Short Field Techniques - Ace Your Private Pilot Checkride
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 тра 2024
- Demonstrating a short field takeoff and landing is a required part of your private pilot checkride. Learn how to master your short field technique on your checkride and in your real world flying. Find us on the web and social media!
CHAPTERS
00:00 INTRO
01:00 OVERVIEW AND EXPLINATION
03:50 SHORT FIELD IN THE COCKPIT
See more videos from the 31 Day Safer Pilot Challenge
• How to Manage Engine F...
Website: mzeroa.com
Facebook: / mzeroa
Twitter: / mzeroa
#mzeroanation #mzeroa #aviation
As a Student pilot my Instructor and I did a short field takeoff on a dirt field. At the end of the runway were a line of hangers. One of the hanger's door was open and a calendar was hanging from the back wall. Before rotation I remember seeing the calendar picture and dates.
After rotation, you remember nothing 😂
Thank you! Really nicely done as usual.
This channel stands out 🙌😊
Flew over to Marco Island yesterday and last week as well, just for a xcountry touch&go, and what a lovely place. I hope that big development off the end of runway 35 isn't give you problems with noise... that was a bad location to pick with all the open spaces around you! I thought I would climb out and just-less-than-full-throttle to maybe reduce my noise a bit, but my instructor yelled at me for that, ha!
Great video. Definitely a must-see for student pilots!
During my student pilot training I practiced simulated short-field takeoffs and landings on longer runways, and didn’t have any close options for actual short-fields to practice on. When I took my private checkride in February this year, short-fields felt like a weaker area to me but I felt confident in performing a go-around if the approach to landing was not how I desired. Unfortunately I ended up shooting about 3 go-arounds because I felt that I was going to land beyond the desired touchdown point. By the third go-around my DPE said “actually you had it on the last one.” That gave me enough confidence to do the same approach and land short field.
Not exactly on topic but two months later I unearthed some paperwork, articles, and trophies from my great-great grandfather George Halsey Sr who used to fly air circuits and wing-walking in the 20’s along with some pilots such as Walter Beech, Matty Laird, and Clyde Cessna. One of the competitions he won was a STOL challenge in Wichita Jun 1929. “It took pilot Halsey but four feet to stop his Ken-Royce plane and win first place in the sport landing contest.” Now that’s a short-field landing!
About that obstacle.... I have been taught that the landing should be as though there is a 50 foot obstacle at the runway threshold. I.E. you must cross the threshold at an indicated altitude that is 50 feet above the field altitude, and then descend to your designated landing spot touching down -0, +200 feet of that declared spot. In your demonstration you are calling out that you have cleared the obstacle way before you get to the threshold and are landing just past the numbers. When I practice this I try to cross the threshold at field altitude +50 feet and use the beginning of the "aiming point markers" at the 1000' point as my declared touchdown point. Those markers are usually (always?) 150' long so as long as I touch down on those stripes I'm good, with 50' to spare. I was also taught to immediately retract the flaps on touchdown to kill the additional lift and transfer as much weight to the wheels as possible, and declare "max braking effort" to the examiner. Perhaps this is a DPE thing, with my CFIs knowing what our usual DPE expects, but I like that it is more definitive as to what is required on the check ride (which I have yet to do!). I'm sure that dragging it in wouldn't fly with our local DPE.
great video... got my checkride 6/2 fretting it already lol
Best of luck to you!
Jason - what did you mean by pushing the nose ahead of the point? Also, are you being gradual with power reduction? what point are you cutting it completely? i sometimes come down hard. i think i'm cutting it too soon.
I use the 1000' markers as my landing spot. I aim to flare 2 runway stripes before them and give special attention to recommended airspeed for the short field landing. If you have more airspeed than what you're supposed to have, you will float longer than you want to.
I give you a 10 for well intentions. I'd give you a 10 for technique if you told us your final approach speed in your 172. Yes I know I can check the POH.... But that's not the point. You hit on some very good general points in your video but I found it too ambiguous to provide much value.
Just use some JATSU rockets. Really short field takeoff!
Anybody notice a similarity with ShamWow infomercials??? Regardless, very nice job and presentation.
Another reason to climb out at Vx is when you are taking off in the opposite direction from your destination.
1. What do you think about a rolling take-off. Accelerating during the turn into start runway heading and short before reaching the heading full power ?
