[ Up ] [ Arthur Slopes Poway ] [ Batteries ] [ From the Beginning ] [ Building Straight ] [ Building Light ] [ Aileron Differential ] [ Working with Epoxy ] [ EPP Design ] [ F3J Towing ] [ Flaps ] [ Fun One ] [ How Do You? ] [ Repairing Fuses ] [ Improve Your Skills ] [ Installing Servos ] [ Gluing and Kicking ] [ Landing ] [ Launching ] [ Linkages ] [ Mig 3 ] [ Mistakes ] [ One Design ] [ RC Soaring ] [ Radios ] [ Positive Attitude ] [ Painting Fuses ] [ sanding ] [ Serious Handlaunch ] [ Bad Servo? ] [ Setting Goals ] [ Tools for the Job ] [ Tools ] [ Tossing it High ]
 |
Landing |
Sage Advice - The Art
of Landing
Fred Sage
If you've been following this column throughout the year,
perhaps you're beginning to see some improvement in your soaring skills. If fact, you may
even have advanced so much that you routinely make your flight tasks. However, in just one
year, it's unlikely that you're taking home the hardware. What's the difference between
your performance and that of the perpetual contest winners? Probably precision and
consistent landing scores. This is where you'll have to focus your attention to bridge the
gap between yourself and the master pilots.
How many times have you overheard someone say, "this
is strictly a landing contest"? This comment is usually made at contests where making
the flight time is assured and the only way to break out the scores is the difference in
landing points. Well, if the truth be known and your goal is to win, they're all landing
contests!
With modern gliders becoming so efficient, it's almost
impossible to devise a soaring task where a skilled pilot can't make the time. This last
statement is a slight oversimplification and applies most appropriately to Southern
California’s soaring conditions. So we see that in local thermal duration contests,
it's always the precision and landing scores that make the difference. Although it's a sad
truth, in reality, the winner of the contest is the pilot who has the hottest thumbs
during the final few seconds of flight!
As a typical intermediate pilot, you've probably advanced
to the point where all your landings are consistently on the tape. In fact, on a good day,
your landings may average 70 or even 80 points per landing with occasional excursions to
near perfect landings. Your precision times are probably within two or three seconds of
perfect. However, to perform at the masters level, your landings will have to average at
least 90 and on a good day will be in the mid to upper nineties. Your precision times will
typically be either perfect or within one second. Improvements in these areas will become
the focus of the remainder of your career as a soaring competitor. Misreading the energy
state of your glider, not recognizing the changing wind conditions during approach, not
being prepared for that last second sink of lift or wind gust, or just misjudging the
relationship between the nose of your glider and the landing spot are all mistakes you'll
have to learn to avoid because they're irretrievable.
A good landing starts with a good approach! As an ex Navy
fighter pilot, I don't know how many practice approaches I made while staying qualified
for carrier landings. The number has to be in the many thousands. These approaches
typically aren't even taken to a touchdown so as to save wear and tear on the planes. An
F-14 landing at 45,000 pounds on a four-degree glide slope at 150 knots doesn't land
lightly. It slams down on the deck at a 900-fpm (15-fps) rate of decent, in what most
observers describe as a controlled crash. Initially in the approach, you're concerned with
ground track, airspeed and altitude. If these parameters are all correct within a few feet
and knots, over a crosswind leg where you visually acquire the "meatball" for
glide slope control, you roll onto final. At this point, your scan transitions to glide
slope, line up and angle of attack or energy state.
The margin for error becomes less and less as you approach
touchdown until either you have the correct landing parameters established and are allowed
to land or the approach is waved off. The difference between a 4 and 5 degree glide slope
is reflected in either a normal landing or the main landing gear struts collapsing or
being shoved up through the wings. The difference between correct landing parameters and
being 5 knots slow or 10 feet low means either a normal arrestment or landing on the
fantail in a ball of flames. Eventually, after years of experience, you learn the subtle
techniques required to cope with head winds, cross winds, improper pattern spacing,
pitching decks, changing ships headings or even night landings. Your challenges are very
similar in trying to consistently land your glider.
The first step toward achieving good landing scores should
be to "groove" your approach (make it consistent and repeatable no matter what
the conditions). Have you ever flown an approach where the glider seemed to be on rails
and you didn't need to touch a thing? Your glider landed precisely on the nail and stayed
there because your glide slope, energy and line up were all within normal parameters. Your
goal should be to duplicate that approach with every flight.
