Re: Wow

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

wrote in :

>
> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>
> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>
> Nice pic:
>
> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB.jpg
>


Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it straight"
when they land, like this guy did, show em this...



Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> wrote in :
>
>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>
>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>
>> Nice pic:
>>
>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB.jpg
>>
>
>
> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it straight"
> when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>
>
>
> Bertie

I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as an
example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before realizing
it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief
Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
Glad they made it out of there.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> wrote in :
>>
>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>
>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>
>>> Nice pic:
>>>
>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
&filename=phpOltUWB
>>> .jpg
>>>
>>
>>
>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as an
> example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before
> realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
> Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief
> Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
> Glad they made it out of there.
>

Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the wing
down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how to do a
crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many airline pilots
beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly, they get away with it.
The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle,
I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well
within the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until the
flare.

Bertie

Bertie

[Blueskies]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message ...
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> wrote in :
>>
>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>
>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>
>>> Nice pic:
>>>
>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB.jpg
>>>
>>
>>
>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em
>> this... Bertie
>
> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a
> problem before realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
> Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
> Glad they made it out of there.
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques


In the still shot, I am amazed at the lack of control deflection. Looks like just a little right aileron and apparently
no rudder. I wonder, due to the gusting conditions, if the FBW in the 320 is damping the pilot inputs?

[Blueskies]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message ...
>>
>
> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the wing
> down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how to do a
> crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many airline pilots
> beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly, they get away with it.
> The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle,
> I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well
> within the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until the
> flare.
>
> Bertie
>
> Bertie

Sounded gusty in the audio of the video...

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Blueskies" > wrote in
et:

>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> wrote in :
>>>
>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>
>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
&filename=phpOltUW
>>>> B.jpg
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this... Bertie
>>
>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as an
>> example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before
>> realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
>> Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief
>> Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine. Glad they made it out of
>> there.
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
>
> In the still shot, I am amazed at the lack of control deflection.
> Looks like just a little right aileron and apparently no rudder. I
> wonder, due to the gusting conditions, if the FBW in the 320 is
> damping the pilot inputs?
>

Well, up high it would be, but (and I don't fly a FBW Bus) the controls
go to "direct law" by degrees when it gets close to the ground and it
begins to fly just like an airplane. I know a couple of A 320 dirvers
and will ask -em when I see -em, but i think he was just trying to
handle the crosswind the way he always did, by plunking it down at
kicking t straight. THis time the conditions didn't let him away with
it.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Blueskies" > wrote in
. net:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>
>>
>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the
>> wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how to
>> do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many airline
>> pilots beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly, they get away
>> with it. The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the
>> drift angle, I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under thirty knots
>> and steady. Well within the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in
>> trouble until the flare.
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Sounded gusty in the audio of the video...

Wel, the airplane is steady on the approach, so while there are surely
little variations in the wind, really gusty conditions would have either
the pilot or autopilot manipulating the airplane a bit more than that. He's
fine til he tries to kick it straight.



Bertie

[Jim Stewart]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> wrote in :
>
>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>
>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>
>> Nice pic:
>>
>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB.jpg
>>
>
>
> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it straight"
> when they land, like this guy did, show em this...

Watched the video and it looked like he tried to
kick it straight with the ailerons instead of the
rudder. Am I missing something?

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Jim Stewart > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> wrote in :
>>
>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>
>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>
>>> Nice pic:
>>>
>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB
>>> .jpg
>>>
>>
>>
>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>
> Watched the video and it looked like he tried to
> kick it straight with the ailerons instead of the
> rudder. Am I missing something?
>

Well, it looks to me he just tried to kick it straight with the rudder. The
roll/yaw couple would have rolled him left and he was drifting when he
touched down, which would have added to the roll left. he appears to have
some right aileron in during that first left yaw, in fact, though it's a
little hard to see
Point is, kicking it straight doesn't really work. It's a neccesary evil in
some jets ( the A 320 isn't one of them) but remains an inferior method of
controlling an airplane in a crosswind.

Bertie

[Kyle Boatright]

"Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
.. .
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> wrote in :
>>
>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>
>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>
>>> Nice pic:
>>>
>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB.jpg
>>>
>>
>>
>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>
> Watched the video and it looked like he tried to
> kick it straight with the ailerons instead of the
> rudder. Am I missing something?

You can't generate much yaw with aileron. The pilot did generate a fair
amount of left yaw (either using rudder or the left brake), which (combined
with the crosswind) gave him a nasty left roll. It looked like he applied a
lot of right aileron before he drug the wingtip, but it wasn't enough. A
boot full of right rudder at that point might have kept him from dragging
the wingtip, but that would have worsened his already bad runway alignment
problem.

KB

[Shirl]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the wing
> down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how to do a
> crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many airline pilots
> beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly, they get away with it.
> The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle,
> I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well
> within the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until the
> flare.

I don't know if it's accurate or not, but I read that they were on
Runway 23 and the wind was 29029G43.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> wrote in :
>>>
>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>
>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>> .jpg
>>>>
>>>
>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as an
>> example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before
>> realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
>> Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief
>> Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>> Glad they made it out of there.
>>
>
> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the wing
> down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how to do a
> crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many airline pilots
> beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly, they get away with it.
> The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle,
> I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well
> within the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until the
> flare.
>
> Bertie
>
> Bertie


I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the wind offset
with gust factor well outside his capabilities.

--
Dudley Henriques

[karl mcgruber]

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
...


It's a swept wing. When you kick it left with rudder the right wing moves
forward to a straight wing configuration and lift increases, wing goes up.
Thus the left roll.

Same thing for the left wing. Except it looses lift.

"Curator" N185KG

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in
:

>
> "Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> wrote in :
>>>
>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>
>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUW
>>>> B.jpg
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>
>> Watched the video and it looked like he tried to
>> kick it straight with the ailerons instead of the
>> rudder. Am I missing something?
>
> You can't generate much yaw with aileron. The pilot did generate a
> fair amount of left yaw (either using rudder or the left brake), which
> (combined with the crosswind) gave him a nasty left roll. It looked
> like he applied a lot of right aileron before he drug the wingtip, but
> it wasn't enough. A boot full of right rudder at that point might
> have kept him from dragging the wingtip, but that would have worsened
> his already bad runway alignment problem.

That's it. here's a well known video full of x-wind landings. Some good ,
some bad.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f78_1184881277

Note the 747 at about 1:45 THat airplane has to land pretty much wings
level and the technique is well done here. There is some yaw introduced at
about 100 feet, probably as an adjustment for tracking rather than to
align. The lion's share is not eliminated until after touchdown and the
observer will notice a large amount of left aileron is simultaneously
introduced.
It can be seen that the touchdown is achieved with some drift going on,
which is just something that has to be lived with if you can't touch down
slipping. It works, but it's messy and to be avoided if possible.

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 2, 5:25*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> wrote :
>
>
>
> > We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
> > Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>
> >http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>
> > Nice pic:
>
> >http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB....
>
> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it straight"
> when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>
> Bertie

Remnds me of this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9M3m1U-QYA
I can watch tis all day.

Wil

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Shirl > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the
>> wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how to
>> do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many airline
>> pilots beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly, they get away
>> with it. The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the
>> drift angle, I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under thirty knots
>> and steady. Well within the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in
>> trouble until the flare.
>
> I don't know if it's accurate or not, but I read that they were on
> Runway 23 and the wind was 29029G43.
>


Well, that makes the component about 25 gusting 37 across, which should be
manageable. Well, obviously it must be within demonstratd for the airplane
or he wouldn't have attempted the approach. The drift angle certainly gives
the appearance of a reasonable cosswind. I've been to Hamburg and it's flat
and 23 is pretty clear on the side of the runway the wind was blowing. I
wonder why they didn't use 31.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> wrote in :
>>>>
>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>
>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>>>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as
>>> an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before
>>> realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
>>> Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief
>>> Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>>> Glad they made it out of there.
>>>
>>
>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the
>> wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how to
>> do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many airline
>> pilots beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly, they get away
>> with it. The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the
>> drift angle, I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under thirty knots
>> and steady. Well within the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in
>> trouble until the flare.
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>> Bertie
>
>
> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the wind
> offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.

Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40 knots.
Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and that;'s just
the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean really easy, in winds
approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO going with the ailerons
in turbulence in it. If the other poster's info is correct, it shouldn;t
have come to what it did. I dont see any effort on the pilot's part to
put the right wing down at all.
Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not have allowd the pilot to
do what he wanted to.
In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look foolish. I
just thought the video neatly illustrated the dynamics of a crosswind
landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused it. A lot of people use
a similar technique and, close to the limit, it will end up looking
pretty much like this...




Bertie
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"karl mcgruber" <skywagon > wrote in
:

>
>
> "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
> It's a swept wing. When you kick it left with rudder the right wing
> moves forward to a straight wing configuration and lift increases,
> wing goes up. Thus the left roll.

But there is plenty of roll control available to stop that and command a
roll in the opposite direction.


Bertie

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 2, 7:13*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> "Kyle Boatright" > wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
> .. .
> >> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> >>> wrote :
>
> >>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
> >>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>
> >>>>http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>
> >>>> Nice pic:
>
> >>>>http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUW
> >>>> B.jpg
>
> >>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
> >>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>
> >> Watched the video and it looked like he tried to
> >> kick it straight with the ailerons instead of the
> >> rudder. *Am I missing something?
>
> > You can't generate much yaw with aileron. *The pilot did generate a
> > fair amount of left yaw (either using rudder or the left brake), which
> > (combined with the crosswind) gave him a nasty left roll. *It looked
> > like he applied a lot of right aileron before he drug the wingtip, but
> > it wasn't enough. *A boot full of right rudder at that point might
> > have kept him from dragging the wingtip, but that would have worsened
> > his already bad runway alignment problem.
>
> That's it. here's a well known video full of x-wind landings. Some good ,
> some bad.
>
> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f78_1184881277
>
> Note the 747 at about 1:45 THat airplane has to land pretty much wings
> level and the technique is well done here. There is some yaw introduced at
> about 100 feet, probably as an adjustment for tracking rather than to
> align. The lion's share is not eliminated until after touchdown and the
> observer will notice a large amount of left aileron is simultaneously
> introduced.
> It can be seen that the touchdown is achieved with some drift going on,
> which is just something that has to be lived with if you can't touch down
> slipping. It works, but it's messy and to be avoided if possible.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Do the 747s have crabbing gears?

Wil

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

William Hung > wrote in
:

> On Mar 2, 5:25*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> wrote :
>>
>>
>>
>> > We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>> > Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>
>> >http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>
>> > Nice pic:
>>
>> >http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
&filename=phpOltUWB
> ...
>>
>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>> straight"
>
>> when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Remnds me of this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9M3m1U-QYA
> I can watch tis all day.
>

Yeah, they are kicking i straight, though they are laying off a bit of
the drift by getting the wing down as the flare. The first one has th
edownwind wing donw slightly. Remember that this exercise is intended to
demonstrate what the airplane is capable of and not to develop
technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
just like an airplane. His first line flight to LHR had mih landing in a
strong crosswind. The trainer next to him asked if he would prefer that
he do th elanding, but my friend pressed on and found it easy.
Note that in each touchdown, the alignment takes place after touchdown,
and that th etouchdonw is positive. the yaw towards alignment is done
smoothly and though you can't see it, they are almost certainly
introducing full aileron ( smoothly) to keep the wing down and to
introduce some very welcome adverse yaw.We used to have to land the 727
like this and though it felt absolutley awful, it worked OK.

Bertie

[Kyle Boatright]

"karl mcgruber" <skywagon > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
> It's a swept wing. When you kick it left with rudder the right wing moves
> forward to a straight wing configuration and lift increases, wing goes up.
> Thus the left roll.
>
> Same thing for the left wing. Except it looses lift.
>
> "Curator" N185KG

Yep, dutch roll. Swept wings amplify the rudder's ability to generate a
roll rate...

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> wrote in :
>>>>>
>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>>>>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as
>>>> an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before
>>>> realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
>>>> Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief
>>>> Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>>>> Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>
>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the
>>> wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how to
>>> do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many airline
>>> pilots beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly, they get away
>>> with it. The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the
>>> drift angle, I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under thirty knots
>>> and steady. Well within the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in
>>> trouble until the flare.
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the wind
>> offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>
> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40 knots.
> Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and that;'s just
> the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean really easy, in winds
> approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO going with the ailerons
> in turbulence in it. If the other poster's info is correct, it shouldn;t
> have come to what it did. I dont see any effort on the pilot's part to
> put the right wing down at all.
> Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not have allowd the pilot to
> do what he wanted to.
> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look foolish. I
> just thought the video neatly illustrated the dynamics of a crosswind
> landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused it. A lot of people use
> a similar technique and, close to the limit, it will end up looking
> pretty much like this...
>
>
>
>
> Bertie
>

I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in heavies all
day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a charter op).
Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)

I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle marker (or
where it would be) inbound. Looked like he flattened it out too high
which had to cost him some airspeed and maneuvering energy. I agree on
the wing. Didn't look good to me either.


--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>>>>>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as
>>>>> an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before
>>>>> realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control
>>>>> authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo
>>>>> from the Chief Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>>>>> Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the
>>>> wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how
>>>> to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many
>>>> airline pilots beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly,
>>>> they get away with it. The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that
>>>> bad. From the drift angle, I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under
>>>> thirty knots and steady. Well within the airplane's capability. He
>>>> wasn't realy in trouble until the flare.
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the wind
>>> offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>
>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40
>> knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and
>> that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean really
>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO going
>> with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other poster's info is
>> correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it did. I dont see any effort
>> on the pilot's part to put the right wing down at all.
>> Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not have allowd the pilot
>> to do what he wanted to.
>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look foolish. I
>> just thought the video neatly illustrated the dynamics of a crosswind
>> landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused it. A lot of people
>> use a similar technique and, close to the limit, it will end up
>> looking pretty much like this...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in heavies all
> day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a charter
> op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>
> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle marker (or
> where it would be) inbound. Looked like he flattened it out too high
> which had to cost him some airspeed and maneuvering energy. I agree on
> the wing. Didn't look good to me either.
>

No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see, He seems to
be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing they do in modern busses
is to set the vref into the magic boxes and that commands a constant
groundspeed during the approach. Sounded crazy to me when I first heard of
it, but the way it works is that the airplane automatically bleeds off
speed as the wind diminishes during descent. even hand flown, the flight
director would have been commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do with
the way thr airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the
kind of precise guidance they were getting to that point. He may have been
doing an auto approach, in fact, which could expalin a lot as the
transition form autoflight to manual can be messy, particularly in wind.
Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it was probably a
million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you flew!
You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a light twin and the
ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in that compilation video I posted
you can see one going around and rocking like crazy. That's a PIO.


Bertie
>

[Jim Stewart]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Much snippage...

> technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
> just like an airplane.

Ok, I'll bite. What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Jim Stewart > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
> Much snippage...
>
>> technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
>> just like an airplane.
>
> Ok, I'll bite. What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?
>
>

Well, some of the older airliners had some interesting and challenging
quirks. They were not very speed stable on approach, wallowed around like a
milk van and could develop rates of descent on approach that could plant
you in seconds if you weren;'t careful. Then there's the FBW Airbusses.
Every time I talk to one of those guys I walk away more confused about how
the flight controls work than I was before. Others, most of the 4 engine
contraptions, for instance, have to be landed wings level. The nmost recent
crop handle quite nicely, don't have spool up times stretching towards ten
seconds and just generaly are pleasant to handle. The satisfaction in
handling the older jets came mostly from tricking them into doing what you
wanted them to!


Bertie

[Jim Stewart]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Jim Stewart > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>
>>Much snippage...
>>
>>
>>>technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
>>>just like an airplane.
>>
>>Ok, I'll bite. What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?
>>
>>
>
>
> Well, some of the older airliners had some interesting and challenging
> quirks. They were not very speed stable on approach, wallowed around like a
> milk van and could develop rates of descent on approach that could plant
> you in seconds if you weren;'t careful. Then there's the FBW Airbusses.
> Every time I talk to one of those guys I walk away more confused about how
> the flight controls work than I was before. Others, most of the 4 engine
> contraptions, for instance, have to be landed wings level. The nmost recent
> crop handle quite nicely, don't have spool up times stretching towards ten
> seconds and just generaly are pleasant to handle. The satisfaction in
> handling the older jets came mostly from tricking them into doing what you
> wanted them to!

What did you think of the 727? In my youth I flew a lot
as a 727 pax. There was always something reassuring
about having 3 people up front and 3 big ole engines in
the back. Engines that you could fsking feel when the
levers were pushed all the way forward. A real airplane
for passengers that love planes.

Then there was the time I asked if I could sit up front.
The copilot graciously apologized for not being able to
let me, but he kindly offered to let me tag along as he
preflighted the a/c. Those were the good old days.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>>>>>>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as
>>>>>> an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before
>>>>>> realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control
>>>>>> authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo
>>>>>> from the Chief Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>>>>>> Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the
>>>>> wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how
>>>>> to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many
>>>>> airline pilots beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly,
>>>>> they get away with it. The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that
>>>>> bad. From the drift angle, I'd reckon the max compnenet to be under
>>>>> thirty knots and steady. Well within the airplane's capability. He
>>>>> wasn't realy in trouble until the flare.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the wind
>>>> offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40
>>> knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and
>>> that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean really
>>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO going
>>> with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other poster's info is
>>> correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it did. I dont see any effort
>>> on the pilot's part to put the right wing down at all.
>>> Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not have allowd the pilot
>>> to do what he wanted to.
>>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look foolish. I
>>> just thought the video neatly illustrated the dynamics of a crosswind
>>> landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused it. A lot of people
>>> use a similar technique and, close to the limit, it will end up
>>> looking pretty much like this...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in heavies all
>> day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a charter
>> op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>>
>> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle marker (or
>> where it would be) inbound. Looked like he flattened it out too high
>> which had to cost him some airspeed and maneuvering energy. I agree on
>> the wing. Didn't look good to me either.
>>
>
> No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see, He seems to
> be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing they do in modern busses
> is to set the vref into the magic boxes and that commands a constant
> groundspeed during the approach. Sounded crazy to me when I first heard of
> it, but the way it works is that the airplane automatically bleeds off
> speed as the wind diminishes during descent. even hand flown, the flight
> director would have been commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do with
> the way thr airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the
> kind of precise guidance they were getting to that point. He may have been
> doing an auto approach, in fact, which could expalin a lot as the
> transition form autoflight to manual can be messy, particularly in wind.
> Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it was probably a
> million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you flew!
> You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a light twin and the
> ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in that compilation video I posted
> you can see one going around and rocking like crazy. That's a PIO.
>
>
> Bertie
>
The approach I shot in the DC8 was into Fairbanks Alaska. Very windy
that day and I flew the approach manually....well, manually on a Collins
FD109 FD anyway. You're right about the difference in airplanes. I had
flown the bird up there from the left seat so was fairly familiar with
the control response, but of course that was at cruise mach. When I
slowed the damn thing down for the approach, the lead time to correct
changed accordingly and it was a guessing game each time I corrected.
I cheated a little and ruddered it rather than use bank that seemed hard
to control to me. Anyway, I got it down in one piece without bending it.
Had the Chief Pilot of the line in the right seat of course, but he had
already told me that unless I got it critical somehow it was all mine to
solve.
Great airplane the DC8. I'll tell you the truth though. I was damn glad
to feel those mains on the pavement. Those guys knew me pretty well and
I didn't want to embarrass myself in their big bad airplane :-))

About PIO; you should see the trouble in pitch a novice can get into in
a T38.
It can get so bad you have to let go and let it phugoid out . There's
absolutely no way a first timer could counter it. If it happens low
enough on approach it can spell REAL trouble.
Great airplane though. Makes me wish I could do it again :-)


--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Jim Stewart > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Jim Stewart > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>>Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>
>>>Much snippage...
>>>
>>>
>>>>technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it
>>>>flies just like an airplane.
>>>
>>>Ok, I'll bite. What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Well, some of the older airliners had some interesting and
>> challenging quirks. They were not very speed stable on approach,
>> wallowed around like a milk van and could develop rates of descent
>> on approach that could plant you in seconds if you weren;'t careful.
>> Then there's the FBW Airbusses. Every time I talk to one of those
>> guys I walk away more confused about how the flight controls work
>> than I was before. Others, most of the 4 engine contraptions, for
>> instance, have to be landed wings level. The nmost recent crop handle
>> quite nicely, don't have spool up times stretching towards ten
>> seconds and just generaly are pleasant to handle. The satisfaction in
>> handling the older jets came mostly from tricking them into doing
>> what you wanted them to!
>
> What did you think of the 727? In my youth I flew a lot
> as a 727 pax. There was always something reassuring
> about having 3 people up front and 3 big ole engines in
> the back. Engines that you could fsking feel when the
> levers were pushed all the way forward. A real airplane
> for passengers that love planes.

