Author: David Jacobson

Where? + How? + When? + How much? + How fast? = the 5 Simple Keys to the JF

18.10.2020 , simple-safe-logical-affordable

Our www.jacobsonflare.com home page describes The Jacobson Flare:

Precisely. In just 3 simple sentences:

1. The Jacobson Flare’s logical, visual ‘framework’ guides pilots to a perfect touchdown in the right place, every time. 

2. Pilots are presented with a type-specific, fully-defined visual eye path, making the landing safe, sure, consistent and universal.

3. The myths that the ‘look‘, ‘feel‘, ‘judgment’ and ‘trial-and-error‘ are essential to master the landing are dispelled forever .

The page continues:

Self-compensating

The Jacobson Flare explains landings as never before.

Moreover, the Jacobson Flare self-compensates for many variables that distract pilots away from the 5 essential elements of all landings:

Where to aim; How to aim; When to flare; How much to flare; and How fast to flare.

Flown initially at a constant angle, the eye path translates naturally to a classic exponential flare curve. Generations of frustrated pilots have attempted to execute this by judgment alone. The flare is initiated from a visual fix, derived from the cockpit lower visual cut-off angle and the flight path angle.

This offers a precise and visible model for both student and instructor.

The improvement in confidence, competence and progress of pilots – at all levels – is not only breathtaking: It’s consistent and it’s measurable.

It’s also Safe. Sure. Consistent. Affordable. Quantifiable. Universal. Unassailable.

So far, so good, you say, but you are well entitled to ask: “OK, but what’s so different from what I’ve just been taught?” … or … “Why would I need it?  I’ve been landing airplanes for 20/30/40 years?” These are fair questions but, in a truly honest moment: Do you fully understand, can you explain, can you determine how and why you can perform a ‘greaser’ of a  landing on most occasions and then a ‘howler’, the very next time? We can blame a gust or some inattention or distraction; but are these reasons, or just excuses?

 

DISCLAIMER:

The following material is descriptive, only, to provide a simple discussion to offer an initial understanding of the principles that underpin The Jacobson Flare. It is not intended to to provide flight instruction advice to individual readers. The fully comprehensive and illuminative description of The Jacobson Flare is contained and presented in The Jacobson Flare App (see further details, below).

 

Let’s take a simple look at the 5 simple pillars that underpin the Jacobson Flare: Where to aim; How to aim; When to flare; How much to flare; and How fast to flare? For these are the keys to understanding the vast differences from the conventional, non-standardised methods, that derive from the pioneering aviators of World War One, passed down without serious challenge or development, for over 100 years.

Where to aim?

Conventionally drawn, a final approach elevation profile diagram, published in text books and manuals, then depicted on whiteboards and flight training software, will usually display just one sloping line to depict the approach path angle. This line is generally never defined and these depictions never explain, or nominate the development of an aim point, let alone offering any method to calculate an appropriate aim point for every airplane type (size). This is critical, to assure runway threshold clearance by the landing gear, yet still maximise the landing distance available.

The minimum number of lines needed to depict the approach path profile is two: one line to represent the pilot’s eye path and a second – lower than and parallel with the first – to represent the main wheel path. It should be appreciated that the bigger the airplane, the deeper the aim point must be, in order for the main landing gear to clear the runway threshold safely.

The Jacobson Flare treatise starts with an understanding of the runway threshold landing gear clearance height, appropriate for the airplane type, projected down to a runway ‘impact point‘ (assuming, for the moment, no flare). The upper and parallel pilot’s eye path is projected down to a runway ‘aim point 1‘. The aim point 1 location, in relation to the runway threshold, is simply the sum of the distance to the impact point, plus the additional longitudinal distance from the impact point to the aim point 1. This latter distance is a simple function of the flightpath angle (usually the standard 3º), the vertical height of the pilot’s eyes above the main wheels and the horizontal distance from the pilot’s eye back (or forward, in a small tail-dragger) to the main wheels. It is not a complex calculation.

The Jacobson Flare App describes the method simply and factually.

How to aim?

If one can visualise the main wheel path as a virtual ‘wet concrete ramp‘ that we are trying to ‘roll‘ down, on the main wheels, it becomes very clear that using the elevators to control airspeed simply won’t achieve the aim: to leave a continuous ‘tyre tread impression‘, down the imagined ‘wet‘ surface. Pitching for airspeed results in a roller-coaster path that would oscillate all the way down the approach, necessitating constant changes in engine power/thrust and the imagined tyre impression would be in-and-out of the ‘wet‘ concrete. The threshold crossing height is inconsistent, resulting in differing height cues and erratic landing consequences. That is why it is essential to select a suitable aim point and then ‘fly our eyes‘ accurately towards that selected aim point on as straight a line as possible, using the elevators and controlling the airspeed with the throttle(s). That is to say, using the primary effects of the controls, instead of the secondary effects.  (The obvious and rare exception, these days, is when engine power is unavailable, such as in the case of total engine failure; this then becomes the subject of a non-normal forced landing procedure.) On most approaches flown today, reliable and variable power/thrust is a given. When the power or thrust value is fixed, such as on take-off, then airspeed is controlled with the elevators.

Flying a ‘path-based’ approach, rather than a ‘speed-based’ approach has several key advantages, the most important one being that it obviates the need to retrain pilots transitioning to more advanced operations:

It is vastly more stable – therefore much safer – than pitching up and down, chasing airspeed; a stable approach is essential – in any airplane.

