Wheelbarrowing and Flare

[Ramapriya]

Has anyone seen wheelbarrowing occur? Prima facie, it appears too
improbable (ludicrous almost) a thing to happen but even the FAA
Airplane Flying Handbook copy that I have mentions it!

Also, while the ways of performing a flare is mentioned at many places,
the reason for a flare is conspicuously absent everywhere. Just why is
a flare needed vis-a-vis a 3-point landing? After all, birds just come
in and sit, without having to flare...

Ramapriya

[PJ Hunt]

Hi Ramapriya,

Ok, I'm game. It's Christmas morning here and I just work up.

You really need to start taking flight lessons. You have way too much
interest in all this to let it go to waste.

I'll answer your last question (topic) first, since it is also related to
your first question (topic) about 3 point landings.

Wheel barrowing (also known as porpoising) is a phenomenon which can occur
when you land flat, or on the nose wheel first, in tricycle gear aircraft.
It happens, I've seen it performed perfectly a few times by student and
non-student pilots. If in fact you saw the pilot do this, then you
witnessed poor pilot technique, regardless of the aircraft he was flying.

Landing flat and especially landing on the nose wheel first is an invitation
to wheel barrow, not to mention that the nose gear is not designed to
withstand the forces generated on it from such a landing. Take a look at
any tricycle gear aircraft and compare the main gear to the nose gear and it
becomes quite obvious as to why you want to land on the mains first.

Wheelbarrowing (porpoising) can quickly damage or destroy an aircraft if not
recovered from immediately. This is but one of the reasons for the 'flare'
you questioned, along with the fact that the flare is also a means of
slowing the aircraft down, thus eventually going from flying speed, to stall
speed, to wont fly anymore hit the ground and roll out speed.

If you look at birds very closely, especially in slow motion video, you will
see that they do indeed flare just before landing. Watch their wings
closely.

A bit of a mention about 3 point landings. Technically there is no such
thing as a 3 point landing in a tricycle gear aircraft. What you saw is
referred to as 'landing flat or a flat landing'. A 3 point landing is when
referring to a tail wheel aircraft that lands on the mains and tail
simultaneously, or even the mains and then the tail touches a second later.

Now on to your second post. "3 more questions"

1. A crosswind is a crosswind, regardless of whether you are taking off or
landing. The wind is still coming from 'across' the runway rather than
straight down the runway. The procedure 'simplified' is apply whatever
rudder is required to keep the nose pointed straight down the centerline,
with ailerons deflected into the wind. As speed increases it will require
less and less rudder and aileron.

2. If you 'tilt' the wing too much you certain can, and pilots have had
engine strikes. But it takes quite an impressive bank to do so. If it
requires that much of a 'tilt' or bank, then what that is telling you is
that the crosswind is too much for that aircraft in it's current
configuration. The same can be said for not having enough rudder to keep
the nose going straight down the runway. If it's a really significant
crosswind, then it's much easier for the novice to discern that it really
does require a combination of both rudder and aileron to land.

3. You slip the aircraft by cross controlling. i.e opposite rudder and
aileron. I sudden draft, or gust, can blow an aircraft a 'off-center'
regardless of whether they are slipping or not. It's just a matter of
experience, training and anticipating and then going around if you don't
like what you're seeing. Every pilot on this form has different thresholds
as to what type of winds and gust are acceptable to them, and what type of
sight picture they're comfortable with before they tuck tail and perform a
go around.

Hope that answered your questions appropriately in my half asleep state.
But heck, that's how I fly half the time anyway.

PJ

============================================
Here's to the duck who swam a lake and never lost a feather,
May sometime another year, we all be back together.
JJW
============================================

"Ramapriya" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Has anyone seen wheelbarrowing occur? Prima facie, it appears too
> improbable (ludicrous almost) a thing to happen but even the FAA
> Airplane Flying Handbook copy that I have mentions it!
>
> Also, while the ways of performing a flare is mentioned at many places,
> the reason for a flare is conspicuously absent everywhere. Just why is
> a flare needed vis-a-vis a 3-point landing? After all, birds just come
> in and sit, without having to flare...
>
> Ramapriya
>
>

[mike regish]

I've never seen a bird land without flaring. Don't know where you got that,
but they most certainly do flare.

