we’ve-always-done-it-this-way

No thanks … We are too busy! Does that ring any alarm bells?

No thanks … We are too busy! Does that ring any alarm bells? – It should.

Many might argue that our lives in general and our working lives in particular, seem busier today than ever; with more responsibilities than ever.

When you’re busy, it is a perfectly normal response to not want to be bothered by fresh thinking, on something that you thought was settled years ago.

But is it always a sensible response? Perhaps not.

When it comes to landing an airplane – of any size – how come it still comes down to an educated guess, regarding when to commence the flare, how much to flare and how fast to flare the airplane? Especially when EVERYTHING ELSE in aviation is very well defined and documented.

Why is it that flight training manuals – whether from manufacturers, aviation authorities or flight training organisations – contain little useful information on HOW to land an airplane, when those same manuals discuss ALL other topics so very well?

Perhaps the answer is because all those other topics are based on fact, whereas discussion around the landing manoeuvre has been based historically on opinion, feel, judgment, repetition and experience – NONE of which can be taught – handed on, unchallenged, for over 100 years. We all had to ‘get the hang of it.

Perhaps this also explains why the quality of landings, worldwide, is so inconsistent, often with sad and expensive results.

We invite you to take a few moments to check out www.jacobsonflare.com and consider the answers to these questions.

 

 

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.

Two pilots dressed for a fancy-dress party, in a cow-suit .. or .. What controls what, on final?

Two pilots dressed for a fancy-dress party, in a cow-suit .. or .. What controls what, on final?

Do you know why some pilots still try to fly a final approach using the SECONDARY effects of the PRIMARY flight controls?

Neither do we!

Arguing about what controls what, on final, has occupied far too much time and confused far too many pilots, for over 100 years. It is vital to the understanding of HOW to aim the approach, accurately, yet the argument still rages. It shouldn’t.

Let me conceive a comical image: Imagine how ridiculous-looking, ungainly and haphazard would be the sight of two pilots dressed for and heading out to a fancy-dress party.

The guy in the front would, presumably, be responsible for finding their way to the venue and steering the ‘beast’, while the poor individual providing the hindquarters would essentially maintain a stooped-over profile and act as the limiting factor on their speed, neither pushing too hard, nor allowing the front half to drag him/her along, too fast.

Now, please hold these thoughts, for a minute or two.

On a normal, powered, manually-flown approach, the pilot’s flying hand – the one holding the control column – is  maintaining both the extended runway centreline and the consistent 3º approach path angle, just like finding the party in the above scenario; the hand on the throttle maintains the selected approach speed and, together with the brain of  the pilot, the complete approach is coordinated. It is instructive, also, to consider how an ‘artificially-flown’ approach is constructed.

In an airliner, conducting a ‘coupled instrument approach’, the autopilot and autothrottle systems perform the same functions, respectively, yet quite independently from each other, using only the primary effects of controls. It is the automated flight control system (AFCS) that coordinates the inputs to control both the approach path and airspeed and simulates the manually-flown approach with impeccable accuracy and stability.

Moreover, because the aircraft is not pitching up and down, the stability of this ‘PATH’ descent also facilitates the application of the unique Jacobson Flare visual fix. It is an accurate, far straighter flight path than the ‘conventional roller’ coaster path of varying amplitude and runway threshold crossing heights, resulting from pitching to maintain approach airspeed. A handy side-effect is enhanced passenger comfort, especially in large aircraft with inherently great inertia and a limited supply of  airsickness bags!

The stability of this PATH descent also facilitates the application of the unique Jacobson Flare visual fix: No roller coaster path, here.

 

There are two occasions, however, when it IS appropriate to control airspeed with the SECONDARY effects of the elevators:

On take-off and in the subsequent climb, for example, with take-off power or climb power set, the pilot must utilise the elevators to control the airspeed. There is no alternative.

