Not so fast

I had about 10 hours in the 300-horsepower Piper PA–32 Lance I was flying. I was thankful I had recently learned to approach at the speeds recommended in the pilot’s operating handbook instead of 15 knots faster as I had initially been taught during my transition training. I had no idea what the braking action would be like on the contaminated runway, and I didn’t want any excess speed on touchdown.

I nailed the recommended approach airspeed of 75 knots and 500 fpm rate of descent for a stabilized final approach. After touching down, I used aerodynamic braking to nearly roll to a stop before applying brakes and had plenty of runway remaining—something I likely wouldn’t have been able to do had I approached at 90 knots.

While there are some instances when we should complete our approach to landing at a higher airspeed than recommended in the POH, these cases are few and far between. Gusty wind conditions are the most common example in which you would increase approach speed in a VFR, single-engine aircraft. However, students, pilots, and instructors typically pad airspeed on final approach because the controls “feel better” or because of a perceived increase in the margin of safety operating low to the ground—a greater spread between approach airspeed and stall speed in the landing configuration. Flying approaches faster than necessary can make it harder to transition to a sleeker aircraft that doesn’t slow as quickly or to an aircraft without flaps. The risks of approaching to land faster than recommended for an aircraft can also make landing more difficult under normal conditions, create a dangerous situation if your flaps fail, or lead to loss of control on the ground. Learning aircraft energy management and practicing precise aircraft control at slower speeds will help you confidently and safely approach at the recommended airspeed.

Approach speed 101

The FAA and aircraft manufacturers provide recommendations for approach speeds that allow the pilot to safely descend to the runway and touch down with minimal floating. The recommended approach speed already includes a safety cushion between the final approach speed and stalling speed in the landing configuration (V_SO). 

“The pilot should use the manufacturer’s recommended airspeed or 1.3 V_SO if there is no manufacturer’s recommendation,” according to the FAA’s Airplane Flying Handbook. Adding 30 percent to the stall speed for the way you have the aircraft configured for landing (flaps retracted, V_S, or flaps extended, V_SO) allows the airplane to descend and start bleeding off airspeed as you flare so that you can slow to touchdown speed instead of floating. When should you reach the target airspeed on final? The FAA suggests wings level on short final.

Manufacturers also provide a buffer between approach speed and stall speed. For example, the information manual for a Cessna 172R recommends an approach speed of 60 to 70 knots with flaps down. Its V_SO speed at 2,450 pounds with no bank and 30 degrees of flaps is 33 knots indicated airspeed (regardless of whether the center of gravity is in the most forward or rearward position). In this case, the recommended approach speed with full flaps (60 to 70 knots) is greater than 1.3 V_SO (33 KIAS times 1.3 equals 43 KIAS).

You should memorize an aircraft’s approach and V speeds by studying the pilot’s operating handbook or information manual, but you can also find V speeds on the airspeed indicator. For the Cessna 172R in this example, the maximum weight V_SO in the landing configuration is the bottom of the white arc—33 KIAS. The next time you go flying, note the spread between the bottom of the white arc and the recommended approach speed—this will give you a good visual indication of buffer already built in.

Risks of being too fast

Padding approach speeds above and beyond what the FAA and aircraft manufacturers recommend in normal conditions can increase risk of floating, overrunning the runway, losing control after touchdown, and damaging the aircraft.

If you are too fast, once you enter ground effect and start the flare, the aircraft will be producing more lift than drag and you will float, sometimes considerably (beyond the first third of the runway the FAA recommends to land on). You also might balloon and need to go around.

Speaking of stopping, if you touch down too far down the runway or force the aircraft onto the ground too fast, you might not be able to get stopped and overrun the end of the runway. Renowned flight instructor William K. Kershner noted in The Advanced Pilot’s Flight Manual that the speed at which you touch down has a greater effect than the weight of the aircraft on the ground roll: “Although your landing distance is directly affected by weight (double the weight and you double the energy to be dissipated), the effect of velocity is even more pronounced (double the velocity at landing and the energy to be dissipated is quadrupled).” In my previous example of landing the Piper Lance on the snow- and ice-covered runway, had I approached 15 knots faster than the recommended speed, floated longer down the 5,003-foot-long runway, and touched down at a higher velocity, stopping could have been problematic.