I used to have an ultralight and when I was fast taxi testing it, I noticed
that the back wheels got light first. It turned out it was somewhat out of
rig, but there was really nothing I could do about it. Once I got sort of
good in the thing, I used to let the back wheels come up on takeoff and
rolla long on the nosewheel for a while until it would catch a little bump
and then I'd pull the nose up. Not reall a wise thing to do, in retrospect,
but it was fun and got a lot of looks from whoever might be watching.

Also did a fairly nasty (no damage-but embarassing) late roundout in my
Tripacer once. It resulted in a pretty good bounce which I had to correct
with power for a good landing. They can get ugly quick if you don't react
right or, preferably, just go around and try again.

mike regish
"Ramapriya" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Has anyone seen wheelbarrowing occur? Prima facie, it appears too
> improbable (ludicrous almost) a thing to happen but even the FAA
> Airplane Flying Handbook copy that I have mentions it!
>
> Also, while the ways of performing a flare is mentioned at many places,
> the reason for a flare is conspicuously absent everywhere. Just why is
> a flare needed vis-a-vis a 3-point landing? After all, birds just come
> in and sit, without having to flare...
>
> Ramapriya
>
>

[[email protected]]

A student busted one of our 150s years ago by wheelbarrowing it. He'd
tried to land twice before, both times too fast and high, and had to go
around. This time he was going to land no matter what, and that's when
it happened.
A good landing starts on downwind. Get the airplane properly
positioned, at the right speed and glidepath, start the roundout when
still out of ground effect to prevent floating from excessive speed,
and touch down on the mains with the nose high. Not as easy as it
sounds.

Dan

[Journeyman]

In article om>, Ramapriya wrote:
> Has anyone seen wheelbarrowing occur? Prima facie, it appears too
> improbable (ludicrous almost) a thing to happen but even the FAA
> Airplane Flying Handbook copy that I have mentions it!

Haven't seen it myself, but it does happen. It's a result of trying to
force the airplane onto the runway before it's ready. The nose winds
up touching down first.

This is bad for several reasons. One of which is that the nose is
ahead of the plane's center of gravity, making it directionally
unstable. One result of which is the infamous ground loop.

Tailwheel airplanes have the same CG/stability issues, so when
you hear about ground loops, it's usually associated with them.


> Also, while the ways of performing a flare is mentioned at many places,
> the reason for a flare is conspicuously absent everywhere. Just why is
> a flare needed vis-a-vis a 3-point landing? After all, birds just come
> in and sit, without having to flare...

You don't spend much time watching birds, do you? They do flare.

It's not that there's an rule requiring airplanes to flare, it just
falls out naturally as you transition from a gliding descent into
level flight just above the runway. The idea is to touch down
onto the runway at very little (almost zero) sink rate.

HTH,

Morris

[Bob Moore]

"PJ Hunt" wrote

> I'll answer your last question (topic) first, since it is also related
> to your first question (topic) about 3 point landings.

PJ, note that Ramapriya's questions deal primarily with jet transports.

> Wheel barrowing (also known as porpoising)

Wheel-barrowing and porpoising are NOT the same. Wheel-barrowing always
results from a too-high speed on the ground and the airpane's attitude
remains relatively stable in a nose too-low attitude. Porpoising results
from landing on the nose wheel in a nose-low attitude resulting in the
airplane rebounding into a nose-high attitude and then repeating this
"porpoising" maneuver. Wheel-barrowing can also occur during takeoff
when one attempts to hold the airplane on the ground after normal take-
off speed.


> 2. If you 'tilt' the wing too much you certain can, and pilots have
> had engine strikes.

Jetliner takeoff wings-level to avoid this situation.

> The same can be said for not having enough rudder to keep the nose
> going straight down the runway.

That's what the nose-wheel steering is for.

> 3. You slip the aircraft by cross controlling.

Never done in jetliners...too uncomfortable for the passengers.

Bob Moore
CFI ATP B-707 B-727

[Bob Moore]

"Ramapriya" wrote

> Also, while the ways of performing a flare is mentioned at many places,
> the reason for a flare is conspicuously absent everywhere. Just why is
> a flare needed vis-a-vis a 3-point landing? After all, birds just come
> in and sit, without having to flare...

