Simviation Forums

Very interested to know how you all land

Depends what kind of of flying .... & I'm sure we all vary this considerably  .....  

Flying an ERJ-900 or a Piper Cub - tarmac or grass -  would definitely effect my approach method  ...

If it is available I always fly a hands-on ILS approach

VFR seat-of-the-pants.

Reminds me of the good ol' days. No radio, no navaids & no ATC except the occasional Aldis lamp or Verey flare. No bloomin' heater either.

I rarely fly in bad weather, takes the fun out of flying IMO. But when I do, I fly the ILS and I do it manuely. Don't know how to do any other instrement approaches...

"Seat of the pants" is the funnest part of flying FS 2004 for me so in good weather I just aim it down the glide slope and set her down. It's all a matter of using altitude for airspeed and reverse. Little practice and you can do it with almost anything. When the weather is bad I tune the Nav radio to the ILS and hand fly that.

If I wanted  fully automatic landings I'd have saved some money and just downloaded a video from the cockpit of an airplane approach and landing.  Just play that over and over and pretend I'm the pilot.

I always land Seat-of-pants. On long haul trips I use the GPS, but once I have visual contact of the airport, I turn it off.

GPS approach to ILS, always, if available.  Pilots use the FMC (I think-it might be something else) to program an extended centerline in real life also, so the GPS approach is the closest thing.

I usually let the MS ATC decide for me. If it's visual landing, then GPS or FMC transition then manual approach/landing with use of a VOR or NDB approach if applicable. If ILS runway, I just use the ILS and disengage 500 ft from the runway if good weather, or bad weather , monitored autoland. Of course if the crosswind is too bad, I disenage AP too and start ruddering near the threshold, but MS ATC shouldn't have been using that runway in the first place..

I alwyas do a manual approaach. because (currently) i see ILS as a pain. hope to change

I used ILS/IFR once, which actually helped me to land correctly (downwind, final, and whatnot.) but i didn't use it again due to the constant warnings from ATC.

to sum it all up, VFR and totally manual landings all the way!

For me, it really depends on the mood i am in  When im in a lazy laid back mood, id probably go for an ILS approach and then land it by hand when im say.... 5 miles or so.  

Othertimes I like to land VFR by hand when im wanting a challenge.  

Of course, it depends on the type of field as well.  My landing style on an aircraft carrier will definately be different from say if I was landing at a controlled aerodrome... or or... landing on a short field inside of a crator... or KTEX!!  ;D

..Big stuff..full ILS approach .....c172 etc...full manual seat of the pants...commoner  ;D

I follow what ATC tells me to do. I like to land on ILS because it is a little bit easier, but visuals are more exciting to do. Not always going right though (Sir Crashalot)

ILS approaches..with Jet-propelled, shiny, passenger cigar tubes... ...?
I'll have none of that hi-tech mumbo-jumbo... ...!

For me its nice little props, often with no instruments at all, and isolated air strips, concrete/grass, often with no tower, (but a hot-dog van is always welcome)... ...!

So its a constant, careful look out, note the wind direction and strength, set up for a straight-in glide, apply full carburettor heat*, close the throttle, trim the airframe, cancel carburettor heat, adjust the throttle, and complete the flare and landing depending on wether I have a tricycle or tail-dragger aircraft.
...and always be ready for a go-around if things are going a little bit pear-shaped at the last minute...!
Its always fun practicing a crab landing if the wind is a bit on the 'iffy side.. ...!

If I have a radio I just call the airfield, request landing instructions, give my current position, and wait for the reply.

I try and avoid International Airports, 'cos most of then dont like us little recreational flyers.. ...!
...and if I am not equiped with a radio and a transponder then I am generally in deep trouble with ATC... ...!
LOL...!

So, for me, its nearly always seat-of-the-pants flying, free of knob twiddling and ATC constraints.. ...!

Sorted...!

Cheers all... ...!

Paul.

* Our Hagar is not a fond user of carb heat in piston prop engines... ..., but I am paranoid about it, having experienced the danger of carburettor icing in some of my old motor cars and motor-bikes.. ...!

* Our Hagar is not a fond user of carb heat in piston prop engines... ..., but I am paranoid about it, having experienced the danger of carburettor icing in some of my old motor cars and motor-bikes.. ...!

Not quite correct Paul. The aircraft I flew weren't fitted with carb heat controls. This is automatic on Gipsy Major engines. I have no knowlege of how to use it correctly.

http://www.gasco.org.uk/upload/docs/GASCo%20paper%20final.doc

Permanently applied carburettor heat

The example is often quoted of the DHC Chipmunk which, when in military use, had its carburettor heat wired permanently on. This inevitably caused a permanent loss in engine power but it is instructive to reflect that the military decided that the loss in engine power and efficiency was a worthwhile trade off against the potential loss of aircraft resulting from carburettor icing. Considering that pilots with greater aptitude than the average GA pilot were operating these aircraft it is arguable that the military solution might have considerable relevance to GA operations and aircraft generally. Gipsy and Renault engines use heat from the side of the crankcase and if not selected will come on automatically with certain throttle settings.  This heated air which is the air that has cooled the cylinders is less intense and has worked well with very little input from the pilots over the years.