Conference vmszoo::rc

    Let's get into this subject a little more!
    
    What are some of the techniques used in landings, such as how should
    you approach the strip, where should you be standing in reference to
    the plane, etc...?
    
    I've been practicing my landings, but I really don't have any concrete
    way of approach.  Also, should the plane touch-down before or after it
    passes you?  Is one easier than the other?  Should I be looking at some
    kind of reference?  And should I just let the planes lack of air-speed
    bring it down or should I use some down elevator?
    
    These are just a few of the questions I have on this subject, and all
    suggestions are welcomed.  Thanks!
    
    Ken
    
    

	In response to your general questions I'll give you an outline 
on how to land a powered RC plane. This was learned from a magazine 
article so it's not my revelation.

	The method is simple. The reasons are complex. I'd have to go 
back and find the article I got this from to detail the flight control
interactions.

	To start set your plane trimmed out for level flight. Now fly
the plane past your self from one side to the other ( at a decent 
altitude). Reduce the throttle setting to "0" until the plane slows.
You will notice that without any elevator input the plane will begin 
it's decent. Now increase the throttle setting a click at a time until the 
decent is at an acceptable angle of decent. This throttle setting is 
your landing throttle setting. 

	Now the process for landing. Start again by bringing the plane
across yourself and reducing throttle until the plane slows. At this 
point increase the throttle the two or three etc.etc. clicks you 
predetermined was your landing setting. Turn the plane 90 degrees on
your base leg on the landing procedure. Stay or this heading until you 
can turn a second 90 degree turn and be lined up with the landing strip.
Your angle of decent will be constant. If you find that you are 
undershooting the strip the correct input is increased throttle. Don't
peg it just add in enough to stop the decent until you feel that your
back on the correct angle of decent. If your coming in high then added
elevator input is used to slow the plane to increase the angle of 
decent. Be careful that the added elevator isn't sufficient to stall 
the plane. That is the basics of a landing.
	As far as where you land, for beginners it is sometimes helpful
to finish a landing as the plans passes then as this helps in 
orientation. However once your comfortable with landing break yourself of 
this habit.  LAND ON A LINE PERPENDICULAR TO YOUR FEET. IF YOU CAN DO 
THIS YOU CAN LAND AT ANY FIELD YOU MAY FLY AT. NO MATTER HOW LONG OR 
SHORT THE APPROACH OR THE LANDING STRIP.


					Tom

    I'm no pro at landing but thought it might help if I mention this.
    When learning to land it's very nerve racking to see 200+ dollars
    comming closer and closer to the ground and sometimes I'ts hard
    to concentrate but one thing I've found that helps is to keep in
    mind , and I'm sure you've heard it before, push the stick twords
    the down wing, this will keep things reasonably leveland has helped
    me on many occasions to eliminate some of the confusion (I've even
    been found to say this out loud as I'm landing)

    Dan,	Threr is an easy way to get over the field uneasyness
    problem. Learn to land the ship so that it touches down perpendicular
    to your feet. In other words, in front of you. Not to either side.
    Once learned you will find that of you can take off from a field
    you can land in that same field. Also it's good to take a few landing
    approaches early into the first flight at a new field. In this way
    you get a quick feel for the landing while the fuel and other odds
    are on your side.
    
    
    Tom

    moving your control stick to the dipping wing is a good trick
    to rember when your plane is comming toward you,BUT if you
    are still at this stage ,your not ready to land yet!!
    only atempt to land when you can fly final approch with
    the wings level,instead make high passes over the runway
    with a instucter by your side to give you confidence.
    after a while you will get a little lower,and before
    you know it your instucter will be able to talk you 
    threw a landing,,and dont feel bad about asking someone to
    help you.i dont know of anyone who has learned this hobby
    on his own...
    
     by the way the way i teach people to correct the wings
    when a plane is comming towards then is to make them turn
    there back to the plane,and look over your shoulder
    
                      
                    happy landing,s
     
                   paul morin (who cant spell,but can sure fly

    
    Since I've been flying the MUNK I've noticed I'm having promlems
    on my landing approaches.  I am usually above 50ft when I start
    my approach.  I cut the engine to an idle and let the plane
    descend on its own.  I sometimes find myself diving a bit to
    bleed off altitude but this results in increased speed which is
    not what I want.
    
    My question is;
    
    	How do the majority of you approach you landings...ie what
    altitude, speed....do you apply down elevator...etc....?
    
    
    Ken

    Ken,
    
    Never, I repeat, NEVER try forcing the ship down with down elevator on
    landing approach.  The airplane will hesitate 'taking' the down, then
    suddenly, pitch down dramatically and, unless you're high enough, you
    can't catch it with up elevator fast enough and end up dorking the
    model in, sometimes VERY hard!
    
    The _perfect_ landing approach is the result of practice, practice and
    more practice.  Just as with a 1:1 power plane, the throttle is pulled
    on the downwind leg when the plane is directly opposite to the point of
    intended touch down.  A nose-down glide is then established and
    maintained throughout base and final legs and, when perfectly executed,
    the plane will touch down right on target with no further application
    of power or adjustment to rate-of-descent.  Of course, it's an
    imperfect world we dwell in and, while practice will yield frequent
    perfect landings, adjustments are frequently required.
    
    So, returning to the scenario just described, we've chopped power and
    established our nose-down attitude.  This establishes the rate of
    descent which will result in either touching down exactly where we want
    to be or be too long or too short.  Now, believe it or not,
    rate-of-descent is controlled mainly with throttle, e.g. if you
    percieve you are going to be too short, add power to stretch the glide
    but maintain the same glide angle, that is, leave the elevator alone.
    This way, the transition when the power is pulled is less drastic...the
    nose won't drop so drastically and you're right back in the desired
    power-off glide.  Power may be added and held clear to the ground but,
    in this event, wait to chop the power 'til the plane's on the ground. 
    Pulling power at 2-or-3' invariably causes the nose to drop and PRANG,
    you just bought a prop, bent a nosewheel (or nosed over with a
    taildragger) or worse.
    
    Now, in the too long scenario what do you do when you can't reduce
    power any further?  Easy...you go around and set it up again, trying
    this time to set up closer, lower or both.  Ideally, you should always
    try to be just a tad short of perfect as a little power always puts you
    where you need to be where, if you set up too long, you have to go
    around or run out into the puckerbrush after yer' plane.
    
    I always set up by pulling throttle to several 'clicks' above idle just
    before turning onto the base leg.  This allows me to pull the throttle
    a little more should I find I'm too long/high.  More often, however, I
    hold this power setting 'til I have the threshold made, then chop and
    glide/flare to landing.  In cases where I hold power all the way in
    (like into a headwind or where my approach was way short), I hold those
    'clicks' of power 'til the wheels are rolling then gently 'milk' the
    power down to idle.  Again, chopping the power suddenly _can_ upset the
    applecart.
    