The second occasion is on approach, IF the power output is constant (or failed, partially or completely). It is necessary, then, to control airspeed with the elevators (along with refining the approach path angle, through judicious tracking and deployment of landing flaps). This is generally a training manoeuvre, such as when practising a NON-NORMAL procedure, such as a forced landing. It is a compromise – inaccurate and results in an oscillating, inconsistent, ‘rollercoaster’ path.

Now, why would anyone want to apply the secondary effects of controls, rather than the primary effects, IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE TO, when flying the most precise manoeuvre that most pilots ever need to master? Not to mention making so many corrections of corrections. Absolutely NOTHING remains stable: Not the power setting, the elevator inputs, the path angle, airspeed, vertical speed or aircraft trim.

Sailplanes (gliders) are normally flown this way; for without power, these aircraft are always descending through a parcel of air which, hopefully, is itself rising faster than the actual descent rate of the sailplane within it (that is, a thermal).

However, most approaches and landings are flown in powered airplanes, where the power output is variable and reliable: Therefore, the afore-mentioned PRIMARY effects of the controls should be applied: The constant approach path angle is maintained with the elevators, by aiming the pilot’s eyes at a suitable aim point and the throttle is utilised to vary the power, slightly, to maintain the selected approach airspeed (IAS) through each flap configuration and wind change.

This is not new to generations of military and airline pilots, but seems to meet ignorant and stubborn resistance, by some misinformed general aviation (GA) flight instructors and their unsuspecting students. The costs are immense, in terms of time, cost, pilot stress and aircraft damage. Many instructors insist that airspeed is controlled with the elevators and the vertical rate of descent is controlled with power; this is misconceived. The use of an increase in power certainly does facilitate descent flight at a reduced path angle, for a given airspeed): Howeverit is the reduced path angle that reduces the rate of descent, not the power. This particular point has been long-lost in the translation, over the last 100 years.

The rate of descent on an approach is the result of two variables: the flight path angle and the aircraft’s ground speed.

OK, let’s return to where we started: Two pilots dressed for a fancy-dress party, in a cow-suit …

From the foregoing, it should become clear that flying a NORMAL, powered approach with a ‘SPEED’ descent, that is, with the secondary effect of the elevators controlling airspeed and power supposedly controlling the rate of descent/path angle, is just as silly as having the guy in the front of the cow-suit, who can see where to steer, worrying only about how fast they are going; and the guy down the back, who cannot see a damn thing, trying to find the party.

So, the comical cow-suit analogy is quite relevant.

There are many more advantages in flying an accurate ‘PATH’ descent: To learn more on this, please review FAQ #5, in https://www.jacobsonflare.com/our-most-frequently-asked-landing-questions/ . The Jacobson Flare App, of course,  expands at length, also, on this critical aspect.

 

Captain David M Jacobson

 

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 …

“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.

When we don’t know something exists, we rarely search for it

When we don’t know something exists, we rarely search for it

On December 17, 1903, Wilbur and Orville Wright made four brief flights at Kitty Hawk. The Wright brothers had invented, flown and somehow landed the world’s first successful powered aircraft. Ever since that historic event, pilots – with a wide range of aptitudes – have pursued the elusive, consistently perfect landing. Sadly, this seemingly formidable task remains elusive to too many pilots, over 100 years later : Sadly, because it is no longer elusive.

The first generation of pilots, who pioneered the next 10 years leading to World War One, virtually taught themselves and each other. By 1914-1918 through to 1987, no formal approach and landing training system had yet been developed, other than trial-and-error and individual pilot opinions. Myths, legends and misinformation were added to the mix and re-cycled, unchallenged by generations of flight instructors who claimed, collectively, that it was a matter of repetition, judgment and experience – none of which can be taught.

