How to Set Up an Approach

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

"There is more than one path to the top of the mountain". Flying is a great example of this. Whether performing a normal landing, a quick stop, an autorotation, power checks, confined area operations, etc. there are usually a few different techniques that can be used to obtain the same result [or a very similar result].

 

I would like to gather everyone's insight on setting up, and maintaining, the desired approach angle for landing.

 

 

I teach my students that the approach angle [steep, normal, shallow] is primarily controlled with the cyclic. Maintaining the desired angle is largely about controlling your forward speed [rate of closure]. The the steeper the angle, the slower you must be flying to maintain the angle. If the angle is becoming steeper, you should decelerate to avoid over-shooting. If the angle is becoming shallow, you should increase your forward speed to avoid landing short. Both of these actions require subtle adjustments w/ the collective [see below].

 

The collective is a 'Secondary' control, that is adjusted as needed to maintain a consistent, stable rate of descent [descending at or below 300'/min- even lower for a shallow approach]. 'Secondary' is not to imply that the collective is unimportant. Any change in cyclic pitch will require coordination w/ the collective. Windshear & turbulence on approach will also require subtle adjustments to the collective to maintain a consistent rate of descent. Decelerating below ETL will require a smooth increase of collective to prevent the ROD from increasing ["falling through"].

 

The pedals are used to keep the aircraft in trim. If your course along the ground is not aligned directly with the wind, you will be crabbing during the approach. This increases stability and reduces drag, improving performance. At approximately 20'AGL the nose should be aligned with your ground track [if landing with a crosswind you will now be out of trim]. My reasoning for this is that if you have a total or partial loss of engine power, you don't want to be coming in sideways and risk dynamic roll-over.

 

Your eyes should be outside. Occasionally I will cover the A/S indicator, VSI and altimeter *while teaching [i do not cover the tachometer, manifold pressure gauge, and engine gauges/warning lights]. In my opinion, everything is relative. There is no specific A/S to maintain, no specific height AGL at which to begin the approach. The objective should be to stay out of the H/V curve as long as possible, and maintain a height AGL that would allow for a successful autorotation for as long as possible.

 

Once you have initiated the approach, you should be assessing the angle constantly and make the appropriate speed [cyclic] correction to maintain it. Small adjustments are made to the collective to keep a consistently slow ROD [i tell my students that the helicopter should feel well supported- no sensation of falling or rushing down, only 'floating']. Pedals for trim. And a quick sweep over your power instruments as you increase collective.

 

One method that I am not particularly fond of is using the collective as the 'Primary' control. With this technique, if the angle becomes steeper, reduce collective & increase ROD to maintain it. If the approach angle becomes shallow, increase collective and temporarily level off to rejoin the 'normal' approach angle.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

*Edit

[Mikemv]

Your kidding about all of this , right?

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

Your kidding about all of this , right?

 

Too much over a 'simple' subject?

[Guest pokey]

i am still wondering if i should keep trying to make sense of this approach and read it again

 

edited because i did read it again: makes sense now---hovever it is hard to learn how to fly a helicopter on a forum

 

edited again because i think i confused myself reading it for the 3rd time

 

edited yet once again to verify the fact that i did confuse myself

Edited April 24, 2013 by pokey

[Flying Pig]

Chop it and drop it works pretty well.

[iChris]

I would like to gather everyone's insight on setting up, and maintaining, the desired approach angle for landing.

 

 

I teach my students that the approach angle [steep, normal, shallow] is primarily controlled with the cyclic. Maintaining the desired angle is largely about controlling your forward speed [rate of closure]. ??????

 

 

Too much over a 'simple' subject?

 

Too much incorrect information over a "not so simple" subject.

 

Start by checking the PTS and reading the recommended reference. Make sure your students get at least the basics.

 

References: FAA-H-8083-21A pg. 9-19; POH/RFM. Also check the new Helicopter Oral Exam Guide pg. CFI-33

 

Objective: To determine that the applicant:

 

1. Exhibits knowledge of the elements related to normal and crosswind approach.

2. Considers performance data, to include height/velocity information.

3. Considers the wind conditions, landing surface, and obstacles.

4. Selects a suitable termination point.

5. Establishes and maintains the normal approach angle, and

rate of closure.