    The whole secret to a good landing is in the approach; a well flown
    approach invariably leads to a good landing and the converse of this is
    equally true.  This returns us to my original point that practice,
    _practice_, PRACTICE and still more _PRACTICE_ is the only way to
    polish up those approach skills.  Every flight should include several
    touch and goes prior to landing.  Start this regimen and it may
    surprise you how quickly the approaches and, therefore, good landings,
    start coming almost automatically.    

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

    Al, good stuff but can you elaborate more on bleeding airspeed.
    
    The problem we face out here in the N.E. is trees and small fields.
    It's not uncommon to have to have to maintain a base leg of 75 feet
    or more due to trees. Then when you turn final, you have to drop
    down to around 20 feet so that you don't go long. The Monk is a
    fairly fast landing ship if you can't make long low final approaches.
    
    In a case like the above, where you can't make a nice constant descent
    (there by controlling airspeed), what would you suggest.
    
    Steve

    I guess I'm a bit confused on the "add power" to raise the nose.
    Don't you have to add a bit of up elevator to raise the nose?  I
    figure by adding just power, you are only increasing the speed of
    the plane but not adding much elevation.  I know that if you add
    more power than you trimmed out for, the nose will rise, but on
    a landing approach you aren't going to add alot of power (??) so
    how does the nose rise?  Do you trim the plane just prior to the
    off power sequence?  MORE INFO!
    
    Ken

    Re: .2 & .3,
    
    Steve,  Yer' sure right about different technique(s) being required to
    drop in over obstacles to hit a small field.  I don't have to tell you
    that dropping the nose for a rapid descent increases airspeed which
    aggravates the "float-past" problem.  And, obviously, at some point
    you'll reach a situation where the obstacles are too high, too close or
    the field too small to get into, period...full scale aircraft have the
    same problem(s).   Obviously, elevator alone cannot control the
    increased airspeed resulting from a rapid letdown over the trees as the
    increased speed will cause the plane to balloon and there's nothing you
    can do about it: increased speed will result in ballooning when the
    angle of attack is increased, that's all there is to it, period!
    
    Full scale deals with the problem in many ways; the most common method
    to get into a small field over tall obstacles once was to "slip" the
    aircraft, i.e. set it up in a cross controlled, side-slip (e.g. left
    aileron, right rudder) where the plane approaches with one wing low,
    presenting its side to the slipstream for maximum drag.  This is a
    tricky procedure and controls must be released just before flaring but
    it can be learned through practice.  The slip (or side-slip) was common
    before the advent of flaps which are really the best way to approach the
    problem.  I'd hazard a guess that Eric, Dan or the other Panic pilots
    have no difficulty letting down into the smallest fields when they use
    that full span flap on the top wing for landing.
    
    The slip and the use of flaps both create the same effect, that of
    allowing the aircraft to descend more steeply with no increase in
    airspeed.  As to what I'd suggest for your particular fields, I have to
    hedge my bets and admit that I can't really advise anything without
    actually seeing/flying from them.  However, in the case of a clean,
    non-flap equipped ship, I have to believe that the slip may be the only
    method which will allow a rapid descent without building up
    unacceptable airspeed.  About the only other option is, don't fly
    except on windy days where airspeed can be maintained at a safe level
    while ground speed is reduced by the winds velocity to an acceptable
    level.
    
    If you want to practice slips, here's how: first, get plenty of
    altitude cause it'll feel plenty slippery the first coupla' times you
    try it.  OK, now, shoot a traffic pattern at this safe altitude and, as
    you turn onto final (upwind), simultaneously dial in left aileron and
    right rudder (kinda' like a knife-edge) such that the ship is skidding 
    with its left side towards you.  Use elevator to keep the nose from 
    dropping too much and throttle to adjust rate of descent.  What you
    look for is a rather vertical descent with minimal (if any) increase in
    airspeed.  Once you feel fairly comfortable with setting up this
    attitude, you're ready to try landing with it; let the plane descend
    all the way down 'til you're ~6' high and [you should be] near the
    threshold of the field, then SMOOTHLY return all controls to normal,
    that is UN-cross control them and flare to the touchdown.  BTW, simply
    reverse everything to do a slip to the right.
    
    Nope, it isn't real easy but it's a valuable skill to have and well
    worth learning...not to mention the fact that the maneuver is
    impressive looking as hell and you'll dazzle spectators and fellow
    pilots alike with it!  :B^)  Seriously, if you can't get into a field
    by slipping, you probably just CAN'T get into it with that particularly
    model.
    
    Ken,  Yer' not the first, nor will you be the last to be confused by
    the old "add power to raise the nose" rule.  In ideal terms, a full
    scale instructor (or a model instructor, if he's worth his salt) will
    tell you that you control altitude with throttle and airspeed with the
    elevator.  Now, that's fine in theory and we can accept that more or
    less power will cause the plane to fly higher or lower and that
    increasing the angle of attack with elevator increases drag/decreases
    airspeed (and vice-versa) but, as you said, a combination of controls
    is really required.
    
    However, from a given trim and power setting, I stand by the statement,
    "add power to raise the nose."  At that given trim/power setting, the
    elevator is getting its mechanical advantage/power from two distinct
    sources: from its passage through the air AND from the propwash over
    it.  Let's think of it as, for explanation purposes, a 10-lb sandbag
    representing power derived from passage of the elevator through the air
    and another 10-lb sandbag representing the propwash...both these
    sandbags are placed atop the hz. stab and the aircraft is in desired
    trim with this 20-lb combined weight on the elevator.
    
    Now, if we want to raise the nose, we _could_ increase up elevator,
    adding [say] 5-lb's more pressure by so doing but, increasing the angle
    of attack thusly may well provoke a stall as the airspeed drops
    proportionately.  So, instead, let's add a touch of power; this adds
    the desired extra 5-lbs pressure wich raises the nose, increases the
    angle of attack AND adds the necessary airspeed to keep airspeed above
    stall speed.  
    
    Once the aircraft is trimmed for some particular attitude, even small
    power changes should be noticeable as changes in pitch attitude.  In
    actual practice, you're right, we'll coordinate useage of throttle and
    elevator but it's _very_ important to recognize which is the primary or
    most vital control...in the landing exercise, it's the throttle!  Once
    I've got my landing attitude established, subsequent changes in pitch
    and/or rate-of-descent are accomplished primarily with throttle.
    
    Any clearer?  Or, have I managed to further confuse the issue??

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

    I've wote this before someplace but I'll be dammed if I can find
    it.
    
    "By using the controls at hand we can make the landing sequence
    almost mechanical, like clock work"
    
    
    
    Here's how....   First to follow on with some of what has been written
    is the previous notes...
    
    	Elevator controls-------------Airspeed
    	Throttle controls-------------Altitude
    
    Most poeple this it's the other way around. It's not.
    