The first step is to decide what type of approach pattern
you want to fly. There are many different patterns, and although none is perfect, each
offers subtle advantages. Aaron Valdez, a master pilot who's name I'm sure you'll
recognize likes to fly the straight in approach. The biggest advantage of this type of
approach is that you're on final for almost 30 seconds and hopefully, you've nailed lineup
at the start. That only leaves two variables, glide slope and energy to control and plenty
of time to fine tune the variables. However, there are some disadvantages with this
approach. Not all flying sites will accommodate a 30 second straight in approach so you
had better be skilled enough to modify your approach to suit the flying site. In addition,
if
Aaron has his energy and glide slope at nominal levels 20
seconds out and there's a big wind shift, he's scrambling to reach the landing spot on
time. George Joy is another master pilot who's extremely consistent with his landings. He
uses a 20-second teardrop approach. George likes to fly overhead with about 20 seconds to
go flying in a downwind direction with about 30 degrees of angle off. In this manner he
can build just enough offset to roll smoothly onto final with about 10 seconds to go.
This pattern is very compact so it can be used at all
fields. It's also excellent because he never gets far enough away from the landing spot so
as to be difficult to accommodate shifts in wind direction. However, the Achilles heel of
this approach is the absolute requirement to correctly position the glider as you roll
onto short final. If you're far off on any of the three parameters, glide slope, energy
state or line up, you don't have much time to correct. George makes this work beautifully,
but I'm not sure it's the right approach for an intermediate pilot.
The approach most competitors use is the 30-second abeam
approach. I use this approach myself because it most closely matches a standard Navy
carrier approach and offers a wide range of adjustability. In other words, I find it
easier to accommodate shifts in wind direction and to accurately roll onto final within
acceptable parameters.
In this approach, you fly abeam of yourself with 30
seconds until landing and fly in the downwind direction. During the downwind leg, you
adjust your flap angle to give yourself the right energy state as you roll onto the
crosswind leg with about 20 seconds till touchdown. During the crosswind leg you continue
to fine tune the energy state until you roll onto final with about 12 seconds to go,
hopefully with the right line up, glide slope and energy state.
There are several reasons I prefer this approach. First,
you have several firmly established checkpoints where you can determine if the approach is
progressing normally. If not, you have ample time to correct as you proceed to the next
check point. As you approach the turn to the crosswind position, are all your parameters
nominal? If not, you can either lead or lag the turn to crosswind. During the crosswind
leg, you're looking at your glider from the side and this makes it much easier to assess
its energy state. I also find it much easier to coordinate a 90-degree turn onto final
rather than a 210-degree turn from the teardrop pattern. Finally, I find that fine tuning
the approach timing is easier by either cutting the corner on the turn to final or even
flying beyond centerline in order to delay a few seconds.
You'll notice that I've only addressed energy and not
speed or altitude as we've discussed these various approaches. That's because speed and
altitude are related as both reflect kinetic energy. High and slow is the same as low and
fast. If you're too high, you’re over energy just as sure as if you're too fast. The
correction for either situation is more flap until you intercept the ideal glide slope and
energy state.
That notwithstanding, to facilitate the checkpoint aspect
of this approach and if your speed is under control, you can use approximate altitudes of
30 feet at the abeam position, 20 feet at the crosswind turn, 10 feet as you roll in on
final and about two to three feet as you approach the end of the tape. These four
checkpoints are what I use to assess my progress during approach. What's 30 feet? About
the height of the power line poles. I typically roll in on final over the road at Poway
with 12 seconds to go and at about the height of the glider’s wing span.
Obviously these various approaches should be tailored to
your personal limitations or to the efficiency of your glider. Your main focus should be
to decide which approach you like and practice toward grooving that approach. To help with
your decision, suggest you take your glider out early one morning before the wind becomes
a factor and try the three types of approaches we've discussed or any other approach you
can envision and see which you prefer. To make this comparison meaningful, it will have to
be done on the clock which means either a transmitter with a countdown timer, a tape
recording, or a helper who is willing to count down your approaches.
Also to help you groove your approach, I suggest that
initially you make your approaches with one-third flap/spoiler set and don't touch the
flap/spoiler angle during approach. If you overshoot the landing spot on your first
attempt, then fly a longer pattern the next attempt until finally the glider lands near
the prescribed spot and with the proper energy. What this will do for you is to determine
the ideal ground track that will be required in no wind conditions with consideration for
the efficiency of your particular glider.