I liked it for some of the same reasons you did. The three crew thing
was great. We used pro flight engineers ( as opposed to a kid fresh out
of Embry Riddle ). It wasn't exactly a sprots car in the handling
department, but it went where you told it with a bit of persuasion
(though you would get exactly the opposite view from a guy who came onto
it off of a 707, which was supposed to be a real handful) It was very
fast. Anything up to mach .93, a bit slower if you were heavy.
Very noisy flightdeck (wind) Nicely thought out for it's day with lots
of redundancy in all systems. It must have seemed like something from
Buck Rogers in 1963.
>
> Then there was the time I asked if I could sit up front.
> The copilot graciously apologized for not being able to
> let me, but he kindly offered to let me tag along as he
> preflighted the a/c. Those were the good old days.


Indeed. You wouldn't get that now.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick
>>>>>>>> it straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people
>>>>>>> as an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem
>>>>>>> before realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control
>>>>>>> authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo
>>>>>>> from the Chief Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>>>>>>> Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting
>>>>>> the wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught
>>>>>> how to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how
>>>>>> many airline pilots beleive that this is the way to do it...
>>>>>> Mostly, they get away with it. The crosswind doesn't appear to be
>>>>>> all that bad. From the drift angle, I'd reckon the max compnenet
>>>>>> to be under thirty knots and steady. Well within the airplane's
>>>>>> capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until the flare.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the wind
>>>>> offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40
>>>> knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and
>>>> that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean really
>>>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO
>>>> going with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other poster's
>>>> info is correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it did. I dont see
>>>> any effort on the pilot's part to put the right wing down at all.
>>>> Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not have allowd the
>>>> pilot to do what he wanted to.
>>>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look foolish.
>>>> I just thought the video neatly illustrated the dynamics of a
>>>> crosswind landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused it. A lot
>>>> of people use a similar technique and, close to the limit, it will
>>>> end up looking pretty much like this...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in heavies
>>> all day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a
>>> charter op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>>>
>>> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle marker (or
>>> where it would be) inbound. Looked like he flattened it out too high
>>> which had to cost him some airspeed and maneuvering energy. I agree
>>> on the wing. Didn't look good to me either.
>>>
>>
>> No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see, He
>> seems to be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing they do in
>> modern busses is to set the vref into the magic boxes and that
>> commands a constant groundspeed during the approach. Sounded crazy to
>> me when I first heard of it, but the way it works is that the
>> airplane automatically bleeds off speed as the wind diminishes during
>> descent. even hand flown, the flight director would have been
>> commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do with the way thr
>> airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the kind of
>> precise guidance they were getting to that point. He may have been
>> doing an auto approach, in fact, which could expalin a lot as the
>> transition form autoflight to manual can be messy, particularly in
>> wind. Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it was
>> probably a million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you flew!
>> You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a light twin
>> and the ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in that compilation
>> video I posted you can see one going around and rocking like crazy.
>> That's a PIO.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> The approach I shot in the DC8 was into Fairbanks Alaska. Very windy
> that day and I flew the approach manually....well, manually on a
> Collins FD109 FD anyway. You're right about the difference in
> airplanes. I had flown the bird up there from the left seat so was
> fairly familiar with the control response, but of course that was at
> cruise mach. When I slowed the damn thing down for the approach, the
> lead time to correct changed accordingly and it was a guessing game
> each time I corrected. I cheated a little and ruddered it rather than
> use bank that seemed hard to control to me. Anyway, I got it down in
> one piece without bending it. Had the Chief Pilot of the line in the
> right seat of course, but he had already told me that unless I got it
> critical somehow it was all mine to solve.
> Great airplane the DC8. I'll tell you the truth though. I was damn
> glad to feel those mains on the pavement. Those guys knew me pretty
> well and I didn't want to embarrass myself in their big bad airplane
> :-))

You were obviously well able to keep it inside his comfort zone. Don't
forget , neophytes get to fly these things all the time, so they're well
used to teaching people on the job. It's one jet I realy would liked to
have gotten a chance to fly. It's very different from almost everything
else flying in a lot of ways.
>
> About PIO; you should see the trouble in pitch a novice can get into
> in a T38.
> It can get so bad you have to let go and let it phugoid out . There's
> absolutely no way a first timer could counter it. If it happens low
> enough on approach it can spell REAL trouble.
> Great airplane though. Makes me wish I could do it again :-)

Someting else I'd love to try! I never found the sensitive ailerons to
be a problem. Most of the problem, as you know is the deah grip on the
stick. I've started them off in turbulence, but dampened them out just
as quick by relaxing my wrist ( there you go ken, an opeing for a gay
lame)



Bertie
>
>

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick
>>>>>>>>> it straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people
>>>>>>>> as an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem
>>>>>>>> before realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control
>>>>>>>> authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo
>>>>>>>> from the Chief Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>>>>>>>> Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting
>>>>>>> the wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught
>>>>>>> how to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how
>>>>>>> many airline pilots beleive that this is the way to do it...
>>>>>>> Mostly, they get away with it. The crosswind doesn't appear to be
>>>>>>> all that bad. From the drift angle, I'd reckon the max compnenet
>>>>>>> to be under thirty knots and steady. Well within the airplane's
>>>>>>> capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until the flare.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the wind
>>>>>> offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>>>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40
>>>>> knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and
>>>>> that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean really
>>>>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO
>>>>> going with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other poster's
>>>>> info is correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it did. I dont see
>>>>> any effort on the pilot's part to put the right wing down at all.
>>>>> Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not have allowd the
>>>>> pilot to do what he wanted to.
>>>>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look foolish.
>>>>> I just thought the video neatly illustrated the dynamics of a
>>>>> crosswind landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused it. A lot
>>>>> of people use a similar technique and, close to the limit, it will
>>>>> end up looking pretty much like this...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>
>>>> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in heavies
>>>> all day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a
>>>> charter op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>>>>
>>>> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle marker (or
>>>> where it would be) inbound. Looked like he flattened it out too high
>>>> which had to cost him some airspeed and maneuvering energy. I agree
>>>> on the wing. Didn't look good to me either.
>>>>
>>> No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see, He
>>> seems to be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing they do in
>>> modern busses is to set the vref into the magic boxes and that
>>> commands a constant groundspeed during the approach. Sounded crazy to
>>> me when I first heard of it, but the way it works is that the
>>> airplane automatically bleeds off speed as the wind diminishes during
>>> descent. even hand flown, the flight director would have been
>>> commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do with the way thr
>>> airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the kind of
>>> precise guidance they were getting to that point. He may have been
>>> doing an auto approach, in fact, which could expalin a lot as the
>>> transition form autoflight to manual can be messy, particularly in
>>> wind. Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it was
>>> probably a million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you flew!
>>> You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a light twin
>>> and the ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in that compilation
>>> video I posted you can see one going around and rocking like crazy.
>>> That's a PIO.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> The approach I shot in the DC8 was into Fairbanks Alaska. Very windy
>> that day and I flew the approach manually....well, manually on a
>> Collins FD109 FD anyway. You're right about the difference in
>> airplanes. I had flown the bird up there from the left seat so was
>> fairly familiar with the control response, but of course that was at
>> cruise mach. When I slowed the damn thing down for the approach, the
>> lead time to correct changed accordingly and it was a guessing game
>> each time I corrected. I cheated a little and ruddered it rather than
>> use bank that seemed hard to control to me. Anyway, I got it down in
>> one piece without bending it. Had the Chief Pilot of the line in the
>> right seat of course, but he had already told me that unless I got it
>> critical somehow it was all mine to solve.
>> Great airplane the DC8. I'll tell you the truth though. I was damn
>> glad to feel those mains on the pavement. Those guys knew me pretty
>> well and I didn't want to embarrass myself in their big bad airplane
>> :-))
>
> You were obviously well able to keep it inside his comfort zone. Don't
> forget , neophytes get to fly these things all the time, so they're well
> used to teaching people on the job. It's one jet I realy would liked to
> have gotten a chance to fly. It's very different from almost everything
> else flying in a lot of ways.
>> About PIO; you should see the trouble in pitch a novice can get into
>> in a T38.
>> It can get so bad you have to let go and let it phugoid out . There's
>> absolutely no way a first timer could counter it. If it happens low
>> enough on approach it can spell REAL trouble.
>> Great airplane though. Makes me wish I could do it again :-)
>
> Someting else I'd love to try! I never found the sensitive ailerons to
> be a problem. Most of the problem, as you know is the deah grip on the
> stick. I've started them off in turbulence, but dampened them out just
> as quick by relaxing my wrist ( there you go ken, an opeing for a gay
> lame)
>
>
>
> Bertie
>>
>
The 8 was great as long as you led the thing by about 3 seconds in roll.
It seemed like a drunken whale to me for the first few turns. Then I got
it down pretty well and led it correctly.
I guess the new stuff is much improved as you say. Sounds like fun
anyway :-)



The Pitts is a good airplane to teach sensitive control in pitch. I
always had them put their thumb on the back of the stick and just their
index finger in the front and fly it that way for a whole hour. After
doing that, they could fly with the wrist relaxed a bit better.
The first time a newbie climbs into a Pitts and tries a takeoff, I
always had them hold it on a bit longer before rotation. The extra speed
would really come into play when they rotated. With any luck at all, you
could get at least 200 feet out of it before they knew what hit them.
I'd have my hand in back of the stick to catch it just in case :-))
One lesson like that was usually enough to solve the PIO issue.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>>>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick
>>>>>>>>>> it straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em
>>>>>>>>>> this...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors
>>>>>>>>> people as an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a
>>>>>>>>> problem before realizing it isn't going to solve using
>>>>>>>>> existing control authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy is on
>>>>>>>>> the way to a memo from the Chief Pilot's office fairly soon I
>>>>>>>>> would imagine. Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting
>>>>>>>> the wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never
>>>>>>>> taught how to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed
>>>>>>>> at how many airline pilots beleive that this is the way to do
>>>>>>>> it... Mostly, they get away with it. The crosswind doesn't
>>>>>>>> appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle, I'd reckon the
>>>>>>>> max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well within
>>>>>>>> the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until the
>>>>>>>> flare.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the
>>>>>>> wind offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>>>>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40
>>>>>> knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and
>>>>>> that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean really
>>>>>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO
>>>>>> going with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other
>>>>>> poster's info is correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it did.
>>>>>> I dont see any effort on the pilot's part to put the right wing
>>>>>> down at all. Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not have
>>>>>> allowd the pilot to do what he wanted to.
>>>>>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look
>>>>>> foolish. I just thought the video neatly illustrated the dynamics
>>>>>> of a crosswind landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused
>>>>>> it. A lot of people use a similar technique and, close to the
>>>>>> limit, it will end up looking pretty much like this...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in heavies
>>>>> all day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a
>>>>> charter op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle marker
>>>>> (or where it would be) inbound. Looked like he flattened it out
>>>>> too high which had to cost him some airspeed and maneuvering
>>>>> energy. I agree on the wing. Didn't look good to me either.
>>>>>
>>>> No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see, He
>>>> seems to be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing they do
>>>> in modern busses is to set the vref into the magic boxes and that
>>>> commands a constant groundspeed during the approach. Sounded crazy
>>>> to me when I first heard of it, but the way it works is that the
>>>> airplane automatically bleeds off speed as the wind diminishes
>>>> during descent. even hand flown, the flight director would have
>>>> been commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do with the way thr
>>>> airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the kind
>>>> of precise guidance they were getting to that point. He may have
>>>> been doing an auto approach, in fact, which could expalin a lot as
>>>> the transition form autoflight to manual can be messy, particularly
>>>> in wind. Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it was
>>>> probably a million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you
>>>> flew! You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a
>>>> light twin and the ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in that
>>>> compilation video I posted you can see one going around and rocking
>>>> like crazy. That's a PIO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>> The approach I shot in the DC8 was into Fairbanks Alaska. Very windy
>>> that day and I flew the approach manually....well, manually on a
>>> Collins FD109 FD anyway. You're right about the difference in
>>> airplanes. I had flown the bird up there from the left seat so was
>>> fairly familiar with the control response, but of course that was at
>>> cruise mach. When I slowed the damn thing down for the approach, the
>>> lead time to correct changed accordingly and it was a guessing game
>>> each time I corrected. I cheated a little and ruddered it rather
>>> than use bank that seemed hard to control to me. Anyway, I got it
>>> down in one piece without bending it. Had the Chief Pilot of the
>>> line in the right seat of course, but he had already told me that
>>> unless I got it critical somehow it was all mine to solve.
>>> Great airplane the DC8. I'll tell you the truth though. I was damn
>>> glad to feel those mains on the pavement. Those guys knew me pretty
>>> well and I didn't want to embarrass myself in their big bad airplane
>>> :-))
>>
>> You were obviously well able to keep it inside his comfort zone.
>> Don't forget , neophytes get to fly these things all the time, so
>> they're well used to teaching people on the job. It's one jet I realy
>> would liked to have gotten a chance to fly. It's very different from
>> almost everything else flying in a lot of ways.
>>> About PIO; you should see the trouble in pitch a novice can get into
>>> in a T38.
>>> It can get so bad you have to let go and let it phugoid out .
>>> There's absolutely no way a first timer could counter it. If it
>>> happens low enough on approach it can spell REAL trouble.
>>> Great airplane though. Makes me wish I could do it again :-)
>>
>> Someting else I'd love to try! I never found the sensitive ailerons
>> to be a problem. Most of the problem, as you know is the deah grip on
>> the stick. I've started them off in turbulence, but dampened them out
>> just as quick by relaxing my wrist ( there you go ken, an opeing for
>> a gay lame)
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>>
>>
> The 8 was great as long as you led the thing by about 3 seconds in
> roll. It seemed like a drunken whale to me for the first few turns.
> Then I got it down pretty well and led it correctly.
> I guess the new stuff is much improved as you say. Sounds like fun
> anyway :-)
>
>

Oh I meant the 757, sorry. The 8 uses servo tasbs AFAIK wth some
hydraulic boosting as well.
>
> The Pitts is a good airplane to teach sensitive control in pitch. I
> always had them put their thumb on the back of the stick and just
> their index finger in the front and fly it that way for a whole hour.
> After doing that, they could fly with the wrist relaxed a bit better.
> The first time a newbie climbs into a Pitts and tries a takeoff, I
> always had them hold it on a bit longer before rotation. The extra
> speed would really come into play when they rotated. With any luck at
> all, you could get at least 200 feet out of it before they knew what
> hit them. I'd have my hand in back of the stick to catch it just in
> case :-)) One lesson like that was usually enough to solve the PIO
> issue.
>

I flew tow of theose an S1C homebuilt and an S2. IO found them OK if a
little skittish. I didn't get a lot of time in either and found th
elight controls a lot to think about doing aerobatics.


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>>>>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick
>>>>>>>>>>> it straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em
>>>>>>>>>>> this...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors
>>>>>>>>>> people as an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a
>>>>>>>>>> problem before realizing it isn't going to solve using
>>>>>>>>>> existing control authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy is on
>>>>>>>>>> the way to a memo from the Chief Pilot's office fairly soon I
>>>>>>>>>> would imagine. Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting
>>>>>>>>> the wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never
>>>>>>>>> taught how to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed
>>>>>>>>> at how many airline pilots beleive that this is the way to do
>>>>>>>>> it... Mostly, they get away with it. The crosswind doesn't
>>>>>>>>> appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle, I'd reckon the
>>>>>>>>> max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well within
>>>>>>>>> the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until the
>>>>>>>>> flare.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the
>>>>>>>> wind offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>>>>>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40
>>>>>>> knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and
>>>>>>> that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean really
>>>>>>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO
>>>>>>> going with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other
>>>>>>> poster's info is correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it did.
>>>>>>> I dont see any effort on the pilot's part to put the right wing
>>>>>>> down at all. Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not have
>>>>>>> allowd the pilot to do what he wanted to.
>>>>>>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look
>>>>>>> foolish. I just thought the video neatly illustrated the dynamics
>>>>>>> of a crosswind landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused
>>>>>>> it. A lot of people use a similar technique and, close to the
>>>>>>> limit, it will end up looking pretty much like this...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in heavies
>>>>>> all day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a
>>>>>> charter op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle marker
>>>>>> (or where it would be) inbound. Looked like he flattened it out
>>>>>> too high which had to cost him some airspeed and maneuvering
>>>>>> energy. I agree on the wing. Didn't look good to me either.
>>>>>>
>>>>> No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see, He
>>>>> seems to be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing they do
>>>>> in modern busses is to set the vref into the magic boxes and that
>>>>> commands a constant groundspeed during the approach. Sounded crazy
>>>>> to me when I first heard of it, but the way it works is that the
>>>>> airplane automatically bleeds off speed as the wind diminishes
>>>>> during descent. even hand flown, the flight director would have
>>>>> been commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do with the way thr
>>>>> airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the kind
>>>>> of precise guidance they were getting to that point. He may have
>>>>> been doing an auto approach, in fact, which could expalin a lot as
>>>>> the transition form autoflight to manual can be messy, particularly
>>>>> in wind. Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it was
>>>>> probably a million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you
>>>>> flew! You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a
>>>>> light twin and the ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in that
>>>>> compilation video I posted you can see one going around and rocking
>>>>> like crazy. That's a PIO.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>
>>>> The approach I shot in the DC8 was into Fairbanks Alaska. Very windy
>>>> that day and I flew the approach manually....well, manually on a
>>>> Collins FD109 FD anyway. You're right about the difference in
>>>> airplanes. I had flown the bird up there from the left seat so was
>>>> fairly familiar with the control response, but of course that was at
>>>> cruise mach. When I slowed the damn thing down for the approach, the
>>>> lead time to correct changed accordingly and it was a guessing game
>>>> each time I corrected. I cheated a little and ruddered it rather
>>>> than use bank that seemed hard to control to me. Anyway, I got it
>>>> down in one piece without bending it. Had the Chief Pilot of the
>>>> line in the right seat of course, but he had already told me that
>>>> unless I got it critical somehow it was all mine to solve.
>>>> Great airplane the DC8. I'll tell you the truth though. I was damn
>>>> glad to feel those mains on the pavement. Those guys knew me pretty
>>>> well and I didn't want to embarrass myself in their big bad airplane
>>>> :-))
>>> You were obviously well able to keep it inside his comfort zone.
>>> Don't forget , neophytes get to fly these things all the time, so
>>> they're well used to teaching people on the job. It's one jet I realy
>>> would liked to have gotten a chance to fly. It's very different from
>>> almost everything else flying in a lot of ways.
>>>> About PIO; you should see the trouble in pitch a novice can get into
>>>> in a T38.
>>>> It can get so bad you have to let go and let it phugoid out .
>>>> There's absolutely no way a first timer could counter it. If it
>>>> happens low enough on approach it can spell REAL trouble.
>>>> Great airplane though. Makes me wish I could do it again :-)
>>> Someting else I'd love to try! I never found the sensitive ailerons
>>> to be a problem. Most of the problem, as you know is the deah grip on
>>> the stick. I've started them off in turbulence, but dampened them out
>>> just as quick by relaxing my wrist ( there you go ken, an opeing for
>>> a gay lame)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> The 8 was great as long as you led the thing by about 3 seconds in
>> roll. It seemed like a drunken whale to me for the first few turns.
>> Then I got it down pretty well and led it correctly.
>> I guess the new stuff is much improved as you say. Sounds like fun
>> anyway :-)
>>
>>
>
> Oh I meant the 757, sorry. The 8 uses servo tasbs AFAIK wth some
> hydraulic boosting as well.
>> The Pitts is a good airplane to teach sensitive control in pitch. I
>> always had them put their thumb on the back of the stick and just
>> their index finger in the front and fly it that way for a whole hour.
>> After doing that, they could fly with the wrist relaxed a bit better.
>> The first time a newbie climbs into a Pitts and tries a takeoff, I
>> always had them hold it on a bit longer before rotation. The extra
>> speed would really come into play when they rotated. With any luck at
>> all, you could get at least 200 feet out of it before they knew what
>> hit them. I'd have my hand in back of the stick to catch it just in
>> case :-)) One lesson like that was usually enough to solve the PIO
>> issue.
>>
>
> I flew tow of theose an S1C homebuilt and an S2. IO found them OK if a
> little skittish. I didn't get a lot of time in either and found th
> elight controls a lot to think about doing aerobatics.
>
>
> Bertie
>
In the single hole round wing you'll notice PIO graphically the first
time you try a point roll with a sharp stop. The natural tendency is to
be sharp on the first 90 knife. What usually happens to the novice is
that it stops on a dime but just the slightest bit of forward stick
starts a real bad PIO that gets progressively worse the more you try and
stop it.
The result can really shake you up if you don't let go. I've seen those
things go to 3 negative and 5 positive as quick as you can say "Holy
Pitts Batman!!" :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Kyle Boatright]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
>>
> In the single hole round wing you'll notice PIO graphically the first time
> you try a point roll with a sharp stop. The natural tendency is to be
> sharp on the first 90 knife. What usually happens to the novice is that it
> stops on a dime but just the slightest bit of forward stick starts a real
> bad PIO that gets progressively worse the more you try and stop it.
> The result can really shake you up if you don't let go. I've seen those
> things go to 3 negative and 5 positive as quick as you can say "Holy Pitts
> Batman!!" :-))
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

