Landing the Mosquito

[Charley]

Did something change in the last year with the Mosquito flight model? The last time I tried the Mosquito was quite a while ago but I was able to have pretty fair landings at least half the time. I was even able to do some good landings with one engine out. Now though, I've tried landing about a hundred times & they've all been bad.  It seems utterly impossible. I try to cross the threshold at about 110-120 mph and set the plane down as gently as possible but it never seems to turn out well.  90% of the time I bend the props & gear , but if I am able to keep the props & gear in good shape , the plane doesn't want to stay straight on the runway & I end up nosing over. Could the real Mosquito have been that fragile? Any ideas about what I'm doing wrong?

best one so far Mosquito landing.trk

[DD_Friar]

@Charley a while back ed introduced new suspension and tyre modelling for the mossie. that may be your issue. 

[Ala13_ManOWar]

On the ground whenever you came in single-engined obviously it's impossible to taxi properly and they didn't even tried. But I guess you mean with a whole airframe.

[Charley]

Oh no, I'm talking about landing the plane , not taxiing. You're right , I never did try taxiing with one engine, I wouldn't know how to . I would like to know if other people have mastered the landings or find them extremely difficult.

[Bozon]

21 hours ago, Charley said:

Oh no, I'm talking about landing the plane , not taxiing. You're right , I never did try taxiing with one engine, I wouldn't know how to . I would like to know if other people have mastered the landings or find them extremely difficult.

This difficulty of landing the Mosquito is somewhat offset by the low probability to survive the sortie and make it back at all 

The thing that made the Mosquito a bit difficult for me was the huge amount of drag that it generates with the undercarriage lowered, flaps out, and 2850 RPM, landing configuration. This makes the power off glide quite steep, and if you want to flatten the final approach and keep ~120 mph, you have to keep some power on. This worked poorly for me and I often messed with the throttles too much and banged the plane in a hard landing.

I now adopted a “glider” like final approach: I keep my altitude, flaps retracted (undercarriage down because it is slow to move), and wait for a relatively steep angle to the zebra before cutting the power and entering a glide. At this point I extend the flaps fully as air brakes, glider-style, to come down steeply. I also allow a higher glide speed than 120 mph if I need to steepen the slope. With all the drag, a higher speed is not a problem and only extends the floating after the flare by a little - flare, hold it floating 1 meter over the runway and the plane will sink the last meter and 3-point itself when it runs out of speed.

That is probably not how they did it in the old days, but I write off fewer airframes this way.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

24 minutes ago, Bozon said:

That is probably not how they did it in the old days, but I write off fewer airframes this way.

Or maybe yes mate. Usually a huge problem in sims is exactly that, people tends to flatten the approach too much (Microlight like, by the way) and since you're coming in on first stage engine power, hence hanging from a high power setting engine, in the end that comes to troubles in touch down, not to mention you don't see the runway whatsoever. The other way, coming in from a "much steeper" (or maybe not that much steeper, it just looks like it's too steep in front of a screen) but second stage engine power setting (hence not "hanging" from the engine, but actually gliding) and since the higher power setting just isn't there and there's not much trouble with rolling off and flare from a lower power engine setting (so less torque to counter), and it's quite more paused and manageable. Maybe you're just performing a correct approach after all.

For a better landing at latest stages I believe Mosquito is not a "cutter", you shouldn't completely cut power from the engines while flaring, lower it but not cut since that's a huge kick you don't wanna have at low altitude and speed.

 

P.S.: first and second stage states means from engine power settings, drag, AoA and so, first stage is the one place (in the curve, it's a power diagram) where you need more power to fly slower, the second stage is where you need actually less power to fly faster, all of that due to available power, drag and AoA, it's not magic

Edited March 26 by Ala13_ManOWar

[Bozon]

@Ala13_ManOWar I think you are correct about the back side of the power (required) curve. 

The Mosquito feels like it has a lot of induced drag and a fairly steep reversed slope for that curve around ~120 mph and below. If I use engine power to hold the speed, and then cut it for the flare, my speed drops fast, the drag shoots up, and I immediately sink and hit the runway hard at the bottom of the flare. It is a matter of practice I know.

Just easier for me to come faster, steeper and power off all the way. Less stuff to manage and the longer float gives my poor flying skills just the time I need to stabilize a 1 meter floating till a gentle touch down.