Why one-third flap/spoiler? Because that will increase the
drag enough to give you a glide slope that is easily controllable as you continue toward
your landing spot. In fact, as I attempt to explain landing techniques to beginning
pilots, I like to say that if you're forced to use either no flaps or full flaps during an
approach, it generally means that you've blown the approach. Resorting to either extreme
means that you haven't recognized that you're going outside of nominal parameters until
too late and a radical last second transition is all that can save the landing.
In fact, observing flap/spoiler usage during approach is
one of the best ways of assessing whether you're progressing beyond the beginner stage.
Are you using your flaps/spoilers like a light switch with them either being up or down,
or are you modulating them correctly to establish and maintain approach energy? In
addition, are you correcting to proper line up by using the rudder to yaw the nose or are
you rolling the wings with ailerons? The answer to those two questions will probably tell
you where you are in your development and provide a due to effective landing technique.
The next step is to put the approach on the clock.
Maintain the same ground track as flown previously and modify the starting altitude and/or
the flap/spoiler setting as necessary to make the approach last approximately 30 seconds.
Get used to checking your parameters as you cross each checkpoint. As an example, assuming
you chose the 30 second abeam approach, is your starting point abeam your shoulder at 30
feet with your speed under control and your flaps partially deployed with 30 seconds to
go? If you see a divergence, correct it immediately before the next checkpoint. This will
keep you corrections small and smooth and ensure that you reach the following checkpoint
within parameters.
Between now and next month, decide the approach you want
to fly and attempt to groove the approach. Don't be terribly concerned with your landing
scores. They will become nothing more than the result of a good approach. Instead, work
toward flying the same approach on each attempt no matter what the landing conditions.
The Art of Landing
—Part 2
Last month discussed the importance of
landings in a typical contest. We also mentioned the importance of a consistent approach
pattern in achieving high landing scores. Hopefully, you’ve taken the opportunity to
try various approaches and have chosen the one that best accommodates your flying style.
Perhaps you’ve even tried to "groove" your approach and have adopted the
check point format to fine tune your approach timing. The next step will be to recognize
that although a consistent approach is the ideal, there are many obstacles that need to be
overcome to arrive at the landing spot at the correct time. Some of the hindrances to a
routine approach and landing include:
-
Cross winds
-
Tail winds
-
Excessive head winds
-
Turbulence
-
Lift/sink during approach
-
Conflicting traffic
-
No landing spot available
-
Not able to get back to the landing spot on time
-
Struggling to make flight time during the approach
While this list isn’t all-inclusive,
it is representative of the more common obstacles you’ll face that require
modification to your approach. As we discuss required modifications to your approach,
remember that I’m using the 30 second abeam approach. In addition, verbally
discussing corrections can be a bit confusing. It’s probably better to corral a
master pilot and ask him to show you the proper correction for these various impediments.
Cross Wind Landings
So, it’s time to land and you’ve
skillfully note that there’s a 10 knot cross wind as you prepare to commence your
approach. First of all, congratulations! Most intermediate pilots don’t even
recognize wind conditions prior to landing. You probably noticed the cross wind by
sighting the wind indicator on your antenna, or perhaps your timer pointed out the wind
shift to you.
In any case, how do you modify your
approach to still arrive at the landing spot at the correct time? With the 30 second abeam
approach, cross wind is an easy condition to accommodate. Assuming we’re flying at
Poway with it’s standard right hand pattern and the cross wind is out of the North,
simply commence your approach from farther abeam. This will stretch the distance of the
crosswind leg. Now you can achieve the standard 8 to 10 seconds on cross wind even with a
tail wind component though the cross wind leg. So, in this approach, the timing stays the
same by deviating the ground track. You still roll in on final with 10 to 12 seconds until
touchdown.
An additional refinement you can adopt for
cross wind landings is to offset the landing spot 20 or 30 degrees in an attempt to
counteract some of the cross wind component. In our example, with a cross wind out of the
north, you would take three or four paces to the left, overshoot the extended center line
and roll onto final from about 20 or 30 degrees to the South of the extended center line.
In this manner you only have to cope with a quartering wind from the left during final. Obviously
if you’re using this technique, it requires that you clear the traffic that’s
landing on the spot next to you. It’s very likely that you will overfly the
extended center line of the adjacent landing spot and a mid air is possible with parallel
traffic. If you chose to use this offset approach technique, the changes to the approach
ground track are minimal for cross wind conditions because the additional distance you
need on the cross wind leg is provided by overflying the extended centerline.