The technique is equally applicable to both visual and instrument approaches;

The technique is standard and mandatory on heavier and/or high performance airplanes;

It minimises the two common student pilot errors of becoming ‘high and fast‘ or ‘low and slow‘ on final approach; and

It eliminates the need to ‘convert‘, at the worst possible time (the flare point) from flying a ‘speed descent‘ down final, to a ‘path descent‘ through the flare, to touchdown.

When to flare?

Historically, the decision on when to flare has been no better than an ‘educated guess‘ of vertical height, above the runway. The word ‘educated‘ is really no better than a euphemism for trial-and-error, repetition, judgment and experience, none of which can be taught; these each come at some indeterminate time, for each individual pilot. Some pilots take longer than others, in ‘getting the hang of it‘. Even after they first solo and consolidate their competency, it all starts again on, at the next airfield, or the next airplane conversion. Moreover, flare height is invisible to the pilot; without a radio altimeter and GPWS computer-generated height callouts, as in modern airliners (“100”, “50”, “40”, “30”, “20”, “10”), it can only be a subjective guess, the consistency of which wears off, anytime ‘absences from our comfort zones‘ occur.

Worse, the approach path angle depicted in just about all flight training books, manuals and briefings, is misrepresented, exaggerated at approximately 25-30º. The actual standard approach path angle is just 3º. This significant error, perpetuated for more than 100 years, has masked the fact that using a guess of vertical height to determine when to flare is further flawed, mathematically. A 3º path angle is a slope of about 1:20. This means that a 1ft error in that guess of flare height compounds x 20-times, longitudinally, along the runway.

Thankfully, triangles have had 3 sides for very long time and we can utilise the hitherto-unused third side, which happens to be the runway centre line. Not only is this side visible; it is, if sealed and painted, a calibrated ruler (with 100ft/30m centreline marks and spaces between). With the stable (and straight) pilots eye path and a second position line, projected at the lowest visible angle over the nose, from the pilot’s eye to the runway centreline, short of the aim point, an accurate visual fix can be derived, accommodating both the flight path angle and the appropriate flare height for the subject airplane. It is 400 times more accurate than a conventional guess of flare height, alone, because instead of the vertical height error compounding x 20-times, any longitudinal error diminishes x 20-times.

This vastly improved tolerance to error facilitates application of the Jacobson Flare fix to unsealed grass and gravel airstrips. It is without peer – any  longitudinal error in assessing the flare fix diminishes to a 1/20th error, vertically.

How much to flare?  

The ‘how much’ and ‘how fast’ to flare questions are closely inter-related, so it is useful to link them, to simplify the explanation of the landing flare manoeuvre. First, the Jacobson Flare does not reflect the conventional and misleading terms, ‘round-out‘ and ‘hold-off‘. In my 50-yrs’ experience, they confuse and misrepresent what we are meaning to achieve:

A pilot, attempting to ’round-out’ often achieves exactly that – pitching up too quickly and then ends up flying straight and level far too early and, as a direct result, too high above the landing surface. Complex corrections are then required.

The expression, ‘holding off’, misrepresents the aim, completely. The aim is really not to attempt to fly straight and level, as long as possible, as low as possible, swapping increasing angle-of-attack for decreasing airspeed (as I thought it was, for many years). The objective should be to execute a manoeuvre that transitions the flight path from a constant 3º path angle to the flare fix, to an exponential curving path that reduces both the flight path angle and rate of descent, each part-second throughout the flare, yet never actually reaches 0º or horizontal (except, perhaps, when executing a 3-point landing in a tail-dragger (tail-wheel landing gear configuration).

There is a actually a very simple answer to the ‘how much‘ question. We’ve done a great job flying an accurate eye path to the appropriate aim point, so why not utilise a second aim point and transition our line of sight progressively along the runway to that pre-determined point? On runways of approximately constant slope (not necessarily level), the optimum position to locate this aim point 2 is at the end of the runway centreline at the upwind (far) threshold. It is not the fence, or the horizon, but on the ground, at the far end of the runway. This will ensure that the final flight path angle is not level, but converges with the runway surface, at an optimal angle of approximately 0.5º.

If the landing surface is undulating, then a simple correction can be made, as follows:

Uphill landing zone: Select aim point 2 at the ‘top’ of the up-sloping landing zone, where it starts to level off; anything beyond this point is not usable.

Downhill landing zone: Select aim point 2 at the ‘bottom” of the down-sloping landing zone, where it starts to level off, to prevent a very deep touchdown.

How fast to flare?

The Jacobson Flare model utilises a 4-second flare (a simple, mental count of “1 .. 2 .. 3 .. 4” secs), through which the pilot transitions his/her line of sight  from the original aim point 1, to the supplementary aim point 2, usually at the upwind threshold, as described, above. Assuming that the Vapp airspeed is within limits (+/- 5kts) at the the flare point, the power or thrust is generally reduced towards idle, during the flare, as usual, with the throttle(s) fully closed just prior to touchdown.