In 1965, as a young student pilot trying to fly an approach, I was taught to pitch the airplane to control airspeed and then use power to control the rate of descent. It made no sense to me to use the secondary effects of controls to fly the approach which, for most pilots, is the most precise manoeuvre they are required to perform; and then, ‘getting the hang‘ of the landing flare from a combination of guesswork, the ‘look’, the ‘feel’, repetition and luck – but with no universal explanation or system to use on subsequent aircraft type conversions, or executing final approaches in challenging, even critical conditions. The silence on precisely ‘HOW’ to land a plane, from flight training books, manuals and videos, is both deafening and worthless.

I went searching for better answers and solutions : and found none. Fortunately I did ‘get the hang of it’, personally but, even twenty years later in 1985 as an experienced flight instructor, I hadn’t been able to resolve the range of problems inherent in teaching landings – in both large and small aircraft – without a comprehensive, fact-based system. That became my dream – and then my dream became a reality.

My good friend and mentor, Geoff Tually, a renowned specialist in agricultural business, financial advice and farm succession planning, recently hit the nail on the head when he said, “If you don’t know that something exists, you’ll never go looking for it.”

I’ve realised that these wise words captured the essence of my work : Finally, by 1985 I knew I was looking for a solution to the circus that conventional landing training has become. By 1987, I had found it from an inspiration back in 1965 and had written my first Paper.

Today, it’s called the Jacobson Flare : and, now, you’ve found it, too.

 

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.

Let’s settle some misconceptions – It’s not a parlour trick

Let’s settle some misconceptions – It’s not a parlour trick

“The Jacobson Flare is not a parlour trick. It doesn’t involve a deck of cards or a pact with the devil. 

It’s my considered opinion that pilots who learn to apply Jacobson’s techniques can make consistently good landings, provided they know how to configure their aircraft and fly a stable approach at the appropriate airspeed.’ 

‘I’m excited to have a cool, new tool in my teaching toolbox. I can’t shake this feeling of a kid in a candy store.” 

– John Ewing, Flight Instructor, California, USA

“If this was any good, it would have been developed by someone, years ago!” is a lame and unenlightened alternate response. “But we’ve always done it THIS way”, is another. If similar attitudes had prevailed through the rest of aviation, we would not have progressed beyond spruce, wire and fabric structures, unreliable power plants and navigating by DR.

The truth is it was developed over 30 years ago by Captain David Jacobson, a career flight instructor and airline pilot. Since the original Jacobson Flare Paper, ‘Where to Flare‘ was published in 1987, the multifarious responses by pilots have been insightful, to say the least.

Many pilots have been open-minded, self-aware and honest enough to realise that conventional landing training methods have been inadequate, at the very least. The most common and insightful observation, by a great many pilots celebrating that ‘Eureka’ moment when they execute another consistently sound landing by applying the Jacobson Flare, is: “This probably what we’ve all been trying to achieve, without realising!”

These more enlightened pilots understand that the best that generations of flight instructors and flight training organisations have been able to manage is to attempt to describe what they, themselves, do and this loose collection of opinions has been passed down, as fact. This explains why every flight instructor has a different explanation, none of which really explain ‘how’ to land an airplane. Trial and error is not good enough, when the rest of aviation has grown from the days of World War One.

At best, all conventional landing methods have revolved around opinions, myths and legends that have well and truly passed their use-by dates. They lean heavily on judgment, perception, false information, experience, repetition and an educated guess of vertical height above the landing surface – none of which can be taught. They are inconsistent and unreliable. Competence comes at some indeterminate time, for each individual pilot and is fallible in differing circumstances. From the dawn of aviation until 1987 there was no definitive, universal landing technique and, even more puzzling, little recognition of the need for one – to this day.

The Law of  Primacy in the discipline of education, refers to the way that many people tend to believe implicitly what they are first taught, creating unshakeable views about any given subject. This very much includes any attempt to discuss a different viewpoint on landing training, which the majority of pilots regard as an ‘art‘.