The flare reduces the rate of descent for a smooth touchdown. Normal
rate of descent during approach is probably 500-800 fpm and one would
really like to touchdown at less than 100fpm. Of course, the flare
also keeps one from putting too much stress on the relatively weaker
nosewheel.

Note that jets landing on an aircraft carrier do not flare.

Bob Moore

[zatatime]

On 25 Dec 2004 02:00:24 -0800, "Ramapriya" > wrote:

>Has anyone seen wheelbarrowing occur? Prima facie, it appears too
>improbable (ludicrous almost) a thing to happen but even the FAA
>Airplane Flying Handbook copy that I have mentions it!

Saw one today by someone who was obviously uncomfortable in their new
Bonanza.

z

[G.R. Patterson III]

Ramapriya wrote:
>
> Has anyone seen wheelbarrowing occur? Prima facie, it appears too
> improbable (ludicrous almost) a thing to happen but even the FAA
> Airplane Flying Handbook copy that I have mentions it!

I've seen it at least twice. The worst case was a Cessna trying to get in before
the field closed for the Sussex County Airshow. The nosewheel hit first and
bounced. Then the mains hit and bounced. The nosewheel came down again, harder.
The plane started porpoising. The third time the nosewheel hit, the tire was
nearly flattened. The noise was impressive. He managed to keep it down on the
fourth strike -- I think the plane had just given up trying to fly by that time.

> Also, while the ways of performing a flare is mentioned at many places,
> the reason for a flare is conspicuously absent everywhere. Just why is
> a flare needed vis-a-vis a 3-point landing?

Typically, the nosegear is more delicate than the mains. The steering mechanism
also may give trouble at high speeds (shimmy is a problem with many designs).
The general idea is to keep the nosewheel off the ground until you're sure there
won't be a problem.

It's also true that the consequences of "wheelbarrowing" can be severe. If the
nosewheel touches before the mains, the back end of the plane continues down
until the mains hit. Once the mains hit, the back end stops traveling down, but
the plane continues to rotate, and the nose wheel leaves the ground again.
Over-reaction by the pilot may cause the nosewheel to come back down even
harder. There have been cases of prop strikes, flattened tires, loss of
directional control, and even cases in which the nosegear broke off. And doing
it in front a a thousand people or so is embarrassing. Flaring properly is an
excellent way of ensuring that this never happens to you.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[Journeyman]

In article >, Bob Moore wrote:
> "Ramapriya" wrote
>
> Note that jets landing on an aircraft carrier do not flare.

Jets do not land on carriers. They make controlled crashes.


Morris (yeah, old joke, but someone had to say it)

[Roger]

On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 23:23:57 GMT, zatatime > wrote:

> On 25 Dec 2004 02:00:24 -0800, "Ramapriya" > wrote:
>
>>Has anyone seen wheelbarrowing occur? Prima facie, it appears too
>>improbable (ludicrous almost) a thing to happen but even the FAA
>>Airplane Flying Handbook copy that I have mentions it!
>
>Saw one today by someone who was obviously uncomfortable in their new
>Bonanza.

The curse of the Bo pilot<G> According to the Bo specific Pilot
Proficiency training I went to, most Bo pilots land their planes way
too fast. They really had to work to get most of them to slow down.
>
OTOH you should have heard the complaints when told they were going to
do full departure stalls with the yoke blocked so they couldn't use
the ailerons. <LOL>

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>z

[Roger]

On 25 Dec 2004 02:00:24 -0800, "Ramapriya" > wrote:

>Has anyone seen wheelbarrowing occur? Prima facie, it appears too

I've seen it a couple of times, but porpoising is much more common.
Wheelbarrowing is due to forcing the plane down when it's still going
too fast to land.

Porpoising OTOH is from not getting the nose up soon enough. The plane
is rotating (nose coming up) when the nose wheel hits first, this
leads to the nose rebounding up and the mains come down and rebound.
You can get some pretty dramatic bounces this way.

The best way to stop a porpoise is to just give it the power and go
around.