If the cross wind is out of the South, no
correction is required from the normal abeam position. The extra time you would have spent
on the cross wind leg because it was into the wind is compensated because you are going to
roll onto final 20 or 30 degrees short of the extended center line for your landing spot.
You’ve taken three or four paces to the right and only have a right quartering wind
to counter on final.
I only recommend this offset approach
technique for cross wind landings for spot landings on a tape. For cross wind landings on
a runway, line up is too critical to utilize this technique. For runway landings, you will
either have to establish a "crab ‘ or "skid" during final while
attempting to remain on lineup. Since this discussion will undoubtedly go long, if you
have questions about proper technique for a "crab" or "skid", see me
at the flying field.
Tail Wind Landings
Tail winds are an extremely difficult
landing anomaly. In fact, in real airplanes, we don’t normally make down wind
landings because it’s hard on tires, brakes and runway overruns. However, to
effectively compete in glider contests you had better be prepared to land in down wind
conditions. Some contests like Visalia are notorious for down wind landings. In other
contests, you will occasionally face down wind conditions if for no other reason than a
thermal is building upwind and the wind shifts to feed the thermal.
How do you modify your approach pattern to
accommodate a down wind landing? Although the ground track of the pattern doesn’t
change a lot, the timing is modified considerably. I like to fly a slightly longer pattern
for down wind landings because to get the same 10 to 12 seconds on final, I will need much
more distance on final. To get this distance, commence the approach earlier from the abeam
position. Since the down wind leg is now upwind, it may take 15 to 18 seconds o get the
extended distance required. The cross wind leg is still used to fine tune approach timing
while attempting to roll onto final at about 10 to 12 seconds to go but from an extended
distance.
How extended? It depends on how severe the
down wind conditions. Just not having the normal head wind requires a slight approach
modification. By the time the down wind gets to 10 knots, the pattern gets very extended.
You should also fly a much flatter
approach during down wind conditions. Normally the lower limit of the optimum glide slope
is determined by the efficiency of your glider as it approaches the landing spot in a head
wind. However, during down wind conditions, you can go far lower than would be prudent
during a normal landing. In fact, it’s almost required that you fly a flatter
approach because you run the risk of flipping inverted if you don’t make a flat
approach. Instead of rolling onto final at about 10 feet of altitude during a standard
approach, with 10 knots of tail wind, roll onto final at about three or four feet. Can you
still get to the landing spot from this low start? Easily, and you’ll still probably
be concerned about overshooting the landing spot.
Most expert competitors use some degree of
"crow" aileron mixing to achieve optimum deceleration characteristics while
landing. You may want to consider having an alternate landing mode that disables crow for
extreme down wind landing conditions. By not mixing "crow" you can fly a lower
energy approach which will also help from overshooting the landing spot.
As you practice down wind approaches and
landings, I suggest you sneak up on extreme conditions. Ground speed will be very high
during down wind landings so start with only a few knots of down wind until comfortable.
You may also want to do your practicing on a grass field or during the time of year when
the ground isn’t too hard. As a last concession to the survival of your glider, you
may also want to remove the landing skegs from your glider before you try extreme down
wind landings. In this manner you won’t be breaking off your landing skegs crushing
the leading edges of your root ribs or cracking your fuselage.
Excessive Head Wind Landings
Excessive head winds are also a very
testing deviation from the standard approach. We’re all used to landing in 8 to 10
knots of head wind and even relish some headwind to slow things down on final. However, by
the time the head wind gets to 15 knots, extreme corrections are necessary to both
approach timing and ground track. With a 15 knot head wind, if we were to roll onto final
from our standard position over the road, we would be on final for 20 plus seconds. To
compensate, we could shorten the distance of the final portion of the approach. However,
if we shorten the final portion of the approach to only the standard 10 to 12 seconds, the
distance would be absurdly short; not much more than a few tape lengths. The answer is a
compromise. Shorten the distance a little and lengthen the time slightly. I’m
typically on final for 12 to 15 seconds with a 15 knot headwind. To get to this point, fly
a 25 second pattern. The downwind leg is only a few seconds with the 15 knot tail wind.
The cross wind leg is still used to fine tune the approach timing while attempting to roll
onto final at about 12 to 15 seconds. It’s also prudent to fly a steeper approach
with more energy than during a standard approach.
Just as in the down wind approach
scenario, the efficiency of your glider determines the upper limit of the glide slope
range. Less efficient gliders will need to fly a steeper glide slope However, with a 15
knot head wind, better to error on the high side of the acceptable glide slope envelope. I
typically roll onto final in a 15 knot headwind on the near side of the road at 15 seconds
to go at an altitude of about 15 feet.