The ‘4-second’ flare derives from actual observations, taken by the author, over no less a period than 30 years. From the moment that ANY pilot, in ANY airplane type, commences the flare, the average elapsed time through to touchdown was observed to be 5-6 seconds. Allowing 1-2 seconds for variables such as slightly excessive airspeed, control inputs or environmental factors, such as a wind gust, 3-4-seconds has been proved to be the optimal timing for the flare – for a normal landing – in ANY airplane type. (The 6 enhanced videos in the JF App Preview 190814 and in the JF App, clearly illustrate this point, in actual C172 and A380 airplanes and in B737-400 and B777-300ER full-flight simulators.)

By the end of the 4th second, the pilot’s line of sight should normally be ‘locked-on‘ to aim point 2, at the upwind threshold, with the throttle(s) closed. The airplane is now in a perfect position and attitude to touch down safely and smoothly – and in the right place: on, or very close to the original aim point 1.

Finally, it should be noted that this discussion has not been confined to any one type or class of airplane, for The Jacobson Flare is universal in its application.

Summary

To reiterate, the material above is descriptive, only, to provide a simple discussion to offer an initial understanding of the principles that underpin The Jacobson Flare. It is not intended to to provide flight instruction advice to individual readers.

You now have a better understanding of the 5 keys to The Jacobson Flare. How about a test drive?

The 6 enhanced videos in the JF App Preview 190814 (and in the JF App, itself) clearly illustrate The Jacobson Flare in practice – in actual C172 and A380 airplanes and in B737-400 and B777-300ER full-flight simulators. Similar videos could be produced for ANY airplane that is flared, to land.

The full, comprehensive and definitive description of The Jacobson Flare is contained and presented in The Jacobson Flare App (see further details, below).

 

Wishing you many safe landings

 

Captain David M Jacobson FRAeS MAP

 

Would you care to experience that unsurpassed sense of accomplishment, derived from executing consistently beautiful landings, more often?

For starters, Download the FREE Jacobson Flare LITE, our no fuss/no frills introduction. Here we demonstrate, step by step, the application of the Jacobson Flare on a typical grass airstrip at Porepunkah, YPOK.

 

We invite you to browse the consistently positive comments on our Testimonials page. Many pilots, of all levels of experience, have downloaded our Apps. Read about their own experiences with the Jacobson Flare technique and the App.

Then download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare app – for iOS. You’re already possibly paying $300+/hour to hire an aeroplane: You’ll recover the cost of the app, in just ONE LESS-NEEDED CIRCUIT. Moreover, you’ll have an invaluable reference tool, throughout your entire life in aviation.

Download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare App for iOS devices now.

 

We invite you, also, to review our new, FREE companion app,

offering a convenient way of staying abreast of our latest blogs.

 

Download the Jacobson Flare NEWS App for iOS devices now.

To learn something new, we may have to un-learn something old …

25.09.2020 , we've-always-done-it-this-way

“To learn something new, we may have to un-learn something old …”

I was reminded of this intriguing thought, in a recent conversation with my chiropractor. I am often asked why I thought it necessary to ‘bother‘ trying to turn the landing manoeuvre away from being regarded as a ‘mystical art’, where most pilots, world-wide, have been indoctrinated to believe it can be mastered only by repetition and experience; where judgment, competency and confidence are achieved at some indeterminate time.

For a start, I regard the landing as a skill – not an art or a science. But to explore this a little more, I was drawn to looking at how the rest of the flight training syllabus -other than the landing – has been taught, historically.

Think back to the time when it was proven that the Earth was round and not flat. The concept was nearly impossible for the majority of those alive to accept.  This is because once a person learns something, it is almost impossible to tell them that it is actually different. This is The Law of Primacy – (Thorndike, Professor Edward L. Teachers College, Columbia University, NY. circa 1932).

We often tend to believe implicitly what we are first taught, on any given subject, creating a strong, almost unshakeable, impression – it becomes a ‘fact’; and if this ‘fact’ is, in fact, not factual – that is, not correct in the first place, it can often be very difficult to un-learn.

Some people exhibit belief-bias effects. They are biased to to accept arguments that attempt to deduce a conclusion they believe to be true and to reject arguments that attempt to deduce a conclusion they believe to be false. This somewhat similar to the term ‘perseveration‘.

In particular, such biases may tend to make people’s beliefs impervious to rational arguments.’

We may need to be reminded of what we think we know, already and review it; perhaps even un-learn it, to clear some  headspace for something better.

I am indebted to the School for Social Entrepreneurs Australia for the succinct ‘Change as a Learning Process’, referenced from their ‘INTRODUCTION TO ACTIVE LEARNING’ participant workbook (page 3, v.2.0 2015):

Clear distinctions are drawn here, between head- and heart-based learning processes.

It is well understood that pilot training is generally based on head-based learning, however there is a ‘stand-out’ exception.

Since the earliest days of aviation, head-based or technically definable training processes have been applied to just about all flight training sequences, but not the landing manoeuvre.

TJF TLaaLP 160731

It is fascinating to note how the most precise manoeuvre that most pilots have to master has been relegated to esoteric, yet meaningless expressions and personal opinions, such as, “about here”, “about now”, and getting the ‘hang’ or the ’sight picture’ or the ‘feel’ of it. Not a very logical, precise or standardised method of instruction, is it?

That is why the Jacobson Flare was developed, in 1987. Without a technically factual explanation, pilots have had no hope of predictable, consistent and universally quantifiable landings. The proven and potential cost savings are immense. Consider:

  • Reductions in training time;
  • Reduced wear and tear on pilot and machine;
  • Greatly improved confidence and competency at all levels;
  • Reductions in airport runway occupancy times; and
  • Vast improvement in flight safety.