The typical porpoise ends up with the pilot behind the airplane (OK so
it started that way), and each bounce gets bigger. They say three
times and out. I saw two instances where this was true. On the third
time they busted the nose gear right off on both planes.

>improbable (ludicrous almost) a thing to happen but even the FAA
>Airplane Flying Handbook copy that I have mentions it!

Some well known planes are quite prone to porpoising if the pilot gets
behind it. They are a bit heavy up front although the CG is fine. The
problem comes in landing. That is why you see cautions about checking
firewalls for wrinkles when purchasing a used plane.

>
>Also, while the ways of performing a flare is mentioned at many places,
>the reason for a flare is conspicuously absent everywhere. Just why is

Actually it's not. *Almost* anything that flys flares on landing
whether it has jet engines or feathers.

>a flare needed vis-a-vis a 3-point landing? After all, birds just come
>in and sit, without having to flare...

Virtually all the birds I've seen flare and they are really good at it
with many almost coming to a stop just before their feet touch down.

As some one else mentioned, with your interest you should take up
flying if you haven't already.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

>
>Ramapriya

[Frankster]

I've seen porpoising. And wheelbarrowing. Very bad juju! Very dangerous.
Everyone *must* learn not to do either!

The most physically dangerous thing that I see with porpoising is the
possibility of stalling at the top of the second or third porpoise, after
the a/c finally runs out of lift, while you are 15-20 feet off of the
ground! Not good.

-Frank

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Ramapriya wrote:
>>
>> Has anyone seen wheelbarrowing occur? Prima facie, it appears too
>> improbable (ludicrous almost) a thing to happen but even the FAA
>> Airplane Flying Handbook copy that I have mentions it!
>
> I've seen it at least twice. The worst case was a Cessna trying to get in
> before
> the field closed for the Sussex County Airshow. The nosewheel hit first
> and
> bounced. Then the mains hit and bounced. The nosewheel came down again,
> harder.
> The plane started porpoising. The third time the nosewheel hit, the tire
> was
> nearly flattened. The noise was impressive. He managed to keep it down on
> the
> fourth strike -- I think the plane had just given up trying to fly by that
> time.
>
>> Also, while the ways of performing a flare is mentioned at many places,
>> the reason for a flare is conspicuously absent everywhere. Just why is
>> a flare needed vis-a-vis a 3-point landing?
>
> Typically, the nosegear is more delicate than the mains. The steering
> mechanism
> also may give trouble at high speeds (shimmy is a problem with many
> designs).
> The general idea is to keep the nosewheel off the ground until you're sure
> there
> won't be a problem.
>
> It's also true that the consequences of "wheelbarrowing" can be severe. If
> the
> nosewheel touches before the mains, the back end of the plane continues
> down
> until the mains hit. Once the mains hit, the back end stops traveling
> down, but
> the plane continues to rotate, and the nose wheel leaves the ground again.
> Over-reaction by the pilot may cause the nosewheel to come back down even
> harder. There have been cases of prop strikes, flattened tires, loss of
> directional control, and even cases in which the nosegear broke off. And
> doing
> it in front a a thousand people or so is embarrassing. Flaring properly is
> an
> excellent way of ensuring that this never happens to you.
>
> George Patterson
> The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[zatatime]

On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 22:11:36 -0500, Roger
> wrote:

>>Saw one today by someone who was obviously uncomfortable in their new
>>Bonanza.
>
>The curse of the Bo pilot<G> According to the Bo specific Pilot
>Proficiency training I went to, most Bo pilots land their planes way
>too fast. They really had to work to get most of them to slow down.

From general observation, I totally agree. The guy today was carrying
significant power all the way to the runway and must've touched down
at around 100 - half way down the 3500 foot strip. I could see him
where I stood, and he looked busier than anything I can make an
analogy for. I kind of felt bad for him.