Reminds me of my last biannual in the RV. A very experienced stick offered
to do the bianuual for free, so off we went. I wanted to do some unusal
attitude recovery work, so closed my eyes and turned it over to him. I
hadn't bothered to brief him on the responsiveness of the RV, and had
AssUMed that with his Pitts experience he'd be fine in the RV. Before I
grabbed the stick, he bounced both our noggins off the canopy twice and the
telltale on the G-meter read +3/-2. He did better the second time around.
;-)

KB

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near
crash:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>>>>>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just
"kick
>>>>>>>>>>>> it straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em
>>>>>>>>>>>> this...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors
>>>>>>>>>>> people as an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a
>>>>>>>>>>> problem before realizing it isn't going to solve using
>>>>>>>>>>> existing control authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy is
on
>>>>>>>>>>> the way to a memo from the Chief Pilot's office fairly soon
I
>>>>>>>>>>> would imagine. Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards
putting
>>>>>>>>>> the wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never
>>>>>>>>>> taught how to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be
amazed
>>>>>>>>>> at how many airline pilots beleive that this is the way to do
>>>>>>>>>> it... Mostly, they get away with it. The crosswind doesn't
>>>>>>>>>> appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle, I'd reckon
the
>>>>>>>>>> max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well
within
>>>>>>>>>> the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until
the
>>>>>>>>>> flare.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the
>>>>>>>>> wind offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>>>>>>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40
>>>>>>>> knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and
>>>>>>>> that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean
really
>>>>>>>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO
>>>>>>>> going with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other
>>>>>>>> poster's info is correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it
did.
>>>>>>>> I dont see any effort on the pilot's part to put the right wing
>>>>>>>> down at all. Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not
have
>>>>>>>> allowd the pilot to do what he wanted to.
>>>>>>>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look
>>>>>>>> foolish. I just thought the video neatly illustrated the
dynamics
>>>>>>>> of a crosswind landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused
>>>>>>>> it. A lot of people use a similar technique and, close to the
>>>>>>>> limit, it will end up looking pretty much like this...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in
heavies
>>>>>>> all day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a
>>>>>>> charter op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle marker
>>>>>>> (or where it would be) inbound. Looked like he flattened it out
>>>>>>> too high which had to cost him some airspeed and maneuvering
>>>>>>> energy. I agree on the wing. Didn't look good to me either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see, He
>>>>>> seems to be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing they do
>>>>>> in modern busses is to set the vref into the magic boxes and that
>>>>>> commands a constant groundspeed during the approach. Sounded
crazy
>>>>>> to me when I first heard of it, but the way it works is that the
>>>>>> airplane automatically bleeds off speed as the wind diminishes
>>>>>> during descent. even hand flown, the flight director would have
>>>>>> been commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do with the way
thr
>>>>>> airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the kind
>>>>>> of precise guidance they were getting to that point. He may have
>>>>>> been doing an auto approach, in fact, which could expalin a lot
as
>>>>>> the transition form autoflight to manual can be messy,
particularly
>>>>>> in wind. Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it
was
>>>>>> probably a million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you
>>>>>> flew! You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a
>>>>>> light twin and the ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in that
>>>>>> compilation video I posted you can see one going around and
rocking
>>>>>> like crazy. That's a PIO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>
>>>>> The approach I shot in the DC8 was into Fairbanks Alaska. Very
windy
>>>>> that day and I flew the approach manually....well, manually on a
>>>>> Collins FD109 FD anyway. You're right about the difference in
>>>>> airplanes. I had flown the bird up there from the left seat so was
>>>>> fairly familiar with the control response, but of course that was
at
>>>>> cruise mach. When I slowed the damn thing down for the approach,
the
>>>>> lead time to correct changed accordingly and it was a guessing
game
>>>>> each time I corrected. I cheated a little and ruddered it rather
>>>>> than use bank that seemed hard to control to me. Anyway, I got it
>>>>> down in one piece without bending it. Had the Chief Pilot of the
>>>>> line in the right seat of course, but he had already told me that
>>>>> unless I got it critical somehow it was all mine to solve.
>>>>> Great airplane the DC8. I'll tell you the truth though. I was damn
>>>>> glad to feel those mains on the pavement. Those guys knew me
pretty
>>>>> well and I didn't want to embarrass myself in their big bad
airplane
>>>>> :-))
>>>> You were obviously well able to keep it inside his comfort zone.
>>>> Don't forget , neophytes get to fly these things all the time, so
>>>> they're well used to teaching people on the job. It's one jet I
realy
>>>> would liked to have gotten a chance to fly. It's very different
from
>>>> almost everything else flying in a lot of ways.
>>>>> About PIO; you should see the trouble in pitch a novice can get
into
>>>>> in a T38.
>>>>> It can get so bad you have to let go and let it phugoid out .
>>>>> There's absolutely no way a first timer could counter it. If it
>>>>> happens low enough on approach it can spell REAL trouble.
>>>>> Great airplane though. Makes me wish I could do it again :-)
>>>> Someting else I'd love to try! I never found the sensitive ailerons
>>>> to be a problem. Most of the problem, as you know is the deah grip
on
>>>> the stick. I've started them off in turbulence, but dampened them
out
>>>> just as quick by relaxing my wrist ( there you go ken, an opeing
for
>>>> a gay lame)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>> The 8 was great as long as you led the thing by about 3 seconds in
>>> roll. It seemed like a drunken whale to me for the first few turns.
>>> Then I got it down pretty well and led it correctly.
>>> I guess the new stuff is much improved as you say. Sounds like fun
>>> anyway :-)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Oh I meant the 757, sorry. The 8 uses servo tasbs AFAIK wth some
>> hydraulic boosting as well.
>>> The Pitts is a good airplane to teach sensitive control in pitch. I
>>> always had them put their thumb on the back of the stick and just
>>> their index finger in the front and fly it that way for a whole
hour.
>>> After doing that, they could fly with the wrist relaxed a bit
better.
>>> The first time a newbie climbs into a Pitts and tries a takeoff, I
>>> always had them hold it on a bit longer before rotation. The extra
>>> speed would really come into play when they rotated. With any luck
at
>>> all, you could get at least 200 feet out of it before they knew what
>>> hit them. I'd have my hand in back of the stick to catch it just in
>>> case :-)) One lesson like that was usually enough to solve the PIO
>>> issue.
>>>
>>
>> I flew tow of theose an S1C homebuilt and an S2. IO found them OK if
a
>> little skittish. I didn't get a lot of time in either and found th
>> elight controls a lot to think about doing aerobatics.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> In the single hole round wing you'll notice PIO graphically the first
> time you try a point roll with a sharp stop. The natural tendency is
to
> be sharp on the first 90 knife. What usually happens to the novice is
> that it stops on a dime but just the slightest bit of forward stick
> starts a real bad PIO that gets progressively worse the more you
tryand
> stop it.
> The result can really shake you up if you don't let go. I've seen
those
> things go to 3 negative and 5 positive as quick as you can say "Holy
> Pitts Batman!!" :-))


Yeah, I hurt my neck the first time I flew it. The elevators had almost
no feel to them at all. In fact, after that flight the owner decided to
install a combo anti servo/trim on it as he wasn't crazy about the lack
of feel either. It was by far the scariest airplane i'd flown at the
time and the approach speeds were just insane. I was terrified I'd
groundloop the thing and the owner builder would kill me if I survived
that!
The S2 was OK, bu tI really didn;t care for it. I only flew it a bit and
the owner wouldn't let me land it and he groundlooped it near the end of
the landing roll! he kept insisting I must have interfered with the
controls, but I hadn't touched a thing! Feet flat on the floor..
I'd kind of like to have one ot fly, but I think I'd prefer a Great
Lakes or a Jungmann, to be honest.


Bertie
>

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near
> crash:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>>>>>>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just
> "kick
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors
>>>>>>>>>>>> people as an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a
>>>>>>>>>>>> problem before realizing it isn't going to solve using
>>>>>>>>>>>> existing control authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy is
> on
>>>>>>>>>>>> the way to a memo from the Chief Pilot's office fairly soon
> I
>>>>>>>>>>>> would imagine. Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards
> putting
>>>>>>>>>>> the wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never
>>>>>>>>>>> taught how to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be
> amazed
>>>>>>>>>>> at how many airline pilots beleive that this is the way to do
>>>>>>>>>>> it... Mostly, they get away with it. The crosswind doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>> appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle, I'd reckon
> the
>>>>>>>>>>> max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well
> within
>>>>>>>>>>> the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until
> the
>>>>>>>>>>> flare.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the
>>>>>>>>>> wind offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>>>>>>>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at 40
>>>>>>>>> knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no problem, and
>>>>>>>>> that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy, and I mean
> really
>>>>>>>>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a PIO
>>>>>>>>> going with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other
>>>>>>>>> poster's info is correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it
> did.
>>>>>>>>> I dont see any effort on the pilot's part to put the right wing
>>>>>>>>> down at all. Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might not
> have
>>>>>>>>> allowd the pilot to do what he wanted to.
>>>>>>>>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look
>>>>>>>>> foolish. I just thought the video neatly illustrated the
> dynamics
>>>>>>>>> of a crosswind landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever caused
>>>>>>>>> it. A lot of people use a similar technique and, close to the
>>>>>>>>> limit, it will end up looking pretty much like this...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in
> heavies
>>>>>>>> all day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a
>>>>>>>> charter op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle marker
>>>>>>>> (or where it would be) inbound. Looked like he flattened it out
>>>>>>>> too high which had to cost him some airspeed and maneuvering
>>>>>>>> energy. I agree on the wing. Didn't look good to me either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see, He
>>>>>>> seems to be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing they do
>>>>>>> in modern busses is to set the vref into the magic boxes and that
>>>>>>> commands a constant groundspeed during the approach. Sounded
> crazy
>>>>>>> to me when I first heard of it, but the way it works is that the
>>>>>>> airplane automatically bleeds off speed as the wind diminishes
>>>>>>> during descent. even hand flown, the flight director would have
>>>>>>> been commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do with the way
> thr
>>>>>>> airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the kind
>>>>>>> of precise guidance they were getting to that point. He may have
>>>>>>> been doing an auto approach, in fact, which could expalin a lot
> as
>>>>>>> the transition form autoflight to manual can be messy,
> particularly
>>>>>>> in wind. Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it
> was
>>>>>>> probably a million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you
>>>>>>> flew! You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a
>>>>>>> light twin and the ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in that
>>>>>>> compilation video I posted you can see one going around and
> rocking
>>>>>>> like crazy. That's a PIO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The approach I shot in the DC8 was into Fairbanks Alaska. Very
> windy
>>>>>> that day and I flew the approach manually....well, manually on a
>>>>>> Collins FD109 FD anyway. You're right about the difference in
>>>>>> airplanes. I had flown the bird up there from the left seat so was
>>>>>> fairly familiar with the control response, but of course that was
> at
>>>>>> cruise mach. When I slowed the damn thing down for the approach,
> the
>>>>>> lead time to correct changed accordingly and it was a guessing
> game
>>>>>> each time I corrected. I cheated a little and ruddered it rather
>>>>>> than use bank that seemed hard to control to me. Anyway, I got it
>>>>>> down in one piece without bending it. Had the Chief Pilot of the
>>>>>> line in the right seat of course, but he had already told me that
>>>>>> unless I got it critical somehow it was all mine to solve.
>>>>>> Great airplane the DC8. I'll tell you the truth though. I was damn
>>>>>> glad to feel those mains on the pavement. Those guys knew me
> pretty
>>>>>> well and I didn't want to embarrass myself in their big bad
> airplane
>>>>>> :-))
>>>>> You were obviously well able to keep it inside his comfort zone.
>>>>> Don't forget , neophytes get to fly these things all the time, so
>>>>> they're well used to teaching people on the job. It's one jet I
> realy
>>>>> would liked to have gotten a chance to fly. It's very different
> from
>>>>> almost everything else flying in a lot of ways.
>>>>>> About PIO; you should see the trouble in pitch a novice can get
> into
>>>>>> in a T38.
>>>>>> It can get so bad you have to let go and let it phugoid out .
>>>>>> There's absolutely no way a first timer could counter it. If it
>>>>>> happens low enough on approach it can spell REAL trouble.
>>>>>> Great airplane though. Makes me wish I could do it again :-)
>>>>> Someting else I'd love to try! I never found the sensitive ailerons
>>>>> to be a problem. Most of the problem, as you know is the deah grip
> on
>>>>> the stick. I've started them off in turbulence, but dampened them
> out
>>>>> just as quick by relaxing my wrist ( there you go ken, an opeing
> for
>>>>> a gay lame)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>> The 8 was great as long as you led the thing by about 3 seconds in
>>>> roll. It seemed like a drunken whale to me for the first few turns.
>>>> Then I got it down pretty well and led it correctly.
>>>> I guess the new stuff is much improved as you say. Sounds like fun
>>>> anyway :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Oh I meant the 757, sorry. The 8 uses servo tasbs AFAIK wth some
>>> hydraulic boosting as well.
>>>> The Pitts is a good airplane to teach sensitive control in pitch. I
>>>> always had them put their thumb on the back of the stick and just
>>>> their index finger in the front and fly it that way for a whole
> hour.
>>>> After doing that, they could fly with the wrist relaxed a bit
> better.
>>>> The first time a newbie climbs into a Pitts and tries a takeoff, I
>>>> always had them hold it on a bit longer before rotation. The extra
>>>> speed would really come into play when they rotated. With any luck
> at
>>>> all, you could get at least 200 feet out of it before they knew what
>>>> hit them. I'd have my hand in back of the stick to catch it just in
>>>> case :-)) One lesson like that was usually enough to solve the PIO
>>>> issue.
>>>>
>>> I flew tow of theose an S1C homebuilt and an S2. IO found them OK if
> a
>>> little skittish. I didn't get a lot of time in either and found th
>>> elight controls a lot to think about doing aerobatics.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> In the single hole round wing you'll notice PIO graphically the first
>> time you try a point roll with a sharp stop. The natural tendency is
> to
>> be sharp on the first 90 knife. What usually happens to the novice is
>> that it stops on a dime but just the slightest bit of forward stick
>> starts a real bad PIO that gets progressively worse the more you
> tryand
>> stop it.
>> The result can really shake you up if you don't let go. I've seen
> those
>> things go to 3 negative and 5 positive as quick as you can say "Holy
>> Pitts Batman!!" :-))
>
>
> Yeah, I hurt my neck the first time I flew it. The elevators had almost
> no feel to them at all. In fact, after that flight the owner decided to
> install a combo anti servo/trim on it as he wasn't crazy about the lack
> of feel either. It was by far the scariest airplane i'd flown at the
> time and the approach speeds were just insane. I was terrified I'd
> groundloop the thing and the owner builder would kill me if I survived
> that!
> The S2 was OK, bu tI really didn;t care for it. I only flew it a bit and
> the owner wouldn't let me land it and he groundlooped it near the end of
> the landing roll! he kept insisting I must have interfered with the
> controls, but I hadn't touched a thing! Feet flat on the floor..
> I'd kind of like to have one ot fly, but I think I'd prefer a Great
> Lakes or a Jungmann, to be honest.
>
>
> Bertie
>
Jungmeister for sure :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Kyle Boatright wrote:
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>
>> In the single hole round wing you'll notice PIO graphically the first
>> time you try a point roll with a sharp stop. The natural tendency is
>> to be sharp on the first 90 knife. What usually happens to the novice
>> is that it stops on a dime but just the slightest bit of forward stick
>> starts a real bad PIO that gets progressively worse the more you try
>> and stop it.
>> The result can really shake you up if you don't let go. I've seen
>> those things go to 3 negative and 5 positive as quick as you can say
>> "Holy Pitts Batman!!" :-))
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> Reminds me of my last biannual in the RV. A very experienced stick
> offered to do the bianuual for free, so off we went. I wanted to do
> some unusal attitude recovery work, so closed my eyes and turned it over
> to him. I hadn't bothered to brief him on the responsiveness of the RV,
> and had AssUMed that with his Pitts experience he'd be fine in the RV.
> Before I grabbed the stick, he bounced both our noggins off the canopy
> twice and the telltale on the G-meter read +3/-2. He did better the
> second time around. ;-)
>
> KB