Isn’t it about time that the industry re-considered the statement, “We’ve always done it this way”? We no longer ‘swing the prop‘ (or fan blades) on modern airplanes; neither do we navigate by the stars. Everything else in aviation has developed.

IF you are seeking some fresh information on landing technique, different from the non-quantifiable and inconsistent results you may have experienced;

IF perhaps you’ve now realised by now that you were never actually taught HOW to land, but just WHAT to do, when landing;

IF you have always felt that there had to be a better way to teach, to understand and to learn HOW to land an airplane, WITHOUT having to ‘getting the hang of it’, on every successive airplane conversion: THEN …

You are invited to view the wealth of information on this website: www.jacobsonflare.com/

 

Wishing you many safe landings

 

Captain David M Jacobson FRAeS MAP

 

Would you care to experience that unsurpassed sense of accomplishment, derived from executing consistently beautiful landings, more often?

For starters, Download the FREE Jacobson Flare LITE, our no fuss/no frills introduction. Here we demonstrate, step by step, the application of the Jacobson Flare on a typical grass airstrip at Porepunkah, YPOK.

 

We invite you to browse the consistently positive comments on our Testimonials page. Many pilots, of all levels of experience, have downloaded our Apps. Read about their own experiences with the Jacobson Flare technique and the App.

Then download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare app – for iOS. You’re already possibly paying $300+/hour to hire an aeroplane: You’ll recover the cost of the app, in just ONE LESS-NEEDED CIRCUIT. Moreover, you’ll have an invaluable reference tool, throughout your entire life in aviation.

Download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare App for iOS devices now.

 

We invite you, also, to review our new, FREE companion app,

offering a convenient way of staying abreast of our latest blogs.

 

Download the Jacobson Flare NEWS App for iOS devices now.

“I learned much more about flying from that experience …”

09.09.2020 , from-our-logbooks

“I learnt more about flying from that experience …”

We were arriving in Brisbane from the South for runway 19L via the STAR and the RW19L ILS. The weather was a broken cloud base of 3000’, wind southeasterly 15 to 25kt, and intermittent light showers. In short, a standard sort of Brisbane spring mid morning.”

This is the ninth article in a planned occasional series, sharing the most memorable and treasured experiences, not only from my own career : We plan to feature other, highly esteemed pilot friends and colleagues, who are only too willing to share their collective aviation experience.

Here, a great friend and esteemed former colleague – a B737-800 Captain – shares some valuable insights into making approaches in fluctuating, marginal instrument/visual meteorological conditions, that we can all apply to our own life experiences.

“After receiving the current aerodrome automatic terminal information service – ATIS – we briefed for a ‘company low visibility procedures‘, Captain-flown ILS approach. On the left base segment of the standard arrival procedure – STAR –  we became visual. We continued with the company low visibility procedures, however on intercepting the instrument landing system – ILS – runway centre line and glideslope, the autopilot was having a hard time managing the gusty crosswind.

As we were in visual contact with the runway, I changed to ‘standard‘ (visual) procedures, disconnected the autopilot, and began hand flying the approach to achieve a smoother ride for our passengers.

Halfway down the ILS I noticed a small, light shower developing to the southeast of the far end of the runway. This moved up towards us, and at approximately the height of the published minima (minimum instrument decision altitude) we flew into it.

The rain on the windshield immediately began to blur our vision, and the PAPI lights started to look a uniform pink colour (neither red nor white). I called for the windscreen wipers, however the rain increased to the point that I felt we were losing the required visibility.

As I went to press the TOGA (take-off/go-around) button to go around, we flew out of the back of the shower. I made a small flight path correction and we landed.

What did I learn?

1. Even very light rain showers can severely reduce visibility.

2. PAPI slope guidance cues can be rendered ineffective during a rain shower. Raw data, – attitude, thrust, and aim point need to be part of the plan.

3. If there is any rain activity anywhere near the airport, stick with the instrument approach rather than switching to a visual approach. That way you are better prepared and more predisposed to the real possibility of executing a missed approach. I had to rapidly re-evaluate our progress twice in a very short period of time.”

 

The bottom line from this real-world experience is that, having committed to a plan that can cover all contingencies in prevailing marginal circumstances, don’t abandon it for a less-capable alternative.

Furthermore, the effects of light refraction due to the rain on the windscreens should not be under-estimated.

Instrument procedures work fine in both IMC and VMC : Visual procedures are suitable only in VMC.

 

Wishing you many safe landings

 

Captain David M Jacobson FRAeS MAP

 

Would you care to experience that unsurpassed sense of accomplishment, derived from executing consistently beautiful landings, more often?

For starters, Download the FREE Jacobson Flare LITE, our no fuss/no frills introduction. Here we demonstrate, step by step, the application of the Jacobson Flare on a typical grass airstrip at Porepunkah, YPOK.

 

We invite you to browse the consistently positive comments on our Testimonials page. Many pilots, of all levels of experience, have downloaded our Apps. Read about their own experiences with the Jacobson Flare technique and the App.

Then download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare app – for iOS. You’re already possibly paying $300+/hour to hire an aeroplane: You’ll recover the cost of the app, in just ONE LESS-NEEDED CIRCUIT. Moreover, you’ll have an invaluable reference tool, throughout your entire life in aviation.