It has been noted by the author, often during the past 35 years, that when a pilot is presented with an alternative to conventional ideas on landing training, defence mechanisms kick in and any new idea can be regarded as a personal challenge to their ego. Instead of listening, or reading, or watching and then considering, many pilots tend to become quite defensive, immediately throwing up as many reasons as they can think of, as to why the Jacobson Flare “cannot work“. They will argue – from a position of total ignorance in relation to the principles and advantages of the Jacobson Flare – about the wide number of variables that certainly do affect the outcome of all landings (all of which and more are, in fact, embraced and diminished by the sound principles behind this innovative technique. They are not to know yet that it does work and has always worked, ever since the sound mathematical principles used to explain David’s 1965 inspiration were applied. Typical comments/questions include:

‘The glareshield must be at the right height’;

JF: There ARE differences between aircraft, but there is a correct seat position to achieve the design eye point.

‘The pilot must be sitting at the right height’;

JF: The pilot should always be sitting at the right height, for adequate control and for ground and flight visibility.

The approach path angle is not consistent’;

JF: Pilots can be taught HOW to fly a consistent path angle, without electronic glideslope guidance.

‘Our runways have no approach path angle guidance systems’ (ILS, PAPI, etc);

JF: The Jacobson Flare actually self-compensates for higher or lower flight path angles, scheduling an earlier/later flare, respectively.

‘What about up- or down-sloping runways?’

JF: The Jacobson Flare actually self-compensates for these runways, scheduling an earlier/later flare, respectively.

‘What about a different flap setting?’

JF: The Jacobson Flare actually self-compensates for different flap angles, scheduling a flare at a similar main-wheel height, but higher pilot eye heights, for lesser flap settings than normal. (The aim point will be lower in the windscreen, due to the slightly higher body angle of the airplane.)

‘What about strong headwind components? Or crosswinds? Or other ambient environmental issues?

JF: These, too, are compensated for, by flying the prescribed pilot eye path. 

‘Every airplane type has a different flare height … and that height is critical’.

JF: Agreed and it is critical. BUT: using flare heightper se, is flawed, because any vertical error compounds 20 x times, one way or the other, along the runway.

“This method is inflexible.”

JF: This technique is more flexible than any other, making it quantifiable and universal in its application.

The ‘instant critics’  cannot yet appreciate that the development of the Jacobson Flare accounts for all of these variables – and many more – by using the flight controls, correctly, to maintain a pre-defined, tolerant and totally visible pilot eye path, from the intercepting of final approach right through to a perfect touchdown – in the right place. They rely instead on browsing for landing videos on channels such as YouTube, essentially shopping for one that conforms with their limited view, just like a person who ‘shops for a physician who will agree with their own uninformed diagnosis.

So, what’s different about the Jacobson Flare?

Essentially, the Jacobson Flare uses a logical, geometric visual ‘framework’ to guide the pilot through the entire manoeuvre. Since the development of The Jacobson Flare from 1985, pilots are presented with a fully-defined visual eye path, specified by the airplane type – making the landing safe, sure, simple and universal.

Accounting for all – even self-compensating for many – of the variable parameters that distract the attention of 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, the Jacobson Flare explains landings as never before.

Simply put: Consistently sound landings are obtained through ‘flying’ a constant-angle final approach to a suitable initial aim point, commencing the flare at an equally-suitable pre-determined visual fix and then executing a 4-second flare through to a new, secondary aim point. That’s it. The framework confirms to the pilot exactly what is happening, at every stage dispelling the myths that ‘trial and error‘, ‘developing a mental picture‘ and ‘feel‘ are the only ways to master the landing.

Flown initially at a constant angle, the eye path translates to the classic exponential flare curve that generations of pilots have attempted to execute 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, offering a precise and visible model for both student and instructor.

The airplane type/size determines the exact positions of aim points 1 and 2 and the flare initiation point and, on a normal powered approach, is flown using a PATH descent – using the elevators to aim the pilots eye and power/thrust to control airspeed. The technique is equally applicable and adaptable to both light and heavy airplanes, from sailplanes to A380s.