2. Zero Flaps to gain speed faster (less drag) and short before reaching stall speed lowering the flaps ?
3. Landing a flat approach with engine power and very little flare ?
No. Follow the published procedure in your POH…the few feet you might squeeze out of your takeoff roll are not worth the added risk of losing directional control, the engine failing to develop full power, or having some weird flap extension glitch at a critical point in the maneuver.
@@FlatOutMatt Thank you, well my IFR Teacher (a very skilled Jet-Pilot with over 10'000 flight hours did it often on short field take-offs. We did it with the Piper Seneca II, Piper Navajo but also in his Citation Jet on short fields in the mountains on a hot day.
His father also a rather old fashion teacher made an outside emergency (simuated) landing. When we touched the ground we realized that the ground was quite soft and we had more resistance than expected.. He left the flaps up and during speeding up he manually started to lower them step by step.
If you need more performance than your POH indicates for the runway length you have, then you should wait for another day with better weather/performance.
And practice ADM and use the risk management matrix.
1. Rolling Takeoff by accelerating during the turn to centerline.... I had a CFI applicant do that one day so I made a note of exactly where we lifted off. I asked him how he chose his method over the one recommended in the POH. I said, "let's land and I'll try one and if yours beats mine, we will continue the check ride." You can probably guess how that ended. That said, there are certain instances where I recommend rolling power addition, for example operating out of a gravel strip where you don't want to be slinging rocks with your prop.
2. Zero flaps initially. I see this particularly at STOL comps. For the average pilot I think it's just an unnecessary increase in workload. The drag at low speed is as minimal as it will ever be the entire flight. But it's worth trying out and see if it makes any difference on your individual airplane.
3. Flat approaches..... Aarrgghhhh. Don't make me scream. I have yet to see a pilot on their PP checkride do a short field like that successfully. If that's what they want to try, I take them to an actual short field with an obstacle. Doesn't have to be much of one. A 4' fence drives home the point quite nicely that when you've been training to short field landings to touch down on the 1,000' markers at an airport with 6,000' runway, it doesn't bear much of a resemblance to reality. A standard 3 degree GS takes you 20' down the runway for every foot of altitude you have. So, a 4' fence adds 80' to your runway length requirement PLUS whatever you'd like to clear the fence by.
Your short field landing really didn’t illustrate what a short field land looks like inside or outside the aircraft. No real mention of airspeed in your Cessna, no demonstration of maximum braking since it was a touch and go. Love your teaching
🤙🏿
[USERNAME] 🚀! Love aviation!
Sure looks like normal landing?? The "50 obstacle" was way out there.
Yezser
I can never reconcile how short field landings align with good aviation decision making. We practice for the ACS but how often in real life is it a wise choice to land on a real life short field?
My same thoughts on the Forward Slip. If you find yourself too high to consider a forward slip, then you should just initiated a go-around.
100% agree! If anything, the short field landing requirement compels a pilot to throw safety out the window in order to hit the mark. It's friggin stupid!
I think both maneuvers were for an aviation world 50 years ago of tail draggers and unpaved runways. Today they may teach airmanship and the limits of the aircraft but no one flies a 172 cross country after they pass their checkride and these techniques are not useful in the real world. I wish the FAA would be thoughtful about updating methods that apply to 2023 (or even 1983).
Interesting perspectives. It's good that you recognize that pushing your limits, or the limits of your aircraft for that matter, could be considered bad judgement. I'm also hearing that using maneuvers (such as the mentioned slip) that we don't normally use in order to 'fix' a poor approach is a bad idea. YUP.
That said... Any maneuver that you practice enough to be unconsciously competent in (IE doing without thinking too much) and is within the limitations of the aircraft is SAFE. I practice forward and side slips on a fairly regular basis so that they are in my toolbox, and are available in situations (such as emergencies) where I might need them. If I haven't practiced them, or short/soft field in a while, I don't consider them an option.
This is probably the biggest factor in being a safe, capable pilot: Crafting your personal minimums to your current equipment and proficiencies, which are always in flux. Great comments!
@@larryk130 The aviation world 50 years ago still exists. I've flown many 50 (70) year old aircraft in to airstrips that were at least that old. Flabob, the oldest airport in California, has a runway that is so narrow it looks like a taxiway, with a big hill on short final. Sounds sketchy, but there are high-school kids being taught to fly, and soloing there, right now. Safely. "Aim small, miss small!"