>OTOH you should have heard the complaints when told they were going to
>do full departure stalls with the yoke blocked so they couldn't use
>the ailerons. <LOL>

That made me laugh! God forbid they need to do something they'll
learn from!

z

[Morgans]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote

>And doing it (nosewheel landings) in front a a thousand people or so is
>embarrassing. Flaring properly is an excellent way of ensuring that this
>never happens to you.
>
> George Patterson


George, is this a confession? <g> ducking and running
--
Jim in NC

[G.R. Patterson III]

Morgans wrote:
>
> "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote
>
> >And doing it (nosewheel landings) in front a a thousand people or so is
> >embarrassing. Flaring properly is an excellent way of ensuring that this
> >never happens to you.
> >
> > George Patterson
>
> George, is this a confession? <g> ducking and running

Nope -- still thinking about that Cessna pilot at Sussex.

I fly a Maule. There's an entire 'nother category of possibilities for
embarassment. We won't discuss my first arrival at Oshkosh ( at least I didn't
run down the Ford tri-motor).

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[Ramapriya]

Mackfly wrote:
> >From: "Ramapriya"
>
> who seems to not know a lot about flying or birds---yes bird do
flare!!!!!!

Relax, mate. I've never claimed I know anything but nothing, though I
hope not to remain at this level forever :)

Cheers,

Ramapriya

[Brian Burger]

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004, G.R. Patterson III wrote:
> Morgans wrote:
> >
> > "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote
> >
> > >And doing it (nosewheel landings) in front a a thousand people or so is
> > >embarrassing. Flaring properly is an excellent way of ensuring that this
> > >never happens to you.
> > >
> > > George Patterson
> >
> > George, is this a confession? <g> ducking and running
>
> Nope -- still thinking about that Cessna pilot at Sussex.
>
> I fly a Maule. There's an entire 'nother category of possibilities for
> embarassment.

"There are two categories of tailwheel pilot: those who have groundlooped
their aircraft, and those who will."

Been there, done that, just once. Didn't ding self, plane or runway
lights, and went up to do another two touch-n-goes to get back on the
horse that threw me...

The wind was gusty & getting close to my X-wind limits (nowhere near the
Citabria's limits, just my personal ones at the time...), so I planned one
last touch-n-go before the full stop. My approach was squirrelly, the wind
gusted hard just at touchdown, and I may have tapped the brakes;
the next thing I knew I was rolling down one of 09's taxiways and Tower
was saying, "Juliet Tango Mike, you OK out there?"

I should have gone into the grass, but Golf taxiway was at exactly the
right spot for me... Got the plane looked at when I went back to the Club;
no stress on it. I was another matter!

> We won't discuss my first arrival at Oshkosh ( at least I didn't
> run down the Ford tri-motor).

Likewise, I missed the runway lights!

Brian
www.warbard.ca/avgas/

[Dale]

In article >,
Roger > wrote:



> I've seen it a couple of times, but porpoising is much more common.
> Wheelbarrowing is due to forcing the plane down when it's still going
> too fast to land.

I guess I'm just more creative. I was getting a check-out in a 207 long
ago. There was just the CFI and me in the airplane, not a lot of gas.
The first takeoff we used 10 or 20 flap, I guess I held a little forward
pressure on the yoke because I was worried about this "big, heavy, fast
airplane" coming off the ground to slow. <G> The initial liftoff was
main wheels first. I can tell you from experience that a 207 doesn't
handle well with just the nosewheel on the ground. Since I wasn't doing
very well driving it I rotated to try flying it and things calmed down.
I have NEVER done that again.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

[Jay Honeck]

> I've seen it a couple of times, but porpoising is much more common.

We had a friend earn his ticket in Iowa City a few years ago who porpoised a
rental Archer so badly that the nosewheel collapsed and the engine had to be
torn down. The prop was a total loss, too, of course.

Sadly, it rattled him so badly that he absolutely disappeared off the face
of the earth after that episode. I've never seen him again, and I presume
he's quit flying.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[john smith]

Ramapriya, this website will answer many of your questions.

http://www.av8n.com/how/

[G.R. Patterson III]

Brian Burger wrote:
>
> "There are two categories of tailwheel pilot: those who have groundlooped
> their aircraft, and those who will."
>
> Been there, done that, just once.

So far, the only time I've done it was deliberately. Landed long on a grass
strip. The trees were approaching rapidly, so about 60' short of them, I locked
the right brake. She spun around just as advertised. The left wingtip got within
3' of the ground. The next time I changed the tires (years later), I found
blades of grass trapped between the bead to the left tire and the rim.

