Thermal right, land left

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

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

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

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

On 10 Mar 2004 21:35:29 -0800, (Mark James Boyd)
wrote:

In article ,
John wrote:
The point I was making was is there benefits for low-time pilots to
thermal right and land left?

This is a naive, but certainly not a stupid question.

If everyone did turn right (or left) in all thermals
(presumably at altitude) this at face value would seem to
reduce the chance of a midair, if both pilots can't
see each other for whatever reason.

It sometimes sort of works. There was an "only circle left within 10
km of the field" rule in force during my, so far, one and only
competition and in general it worked pretty well. However, on one task
I made a restart about 35 minutes later, by which time non-competition
flying had restarted. This traffic was not bound by such a rule, but
did raise a potential dilemma - do you obey the normal rule of
circling in the same direction the first guy in the thermal if he's
turning right and risk a DQ for not turning left within 10km or do you
look for another thermal and risk a time-consuming low save or even a
land-out near the field and a blown task?

Bottom line: such a rule cannot work unless its rigidly applied to all
traffic and I don't think this is either likely or sensible.


--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

"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)

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

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

"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

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