I have to disagree. Dragging it in is a viable short field method and is how bush pilots do it. It is not that it is wrong, it is that it is different. Plenty of true short fields have no obstacles. What you need to do is instead of imposing the obstacle and clearance, treat them as two distinctly different scenarios. If you want to call it a “spot landing” instead, fine, but train to both situations. Train to a short field landing over obstacle and separately train to short field landing with no obstacle. Even if you expect them never to use a no obstacle short field spot landing, they’re still valuable as they reinforce learning about ground effect and about power relationships. Note these also apply to confined water space for the float planes, with and without obstacle. Note also those same bush pilots in the case of with obstacle are more than happy to slip it in. Fear not the drag in with power with no obstacle, fear not the slip with obstacle. Having said all this, realize in planning before flying you need to also know you can take off again at said short field. Such may mean that you’re limited to fields from which you don’t have to truly use full short field optimized techniques. If such be true, treat them as normal landings with a decision at touchdown to flaps half go-around or flaps up smooth slow application to full brakes. Tailwheel try to three point else wait till tail down on that braking. In all cases, use AOA if you have it available. If not, actually calculate Vref on current weight and use it. If you have no such calculation in light GA aircraft, subtract a knot from that Vref given for max weight for every 100 pounds below max weight. Airspeed is not king, it is mere proxy, it is at best the king’s regent. AOA is king. You mentioned intended aimpoint rising or falling, great, what do you do about it? Less power / more power, and anticipate counter-corrections.
Similarly, short field takeoff only applies to with the obstacle, disagree. It is also worth breaking into with and without as without, you may want to accelerate in ground effect as you did on the soft field when without obstacle. Teaching such context should help students brief “what is different about this takeoff” in their departure briefs getting them to adapt better to circumstances.
Given clearance of terrain, you may not want Vy from Vx. The discussions between the two often mislead. You may want compromise for better cooling faster than Vy. You may also want faster than Vy even if, especially if, low to the ground to compensate for potential startle time as well as giving a cushion to zoom a bit should you need to avoid something. Other factors including gaining optionality are worth discussing when hitting Vx versus Vy versus something faster. Vx is valuable in this discussion, but you really almost never need Vy. Vy is more for ATC asking for expedited climb. But, since we’re talking about these, how about a mention for factors affecting Vx? Lowering pitch from Vx to Vy shouldn’t induce momentary descent as you can change pitch more slowly accelerating slower but maintaining some fashion of climb. What might get you here is actually the cleanup raising flaps. Good thought to gain extra height first but realize the issue is likely the cleanup especially if you accept time to transition from Vx to faster speeds.
We shouldn’t be teaching to the check ride. We should be teaching to practical functionality. What are they going to do after the check ride? How do you make them reliably safer after the check ride?
Consider applying the Navy’s view on things:
Meatball (glide path), Lineup, Angle of Attack (or, if you must, airspeed in lieu of but remember it really is in lieu of as a workaround not a solution). Use power techniques as best able, those often mistakenly called “back side.” Note power techniques work both back side and front side though some aircraft due to long spool-up times can’t use them hence must fly front side as true back side techniques are horrendous.
Landing Signals Officer (LSO) Rules to Live By - apply the first four though the last two don’t count as you [round out and] flare, Navy aircraft don’t, though you can apply all six for instrument approaches:
- Always Lead a High or Fast
- Never Lead a Low or Slow
- If High and Fast, Fix the Fast then the High [trim then power]
- If Low and Slow, Fix the Low then the Slow [Power! then trim]
------------
- Never Re-Center a High Ball In Close, but Stop the Rising Ball
- Fly the Ball All the Way to Touchdown
Note “Fast” and “Slow” apply to AOA but ‘High’ and ‘Low’ are already taken to describe glide path. Hence they use “on-speed” and speed terms but for AOA. It is a bit like they’d never say “cease fire” as you might only hear the latter half of the communication. Instead, you’d hear “Hold! Hold, Hold Hold” or “Abort, Abort, Abort.”
And remember, the slower you are (the higher AOA you are), the less energy you need to dissipate hence the less you’ll float and the less rollout you’ll need. You can bullseye an AOA (or speed) with power techniques and with such really own the glide path with power thus owning that touchdown. Yet you also get plenty of slop at and after that touchdown in the ACS. Going around to try again simply reflects good ADM, so you have another try too.
