Page 2 of 3

Re: Aerobatics and then this

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2015 6:47 pm
by Colonel
What would you / could you do as directional control becomes a problem ?
A burst of power makes the rudder effective
as the slipstream passes over it ... however
if you are flying an antique this is not an option,
if the carburetor lacks an accelerator pump.

With sufficient runway length the above
works.  If you're tight on runway, time to
put the throttle all the way in, leave it there,
and get the hell out of dodge.

I was talking to a former tailwheel student
of mine today, whom is now flying a biplane.
He mentioned a sketchy landing, and I
reminded him to overshoot - get the power
on! - if there was any doubt during the
approach, flare or rollout.

While Bob Hoover could transform a bad
approach into a good landing, that is not
a reasonable expectation for a low-time
pilot.

Throttle goes in, another circuit, another
0.1 in your logbook.  Unless the mother
is on fire.

Re: Aerobatics and then this

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2015 7:37 pm
by Chuck Ellsworth
Huron:

My comment regarding VYSE was to point out it only matters if you are climbing on one engine...

.....it has no fucking meaning when on approach and planning/flying a short field landing.

As long as you have enough speed to control the airplane to the point of touch down your speed is good....and the lower the speed the shorter the landing will be..

When you are experienced enough you can fly right at the point of stall by using power.

Note:::::

Do not take my comments to mean you can do this without proper training and lots of experience on the airplane in use.

And make sure your teacher knows what he/she is trying to teach.

C.E.  ( Caitlyn )

Re: Aerobatics and then this

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:05 pm
by Colonel
HPC:  When you are doing your multi-
engine training, ask your young instructor
to demonstrate maximum short field
performance takeoffs and landings by
flying below redline.

Please get back to us with his response.

Pop Quiz:  if an engine burps below redline,
what do you do?

Re: Aerobatics and then this

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:10 pm
by Chuck Ellsworth
Huron:

Flight in the lower end of the speed envelope is not something to be uncomfortable with.

Flight in the lower end of the speed envelope is something to be learned and very comfortable with.

I get so depressed when I read that there are so many people with pilots licenses who have been programmed by inferior / inept / ignorant flight instructors I almost want to ever read these forums again.

Find a group of competent pilots and strive to get re programmed again.

Another one that really gets me is pilots who are afraid of doing the final several hundred feet of an approach and landing with zero power in multi engine airplanes.....it is the result of the fear of under blue line type thinking that drives this nonsense.

Think space shuttle.

Re: Aerobatics and then this

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2015 10:12 pm
by Chuck Ellsworth
Hey...

Colonel...

I'm thinking I should start a re training business and see if I can help some of these poor guys out.

It just drives me nuts to see how much damage poor training really does to our industry.

Re: Aerobatics and then this

Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2015 1:01 am
by Colonel
poor training
Truly wretched aircraft handling skills
results not only in people struggling
with crosswinds and taildraggers, but
really awful multi-engine flying, too.

Image

TransAsia 235 shows this problem in
spades.  Those guys had auto-feather
and still managed to screw it up.

I privately suspect that most people
flying piston twins are dead meat if
they have an engine failure under
500 feet.

I'm thinking I should start a re training business and see if I can help some of these poor guys out.
A school with a Piper Cub and an
Apache - with a competent instructor -
could help out an awful lot of really
marginal pilots.

Frankly, there needs to be about
100 of those operations in asia,
and start running the four-bars
through them.  Might hurt some
feelings, but a lot fewer people
would die.  Not sure how important
that is any more, though.

Re: Aerobatics and then this

Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2015 1:13 am
by Colonel
(if an engine burps below)
redline on the ASI? Mmm.. stick forward?
No!  PULL BOTH THROTTLES BACK ALL THE WAY and
just let the nose drop.  YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PUSH
FORWARD
unless your trim is totally screwed up.

I don't know why people think they need to push
negative five G's after takeoff after the engine
sputters.

The clowns in the front of the ATR-72 would still
be alive, if they had done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING
and just let go of the controls.  Their pax wouldn't
have been sliced and diced and deep fried, either.

I really, really wish I could teach pilots that
THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.

STOP DOING DUMB SHIT and let the airplane fly.
One of my students put this placard on the
dash of his airplane:

Image

I read somewhere that most airbus accidents
wouldn't have happened if the pilot had let
go of the stick.

The clown in AF447 held the stick back all the
way for 3.5 minutes, in a 10,000 fpm falling
leaf, right into the ocean.  The aircraft did
EXACTLY what he asked it to do.  The problem
is that he was too stupid to know that

ATTITUDE PLUS POWER IS PERFORMANCE

It's amazing how almost all pilots think that
they are well above average (a statistical
impossibility) and as a result of that, are
certain that if they pee in the soup, it will
improve he flavour.

I think I mentioned already that my friend
Spencer did a spin recovery technique
comparison, and Beggs-Mueller resulted
in the minimum loss of altitude.

You simply wouldn't believe the trouble
pilots insist on causing during spins.

Do keep in mind that this picture was
taken from the ground:

www.pittspecials.com/images/gat_t12.jpg

Perhaps I have a clue, of what I speak.

Re: Aerobatics and then this

Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2015 3:29 am
by Colonel
Bill Kershner once suggested that the
best spin recovery device would be a
powerful spring behind the dashboard,
attached to a boxing glove, which
would be released when the AOA
exceeded the stall.

This would incapacitate the pilot and
allow the aircraft to unstall/unspin.

I am not making this up.

Unfortunately few people know who
Bill Kershner was, any more.

Re: Aerobatics and then this

Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2015 3:34 am
by Fendermandan
praveen4143 wrote: If you look in the CPL flight test guide, there's a formula for approach speed in final. Figure it out using your AFM/POH.. Make sure you use CAS and IAS properly!
Fly the approach with the speed you just figured out aiming slightly short of the threshold especially if you're flying the Floaty McFloatsalot Cessna 172. Flare and touch down like you would a normal landing but because you have the proper amount of kinetic energy, you will land quickly. Once landed, clean up the flaps, pull back on the stick and apply light braking to stop in well under 1000 feet!

Try it out every time you go flying and landing on so called short fields will be a breeze!
Did you try to fly as per CPL FTG? On my C172 that speed with two people and half tanks was around 51-52 KIAS, no float, short roll out and nice landing once you even slow it down more after you cross the fence. If you nurse it even slower with some power and good headwind = 50 ft roll out. Not kidding you, have a video.  ;)