Edited April 24, 2013 by iChris

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

Too much incorrect information over a "not so simple" subject.

 

Start by checking the PTS and reading the recommended reference.

 

 

References: FAA-H-8083-21A pg. 9-19; POH/RFM.

Objective: To determine that the applicant:

 

1. Exhibits knowledge of the elements related to normal and crosswind approach.

2. Considers performance data, to include height/velocity information.

3. Considers the wind conditions, landing surface, and obstacles.

4. Selects a suitable termination point.

5. Establishes and maintains the normal approach angle, and

rate of closure.

 

I wouldn't say that incorrect information was posted. Perhaps it wasn't articulated well as there seems to be some confusion to the point I was trying to make.

 

And I agree that this isn't a simple subject. I'm sure we've all met atleast one pilot that only flies by'feel' without applying theory. They let the aircraft fly them. And when approach gets sloppy they blame it on the aircraft, wind or bad juju.

[DS_HMMR]

Nearly Retired, is this you?

 

The approach method I prefer is an extended right hand, just below chest level; thumb up. Make eye contact and smile. Introduce yourself and when the gesture is reciprocated, begin networking.

Edited April 24, 2013 by DS_HMMR

[iChris]

I teach my students that the approach angle [steep, normal, shallow] is primarily controlled with the cyclic. Maintaining the desired angle is largely about controlling your forward speed [rate of closure]. The the steeper the angle, the slower you must be flying to maintain the angle. If the angle is becoming steeper, you should decelerate to avoid over-shooting. If the angle is becoming shallow, you should increase your forward speed to avoid landing short. Both of these actions require subtle adjustments w/ the collective [see below].

 

Is this what your school teaches?

[Guest pokey]

i do believe what he/she is saying,,, has lost alot from the cockpit to the keyboard--at least i hope so

[HeliUtah]

I highly recommend getting yourself a copy of the Helicopter Flying Handbook (you can download it from faa.gov) and read the section on approaches. This might shed some light as to why everyone is so confused and/or confounded by your 'method'.

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

Is this what your school teaches?

 

This is what I teach. My colleagues teach in a different manner, but the end result is the same. All of our students are all trained to land the aircraft in a safe, efficient manner. When I put one of my students up for a stage check, they perform to the standards that are expected at my school [and we keep the bar quite high...].

 

I feel that translation is being lost in typing this. As we are not able to meet in person [perhaps one day], I will continue thinking of a better way to articulate and explain my original post.

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

And I realize that the FAA Helicopter Flying Handbook states that the collective controls the 'angle of approach'.

 

There is more than one way to land a helicopter safely. The FAA recommends using the collcetive to increase/decrease ROD to maintain the approach angle. That works, and obviously a lot of pilots use this technique.

 

I prefer to maintain a constant ROD and manipulate speed as necessary to maintain the angle.

 

Personal preference, not saying it's my way or the highway.

[iChris]

This is what I teach. My colleagues teach in a different manner, but the end result is the same.

 

I feel that translation is being lost in typing this. As we are not able to meet in person [perhaps one day], I will continue thinking of a better way to articulate and explain my original post.

 

 

And I realize that the FAA Helicopter Flying Handbook states that the collective controls the 'angle of approach'.

 

There is more than one way to land a helicopter safely. The FAA recommends using the collcetive to increase/decrease ROD to maintain the approach angle. That works, and obviously a lot of pilots use this technique.

 

I prefer to maintain a constant ROD and manipulate speed as necessary to maintain the angle.

 

Personal preference, not saying it's my way or the highway.

 

Is this a Part 141 school ?

 

Make sure your students get at least the basics. Your school should have some type of standardization training to make sure each instructor is teaching the same basic fundamentals. Otherwise, you’ve done your students a disservice.

 

Your school could have the local DPE do some recurrent standardization training with all the instructors two or three times a year.

 

Check the following References:

 

FAA-H-8083-21A pg. 9-19

Also check the new Helicopter Oral Exam Guide pg. CFI-33

 

If they conflicts with what you’re currently teaching stop teaching it your way and start teaching it by the book.

Edited April 25, 2013 by iChris

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

Is this a Part 141 school ?