Proper use of flaps is critical during
high head wind landings. The tendency is to use too much flap and to fall short of the
landing spot. Since you’re probably flying a steeper glide slope, you already have a
high sink rate established and will only use you flaps to control glider speed. Don’t
use high flap settings until almost over the spot. Ground speed is extremely low during
high head wind landings, so fly a steep approach and stick the nose right into the nail!
Turbulence
Turbulence can be very disconcerting on
final. Standard approach ground track and timing don’t vary much to counter expected
turbulence. However, I do fly a faster final approach speed. In fact, in either turbulence
or high head winds, I’ve gotten use to flying the approach in reflex. The fact that
I’m in reflex doesn’t really matter when the flaps are partially deployed, but I
also have a few clicks of down mixed in with my reflex. This makes the steady state speed
of my glider slightly faster which allows me to punch through turbulence. This also
mandates a last second transition to the proper landing attitude and speed. However, this
can be consistently accomplished with practice. The alternative at a slower approach speed
is that your glider is disturbed by the turbulence to the extent that you can’t
regain control in time for a good landing.
How do you know to expect turbulence
during your approach? Being observant is the answer. Are you flying in an unstable low
pressure air mass? Has the wind indicator on your antenna shifted as a thermal blew by?
Has your timer looked upwind and reported on the dust devil that’s headed your way.
Anticipate turbulence and be prepared!
Lift/Sink During Approach
Unexpected lift or sink cycles can be very
troublesome during final approach. You’re probably flying you final approach in the
heart of your glide slope envelope and that’s certainly the best tactic. The lower
limit of your glide slope envelope is defined as the least altitude you can fly final
approach in sink and still make the landing spot and the upper limit is defined as the
steepest approach you can make on final in lift and still land on the spot. Obviously by
being in the heart of this range, you increase you chance of coping with unexpected
lift/sink. If you do encounter lift/sink on final, by definition, you can still make it to
the landing spot. However, the proper technique if you encounter unexpected lift is to
lower full flaps immediately, drop the nose to well below the horizon and dive through the
lift. As you approach the landing spot, raise the nose and let the glider decelerate to
land. Conversely, if you encounter sink, you should immediately raise whatever flaps you
had set for approach and press on toward the landing spot. Depending on how severe the
sink, you may want to ease down into ground effect at a few feet off the ground and dial
in a little trailing edge camber as if thermalling. This will give you the best
opportunity to extend your glide to the landing spot. In each of these two examples,
whatever fine tuning of approach timing you had to do on final will probably be overcome
by events (OBE). However, it’s probably far more important to get the landing points
than the one or two seconds of precision time that you’ll lose.
As with all these landing obstacles,
it’s best to anticipate lift/sink during approach. How can you tell if you’re
going to encounter lift/sink? Simple; fly through the approach corridor as you descend for
approach. In addition, you may want to take a look over you shoulder to see what’s
going on upwind. As a final check, while preparing for your approach, you could even
observe other gliders as they make their approaches.
Conflicting Traffic
Conflicting traffic can force you to
deviate from your standard approach pattern. This is the main reason I don’t like to
launch with a gaggle of competitors. If the task is seven minutes and you find all four
winches going full bore because a thermal is nearby, it stands to reason the landing zone
will be crowded when it’s time to land. Instead of launching as soon as a winch is
available, wait 45 seconds to build in a relatively unobstructed window at a landing tape.
Now I know you’re thinking that I’ve told you it was critical to get airborne
immediately when lift is reachable. While that’s true, it’s also imperative that
you ensure an unobstructed opportunity to make a normal approach and landing. After all,
what good is it to make the required flight time but lose the landing because of a crowded
landing zone.
I’ve talked to some of the luminaries
in our sport who say that they actually select their launch time dependent upon the
expected landing conditions when they’re required to land. Talk about competing at
the next level. While I’m still trying to read the air and make my flight time, what
I should be doing is optimizing my chances for good landing conditions. It makes perfect
sense if you think about it. You’re required to make you flight time to be
competitive. Any deductions from a perfect score come as a result of your landing. So why
not optimize your chance of winning by anticipating landing conditions.