Once you get them past that first one, it usually gets better :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near
>> crash:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>>>>>>>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just
>> "kick
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors
>>>>>>>>>>>>> people as an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a problem before realizing it isn't going to solve using
>>>>>>>>>>>>> existing control authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the way to a memo from the Chief Pilot's office fairly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon
>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would imagine. Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards
>> putting
>>>>>>>>>>>> the wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never
>>>>>>>>>>>> taught how to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be
>> amazed
>>>>>>>>>>>> at how many airline pilots beleive that this is the way to
>>>>>>>>>>>> do it... Mostly, they get away with it. The crosswind
>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle,
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd reckon
>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well
>> within
>>>>>>>>>>>> the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until
>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> flare.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the
>>>>>>>>>>> wind offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at
>>>>>>>>>> 40 knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no
>>>>>>>>>> problem, and that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy,
>>>>>>>>>> and I mean
>> really
>>>>>>>>>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a
>>>>>>>>>> PIO going with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other
>>>>>>>>>> poster's info is correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it
>> did.
>>>>>>>>>> I dont see any effort on the pilot's part to put the right
>>>>>>>>>> wing down at all. Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might
>>>>>>>>>> not
>> have
>>>>>>>>>> allowd the pilot to do what he wanted to.
>>>>>>>>>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look
>>>>>>>>>> foolish. I just thought the video neatly illustrated the
>> dynamics
>>>>>>>>>> of a crosswind landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever
>>>>>>>>>> caused it. A lot of people use a similar technique and, close
>>>>>>>>>> to the limit, it will end up looking pretty much like this...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in
>> heavies
>>>>>>>>> all day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a
>>>>>>>>> charter op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle
>>>>>>>>> marker (or where it would be) inbound. Looked like he
>>>>>>>>> flattened it out too high which had to cost him some airspeed
>>>>>>>>> and maneuvering energy. I agree on the wing. Didn't look good
>>>>>>>>> to me either.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see,
>>>>>>>> He seems to be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing
>>>>>>>> they do in modern busses is to set the vref into the magic
>>>>>>>> boxes and that commands a constant groundspeed during the
>>>>>>>> approach. Sounded
>> crazy
>>>>>>>> to me when I first heard of it, but the way it works is that
>>>>>>>> the airplane automatically bleeds off speed as the wind
>>>>>>>> diminishes during descent. even hand flown, the flight director
>>>>>>>> would have been commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do
>>>>>>>> with the way
>> thr
>>>>>>>> airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the
>>>>>>>> kind of precise guidance they were getting to that point. He
>>>>>>>> may have been doing an auto approach, in fact, which could
>>>>>>>> expalin a lot
>> as
>>>>>>>> the transition form autoflight to manual can be messy,
>> particularly
>>>>>>>> in wind. Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it
>> was
>>>>>>>> probably a million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you
>>>>>>>> flew! You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a
>>>>>>>> light twin and the ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in
>>>>>>>> that compilation video I posted you can see one going around
>>>>>>>> and
>> rocking
>>>>>>>> like crazy. That's a PIO.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The approach I shot in the DC8 was into Fairbanks Alaska. Very
>> windy
>>>>>>> that day and I flew the approach manually....well, manually on a
>>>>>>> Collins FD109 FD anyway. You're right about the difference in
>>>>>>> airplanes. I had flown the bird up there from the left seat so
>>>>>>> was fairly familiar with the control response, but of course
>>>>>>> that was
>> at
>>>>>>> cruise mach. When I slowed the damn thing down for the approach,
>> the
>>>>>>> lead time to correct changed accordingly and it was a guessing
>> game
>>>>>>> each time I corrected. I cheated a little and ruddered it rather
>>>>>>> than use bank that seemed hard to control to me. Anyway, I got
>>>>>>> it down in one piece without bending it. Had the Chief Pilot of
>>>>>>> the line in the right seat of course, but he had already told me
>>>>>>> that unless I got it critical somehow it was all mine to solve.
>>>>>>> Great airplane the DC8. I'll tell you the truth though. I was
>>>>>>> damn glad to feel those mains on the pavement. Those guys knew
>>>>>>> me
>> pretty
>>>>>>> well and I didn't want to embarrass myself in their big bad
>> airplane
>>>>>>> :-))
>>>>>> You were obviously well able to keep it inside his comfort zone.
>>>>>> Don't forget , neophytes get to fly these things all the time, so
>>>>>> they're well used to teaching people on the job. It's one jet I
>> realy
>>>>>> would liked to have gotten a chance to fly. It's very different
>> from
>>>>>> almost everything else flying in a lot of ways.
>>>>>>> About PIO; you should see the trouble in pitch a novice can get
>> into
>>>>>>> in a T38.
>>>>>>> It can get so bad you have to let go and let it phugoid out .
>>>>>>> There's absolutely no way a first timer could counter it. If it
>>>>>>> happens low enough on approach it can spell REAL trouble.
>>>>>>> Great airplane though. Makes me wish I could do it again :-)
>>>>>> Someting else I'd love to try! I never found the sensitive
>>>>>> ailerons to be a problem. Most of the problem, as you know is the
>>>>>> deah grip
>> on
>>>>>> the stick. I've started them off in turbulence, but dampened them
>> out
>>>>>> just as quick by relaxing my wrist ( there you go ken, an opeing
>> for
>>>>>> a gay lame)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>> The 8 was great as long as you led the thing by about 3 seconds in
>>>>> roll. It seemed like a drunken whale to me for the first few
>>>>> turns. Then I got it down pretty well and led it correctly.
>>>>> I guess the new stuff is much improved as you say. Sounds like fun
>>>>> anyway :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Oh I meant the 757, sorry. The 8 uses servo tasbs AFAIK wth some
>>>> hydraulic boosting as well.
>>>>> The Pitts is a good airplane to teach sensitive control in pitch.
>>>>> I always had them put their thumb on the back of the stick and
>>>>> just their index finger in the front and fly it that way for a
>>>>> whole
>> hour.
>>>>> After doing that, they could fly with the wrist relaxed a bit
>> better.
>>>>> The first time a newbie climbs into a Pitts and tries a takeoff, I
>>>>> always had them hold it on a bit longer before rotation. The extra
>>>>> speed would really come into play when they rotated. With any luck
>> at
>>>>> all, you could get at least 200 feet out of it before they knew
>>>>> what hit them. I'd have my hand in back of the stick to catch it
>>>>> just in case :-)) One lesson like that was usually enough to solve
>>>>> the PIO issue.
>>>>>
>>>> I flew tow of theose an S1C homebuilt and an S2. IO found them OK
>>>> if
>> a
>>>> little skittish. I didn't get a lot of time in either and found th
>>>> elight controls a lot to think about doing aerobatics.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>> In the single hole round wing you'll notice PIO graphically the
>>> first time you try a point roll with a sharp stop. The natural
>>> tendency is
>> to
>>> be sharp on the first 90 knife. What usually happens to the novice
>>> is that it stops on a dime but just the slightest bit of forward
>>> stick starts a real bad PIO that gets progressively worse the more
>>> you
>> tryand
>>> stop it.
>>> The result can really shake you up if you don't let go. I've seen
>> those
>>> things go to 3 negative and 5 positive as quick as you can say "Holy
>>> Pitts Batman!!" :-))
>>
>>
>> Yeah, I hurt my neck the first time I flew it. The elevators had
>> almost no feel to them at all. In fact, after that flight the owner
>> decided to install a combo anti servo/trim on it as he wasn't crazy
>> about the lack of feel either. It was by far the scariest airplane
>> i'd flown at the time and the approach speeds were just insane. I was
>> terrified I'd groundloop the thing and the owner builder would kill
>> me if I survived that!
>> The S2 was OK, bu tI really didn;t care for it. I only flew it a bit
>> and the owner wouldn't let me land it and he groundlooped it near the
>> end of the landing roll! he kept insisting I must have interfered
>> with the controls, but I hadn't touched a thing! Feet flat on the
>> floor.. I'd kind of like to have one ot fly, but I think I'd prefer a
>> Great Lakes or a Jungmann, to be honest.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> Jungmeister for sure :-))
>

Yeah, I know someone who had one before I met him. ******* sold it so I
never got to fly it!:(
just one of the prettiest airplanes ever.


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near
>>> crash:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>>>>>>>>>>>>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just
>>> "kick
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people as an example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a problem before realizing it isn't going to solve using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> existing control authority. Absolutely amazing! This guy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the way to a memo from the Chief Pilot's office fairly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon
>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would imagine. Glad they made it out of there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards
>>> putting
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never
>>>>>>>>>>>>> taught how to do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be
>>> amazed
>>>>>>>>>>>>> at how many airline pilots beleive that this is the way to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> do it... Mostly, they get away with it. The crosswind
>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't appear to be all that bad. From the drift angle,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd reckon
>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> max compnenet to be under thirty knots and steady. Well
>>> within
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in trouble until
>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> flare.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't have the official wind figures, but I would make the
>>>>>>>>>>>> wind offset with gust factor well outside his capabilities.
>>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't look like it to me. Most moderns are demonstrated at
>>>>>>>>>>> 40 knots. Even the older ones can do 30 or 35 with no
>>>>>>>>>>> problem, and that;'s just the demonstrated. The 757 is easy,
>>>>>>>>>>> and I mean
>>> really
>>>>>>>>>>> easy, in winds approaching 40, although it's easy to get a
>>>>>>>>>>> PIO going with the ailerons in turbulence in it. If the other
>>>>>>>>>>> poster's info is correct, it shouldn;t have come to what it
>>> did.
>>>>>>>>>>> I dont see any effort on the pilot's part to put the right
>>>>>>>>>>> wing down at all. Having said that, it's a 'bus and it might
>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> allowd the pilot to do what he wanted to.
>>>>>>>>>>> In any case, crossposting his wasn't to make the crw look
>>>>>>>>>>> foolish. I just thought the video neatly illustrated the
>>> dynamics
>>>>>>>>>>> of a crosswind landing gone wrong very nicely, whatever
>>>>>>>>>>> caused it. A lot of people use a similar technique and, close
>>>>>>>>>>> to the limit, it will end up looking pretty much like this...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure your right. After all, you look at this stuff in
>>> heavies
>>>>>>>>>> all day long. I landed a DC8 once as a guest of the airline (a
>>>>>>>>>> charter op). Man, what a handful THAT thing was!! :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I read this guy's approach as bad from around the middle
>>>>>>>>>> marker (or where it would be) inbound. Looked like he
>>>>>>>>>> flattened it out too high which had to cost him some airspeed
>>>>>>>>>> and maneuvering energy. I agree on the wing. Didn't look good
>>>>>>>>>> to me either.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, looks good all the way to the runway as far as i can see,
>>>>>>>>> He seems to be tracking the runway alright. One burios thing
>>>>>>>>> they do in modern busses is to set the vref into the magic
>>>>>>>>> boxes and that commands a constant groundspeed during the
>>>>>>>>> approach. Sounded
>>> crazy
>>>>>>>>> to me when I first heard of it, but the way it works is that
>>>>>>>>> the airplane automatically bleeds off speed as the wind
>>>>>>>>> diminishes during descent. even hand flown, the flight director
>>>>>>>>> would have been commanding this speed. I t has nothing to do
>>>>>>>>> with the way
>>> thr
>>>>>>>>> airplane was flown in the last few seconds, but it shows the
>>>>>>>>> kind of precise guidance they were getting to that point. He
>>>>>>>>> may have been doing an auto approach, in fact, which could
>>>>>>>>> expalin a lot
>>> as
>>>>>>>>> the transition form autoflight to manual can be messy,
>>> particularly
>>>>>>>>> in wind. Never flown a DC8, but with those old tab controls, it
>>> was
>>>>>>>>> probably a million miles away from the fighters and Pitts' you
>>>>>>>>> flew! You'd find the 757 more to your liking,. It flies like a
>>>>>>>>> light twin and the ailerons are VERY responsive. In fact in
>>>>>>>>> that compilation video I posted you can see one going around
>>>>>>>>> and
>>> rocking
>>>>>>>>> like crazy. That's a PIO.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The approach I shot in the DC8 was into Fairbanks Alaska. Very
>>> windy
>>>>>>>> that day and I flew the approach manually....well, manually on a
>>>>>>>> Collins FD109 FD anyway. You're right about the difference in
>>>>>>>> airplanes. I had flown the bird up there from the left seat so
>>>>>>>> was fairly familiar with the control response, but of course
>>>>>>>> that was
>>> at
>>>>>>>> cruise mach. When I slowed the damn thing down for the approach,
>>> the
>>>>>>>> lead time to correct changed accordingly and it was a guessing
>>> game
>>>>>>>> each time I corrected. I cheated a little and ruddered it rather
>>>>>>>> than use bank that seemed hard to control to me. Anyway, I got
>>>>>>>> it down in one piece without bending it. Had the Chief Pilot of
>>>>>>>> the line in the right seat of course, but he had already told me
>>>>>>>> that unless I got it critical somehow it was all mine to solve.
>>>>>>>> Great airplane the DC8. I'll tell you the truth though. I was
>>>>>>>> damn glad to feel those mains on the pavement. Those guys knew
>>>>>>>> me
>>> pretty
>>>>>>>> well and I didn't want to embarrass myself in their big bad
>>> airplane
>>>>>>>> :-))
>>>>>>> You were obviously well able to keep it inside his comfort zone.
>>>>>>> Don't forget , neophytes get to fly these things all the time, so
>>>>>>> they're well used to teaching people on the job. It's one jet I
>>> realy
>>>>>>> would liked to have gotten a chance to fly. It's very different
>>> from
>>>>>>> almost everything else flying in a lot of ways.
>>>>>>>> About PIO; you should see the trouble in pitch a novice can get
>>> into
>>>>>>>> in a T38.
>>>>>>>> It can get so bad you have to let go and let it phugoid out .
>>>>>>>> There's absolutely no way a first timer could counter it. If it
>>>>>>>> happens low enough on approach it can spell REAL trouble.
>>>>>>>> Great airplane though. Makes me wish I could do it again :-)
>>>>>>> Someting else I'd love to try! I never found the sensitive
>>>>>>> ailerons to be a problem. Most of the problem, as you know is the
>>>>>>> deah grip
>>> on
>>>>>>> the stick. I've started them off in turbulence, but dampened them
>>> out
>>>>>>> just as quick by relaxing my wrist ( there you go ken, an opeing
>>> for
>>>>>>> a gay lame)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>> The 8 was great as long as you led the thing by about 3 seconds in
>>>>>> roll. It seemed like a drunken whale to me for the first few
>>>>>> turns. Then I got it down pretty well and led it correctly.
>>>>>> I guess the new stuff is much improved as you say. Sounds like fun
>>>>>> anyway :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Oh I meant the 757, sorry. The 8 uses servo tasbs AFAIK wth some
>>>>> hydraulic boosting as well.
>>>>>> The Pitts is a good airplane to teach sensitive control in pitch.
>>>>>> I always had them put their thumb on the back of the stick and
>>>>>> just their index finger in the front and fly it that way for a
>>>>>> whole
>>> hour.
>>>>>> After doing that, they could fly with the wrist relaxed a bit
>>> better.
>>>>>> The first time a newbie climbs into a Pitts and tries a takeoff, I
>>>>>> always had them hold it on a bit longer before rotation. The extra
>>>>>> speed would really come into play when they rotated. With any luck
>>> at
>>>>>> all, you could get at least 200 feet out of it before they knew
>>>>>> what hit them. I'd have my hand in back of the stick to catch it
>>>>>> just in case :-)) One lesson like that was usually enough to solve
>>>>>> the PIO issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I flew tow of theose an S1C homebuilt and an S2. IO found them OK
>>>>> if
>>> a
>>>>> little skittish. I didn't get a lot of time in either and found th
>>>>> elight controls a lot to think about doing aerobatics.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>
>>>> In the single hole round wing you'll notice PIO graphically the
>>>> first time you try a point roll with a sharp stop. The natural
>>>> tendency is
>>> to
>>>> be sharp on the first 90 knife. What usually happens to the novice
>>>> is that it stops on a dime but just the slightest bit of forward
>>>> stick starts a real bad PIO that gets progressively worse the more
>>>> you
>>> tryand
>>>> stop it.
>>>> The result can really shake you up if you don't let go. I've seen
>>> those
>>>> things go to 3 negative and 5 positive as quick as you can say "Holy
>>>> Pitts Batman!!" :-))
>>>
>>> Yeah, I hurt my neck the first time I flew it. The elevators had
>>> almost no feel to them at all. In fact, after that flight the owner
>>> decided to install a combo anti servo/trim on it as he wasn't crazy
>>> about the lack of feel either. It was by far the scariest airplane
>>> i'd flown at the time and the approach speeds were just insane. I was
>>> terrified I'd groundloop the thing and the owner builder would kill
>>> me if I survived that!
>>> The S2 was OK, bu tI really didn;t care for it. I only flew it a bit
>>> and the owner wouldn't let me land it and he groundlooped it near the
>>> end of the landing roll! he kept insisting I must have interfered
>>> with the controls, but I hadn't touched a thing! Feet flat on the
>>> floor.. I'd kind of like to have one ot fly, but I think I'd prefer a
>>> Great Lakes or a Jungmann, to be honest.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> Jungmeister for sure :-))
>>
>
> Yeah, I know someone who had one before I met him. ******* sold it so I
> never got to fly it!:(
> just one of the prettiest airplanes ever.
>
>
> Bertie

Totally agree. I can still see Bevo flying that thing. An absolutely
wonderful airplane.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:


>
> Totally agree. I can still see Bevo flying that thing. An absolutely
> wonderful airplane.
>

I must make an effort to get out in a Jungmannn one day. I have heard a
rumor of one for rent near a place I overnight in....


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>
>> Totally agree. I can still see Bevo flying that thing. An absolutely
>> wonderful airplane.
>>
>
> I must make an effort to get out in a Jungmannn one day. I have heard a
> rumor of one for rent near a place I overnight in....
>
>
> Bertie
By all means do so if you can. I've not flown the Jungmann but I've been
told it's a great bird.
Closest I got was the Great Lakes. Good times for sure!

--
Dudley Henriques

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 2, 7:57*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> William Hung > wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 2, 5:25*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> wrote :
>
> >> > We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
> >> > Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>
> >> >http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>
> >> > Nice pic:
>
> >> >http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
> &filename=phpOltUWB
> > ...
>
> >> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
> >> straight"
>
> >> when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>
> >> Bertie
>
> > Remnds me of this video. *http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9M3m1U-QYA
> > I can watch tis all day.
>
> Yeah, they are kicking i straight, though they are laying off a bit of
> the drift by getting the wing down as the flare. The first one has th
> edownwind wing donw slightly. Remember that this exercise is intended to
> demonstrate what the airplane is capable of and not to develop
> technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
> just like an airplane. His first line flight to LHR had mih landing in a
> strong crosswind. The trainer next to him asked if he would prefer that
> he do th elanding, but my friend pressed on and found it easy.
> Note that in each touchdown, the alignment takes place after touchdown,
> and that th etouchdonw is positive. the yaw towards alignment is done
> smoothly and though you can't see it, they are almost certainly
> introducing full aileron ( smoothly) to keep the wing down and to
> introduce some very welcome adverse yaw.We used to have to land the 727
> like this and though it felt absolutley awful, it worked OK.
>
> Bertie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I heard the Helio also has crabbing gears. Ia that right?

For some reason, I don't feel threatened by the heavies like most
people seam to be. I some how, even though Ihave never flown ne,
think that I can if givemn the chance. I think the big ones would
probably be more stable that the 150 that I train in.

Do thebig ones give you more or less time to react and plan ahead?

Of course, not having any experience in them makes make my opinion
just that, only an opinion.

Wil

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>> Totally agree. I can still see Bevo flying that thing. An absolutely
>>> wonderful airplane.
>>>
>>
>> I must make an effort to get out in a Jungmannn one day. I have heard a
>> rumor of one for rent near a place I overnight in....
>>
>>
>> Bertie
> By all means do so if you can. I've not flown the Jungmann but I've been
> told it's a great bird.
> Closest I got was the Great Lakes. Good times for sure!
>

I love the Lakes. I've only flown "new" ones, but a close friend has a '29
with a 260 Franklin. he lives a long way from me ( but very close to you)
I'm hoping to meet up with him this summer.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

William Hung > wrote in
:

> On Mar 2, 7:57*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> William Hung > wrote
>> innews:bff1ba6f-28ab-44c0-884e-85cc
> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 2, 5:25*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> wrote :
>>
>> >> > We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>> >> > Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>
>> >> >http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>
>> >> > Nice pic:
>>
>> >> >http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>> &filename=phpOltUWB
>> > ...
>>
>> >> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>> >> straight"
>>
>> >> when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>
>> >> Bertie
>>
>> > Remnds me of this video.
>> > *http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9M3m1U-QYA
>
>> > I can watch tis all day.
>>
>> Yeah, they are kicking i straight, though they are laying off a bit
>> of the drift by getting the wing down as the flare. The first one has
>> th edownwind wing donw slightly. Remember that this exercise is
>> intended to demonstrate what the airplane is capable of and not to
>> develop technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me
>> it flies just like an airplane. His first line flight to LHR had mih
>> landing in a strong crosswind. The trainer next to him asked if he
>> would prefer that he do th elanding, but my friend pressed on and
>> found it easy. Note that in each touchdown, the alignment takes place
>> after touchdown, and that th etouchdonw is positive. the yaw towards
>> alignment is done smoothly and though you can't see it, they are
>> almost certainly introducing full aileron ( smoothly) to keep the
>> wing down and to introduce some very welcome adverse yaw.We used to
>> have to land the 727 like this and though it felt absolutley awful,
>> it worked OK.
>>
>> Bertie- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I heard the Helio also has crabbing gears. Ia that right?

Might do. I used to fly a 195 that had them. Awful, really.
The 737 has castering mains. It makes it a bit difficult to taxi,
actually (just go to to th esupermaket if you don't believe me)

>
> For some reason, I don't feel threatened by the heavies like most
> people seam to be. I some how, even though Ihave never flown ne,
> think that I can if givemn the chance. I think the big ones would
> probably be more stable that the 150 that I train in.

