This is very unrealistic and makes it nearly impossible to flare.
My point here is that when you flare, the plane does not get the kind of resistance and breaking you would get when landing a real plane.
Some aircraft I have experienced this with are:
C172 (both), Extra 330LT, TBM 930 and all the Cubs.
Please note that this list is not complete.
While you don’t usually talk about gliding range and flaring together it probably has to do with the fact that these planes have not enough resistance from the air in general so they glide further and this effect is more pronounced when flaring as that is the point where you really want the plane to get resistance.
i noticed this from the start but i didn’t know if it was real or not (never piloted a plane before) but in YT some real pilot say that it act like the real thing
Not to mention, it’s really important that you say which aircraft you’re talking about, what’s your speed over the threshold, what are your flap settings?
Speed over the threshold is massively important. If you’re doing 100 knots in a C152 as you approach the runway, yeah, you’re not going to land on the runway… (that’s just an example, silly as it may be)
The lack of propeller drag causes some turboprops to float way more than they are supposed to during the flare. Not sure if that is what the OP is talking about.
I experience this extreme floating with the CJ4, when flaring. At idle power it actually climbs with just a tad nose up. Fortunately this aircraft has awesome brakes and a short landing distance requirement. But it means your landing fpm will take a hit and you have to adjust your landing config for this aircraft out of norm to get a decent fpm.
Some planes being “floaty” is kind of the way they are. The Mooney is notorious for that. And it takes some practice to land it well.
However, we have no idea what plane you’re talking about or what kind of speeds you’re approaching at. Any plane will glide too far on 0 power if you’re coming in too fast. This isn’t unrealistic in the slightest.
I think I need to learn the approach speeds better then. I tried staying close to stall speeds on approach but the plane dropped like a hot potato when you turn the AP off. I guess that is the difference between a simmer and a real pilot.
I will try slower approach speeds then. I usually try to get to the threshold close to 140 IAS. Then cut throttle once I cross the threshold. My attitude especially on RNAV approaches leaves much to be desired, but I imagine it can be done better.
Sorry there is indeed not so much information in my post.
My point here is that when you flare, the plane does not get the kind of resistance and breaking you would get when landing a real plane.
Some aircrafts I have experienced this with are:
C172 (both), Extra 330LT, TBM 930 and all the Cubs.
Please note that this list is not complete.
And while you don’t usually talk about gliding range and flaring together it probably has to do with the fact that these planes have not enough resistance from the air in general so they glide further and this effect is more pronounced when flaring as that is the point where you really want the plane to get resistance.
Hope this clears things up.
Yes haha the Moneys do that indeed!
I have indeed given too little information in my initial post, I have updated this now please take a look and see if you might be able to understand my concerns.
With the C172 I am certain that this is unrealistic from my own experience with 172s as well as with the TBM 930 where a SET certified pilot has confirmed my findings.
Personally, I haven’t had that issue, the two I’ve actually flown that are in the game are the C172 and C152, and in the sim those two planes flare and land as I’d expect if I keep my speed correct and pull out the power. And when I don’t, yeah, they float down the runway just like they do when I do that in real life. (yeah, been there, done that sigh)
Certainly the mods for the C152 made it fly much more realistically, though, with the last update, the default version is flying better, ‘feels’ better.
I can’t speak to the TBM or the 350i, I’ve never actually flown anything even close to those aircraft. But, overall, landing has been the least of my issues in the sim as long as I can get a decent descent/speed combo going across the threshold.
Never had such an issue with the TBM and C172 once I learned to control their speed properly on approach. I can typically come in for a landing at the right speed and have my stall warning just as I touch the ground and most of the time it’s a beautiful smooth landing. It’s really all about energy management.
Tail draggers though, I’m terrible with when it comes to landing. I love the Extra for fun barnstorming runs, but when it comes to landing, In my case, it’s definitely user error. And I don’t care for those planes enough to really even bother trying.
The Mooney can be very ‘floaty’ as well. It takes some practice to touch down without floating too far. But that’s the way the plane is in real life as well.
Have read up on the ground effect and the perception of how it is modelled in the SIM, this may provide you with some of the answers you seem to be searching for here. There are plenty of threads on the Ground Effect.
I agree with what I think the OP is trying to say AKASH7788
Some of the GA planes are far too slippery ?, in that when you reduce power, they continue to fly as if some power is still applied.
Nothing to do with flare, landing speed, ground effect, the planes just don;t slow down realistically, with min power, in level flight,
The C172 is bad, the ACON A2 is even worse.
Some of the MSFS GA aircraft slow down too slowly on “min” power
There is a problem with ground effect in this sim. I have noticed in particular the A320 and the C172. When testing the A320, I flared at the touchdown zone and held the aircraft in ground effect as long as possible. By the time I reached the opposite end touchdown zone the speed had reduced to 90 kts and I was still airborne. (50% fuel and pax) Something is misconfigured with the flight model. The Dash 8 would even been stalling at that speed.
I would suggest that aircraft slow down with reduced power, should 1st be got correct above the ground effect level , and the when that is modeled correctly, add in the ground effect.
Out of my own interest I have just tested this using the C172 Steam gauge.
I used the Airfield I fly from IRL as I know the landmarks and distances well. I set the winds to 0 inline with the POH which on the graph indicates at a height of 2000ft you should be able to glide for 3NM.
I set the altimeter to QFE so height above the ground and flew to distance of exactly 3NM from the Threshold of the runway. I then cut power completely, so prop was wind milling in line with the POH and then adjusted pitch to adopt best glide, 68Kts Indicated airspeed and trimmed the aircraft to hold that attitude. I landed approx 100m down the runway from the threshold, which included holding off to land correctly.
So from that test it would suggest that the aerodynamic model is actually quite accurate in regards to glide distance. I was quite surprised to be honest so I repeated it with exactly the same result, touchdown at nearly exactly the same point.
I beieve that the problem is more, if you remain in level slight, and reduce power to min, the plane does not slow down as quickly as it should. Try bleeding speed of the Icon A2, it just keeps going ad going !!!
sigh)