Download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare App for iOS devices now.

 

We invite you, also, to review our new, FREE companion app,

offering a convenient way of staying abreast of our latest blogs.

 

Download the Jacobson Flare NEWS App for iOS devices now.

‘Mud or Mustard’ by former RAAF F-18 Top Gun Ralph Petritsch

30.08.2020 , from-our-logbooks

You may well ask what the term ‘Mud or Mustard’ has to do with flying?

It does, in fact, have everything to do with being a fighter pilot. Well, these words form a key part of the catchcry echoed throughout the seat of air combat learning in the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF).

This is the eighth article in a planned occasional series, sharing the most memorable and treasured experiences, not only from my own career : We plan to feature other, highly esteemed pilot friends and colleagues, who are only too willing to share their collective aviation experience.

Here, my great friend and colleague Ralph Petritsch, currently flying B787s, following an illustrious career as a fighter pilot and fighter combat instructor -‘Top Gun‘ on the RAAF FA-18A ‘Hornet’ and USAF F-15E ‘Eagle‘ shares some valuable insights that we can all apply to our own life experiences. (Photo courtesy of RAAF Williamtown Photograhic Section © 1986)

RAAF Base Williamtown is situated just north of Newcastle on Australia’s east coast. It is there that the young men and women of Australia train to become a fighter pilot and where they strive to join the ranks of the RAAF’s airborne fighting elite.

The full catchcry:

‘MUD or MUSTARD, SHIT or BLOOD, GRIT YOUR TEETH AND STAY THERE!’

These few words embody an ethos that is taken on as a core value for generations of young Australians who aspire to don the mantle of ‘fighter pilot’ within the RAAF. Like a commandment, it is an idea which forms a guiding principle to those who strap tonnes of metal and composite to their back and hurl themselves through space at speeds approaching those of a bullet. Their primary pursuit – excellence – air combat excellence.

The philosophy behind this curious phrase is as follows:

No matter what adversity you face – never give up. No matter how difficult your situation is or how insurmountable your odds seem – don’t relent. No matter how fearful your predicament or dire your situation – apply yourself, persist and commit to a successful outcome.

It may seem a little ‘gung-ho’, but this mindset is an essential one to have if you are to succeed in the incomprehensibly dynamic world of modern air combat. It is a world in which the earth tumbles violently around you, as you and your fighting-machine hurtle through the atmosphere at thousands of kilometres per hour, testing the very limits of pilot and machine, in an attempt to prosecute a designated target.

Some of the greatest air aces in history have attested to this way of thinking and affirmed that these principles were the difference, often, between success and failure in an air combat environment. That and perhaps the odd smattering of luck. Remember though, the harder you work – the luckier you get!

There is also the famous fighter pilot expression – ‘In air combat, there are no points for second place!’ Success in an air combat environment can be measured in many ways. Principally – you must win! Kill the bandit before he kills you and live to fight another day. Don’t die for your country, make the other pilot die for his!

In essence, these statements are fundamental truths, but the reality involves much, much more… Bring your weapons to bear on your chosen target efficiently and accurately. Prosecute your attack with conviction, without endangering yourself or your teammates. Maintain situational awareness of, and mutual support for, your wingman. A competent fighter pilot has to be effective, efficient, safe and reliable. I measured my own success as a fighter pilot against these core capabilities.

Adoption of, and belief in, the principles of ‘Mud or Mustard’ was instrumental in my success as a fighter pilot and has also had a profound impact on other areas of my life. This simple concept has provided inspiration during difficult times and become my benchmark attitude when tackling any challenges set before me. As I hope you’ll appreciate, being a fighter pilot is as much about this attitude, as it is about flying fast jets.

I am now long-retired from the RAAF and the outrageously dynamic world of air combat. However, my years of service to this great country taught me that with a commitment to sound processes, diligent application to training, focused attention to the execution of any task assigned to me and a determined attitude – ‘Mud or Mustard’ – anything is achievable.

Since leaving the Service, I have been drawn to people, practices and pursuits that apply the ‘Mud or Mustard’ philosophy. My love of flying has not waned and in furthering my aviation career, I have sought out the processes that are readily adaptable to the aforementioned attitude and which make the art of flying effective, efficient, safe and reliable.

One of the processes which I have found that lends itself well to the ‘Mud or Mustard’ concept is David Jacobson’s flare technique. It is simple to understand, precise, exacting and repeatable. As I have frequently found, if you take the time to read and understand a foolproof concept, practise it diligently and consistently apply it, it will serve you well and enhance your capabilities. I commend The Jacobson Flare to anyone who finds the practise of landing an aircraft a challenge or who, even if they have been landing successfully for years, just wants to better understand what they are doing and unlock the secret of how to execute landings with more finesse. Think of it as striving for – excellence – landing excellence!

Upon being made aware of the technique, by David himself, during one of my flights – crewing with him on a Boeing 737 – it was obvious to me that he had designed, developed and implemented a process that works. Every landing can be set up, executed and scrutinised later with accuracy and precision. The logical flow through: consistent and safe landings every time.