    
    To start fly the plane past yourself in a straight line. Reduce
    throttle completely and allow the airplane to slow down. You will
    notice that in order to keep the plane at a constant altitude as
    it slows that you will apply elevator. However the elevator will
    have the end result of slowing down the aircraft and you will observe
    the plane starting to decend on an angle. You will notice that
    with the throttle completely reduced the angle will become excessive.
    As the plane slows down and the angle of decent becomes excessive
    add throttle one click at a time until the angle of decent is 
    acceptable. Remember how many clicks you have input into the 
    throttle. This is your landing throttle setting.
    
    Now it's time to practice. Let the plane fly parallel to yourself
    and reduce the throttle. As the plane slows add the predetermined
    throttle setting and fly past yourself. Turn onto final and fly
    the plane at this throttle setting. If the angle of decent isn't
    sufficient to land the plane two alternatives can be chosen.
    First, reduce throttle a little more. This will increase the
    angle of decent. If the angle as previous set is sufficient then
    the second alternative of to fly further downwind after the preset
    throttle setting has been input. This will give more distance
    between the final turn and the landing area.
    
    If however the landing is short you add throttle. DON'T ADD ELEVATOR.
    elevator will stall the plane. Next time to try landing input the
    predetermined throttle setting however cut the base leg a little
    shorter.
    
    You will find that there are a couple of throttle settings that
    work dependent on the weather conditions your flying in. Calm weather
    will have a reduced throttle setting. Windy conditions will require
    a little more throttle so you'll be flying the plane in.
    
    
    
    							Tom

    Ah yes, the ole "slip it right in" technique. I used to do that
    with full scale and it was a blast. You come down like an elevator
    without increasing airspeed. That's one of the things I want to
    try with the Fiesta. Just havn't got up the nerve yet. We have a
    field out here (Crow Island) where that would come in handy.
    
    It IS a very effective maneuver.
    
    Just to answer the original question (how do people do it), I start
    my landing approach on the down wind leg directly opposite me. I
    chop the throttle all the way back to idle, and then maintain level
    flight (slight up elevator will be needed) to bleed off speed. When
    the speed is right (practice, practice, practice) I let off the
    elevator I've been holding and begin the descent adding in about
    3 to 4 notches of power (again, this depends on wind conditions). 
    The proper descent for your plane is derrived through instructor 
    knowledge and practice. If it's done correctly, I hold that descent 
    rate all the way through the base leg and final approach. Most
    adjustments will be made on the final approach. As Al has stated,
    add or reduce power to make the threshold. For my particular plane,
    I'll throttle back to idle about 6 feet up and 10 to 15 feet out
    from the end of the runway. About 2 to 3 feet up I'll begin the flare.
    Keep on flaring as needed to touch down.
    
    This is the way Charlie Watt tought me to land, and I think my landings
    come out pretty good. MOST OF THEM ANYWAY.

All the above refer to power on landings, what about dead stick. As somebody 
who has most of his landings dead stick as a Pylon racer has two engine speeds, 
go very fasts, and stop. Try this approach; pun intended.

Start the approach at 50-100' in front of you heading down wind at  an altitude 
determined by the glide angle of the model; eg my RCM Expert is about 50', My 
F3D is about 15'.

Next commence a slow half circle that will bring you on to the end of the 
runway heading up wind.

If you find during the turn you are too high turn your half circle into a  1/4 
and do an "S" approach after the 1/4 circle, too low and tighten up the circle 
in to more of an ellipse.

 
 
                           H      H  N  N
                   H            N           N
                              N                 N
              H            N                      N
                          N            L L  L    L  N
                 H       N          L                 N
H= To high        H    N       L                       N
L= To low           H N     L                             N
N= Normal            HN  L                                 N
               |-------------|
               |             |

    
        I solved the problem of trying to slow down buy installing a 14
    6-10 pitch prop on my Munk.  Since I'm running a OS .91 four stroke on
    it and flying at 7200' things go alittle quicker.  The thin air doesn't
    help to slow things down much.  This prop (a "four stroke prop") when
    the power is applied really moves the Munk.  But when the power is
    taken away it's like someone just put a rope on the tail of the plane. 
    I mean it really slows quickly.  You might want to try this.  It works
    well for me.
    
    John

Al, I thought you landing explanations were outstanding.  A few other notes
that have helped me both in modeling and 1:1.

Set up - practice, practice, practice flying a consistent rectangular pattern.
Invariably, a sloppy pattern leads to a poor, or hit or miss landing.
Practicing these at pattern altitude is very helpful, particularly in the 
even of a cross wind.

The approach - Consistently, I used fight the natural crab or weathervaining
that results in anything other than a direct head wind approach, or heaven 
forbid a direct tailwind approach.  Don't fight it - it the only way to
prevent drifting off the center line. Just correct with a little rudder just
before flair - or sometimes note real importing with trikes - but with a
tail wheel, could result in the infamous tail loop and PRANG.

Judging distance - it'll never be the same unless you have the luxury of flying
indoors, or you just never get any winds - is it that way at PNO?? Only kidding
Al.  Whoever said pitch controls speed, and throttle controls distance was 
right on - don't ever forget it.  Assuming I've got throttle - I like to shoot
just a little short - dead sticks another issue.  If you have you attitude set
up, just add a little throttle and your airspeed shouldn't change significantly.
If you have a slippery aircraft, the attitude of the craft will have to be very
flat.  That's why you rarely see flaps on 1:1 biplanes - they have *lots* of
resistance. permitting a steep, slow decent in the pattern.  The 1:1 J-3 that
I fly has a nice fat wing, when I pull back on the throttle, you can set up 
a nice approach a 65 indicated with a steep angle of decent. No flaps are 
needed - if your to high, just add a little slip - creating *lots* of drag.
It almost feels like your on an elevator, and looking down the runway on final
through the side windows a strange sensation.  If you over shoot with a flap
equipped plane on a short field with full flaps, you'd better be prepared 
for a go around - period. Be it full scale or models.

Slip - keep you windward wing down - into the wind.  Feed in the aileron and
rudder at the same time - `feeling' it throughout the procedure.  Hold it
as long as necessary - right up to flair if needed, then straighten out
and flair.

Enough babbling - but certainly a topic that always, at least in my book,
can use rehearsal. Some great ideas here - keep um rolling.

Brian

    Okay, things are starting to make sense, but I want to make sure
    I understand flairing.  Flairing is done by adding POWER and not
    AILERON.....correct?  I guess its time to train the left hand!
    
    For some reason, this makes me nervous.  I don't like to add power
    just before the plane touches down.  But until I try it, I'll take
    the words of the experts. (its kinda like trusting a compass over
    your own instincts....)                                       
    
    Thanks for the info.
    
    Ken

    This will only serve to support what has been said so far about
    how to control speed and distance in landing.  This pertains to
    full scale aircraft, but the flight characteristics are the same.
    
