If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
John wrote: If we assume we all fly well (either direction), and we all understand the importance of controlling airspeed during landing, why is the number one pilot error that is causing injury the stall/spin while turning to land? A) Because stall/spins at altitude aren't as often fatal B) Because a huge portion of the time flying, pulling back on the stick gives an instantaneous zoom up. This is even true of airline pilots. Because the aircraft is flown so often on the front side of the curve, despite knowing and training that pulling back on the stick doesn't always make the aircraft go up, seeing it happen that way the last bijillion times you did it is sometimes psychologically compelling. I'd be willing to bet that the ratio of stall/spin fatalities to other causes is very different depending on the recency and number of stalls the pilot has performed. I'd bet CFIs who regularly instruct these things have a much lower ratio while acting as PIC in normal solo flight than other pilots. The airlines seem to know this and that's why they love those simulators. On the bad side, some of the airlines sim check pilots don't force the plane into a stall that the pilot must recover from, and I suspect that some pilots who avoid stalls in the sim may not see them for a long time, and may not recover correctly when they unexpectedly occur. I think some recency in stall practice is really important. Of course I also stopped my prop and dove for air-restart yesterday to stay current in that too... Nothing like recent practice to remind one of the hazards... -- ------------+ Mark Boyd Avenal, California, USA |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Chris OCallaghan wrote:
John, this is the value of the trim handle. By resetting it, if you become momentarily distracted, you are less likely to let the nose float up. I had an interesting trim quandry a few days ago. Should one trim the AC-4c retract nose down or nose up for landing? If nose down, then the pilot is less likely to accidentally stall on landing. But as the two pilots before me put it on the nose, perhaps there is a downside. Trim nose up, and then after landing, one is less likely to pop it on the nose. Just make sure to apply pressure forward for landing. I'm a fan of more nose down trim than required for a certain airspeed, so I constantly have a tiny back pressure while flying. Maybe pulling is less tiring than pushing too... -- ------------+ Mark Boyd Avenal, California, USA |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Mark James Boyd wrote:
Chris OCallaghan wrote: John, this is the value of the trim handle. By resetting it, if you become momentarily distracted, you are less likely to let the nose float up. I had an interesting trim quandry a few days ago. Should one trim the AC-4c retract nose down or nose up for landing? If nose down, then the pilot is less likely to accidentally stall on landing. But as the two pilots before me put it on the nose, perhaps there is a downside. I suggest more likely reasons are a forward CG, braking too hard, and not doing a "fully held off" landing, which ends up with the stick in your lap. ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
I can't let this one go. Where in heaven's name do you get your
information? Your assertions re airline pilots is absurd. Here are the stall maneuver requirements for an ATP check ride: B. TASK: APPROACHES TO STALLS REFERENCES: FAR Part 61; AC 61-21; FSB Report; Pilot's Operating Handbook, AFM. THREE approaches to stall are required, as follows (unless otherwise specified by the FSB Report): 1. One in the takeoff configuration (except where the airplane uses only zero-flap takeoff configuration) or approach configuration. 2. One in a clean configuration. 3. One in a landing configuration. One of these approaches to a stall must be accomplished while in a turn using a bank angle of 15 to 30°. Objective. To determine that the applicant: 1. Exhibits adequate knowledge of the factors which influence stall characteristics, including the use of various drag configurations, power settings, pitch attitudes, weights, and bank angles. Also, exhibits adequate knowledge of the proper procedure for resuming normal flight. 2. Selects an entry altitude, when accomplished in an airplane, that is in accordance with the AFM or Operating Handbook, but in no case lower than an altitude that will allow recovery to be safely completed at a minimum of 3,000 feet (900 meters) AGL. When accomplished in an FTD or flight simulator, the entry altitude may be at low, intermediate, or high altitude as appropriate for the airplane and the configuration, at the discretion of the examiner. 3. Observes the area is clear of other aircraft prior to accomplishing an approach to a stall. 4. While maintaining altitude, slowly establishes the pitch attitude (using trim or elevator/stabilizer), bank angle, and power setting that will induce stall at the desired target airspeed. 5. Announces the first indication of an impending stall (such as buffeting, stick shaker, decay of control effectiveness, and any other cues related to the specific airplane design characteristics) and initiates recovery or as directed by the examiner (using maximum power or as directed by the examiner). 