That I would adopt the Jacobson Flare as a standard tool in my flying toolbox was inevitable. It was right up my ‘fighter pilot alley‘. I have been using it ever since, on every landing, on every aeroplane that I have flown, from the smallest light sport aircraft through to the 250 tonne Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

Don’t just take my word for it. Get the app, read it, apply it and, with a bit of ‘Mud or Mustard’, watch how your landing technique improves. Honestly, you’ll wonder why nobody had solved the landing riddle, the way David has, before now.

In summing up, I was fortunate to have experienced the ‘tip of the aviation spear’ during operations in the fighter world. But flying fighters was as much about adopting a positive mental attitude and applying good processes, as it was about flying fast jets. These characteristics carry through to everyday life and are relevant to any aircraft you might choose to fly. To be a fighter pilot, you have to fly fighters, but anyone can have a fighter pilot attitude:

‘MUD or MUSTARD, SHIT or BLOOD, GRIT YOUR TEETH AND STAY THERE!’

 

Wishing you many safe landings

 

Captain David M Jacobson FRAeS MAP

 

Would you care to experience that unsurpassed sense of accomplishment, derived from executing consistently beautiful landings, more often?

For starters, Download the FREE Jacobson Flare LITE, our no fuss/no frills introduction. Here we demonstrate, step by step, the application of the Jacobson Flare on a typical grass airstrip at Porepunkah, YPOK.

 

We invite you to browse the consistently positive comments on our Testimonials page. Many pilots, of all levels of experience, have downloaded our Apps. Read about their own experiences with the Jacobson Flare technique and the App.

Then download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare app – for iOS. You’re already possibly paying $300+/hour to hire an aeroplane: You’ll recover the cost of the app, in just ONE LESS-NEEDED CIRCUIT. Moreover, you’ll have an invaluable reference tool, throughout your entire life in aviation.

Download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare App for iOS devices now.

 

We invite you, also, to review our new, FREE companion app,

offering a convenient way of staying abreast of our latest blogs.

 

Download the Jacobson Flare NEWS App for iOS devices now.

FAQ #6 Update: Landing by night – just as by day – the Jacobson Flare

23.08.2020 , simple-safe-logical-affordable

FAQ #6 Update: Landing by night – just as by day – the Jacobson Flare

A recent question became a timely reminder that an expanded explanation on how to adapt the Jacobson Flare principles to night landings was overdue. So, for current exponents of the JF, here is a suggestion that can tune your night landings into the same, exacting standards that you are now achieving, by day. It updates the information, previously found in FAQ #6, at https://www.jacobsonflare.com/our-most-frequently-asked-landing-questions/

Disclaimer

This is a technical dissertation, intend primarily for more-experienced pilots and to provide an interim supplement to the Jacobson Flare App. Less-experienced pilots are advised to treat the information contained herein, as information, only. Please, do NOT attempt to apply the information, contained herein, if you are a new or yet-to-be user of the Jacobson Flare.

It’s generally NOT a good idea to do anything in an airplane, for the very first time! By this we mean, do it with someone, preferably a flight instructor, who has done it before. Your safety is paramount. So, become proficient at using the Jacobson Flare by day, before attempting to apply it at night.

This information is directed more specifically to pilots of 4-6 place single- and twin-engine-airplanes, below 12,500lb/5,700Kg MTOW, operating onto runways without glideslope guidance.

Any study or application of this content should not be rushed, if full comprehension is to be achieved.

Pilots of larger airplanes should be able to relate the principles to their current airplane, although the aircraft landing lights generally illuminate the runway fixed distance markings well, which helps to identify both the correct visual aim point 1 and the pre-calculated flare cut-off point for the airplane type. Alternatively, please feel welcome to contact info@jacobsonflare.com for further information.

 

Background

Early in the research and development of the Jacobson Flare, around 1985-87, I was a civilian flight instructor at the RAAF Point Cook Flying Club, in addition to my full-time career as an airline transport pilot – at that time, a DC-9-30 line training captain with Trans-Australia Airlines (TAA)/Australian Airlines.

I am not ex RAAF, myself, but was in the ‘right place/right time’, from 1983-89), in a more-or-less voluntary capacity.

The following technique was flight-tested and proven, in C150, PA-28 and PA-38 aircraft, on Runway 17 at RAAF Base Williams, at Point Cook -YMPC – a classic  ‘black-hole’ runway, at night, located SW of Melbourne.

When headed away from the lights of Melbourne city, the immense Port Phillip Bay is the black backdrop and, depending on the prevailing conditions. it can be difficult to discern the horizon. The lights of the Melbourne SE shoreline suburbs are not much help, either, when late on final approach for a landing on 17.

There is no T-VASIS, PAPI or ILS glideslope to ‘hang your hat on‘, so it was a ‘Mk 1 eyeball’ approach. However, this solution proved to work perfectly at YMPC and can be adapted easily to the night situation, at other locations.

Note: If visual glideslope guidance, such as a PAPI system, is available at a particular airfield, then the PAPI aim point comparison calculator (standard in the Jacobson Flare App), together with the published runway edge lighting spacing and the following information, can be applied to ascertain and then optimise the actual PAPI aim point 1 and flare cut-off point for the subject aircraft, in night operations.

Let’s take a look at the following standard 5 JF considerations, to re-examine what we use by day and what we can adapt for night landings.

Note: The ft/m conversions have been rounded, for convenience. This makes no practical difference to the landing outcome.

