Jacobson Flair

I'm impressed Turbo......I've never noticed that you had a sense of humour before. This thread seems to have demonstrated you are actually capable of comprehending and using tongue in cheek sarcasm.

At least I hope that's what it is.....

 Depends on whether the controls are powered and the rate of response to the controls being applied. High inertia aircraft will stay tracking on centreline for longer then lighties that get blown away by the wind. as soon as the wings are level. Hence the "land on one wheel" manner of doing it. Many jets have a clearance problem with flap trailing edges or underslung engine nacelles touching the runway at relatively small bank angles.. A highwing gives maximum opportunity to Counter the X wind component as long as the you don't run out of rudder effect and you are game enough to go there. Nev

Seems you have to have lots of technical graphs and mental maths to be able to land an aircraft, how did people manage in the olden days? I opened that file on the Jacobson flair and  couldn't get past the second paragraph without falling asleep.

Referencing the olden days again the advice to land a Tiger was throttle off and land, that was all. No dire warnings about shock cooling or standard or non standard glide slopes. Seems it was all very easy, how did they manage without the Jacobson flair?

All the theory is too much for me, I just land the aircraft, learning from each one. 

Seems you have to have lots of technical graphs and mental maths to be able to land an aircraft, how did people manage in the olden days? I opened that file on the Jacobson flair and  couldn't get past the second paragraph without falling asleep.

Referencing the olden days again the advice to land a Tiger was throttle off and land, that was all. No dire warnings about shock cooling or standard or non standard glide slopes. Seems it was all very easy, how did they manage without the Jacobson flair?

 

All the theory is too much for me, I just land the aircraft, learning from each one. 

I suspect your the one that will get from point A to point B way faster. He first has to start with a flare.

Looks like you've got a flair for it.

I'm glad someone is finally working that angle . 

My brain hurts. Too much overload and too hot to go flying☹️

Seems you have to have lots of technical graphs and mental maths to be able to land an aircraft, how did people manage in the olden days?

But as soon as they became high-performance (ie military) and had to fly any weather, any airfield, any time - to loss 1-2% due to crash landings on every sortie appeared to be normal

No probs Antonts, still much the same these days.

Just go and fly, simple

I notice that the issue of slipping approaches - the perceived safety of them - has come up again in this thread.

Those who've been on here for a while will remember that 5 years back there was an epic thread started by pmccarthy.

It stretched to more than 400 posts and generated lots of heat and light.

It was called Steering on Final with Rudder.

For those who've got a few days to spare (and since it's too hot to go flying)  here's a link to it:

But for me, the in-a-nutshell, take-home-message was this part of DJP's post on Page 5 (#112):

'From the USA FAA's Airplane Flying Handbook "Unlike skids, however, if an airplane in a slip is made to stall, it displays very little of the yawing tendency that causes a skidding stall to develop into a spin. The airplane in a slip may do little more than tend to roll into a wings level attitude. In fact, in some airplanes stall characteristics may even be improved (p. 8-11)."

From Noel Kruse's Book #1, Aerodynamics and Other Stuff page 224 at http://www.flybetter.com.au/

"Well many instructors believe that a sideslip is a precursor to a spin (!) because the speed is low and the controls are in a similar ‘out of balance’ position. This is a misconception brought about by their lack of understanding of spinning. Let me put it simply; you can no more spin off a properly ‘set up’ side slipping approach than you can off a properly set up ‘straight’ approach."

From Rich Stowell's book, Stall/Spin Awareness page 335: "A properly executed slip takes us further from the critical angle of attack than even wings-level, coordinated flight. Furthermore, the yaw and roll coupling needed to drive a spin not only is missing, but yaw and roll as as far from coupled as possible during a slip. Slipping actually provides a greater stall/spin margin than even normal cruise flight."

Depending on the aeroplane type there may be some uncommanded roll enough to scare some-one the first time he/she encounters it nevertheless sideslips are inherently spin resistant.

(Of course, I and the authors above only ever refer to behaviour of certified aircraft.)'

No probs Antonts, still much the same these days.

Just go and fly, simple

All the theory is too much for me, I just land the aircraft, learning from each one. 

 Landing on 70-80 kn what we are doing today is not the same as landing on tiger moth which cruises on 60 and lands on 30. It differs. Some things are easier (crosswind), some things are much worse due to speed.

I do fly heavier/faster machines and the basic procedure is still the same, throttle off and land.

 ... and from what I know about your flying career so far, Mr.Glenn, I reckon you'd have had way more than 100,000 of those lessons by now.