6. Recovers to a reference airspeed, altitude and heading, allowing only the acceptable altitude or airspeed loss, and heading deviation. 7. Demonstrates smooth, positive airplane control during entry, approach to a stall, and recovery. In several hundred ATP evaluations,including PCs, PTs, line checks and ATP rating rides, - in both simulators and airplanes - I have never seen a applicant who thought that pulling back on the yoke always made the aircraft go up. In fact, almost the opposite was true. During the wind shear accidents of the '70s, it was very hard to get the average ATP pilot to fly on the edge of the stick shaker (which gave maximum performance during a departure or go around wind shear situation.) Sim check pilots don't demonstrate full stalls during instruction or check rides because it is not required and would serve no useful purpose. The point is to recognize the onset of a stall and never let one develop. By the time a pilot gets to - and through - airline training. all the nonsense information that surrounds flying is pretty much excised. One could only hope that this were true about RAS, as well. Allan Pratt Minden, NV This is even true of airline pilots. Because the aircraft is flown so often on the front side of the curve, despite knowing and training that pulling back on the stick doesn't always make the aircraft go up, seeing it happen that way the last bijillion times you did it is sometimes psychologically compelling. The airlines seem to know this and that's why they love those simulators. On the bad side, some of the airlines sim check pilots don't force the plane into a stall that the pilot must recover from, and I suspect that some pilots who avoid stalls in the sim may not see them for a long time, and may not recover correctly when they unexpectedly occur. Mark Boyd Avenal, California, USA |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
"Tim Ward" wrote in message
Could someone explain _why_ the rules specify left? I can see the point of everyone turning the same direction, but why not pick the direction in which you turn after getting off tow? Tim Ward Tim, There is no need to *turn* right after release from tow (USA). Just release, roll right, and as soon as tug clearance is assured, roll left and continue to turn left. Most contest tug pilots are gone so fast there is no need to even make the initial momentary right roll. The requirement to thermal left comes from the fact that contests used to require fixed cameras and they were required to be mounted on the left side. (again USA). Andy (GY) |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Andy Durbin wrote:
"Tim Ward" wrote in message Could someone explain _why_ the rules specify left? I can see the point of everyone turning the same direction, but why not pick the direction in which you turn after getting off tow? Tim Ward Tim, There is no need to *turn* right after release from tow (USA). Just release, roll right, and as soon as tug clearance is assured, roll left and continue to turn left. Most contest tug pilots are gone so fast there is no need to even make the initial momentary right roll. The requirement to thermal left comes from the fact that contests used to require fixed cameras and they were required to be mounted on the left side. (again USA). No cameras now. I think it's time to change the rule, but I'll leave that to the folks that still take aerotows. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
ADP wrote:
In several hundred ATP evaluations,including PCs, PTs, line checks and ATP rating rides, - in both simulators and airplanes - I have never seen a applicant who thought that pulling back on the yoke always made the aircraft go up. Not much information there. An aircraft doesn't "always" yaw nose right when you apply right rudder either. "Always" is a pretty bland proof. "An applicant" is a crappy example of what a pilot will do after 10 hours of flying on an empty stomach then trying to land at a Cuban or Hong Kong airport at night with a quirky approach. If you want realism, take an airline pilot at the END of a 12 hour day, stick him in a sim, and don't tell him which plane he's flying (no type airspeed info). Then spill hot coffee in his lap and have his FO do all the callouts in Yiddish. Then he will "sometimes" pull back on the stick and the plane will go down... Ditto for the 1-26 guy at the end of his 500km... Sim check pilots don't demonstrate full stalls during instruction or check rides because it is not required and would serve no useful purpose. I read an accident report of a cargo flight landing at Cuba. On the recorder, the FO and FE both called out warning for low airspeed. The stick shook, and the Captain put the plane into the ground. In several reports (maybe ATR's?) ice buildup that wasn't expected to happen caused the aircraft to stall, resulting in fatalities. I wonder if, right before impact, these pilots said to themselves "Gee, I'd do a stall recovery, but I forgot how, since I haven't done one since my ATP checkride decades ago. I wish the sim guy 4 months ago had required me to show a recovery from an unexpected full stall and thought it would serve some useful purpose. Oh well...AHHHHRRRRGGGGG!!!! sound of crunching metal, smell of burning flesh" The