Well, you don't have to be an astronaut to fly them, but it's unlikely
you'd be able to just jump in one and fly it well. You might, and that's
a big might, be able to land one if someone were to instuct you every
step of the way.
They vary from type to type. The newer ones are a bit easier, mostly
because of the high bypass fans they have. This makes them effectively a
prop driven airplane. The old skinny jet engines had less "traction" and
needed a lot of power changes during approach.Newer wings are easier to
handle too.Older wings had very flat drag curves and keeping the speed
nailed kept your attention.
You'd find controlling the pitch and speed a bit of a handful both on
departure and arrival in any of them, though. In addition, the ones with
underslung engines will have a fairly large pitch trim change with each
power change, and if you aren't ahead of the airplane you will have a
lot of power changes. This can degenerate to a very mess situation where
you're chasing just about everything.
They have to be flown solidly "in the slot" on the approach. You can't
just chop the power and dive for the runway if you get a little high in
the last couple hundred feet. Well, you could, but the result would be
pretty nasty.
There are fairly narrow allowable speeds for each flap postition. On
some airplanes, max speed for the first flap postition might be 230 and
the minimum speed for that position might be 210, for instance. With
that flap out, you can go down to 190 but the max sped for the next flap
setting would be 215, min 170 and so on. That sounds like a lot and it
is when you are used to it, but add to this the fact that the flaps wear
quickly if you put them out near the max speed and you have an airplane
you must keep an eye on, particularly if you're hand flying.
>
> Do the big ones give you more or less time to react and plan ahead?

Mmmm. You have to think ahead about a number of things much more so than
in a light plane. Leaving out instrument departures and arrivals, just
handling it requires a lot of procedures.Then there are emerergencies,
but if you were going to just go out and do some sunday flying in one
like you would in a 150 then the big differences would be knowing the
numbers for pitch and power (and there are a lot of them) and being able
to visualise the flight path to a finer degree than you are used to. The
speed is just a bunch of numbers, it's a scale thing. And since you fly
a wider pattern anyway the speed is kind of irrelevant. Just a bunch of
different numbers. Even with a 1500 fooot pattern (normal visual size)
you would be flying a downwind probably three miles out and be hitting
the descent point in finals at about four miles. It;s the numer of
things the airplane would demand from you rather than the speed of the
thing you'd find a bit demanding. Although, how do you think you'd cope
with a 6,000 fpm plus rate of climb during take off or go around? ;)
That's what the 757 wil do lightly loaded.
Anyhow, to adress your point, more stable they are not. More lumbering,
maybe, but not more stable. But they need to be flown in a more stable
fashion.

>
> Of course, not having any experience in them makes make my opinion
> just that, only an opinion.

It's do-able, alright. I put a 16 year old from my model flying club and
put him an an old 737-200 sim years ago. I gave him about two hours of
instruction before we went in and I had to talk him through most of the
actual flying, but he did every appraoch and landing pretty well. We
were heavily reliant on the flight director (these are little bars that
superimpose over the airplane figure on the Attitude indicator that
basically give you pitch and bank) and I , of course, was feeding the
flight director with the info tha it needed to guide him,. but he did
pretty well. The Chief pilot was there and was impressed. Unfortunately
the kid had a fairly big color blindness deficiency, but he's a
succesful accountant today and has his own glider..
We're trainign up a lot of new hires in work at the moment. The ones who
have been flying turboprops and such are getting up to speed pretty
quickly, but the lightplane guys are on a steeper learning curve, though
they'll get there in the end. As a rule, glider pilots and guys who have
flown airplanes that 'need to be flown' ultimately are smootehr and more
accurate when they get used to them...

So the answer is yes, you could do it, but if you're going to spend
money trying it probably best to wait til you get your instrument raing
or at least are well along training for one. You'd get more out of the
experience.


Bertie

[Oz Lander[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

> "Blueskies" > wrote in
> . net:
>
> >
> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>>
> >>
> >> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting the
> >> wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never taught how
> to >> do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed at how many
> airline >> pilots beleive that this is the way to do it... Mostly,
> they get away >> with it. The crosswind doesn't appear to be all that
> bad. From the >> drift angle, I'd reckon the max compnenet to be
> under thirty knots >> and steady. Well within the airplane's
> capability. He wasn't realy in >> trouble until the flare.
> >>
> >> Bertie
> >>
> >> Bertie
> >
> > Sounded gusty in the audio of the video...
>
> Wel, the airplane is steady on the approach, so while there are
> surely little variations in the wind, really gusty conditions would
> have either the pilot or autopilot manipulating the airplane a bit
> more than that. He's fine til he tries to kick it straight.
>
>
>
> Bertie

The A320 has a crosswind landing limit of 33 kts gusting 38 kts

According to the data at the time, the wind was 35kts, gusting 55 kts.

The incident happened at 13:55 local time
The flight LH 044 (D-AIQP), an A320 from MUC (Munich)
The landing runway was 23 LOC-DME (ATIS gave no other option)
after the go-around the pilots elected runway 33 also LOC-DME approach
and landed safely but minus the left winglet...
immediately after the incident ATIS gave runway 23 and 33 as well

--
Oz Lander.
Straight and Level Down Under Forum.
http://www.straightandleveldownunder.net

[Oz Lander[_2_]]

Oz Lander wrote:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
> > "Blueskies" > wrote in
> > . net:
> >
> > >
> > > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting
> > the >> wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never
> > taught how to >> do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed
> > at how many airline >> pilots beleive that this is the way to do
> > it... Mostly, they get away >> with it. The crosswind doesn't
> > appear to be all that bad. From the >> drift angle, I'd reckon the
> > max compnenet to be under thirty knots >> and steady. Well within
> > the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in >> trouble until the
> > flare. >>
> > >> Bertie
> > >>
> > >> Bertie
> > >
> > > Sounded gusty in the audio of the video...
> >
> > Wel, the airplane is steady on the approach, so while there are
> > surely little variations in the wind, really gusty conditions would
> > have either the pilot or autopilot manipulating the airplane a bit
> > more than that. He's fine til he tries to kick it straight.
> >
> >
> >
> > Bertie
>
> The A320 has a crosswind landing limit of 33 kts gusting 38 kts
>
> According to the data at the time, the wind was 35kts, gusting 55 kts.
>
> The incident happened at 13:55 local time
> The flight LH 044 (D-AIQP), an A320 from MUC (Munich)
> The landing runway was 23 LOC-DME (ATIS gave no other option)
> after the go-around the pilots elected runway 33 also LOC-DME approach
> and landed safely but minus the left winglet...
> immediately after the incident ATIS gave runway 23 and 33 as well

For got the ATIS!
EDDH 011220Z 29028G48KT 9000 -SHRA FEW011 BKN014 07/05 Q0984 TEMPO
29035G55KT 4000 SHRA BKN008

--
Oz Lander.
Straight and Level Down Under Forum.
http://www.straightandleveldownunder.net

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 2, 9:41*pm, Jim Stewart > wrote:
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> > Jim Stewart > wrote in
> :
>
> >>Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
> >>Much snippage...
>
> >>>technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me it flies
> >>>just like an airplane.
>
> >>Ok, I'll bite. *What airplanes don't fly like airplanes?
>
> > Well, some of the older airliners had some interesting and challenging
> > quirks. They were not very speed stable on approach, wallowed around like a *
> > milk van and could develop rates of descent on approach that could plant
> > you in seconds if you weren;'t careful. Then there's the FBW Airbusses.
> > Every time I talk to one of those guys I walk away more confused about how
> > the flight controls work than I was before. Others, most of the 4 engine
> > contraptions, for instance, have to be landed wings level. The nmost recent
> > crop handle quite nicely, don't have spool up times stretching towards ten
> > seconds and just generaly are pleasant to handle. The satisfaction in
> > handling the older jets came mostly from tricking them into doing what you
> > wanted them to!
>
> What did you think of the 727? *In my youth I flew a lot
> as a 727 pax. *There was always something reassuring
> about having 3 people up front and 3 big ole engines in
> the back. *Engines that you could fsking feel when the
> levers were pushed all the way forward. *A real airplane
> for passengers that love planes.
>
> Then there was the time I asked if I could sit up front.
> The copilot graciously apologized for not being able to
> let me, but he kindly offered to let me tag along as he
> preflighted the a/c. *Those were the good old days.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The good old days, sure mis them. I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
PanAm crew. Too bad I lost that wing.

The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from
firemen and badges from policemen. I jnow the firemen still give out
fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that
kidslook up to anymore. At least not around here.

Wil

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>
>>>> Totally agree. I can still see Bevo flying that thing. An absolutely
>>>> wonderful airplane.
>>>>
>>> I must make an effort to get out in a Jungmannn one day. I have heard a
>>> rumor of one for rent near a place I overnight in....
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> By all means do so if you can. I've not flown the Jungmann but I've been
>> told it's a great bird.
>> Closest I got was the Great Lakes. Good times for sure!
>>
>
> I love the Lakes. I've only flown "new" ones, but a close friend has a '29
> with a 260 Franklin. he lives a long way from me ( but very close to you)
> I'm hoping to meet up with him this summer.
>
>
> Bertie

Let me know when your coming. We'll have a few together.

--
Dudley Henriques

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 3, 6:32*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> William Hung > wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 2, 7:57*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> William Hung > wrote
> >> innews:bff1ba6f-28ab-44c0-884e-85cc
> > :
>
> >> > On Mar 2, 5:25*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> wrote :
>
> >> >> > We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
> >> >> > Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>
> >> >> >http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>
> >> >> > Nice pic:
>
> >> >> >http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
> >> &filename=phpOltUWB
> >> > ...
>
> >> >> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
> >> >> straight"
>
> >> >> when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>
> >> >> Bertie
>
> >> > Remnds me of this video.
> >> > *http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9M3m1U-QYA
>
> >> > I can watch tis all day.
>
> >> Yeah, they are kicking i straight, though they are laying off a bit
> >> of the drift by getting the wing down as the flare. The first one has
> >> th edownwind wing donw slightly. Remember that this exercise is
> >> intended to demonstrate what the airplane is capable of and not to
> >> develop technique. I have a frined who flies the 777 and he tells me
> >> it flies just like an airplane. His first line flight to LHR had mih
> >> landing in a strong crosswind. The trainer next to him asked if he
> >> would prefer that he do th elanding, but my friend pressed on and
> >> found it easy. Note that in each touchdown, the alignment takes place
> >> after touchdown, and that th etouchdonw is positive. the yaw towards
> >> alignment is done smoothly and though you can't see it, they are
> >> almost certainly introducing full aileron ( smoothly) to keep the
> >> wing down and to introduce some very welcome adverse yaw.We used to
> >> have to land the 727 like this and though it felt absolutley awful,
> >> it worked OK.
>
> >> Bertie- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > I heard the Helio also has crabbing gears. *Ia that right?
>
> Might do. I used to fly a 195 that had them. Awful, really.
> The 737 has castering mains. It makes it a bit difficult to taxi,
> actually (just go to to th esupermaket if you don't believe me)
>

Don't they have a locking option?

>
sniped

> setting would be 215, min 170 and so on. That sounds like a lot and it
> is when you are used to it, but add to this the fact that the flaps wear
> quickly if you put them out near the max speed and you have an airplane
> you must keep an eye on, particularly if you're hand flying.
>

That does sound like a lot of work.

>
>
> > Do the big ones give you more or less time to react and plan ahead?
>
> Mmmm. You have to think ahead about a number of things much more so than

snipped
> thing you'd find a bit demanding. Although, how do you think you'd cope
> with a 6,000 fpm plus rate of climb during take off or go around? ;)

I think I would cope with that with a big ****e eating grin, what do
you think? :-))))

> That's what the 757 wil do lightly loaded.
> Anyhow, to adress your point, more stable they are not. More lumbering,
> maybe, but not more stable. But they need to be flown in a more stable
> fashion.
>

See, that's the term that I have heard from many pro pilots 'more
stable' and that gave me confidence. You tell me that it is 'more
lumbering', that's probably a more accurate description.

>
>
> > Of course, not having any experience in them makes make my opinion
> > just that, only an opinion.
>
> It's do-able, alright. I put a 16 year old from my model flying club and
> put him an an old 737-200 sim years ago. I gave him about two hours of

Where do I get in line? :-)

> instruction before we went in and I had to talk him through most of the
> actual flying, but he did every appraoch and landing pretty well. We
> were heavily reliant on the flight director (these are little bars that
> superimpose over the airplane figure on the Attitude indicator that
> basically give you pitch and bank) and I , of course, was feeding the
> flight director with the info tha it needed to guide him,. but he did
> pretty well. The Chief pilot was there and was impressed. Unfortunately
> the kid had a fairly big color blindness deficiency, but he's a
> succesful accountant today and has his own glider..
> We're trainign up a lot of new hires in work at the moment. The ones who
> have been flying turboprops and such are getting up to speed pretty
> quickly, but the lightplane guys are on a steeper learning curve, though
> they'll get there in the end. As a rule, glider pilots and guys who have
> flown airplanes that 'need to be flown' ultimately are smootehr and more
> accurate when they get used to them...
>
> So the answer is yes, you could do it, but if you're going to spend
> money trying it probably best to wait til you get your instrument raing
> or at least are well along training for one. You'd get more out of the
> experience.
>
> Bertie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thanks for a great explanaton Bertie.

Wil

[Big John[_2_]]

-----------clip---------------

I heard the Helio also has crabbing gears. Ia that right?

------------------------clip-----------------------


Wil

I flew the Helio Courier (USAF U-10) with castering gear.

Felt crazy after landing and nose weather vaned into the cross wind.

If you took off with gear unlocked you landed with it unlocked. This
was to prevent a malfunction and only one gear locking if you tried to
lock in air. Landing with one locked and one unlocked would probably
cause an accident or ground loop at least.

You could unlock in air for landing as no failure in unlocking system.

I played with system to keep current but never had to use it in
practice.

Big John

[Big John[_2_]]

-------------------clip----------------

>> What did you think of the 727? In my youth I flew a lot
>> as a 727 pax. There was always something reassuring
>> about having 3 people up front and 3 big ole engines in
>> the back. Engines that you could fsking feel when the
>> levers were pushed all the way forward. A real airplane
>> for passengers that love planes.
>
>I liked it for some of the same reasons you did. The three crew thing
>was great. We used pro flight engineers ( as opposed to a kid fresh out
>of Embry Riddle ). It wasn't exactly a sprots car in the handling
>department, but it went where you told it with a bit of persuasion
>(though you would get exactly the opposite view from a guy who came onto
>it off of a 707, which was supposed to be a real handful) It was very
>fast. Anything up to mach .93, a bit slower if you were heavy.
>Very noisy flightdeck (wind) Nicely thought out for it's day with lots
>of redundancy in all systems. It must have seemed like something from
>Buck Rogers in 1963.


-----------clip------------

Bertie

Tell the story about when 727 first came out and a couple crashed
during flare (one was at SLC as I remember).

Bird was dirtiest aircraft I had seen up to that time when on final.
With everything out and down and Stews dragging their feet out of back
stair well didn't hardly look much different than a flying brick :o)

You can correct my remembrance. Bird started to get a bad name and
lots of quick investigations took place. It was found that if pilots
were sloppy flying the handbook airspeed on final and got just a
couple of knots slow they couldn't flare the bird. The fix was to
change the operating manual and raised approach speed 3 or so knots
(just a tweak) and bird became one of the best and safest birds
flying.

Correct me where I have remembered the details wrong.

Big John

[Big John[_2_]]

---------------------clip-----------------

The good old days, sure mis them. I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
PanAm crew. Too bad I lost that wing.

The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from
firemen and badges from policemen. I jnow the firemen still give out
fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that
kidslook up to anymore. At least not around here.

*********************************

Wil

Are you talking about the "Leg Spreaders" they used to hand out?

I still have a set in my box of old airplane memorabilia :o)

Big John

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 3, 10:44*am, Big John > wrote:
> ---------------------clip-----------------
>
> The good old days, sure mis them. *I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
> and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
> PanAm crew. *Too bad I lost that wing.
>
> The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from
> firemen and badges from policemen. *I jnow the firemen still give out
> fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that
> kidslook up to anymore. *At least not around here.
>
> *********************************
>
> Wil
>
> Are you talking about the "Leg Spreaders" they used to hand out?
>
> I still have a set in my box of old airplane memorabilia :o)
>
> Big John

Don't quite follow you with the "Leg Spreaders", but if you are
refering to the bush jumpers wings, I've seen them. lol I meant the
plastic captain's wings that they gave out. :-)

Thinking back, I remember we kids would run up to police cars when
they showed up in our 'hood'. We would bug them to turn on the sirens
and lights and they would hand out plastic badges. Now kids look the
other way when they see cops.

Shame really.

Wil

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 3, 10:08*am, Big John > wrote:
> -----------clip---------------
>
> I heard the Helio also has crabbing gears. *Ia that right?
>
> ------------------------clip-----------------------
>
> Wil
>
> I flew the Helio Courier (USAF U-10) with castering gear.
>
> Felt crazy after landing and nose weather vaned into the cross wind.
>
> If you took off with gear unlocked you landed with it unlocked. This
> was to prevent a malfunction and only one gear locking if you tried to
> lock in air. Landing with one locked and one unlocked would probably
> cause an accident or ground loop at least.
>
> You could unlock in air for landing as no failure in unlocking system.
>
> I played with system to keep current but never had to use it in
> practice.
>
> Big John

Did you fly in 'Nam John?

WIl

[Big John[_2_]]

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:10:55 -0800 (PST), William Hung
> wrote:

>On Mar 3, 10:44*am, Big John > wrote:
>> ---------------------clip-----------------
>>
>> The good old days, sure mis them. *I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
>> and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
>> PanAm crew. *Too bad I lost that wing.
>>
>> The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from
>> firemen and badges from policemen. *I jnow the firemen still give out
>> fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that
>> kidslook up to anymore. *At least not around here.
>>
>> *********************************
>>
>> Wil
>>
>> Are you talking about the "Leg Spreaders" they used to hand out?
>>
>> I still have a set in my box of old airplane memorabilia :o)
>>
>> Big John
>
>Don't quite follow you with the "Leg Spreaders", but if you are
>refering to the bush jumpers wings, I've seen them. lol I meant the
>plastic captain's wings that they gave out. :-)
>
>Thinking back, I remember we kids would run up to police cars when
>they showed up in our 'hood'. We would bug them to turn on the sirens
>and lights and they would hand out plastic badges. Now kids look the
>other way when they see cops.
>
>Shame really.
>
>Wil


************************************************** ***

Wil

In olden days pilots were a good catch for young ladies. If you had a
set of wings to wear it was half the battle :o) They all wanted to go
out with you :o)

The wings were metal like real ones but nothing in center saying what
airline, etc.

These were probably even before Berties time :o)

Big John

[Big John[_2_]]

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:11:30 -0800 (PST), William Hung
> wrote:

>On Mar 3, 10:08*am, Big John > wrote:
>> -----------clip---------------
>>
>> I heard the Helio also has crabbing gears. *Ia that right?
>>
>> ------------------------clip-----------------------
>>
>> Wil
>>
>> I flew the Helio Courier (USAF U-10) with castering gear.
>>
>> Felt crazy after landing and nose weather vaned into the cross wind.
>>
>> If you took off with gear unlocked you landed with it unlocked. This
>> was to prevent a malfunction and only one gear locking if you tried to
>> lock in air. Landing with one locked and one unlocked would probably
>> cause an accident or ground loop at least.
>>
>> You could unlock in air for landing as no failure in unlocking system.
>>
>> I played with system to keep current but never had to use it in
>> practice.
>>
>> Big John
>
>Did you fly in 'Nam John?
>
>WIl

************************************************** *********

Yep.

0-1 and 0-2. (350+ combat hours)

Ran II DASC at Pleiku during TET era (67-68).