 

Make sure your students get at least the basics. Your school should have some type of standardization training to make sure each instructor is teaching the same basic fundamentals. Otherwise, you’ve done your students a disservice.

 

Your school could have the local DPE do some recurrent standardization training with all the instructors two or three times a year.

 

Check the following References:

 

FAA-H-8083-21A pg. 9-19

Also check the new Helicopter Oral Exam Guide pg. CFI-33

 

If they conflicts with what you’re currently teaching stop teaching it your way and start teach it by the book.

 

I asked for insight and appreciate that you have taken the time to give me your feedback.

 

I am detecting that you may be under the impression that there is a fault in the way I am teaching.

 

While not a 141 school, standardization is very important to me and the other instructors. I can put any one of my 14 students with another instructor at my school and they will demonstrate all of the fundamentals that are expected.

 

I also believe that there are different teaching styles and that there is more than one correct way to teach something. Deviating from 'the book' is not a fault as long as the end result is safe, efficient and results in meaningful learning.

[Wally]

"There is more than one path to the top of the mountain". Flying is a great example of this. Whether performing a normal landing, a quick stop, an autorotation, power checks, confined area operations, etc. there are usually a few different techniques that can be used to obtain the same result [or a very similar result].

 

I would like to gather everyone's insight on setting up, and maintaining, the desired approach angle for landing.

 

 

I teach my students that the approach angle [steep, normal, shallow] is primarily controlled with the cyclic. Maintaining the desired angle is largely about controlling your forward speed [rate of closure]. The the steeper the angle, the slower you must be flying to maintain the angle. If the angle is becoming steeper, you should decelerate to avoid over-shooting. If the angle is becoming shallow, you should increase your forward speed to avoid landing short. Both of these actions require subtle adjustments w/ the collective [see below].

 

The collective is a 'Secondary' control, that is adjusted as needed to maintain a consistent, stable rate of descent [descending at or below 300'/min- even lower for a shallow approach]. 'Secondary' is not to imply that the collective is unimportant. Any change in cyclic pitch will require coordination w/ the collective. Windshear & turbulence on approach will also require subtle adjustments to the collective to maintain a consistent rate of descent. Decelerating below ETL will require a smooth increase of collective to prevent the ROD from increasing ["falling through"].

 

The pedals are used to keep the aircraft in trim. If your course along the ground is not aligned directly with the wind, you will be crabbing during the approach. This increases stability and reduces drag, improving performance. At approximately 20'AGL the nose should be aligned with your ground track [if landing with a crosswind you will now be out of trim]. My reasoning for this is that if you have a total or partial loss of engine power, you don't want to be coming in sideways and risk dynamic roll-over.

 

Your eyes should be outside. Occasionally I will cover the A/S indicator, VSI and altimeter *while teaching [i do not cover the tachometer, manifold pressure gauge, and engine gauges/warning lights]. In my opinion, everything is relative. There is no specific A/S to maintain, no specific height AGL at which to begin the approach. The objective should be to stay out of the H/V curve as long as possible, and maintain a height AGL that would allow for a successful autorotation for as long as possible.

 

Once you have initiated the approach, you should be assessing the angle constantly and make the appropriate speed [cyclic] correction to maintain it. Small adjustments are made to the collective to keep a consistently slow ROD [i tell my students that the helicopter should feel well supported- no sensation of falling or rushing down, only 'floating']. Pedals for trim. And a quick sweep over your power instruments as you increase collective.

 

One method that I am not particularly fond of is using the collective as the 'Primary' control. With this technique, if the angle becomes steeper, reduce collective & increase ROD to maintain it. If the approach angle becomes shallow, increase collective and temporarily level off to rejoin the 'normal' approach angle.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

*Edit

 

It's been 3 decades and 60,000 landings since I taught this, but... You mathematically CAN'T maintain a constant rate of descent throughout an approach. Holding a 10° approach angle as you initiate at "X" knots is going to involve a descent rate of "Y" fpm. As your airspeed slows, your descent rate has to slow proportionately.

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

It's been 3 decades and 60,000 landings since I taught this, but... You mathematically CAN'T maintain a constant rate of descent throughout an approach. Holding a 10° approach angle as you initiate at "X" knots is going to involve a descent rate of "Y" fpm. As your airspeed slows, your descent rate has to slow proportionately.