(For those pilots taught that airspeed is controlled with the elevators and rate of descent is controlled with the throttle, the use of elevators to control airspeed, on final approach is more correctly applied to the Non-Normal cases when power/thrust is fixed – or failed – such as in a forced landing. For further explanation, please see FAQ #5, in the FAQs tab.)

The flare fix determines a longitudinal flare point on the runway centreline (based on the correct conventional flare height) while gradually reducing power/thrust back to idle). The concept of using a longitudinal flare point rather than flare height has three great advantages:

The flare point is visible and therefore easily identified and able to be repeated, consistently;

Any longitudinal error made in mis-identifying the longitudinal flare point DIMINISHES 20 times, compared with the fact that any error in mis-identifying a conventional vertical flare ‘height’ COMPOUNDS 20 times. This is due to the fact that the standard approach path angle is 3º – approximately a 1:20 gradient. Overlooked by the entire flight training industry for 100 years, this angle is routinely misrepresented in text books and manuals as approximately 25-30º and this has masked its significance; and

Triangles have 3 sides and only 2 were ever utilised. The third (adjacent) side is fully visible as the runway centreline and, on sealed and painted runways, is effectively a calibrated ruler.  The 1:20 tolerance, afforded by utilising a longitudinal flare point, has the great advantage of being so tolerant of error that the technique can be equally applied on unsealed airstrips of grass or gravel, where an estimation of runway segment distance is required.

Summary  – The Jacobson Flare Advantage

Overall, the Jacobson Flare offers the following advantages over conventional practices:

Landing an airplane can now be regarded as a skill that can be logically taught and learned, rather than as an art to be mastered eventually. This innovative technique defines the entire landing flare manoeuvre for any airplane from day one, greatly enhancing self-confidence for all pilots;

Most of the variable factors affecting perception and estimation of flare height may be discounted because pilots can fly a clearly delineated eye path, from final approach through to a predictable touchdown. The distinctions between aircraft types are reduced to just the aim point and flare cut-off point positions;

The concept of a longitudinal flare cut-off point on the runway is extremely tolerant as any errors in the selection or identification of this position are greatly diminished, vertically;

The Jacobson Flare offers standardisation throughout an organisation and facilitates accurate assessment of increasingly vital evidence-based competency standards;

Elementary and advanced pilot training is simplified for student and instructor, representing a meaningful reduction in total training time and costs; this pilot-portable technique adapts simply to successive airplane endorsements throughout a pilot’s career;

Experienced pilots, especially when returning from a period of leave or non-flying management duties, can achieve better landing consistency by using the visual flare fix to complement their highly developed levels of judgement, coordination and skill;

Runway occupancy times are minimised, optimising traffic flow. More consistent touchdown points lead to reduced airplane tyre, brake and undercarriage wear and tear, which may then reduce runway wear and tear;

No device or modification of the airplane is required – therefore no additional costs are incurred;

The approach path, flare fix and flare rate are very similar to, and compatible with, those commanded by Head-up Guidance Systems (HGS) on the B737NG and other airplanes;

The likelihood of landing accidents causing aircraft damage, loss and ensuing insurance claims is greatly diminished;

Safety is greatly enhanced, because pilots no longer need to rely solely on guesswork and ‘feel’, perception, judgment and experience; the entire approach and landing manoeuvre is virtually visible to the pilot; The Jacobson Flare is universal, quantifiable, consistent and unassailable.

The Jacobson Flare is comprehensive yet practical, simple to master and extremely effective. Since 1985, it has been adopted in 65 nations by thousands of civil and military pilots of various ages, abilities and experience, in airplane types ranging from sailplanes and single-engine light airplanes to large jet transports. The improvement in confidence, competence and progress of pilots – at all levels – is not only breathtaking: It’s measurable.

The Jacobson Flare addresses obvious differences between airplanes but embraces their similarities. It delivers a basic system of flight training that may be adapted as necessary to meet specific requirements. Its universal application is long overdue and the App presents the Jacobson Flare clearly and comprehensively as never before.

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.