Big John

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Oz Lander" > wrote in news:fqgu7o$2qk$1@news-
01.bur.connect.com.au:

> Oz Lander wrote:
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>
>> > "Blueskies" > wrote in
>> > . net:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> > > ...
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >> Well, he doesn't appear to have made any effort towards putting
>> > the >> wing down at all. Not his fault.He was obviously never
>> > taught how to >> do a crosswind landing properly. You'd be amazed
>> > at how many airline >> pilots beleive that this is the way to do
>> > it... Mostly, they get away >> with it. The crosswind doesn't
>> > appear to be all that bad. From the >> drift angle, I'd reckon the
>> > max compnenet to be under thirty knots >> and steady. Well within
>> > the airplane's capability. He wasn't realy in >> trouble until the
>> > flare. >>
>> > >> Bertie
>> > >>
>> > >> Bertie
>> > >
>> > > Sounded gusty in the audio of the video...
>> >
>> > Wel, the airplane is steady on the approach, so while there are
>> > surely little variations in the wind, really gusty conditions would
>> > have either the pilot or autopilot manipulating the airplane a bit
>> > more than that. He's fine til he tries to kick it straight.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Bertie
>>
>> The A320 has a crosswind landing limit of 33 kts gusting 38 kts
>>
>> According to the data at the time, the wind was 35kts, gusting 55
kts.
>>
>> The incident happened at 13:55 local time
>> The flight LH 044 (D-AIQP), an A320 from MUC (Munich)
>> The landing runway was 23 LOC-DME (ATIS gave no other option)
>> after the go-around the pilots elected runway 33 also LOC-DME
approach
>> and landed safely but minus the left winglet...
>> immediately after the incident ATIS gave runway 23 and 33 as well
>
> For got the ATIS!
> EDDH 011220Z 29028G48KT 9000 -SHRA FEW011 BKN014 07/05 Q0984 TEMPO
> 29035G55KT 4000 SHRA BKN008
>

Well, it's not 90 degrees, though that'd only knock 15% off the figures,
and the 35 gusting 55 is a tempo. it;'s only the actual they're giving
on the approach that matters at the time and there's no way of finding
out what that was on th enet AFAIK, someone might.
It's immaterial, however. The drift angle as he crossed the threshold
wasn't excessive and it's pretty clear no attempt was made to put the
right wing down, which is what was needed. If he had the controls
crossed to nearly max and the drift was still excessive then he would
have been exceeding what was the practical limit for the airplane. He
didn't. It may be that he couldn't ( I've e-mailed an A320 driver of my
acquantence to find out) but the relevance to everyone else is, that
that is exactly what will happen to any airplane if you try and "kick it
straight" as you flare.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Totally agree. I can still see Bevo flying that thing. An
>>>>> absolutely wonderful airplane.
>>>>>
>>>> I must make an effort to get out in a Jungmannn one day. I have
>>>> heard a rumor of one for rent near a place I overnight in....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>> By all means do so if you can. I've not flown the Jungmann but I've
>>> been told it's a great bird.
>>> Closest I got was the Great Lakes. Good times for sure!
>>>
>>
>> I love the Lakes. I've only flown "new" ones, but a close friend has
>> a '29 with a 260 Franklin. he lives a long way from me ( but very
>> close to you) I'm hoping to meet up with him this summer.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Let me know when your coming. We'll have a few together.
>

Looking like april at the moment. My e-mail is a bit fuxored at the
moment, BTW. Can't send.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

William Hung > wrote in
:

> On Mar 3, 6:32*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> William Hung > wrote
>> innews:01d608a8-8d76-49a6-9dad-3bc6
> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 2, 7:57*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> William Hung > wrote
>> >> innews:bff1ba6f-28ab-44c0-884e-85cc
>> > :
>>
>> >> > On Mar 2, 5:25*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> wrote
>> >> >> :
>>
>> >> >> > We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>> >> >> > Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>
>> >> >> >http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>
>> >> >> > Nice pic:
>>
>> >> >> >http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
>> >> &filename=phpOltUWB
>> >> > ...
>>
>> >> >> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick
>> >> >> it straight"
>>
>> >> >> when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>
>> >> >> Bertie
>>
>> >> > Remnds me of this video.
>> >> > *http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9M3m1U-QYA
>>
>> >> > I can watch tis all day.
>>
>> >> Yeah, they are kicking i straight, though they are laying off a
>> >> bit of the drift by getting the wing down as the flare. The first
>> >> one has th edownwind wing donw slightly. Remember that this
>> >> exercise is intended to demonstrate what the airplane is capable
>> >> of and not to develop technique. I have a frined who flies the 777
>> >> and he tells me it flies just like an airplane. His first line
>> >> flight to LHR had mih landing in a strong crosswind. The trainer
>> >> next to him asked if he would prefer that he do th elanding, but
>> >> my friend pressed on and found it easy. Note that in each
>> >> touchdown, the alignment takes place after touchdown, and that th
>> >> etouchdonw is positive. the yaw towards alignment is done smoothly
>> >> and though you can't see it, they are almost certainly introducing
>> >> full aileron ( smoothly) to keep the wing down and to introduce
>> >> some very welcome adverse yaw.We used to have to land the 727 like
>> >> this and though it felt absolutley awful, it worked OK.
>>
>> >> Bertie- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > I heard the Helio also has crabbing gears. *Ia that right?
>>
>> Might do. I used to fly a 195 that had them. Awful, really.
>> The 737 has castering mains. It makes it a bit difficult to taxi,
>> actually (just go to to th esupermaket if you don't believe me)
>>
>
> Don't they have a locking option?


Nope. We had a 170 with them but we took them off because they were so
awful. THe 195 was a leaseback and the owner liked them.
>
>>
> sniped
>
>> setting would be 215, min 170 and so on. That sounds like a lot and
>> it is when you are used to it, but add to this the fact that the
>> flaps wear quickly if you put them out near the max speed and you
>> have an airplane you must keep an eye on, particularly if you're hand
>> flying.
>>
>
> That does sound like a lot of work.

Like anything, it's second nature when you get used to it, but even so,
it's one of the things we cross check carefully. Newer airplanes have
alarms for the high speed side so we don't bend them. Some have "load
relief" that retracts them automaticaly if you overspeed.
BTW, the DC-3 also has that feature!


>> thing you'd find a bit demanding. Although, how do you think you'd
>> cope with a 6,000 fpm plus rate of climb during take off or go
>> around? ;)
>
> I think I would cope with that with a big ****e eating grin, what do
> you think? :-))))


Depends on your level off altitude! You wou;dn't have time to grin if
you had to level off at 1500 feet, get the power back ( remember that
big trim change with power changes? ) and clean up without exceeding
flap speeds! Go-arounds and takeoffs with a low intercept altitude can
be very messy because of this.
>
>> That's what the 757 wil do lightly loaded.
>> Anyhow, to adress your point, more stable they are not. More
>> lumbering, maybe, but not more stable. But they need to be flown in a
>> more stable fashion.
>>
>
> See, that's the term that I have heard from many pro pilots 'more
> stable' and that gave me confidence. You tell me that it is 'more
> lumbering', that's probably a more accurate description.
>

Well, they're less flitty, but more stable is't realy what they are. ion
fact, as far as speed control goes they're considerably less stable than
a lightplane.
>>
>>
>> > Of course, not having any experience in them makes make my opinion
>> > just that, only an opinion.
>>
>> It's do-able, alright. I put a 16 year old from my model flying club
>> and put him an an old 737-200 sim years ago. I gave him about two
>> hours of
>
> Where do I get in line? :-)

There are guys who set these things up. A guy that used to work for us
set up these for corporate days out or anyone who wanted to try it. He
even bought an antiquated sim ( I think it was a 707 sim) but mostly he
bought spare time in very modern sims. I used to be able to get a spare
fifteen or thirty minutes in one at the end of a session, but not
anymore. I don't know what the deal is in the post 9-11 era with this
sort of deal, though.
Some of the older sims are still around ( old 737, 727) and some
airplanes use them for generic training and they might be available.


>
> Thanks for a great explanaton Bertie.

Yer welcome!

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Big John > wrote in
:



> Bertie
>
> Tell the story about when 727 first came out and a couple crashed
> during flare (one was at SLC as I remember).
>
> Bird was dirtiest aircraft I had seen up to that time when on final.
> With everything out and down and Stews dragging their feet out of back
> stair well didn't hardly look much different than a flying brick :o)


Oh yeah, it could get a sink rate going that was just horrific. Even
clean it comes down like a brick. THe speedbrakes are quite effective
too, so if you wanted to you could get down real fast compared to other
airliners.

>
> You can correct my remembrance. Bird started to get a bad name and
> lots of quick investigations took place. It was found that if pilots
> were sloppy flying the handbook airspeed on final and got just a
> couple of knots slow they couldn't flare the bird.


Well, you're right except the flare part. What was happening was that
thy would get a messy appraoch going and they would revert to their
previous experince on DC-6s and what not and just haul the power back
and get it going down. Problem with the 727 was that that rate could
easily top 3,000 fpm in just a few seconds and it could take eight
seconds or so for the engines to spool up to approach power again. The
drill with all of these airplanes is to be absolutely on the glide,
fully configured, with the speed at or at least close to, final approach
speed at 1,000', no later. This is a good idea in most jets, but
absolutely essential in the 727. I don't know the specifics of any of
the accidnets, but there was one in Chicago, I think, where they didn;t
even make the airfield. Lots of others, as you say, where the meeting
with the runway didn't go so good.


The fix was to
> change the operating manual and raised approach speed 3 or so knots
> (just a tweak) and bird became one of the best and safest birds
> flying.
>
> Correct me where I have remembered the details wrong.

Don;t know about the increased approach speed, but they might have. I
think the training was probably the key to it's improved record. The
guys flying it, even the military guys, were often coming off of
airplanes that you could toss around at will. The 727 really had to be
flown in a very stable way al the way down. One other thing they did at
some point before I flew it, was to delete the 40 flap position. All
they did was put a bolt on the flap gate to restrict it's movement!


Bertie
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Robert Moore > wrote in
46.128:

> Bertie wrote
>> The 737 has castering mains. It makes it a bit difficult to taxi,
>
> Are you sure? I don't recall that our (PanAm) 737s had castering
> mains. Of course, they were the early models.
>
> Bob Moore
>


Yeah, I flew really early 200s as well. They all had them. They didn't
tell you about it, though! If you're taxiing behind one and there is a
camber on the taxyway you can see it leaning, the mains both swung off
slightly. The nosewheel will be on the centerline and the mains not quite
centered. It's nickname in our place was "the shopping cart" because of
this. I have no idea why it wasn't in any of the pilot's manuals. Just a
nice to know rather than need to know, I guess.

Bertie

[Paul Riley]

Hey John,

Were you at Pleiku during the period May-Nov 68??

I flew with the 361st Aerial Weapons Company (Pink Panthers) at Camp
Holloway then (first half of second tour). Started with C-model Huey
gunships, we switched to the Cobra in about June if memory serves. I sure
did love that bird. :-)))

Paul

"Big John" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:11:30 -0800 (PST), William Hung
> > wrote:
>
>>On Mar 3, 10:08 am, Big John > wrote:
>>> -----------clip---------------
>>>
>>> I heard the Helio also has crabbing gears. Ia that right?
>>>
>>> ------------------------clip-----------------------
>>>
>>> Wil
>>>
>>> I flew the Helio Courier (USAF U-10) with castering gear.
>>>
>>> Felt crazy after landing and nose weather vaned into the cross wind.
>>>
>>> If you took off with gear unlocked you landed with it unlocked. This
>>> was to prevent a malfunction and only one gear locking if you tried to
>>> lock in air. Landing with one locked and one unlocked would probably
>>> cause an accident or ground loop at least.
>>>
>>> You could unlock in air for landing as no failure in unlocking system.
>>>
>>> I played with system to keep current but never had to use it in
>>> practice.
>>>
>>> Big John
>>
>>Did you fly in 'Nam John?
>>
>>WIl
>
> ************************************************** *********
>
> Yep.
>
> 0-1 and 0-2. (350+ combat hours)
>
> Ran II DASC at Pleiku during TET era (67-68).
>
> Big John
>

[Michael[_1_]]

On Mar 2, 9:17*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Then there's the FBW Airbusses.
> Every time I talk to one of those guys I walk away more confused about how
> the flight controls work than I was before.

And I hate to tell you this, but it shows.

A good friend of mine (and in fact the guy who taught me to fly my
Twin Comanche when I bought it) went from captain of the DC9 to 727 to
A320 to 757, and has a lot of good things to say about all of them -
except for the A320. We're both engineers by training, so it only
took him about an hour or two to explain that flight control system to
me. Mostly my response was "What?!?!?!?" and "You gotta be kidding."

It's a perfect example of what happens when you allow the engineers to
design the user interface. It usually turns into something only an
engineer will want to use.

I saw this video when someone emailed me a link to it - before I saw
this thread - and I knew right away what sort of plane it was. I
can't recognize them by sight - but from the way it was behaving, it
was obvious what the pilot was trying to do - and why it wasn't
letting him. Only then did I really believe my friend.

I know you mentioned proportional mode upthread - but it does not mean
what you think it means. You still can not command a deflection - or
anything that would act like a deflection. What you command is a
rate. In other words, down low it doesn't do what it does up high
(your understanding is correct there) but it still doesn't act like an
airplane.

You can not slip an A320 - not even down low. Try to find an A320
driver who is trained as an engineer (and not one who scraped by on
C's) and he will probably be able to explain it to you. Once you
understand it, you will understand why the pilot did what he did, why
the crosswing limit is so low, and why you probably wouldn't have done
any better.

Michael

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Michael > wrote in
:

> On Mar 2, 9:17*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Then there's the FBW Airbusses.
>> Every time I talk to one of those guys I walk away more confused
>> about how
>
>> the flight controls work than I was before.
>
> And I hate to tell you this, but it shows.
>

Not in this case.


> A good friend of mine (and in fact the guy who taught me to fly my
> Twin Comanche when I bought it) went from captain of the DC9 to 727 to
> A320 to 757, and has a lot of good things to say about all of them -
> except for the A320. We're both engineers by training, so it only
> took him about an hour or two to explain that flight control system to
> me. Mostly my response was "What?!?!?!?" and "You gotta be kidding."


Well, that i can believe.
>
> It's a perfect example of what happens when you allow the engineers to
> design the user interface. It usually turns into something only an
> engineer will want to use.


Couldn't agree more.

>
> I saw this video when someone emailed me a link to it - before I saw
> this thread - and I knew right away what sort of plane it was. I
> can't recognize them by sight - but from the way it was behaving, it
> was obvious what the pilot was trying to do - and why it wasn't
> letting him. Only then did I really believe my friend.
>

Well, it depends.

> I know you mentioned proportional mode upthread


No, I mentioned direct law.


- but it does not mean
> what you think it means.
You still can not command a deflection - or
> anything that would act like a deflection. What you command is a
> rate. In other words, down low it doesn't do what it does up high
> (your understanding is correct there) but it still doesn't act like an
> airplane.
>
> You can not slip an A320 - not even down low. Try to find an A320
> driver who is trained as an engineer (and not one who scraped by on
> C's) and he will probably be able to explain it to you. Once you
> understand it, you will understand why the pilot did what he did, why
> the crosswing limit is so low, and why you probably wouldn't have done
> any better.
>

Maybe, but it's besides the point. I made it clear that whoever or
whatever decided to handle the airplane in the way it was handled, it
was the wrong way. I didn't say I would have done any better, BTW, and
at no time did I blame the crew. The reason I posted it in the first
place was to dispel the urban legend that airliners were kciked straight
and to illustrate what happens when they are..


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Robert Moore > wrote in
46.128:

> Bertie wrote
>> The reason I posted it in the first place was to dispel the urban
>> legend that airliners were kciked straight and to illustrate what
>> happens when they are..
>
> I kicked Boeing jetliners straight for 25 years...B-707, B-727.
> Never had a problem.

Case of having to in both of those. I did it in the 727 and it workd, but
it's not as effective as putting a wing down. It's a much more stable way
of putting it down. No side load, the controls are already steady in the
positions best suited for th erollout and there's not a lot of juggling
going on to transition.
But the most disturbing thing I found about landing the 727-200 in a crab
was if the runway was narrow (say 150') and your mains were straddling the
centerline, the cockpit was nearly over the runway edge if the wind was
strong enough!



Bertie

[Roger[_4_]]

On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 17:37:43 -0500, Dudley Henriques
> wrote:

>Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> wrote in :
>>
>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>
>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>
>>> Nice pic:
>>>
>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB.jpg
>>>
>>
>>
>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it straight"
>> when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
>I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as an
>example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before realizing
>it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
>Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief
>Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>Glad they made it out of there.

Coming out of Logan International one day the guy beside me must have
noticed the white knuckle grip on the arm rest, when he asked if I was
OK. I just replied, "Sometimes it's better not to know what's going
on"

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Roger > wrote in
:

> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 17:37:43 -0500, Dudley Henriques
> > wrote:
>
>>Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> wrote in :
>>>
>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>
>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
&filename=phpOltUW
>>>> B.jpg
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>>I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as an
>>example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before
>>realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
>>Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief
>>Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>>Glad they made it out of there.
>
> Coming out of Logan International one day the guy beside me must have
> noticed the white knuckle grip on the arm rest, when he asked if I was
> OK. I just replied, "Sometimes it's better not to know what's going
> on"

I know the feeling and I know it well. It's a pilot thing, I think.
We're all control freaks.

Bertie
>

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Roger > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 17:37:43 -0500, Dudley Henriques
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> wrote in :
>>>>
>>>>> We had a couple of very windy days over here in Europe.
>>>>> Look at a crosswind landing of an A320 at HAM, a near crash:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185
>>>>>
>>>>> Nice pic:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887
> &filename=phpOltUW
>>>>> B.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Next time someone tries to tell you that airliners just "kick it
>>>> straight" when they land, like this guy did, show em this...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>> I just sent this out this afternoon to our human factors people as an
>>> example of how deeply a pilot has to fly into a problem before
>>> realizing it isn't going to solve using existing control authority.
>>> Absolutely amazing! This guy is on the way to a memo from the Chief
>>> Pilot's office fairly soon I would imagine.
>>> Glad they made it out of there.
>> Coming out of Logan International one day the guy beside me must have
>> noticed the white knuckle grip on the arm rest, when he asked if I was
>> OK. I just replied, "Sometimes it's better not to know what's going
>> on"
>
> I know the feeling and I know it well. It's a pilot thing, I think.
> We're all control freaks.
>
> Bertie
>
They showed this approach on FOX News tonight.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

>> I know the feeling and I know it well. It's a pilot thing, I think.
>> We're all control freaks.
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> They showed this approach on FOX News tonight.
>

Yeah, they're showing it everywhere! It's the rubberneck syndrome at it's
finest, eh?


Bertie

[Michael[_1_]]

On Mar 3, 3:48*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> > I know you mentioned proportional mode upthread
> No, I mentioned direct law.

My mistake. Point still holds. Direct law doesn't command a
deflection (or anything that acts like a deflection) either. I seem
to recall there is a mode that will allow you to command something
that acts a lot like a deflection - but it's considered a very
degraded mode, and you can't access it without pulling a bunch of
breakers.

> > You can not slip an A320 - not even down low.
> Maybe, but it's besides the point.

Um, no - that is the point. If you can't slip, you have no choice but
to crab and kick it out. You mentioned some airplanes that could not
be slipped because of physical limitations (scraping engines and such)
but this is a plane that can't be slipped because of SOFTWARE
limitations.

More than likely, the pilot had the stick all the way to the right
well before the left wing scraped - but you couldn't see it in the way
the plane flew. You can't command aileron deflection with the stick -
all you can command is the maximum available roll rate - and the
computer decides what that is, not you. And cross control confuses
it. And because of the autothrottle control (the one that yells
'retard' at you when it's time to land - no joke) that maintains a
constant ground speed (sic!), you really can't time it very well with
a lot of headwind because you float forever.

> I made it clear that whoever or
> whatever decided to handle the airplane in the way it was handled, it
> was the wrong way.

Because of the software, there is no right way. In most cases, the
demonstrated crosswind component is not really an operating limitation
(though I suppose under 121 it might legally be one - I've forgotten a
lot about that stuff since I took my ATP) because it all depends on
how the pilot handles it. But with the 320 it really is the limit -
because the software won't let you do what it takes to do better.

> I didn't say I would have done any better, BTW, and
> at no time did I blame the crew. The reason I posted it in the first
> place was to dispel the urban legend that airliners were kciked straight
> and to illustrate what happens when they are..

