There's a right way and a wrong way...

[AndyJWest]

...to make a landing approach. This is the wrong way. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NE_ZocZkrUc&feature=youtu.be

 

Next time, I'll try it in the Peshka... 

 

 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Negative, Ghostrider. The pattern is full..........................

[unreasonable]

I have to say if I was landing at a forward airfield with a high probability of there being lurking enemy fighters waiting to shoot down victims toodling along at 300 kph in the landing pattern I might land something like that, though with a less exuberant zoom.

 

Cannot remember where I read it but I recall an article about RAF Tornado squadrons training in the US who used to drive the tower controllers nuts: the USAF were obliged to follow safety procedures with a pattern and a long stabilized approach. The RAF just flew in at treetop level and then landed rather as you did in the video. On being upbraided they just claimed it was the only way they had ever been trained to land!

[AndyJWest]

Yeah. Someone (Requiem?) showed a video of a technique where you come in low and fast, and climb up into the last turn to lose speed - it certainly minimises your vulnerability to attack in-circuit. Somehow I can't see even fighter jocks wanting to do it my way though - too easy to get it wrong and end up a smoking hole.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

In MP I cross the field on the deck at about 90 degrees, above 500kph, extend and climb while checking all of my quadrants (4-6-8 multiple times), yank it around hard, chop the throttle and dirty it up, forward slip, check six again, flare and land.

 

My patterns in QMB are pretty little text book ones.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Andy,

 

The only significant difference between the techniques is your half Cuban which would make you slow and vulnerable too early. Other than that it's pretty good showmanship