point is to recognize the onset of a stall and never let one develop. And I guess if it does happen unexpectedly despite repeatedly successfully avoiding it while well rested and flying the sim, just accept your fate or try to remember back to your ATP checkride, eh? Not for me, brother... By the time a pilot gets to - and through - airline training. all the nonsense information that surrounds flying is pretty much excised. Allan Pratt Minden, NV Which is why airline pilots "pretty much" don't crash airliners. All that's left is the rare, unexpected cases. Some of these crashes involve emergencies: not something an abnormal procedure covers, but something the pilot, checkpilot, and/or manufacturer never anticipated. What does this have to do with RAS? Plenty. I suggest pilots who are very experienced can benefit from practicing things that are VERY "rare." As you get more experienced, these things become even rarer (because skill and judgement make them so.) Slack rope, the need for takeoff abort, unexpected need for release, full stalls, failed instruments, etc. are rare because super experienced pilot skills are so good one avoids these things well. I suggest that if one spends enough time in the safe regime, the rare events happen extremely rarely, but when they do, they are more unexpected, more mentally jarring, and more potentially devastating. The mental disbelief of an experienced pilot can be more profound and more crippling than for a novice. I myself have had a delayed reaction to a recovery because of disbelief and had to go back to training from many years past to recover. And I've seen this while flying with other experienced pilots... -- ------------+ Mark Boyd Avenal, California, USA |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
"ADP" wrote:
Your assertions re airline pilots is absurd. By the time a pilot gets to - and through - airline training. all the nonsense information that surrounds flying is pretty much excised. One could only hope that this were true about RAS, as well. As an ex-airline pilot having just a few [ten thousands] hours of flying, I just can't help myself from chiming in on this one: 1. Most airline pilots are indeed absurd. ;-) 2. Airline training is absolutely chock-full of nonsense information. 3. RAS, too, is most certainly full of nonsense information (like people arguing about what it would be like to soar on Mars, for instance). As far as pulling on the yoke, all I can attest to is at first the houses get smaller and smaller. But if one keeps pulling on the yoke the houses surely will get big again! BTW, I like the idea of designated turn directions. When driving, I make all of my turns to the left so as not to get confused with the right turn I must make into my garage when parking... I guess I better never move, eh? As far as this thread goes, I can only hope that the soaring season gets here...AND SOON! Ray |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Well Mark,
After defending the honor of Airline Pilots, I suppose that I could be forgiven the fact that I agree with your last two paragraphs, to wit: What does this have to do with RAS? Plenty. I suggest pilots who are very experienced can benefit from practicing things that are VERY "rare." As you get more experienced, these things become even rarer (because skill and judgement make them so.) Slack rope, the need for takeoff abort, unexpected need for release, full stalls, failed instruments, etc. are rare because super experienced pilot skills are so good one avoids these things well. I suggest that if one spends enough time in the safe regime, the rare events happen extremely rarely, but when they do, they are more unexpected, more mentally jarring, and more potentially devastating. The mental disbelief of an experienced pilot can be more profound and more crippling than for a novice. I myself have had a delayed reaction to a recovery because of disbelief and had to go back to training from many years past to recover. And I've seen this while flying with other experienced pilots... It's like saying puppy dogs are cute. Of course you are mostly right but it does not entirely explain why experienced pilots do dumb things. I can not, for the life of me, understand how a pilot gets into an inadvertant spin close to the ground. I have seen it and read about it, but I don't understand it. To take your thesis to its logical extent, I suppose I am an accident just waiting to happen, as are we all. With over 15,000 hours of accident free flying, I guess it's time to hang it up. (He says, modestly.) So what's the point? How can we all benefit from these observations? I'll check back with you after soaring on Mars with my flying wing, if I survive. Allan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
For Auction: Thermal Imaging Camera - One Day Left | sell2all | Rotorcraft | 0 | April 29th 04 08:29 PM |
For Auction: Thermal Imaging Camera - One Day Left | sell2all | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 29th 04 08:09 PM |
For Auction: Thermal Imaging Camera - One Day Left | sell2all | General Aviation | 0 | April 29th 04 08:09 PM |
Spin on thermal entry - how-to | Bill Daniels | Soaring | 0 | January 29th 04 05:43 PM |
Thermal to Wave contact! | C.Fleming | Soaring | 1 | January 21st 04 01:54 PM |