[Bozon]

I continue theorizing from my post above. After some more thought I realized that the bottom of the power required (also minimal drag) shifts from around 150 mph (clean) to a much lower speed (near 110 maybe?) due to the added parasitic drag (gears & flaps extended).

The real FB.XI manual says final approach speed with flaps down should be 100-105 mph, and warns that the glide with all the drag extended is steep. This speed is extremely low and just a hair above the stall speed which is said to be 95–100 mph - so this must be at the back of the power required curve, even with all the drag out. This sounds dangerous to me, as every pull of the stick only makes you sink harder, or stalls you.

Gliding down on final with drag out & power-off at 120–130 mph should put me on the bottom or front side of the power required (drag) curve. Thus when I flare and the speed starts to drop I initially get less drag and a more manageable and easy flare before the speed drops to the other side of the curve, the drag shoots up and the plane sinks - which is desirable if I am already floating by this time.

edit:

The manual says for go-around that the plane “will climb satisfactorily at approximately 120 mph with flaps and undercarriage down” - so I assume this is roughly the minimal drag speed for this configuration.

Edited March 26 by Bozon

[grafspee]

2 hours ago, Bozon said:

@Ala13_ManOWar I think you are correct about the back side of the power (required) curve. 

The Mosquito feels like it has a lot of induced drag and a fairly steep reversed slope for that curve around ~120 mph and below. If I use engine power to hold the speed, and then cut it for the flare, my speed drops fast, the drag shoots up, and I immediately sink and hit the runway hard at the bottom of the flare. It is a matter of practice I know.

Just easier for me to come faster, steeper and power off all the way. Less stuff to manage and the longer float gives my poor flying skills just the time I need to stabilize a 1 meter floating till a gentle touch down.

That is how i do it in all warbirds, approach higher and my final i do with throttle cutoff ofc you need to be quite proficient when to cut throttle to be able to glide to runway.

I make landing like this guy.

 

[Charley]

 Lately I've been trying landing with about 30 % flaps down instead of fully down &  I think it might be  better. I think it gives me a little better speed control after the flare & lets the plane settle more gradually (at least this is what I believe so far). I still have a great deal of difficulty most of the time with keeping the plane straight on the runway after touchdown though. Also, a few times the plane has nosed over just before coming to a stop even though I have the stick fully pulled back & no brakes applied. I don't understand.

Edited March 26 by Charley

[grafspee]

45 minutes ago, Charley said:

 Lately I've been trying landing with about 30 % flaps down instead of fully down &  I think it might be  better. I think it gives me a little better speed control after the flare & lets the plane settle more gradually (at least this is what I believe so far). I still have a great deal of difficulty most of the time with keeping the plane straight on the runway after touchdown though. Also, a few times the plane has nosed over just before coming to a stop even though I have the stick fully pulled back & no brakes applied. I don't understand.

 

Make sure that you don't have any double bind for brakes.

[Slippa]

…and hold tight on the roll out. Can’t say I’m a fan of the last ‘upgrade’ to the Mossie but as far as I can tell, nothing changed about the way it behaves in the air. Getting it down seems about the same, (for me, always eventful), it’s when it’s on terra firma the buggering about starts.

Practice, practice n all that as always, good luck. 

[Nealius]

I've had best results by treating it like an oversized Spitfire. Somewhere around 120mph in the pattern, 110ish over the fence, flare and touchdown somewhere between 90-100 if I were to guess (busy looking outside instead of at the speed indicator). 

The most difficult part for me is getting in the 3-point attitude because it's so much shallower than what I'm used to.

[Skewgear]

AP 2019E-PN, the Pilots' Notes for the FB.VI. Note very carefully that these were issued in the 1950s and the speeds given are in knots, not mph.

This means you need to convert the given speeds to statute miles per hour, which is what our wartime Mosquito's ASI is calibrated in.

105kts = 121mph.

120kts = 138mph.

No wonder many people are finding landing so hard - you're well on the back of the drag curve.

[Nealius]

Any higher than the "back end" and she bounces horribly due to the suspension issues that have been discussed to death since her release.

[Holbeach]

19 hours ago, Charley said:

 Lately I've been trying landing with about 30 % flaps down instead of fully down &  I think it might be  better. I think it gives me a little better speed control after the flare & lets the plane settle more gradually (at least this is what I believe so far). I still have a great deal of difficulty most of the time with keeping the plane straight on the runway after touchdown though. Also, a few times the plane has nosed over just before coming to a stop even though I have the stick fully pulled back & no brakes applied. I don't understand.

