February 20, 2013 at 12:50 am #84059
I recently bought a C310P, and my instructor and I have been trying to “dial in” the correct approach/landing speeds and power settings. Blue line is 111.5 mph and we’ve been maintaining that airspeed until over the fence. Then, we’ve started to slowly pull the power back at that point. However, we’ve also noted that we lose airspeed rapidly without any power (even with the runway clearly made) and the airplane will even stall out at about 2-3 ft. off the runway (roughly 85 mph). This, of course, is very frustrating, so I’m hoping to get some insight into the “pros” and “cons” of keeping some power in until the wheels are on the ground. I’m also looking for any other techniques used to grease your landings and minimizing the impact on the gear. This all seems to make complete sense but also increases the landing roll. So, another consideration is in regard to short field landings. Appreciate your thoughts on the matter.February 20, 2013 at 1:52 am #97909
I flew a P model quite a few years ago, but I recall approx. 18″ MP on final, holding blue line until landing assured, full flaps, then slowly bleeding power back to idle entering ground affect. I recall 95-100 MPH over the fence. If it is stalling and landing hard, you are probably flaring too high and/or pulling power off too quickly.
Using normal procedures, the 310 will land pretty short. You can come in slower, behind the power curve, but you have to be vigilant. A couple of hours with an experienced 310 pilot would be most helpful. Your instructor should not be entering uncharted territory here. It’s not rocket science, but you can bend it up if you get behind it. Seek an experienced twin Cessna pilot/instructor until you are comfortable.February 20, 2013 at 1:59 am #97910
18″ is a good approach setting, and I keep blue line until landing assured as well. Below 15″ and blue line, our N model with 3-bladed props will drop like a rock – the props block out a good portion of the wings and elevator. I keep 15″ until very close to the runway, then pull back to idle and let the plane slow down.
310s aren’t hard to land, but I found that the landing was different than planes I’d previously flown, so it simply took some getting used to. Once I got used to it, no problems.February 20, 2013 at 3:53 am #97913
Thank you, Gentlemen. I’ll incorporate your suggestions.February 20, 2013 at 4:08 am #97914
I did my ME training in a 310. It was impressive how much drag there is at low power settings coming from mostly low drag singles. I think you are really pulling the power too early. I would suggest holding the power in until just before the start of flare and not fully pulling the power until just before touch down. Between the gear and the flaps, you have something like 800 fpm of drag. At idle power, you will either quickly bleed airspeed, or come in at a higher than normal rate of descent.
If you are transitioning to the 310, I would also make sure your training includes loadings closer to gross weight and also closer to the aft limit. The plane will behave differently, most noticeable in takeoff and landing – and the amount of aft yoke movement will be very different.
It will help you if your instructor has more experience in the 310. One important point is for single engine operations you need to delay gear and flaps until the runway is truly made. The 310 does not have enough power SE to overcome this amount of drag (I don’t think any non turbine twin can climb away with flaps and gear)February 20, 2013 at 2:12 pm #97915
EPANNING: Thank you. After thinking through this feedback, I believe that you are spot on. Our landings have been pretty good overall (only a few that weren’t up to par), but I’m a perfectionist and love hearing from this group of seasoned twin cessna pilots who know exactly how to land these specific planes. No substitute for time in make/type/model, training, proficiency and safety, and this really provides a lot more clarity on this issue from those of us who love and fly twin cessnas. Also an excellent point on different CG loading. We’re actually doing some of that training this Friday. And, even though my instructor is incredibly knowledgable, has a great deal of overall and twin time, I agree that he could us a bit more specific twin cessna time. I’ll address this issue as well. Again, I appreciate the insight. It really helps.February 20, 2013 at 8:23 pm #97920quote ttalarico:
I am not as seasoned as many here! 🙂 Another thing to look at is changing your approach speed based on weight. 1.3 x Vso (stall speed with gear and flaps) defines the reference speed. The higher you are above this speed the longer your roll out will be. When to change your speed is something you will have to sort out. Blue line approaches have a safety factor but within 1/2 mile or so of touch down you can start slowing down, fine tuning landing point, adjusting power, etc. I basically keep ~ blue line until final flaps are in, and then adjust for my Vref speed as I adjust to the new flap setting, etc. I would say typically if you are blue line with approach flaps and 18″ or whatever you will be close to a typical Vref with full flaps and no to little change in power setting.