    I had occasion to watch a lot of "short field" landings at a dirt
    strip in Korea.  The aircraft type using this strip were T-6's,
    C-47's, C-54's, P-2V's and others.
    
    "Throttle controls distance".  -  the accepted practice at this
    strip was as follows, and if they didn't do it this way they were
    in deep rice paddy muck:  
    
    Come in short....then hold the aircraft up with throttle....so called
    "Draggin' it in".  The when at the fence - chop it !  that's it !
    
    Every once in a while someone would come down the chute in what would
    otherwise be a normal approach, go a little "long", and then - - - !
    Fun to watch, but I wouldn't care to share the emotions of panic that
    some of those jockeys must have had.
    
    The point I'm trying to make here, without getting into war stories,
    is that it's true; your "Throttle" will get you up and down, rather 
    than your elevator. (At least in this "low speed" flight realm).
    
    john

    Ken,
    
    	There's alot of thing we do in the realm of flying that we take
    for granted. You don't realize how complicated it is until you try
    and put it into words. In a previous reply, I said "flare as needed".
    Three little words. Now let's see what it takes to explain that.
    
    	Please do not equate flaring with adding power or giving any
    alieron input. That's not to say you wouldn't do either, but if
    it's anything, it's PART of flaring and not a description of flaring.
    
    	My definition of flaring would be "that part of the landing
    sequence, usually the very last thing, during which you end your
    approach descent and begin to slow the plane so that it settles
    softly onto the runway."
    
    	Let's begin with the down wind leg. We'll assume that your initial
    approach altitude is correct and that you have mastered your approach
    descent. So, you chop your throttle and begin your descent to the
    runway. You already understand that once you chop the throttle,
    the plane will drop it's nose and begin to come down. In order to
    keep this descent at an acceptable rate, you will add in some up
    elevator, or add power as the situation demands. The object is to
    establish a rate of descent that, once you have gone through the
    entire approach, will put you 3 or 4 feet up over the threshold
    of the runway.
    
    	Now your coming over the end of the runway. If you do nothing,
    and just maintain the rate of descent you have established, you
    will land hard. The best you can say is that you "flew" the plane
    onto the ground. What you actually want to do at this point is
    "transition" into your landing. You do this by flaring. As you cross
    the end of the runway, you need to "break" your rate of descent.
    Do this by adding just enough up elevator to level the plane and
    stop the descent. When you do this, the plane does not have the
    power to maintain level flight, so it slows some more and once again,
    begins to sink. At this point, you add a little more up elevator
    to once again attempt to maintain level flight. The same thing will
    happen (the plane cannot maintain level flight), so it will slow
    some more, and sink some more. Add more up elavator etc. until the
    plane settles gently onto the runway.
    
    	This, basically is flaring. What I described would apply mostly
    to a "No wind" situation. If your fighting a head wind, you would
    most likely carry power through your final approach, probably breaking
    your descent quite a ways out and maintaining altitude up to the
    threshold, and then cutting power and settling in using the method
    described above.
    
    	The use of power or any control input would be used for corrections
    during the approach. For example, if you flare too high, and your
    airplane is going to "drop" onto the ground, adding a touch of power
    will generally pull it through and allow you to land normally.
    
    	Different condition require different methods, but once you
    understand the basics, a little common sense should get you through
    most landings.
    
    	One more thing. Remember I said that way back when you start
    your initial approach, you would cut power and add a little up
    elevator? Well, you would be holding this up elevator to one degree
    or another all the way through your approach. Consider what makes
    the elevator and other control surfaces work. Air flowing over them.
    If your coming in short and add power, 2 things happen. You increase
    speed, which increases air flow over the elevator, which makes it
    more effective, which raises the nose. You also increase prop wash
    which helps do the same thing. That's why adding power during your
    descent raises the nose and extends your approach.
    
    Regards,
    
    Steve

    Re: .10, Ken, 
    
    I'm gonna' assume you meant elevator, not aileron.  The answer's still
    no, not necessarily.
    
    The flare maneuver is used to do the final slowing of the aircrat just
    prior to touch down.  With a model, flare should start a foot or less
    over the runway;  the elevator is used to attempt to HOLD that last
    foot or so of altitude.  Of course, this isn't possible but in
    attempting to hold the ship off, what happens is that the angle of
    attack gradually increases as you increase the amount of up elevator,
    trying to hold the plane off.  The plane gently slows and descends the
    last few inches to a smooth touch down...when properly executed, you'll
    hit full up elevator just as the wheels touch.  If you were holding any
    throttle adjustment during the approach, NOW is the time to gently milk
    it off. If the plane balloons when you start to flare, you're too fast, 
    applied too much up elevator or both.  
    
    What I've described here is called a full stall (or 3-point) landing
    wherein the aircraft's wing is completely stalled (generating no lift)
    just at the point of touch down.  For a taildragger, all 3-wheels will/
    should make contact at the same time.  For a trike-geared ship, the
    mains will touch first with the nosewheel up out of harm's way.
    
    Wheel-landings (taildraggers only) are preferred by fighter type models
    as they are much more realistic.  This is where the ship is essentially
    flown onto the ground, mains first, and it rolls out in a horizontal
    attitude carrying the tail high 'til speed bleeds off sufficiently for
    the tail to drop when the wing finally quits flying/producing lift. 
    Once learned, the wheel-landing is easy enough and is much prettier
    IMHO than a stall-landing but the full-stall should be mastered _first_
    so the mechanics of landing can be ingrained into you.  Wheel-landings
    require a full understanding of the landing maneuver as touch down
    speed is higher and the wing is still flying which can get you into
    _real_ trouble if you don't understand what's happening.
    
    Perfect the full-stall technique first, then we can speak to the
    technique for wheel-langings.    

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

    BOO BOO made in my last reply.  I met to say ELEVATOR not aileron.
    
    So correct me if I still misunderstand....when landing you must
    use your elevator somewhat ALONG with power?  If so then I have
    not been too far off.  I just need to try the power trick to
    maintain a proper glide pattern.
    
    I usually try to cut power on the downwind leg and bleed off my
    altitude during the rest of downwind along with base and by the
    time I turn on final I should be pretty well set, but from that
    point on I use the elevator to maintain a level nose and add just
    a tad more just before she touches down, in essence, I flair.
    Its just different with the MUNK....probably due to its weight.
    
    Ken

Under normal circumstances, and plane should land when it's fully, 
aerodynamically stalled - optimally, just above the ground.  Be it a 
747 or ultralight, the 1:1's are the same.  Some circumstances 
do however require you to "fly" the plane on the ground.  For example,
if I flying the 1:1 J-3 on a windy day, I would opt for a "wheel" landing,
landing the plane on the main gear, and slowing it down on the ground, letting
the tail wheel settle - same for trikes.

So in most cases, you want to hold the plane off the ground until it STOPS
flying.  The inadvertent "bounce" occurs when the plane is landed without 
a full stall.  The elevator should usually be all the way back just when you
touch down.