 

Short answer to your OP is, yes, it has become more difficult.

I took over your landing and didn't have a single success. It's like landing on rocks. I gave up.

I went back to my original 'go to' airfield, (Eastchurch, Channel), to get my sanity back.

I've been practicing here for years, so here are this mornings efforts.

 

 

 

..

Eastchurch mos landing.trk Eastchurch mos landing 2.trk

[Slippa]

2 hours ago, Holbeach said:yes, it has become more difficult.

I went back to my original 'go to' airfield, (Eastchurch, Channel), to get my sanity back.

I've been practicing here for years, 

Any reason you like Eastchurch?

2 hours ago, Holbeach said:

yes, it has become more difficult.

Do you think there’s been a change in flight modelling then? Or because of the silly ‘suspension update’?

[Holbeach]

2 hours ago, Slippa said:

Any reason you like Eastchurch?

Do you think there’s been a change in flight modelling then? Or because of the silly ‘suspension update’?

Good question.

I wanted a typical Mosquito wartime short airfield of around 3,300' to practice on, so I've used it right from the start, for continuity.

I always use RAF practise of 3 point landings, to keep the touchdown speed low.

This creates a discipline and means that if you can't do it, it's either technique or FM that's out.

I don't think the FM is different, but the touchdown seems harder suspension. Eastchurch is bumpy, so you never get a plant, there will always be a slight bounce.

A video library will provide past references, rather than relying on memory.

Here's this mornings efforts.

..

[Charley]

Holbeach, those were really decent landings! I wish I could have a landing that good. If you ever have a chance, I'd like to see a video with the  right control + enter control indicator box open so I can try and copy your input procedure. What's especially been giving  me a lot of trouble lately is keeping the plane straight on the runway after touchdown. I'd like to see how you do that.

[Slippa]

Not bad Holbeach, makes me wanna have a go now.

Personally I’m all pedals and brake-dabs to keep it straight on roll out. If I can get it down properly o course. 

[Holbeach]

 

 

On 3/27/2024 at 10:57 PM, Charley said:

Holbeach, those were really decent landings! I wish I could have a landing that good. If you ever have a chance, I'd like to see a video with the  right control + enter control indicator box open so I can try and copy your input procedure. What's especially been giving  me a lot of trouble lately is keeping the plane straight on the runway after touchdown. I'd like to see how you do that.

I don't think the indicator box will help. You can't replicate what I do. It's a practice to reaction thing.

If you use the replays, you can turn the box on yourself. 1. a straight in approach and 2. a military approach. (I'm still working on this one).

On the positive side I simply could not get the landing right on your runway at Kutasi and crashed every time, so I moved to Senaki-Kohlkhi.

The perfect world was restored. Landings were straightforward, no drama, 3 pointers and straight roll out with a dab of brakes at the end when the rudder starts to lose it.

Give it a try..

 

Edited April 2 by Holbeach

[Holbeach]

1 hour ago, Slippa said:

Not bad Holbeach, makes me wanna have a go now.

Personally I’m all pedals and brake-dabs to keep it straight on roll out. If I can get it down properly o course. 

I use full deflection left rudder immediately after brakes off and never touch the brakes again, (it's counter productive on a short runway).

Usually works.

..

[Doc3908]

I hadn't flown the Mossy in a long time - probably over a year. I do remember when they announced that the LG has been re-worked, but didn't really think it'd make that much of a difference until I started reading about people experiences. So, I found a 1/2 hr today to try it out - made a quick video too. Honestly, I don't find it all that different - maybe I just don't remember how it used to be. It's not hard to land, but after landing, the bouncing and vibrations during taxiing are intolerable in VR.

 

 

 

[Holbeach]

6 hours ago, Doc3908 said:

 - maybe I just don't remember how it used to be. It's not hard to land, but after landing, the bouncing and vibrations during taxiing are intolerable in VR.

 

..

 

 

The landing gear is less compliant than it use to be, which makes it more susceptible to damage on touchdown, as you proved on your last landing.

..

Edited March 29 by Holbeach

[VH-Rock]

I think the thing here is that if you were landing with the proper technique before, the new landing gear code hasn't made much of a difference. If you were on the limit before, you'll now find it more challenging. There's some great advice in here that should help people overcome the new challenge