Hardest plane to learn?

[pilottj]

I would have to say the FS Lab Concorde for me too.  It is one purchase I regret making.  Not because it is a bad sim, it is an excellent sim, it is just waaay above my ability.

[John P Zeggert Jr.]

I would  Have 2 say the Gee bee  Racer     Good God almight  that a tuff airplane to land 

[HamSammich]

Too bad they don't make a hi-fidelity F-104. They used to call it the missile-with-a-man-in-it, the flying stovepipe, widowmaker, pilot-killer, you name it.

 

Can't imagine, being a Lockheed product and, I think, a Kelly Johnson design, it would be so user-hostile. Then again, those were different times, It was designed to go fast, and that's about it.

[SamN]

The Q400.  This Majestic document is a good indication: http://majesticsoftware.com/mjc8q400/resources/LandingTheQ400.pdf

[HamSammich]

Funny, in my opinion at least, that document is exactly why the Q400 is **not** so hard to fly. He's done all the hard work for us--and with real passengers in back.

 

Every plane, and every fake plane, demands its own technique. Once you crack the code, it's just rinse and repeat. That doc helps crack the code.

 

Momentum+Skinny Wings+Stiff Gear===>Use those big engines and fat props to keep you in the energy game, while keeping a suitable target picture and letting the speed vary slightly. Works for him IRL and works for me in the fake one. The key is just not to fly it either like a GA plane or a 777.

 

 

 

The Q400.  This Majestic document is a good indication: http://majesticsoftware.com/mjc8q400/resources/LandingTheQ400.pdf

[SamN]

To the contrary, in my opinion at least. That document is exactly why the Q400 is **not** so hard to fly.

 

That contradicts the fact that the professional Q400 pilot who wrote that document was explicitly asked to write that PDF, because it was the stuff that their customers expressed to have most problems with.

[jfriz]

Well, I don't think he meant pitch but rate of descent. And this is indeed a very common an great method to stay on the glide slope. Too high, just lower the throttle slightly, too low, just add a little bit of power. Pitch on the other hand controls speed.

Btw, the dash is certainly a power on aircraft on landing. I even saw a video of a Baltic crew adding a little bit of power just before landing to soften the often quite stiff landing of dash, something she is very famous for.

Hi Chrjs,

Sorry, but if you are high on the glide slope, first pitch the nose down to get back on, when back on glide slope, pitch up, and re-trim....... if your AS, increases more than 10 kts., reduce thrust,.......same procedure for any airplane, prop.,,,or  jet...   remember, as you descend, the air is changing, you will need to make changes, in elevator trim, and thrust levers..

Cheers,

Jerry Friz

[HamSammich]

Well, I'll certainly agree that figuring it out without a tutorial is challenging. The only point I was making (badly) is that I've found that figuring any plane out without a tutorial is tough. Landing the A2A Cherokee ain't easy, either--but watching Flightsim481's video makes it child's play.

 

 

That contradicts the fact that the professional Q400 pilot who wrote that document was explicitly asked to write that PDF, because it was the stuff that their customers expressed to have most problems with.

[Benny]

Ha ha, following this thread... yesterday I tested the Q400 at Sedona VS the QW bae 146 200. The 146 is a breeze to land compare to the Q400.

 

With the Q400 I have to come lower with power and 15 deg of flap, even If I touch soon with full reverse trust I take almost all the runway. The 146 as no reverse trust on top. I feel that if I have the right slop the the Q400 it want to flare for ever and near stall the control are sluggish.

 

Anyway they are my 2 favorite regional plane.

 

Ben

[HamSammich]

Ben, a few questions:

 

1) What's your landing weight/fuel load?

2) What's your Vref?

3) Winds?

4) Prop speed?

 

At standard weights and speeds, even at props 850 and flaps 15 and a three-degree glidepath, you ought to be able to land and stop using only beta and brakes. The key is power at about 17-percent torque at that altitude. Believe the runway slopes as well, so that might have an effect.

 

Will try this out later and post results

[HamSammich]

Okay Ben, and anyone interested in a little comic relief,

 

Here's the approach and landing. First time out. By no means perfect. Was a little high, a little hot, a bit too much sink at the end. All that said, getting it on and stopped at flaps 15 and 850 props is a cinch--even though, as you'll see, I made a dog's breakfast of the touchdown.

 

Full flaps and props could likely be done in half the space. Enjoy. (And don't fly like my brother!)

 

Marshall

 

 

https://youtu.be/Jd5w4wHAMBE

[Marvic]

Well the Coolsky DC-9 definitely has its challenges. There is no set it and forget it like modern day airliners, you have to constantly fly the plane in all parameters of flight. With most airlines today, the autopilot does all the work, the pilots end up being passengers, keeping an eye on the systems.

With the DC-9 the reward is simply greasing the landing after an ILS approach down to minimums, all hand flown.

[HamSammich]

Love to try the DC-9. Got a cockpit tour of an Allegheny Series 30 as a kid. Funky and very cool
 

[Benny]

Okay Ben, and anyone interested in a little comic relief,

 

Here's the approach and landing. First time out. By no means perfect. Was a little high, a little hot, a bit too much sink at the end. All that said, getting it on and stopped at flaps 15 and 850 props is a cinch--even though, as you'll see, I made a dog's breakfast of the touchdown.