The 310 is a great plane, I was very fortunate to find one of the few available for instruction locally and it made the transition to the 421C much easier.
Here is a Vref article: http://www.swaviator.com/html/issueJA05/BasicsJA05.html that also makes good points on finding a power setting that maintain’s Vref for the config at a target rate of descent (500 fpm).
They suggest creating a reference table and this is a good idea too. As a final check prior to landing – am I at the configuration settings that I want to be at (gear, flaps, power, etc) and am I getting the performance expected (airspeed,rate of descent and pitch attitude). If not, something is wrong.
You will perfect it soon – have a great time in your 310!February 20, 2013 at 9:37 pm #97922
Thanks again, my friend. Great stuff. You take care as well!February 21, 2013 at 1:30 pm #97923
I’d definitely agree to do some practice at high loads as well as low with aft CG. I find the plane is actually easier to land heavy, but the aft CG I typically want to go in a bit faster.February 22, 2013 at 12:39 am #97926
Thanks again for the insight, TDUPUIS. Much appreciated, and we’ll be doing some of that type of work tomorrow. I’m sure that it will be very valuable!February 22, 2013 at 3:37 am #97927rwelshParticipant
You didn’t say if your 310 has VGs. With VGs, it should stall around 72 knots or 76 MPH. 85 MPH seems quite high with full flaps. The 310 can operate out of 1600 foot strips, but you will need to be way lower then blue line. So if you have the need to operate in short strips, you will need to do some short field landings beforehand. The 310 is easy to fly slow, but the risk factor goes up as you will be below blue line for awhile in landing and takeoff.February 22, 2013 at 12:23 pm #97928
The shortest I’ve done in the 310 is 1900 x 25. It wasn’t bad, but certainly less margin than from our home strip of around 2800 (which itself isn’t particularly large margin). As with any twin, the longer runway you can get the better off you are. It just depends on what your risk tolerance is and your required safety margin. For us, the runways we choose are typically dictated by where we’re going, which ends up being smaller runways in many cases. Less expensive fuel is also an important factor when we’re able to do it, which often means smaller runways. I wouldn’t want to do 1900 ft every day, but 2800 provides enough room to be comfortable for me. However, I’m glad I started off flying the plane out of ~5000 ft runways until I got used to it.
Of course, on our current vacation (snow all over) we’re opting for larger airports with better services and more expensive fuel.February 22, 2013 at 5:14 pm #97931
RWELSH: Actually no VGs, and we’ve been doing our landings with full flaps and others with less. This, of course, is part of running through various scenarios that I may face. The couple of times we’ve stalled right off of the deck have been with less than full flaps (varied settings), so the stall speed is a bit higher. However, as was pointed out earlier this week by TALLEN, I think the issue is flaring a bit too high and pulling the power back a little too soon. I’ll work on that today along with the different CG/weight configurations. Hopefully this feedback will solve the “problem” and we’ll be good to go. Also, as stated in the book, I’ll come in a bit slower and with full flaps on my short field landings, but be very conscience about being below blue line and closer to Vmc. Thanks again, everyone, for your input. Really value it, and so glad to be part of the “Twin Cessna Flyer Family”!February 23, 2013 at 2:43 am #97933
If you don’t have VGs, you might want to consider adding them. They’re cheap and it seems everyone has good things to say about them. On the other hand you do give up a knot or two in cruise, but I will accept that speed loss for the extra low speed and OEI stability that I’m told they afford you.
Disclaimer: The 310 I fly has VGs, and it and the (T)310Rs I flew a bit also all had VGs, so I don’t know what one flies like without them.March 4, 2013 at 12:15 am #98008
Thanks a million to all of you gentlemen who weighed in on this topic. After incorporating your suggestions and a little practice, I’ve got the landings nailed and I’m enjoying the heck out of my 310! Again, I really appreciate your help, encouragement and support! Really glad that I joined TTCF!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.