/Brian

    Ken, after reading Al's response and re-reading mine, I was in error
    when I suggested starting the flare 3 to 4 feet up. Don't ask me
    why I said that, but I did. Al is in fact correct when he states
    that you should continue the approach down to about a foot, then
    start the flare and keep feeding in up elevator trying to maintain
    that foot.

                Nobody  has    mentioned   a  totally  different  landing
        technique.  This one is absolutely mandatory with my Byron's F16,
        and is used by all passenger jests that I fly on.
        
                Try to notice the  nose  attitude  next time you are on a
        landing airliner.  Its pointed  UP!   And the jet comes in with a
        fair amount of power.  This  is  the  ONLY way to keep speed down
        and  completely  consistent  with  the  "use elevator  for  speed
        control" principle.  In order to prevent the plane from coming in
        at  too  steep  a  descent  the throttle is applied,  once  again
        consistent  with  the  stated principles.  When landing my F16  I
        apply up elevator as soon as I get on to the  final  leg and then
        use  the  throttle  all  the  time  to maintain the right rate of
        descent.  As the plane closes in on the ground even more throttle
        is fed in until it makes a "perfect" touchdown.  I quoted perfect
        because on a  grass  field  the F16 slams the nose wheel into the
        ground as soon as the main wheels touch the grass.
        
                If I try to  execute  the  landing  approaches  described
        earlier the F16 floats right through the field at high speed.  No
        way will you get it on the ground.
        
                The fascinating thing is that this  type  of landing also
        works on a regular prop plane.   You better have some experience,
        because you don't want to raise the nose  so  high  that the wing
        stalls.  But this is a great manouver if  you  want  to  land the
        plane at basically zero speed.

                      _ 
                     / |
           _----____/==|
         /__====------- 
             |-          
            /              
           /               
         Hang in there!      
                           
             Anker           

    Would any of our experts like to make some comments on landing a
    glider? Without a "noise and go" device up front, you do not have the
    "throttle controls rate of descent" facility. On the bigger machines
    with brakes/flaps/spoilers you obviously have some control over rate of
    descent, but on my simple 78" span rudder/elevator job, which floats on
    and on if you try to flare out, it seems that the only choices are to
    fly in a big field, or drive it in nose first like a javelin!
    

    I'm not all that familiar with gliders, but I'd say basically it's
    all judgment. You get one shot, and your either right or wrong.
    I think experience is the only teacher here and you learn how to
    judge your approach through repetition.
    
    As far as getting it on the field, you basically "fly" a glider
    right to the ground with no flare. Although....... with a "little"
    down elevator, gliders tend to sink vertically rather than dropping
    the nose. So, if you flare a couple of inches off the ground to
    get the plane horizontal, and then feed in a little down, it should
    settle vertically onto the runway rather than dropping the nose
    and going in like a spear.
    
    Come on glider guiders......how's it done

    We'll it is true about gliders that you only get one shot.  I was home
    at Christmas and me and my brother were flying his power plane off of a
    two lane road out in the sticks.  There was a little crosswind and he
    was nervous about landing on the road.  I told him that I would land it
    for him.  So the first thing that I did was pull throttle and trim and
    killed the engine.  I told him "OK, its a glider now!!!!" and proceeded
    to grease it in on the road right in front of us!
    
    People do have trouble landing gliders.  I preach that a good landing
    is made in the pattern and not on final (same goes for power).  I tell
    people to fly a nice square pattern and learn to judge when and where
    you should be.  While flying on your downwind leg if you are short turn
    early, if you are long turn later and just adjust every leg of your
    pattern as needed.  Some things you can do is to extend your base leg
    past the point of where you would turn final and let it continue on
    base and then make a 180 degree turn and fly back along base and turn
    final if things look OK.  The whole thing is to just adjust and be
    creative in the pattern until things look about right.
    
    I would not advocate a beginner trying to force a plane onto the ground
    because the down elevator translates to speed which translate back into
    altitude and next thing you know they are in trouble.  On my Gentle
    Lady on small fields I would just put it into a comfortable circle
    inside the field and let it loose altitude.  Get used to flying it
    close to the ground and make your pattern low and slow (normal
    airspeed).  The most important thing just like in power is not to try
    to get altitude by using elevator.  Like they said before the last
    thing you want is a stall 10' of the ground(but with a 2m poly plane it
    should survive to fly again due to the low mass).
    
    Some tricks I would use to get a plane down from altitude are if you
    are high enough fly inverted (Let a power guy try that with a plane
    that has 12 degrees of dihedreal in it!!!!) then as you get lower pull
    it out like a split-S  or put it into a very tight circle (almost stand
    it up on its wing verticaly), but this takes lots of up elevator to
    counter act for the loss in lift and will generate quite a bit of
    airspeed so leave yourself some room to bleed off the airspeed as you
    roll out of this death spiral.
    
    On 2 min percision duration tasks I would stay at altitude until 1:20
    and then go into the death spiral.  Hey it worked and won me a couple
    contests.  I could land that gentle lady (no spoilers, no nothing)
    better than I could most anything else.
    
    
    Bottom line for landing gliders, hit the ground with the wings level
    where ever that is and you will be fine.  Accuracy can always be
    improved with a plane that still flys!!!!!!
    
    Happy Landings.....
    

    Re: .-1, Mark,
    
    Wow! Some of those techniques sound pretty bee-zarre!!  But, having
    almost zero glider experience, I have to yield to yer' experience and
    assume these are good techniques.
    
    As I said, I have almost no glider time but landing can't be _too_ much
    different than landing an oldtimer which has no flaps, spoilers, etc.,
    just rudder and elevator.  The technique I use that works great for me
    is to start orbiting the intended landing area while still up quite
    high.  As the ship slowly loses altitude with each orbit, I steadily 
    thighten the diameter of the circular orbit.  The path through the air
    would look like a coil spring with a much smaller diameter at the
    ground than at the top, sorta' like the classic image most of us have
    of a tornado.
    
    I keep the ship out in front of me at all times and, as the ship
    finally gets low enough (a pure judgement call), I break out of the
    circling pattern and fly a loose rectangular pattern, adjusting the
    length of each leg to suit.  Once on final, yer' pretty much committed;
    if yer' too low/short, that's the way it's gonna' be...without engine,
    you just can't stretch it beyond a small amount.  If too high/long, I
    "S" turn it gently to spill off excess altitude/airspeed to the desired
    level.  Now, simply guide the ship to the desired spot and flare just
    before touch down.
    
    This and, really, ANY technique requires that you make a number of
    judgement calls based on knowledge of how the ship should appear at
    various stages of the approach.  Again, and I can't stress this enough,
    the only way to acquire this knowledge is PRACTICE, PRACTICE, PRACTICE.
    If you don't know instinctively how the plane should appear at the
    critical points in the pattern, no technique in the world will make a
    landing automatic for you.  You simply must practice until things
    kind'a go on automatic for you and, if you practice enough, I assure
    you that day _will_ come.
    