 

Full flaps and props could likely be done in half the space. Enjoy. (And don't fly like my brother!)

 

Marshall

 

 

https://youtu.be/Jd5w4wHAMBE

 

 

Cool vid!!! I have a few myself and will post later!!!! Nice landing!!! I have to say that I have a tendency to flair a lot to kill speed for smoother landing. I think I have a good on with the 146 also!!!

 

Nice thread!!!

 

Ben

[---]

Interesting discussion about drag, lift, barn door effect, prop wash etc etc.

Don't have the Majestic Q400 but I've flown the Dash7, Dash8/100/300 IRL a few thousand hours and you could land all three of them at idle power without any difficulty with the standard flap setting (25 on the Dash7 and 15 on the Dash8). Loved to land the 300 at 900RPM, almost jet like.

Asked our Q400 pilots if their plane is so difficult to land due to the high attitude on final and the big props. Guess what, they said that you can land the 400 like the 300 at idle.

Did a few flights on the jumpseat and observed quite a few landings performed at idle power.

 

To stay on topic; IRL the A320 family is by far the most difficult plane to learn. It might look easy at the first glance but after many years you find out that it's basically impossible to know this plane inside out.

[HamSammich]

Well, in the fake one at least, you can land at idle, just like any other plane-- but at a drastically steeper nose down glide path. It's a supercritical highly loaded wing, so it doesn't exactly waft you downward

[Cal]

Hi all,

 

I also found the Q400 a real handful but it got smoother as I practiced. One that I found really hard to handle was the Vulcan. Once someone posted the starting sequence on youtube, I was able to get it airborne and thundering into the stratosphere and it is a magnificent beast but it turned like a concrete building and it was mighty hard to slow and land. I don't think I ever got it stopped within the runway. 

 

I haven't even thought about it for months but I may taxi it out and try again. Like I  said, it was pretty awesome. 

 

good flights, Cal

[HamSammich]

berndt,

Quick question: We're you involved in the flight modeling of the Q? If so, you have my deepest gratitude.

[SolRayz]

I am finally enjoying the NGX, and although seemingly daunting at first, it has turned out not so difficult after the fact. Probably the most involved simulation to date for me. Q400 comes next as far as complexity and involvement. As far as difficulty hand flying, I must say that Aerosoft out did themselves with the F-14X, and hand flying this old bird is far more involved than I ever imagined.

[Benny]

Hardest plane to learn? I own over 60 payware. A lot are hard.. or different.

Now, which one is the more realistic! Or at least feel like it...

 

There is no real answer as much of us can't verified or judge. Even with 4000 + hours in the real thing I can't say if a 320 from Aerosoft feel real.

 

Are we having fun, hell yes!

 

To be honest, heli are the hardest.

 

Ben

[HamSammich]

Rotary aircraft scare the hell outta me.

 

To be honest, heli are the hardest.

 

Ben

 

[HamSammich]

For Bernt and others,

 

Here's a quick clip of The Mighty Dash at KSEZ, landing--precipitously--with idle power and props 850.

 

https://youtu.be/quAh_5zqM1g

 

 

Marshall

[freddy]

When I first got the Q400, I read all the manuals and specifically noted the points about landing and power requirements etc. My first landing was fine ... and my subsequent landings were fine as well.  I was flying it and landing it as the manuals said to fly it and land it, and I was having no issues with that whatsoever. In fact, because of this, I decided to run the experiment of landing it at idle thrust in an effort to see what difference it would make to my landings.  And, yep, (as probably expected), the landing was much harder than all of my other landings. A good learning experience.

 

Interestingly, reading this thread makes me wonder why I didn't have (more) difficulty learning, flying, and landing this aircraft. Was it the hardest plane in my hangar to learn?  No, I wouldn't say that it was.  I find that (for any aircraft) reading the manuals, watching and absorbing as many videos as you can of other people flying it and giving tips, and generally just "taking your time" to build a knowledge and understanding of the aircraft and its idiosyncrasies ... BEFORE you jump in to the cockpit ... followed then by getting in and methodically going through and using the checklists (and charts) ... works.

 

The hardest plane in my hangar to learn was probably the PMDG 747-400. It was the first "complex" plane that I purchased and it was vastly different from the default 747-400 in the sim. It is the PMDG 747-400 that taught me you cannot just jump in after only briefly browsing over the manuals without really absorbing and understanding them. It is the PMDG 747-400 that taught me to "take my time" rather than being excited by my new purchase and wanting to fly it straight away. It is the PMDG 747-400 that taught me the You Tube videos of people flying it and giving tips were definitely a good compliment to the manuals and were worth watching. I thank the PMDG 747-400 for teaching me all THOSE things.  And, thus, every aircraft I purchased after the PMDG 747-400 was far simpler to learn after that.

[HamSammich]

Freddy:

 

Amen to all of that. Well said. It's especially nice that developers like PMDG, Majestic, A2A and others make aircraft that demand that level of study. The rewards are in the journey and the destination.

 

(And ORBX makes nice destinations)

 

Marshall

[freddy]

HamSammich,

 

... and Amen to that!