 

The 5 Jacobson Flare Considerations – Applied to Night Operations

  1. Where to aim?

The JF-suggested visual aim point, for 4-6 place single- and twin-engine-airplanes below 5700Kg MTOW, located at 300ft/90m from the threshold is still ‘King’, to assure approximately 10ft threshold clearance of the main landing gear (MLG). By day it’s the ’top’ of the first centre line mark, past the runway numbers. So it is, normally, by night. Now, the runway edge lighting is a great reference, as you can use the normal (i.e., 90º) axes across the parallel pairs of edge lights, to determine suitable longitudinal references for both the aim point 1 and the flare point.

The standard runway edge lighting spacing is 60m , but a detailed check of this information confirms RAAF Point Cook -YMPC has a non-standard spacing of 85.6m (approx 90m). Like many things in aviation, edge lighting spacing is not as standard as it might be: For example, Australia’s busiest GA training aerodromes: Adelaide Parafield YPPF 03L/21R, Brisbane Archerfield YBAF 10L/28R, Melbourne Moorabbin YMMB 13L/31R and 17L/35R and Sydney Bankstown YSBK 11C/29C, have their runway edge lighting spaced at approx 90m intervals, yet Perth Jandakot YPJT 06L/25R and 12/30 has the runway edge lighting spaced at the standard 60m intervals.

Fortunately, these variations are covered by the 1:20 tolerance of the unique longitudinal flare point principle of the Jacobson Flare. This point is explained, below, in 3. When to flare?

Note: In addition, YSBK 11C/29C and YPJT 24R each have 3º PAPIs, with 25ft MEHTs.* (*Minimum Eye Height at Threshold) 

By night, the runway threshold is marked by the standard runway threshold green lights.

  • At 200ft/60m standard spacing, the 300ft/90m aim point 1 would lie mid-way between the axes of the first and second pairs of edge lights; the flare cut-off point is 100ft/30m back from aim point 1, at 200ft/60m, exactly on the axis of the first row. See the 60m spacing illustration in Fig 1, below:

 

Fig 1

 

  • At 300ft/90m spacing, aim point 1 would fall exactly on the axis across the first pair of edge lights, at 300ft/90m. However, the flare cut-off point would lie 100ft/30m back from there, at 200ft/60m, unserved by any usable or consistent visual cue at night, except the aircraft landing lights. See the 90m spacing illustration in Fig 2, below:

Fig 2

 

Having different aim- and flare-point indicator cues at night, for the same actual aim and flare point locations is less than ideal; and you may or may not have the luxury of being able to check the light spacing before you land somewhere. In any case, the quality of this data may not be all that accurate.

So, to keep things simple, consistent and conservative, let’s establish a single, consistent assumption for all aerodromes that you are likely to use at night:

We have established above that, at 200ft/60m standard spacing, the 300ft/90m aim point 1 would lie mid-way between the axes of the first and second pairs of edge lights; the flare cut-off point is 100ft/30m back from aim point 1, at 200ft/60m, exactly on the axis of the first row.

Now, if the spacing was actually 300ft/90m – BUT, we aimed at the same NIGHT aim point 1, mid-way between the axes of the first and second pairs of edge lights, then the ACTUAL aim point 1 location would be located at 450ft/135m, somewhat deeper.

Given that the certified landing distance is factored (increased) by 67%, this is not a practical issue, as long as the approach is flown accurately, within +5/-0kts. See the 90m spacing illustration in Fig 3,  below:

Fig 3

  1. How to aim?

No change is needed. Fly the same aim point 1/glare shield relationship as by day, controlled with the elevators and the airspeed controlled with power/thrust – to achieve the essential stable approach path.

Aim point 1, as discussed above, is the mid-point of the imagined axis, longitudinally mid-way between the axes of the first and second pairs of edge lights; in other words, the centre of the black space between the first 4 edge lights.

Now, many pilots find that, at night, things seem to be happening ‘faster than by day’, as the airplane approaches the runway, on short final. This may be due to our eyes ‘zooming-in‘, like a camera lens, on the pre-dominant object in the pilot’s view: the runway shape, outlined by the threshold and edge lighting. The rest of the airfield is often very dark.

It has been found very useful to imagine the airfield as it appears by day, or imagine wearing night-vision goggles, so the visual field more resembles the daylight view: the pilot’s eyes don’t ‘zoom-in‘ and the approach groundspeed appears more ‘normal‘.

 

  1. When to flare?

This where the 1:20 advantage of a longitudinal flare point assists, greatly. We already know that the flare cut-off point is 100ft/30m back from aim point 1 – for 4-6 place single- and twin-engine-airplanes, below 5700Kg MTOW.

For 200ft/60m spacing, aim point 1, mid-way between the axes of the first and second pairs of edge lights, is perfectly located at 300ft/90m, so the flare point will be located on the axis through the first pair, at 200ft/60m, exactly as by day.

As stated above, if the spacing was 300ft/90m – and we aimed at the same NIGHT aim point 1 cue, mid-way between the axes of the first and second pairs of edge lights then the ACTUAL aim point 1 location would be located at 450ft/135m, somewhat deeper. The correct flare cut-off point for that aim point location would lie 100ft/30m back from there, at 350ft/105m.

However, to be consistent with the 200ft/60m case, we might wish to use the same flare point indicator, namely the axis of the first pair of edge lighting, at 300ft/90m. This would create an actual flare cut-off distance of 150ft/45m: an error of 50ft/15m.