Except that some of them are - most because of physical limitations,
but this one because of the software.

Michael

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>>> I know the feeling and I know it well. It's a pilot thing, I think.
>>> We're all control freaks.
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> They showed this approach on FOX News tonight.
>>
>
> Yeah, they're showing it everywhere! It's the rubberneck syndrome at it's
> finest, eh?
>
>
> Bertie
It's amazing how interested" the public gets in aviation when you show
them things like this.

--
Dudley Henriques

[[email protected]]

On Mar 4, 9:23 am, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>
> It's amazing how interested" the public gets in aviation when you show
> them things like this.
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
today??"

No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
there."

And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.

Dan

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Michael > wrote in news:3373f079-bf99-
:




>

You missed the point completely.


For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it straight
technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the best way to go
whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp. Period. Endo of stoy. I
wasn't making any other point arguing anything else or entertaining any
other though. Finis Finito Spaghettio.



Bertie

[Michael[_1_]]

On Mar 4, 10:12*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> You missed the point completely.

No, I don't think so.

> For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it straight
> technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the best way to go
> whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp.

That's the part I disagree with. This was not a good demo of the kick
it straigh technique. It was a great demo of how to do it wrong.
That's because the computer doesn't know how, and won't let the human
do it. AFAIK, the chimp is probably still at the board meeting.
Watching that video tells you absolutely nothing about the relative
advantages and disadvantages of the kick it straight technique. It
demonstrates nothing other than the peculiarities of some poor
software.

Michael

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Michael > wrote in news:8ea1fe91-e284-
:

> On Mar 4, 10:12*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> You missed the point completely.
>
> No, I don't think so.
>
>> For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it straight
>> technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the best way to go
>> whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp.
>
> That's the part I disagree with.


Be my guest.




Bertie

[Michael Ash]

In rec.aviation.student Michael > wrote:
>> > You can not slip an A320 - not even down low.
>> Maybe, but it's besides the point.
>
> Um, no - that is the point. If you can't slip, you have no choice but
> to crab and kick it out. You mentioned some airplanes that could not
> be slipped because of physical limitations (scraping engines and such)
> but this is a plane that can't be slipped because of SOFTWARE
> limitations.

This makes me curious. If it's true that you can't slip the thing, and if
cross control only confuses the software, why does it have rudder pedals
at all? It seems like if you're going to go this far, you may as well take
them out, maybe replace them with a miniature foot jacuzzi for the pilot,
and let the computer handle the rudder since that's what it does anyway.
Is it just there so people don't freak out, or do those pedals still serve
some useful purpose?

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

[Al G[_1_]]

"Michael Ash" > wrote in message
...
> In rec.aviation.student Michael > wrote:
>>> > You can not slip an A320 - not even down low.
>>> Maybe, but it's besides the point.
>>
>> Um, no - that is the point. If you can't slip, you have no choice but
>> to crab and kick it out. You mentioned some airplanes that could not
>> be slipped because of physical limitations (scraping engines and such)
>> but this is a plane that can't be slipped because of SOFTWARE
>> limitations.
>
> This makes me curious. If it's true that you can't slip the thing, and if
> cross control only confuses the software, why does it have rudder pedals
> at all? It seems like if you're going to go this far, you may as well take
> them out, maybe replace them with a miniature foot jacuzzi for the pilot,
> and let the computer handle the rudder since that's what it does anyway.
> Is it just there so people don't freak out, or do those pedals still serve
> some useful purpose?
>
> --
> Michael Ash
> Rogue Amoeba Software

Evidently the Airbus software will allow you to use the rudder remove
the vertical stabilizer.

Al G

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

wrote:
> On Mar 4, 9:23 am, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> It's amazing how interested" the public gets in aviation when you show
>> them things like this.
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
> fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
> today??"
>
> No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
> non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
> there."
>
> And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
Well, you might not want to go quite as far as NASCAR. I know a lot of
people who are NASCAR fans. These people might be unique in racing.
If you put your theory up to them you just might get out alive by
dodging adeptly the empty Budweiser bottles coming your way.
:-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[[email protected]]

On Mar 4, 11:39 am, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> wrote:
> > On Mar 4, 9:23 am, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> >> It's amazing how interested" the public gets in aviation when you show
> >> them things like this.
>
> >> --
> >> Dudley Henriques
>
> > In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
> > fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
> > today??"
>
> > No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
> > non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
> > there."
>
> > And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.
>
> > Dan
>
> Well, you might not want to go quite as far as NASCAR. I know a lot of
> people who are NASCAR fans. These people might be unique in racing.
> If you put your theory up to them you just might get out alive by
> dodging adeptly the empty Budweiser bottles coming your way.
> :-))
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

True, true..

OK, SPRINT cars -- them folks i know is out fer blood!

Dan

[Ken S. Tucker]

Hi Michael.

On Mar 4, 7:26 am, Michael > wrote:
> On Mar 4, 10:12 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
....
> > For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it straight
> > technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the best way to go
> > whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp.
>
> That's the part I disagree with. This was not a good demo of the kick
> it straigh technique. It was a great demo of how to do it wrong.
> That's because the computer doesn't know how, and won't let the human
> do it. AFAIK, the chimp is probably still at the board meeting.
> Watching that video tells you absolutely nothing about the relative
> advantages and disadvantages of the kick it straight technique. It
> demonstrates nothing other than the peculiarities of some poor
> software.
> Michael

That software may have saved the plane, because
it knows the limitations of gyroscopic coupling that
the engines will force into the airframe and then
into the A/C attitude.

A *gentle* "kick it straight" from crabbing has limitations
of the rate of angular change, because you're torquing
large spinning turbofans, which act like gyros.

That sudden x-wind gust, took the landing way beyond
safe, or even possible. An ultra fast rotation applied by
the pilot may have throwen an engine, disengaged
blades, warped the airframe, overstressed bearings,
all of the above and more.

All and all, it was probably the best outcome to recover
from that anomalous gust....touch and go.
Ken
PS: I'd pay extra to have been on that plane!

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> Hi Michael.
>
> On Mar 4, 7:26 am, Michael > wrote:
>> On Mar 4, 10:12 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> ...
>> > For the very last time, I was pointing out that the kick it
>> > straight technique , so ably demonstrated in this clip is not the
>> > best way to go whether it's done by a human, computer or chimp.
>>
>> That's the part I disagree with. This was not a good demo of the
>> kick it straigh technique. It was a great demo of how to do it
>> wrong. That's because the computer doesn't know how, and won't let
>> the human do it. AFAIK, the chimp is probably still at the board
>> meeting. Watching that video tells you absolutely nothing about the
>> relative advantages and disadvantages of the kick it straight
>> technique. It demonstrates nothing other than the peculiarities of
>> some poor software.
>> Michael
>
> That software may have saved the plane, because
> it knows the limitations of gyroscopic coupling that
> the engines will force into the airframe and then
> into the A/C attitude.
>
> A *gentle* "kick it straight" from crabbing has limitations
> of the rate of angular change, because you're torquing
> large spinning turbofans, which act like gyros.
>
> That sudden x-wind gust, took the landing way beyond
> safe, or even possible. An ultra fast rotation applied by
> the pilot may have throwen an engine, disengaged
> blades, warped the airframe, overstressed bearings,
> all of the above and more.


Good grief.


>
> All and all, it was probably the best outcome to recover
> from that anomalous gust....touch and go.

Yes, I'm sure that's what you call a touch and go.


> Ken
> PS: I'd pay extra to have been on that plane!
>

Of course you would.


Bertie

[Al G[_1_]]

"James Robinson" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Al G" > wrote:
>>
>> Evidently the Airbus software will allow you to use the rudder
>> remove the vertical stabilizer.
>
> That was a non-FBW aircraft, (A-300) so software had nothing to do with
> it.

I sit corrected. :)

Al G

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

wrote:
> On Mar 4, 11:39 am, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> On Mar 4, 9:23 am, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>>>> It's amazing how interested" the public gets in aviation when you show
>>>> them things like this.
>>>> --
>>>> Dudley Henriques
>>> In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
>>> fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
>>> today??"
>>> No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
>>> non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
>>> there."
>>> And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.
>>> Dan
>> Well, you might not want to go quite as far as NASCAR. I know a lot of
>> people who are NASCAR fans. These people might be unique in racing.
>> If you put your theory up to them you just might get out alive by
>> dodging adeptly the empty Budweiser bottles coming your way.
>> :-))
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> True, true..
>
> OK, SPRINT cars -- them folks i know is out fer blood!
>
> Dan
You got it!! :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"gatt" > wrote in
:

>
>
>> I don't know if it's accurate or not, but I read that they were on
>> Runway 23 and the wind was 29029G43.
>
>
> I'm confused about something as well. The photo indicates that he
> was on RWY 33 and the reports indicate wind was out of 290. The
> video clearly shows that he was crabbing to the right by as much as
> about 30 degrees. The math doesn't add up, does it?
>
> http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB.j
> pg
>
> Either that, or the perspective is skewed in the photo and the "33-15"
> sign doesn't correspond to his runway.
>

It's a maekr indicating that the intersection of 33/15 is approaching. He
was on 23


Bertie

[gatt[_2_]]

> I don't know if it's accurate or not, but I read that they were on
> Runway 23 and the wind was 29029G43.


I'm confused about something as well. The photo indicates that he was on
RWY 33 and the reports indicate wind was out of 290. The video clearly
shows that he was crabbing to the right by as much as about 30 degrees.
The math doesn't add up, does it?

http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=536882887&filename=phpOltUWB.jpg

Either that, or the perspective is skewed in the photo and the "33-15" sign
doesn't correspond to his runway.

-c

[gatt[_2_]]

"William Hung" > wrote in message
...

> The good old days, sure mis them. I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
> and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
> PanAm crew. Too bad I lost that wing.
>
> The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from firemen
> and badges from policemen. I jnow the firemen still give out
> fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that kidslook
> up to anymore. At least not around here.

Two years ago I stopped a gaggle of shoppers from jaywalking into traffic in
downtown Portland. After they finally crossed, an officer that was standing
right there poked my arm and then gave me a Junior Crime Fighter sticker.
Apparently he'd been passing them out to kids. I hadn't even noticed him
there. But, no matter.

I'm a Junior Crime Fighter. Respect my authoritah!

As for the airlines, I must have kept my United and Continental wings until
I was a teenager. I can still remember what they looked like. If you think
about it, that's some inexpensive long-term advertising.

-c

[Jim Stewart]

gatt wrote:
> "William Hung" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> The good old days, sure mis them. I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
>> and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
>> PanAm crew. Too bad I lost that wing.
>>
>> The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from firemen
>> and badges from policemen. I jnow the firemen still give out
>> fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that kidslook
>> up to anymore. At least not around here.
>
> Two years ago I stopped a gaggle of shoppers from jaywalking into traffic in
> downtown Portland. After they finally crossed, an officer that was standing
> right there poked my arm and then gave me a Junior Crime Fighter sticker.
> Apparently he'd been passing them out to kids. I hadn't even noticed him
> there. But, no matter.
>
> I'm a Junior Crime Fighter. Respect my authoritah!
>
> As for the airlines, I must have kept my United and Continental wings until
> I was a teenager. I can still remember what they looked like. If you think
> about it, that's some inexpensive long-term advertising.

I kept a pair of PanAm headphones. Does that count?

[gatt[_2_]]

"Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
.. .
> gatt wrote:
>> "William Hung" > wrote in message

>> As for the airlines, I must have kept my United and Continental wings
>> until I was a teenager. I can still remember what they looked like. If
>> you think about it, that's some inexpensive long-term advertising.
>
> I kept a pair of PanAm headphones. Does that count?


More or less, depending on whether it's the newfangled electric ones with
hair gel and earwax all over the felt pads, or the old air-tube style (one
step above the tin-can-and-string model)

[Big John[_2_]]

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 13:53:45 -0800, Jim Stewart >
wrote:

>gatt wrote:
>> "William Hung" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> The good old days, sure mis them. I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
>>> and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
>>> PanAm crew. Too bad I lost that wing.
>>>
>>> The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from firemen
>>> and badges from policemen. I jnow the firemen still give out
>>> fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that kidslook
>>> up to anymore. At least not around here.
>>
>> Two years ago I stopped a gaggle of shoppers from jaywalking into traffic in
>> downtown Portland. After they finally crossed, an officer that was standing
>> right there poked my arm and then gave me a Junior Crime Fighter sticker.
>> Apparently he'd been passing them out to kids. I hadn't even noticed him
>> there. But, no matter.
>>
>> I'm a Junior Crime Fighter. Respect my authoritah!
>>
>> As for the airlines, I must have kept my United and Continental wings until
>> I was a teenager. I can still remember what they looked like. If you think
>> about it, that's some inexpensive long-term advertising.
>
>I kept a pair of PanAm headphones. Does that count?

************************************************

Did they ever 'spread legs' :o)

Big John

[Blueskies]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message ...
>>> Great Lakes or a Jungmann, to be honest.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> Jungmeister for sure :-))
>>
>
> Yeah, I know someone who had one before I met him. ******* sold it so I
> never got to fly it!:(
> just one of the prettiest airplanes ever.
>
>
> Bertie

What about a Stampe?

Finally did a flight in a Pitts S2 a couple years ago. The elevator is soft, and inverted I pushed -4 on the meter, just
a twitch, and the GIB didn't like that much ;-)

[Bertie the Bunyip]

On 5 Mar, 22:57, "Blueskies" > wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in .com...
>
> >>> Great Lakes or a Jungmann, to be honest.
>
> >>> Bertie
>
> >> Jungmeister for sure :-))
>
> > Yeah, I know someone who had one before I met him. ******* sold it so I
> > never got to fly it!:(
> > just one of the prettiest airplanes ever.
>
> > Bertie
>
> What about a Stampe?
>

Nice, kinda weird ailerons, though. The top ones are real loose on
most and I worried about flutter, but it doesn't seem to be a problem.
Nearly bought one cheap years ago. Lucky I didn't as they have some
serious issues with the fuselage getting oil soaked. You can easily
spend as much on them as you bought them for getting it sorted. Very
like the Great lakes, though. Very pleasant to fly and they have funky
cantankerous engines too! (that's a plus in my book)


Bertie

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 4, 4:33*pm, "gatt" > wrote:
> "William Hung" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > The good old days, sure mis them. I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
> > and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
> > PanAm crew. Too bad I lost that wing.
>
> > The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from firemen
> > and badges from policemen. I jnow the firemen still give out
> > fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that kidslook
> > up to anymore. At least not around here.
>
> Two years ago I stopped a gaggle of shoppers from jaywalking into traffic in
> downtown Portland. *After they finally crossed, an officer that was standing
> right there poked my arm and then gave me a Junior Crime Fighter sticker.
> Apparently he'd been passing them out to kids. *I hadn't even noticed him
> there. But, no matter.
>
> I'm a Junior Crime Fighter. * Respect my authoritah!
>
> As for the airlines, I must have kept my United and Continental wings until
> I was a teenager. *I can still remember what they looked like. *If you think
> about it, that's some inexpensive long-term advertising.
>
> -c

Good to hear that there are still some out there doing that.

Wil

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 3, 11:43*am, Big John > wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:10:55 -0800 (PST), William Hung
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >On Mar 3, 10:44*am, Big John > wrote:
> >> ---------------------clip-----------------
>
> >> The good old days, sure mis them. *I flew in a PanAm 747 a few imes
> >> and an Eatern 727 once as a kid and remember getting the wing from the
> >> PanAm crew. *Too bad I lost that wing.
>
> >> The good old days when kids get wings from pilots, fire hats from
> >> firemen and badges from policemen. *I jnow the firemen still give out
> >> fire hats at open houses, but the cops are no longer someone that
> >> kidslook up to anymore. *At least not around here.
>
> >> *********************************
>
> >> Wil
>
> >> Are you talking about the "Leg Spreaders" they used to hand out?
>
> >> I still have a set in my box of old airplane memorabilia :o)
>
> >> Big John
>
> >Don't quite follow you with the "Leg Spreaders", but if you are
> >refering to the bush jumpers wings, I've seen them. lol *I meant the
> >plastic captain's wings that they gave out. :-)
>
> >Thinking back, I remember we kids would run up to police cars when
> >they showed up in our 'hood'. *We would bug them to turn on the sirens
> >and lights and they would hand out plastic badges. *Now kids look the
> >other way when they see cops.
>
> >Shame really.
>
> >Wil
>
> ************************************************** ***
>
> Wil
>
> In olden days pilots were a good catch for young ladies. If you had a
> set of wings to wear it was half the battle :o) They all wanted to go
> out with you :o)
>
> The wings were metal like real ones but nothing in center saying what
> airline, etc.
>
> These were probably even before Berties time :o)
>
> Big John- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

So john, tell us about soe of your sorties in Nam. I would also like
to hear some of the R&R stories as well.

Wil

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 3, 11:46*am, Big John > wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:11:30 -0800 (PST), William Hung
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >On Mar 3, 10:08*am, Big John > wrote:
> >> -----------clip---------------
>
> >> I heard the Helio also has crabbing gears. *Ia that right?
>
> >> ------------------------clip-----------------------
>
> >> Wil
>
> >> I flew the Helio Courier (USAF U-10) with castering gear.
>
> >> Felt crazy after landing and nose weather vaned into the cross wind.
>
> >> If you took off with gear unlocked you landed with it unlocked. This
> >> was to prevent a malfunction and only one gear locking if you tried to
> >> lock in air. Landing with one locked and one unlocked would probably
> >> cause an accident or ground loop at least.
>
> >> You could unlock in air for landing as no failure in unlocking system.
>
> >> I played with system to keep current but never had to use it in
> >> practice.
>
> >> Big John
>
> >Did you fly in 'Nam John?
>
> >WIl
>
> ************************************************** *********
>
> Yep.
>
> 0-1 and 0-2. (350+ combat hours)
>
> Ran II DASC at Pleiku during TET era (67-68).
>
> Big John- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Is the 0-2 the Skymaster? Saw a great movie some years back that has
a nice 0-2 flying scenes, think it might have been 'Flight of the
Intruder'.

Wil

[WJRFlyBoy]

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 11:39:23 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

>> In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
>> fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
>> today??"
>>
>> No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
>> non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
>> there."
>>
>> And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.
>>
>> Dan
>>
> Well, you might not want to go quite as far as NASCAR. I know a lot of
> people who are NASCAR fans. These people might be unique in racing.

Not might be, are unique. Though they are parallel matched with the least
complex form of professional motor racing that has mass appeal.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

WJRFlyBoy wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 11:39:23 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
>>> In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
>>> fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
>>> today??"
>>>
>>> No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
>>> non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
>>> there."
>>>
>>> And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>> Well, you might not want to go quite as far as NASCAR. I know a lot of
>> people who are NASCAR fans. These people might be unique in racing.
>
> Not might be, are unique. Though they are parallel matched with the least
> complex form of professional motor racing that has mass appeal.


No big thing, but please do me a favor watch your quotes in replies to
my comments. I didn't write the paragraph you attributed to me above.
That was written by the poster I was answering. Don't know about you,
but I've found defending my own quotes on Usenet is hard enough without
defending someone else's :-)))
Many thanks.

Many thanks.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Big John[_2_]]

--------------clip---------------

So john, tell us about some of your sorties in Nam. I would also like
to hear some of the R&R stories as well.

Wil


************************************************** ****************

Will

Nam was very much like other conflict/wars.

Lost some close friends and acquaintances.
Killed enemy.
Got shot at.

I was in the FAC business. Besides being Director of II DASC flew a
combat sortie on average of every other day when I had paper work
done.

I lost two of my pilotsout of about 35 during my tour.

First was buzzing returning from mission and ran into a tree top
killing him and the ARVN observer.

Other was in mountainous terrain and a high wind that day. Just never
came back and never found. Best guess was that he got trapped in a
canyon and with wind and mountain gusts couldn't get turned around????

My order of best close air support fighters 'in country'.

Spooky's in a class by them selves.

A-1 and AT-37 about equal and best for close air support. Both slow,
long mission duration so could hold over battlefield and wall to wall
ordnance.

F-100 good all around bird. Could normally hit target.

F-4 not a good CAS bird. Very hard to get them to hit marked target.