    One last parting shot:  If you want to go up, give the plane some up-
    elevator.  If you want it to go down, give it _more_ up-elevator!  The
    message not too cleverly hidden in there is to always be alert to stall
    when using up-elevator near the ground.  A snap, spin and crash from
    even low altitudes (20-30' and below) is almost always a nasty thing
    and it's frequently fatal!!  

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

    Bizar????  Maybe the point you are missing is, in some of my techniques
    you noticed I was trying to get the glider down in a hurry.  That is
    usually because it a percision duration event.  In other words put the
    glider on the ground at 6 mins, not 6 mins and 15 secs.  So that is why
    they may seem a little aggressive.
    
    Take care
    

    Re: .-1, Mark,
    
    Nope!  I perceived what'cha meant but was puzzled as to how flying
    inverted would help slow the ship, especially when it's followed by a
    split-S.  Again, I bow readily to yer' expertise in a field I have
    virtually no exposure to.  I'd certainly never contest anything to do
    with sailplanes.
    
    I think my reaction emanated from the perspective of a relative novice, 
    which I AM when it comes to sailplanes.  These techniques sounded a bit 
    bizarre/radical if my primary objective was simply to get down in a 
    restricted area all in one piece without benefit of flaps/spoilers/speed   
    brakes, etc.
      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

        Re:         <<< Note 1197.22 by PNO::CASEYA "THE DESERT RAT (I-RC-AV8)" >>>

        Al,
        
                In most  glider  events  the  point  is  to  make a point
        landing.  Pretty  landings don't get you anything.  The number of
        points you make by being within a few inches of the center of the
        circle  will make the difference between an  average  performance
        and being in the leaders.  Making a  pretty landing is easy, just
        peep it flying until the ground catches up with  you.   Trying to
        get it to land at a specific point without the  ability  to  make
        another  circuit  is  a  different  story and VERY different from
        power plane flying.
        
        
                      _ 
                     / |
           _----____/==|
         /__====------- 
             |-          
            /              
           /               
         Hang in there!      
                           
             Anker           

    
    I have to echo Anker's earlier reply about how to lose altitude
    quickly if you don't know how to crab and don't have flaps.
    Every time I see someone consistently coming in too hot I suggest
    they raise the nose just a tad during the entire approach.  They are
    almost always amazed at how much difference this makes.  Don't
    overdo it (obviously), since the resulting stall/snap won't be very
    pretty.  But give it a try, I for one have excellent results with it.
    BTW, still use the throttle (as mentioned severl times) to control the
    flight path.
    
    Bill

    re: .-2  Flying inverted is not the most efficent use of an airfoil, so
    hence it looses altitude pretty good, plus the WOW factor is thrown in
    also for the spectators.  This is when you are spec'd out and want to
    come down without pulling the wings off from excessive speed and you
    have no spoilers/flaps etc.  The split-s is done with plenty of
    altitude left.

    I think what Mark had in mind by flying inverted, was to increase
    the sink rate while not increasing forward speed, and I assume,
    would be done at a higher altitude, not during the last few seconds
    of flight. This technique works well with lightly loaded Gentle
    Lady type aircraft that should be kept at lower speeds and not horsed
    around too much lest you snap a main spar.
    I usually have my best luck in spot landings by keeping it a little
    faster and lower than I think I should, then dorking it in and letting
    it slide up to the spot. I virtually never do this sucessfully.
    
    Terry
    

    Gee I guess Pattern fliers are the best landers then...
    
    They have power on,land on or near a spot and have to make it look
    pretty
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    							:-):-)
    
    
    Tom

    No Tom Glider guiders are the best landers......
    
    They have to land at the exact center of a 50' diam circle percisly at
    the specified time and with no busted pieces or missing parts, right
    side up.
    
    All This with NO ENGINE!!!!!!!
    

    I pretty much agree with what's been said so far but an important point
    has been left out. That is the difference between how the elevator
    affects the rate of decent vs how it affects the angle of decent.
    Everything that I'm going to say here can be found in the book "Stick
    and Rudder" by  Wolfgang Longschlige (the spelling of the author's name
    is wrong but it goes something like that). This is a full scale pilot's
    book and I've seen it in a number of book stores. The book explains
    this better than I can but I'll try to get the basic idea across. BTW,
    this book was copyrighted sometime during the 1940's, the information
    in there is timeless and I highly recommend it.

    Most of what I'm going to say here applies to the longer term effects
    which happen when the controls are kept in a more or less constant
    position and when the engine is either off or at idle. The same
    arguments work if the engine is producing thrust but I won't go into
    that right now to keep this shorter. At the moment controls are moved
    to a new position, there are transient effects which damp out into the
    longer term steady state conditions (more about this later). 

    First the rate of sink...  As up elevator is increased (in a long term
    sense), the rate of decent decreases until the angle of attack has
    increased enough for the wing to stall. This part is pretty simple,
    pulling in up elevator tends to make the rate of sink lower (assuming
    that you don't stall).

    Now the decent angle... This is more complicated. The angle of decent
    is determined by the lift to drag ratio (L/D) that the aircraft is
    operating at. If the L/D is, say, 10 then for every 10' that the
    aircraft moves forwards, it drops 1'. If the L/D were 5 then it would
    drop 1' for every 5' of forward travel (twice as much). Now we get to
    what the elevator does. As the angle of attack (AOA) of the wing (and
    airplane) changes, the L/D changes. The elevator is the control that
    determines the angle of attack. At some elevator setting (i.e. angle of
    attack) which varies from airplane to airplane, the L/D is at it's
    maximum. For a given altitude the max L/D AOA gives you the greatest
    distance before you hit the ground. The max L/D occurs at a fairly low
    AOA which translates into a fairly high flight speed. As up elevator
    (and therefore AOA) is increased), the drag increases due to the higher
    AOA (basically the same effect that you get when you hold your hand out
    of a moving car and change the angle of your palm), the L/D decreases,
    and the angle of decent gets steeper. The practical effect of this is
    that as up elevator is increased (again assuming that the stall AOA is
    never reached), the airplane drops at a steeper angle (note that the
    sink RATE is lower but the sink ANGLE is steeper). At first this seems
    counter-intuitive it makes complete sense once you work through the
    physics of what is happening.

    Now a practical example... Let's say that you're out a ways, a little
    low, and your engine dies. The best thing to do is the head back in a
    fairly fast glide (a glide, NOT a dive). This gives you a fairly good
    L/D and gets you over the field with the most altitude (or closer to
    the field if you were really low). Another reaction could have been to
    give it up elevator to attempt to "keep it in the air longer". Yes, the
    up elevator will keep it the air longer but the the increased AOA will
    kill you L/D and make you come down shorter than a faster glide would
    have. The point is that the thing that you want to do with the altitude
    that you've got is not to "stay in the air longer" but to "travel the
    greatest horizontal distance".