 

You're absolutely correct. I mis-spoke before. A reduction in forward speed dictates a reduction in ROD. Otherwise the approach angle wold be a curve [the descent would 'out-run' your forward movement].

 

What I should have said is that your relative rate of descent appears to be constant.

 

Much the same way your relative rate of closure appears to stay the same [maintaining a 'normal' walking pace]. In reality your are progressively decelerating as you get lower in the approach.

 

I still stand by the basics. In my mind, forward speed is the primary element I look at when intercepting an maintaining the approach angle. With what you've said in mind, the ROD is consistently low, but not necessarily set at a specific value.

[Mikemv]

H_G_P,

 

What school is this that this teaching method is being taught?

 

"There is no specific A/S to maintain, no specific height AGL at which to begin the approach. The objective should be to stay out of the H/V curve as long as possible, and maintain a height AGL that would allow for a successful autorotation for as long as possible".

 

You mention that you keep the bar high and consider staying out of the HV shaded area during an approach and that in itself shows a lack of understanding of the HV diagram and how it is produced and in what modes of flight it applies. Your bar can not be high with this demonstrated lack of knowledge.

 

Instructors should not make up stuff in trying to teach things outside the norm. That is why we have handbooks describing maneuvers and PTS testing minimum standards.

 

Work on flying to the standards and not creating "your" way of trying to impress people.

Edited April 25, 2013 by Mikemv

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

H_G_P,

 

What school is this that this teaching method is being taught?

 

"There is no specific A/S to maintain, no specific height AGL at which to begin the approach. The objective should be to stay out of the H/V curve as long as possible, and maintain a height AGL that would allow for a successful autorotation for as long as possible".

 

You mention that you keep the bar high and consider staying out of the HV shaded area during an approach and that in itself shows a lack of understanding of the HV diagram and how it is produced and in what modes of flight it applies. Your bar can not be high with this demonstrated lack of knowledge.

 

Instructors should not make up stuff in trying to teach things outside the norm. That is why we have handbooks describing maneuvers and PTS testing minimum standards.

 

Work on flying to the standards and not creating "your" way of trying to impress people.

 

You misunderstand what I'm saying. So relax, no need to come out guns blazing.

 

To clarify my statement,

"There is no specific A/S to maintain, no specific height AGL at which to begin the approach. The objective should be to stay out of the H/V curve as long as possible, and maintain a height AGL that would allow for a successful autorotation for as long as possible".

 

Prior to initiating the approach, you should maintain a height AGL that allows for successful autorotation to a suitable forced landing site, assuming a suitable spot exists. Meaning that you shouldn't be so low that you are skimming tree-tops as you intercept your desired approach angle.

 

Prior to initiating the approach, you should stay out of the H/V curve as long as possible. Don't decelerate into the shaded region until the approach angle dictates it. Obviously once you are commencing your approach you are in the H/V curve.

 

What I am talking about is really a power vs. pitch argument, the kind that is often brought up when discussing how to maintain the glide-slope on an ILS. You see the glide slope needle starting to go down. Do you decrease power [collective] and drop back into the proper glideslope? Or do you decelerate [cyclic pitch] & create a steeper angle of descent that way?

[SBuzzkill]

On an instrument approach you make your glide slope adjustments with the collective and airspeed should be constant.

Edited April 25, 2013 by SBuzzkill

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

On an instrument approach you make your glide slope adjustments with the collective and airspeed should be constant.

 

That is one technique, and an acceptable one. But adjusting airspeed is also a practice that is used. There are advantages and disadvantages to both.

[SBuzzkill]

Yeah, the disadvantage being a reduction in descent rate putting you even further above the glide slope.

 

I think what you are trying to discuss is playing with the front and back side of the "power curve." That requires you to be at a relatively low airpspeed, much below that of an instrument approach.

Edited April 25, 2013 by SBuzzkill

[pilot#476398]

I'm not teaching anyone, but this seemed to work at my school. Its from the R22 Training Guide.

 

 

NORMAL APPROACH TO A HOVER

Purpose: To transition from flight at altitude to a stabilized 5 foot hover.