Back to flying your pattern with
conflicting traffic. Deviate as necessary to avoid a mid air and re-intercept your optimum
approach profile as soon as possible. If you’re forced to deviate on short final, you
may have cause for a protest and should request to relaunch for landing points. However,
this is at the CD’s discretion and I wouldn’t count on his decision going in
your favor. In fact, the AMA rule book states that a relaunch for landing points is
allowed only if contact is actually made during final approach. Perhaps a surer course
would be to fly either a steeper or flatter approach as necessary to avoid a mid air on
final. Don’t allow the other glider to distract your focus of achieving maximum
landing points.
No Landing Spot
No landing spot available can be a
definite distraction to a normal approach and landing. To preclude this possibility, I try
to get on a landing spot with a minimum of two minutes to go. In fact, my landing check
list starts at two minutes to go by taking off my sunglasses. I feel very uncomfortable
not being on a spot as the countdown continues from this point. Because I’m trying to
plan ahead, I like to be on a spot even sooner. However, this raises the issue of should I
relinquish the spot to another competitor who needs to land before I do? The answer is
yes, because at some point, I’m going to need this accommodation. I’ll let
another competitor land in front of me if there’s at least 45 seconds separating our
projected landing times. In this manner, the competitor can land, determine his landing
score, reorient the tape if necessary and be clear of the landing circle well prior to my
landing time.
However, I’m less inclined to
surrender the tape to a competitor in an add-em-up contest who’s circling low over
the approach corridor while trying to extend his flight time. The reason for my reluctance
is there’s no way of knowing how long he’ll be able to hang in the approach
corridor. Because he’s a nuisance until he commits to landing and may well conflict
with my approach, I probably won’t offer the landing tape in this instance.
Not being able to get back to the landing spot on time
Not being able to get back to the landing
spot on time will definitely disrupt your standard approach. Lets assume that the task was
10 minutes and you’ve been struggling to make the flight time. With two minutes to go
you’re back on the slope at barely above telephone pole height. You’re doing
figure eights while trying to stay in the minimal slope lift. You know if you leave the
slope you’ll never be able to stay up for two more minutes. Your only option is to
hang at the slope until about 30 seconds to go and then make a modified straight in
approach. You certainly won’t have any excess energy to make turns or fine tune your
approach timing.
As you gain experience, you’ll be
required to make approaches from all different angles, with minimal energy and with little
time remaining. Practice these abbreviated approaches. I can’t talk you through them
all because there’s an infinite number of permutations.
Struggling to make flight time during the approach
Struggling to make flight time during the
approach is an interesting variable. Lets say that you’re working a hand launch
bubble at 20 feet nearly overhead with one minute to go. Clearly you have to stay in the
narrow hand launch thermal core to have any chance at staying airborne for one minute.
Therefore, the standard approach isn’t going to work. If you’re able to stay in
the low altitude thermal, at some point you’re going to have to bail out and make a
last second transition to landing.
As the bubble drifts downwind, you find
yourself over the approach corridor. I don’t know how many competitors I’ve seen
in this scenario who make their last turn directly over the final run in course. From this
position, they have to make a last second wrapped up turn and an angling approach. Not
only is their timing way off, but usually they don’t have the energy and either stall
or land far short of the prescribed landing spot.
What they should have done was offset
themselves one thermal turn circle diameter from the final run in course and roll smoothly
onto final at approximately their normal turn in position. From this point the approach is
routine and the result is usually an excellent landing. In fact, what I do occasionally is
establish a 12 second approach arc around the landing corridor. I practice intercepting
this arc at minimal energy from different angles and making a smooth turn onto an
abbreviated final.
Understand the relative importance of landings
Another important point I’d like to
make about landings is to thoroughly understand the relative importance of landings versus
flight time versus precision points. Landing points and precision times are always related
and unless their relative value is understood, a rational decision about their respective
importance can’t be made. As an example of one extreme, lets briefly examine the SC2
contest that was held at the SWSA field in Covina last month. The flight times were 3,5,7
and 9 minutes normalized to 975 points per round. The landings were on a standard 25 foot
tape but were only worth a maximum of 25 points. At this rate, landing points only
decrement at one point per foot. However, in the three minute round precision points
decremented at 5.4 points per second. In this scenario, it should have been obvious that
making flight times on the second was far more important than banging in a good landing.
Missing the landing target by five feet didn’t cost as much as being off just one
second in precision time. The winner recognized the importance of precision and biased his
approaches toward achieving perfect precision scores. He wasn’t off a single second
through four rounds.
I can think of many more landing tips including how to
modify your approach for runway landings, how to simplify you landing in an add-em-up
contest and landing considerations during man on man rounds, but this is probably a good
place to break for now.
|