    At times I've read in the magazines about guys going dead stick then
    trying to "stretch their glide" and snap stalling the plane into the
    ground. This should NEVER happen since you get the best distance at a
    fairly low AOA. If you're near the stall then you sink rate will be low
    but you'll be coming down steeply. This ISN'T what you want if you're
    trying to get back to the field and aren't sure that you'll make it.

    One of the things that's tempting to say after seeing this stuff for
    the first time is "but, if I'm going along and I put in up elevator
    then then plane goes up..". If you're flying one of those crazy Panics
    with a 120 up front at full throttle then yep, put in up and it'll go
    UP. If you're gliding, then feeding in the up makes the plane zoom up
    and gain a little altitude before it stabilizes at the greater sink
    angle. For a few seconds the plane will stay above the original glide
    slope. Eventually the higher sink angle catches up with you and you
    fall below the original glide slope. The same thing happens in reverse
    when you reduce the amount of up elevator. If the engine is producing
    thrust then all of this gets modified since engine thrust will cancels
    an equivalent amount of aircraft drag, which in turn changes the
    effective L/D and therefore the glide angle (or climb angle if there is
    enough thrust).

    All of this ties back into the stuff about using the engine to control
    sink rate and the elevator to control airspeed but this is getting a
    little longer than I had intended so I'm going to cut it off here since
    it's all in the book anyways.

Glenn Schrader

Dorking it in isn't the "best" landing though...

What was Kay's comment about Competitive Javelin guiding?? ;^)

    "Best", in this case means maximum landing points awarded; without
    parts falling off or the airplane coming to rest inverted. As for
    being javelins, heck yes, why else build the fuselages from
    kevlar and carbon fiber?
    
    Terry
    

And there I was just stretching another 5-10 seconds out of the ground effect.

;^)

    I get a major kick out of slipping my RC planes out of the sky real
    steep and under control.  I have a small bud nosen champ that flys
    so realistically its definitely not RC trainer material but because
    of its realistic characteristics it slips great.
    
    Final leg is no place to learn to slip you pride and joy however!
    
    I learn the process on each of my planes up high where I can blow
    it and try again.  Lower the power to where you would if you were
    going to land.  Begin by putting in some rudder, as the plane begins
    to turn with rudder application slowly counter the turn with opposite
    aileron.  Keep progressing with this until you are able to counter
    a full rudder deflection with opposite aileron and only have the
    wing you are lowering with aileron slightly lower than the opposite
    side.  You'll know you have it right when its flying along sideways
    and holding a straight track, neddless to say but unless you have
    the power too high it will be coming down too!
    
    Since you are presenting so much area to the wind you can let the
    nose down and not zoom the plane.  If you do raise the nose it will
    slow down quickly.  Some planes have increased stall speeds or
    aggravated stall characteristics in a slip, do give it a try up
    high first.
    
    If you are landing in a crosswind, be sure to have the lowered wing
    on the upwind side of the crosswind.  You can get tipped over easy
    if you do it the other way. Also the aggravated stall characteristics
    occassionally show themselves quicker when you slip away from the
    wind.  I understand that the aggravated stall that can occur when 
    slipping usually comes from "blanketing" of the tail surfaces that
    leads to buffeting and temporary loss of pitch control.
    
    Not all of my planes can be made to slip.  I have a couple with
    what are essentially no dihedral wings where right rudder causes
    the left wing to dip, you pattern flyers are familiar with this.
    
    If you are having trouble getting it to slip try to find the point
    at which your plane will fly level with the least power then begin
    crossing the controls.
    
    Will            
    

    Ajai,
    
    Tom's idea to use a liece of fuel-tubing to extend the vent to the top
    of the tank also sounds good if yer' having trouble getting the
    bent-brass tube to cooperate.  Just remember to notch the sides of the
    fuel tubing with a razor blade/knife or equivalent the same as
    described for the brass and it should provide the identical function
    and safeguards.
    
    Several times now you've mentioned "holding the nose up" during yer'
    landing approaches and I have to comment that, if that's _really_
    what'cher doin', yer' forming a BAD habit.  You should never try to
    hold the nose up with elevator in low/no power situations 'til the
    plane is at "flatten and flare altitude!"  Doing so is simply BEGGING
    for a stall/snap/spin/crash episode and, while yer' trainer might be
    letting you get away with it, less docile/forgiving/friendly sport
    types may NOT!!  Try to get into the habit of letting the aircraft
    glide to touchdown with the nose slightly down, only raising the nose
    with elevator the last coupla' feet as you flatten the glide and,
    finally, flare to touchdown.  This is how the higher performance types
    will DEMAND to be handled so you might as well be learning that way
    right now as opposed to developing a habit that's almost guaranteed to
    get you into deep-sneakers very shortly down the road.
    
    Thanx fer' the well wishes this weekend.  I really want to do well and
    bring some "braggin' rights" back to the notesfile and will do my best
    to make that happen.  I don't believe a win is possible, taking into
    account the _considerable_ competition, especially in the hardware
    department.  Heck-a-mighty, some of these guys have 3-times the $$$ in
    their landing gear as I have in my entire airplane.  However, the ol'
    MiG continues to fare respectably in competition and a good strong
    finish in the top-10 (or even 5) is certainly within the realm of
    possibility.  I'll give 'er muh' best shot, amigo.
						 __
				|      |        / |\	   	       
      	         \|/		|______|__(o/--/  | \	   	       
      | |        00	       <|  ~~~  ____ 04 ---- | --------------------
    |_|_|        (O>o		|\)____/___|\_____|_/	   Adios amigos, Al
      |     \__(O_\_	        |	  |___/	 o	   (The Desert Rat)

    ref. previous notes on high angle of attack landings.
    
         As most of you probably know, a symetrical airfoil will allow
    a nose high approach, using power to control the rate of descent.
    This is your typical carrier approach.  However, with an R/C aircraft,
    a constant angle of attack approach is problematical .  Keeping track
    of how much elevator that you are applying will give a good indicator
    of the amount of lift that is left in your wing.  From there its all
    power controlled descent to touchdown.  Knowing the low speed handling
    characteristics of your ship (established with experimentation at
    higher altitudes) is essential.  Stalling and crashing on landing is
    more often the result of insufficient familiarity and a lack of
    practice.  Landing is one of the prettiest manuevers that an aircraft
    executes.  Practice makes them better.
    
    
    
    David  

    OK, jeopardy contestants, here is the first question.
    
    How do you do a sideslip? Can all planes do it to differing degrees? I
    know the basic technique is to apply opposite ailerons and rudder, and
    you modulate one or the other control to maintain aircraft attitude. I
    would like to hear how you do it wrt wind, and where you should be in
    your pattern so you can then do a landing.
    