Don't mistake that for a claim that I've kept the plane under perfect control
during all my landings. :-)

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> Sadly, it rattled him so badly that he absolutely disappeared off the face
> of the earth after that episode. I've never seen him again, and I presume
> he's quit flying.

Probably still making installments on the damage bill.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[Morgans]

"Brian Burger" > wrote

> the next thing I knew I was rolling down one of 09's taxiways and Tower
> was saying, "Juliet Tango Mike, you OK out there?"
>
> Brian

The proper response for that situation should have been, "Give me a minute.
I ain't done crashin', yet!" <VBG>
--
Jim in NC

[Brian Burger]

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004, Morgans wrote:

>
> "Brian Burger" > wrote
>
> > the next thing I knew I was rolling down one of 09's taxiways and Tower
> > was saying, "Juliet Tango Mike, you OK out there?"
> >
> > Brian
>
> The proper response for that situation should have been, "Give me a minute.
> I ain't done crashin', yet!" <VBG>

<grin> I've heard that joke too; thankfully it didn't really apply in my
case - no damage to self or plane!

I think my reply was something like, "Uh, yeah Tower, I'm OK; I'd like to
switch to Ground for the taxi back to 09 for another takeoff..."

The next two landings went fine; Tower might have been holding their
breath a bit though! A strong coffee after landing helped me a great
deal... :)

Brian.
www.warbard.ca/avgas/

[[email protected]]

Wheelbarrowing and porpoising are very different things. In
wheelbarrowing, insufficient back pressure leads to directional
instability. A fairly common response is to release even more back
pressure and concentrate on trying to steer, which immediately makes
things worse as the airplane swerves sown the runway in a series of
overcorrections.

In porpoising, the aircraft's nosewheel hits, causing it to bounce in
the air, drop to the runway, and repeat. This is often a divergent
oscillation -- the amplitude increases with each bounce until either
back pressure is applied or the energy decreases sufficiently. It
usually happens on touchdown.

A nosewheel landing usually results in a porpoise. Releasing back
pressure on rollout (often in crosswinds) is the normal way to initiate
wheelbarrowing. On Cessnas, retracting flaps for a touch and go
without adding back pressure can start the wheelbarrow.

Paul

[Cub Driver]

On 28 Dec 2004 07:24:15 -0800, wrote:

>In porpoising, the aircraft's nosewheel hits,

I probably shouldn't say this, but taildraggers can porpoise too.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
Cub Driver > wrote:

> On 28 Dec 2004 07:24:15 -0800, wrote:
>
> >In porpoising, the aircraft's nosewheel hits,
>
> I probably shouldn't say this, but taildraggers can porpoise too.


Just remember the old adage:
"A nosegear is nNOT a *landing* gear!

[Roger]

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 00:17:49 -0500, "Morgans"
> wrote:

>
>"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote
>
>>And doing it (nosewheel landings) in front a a thousand people or so is
>>embarrassing. Flaring properly is an excellent way of ensuring that this
>>never happens to you.
>>
>> George Patterson
>
>
>George, is this a confession? <g> ducking and running

Welll... on one of our Young Eagle Saturdays for EAA Chapter 1093 we
had a Beech Musketeer, or Mousekateer start a porpoise in front of
about a hundred or so spectators., many of which were getting to send
their kids out for a ride. He busted the nose gear off on the third
bounce. What an impression that must have made.

To top it off he landed down wind. Fortunately it was a light wind.

We explained to the audience he wasn't any one any of us knew.
Probably from one of those big cities.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger]

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:42:18 -0500, "Morgans"
> wrote:

>
>"Brian Burger" > wrote
>
>> the next thing I knew I was rolling down one of 09's taxiways and Tower
>> was saying, "Juliet Tango Mike, you OK out there?"
>>
>> Brian
>
> The proper response for that situation should have been, "Give me a minute.
>I ain't done crashin', yet!" <VBG>

Ahhh... Stand by one, I'm busy counting seat cushions.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[G.R. Patterson III]

Cub Driver wrote:
>
> I probably shouldn't say this, but taildraggers can porpoise too.