Yes, it’s a little earlier – and correspondingly higher, BUT:

The longitudinal error is 50ft/15m: Applying the 1:20 advantage, (dividing by 20) indicates a diminished vertical error of just 2.5ft/0.75m. This is well within the vertical tolerance of any landing, flared using the conventional ‘educated guess’ of height.

Speaking of flare point tolerance, it has been found useful to regard the flare point much like a CG, lying within an acceptable range between a forward and an aft limit. This an example of that comparison. Now, at a normal 3-4º approach path angle and flaring over the usual 4-seconds to a new aim point 2, probably at least 2000ft/600m away, or even further, it makes little difference whether you flare at the aft limit, the forward limit, or anywhere in-between: it is relatively insignificant.

Review Figs 1 and 3, above: The edge lighting spacing is different, but we can use the same visual cues for both the aim point 1 and the flare point, for runway edge lighting spacing of 60-90m spacing and the 4-second flare will smooth out the variations in actual flare cut-off distance, between the aim point 1 and the flare point, due to the 1:20 tolerance of using a longitudinal flare cue.

 

Finally, use EVERY cue at your disposal, including your experienced assessment of vertical flare height, too. Triangles still have three sides! We might as well use all of them.

Airline fleets and other advanced types offer the added advantage of computer-generated call-outs of ‘100..50.. 40.. 30.. 20.. 10‘ ft radio altitude (‘radalt‘), from the ground proximity warning systems (GPWS). However, these are still subject to certain limitations, such as radio interference and the mathematical fact that, on the standard 3º flight path angle, every +/- 1ft vertical error compounds as a longitudinal error of +/- 20ft respectively, along the runway.

 

  1. How much to flare?

Again as by day, transition to aim point 2, at the end of the runway lights. For a runway of uniform slope – not necessarily level –  this is the same as used by day: the upwind threshold.

For undulating runways:

Where the landing zone is located on a downhill slope, aim point 2 is relocated to the ‘bottom end‘ of that downhill slope, before the runway becomes more level; geometrically, the flare cue will occur later/lower than the level-runway case. (* See this app Pp 93-95)

Where the landing zone is located on an uphill slope, aim point 2 is relocated to the ‘top end‘, or ‘brow‘ of that uphill slope, before the runway becomes more level; geometrically, the flare cue will occur earlier/higher than the level runway case. (* See this app Pp 93-95)

This technique will assure a more accurate convergence with the landing zone surface in each case.

 

  1. How fast to flare?

The usual Jacobson Flare 4-second technique, or maybe stop the flare at 3-3.5 seconds, if the runway has a lot of water on it, to reduce the risk of aquaplaning.

(In a jet transport airplane, aiming at aim point 2, after completing the full, 4-second flare, can result in too-smooth a landing! The main wheels don’t penetrate the water layer and make proper ground contact, so apart from the risk of aquaplaning, the main wheels don’t spin up to about 700rpm and, in some airplane types, the pre-armed auto brakes and auto-spoilers don’t actuate – they actually get ‘confused‘.)

So, there you go. It’s a bit to digest:  Try drawing it out on some paper, to scale for your airplane; think it through; sit in a chair and visualise the whole thing. And try it, first time, with someone else, preferably a flight instructor, with you, or better still, have a play in a simulator. It may be very beneficial, to prove it to yourself, first.

Use all available cues, including the landing light-illumination of the centreline and fixed distance runway markings and your accumulated experience, (together with the GPWS ‘radalt’ callouts in larger aircraft), in assessing your height above the runway.

Of the three components to any landing:

1. The initial pilot’s eye path to aim point 1;

2. The commencement point of the flare; and

3. The flare, itself, through to the second aim point, usually at the far, upwind threshold:

The first is the most important; second most is the third and the least important is the flare initiation point, so long as it is within that ‘range of acceptable flare points/heights‘ for the airplane type, as discussed above.

Finally, to reiterate, the one aim point 1 – at 1.5 rows of edge lights – and the one flare point – at the first row of edge lights – may be applied for runway edge lighting spacing of 60-90m spacing and the 4-second flare will smooth out the differences. See the generic spacing illustration for 60-90m edge lighting spacing in Fig 4, below:

 

Fig 4

Wishing you many safe landings

 

Captain David M Jacobson FRAeS MAP

 

Would you care to experience that unsurpassed sense of accomplishment, derived from executing consistently beautiful landings, more often?

For starters, Download the FREE Jacobson Flare LITE, our no fuss/no frills introduction. Here we demonstrate, step by step, the application of the Jacobson Flare on a typical grass airstrip at Porepunkah, YPOK.

 

We invite you to browse the consistently positive comments on our Testimonials page. Many pilots, of all levels of experience, have downloaded our Apps. Read about their own experiences with the Jacobson Flare technique and the App.

Then download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare app – for iOS. You’re already possibly paying $300+/hour to hire an aeroplane: You’ll recover the cost of the app, in just ONE LESS-NEEDED CIRCUIT. Moreover, you’ll have an invaluable reference tool, throughout your entire life in aviation.

Download the COMPLETE Jacobson Flare App for iOS devices now.

 

We invite you, also, to review our new, FREE companion app,

offering a convenient way of staying abreast of our latest blogs.

 

Download the Jacobson Flare NEWS App for iOS devices now.