With recent increased interest in autonomous vehicles and the associated technology, the prospect of realizing a personal aerial vehicle seems closer than ever. However, there is likely to be a continued requirement for any occupant of an air vehicle to be comfortable with both the automated portions of the flight and their ability to take manual control as and when required. This paper, using the approach to landing as an example maneuver, examines what a comfortable trajectory for personal aerial vehicle occupants might look like. Based upon simulated flight data, a "natural" flight trajectory is designed and then compared to constant deceleration and constant optic flow descent profiles. It is found that personal aerial vehicle occupants with limited flight training and no artificial guidance follow the same longitudinal trajectory as has been found for professionally trained helicopter pilots. Further, the final stages of the approach to hover can be well described using the Tau theory. For automatic flight, personal aerial vehicle occupants prefer a constant deceleration profile. For approaches flown manually, the newly designed natural profile is preferred.Nomenclature a x , a z = acceleration in the x and z axes, ft∕s 2 a xc = longitudinal commanded acceleration, ft∕s 2 a xd = commanded acceleration to drive this symbology, ft∕s 2 c, C = constant parameters g = acceleration of gravity, ft∕s 2 h = instantaneous height above the ground, ft K g = collective input to the command flight-path angle K I , K p = integral and proportional gains k = coupling constant k a , k d = coupling constants for constant acceleration and deceleration k f = tangent value of the constant flight-path angle k r = coupling constant for flight-path guidance k x = gain to account for the velocity difference m, n = number of ratings given by each test subject p = number of the current profile T = maneuver period, s T r = flight-path arising period, s t = time, s t = normalized by the maneuver period u = forward velocity in the body axis, ft∕s x = pilot's viewpoint distance ahead y = lateral of the aircraft z = height above the ground, ft _ x = closure rate to a boundary (x axis), ft∕s x = acceleration to a boundary (x axis), ft∕s 2 Z w , Z δ col = collective heave and control damping derivatives _ z = closure rate to a boundary (z axis), ft∕s z = acceleration to a boundary (z axis), ft∕s 2 γ a = flight-path angle gap to go, deg γ f = final flight patch angle, deg _ γ a = flight-path angle gap closure rate, deg ∕s δ col , δ lon = collective and longitudinal control inputs, in. η = pilot's control deflection, in. _ η pk = peak of the rate of control input, in:∕s τ = instantaneous time to contact boundary in the optical field, s ω = eye-height velocity, 1∕s _ τ = rate change of optical tau τ d = time delay between the cyclic input and acceleration response, s τ g = intrinsic τ guidance, s