Another risk of touching down at too high of a velocity is that you could lose control of the aircraft. Sloppy footwork after touchdown, such as applying the brakes too soon or too hard, could damage the aircraft by causing flat spots on the tires and wearing the brakes. In the case of a contaminated runway, if you apply brakes heavily on ice (which won’t do you any good) and then roll off the ice onto the paved runway surface, it could damage the tires or landing gear. Improper rudder inputs at a higher speed could lead to loss of control on the ground.

Time to slow down

It might feel unnerving to start approaching at a slower airspeed than you have been accustomed to, particularly if you learned to fly the approach faster than the manufacturer recommended or you simply got into that habit. I’ve experienced that myself.

When I was working on my tailwheel endorsement in an American Champion Super Decathlon, I learned to approach faster for wheel landings than I would for three-point landings. That technique didn’t transfer to my Cessna 170B. If I approached faster and forced the main wheels onto the runway in my Cessna 170B, when I pulled the yoke back to lower the tail, the aircraft would become airborne again. I had enough airspeed that the wings hadn’t quit flying yet.

I had learned to fly final approach at 90 knots in the Piper Lance I mentioned previously because the aircraft controls felt more responsive. After relearning to fly the approach at 75 knots, the controls felt just fine—I had learned the new feel and knew how to correct immediately should I get too slow or experience a high sink rate.

With an understanding of aircraft energy management and purposeful practice, you can learn to confidently approach at slower airspeeds.

The FAA’s Airplane Flying Handbook defines aircraft energy management as, “the process of planning, monitoring and controlling altitude and airspeed targets in relation to the airplane’s energy state.” You do this with the coordinated use of the throttle and elevator. An easy memory aide from the handbook is “Pitch plus power controls energy state.” Because you’ll be flying at lower airspeeds, it is important to manage the aircraft’s energy properly and understand how to operate safely in what’s called the “region of reverse command.” In the region of reverse command, if you are low and slow on final approach, you would need to add power and lower the nose, not raise it, to gain altitude.

In Rod Machado’s How to Fly an Airplane Handbook, renowned flight instructor, humorist, and author Rod Machado recommends a technique in which you think of the aircraft’s controls “in terms of your throttle controlling your descent rate and the elevator controlling your airspeed.” That way you can operate the same whether you are on the front or back side of the power curve. “If you do get too slow on final approach and move onto the back side of the power curve, using throttle to control descent rate means you are a lot less likely to pull aft on the elevator control in an attempt to stretch your glide,” Machado explains.

Explore energy management scenarios at altitude with an instructor with some slow flight work. Practice slow flight at minimum controllable airspeed and final approach speeds at each flap setting and in the landing configuration. Set up descents at 500 feet per minute to simulate the approach. Note how the controls feel as well as the pitch and power inputs as you correct for deviations in your airspeed or rate of descent. With an instructor (or other pilot if you are already certificated), practice a series of power-off stalls with no flaps, partial flaps, and full flaps in the landing configuration. Note the flight conditions, such as the temperature and humidity, altitude, and weight of the aircraft, then write down the speed at which the aircraft stalls—your instructor or other pilot can do this while you focus on flying. Multiply those numbers by 1.3 to get your recommended approach speed (in the absence of speeds that the aircraft manufacturer recommends) for V_S and V_SO. You will be able to see exactly the buffer between stalling and approach speed for those conditions. Then, note the aircraft manufacturer’s recommended approach speeds (flaps up and flaps down). As in the case with the Cessna 172R, you’ll notice a much larger cushion between the approach speed and stall speed. You might repeat the scenario at a different weight (for example fully loaded instead of minimally) and different density altitudes and note those differences as well.

After these practice sessions, you should feel much more comfortable operating your aircraft at lower airspeeds and you can begin reducing your approach speeds to the manufacturer’s recommended speed or 1.3 V_SO if one isn’t specified. You’ll be flying more precisely and you’ll likely also notice an improvement in your landings without all that excess airspeed.