I’ve heard the term used to describe an airplane landing with all three wheels touching down simultaneously, suggesting that it takes a high degree of piloting skill. But is that really the proper way to land a plane? It seems to me that the rear wheels landing first, like every commercial plane that I’ve ever observed, would be the safer and stabler method. So is it really “perfect”?
Tricycle landing gear = wrong way
Some conventional gear ( tail wheeled aircraft ) not always the best due to circumstances.
Most conventional geared aircraft = best way.
To do consistently = very hard to do.
Best landing = walk away & can reuse airplane.
Which one of those describes most commercial airplanes, eg. Boeing 737?
Most commercial aircraft (737, A320, 777, etc…) are tricycle landing gear. The rear main tires/gear touch down first to take the impact of the landing. The rear suspension construction is designed to take the weight of the aircraft. A three point landing would unduly stress the forward steering gear.
Three point landings are for “tail-draggers”. Touch down is simultaneous; main gear and the small tail wheel impact at the same time at just above aircraft stall speed.
In actuality, touching down the main gear first is preferable in all cases. Erring and smacking down the steering gear (either forward or the tail wheel) first risks substantial damage to the aircraft.
A taildragger landing takes much more touch, since the center of gravity is behind the main wheels and the plane wants to turn sideways. Still, setting the tailwheel down at the same time is normally preferred, since it gives you some measure of stability and steering control as soon as you need it. A “wheel landing”, mains first, is a way to limit the effect of a significant crosswind, since it lets you land at a higher groundspeed due to the lower angle of attack of the wing. But it takes more runway length, and you do have to deal with the balancing act when you slow enough to get the tailwheel down. A tricycle gear is always landed on the mains first - there’s no reason to land flat, and certainly none to wheelbarrow it. With the mains behind the CG, it’s always directionally stable (well, due to inertial effects anyway, wind is a factor too, obviously).
But there’s no smacking involved in a perfect landing, with either design - that definition typically includes touching down with zero vertical speed, so there is no change in vertical acceleration, and neither you nor the plane even feels it until you notice the wheels rolling. On a jet, with a high landing speed and high angle of attack at touchdown, it is, however, common to push the nose down quickly as soon as the mains touch, to dump lift and gain steering control immediately.
I did a three point landing yesterday. The three points were about 50 feet apart.
I think that’s called a 3-bounce landing!
I look at it this way - if they’re spread out enough I get my 90-day passenger currency all in one approach!
That’s the way I always did it… 
I don’t know about that. If you intend to do a three-pointer in a tail-dragger and touch mains first, the tail will drop slightly, increase the angle of attack, increase the lift, and cause a bounce. If you touch tail-wheel first, the mains then drop down, decreasing the angle of attack, decreasing lift, and causing the aircraft to settle on the ground. Provided your rate of descent is low you won’t cause any damage to a tail-wheel by touching down on it (slightly) before the mains. On the other hand, to touch down nose-wheel first in a tricycle undercarriage aircraft you are going way to fast, the mains will drop, angle of attack increases, big increase in lift, and big bounce. Also there’s a significant risk of hitting the prop on the ground.
Ultimately the touch down attitude of the aircraft is much the same for both, it’s just that a tail-dragger sits in the landing attitude on the ground while the tricycle undercart sits flat.
My flight instructor always use to say that there were about 12 things that could go wrong in a landing – and by touching down on the main gear first, you eliminated about 10 of them. (This was in a Cessna.)
J.
Was that Cessna a taildragger or a tricycle?
If it was a retract, you could go for the perfect one-point landing.
I’m not disputing the “ideal” landing of a tail-dragger is a three point. I learned from one of general aviation pioneers, Stan Robertson, Robertson Field, Plainville, CT. Robertson Field is the oldest airport in Connecticut. Stan and my dad used to pal around on motorcycles.
Anyway, I learned in Stan’s Aeronica Champ (I think a '47 but that’s back a ways) and woe to me if I didn’t have that stick back all the way and the aircraft about to stall. With a good headwind, the landing roll was about 20 feet:D. The tail wheel and so-called suspension wasn’t the sturdiest so Stan wasn’t too critical of the slightest touch of the main gear first.