I will be starting at ATPs charlotte location in March with Credit for private, and I’ve been watching some training videos aside from the required self study. I learned to fly an approach to landing using pitch for airspeed and power for altitude. I watched a video on stabilized approaches in the training library, and ATP apparently teaches the pitch for glidepath power for airspeed method. Am I going to need to teach myself this other method or continue the way I know.
You need to learn how ATP wants you to do it. Power for airspeed and pitch
for altitude is the proper way. It makes flying an ILS a lot easier.
I too was taught the way you were, which kind of works in forward CG
airplanes, but as you get into bigger jets it becomes difficult to fly a
stabilized approach. So, do yourself a favor now and learn the proper way.
Pitching for airspeed and power for altitude is the most backwards thing the FAA has ever come up with. So according to the FAA’s logic, when you want to take off, you should pump the yoke until you get up enough speed, THEN add power to rotate. Madness.
I think the question is either you put more credence in the flight instructor at your local FBO or ATP who have been training pilots for the airlines for 40+ years. Flight training isn’t cheap and you need to have confidence in the program you’re investing in. If you think ATP doesn’t know what their doing OR your local instructor knows better it begs the question why are you planning on training with ATP?
First off lets be clear, please. I never said I didn’t have confidence in ATP or that I thought either flight school was more knowledgable. I came to the forum to hear opinions on the best way to approah this. Obviously my goal is to be up to speed upon arrival at ATP or I wouldn’t have asked the question.
Yes let’s be clear. The CLEAR title of your post is “My landing technique vs ATP” and you follow by clearly asking “Am I going to need to teach myself this other method or continue the way I know”. You then clearly state “I came to the forum to hear opinions on the best way to approah this”. If you do in fact have faith in ATP’s training then clearly you should follow that it.
The good news is no one expecting you to “teach yourself” anything. You’re not the first person to show up with your PPL and some potentially bad habits. It’s not a problem. Training pilots is what ATP does and they do it well.
You will find that in aviation there are often multiple ways to do the same thing. Your question was a good one and I guarantee you that you will transition incredibly easily to flying ATP’s way. You will find that it just makes more sense.
I could have worded the title a little bit different. That is basically what i was trying to ask. Will i need to have learned the new technique by march (which i will try to do) or if for some reason I haven’t will ATP help me sorry for the confusion and thank you for the help.
So Chris is landing the hardest to do in flying? I’m going on my 2nd flight with ATP the following weekend and wanted to know if I need to keep only the right rudder down when taking off or hold it down while using the left? You were telling me that I need to use the right rudder to take off, why is that? I won’t get to load as it isn’t alowed for insurance reasons is what Mac told me but it looks very difficult how long did it take you to get that dialed in just in normal weather?
Load?? I typed Land! Sheesh sorry !
It has been so long since I have flown a single engine airplane that I am not really comfortable giving instruction on it. Talk to your instructor and follow their advice.
Ya probably another stupid question… I’ll ask when I go up on my 2nd flight next Sat TX Chris
you step on the right rudder to counter the left turning tendency of the SES (Single engine Ship), its get pretty bad when you apply full power during takeoff . You also step on the rudder to counter act adverse yaw when you roll aka bank or turn the airplane.
I’m currently enrolled in the ATP program myself. The pitch for airspeed power for altitude method is taught to aid in slow flight and more specifically landing configurations. The method becomes very useful and is quite structured as you enter different phases of your landing pattern. To the person who asked about rudder input, it definitely varies depending on wind conditions. However significant right rudder is almost always needed in takeoff as well as some landing approaches due to p-factor. If you are just jumping in to the program you will definitely have an urge to over think the amount of rudder input. Eventually it will become more instinctual and you will find yourself casually giving rudder inputs without even thinking about it.
When you land, you are in the reverse region of command. As one other person out it, essentially slow flight. In this configuration, the plane requires pitch for airspeed and power for altitude during the landing phase of flight. Anything else and you are getting yourself closer to a stall than you would want.
Imagine this, you come in to land in a stabilized approach and at the last minute you decide you want to purposely float half way down the runway at your curremt landing speed of 65kias. If you were to use pitch for altitude, you would level off and then start to sink. You would then add power and have to pitch back down to not climb changing your pitch back where it was i the begining. If you were to use power for altitude, you would increae the power holding the pitch constant, your airspeed would remain constant and your sink rate from landing would atop and you could maintain altitude down the length of the runway, fully configured, amd stable. This goes for cessnas as mucj as it goes for jets. And in a jet, if you try tonise power for airspeed in landing config, you will have a verry unstable approach.
CFI CFII MEI, ATP, Pilot Instructor at Airlines
I actually beg to differ. The definition of the region of reverse command is the flight regime in which flight at a higher airspeed requires a lower power setting and flight at a lower airspeed requires a higher power setting in order to maintain altitude. This doesn’t mean power for altitude. It’s a common misconception. It still means pitch for altitude and power for airspeed, but when you’re flying at slow speeds, on the back side of the power curve (the region of reverse command) the drag being produced is more induced than parasite. In order to overcome the induced drag, more power is required to maintain the airspeed.
I ran across this video today and thought about this thread, wondering if the “pitch for airspeed/power for altitude” was in play for these take-offs…
Disclaimer: I have no flight experience. I’m just a dreamer and am living vicariously through reading these posts!
No matter what kind of takeoff you’re doing you always want to pitch for
airspeed, because power is “set,” relatively speaking. During other phases
of flight like cruise, descent and landing, it’s pitch for altitude and
power for airspeed because power is available, or not “set.”