    I want to do those 45 to 90 degrees to the field side-slips, hedge-hop,
    then land.
    
    ajai
    

    Ajai,
    
    	When you master those 90 degree to the field side slips, please
    let me know so I can video the feat. 8^)
    
    	Basically, you've got it down. Opposite rudder and aileron. You
    just want to make sure you do it so that your "up wind" wing is the one 
    you drop. Picture yourself sitting in the cockpit. You have a right
    to left cross wind. You'll want to feed in left rudder and right
    aileron to keep the right wing down into the wind. You don't want
    to raise the right wing and let the wind get under it.
    
    The side slip is done on final approach. When depends on how high you 
    are. In your case, I'd start about 2 miles out. 8^) Actually, in a
    typical CMRCM approach you could start it just past the dirt road on a 
    left to right approach. The idea being that you should be just short
    of the runway apron when you abort the slip and straighten everything
    out. 
    
    Steve

    Slipping is one of the few basic maneuvers that I have found to be 
    MUCH easier in a full scale plane than a model...  In a 1:1 plane, 
    you can get a much better feel for the slip, and the amount of 
    each control to hold...  In addition, you are using your feet on
    the rudders rather than telling both hands to do opposite things.
    
    My opinion is that slips with R/C models is one of the most 
    difficult maneuvers to learn.  Being close to the ground, there is
    little room for mistakes...
    
    cheers,
    jeff
    

>>    	When you master those 90 degree to the field side slips, please
>>    let me know so I can video the feat. 8^)

You!!

That referred to fuselage position/attitude, not flight path (which could be 
more like 45 degrees).
    
>>    The side slip is done on final approach. When depends on how high you 
>>    are. In your case, I'd start about 2 miles out. 8^)

Aw C'mon. You haven't seen my 20 feet high t&g patterns on those evenings 
I decide to do 50 or a 100 t&g's! Shake off those knees-knocking-beginner
flapping attempts you have pictured in your head, will ya? :-)

Re -.1, I have to agree somewhat, since my own experience being a full
scale glider pilot bear out your comments, Jeff. However, I have seen Tom 
Kosowski [sp?] slip in and out with his Piper Cub (1/3 scale though?),
that makes me feel real envious. Maybe it is big enough.

My FS seems to "dive" on its side. Not too impressive. And the feeble side
slips don't make me drool

ajai 

    >each control to hold...  In addition, you are using your feet on
    >the rudders rather than telling both hands to do opposite things.
    
    Yes that is a difficult thing - coordinating the hands - reminds me
    of those early days coordinating the ailerons when the plane was coming
    towards you and then away - but it then just sinks in and you forget
    about it. Can't really say taht of slipping yet though. I think as Ajai
    say there in .-1 that its easier with a larger model. But I keep
    trying !
    
    >My opinion is that slips with R/C models is one of the most 
    >difficult maneuvers to learn.  Being close to the ground, there is
    >little room for mistakes...
   
    Simply Yes !
    
    Eric.

    Steve,
    	Wouldn't you want to apply Right Rudder in a left to right cross
    wind?  You want to yaw the nose into the wind when side slipping in for
    a landing unless I'm missing something here.
    
    Confused
    

    Hummmmm.....Now your going to go and make me think!!!!!!! Did I
    slip about the slip???? Unless someone else wants to correct me, 
    I'll stand with what I said before, at least for now. First of all, 
    unless we both have opposite pictures in our minds, if the wind is
    blowing left to right--------------->>>>>>>> and you apply right
    rudder --------------->>>>>>> you'd be pointing the nose down wind,
    not into the wind. Other than that, the idea behind a side slip is to 
    maintain a straight in approach while presenting the side of your 
    aircraft to the forward direction of flight creating all kinds of drag, 
    thus dropping you out of the sky (in a controlled manner). You counter 
    the yaw effect with opposite aileron to keep the plane going straight
    ahead. The other rule in cross wind landings is to keep the upwind wing 
    down. So, in the example above (arrows) you are correct that you would
    apply right rudder and left aileron, but I think your correct for
    different reasons than you might have thought.
    
    Steve
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    Now I agree with you, Steve.  You want to point the nose into the wind
    and keep the up wind wing low when sideslipping in for a cross wind
    landing.  You only need the opposite aileron if the plane has lots of
    roll coupling with the rudder.  
    
    Charlie
    

    Well, this afternoon at Crow Island was fun. I notched up 4 flights for
    a total of 86 minutes of flying time. It was the first time that I was
    flying at a new site on my own, and boy, did it feel different! I can
    just imagine how hard it must be for those competing around the
    country, to learn *that* aspect of flying - i.e. being able to deliver
    the piloting skills honed at the home field  at a different place!
    
    Dan Snow, Dan Weier, Evil Eric (the organiser), Charlie WAtt, Dave
    Walter, Jim Cavanagh, Jim Reith, Jeff Friedrichs, Kay Fisher (did I
    miss someone?) were at the field. I'll leave out the details, but
    everyone had a good time.
    
    Jim's engine quit, and he had a long haul back. The trees let him go,
    and he disappeared into a hollow at the end of the field, which was
    filled with water - a fairly decent sized pond. he was lucky to land
    _just_ at the shore, about 6" from water!!
    
    Why am I putting all this here - Ah! Yes, I was practising side
    slipping most of the time, though having 4+ planes in the air on many
    occassions made for some disconcerting moments! The plane seemed to
    sideslip better the wrong way - i.e. with the windward side of the wing
    up!! 
    
    As I got better, I got lower. Upon Kay's query, I checked out the
    rate/angle
    of decent hands off, vs side slipping - and found them to be the same.
    The only difference, as he pointed, is that I didn't build up speed
    SSing.
    
    Tomorrow is supposed to hit record breaking temperatures - 75+ - and by
    law, Injuns have a right to enjoy Indian Summers by flying their
    planes...
    
    :-)
    
    gotta run
    
    ajai
    
    

    I'm having a hard time picturing how far away from the runway the trees
    are.  Here in Colorado Springs, it's not the trees as much as the hills
    and cattle that make landing difficult.
    
    John

    I think .41, Schrader, gave the best technical explaination of the
    effect of angle of attack on landing.  Real planes have published
    speeds for things like best angle of climb, best rate of climb and best
    glide speed.  All of these things address the angle of attack vs drag
    ratio.  As he said, increased angle of attack means increased drag. 
    The elevator and the throttle interact in that they are trying to do
    the same thing, that is control lift.  The elevator does it through
    changes in angle of attack and the throttle does it through speed
    (airflow over the wing).  A change in one always affects the other.
    
    However, only one of them is 100% reliable, the elevator.  I always
    make my landings power off (engine at idle, not stopped).  It protects
    me from an unexpected engine failure and as long as it is running I can
    still use it in an emergency if I judged wrong.  To get a full scale
    license you have to demonstrate simulated dead stick landings and I
    always taught my students to maintain as little throttle over the fence
    as possible. I do not believe in the "drag it in over the fence approach"