safety Bureau:

We all want to be able to fit ourselves into the flow of traffic, to get everyone on and off the runway efficiently. We all want to be seen and perceived as masters of our aircraft, able to comply with controller requests and unusual situations. We don’t want to get in the way of other aircraft, or to be vectored away and delayed making our own arrival. 

So how do we reconcile a request to keep our speed up with the needs of a stabilized approach and a safe arrival?

First, what went right in this event? Tragedy was averted and this ATSB report became an advisory about a “near” accident, because the instructor recognized the indications of an impending stall and lowered the nose, that is, reduced angle of attack, to maintain controllability and flying speed. It would be very difficult to push forward on the Cessna’s control wheel with a line of hangars in your windscreen, even more so after the stress of a runway excursion and fuselage ground contact. The instructor showed great expertise and discipline to do the right thing once the aircraft was in this situation. 

But frequently the situations that require exceptional pilot skill are events of our own making.

The larger question is how to comply with a “best speed” request…and then how to turn it into a safe landing. The key is making the transition from an unstable (or at least, unusual) approach to a normal, stable final approach, flare and landing.

What is a stable approach? The U.S. FAA defines a stable approach as a “constant angle glidepath towards a predetermined point on the landing runway.” The term is generally expanded to include the airplane being in the landing configuration (that is, flaps and landing gear) and at the proper final approach speed. As the ATSB report states, the usual recommendation is to fly a stabilized approach below 500 feet above runway elevation in light airplanes. Other sources recommend being “stable” below 1000 feet Above Ground Level (AGL), or even higher, in large aircraft.  

The trick when complying with a controller’s request to “keep your speed up” is to do so to a point as close to the airport as possible, but to slow down in time to land in the normal touchdown zone at the normal landing speed so as to have aircraft control and sufficient runway remaining to stop normally. You may be able to taxi clear of the runway sooner that way than if you land fast. And getting you clear of the runway is soon as possible is ultimately the controller’s goal when asking a pilot to maintain “best speed.”

For example, a technique I developed and began teaching over 30 years ago is optimized for making a high-speed approach in a Beech Bonanza. To fly the technique you must first know the airplane configuration and power setting needed for a standard precision approach, both for level flight prior to glideslope/glidepath intercept and for the descent phase of the approach. The technique works equally well with a visual glide path indication system like a PAPI or VASI.

In the case of an A36 Bonanza it takes about 18 inches of manifold pressure, 2500 rpm propeller speed and approach flaps (12° to 15° depending on vintage) to fly level at approach speed (110 knots, for type-specific reasons I won’t address here). To descend on glidepath/glideslope, extend the landing gear and the airplane descends on a roughly 3° glide path (500-600 feet per minute) at that same airspeed. In that same example, it takes about 22 inches of manifold pressure at 2500 rpm, gear and flaps up, to fly at 150 knots indicated airspeed—just below the landing gear extension speed. Fly at that higher speed until the glide path marker is one dot “fly up” or the visual indicator is just beginning to show you’re on glidepath. Then, smoothly change the parameters to what’s normal for the precision descent—gear down, flaps approach, power to 18 inches—as you pitch to the glideslope/glide path and trim off the pressures. By the time you’ve descended 200 to 300 feet you’ll be trimmed on your normal 110 knot speed and ready to complete the approach with a normal flare and landing. You’ll be stabilized well before you’re 500 feet above runway height and in position for a controlled, normal touchdown.

Of course this is designed for a particular type of aircraft using its unique design and handling characteristics. But it shows you one way of developing your own Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for when asked to “keep your speed up” that is effective in the type of airplane you’re flying. Create specific speed profiles for segments of your high-speed arrival, find power settings and configurations that result in those speeds, and practice the transition frequently enough that you have your own SOP. Yes, you can do this even in a Cessna 172.

“But wait, you might reasonably say, “the controller asked the Cessna pilot to maintain best speed all the way in to crossing the runway.” To this request I’d respond that my “best speed” is to fly as fast as I can to a point on glidepath that permits me to slow to normal speed before I’m at 500 feet AGL. From there I’ll fly a normal, stabilized approach. The pilot in command gets to decide what is “best.” 

If that’s not sufficient to fix the controller error that put two airplanes too close together on the final approach course, on intersecting runways, or whatever the conflict, then say “unable” and take the vector away to reenter the landing sequence. 

What you don’t want is to be “unsure how to comply” and put yourself in a position you cannot land and clear the runway normally. That may lead to loss of control and, if you aren’t skilled and disciplined, can lead to tragedy.

Questions? Comments? Supportable opinions? Let us know at [email protected]

Debrief: 

Readers write about recent FLYING LESSONS:

Reader and monthly supporter Edmund Braly answers last week’s questions:

Edmund writes: 

I agree—the primary reason-for-being for a precautionary landing is an inflight fire. Thanks, Edmund.

Reader Robert Lough adds:

Levels of Learning (FAA Aviation Instructor’s Handbook)

That’s an excellent point. In Bach’s era precautionary landings were more common, with less reliable engines and poorly reported aviation weather…with no inflight updates other than what you could see through the windscreen or perhaps get by a radio call to Flight Watch (remember that?). That said, I’d like to see more training and evaluation of correlation, the highest level of learning, especially on the Commercial Pilot level and again in the various Flight Instructor Airman Certification Standards. Thank you, Robert.

More to say? Let us learn from you, at [email protected]

Share safer skies. Forward FLYING LESSONS to a friend

Please help cover the ongoing costs of providing FLYING LESSONS through this secure PayPal donations link. Or send a check made out to Mastery Flight Training, Inc. at 247 Tiffany Street, Rose Hill, Kansas USA 67133. Thank you, generous supporters. 

Thank you to our regular monthly financial contributors:

And thanks to these donors in 2024:


Thomas P. Turner, M.S. Aviation Safety 

Flight Instructor Hall of Fame Inductee

2021 Jack Eggspuehler Service Award winner

2010 National FAA Safety Team Representative of the Year 

2008 FAA Central Region CFI of the Year

FLYING LESSONS is ©2024 Mastery Flight Training, Inc.  For more information see www.thomaspturner.com. For reprint permission or other questions contact [email protected].  

Disclaimer

FLYING LESSONS uses recent mishap reports to consider what might have contributed to accidents, so you can make better decisions if you face similar circumstances. In most cases design characteristics of a specific airplane have little direct bearing on the possible causes of aircraft accidents—but knowing how your airplane’s systems respond can make the difference in your success as the scenario unfolds. Apply these FLYING LESSONS to the specific airplane you fly.

Verify all technical information before applying it to your aircraft or operation, with manufacturers’ data and recommendations taking precedence. You are pilot in command, and are ultimately responsible for the decisions you make.