Something from this to explore: You’ve done constant altitude constant airspeed turns. To do these, you added back stick rolling into the turn while adding a little power to compensate for the increased drag. The back stick increased your AOA to compensate for the increased lift required. Have you tried a constant AOA level turn? To do such, roll into your turn but do not add back stick. Instead add a little more power than you would have added if doing constant speed. Your speed will tick up a few knots while your AOA will stay at the trimmed setting. Use power adjustments to maintain level. With such AOA turns, you do not cut into your stall margin during the turn. Such is how Navy jets fly in their landing patterns. Though they’ll slowly reduce power through the turn so as to increase rate of descent. Note with these, as you added more power for the turn, you need a bigger power reduction rolling wings level to avoid ballooning. While it would be nice to see both AOA and airspeed in experimenting with these at altitude to include during slow flight, you don’t need to see the AOA to do them. The wing is trimmed to the AOA regardless of you seeing its AOA. After doing them at altitude, you can try doing them in the landing pattern. Once you understand these, you’ll realize you can fly your pattern while needing to control for less variables simultaneously. Rather than doing constant speed turns in your pattern, I would suggest you should be doing constant AOA turns. These need not be at “on-speed” AOA as flying a lower AOA faster speed gives you a larger energy package increasing your contingency options (PO180 capacity). For reference, Navy patterns are flown fully configured and trimmed to “on-speed” AOA NLT Abeam maintaining that “on-speed” AOA from there throughout. Students are taught to work to this from the very beginning.
Now about Front Side v. “Back Side” v. Back Side
We should note our “Fundamental Motions” of Straight and Level, Climb/Descend, Accelerate/Decelerate, and Turn are an incomplete list. We also have Zoom and Dive. To Climb or Descend, we change Power thus giving excess to Climb or letting Drag dominate to Descend. To Accel/Decel, we change Pitch typically while also changing Power so as to stay Level or stay on a Constant Glide Path. Zooming and Diving, however, are Trades between Kinetic and Potential Energy. Zoom and Dive differ from Climb and Descend in this. When we Climb or Descend, we maintain our Trim Setting Maintaining a Constant AOA. Our fixes for Distributive Errors are really miniature Zooms or Dives. Shallowing or steepening VVI at constant AOA (or speed) are miniature Climbs and Descents.
For the Front Side, we use Pitch to Control Glide Path and Power to Manage Speed. These are Zooms or Dives coordinated with Accelerations or Decelerations.
For a moment, imagine flying Front Side but at zero Power. If we’re High, we can Nose Down as we will Accelerate per this Dive trading Potential Energy for Kinetic Energy and adding Drag as we move up the Parasitic side of the curve. Added drag helps against the over-energy state of being High. There’re limits to this as we cannot Dive through the Ground and we have a Vne. If we’re Low, we can Nose Up reducing Parasitic Drag to stretch. There’s a limit to this as we’ll eventually bleed through L/Dmax to the Back Side and thus as we’d continue to bleed adding Drag from the Induced side of curve.
Use Pitch (trim) to control AOA (or speed as proxy) and Power for Glide Path in what some mistakenly consider Back Side though what are really Power Techniques. These work on any plane in any position of the curve. To prove this, consider Cruise flying obviously Front Side. What happens if you add Power with no other changes?
Note: Gliders use “Power Techniques” too though by simultaneously adding Drag and reducing Lift through Spoilers. Spoilers are mechanized to act with the same effect as a Throttle or Power Lever with more Spoiler Control Lever Back less Spoiler Control Lever Forward. Nominal Spoiler is midrange allowing for adjustments in both directions. Trim for AOA (or speed), Spoiler in lieu of Power for Glide Path.
Why Front Side if Power works anywhere on the curve? Delayed power responses in turbines make the power technique susceptible to PIO and not functional for many jets. Navy aircraft get around this by adding lots of drag so as to have a neutral power point significantly up in power hence turbines are already spun up hence power is more responsive.
What is true Back Side? Consider again flying with zero Power though this time on the Back Side. If you’re High, Pull Up thus Slowing and Increasing Induced Drag thus Sinking then Dump the Nose to Accelerate reducing Drag and Catch desired Glide Path. If Low, Push the Nose gaining Speed Reducing Drag to Float further. Obviously, these are uncomfortable, hence we prefer the Power Techniques. They’re also more susceptible to mistakes, hence again, we prefer Power Techniques.
While High and with Zero Power, you can Forward Slip. Technically, this is Front Side as you’re using Parasitic Drag to Drop. It is it’s own unique case, however, as you’re distorting the Drag Curve. In the Forward Slip, you are massively amplifying the Parasitic thus pushing the intersection of Induced and Parasitic Up and Left.
Does the obstacle count if its a quarter mile from the threshold?
Half as long, twice as hard 😉