Mine loves to. My wife refers to landing practice as "dribbling the plane."

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

[john smith]

That was back in his tricycle days.
Since he became a "taildragger" pilot, he doesn't do that anymore.

>>"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote
>>>And doing it (nosewheel landings) in front a a thousand people or so is
>>>embarrassing. Flaring properly is an excellent way of ensuring that this
>>>never happens to you.
>>>George Patterson
>>
>>Roger wrote:
>>George, is this a confession? <g> ducking and running

[Brian Burger]

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004, G.R. Patterson III wrote:

> Cub Driver wrote:
> >
> > I probably shouldn't say this, but taildraggers can porpoise too.
>
> Mine loves to. My wife refers to landing practice as "dribbling the plane."

Ouch. That's a vivid phrase.

On a related topic, C172s can do very good kangaroo impressions!

Thankfully, this was during training for my Night Rating (I was new to
172s, as well), so darkness kept the audience minimal!

Brian
PP-ASEL/Night
http://www.warbard.ca/avgas/

[Cub Driver]

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 21:10:57 -0800, Brian Burger
> wrote:

>On a related topic, C172s can do very good kangaroo impressions!

Actually, kangarooing or better yet rooing is a more accurate phrase
than porpoising.

Easier to spell, too.

[Cub Driver]

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:28:08 -0500, BUFF5200 > wrote:

>> Note that jets landing on an aircraft carrier do not flare.
>
>But their landing gear is stressed for 2,000 fpm descent rate.

Yes, every carrier landing is essentially a crash landing, or so they
tell me.

I'm not conscious that I flare, either. Does one flare when making a
wheelie on a conventional-gear aircraft?

Did the Wright Bros flare, or were they making crash landings also?

[BUFF5200]

Bob Moore wrote:

> Note that jets landing on an aircraft carrier do not flare.

But their landing gear is stressed for 2,000 fpm descent rate.

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 18:35:35 -0600, Journeyman
> wrote:

>In article >, Bob Moore wrote:
>> "Ramapriya" wrote
>>
>> Note that jets landing on an aircraft carrier do not flare.
>
>Jets do not land on carriers. They make controlled crashes.
>
>
>Morris (yeah, old joke, but someone had to say it)

I've heard it said that Navy pilots basically fly the airplane into
the carrier.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <1104445981.bbab3be025bbb3c0b0b08c046e6f0180@terane ws>,
wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 18:35:35 -0600, Journeyman
> > wrote:
>
> >In article >, Bob Moore
> >wrote:
> >> "Ramapriya" wrote
> >>
> >> Note that jets landing on an aircraft carrier do not flare.
> >
> >Jets do not land on carriers. They make controlled crashes.
> >
> >
> >Morris (yeah, old joke, but someone had to say it)
>
> I've heard it said that Navy pilots basically fly the airplane into
> the carrier.


If the aircraft is reusable, it is a great landing; if the pilot walks
away, it is a good landing; if the pilot merely survives, it is an OK
landing. ;>)

[Darrell S]

Navy pilots say flaring to land is like squatting to pee. Real men don't do
it!

--

Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler History: http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/
-

> wrote in message
news:1104445981.bbab3be025bbb3c0b0b08c046e6f0180@t eranews...
> On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 18:35:35 -0600, Journeyman
> > wrote:
>
>>In article >, Bob Moore
>>wrote:
>>> "Ramapriya" wrote
>>>
>>> Note that jets landing on an aircraft carrier do not flare.
>>
>>Jets do not land on carriers. They make controlled crashes.
>>
>>
>>Morris (yeah, old joke, but someone had to say it)
>
> I've heard it said that Navy pilots basically fly the airplane into
> the carrier.
>

[[email protected]]

Cub Driver wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:28:08 -0500, BUFF5200 >
wrote:
>
> I'm not conscious that I flare, either. Does one flare when making a
> wheelie on a conventional-gear aircraft?

Yes. They have to reduce the sink rate to a minimum before
touching down, and then raise the tail a bit to keep the wheels
planted. Banging the mains on with insufficient flare causes what we
know as "jackrabbiting" down the runway, and propstrikes are often the
result.

Dan