F-105. During bombing pause in north, sent me a flight of 105's to use
in troops in contact. With TIC you had to be very careful not to hit
your friendly's. When the 105's checked in they said all they could
give me was one pass. I marked target and they rolled in as a flight
from 20k pickled everything and with the burners running pulled out
and headed for home in Thailand. They threw bombs all over the area
and just lucky they were so poor a shot or they would have killed
some friendly's. Their delivery was what they did in north VN but
worthless in south VN. I called Saigon and told them not to send any
more 105's to Two Corps and what had happened. They then just gave the
105's a stand down in Thailand.

During TET I launched after things broke (about 01:00) and flew till
dawn to have a FAC airborne. They started shooting at me and I could
see the tracers so just turned my lights off and flew blacked out.

Had a flight of F-100's and we had just poked a hornets nest when my
engine quit :o( Didn't wan't to go down where we had stirred them up
so did all the good things and finally got engine running again. told
the flight leader I had lost engine and he offered to escort me back
to home base. I told him to stay with me until I got back over Hwy 1
(which ran the full length of county north and south and had lots of
friendly traffic all day on it). When I got over Hwy told fighters
thanks and released them and both of us flew home. Bird check out ok
on ground so was kept on schedule. A couple of days latter it did the
same thing with one of my pilots and he also made it back. We took to
support Sq and they put a new engine in. Looking back, I think the
problem was probably the mixture. We ran pretty lean as SOP.

Got a call one day from Spooky CO and wanted a joint mission with a
FAC. There was a village near Pleiku that was giving them ground fire
on their night missions. Rendezvoused with the Gooney after dark and
they started dropping flares. I flew under the flares where I could be
seen from ground. As soon as I started getting fire, Spooky opened up
and zapped them. We did this several times until they had cleaned out
that nest.

Nothing like D-day but each day was something new for me.

On numerous occasions had Army troops come up to me and thank me for
saving their life. Told them our mission was to help the Grunts :o)

Just some more ramblings Will.

Was ALO to 7th ARVN at My Tho. Story was told that Martha Ray had
visited a few weeks before I arrived and she got in 0-1 and was taken
on a combat mission. Saigon turned their eyes on her activities in VN.
Troops at all levels loved her maybe more than Bob Hope as she went to
the small units that Bob didn't visit. He did good but she may have
done better. She also had nurses training and helped medically on many
occasions. Sorry to see her pass.

Provided back up support for some Seal operations.

Landed by a line of idling Huey's. One didn't have his collective full
flat pitch. As I went buy the down wash blew me over almost on my
back.

Army Hueys used to land at our little laterite (clay) strip to refuel
and re-arm. In heat of summer with full fuel and a full load of 2.75
Inch FFAR's they couldn't lift off and then accelerate to translation
so they would put on max power and max blade rotation (both probably
over red line?) and then add collective and bird would jump in air and
then fall back to ground. They kept some forward stick in and each
time they jumped they got a little more forward speed and eventually
they got into translation and started flying. As their speed built up
they then could start to climb. These takeoffs always scared me as
they fell back and hit so hard. I expected them to explode but all I
watched made it ok.

We may have some chopper pilots who can expand on this technique???

Went to Hong Kong and landing at the old airport was just like I had
read about. Buildings above final approach altitude off both wing tips
and wheels just above roof tops. Touch down and full brakes and
reverse and just stopped 100 feet from end of runway (and harbor)
normal landing.

Enough chit chat. All from a time long ago and a war far away.

Big John

[Big John[_2_]]

...............clip................

Is the 0-2 the Skymaster? Saw a great movie some years back that has
a nice 0-2 flying scenes, think it might have been 'Flight of the
Intruder'.

Wil

************************************************** *******************

Wil

Not flight of Intruder. That was a Navy A-6 movie. Name was "Bat 21".

Pilot got shot down and was given vectors based on a golf course he
had played to a pick up point by SF troops.

Yes 0-2A was FAC Skymaster.

Didn't like it as a FAC bird.

Start a turn around a target and after 180 degrees would get stall
warning and have to go to METO power.

Took lots of technique to put Willie Pete (marking rockets) on small
target vs 0-1.

Had hydraulic pump on only one engine and if you lost that engine on
take off, before you got gear up, bird was marginal single engine and
dirty configuration.

One of reasons Air Force bought bird was to use on
trail (replacing 0-1's). Only problem was that if on trail and lost a
engine the single engine altitude was not high enough to fly over the
mountains to get home to south VN. Maybe make it VFR but not night or
IFR en route.

My last GA flight was in a 337 my buddy wanted me to fly for him. Hit
a big buzzard and almost tore a wing off :o(

Need to do some things around house.

Bye

Big John

[WJRFlyBoy]

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 09:59:25 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

> WJRFlyBoy wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 11:39:23 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:
>>
>>>> In this case, they're "interested in aviation" in the same way NASCAR
>>>> fans are interested in internal combustion -- "Gonna be a cool wreck
>>>> today??"
>>>>
>>>> No matter how much reason you apply, the average person (non-pilot,
>>>> non-enthusiast) puts up with flying -- they don't like being "up
>>>> there."
>>>>
>>>> And, if you think about it, you can't really blame them.
>>>>
>>>> Dan
>>>>
>>> Well, you might not want to go quite as far as NASCAR. I know a lot of
>>> people who are NASCAR fans. These people might be unique in racing.
>>
>> Not might be, are unique. Though they are parallel matched with the least
>> complex form of professional motor racing that has mass appeal.
>
> No big thing, but please do me a favor watch your quotes in replies to
> my comments. I didn't write the paragraph you attributed to me above.
> That was written by the poster I was answering. Don't know about you,
> but I've found defending my own quotes on Usenet is hard enough without
> defending someone else's :-)))
> Many thanks.
>
> Many thanks.
------------------------------------------------------------

/Well, you might not want to go quite as far as NASCAR. I know a lot of
people who are NASCAR fans. These people might be unique in racing.
If you put your theory up to them you just might get out alive by
dodging adeptly the empty Budweiser bottles coming your way.
:-))

--
Dudley Henriques/

Sorry, I was and did respond to the above. Must be my reader.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

WJRFlyBoy wrote:

on quotes;

No sweat. :-)))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Blueskies]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> On 5 Mar, 22:57, "Blueskies" > wrote:
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in .com...
>>
>> >>> Great Lakes or a Jungmann, to be honest.
>>
>> >>> Bertie
>>
>> >> Jungmeister for sure :-))
>>
>> > Yeah, I know someone who had one before I met him. ******* sold it so I
>> > never got to fly it!:(
>> > just one of the prettiest airplanes ever.
>>
>> > Bertie
>>
>> What about a Stampe?
>>
>
> Nice, kinda weird ailerons, though. The top ones are real loose on
> most and I worried about flutter, but it doesn't seem to be a problem.
> Nearly bought one cheap years ago. Lucky I didn't as they have some
> serious issues with the fuselage getting oil soaked. You can easily
> spend as much on them as you bought them for getting it sorted. Very
> like the Great lakes, though. Very pleasant to fly and they have funky
> cantankerous engines too! (that's a plus in my book)
>
>
> Bertie

Yea..I like the lines and many seem to like the handling. I saw one somewhere with an opposed 4 in it and thought it was
blasphemy...

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Blueskies" > wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> news:8c8e8d28-970b-4b97-afc5-986642eb93e0
@n36g2000hse.googlegroups.com.
> ..
>> On 5 Mar, 22:57, "Blueskies" > wrote:
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in
>>> .com...
>>>
>>> >>> Great Lakes or a Jungmann, to be honest.
>>>
>>> >>> Bertie
>>>
>>> >> Jungmeister for sure :-))
>>>
>>> > Yeah, I know someone who had one before I met him. ******* sold it
>>> > so I never got to fly it!:(
>>> > just one of the prettiest airplanes ever.
>>>
>>> > Bertie
>>>
>>> What about a Stampe?
>>>
>>
>> Nice, kinda weird ailerons, though. The top ones are real loose on
>> most and I worried about flutter, but it doesn't seem to be a
>> problem. Nearly bought one cheap years ago. Lucky I didn't as they
>> have some serious issues with the fuselage getting oil soaked. You
>> can easily spend as much on them as you bought them for getting it
>> sorted. Very like the Great lakes, though. Very pleasant to fly and
>> they have funky cantankerous engines too! (that's a plus in my book)
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Yea..I like the lines and many seem to like the handling. I saw one
> somewhere with an opposed 4 in it and thought it was blasphemy...
>
>

Yeah, I've seen a couple on barnstormers like that. You'd wonder why
they don't at least re-engine with a LOM. I looked at a couple with the
original engines. They made them with to different engines, a Renault
and a Gypsy. THey each had peculiar carberated inverted systems. This is
from memory, so for what it;s worth, the british Gypsy had a lever in
the cockpit that operated a shutoff/bypass to the float chamber,
effecting a direct feed from the header tank to the carb jets. This is
supposed to have worked quite well and was relatively idiot proof but
made the throttle a thing to be handled very carefully if a rich cut was
to be avoided. The Renault had a twin carb setup, one upright and one
inverted. I believe the Buckers had a similar setup. The Renault was
idiot proof and just needed to be set up properly on the ground.
There are still lots of them flitting around Europe and they command big
bucks! I think most have had the fuselage problems dealt with at this
point.

Bertie

[Roger[_4_]]

On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:18:39 -0600, Big John >
wrote:

>--------------clip---------------
>
>So john, tell us about some of your sorties in Nam. I would also like
>to hear some of the R&R stories as well.
>
>Wil
>
>
>************************************************** ****************
>
>Will
>
>Nam was very much like other conflict/wars.
>
>Lost some close friends and acquaintances.
>Killed enemy.
>Got shot at.
>
>I was in the FAC business. Besides being Director of II DASC flew a
>combat sortie on average of every other day when I had paper work
>done.
>
>I lost two of my pilotsout of about 35 during my tour.
>
>First was buzzing returning from mission and ran into a tree top
>killing him and the ARVN observer.
>
>Other was in mountainous terrain and a high wind that day. Just never
>came back and never found. Best guess was that he got trapped in a
>canyon and with wind and mountain gusts couldn't get turned around????
>
>My order of best close air support fighters 'in country'.
>
>Spooky's in a class by them selves.

My cousin played bait/target in the little Bell 47s.
He also flew Hueys (with guns on skids). Took in a bunch of troops,
came under fire. Used Huey to block fire and took out enemy. Huey went
down and burned with all on board. He didn't get out. Had Silver Star
waiting from previous mission that he never knew he earned.

It was written up on popasmoke. There used to be quite a story there,
but I see they just have the essentials now..
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Big John]

On 06 Mar 2008 20:37:40 GMT, Robert Moore >
wrote:

>Big John wrote
>> I was in the FAC business. Besides being Director of II DASC flew a
>> combat sortie on average of every other day when I had paper work
>> done.
>
>John, ever run into a FAC pilot named Richard J. Smith? Later became
>KC-135 Wing Commander at Fairchild. He probably retired in the mid 70's
>and moved to Miami where I met him.
>
>Bob Moore


********************

Bob

Name doesn't srike a bell. Sorry.

Big John

[Big John[_2_]]

On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 16:07:51 -0400, John Smith > wrote:

>> >> I was in the FAC business. Besides being Director of II DASC flew a
>> >> combat sortie on average of every other day when I had paper work
>> >> done.
>
>Sorry I am coming to this discussion late...
>Big John, did you mention which aircraft you flew as a FAC?
>I have read a couple of books on the O-1's (Army, Air Force, RAVENs),
>OV-10's (Marines), and F-100 "Fast-FACs")
************************************************** ***********

John

0-1 & 0-2A

Big John

[Big John[_2_]]

On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:32:37 -0500, Roger >
wrote:

>On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:18:39 -0600, Big John >
>wrote:
>
>>--------------clip---------------
>>
>>So john, tell us about some of your sorties in Nam. I would also like
>>to hear some of the R&R stories as well.
>>
>>Wil
>>
>>
>>************************************************** ****************
>>
>>Will
>>
>>Nam was very much like other conflict/wars.
>>
>>Lost some close friends and acquaintances.
>>Killed enemy.
>>Got shot at.
>>
>>I was in the FAC business. Besides being Director of II DASC flew a
>>combat sortie on average of every other day when I had paper work
>>done.
>>
>>I lost two of my pilotsout of about 35 during my tour.
>>
>>First was buzzing returning from mission and ran into a tree top
>>killing him and the ARVN observer.
>>
>>Other was in mountainous terrain and a high wind that day. Just never
>>came back and never found. Best guess was that he got trapped in a
>>canyon and with wind and mountain gusts couldn't get turned around????
>>
>>My order of best close air support fighters 'in country'.
>>
>>Spooky's in a class by them selves.
>
>My cousin played bait/target in the little Bell 47s.
>He also flew Hueys (with guns on skids). Took in a bunch of troops,
>came under fire. Used Huey to block fire and took out enemy. Huey went
>down and burned with all on board. He didn't get out. Had Silver Star
>waiting from previous mission that he never knew he earned.
>
>It was written up on popasmoke. There used to be quite a story there,
>but I see they just have the essentials now..
>Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>www.rogerhalstead.com

************************************************** ***********************
Roger

Sorry to hear about your cousin.

There were a lot of Choppers getting shot up and down lifting troops
into hot LZ's. They came to the Air Force in my Corps and asked us to
prep the LZ just before arrival of the troops in the choppers.

After the troops landed and made it into the tree line, we (Air Force)
would turn the CAS over to the Gun Ships. Our FAC would stay in area
and contact with ground commander for a while to see what developed
and if things got too hot for the Gun Ships we brought some fast
movers back to provide heavy support.

After this change in tactics it became rare for troops to go into a
hot LZ.

Big John

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 6, 3:53*pm, Big John > wrote:
> ..............clip................
>
> Is the 0-2 the Skymaster? *Saw a great movie some years back that has
> a nice 0-2 flying scenes, think it might have been 'Flight of the
> Intruder'.
>
> Wil
>
> ************************************************** *******************
>
> Wil
>
> Not flight of Intruder. That was a Navy A-6 movie. Name was "Bat 21".

Ah yes that's what is was, "Bat 21" I loved how the 02 flew. Saw
some going for 50ish and some for over a 100, Riley Rocket I think
they are called.

>
> Pilot got shot down and was given vectors based on a golf course he
> had played to a pick up point by SF troops.
>
> Yes 0-2A was FAC Skymaster.
>
> Didn't like it as a FAC bird.
>
> Start a turn around a target and after 180 degrees would get stall
> warning and have to go to METO power.
>
> Took lots of technique to put Willie *Pete (marking rockets) on small
> target vs 0-1.
>

The 01 being the L-19 Cessna?

> Had hydraulic pump on only one engine and if you lost that engine on
> take off, before you got gear up, bird was marginal single engine and
> dirty configuration.
>
> One of reasons Air Force bought bird was to use on
> trail (replacing 0-1's). Only problem was that if on trail and lost a
> engine the single engine altitude was not high enough to fly over the
> mountains to get home to south VN. Maybe make it VFR but not night or
> IFR en route.
>
> My last GA flight was in a 337 my buddy wanted me to fly for him. Hit
> a big buzzard and almost tore a wing off :o(
>
> Need to do some things around house.
>

Honey dos? Know the feeling.

Wil

> Bye
>
> Big John

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 6, 3:18*pm, Big John > wrote:
> --------------clip---------------
>
> So john, tell us about some of your sorties in Nam. *I would also like
> to hear some of the R&R stories as well.
>
> Wil
>
> ************************************************** ****************
>
> Will
>
> Nam was very much like other conflict/wars.
>
> Lost some close friends and acquaintances.
> Killed enemy.
> Got shot at.
>
> I was in the FAC business. Besides being Director of II DASC flew a
> combat sortie on average of every other day when I had paper work
> done.
>
> I lost two of my pilotsout of about 35 during my tour.
>
> First was buzzing returning from mission and ran into a tree top
> killing him and the ARVN observer.
>
> Other was in mountainous terrain and a high wind that day. Just never
> came back and never found. Best guess was that he got trapped in a
> canyon and with wind and mountain gusts couldn't get turned around????
>
> My order of best close air support fighters 'in country'.
>
> Spooky's in a class by them selves.
>
> A-1 and AT-37 about equal and best for close air support. Both slow,
> long mission duration so could hold over battlefield and wall to wall
> ordnance.
>
> F-100 good all around bird. Could normally hit target.
>
> F-4 not a good CAS bird. Very hard to get them to hit marked target.
>
> F-105. During bombing pause in north, sent me a flight of 105's to use
> in troops in contact. With TIC you had to be very careful not to hit
> your friendly's. When the 105's checked in they said all they could
> give me was one pass. I marked target and they rolled in as a flight
> from 20k pickled everything and with the burners running pulled out
> and headed for home in Thailand. They threw bombs all over the area
> and just lucky they were so poor a *shot or they would have killed
> some friendly's. Their delivery was what they did in north VN but
> worthless in south VN. I called Saigon and told them not to send any
> more 105's to Two Corps and what had happened. They then just gave the
> 105's a stand down in Thailand.
>
> During TET I launched after things broke (about 01:00) and flew till
> dawn to have a FAC airborne. They started shooting at me and I could
> see the tracers so just turned my lights off and flew blacked out.
>
> Had a flight of F-100's and we had just poked a hornets nest when my
> engine quit :o( Didn't wan't to go down where we had stirred them up
> so did all the good things and finally got engine running again. told
> the flight leader I had lost engine and he offered to escort me back
> to home base. I told him to stay with me until I got back over Hwy 1
> (which ran the full length of county north and south and had lots of
> friendly traffic all day on it). When I got over Hwy told fighters
> thanks and released them and both of us flew home. Bird check out ok
> on ground so was kept on schedule. A couple of days latter it did the
> same thing with one of my pilots and he also made it back. We took to
> support Sq and they put a new engine in. Looking back, I think the
> problem was probably the mixture. We ran pretty lean as SOP.
>
> Got a call one day from Spooky CO and wanted a joint mission with a
> FAC. There was a village near Pleiku that was giving them ground fire
> on their night missions. Rendezvoused with the Gooney after dark and
> they started dropping flares. I flew under the flares where I could be
> seen from ground. As soon as I started getting fire, Spooky opened up
> and zapped them. We did this several times until they had cleaned out
> that nest.
>
> Nothing like D-day but each day was something new for me.
>
> On numerous occasions had Army troops come up to me and thank me for
> saving their life. Told them our mission was to help the Grunts :o)
>
> Just some more ramblings Will.
>
> Was ALO to 7th ARVN at My Tho. Story was told that Martha Ray had
> visited a few weeks before I arrived and she got in 0-1 and was taken
> on a combat mission. Saigon turned their eyes on her activities in VN.
> Troops at all levels loved her maybe more than Bob Hope as she went to
> the small units that Bob didn't visit. He did good but she may have
> done better. She also had nurses training and helped medically on many
> occasions. Sorry to see her pass.
>
> Provided back up support for some Seal operations.
>
> Landed by a line of idling Huey's. One didn't have his collective full
> flat pitch. As I went buy the down wash blew me over almost on my
> back.
>
> Army Hueys used to land at our little laterite (clay) strip to refuel
> and re-arm. In heat of summer with full fuel and a full load of 2.75
> Inch FFAR's they couldn't lift off and then accelerate to translation
> so they would put on max power and max blade rotation (both probably
> over red line?) and then add collective and bird would jump in air and
> then fall back to ground. They kept some forward stick in and each
> time they jumped they got a little more forward speed and eventually
> they got into translation and started flying. As their speed built up
> they then could start to climb. These takeoffs always scared me as
> they fell back and hit so hard. I expected them to explode but all I
> watched made it ok.
>
> We may have some chopper pilots who can expand on this technique???
>
> Went to Hong Kong and landing at the old airport was just like I had
> read about. Buildings above final approach altitude off both wing tips
> and wheels just above roof tops. Touch down and full brakes and
> reverse and just stopped 100 feet from end of runway (and harbor)
> normal landing.
>
> Enough chit chat. All from a time long ago and a war far away.
>
> Big John

Thanks John. Great reading, you should write some more and some day
put them all together into a book.

Wil