Description:

On final approach, the helicopter should be headed into the wind, aligned with the point of intended touchdown, at 60 KTS and 300 feet AGL. When a normal approach angle of 10° is intercepted, begin the approach by lowering the collective sufficiently to get the helicopter descending down the approach angle. With the decrease in collective, the nose will tend to pitch down, requiring aft cyclic to maintain a 60 KT attitude and right pedal to maintain heading. The pilot can determine the proper approach angle by relating the point of intended touchdown to a point on the helicopter windshield. The collective controls the angle of approach. If the touchdown point seems to be moving up on the windshield, the angle is becoming shallower, neccessitating a slight increase in collective. If the touchdown point moves down on the windshield, the approach angle is becoming steeper, requiring a slight decrease in collective. The cyclic is used to control the rate of closure or how fast you are moving toward the touchdown point. Maintain entry airspeed until the apparent groundspeed and rate of closure appear to be increasing. At this point, slowly begin decelerating with slight aft cyclic, maintaining the approach angle by smoothly reducing the collective. Use the cyclic to maintain a rate of closure equivalent to a brisk walk. At approximately 25 to 40 feet, depending on wind, the helicopter will begin to lose effective translational lift. This loss will be felt as a lateral vibration and the aircraft will begin to settle. The pilot must anticipate the loss of ETL, and compensate with increased co1le-tive to maintain the approach angle, and increase the RPM to 104%. The increase of collective will tend to make the nose rise requiring forward cyclic to maintain proper rate of closure. As the helicopter approaches an altitude of 5 feet, the collective should be increased sufficiently to hold a 5 foot hover.

[Mikemv]

H_G_P,

 

"Prior to initiating the approach, you should stay out of the H/V curve as long as possible. Don't decelerate into the shaded region until the approach angle dictates it. Obviously once you are commencing your approach you are in the H/V curve."

 

Obviously you do not know what you are talking about commencing an approach and being in an HV curve !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Again what great high bar school is this?

 

I think this post by the OP is a joke and meant to stir the pot.

 

H_G_P, flying the way you describe, you could not pass any practical test or pre-higher check ride and hopefully your students know how to fly a "normal" approach to attain their certificates.

 

Guns Blazing- wtf? Just pointing out how off base you are but you will not accept that. CFIs that decide they will teach in some "radical made up, I will show you how to do it my way" mentality only hurt the industry.

 

What DPE is giving practical tests at your school? What school is this?

 

Sorry for being so blunt, no guns required.

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

H_G_P,

 

"Prior to initiating the approach, you should stay out of the H/V curve as long as possible. Don't decelerate into the shaded region until the approach angle dictates it. Obviously once you are commencing your approach you are in the H/V curve."

 

Obviously you do not know what you are talking about commencing an approach and being in an HV curve !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Again what great high bar school is this?

 

I think this post by the OP is a joke and meant to stir the pot.

 

H_G_P, flying the way you describe, you could not pass any practical test or pre-higher check ride and hopefully your students know how to fly a "normal" approach to attain their certificates.

 

Guns Blazing- wtf? Just pointing out how off base you are but you will not accept that. CFIs that decide they will teach in some "radical made up, I will show you how to do it my way" mentality only hurt the industry.

 

What DPE is giving practical tests at your school? What school is this?

 

Sorry for being so blunt, no guns required.

 

There is an obvious mis-communication between you and myself. So I will do my best to make sure that we are on the same page.

 

First- what I am talking about is not some radical, dangerous theory cooked up by an uneducated crock-pot. If you and I were to fly a "normal" approach side-by-side, I'm willing to bet that they would be very, very similar.

 

Second- this conversation was started for the sake of exchanging personal insight into a subject that is often passed off, wrongfully, as being elementary and simple. I'm not trying to spread blasphemy and lies here. Just sharing ideas

 

Third- I understand your frustration [although I believe it is misdirected]. There are CFI's out there that are teaching inaccurate, crock-pot non-sense and their students are suffering as a result of it. I am NOT one of them. If you met me [or any one of my students] IN PERSON, there would be no misunderstanding between us. Myself [and my students], are safe, competent and knowledgeable pilots.

 

Unfortunately, I am not doing a very good job explaining myself in this thread. One day perhaps we will meet and I will have the opportunity to express clearly, in person, what I've been trying to say. And if all else fails at least buy you a drink and agree to disagree.