Turn to Final - Keeping Ball Centered

On Mar 13, 11:14*am, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk At Wow Way
D0t C0m wrote:


Note: as others are beating to death - stall speed doesn't change with bank.

Do you really mean that?

Cheers

On Mar 13, 1:53*pm, "Vaughn Simon"
wrote:
"WingFlaps" wrote in message

...
On Mar 13, 1:16 pm, "Vaughn Simon"
wrote:

As I read it, this is not VFR it's an IF test...

* *I read it that way also, which is why I suitably qualified my answer

Cheers back atcha
Vaughn

So, how do you do it in an IF test?

Cheers back again

On Mar 12, 4:14*pm, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk At Wow Way
D0t C0m wrote:
. . .
Instead of asking about keeping the ball centered, perhaps you should be
asking why you elected to flirt with a pilot error fatality by cranking and
yanking for the sake of a few style points... So what if you overshoot the
turn????
Geoff

This, of course, is a good question. The bank was probably 45 deg, so
it wasn't an extremely steep turn, just steeper than I am used to
making at that point in my approach. Also, I wasn't "yanking" if, by
that, you mean pulling back significantly on the yoke; although I lead
guilty to "cranking". I was letting the nose stay down and descending
at a normal or better rate (is this "unloading"the wing?), and the
airspeed at 70-75 K, rather than the usual 65-70 K. I wasn't thinking
about about "style"; I was just wanting to keep the plane upright and
make the runway. I had been asked by the tower at my local airport
(KBIL) to make a short base and turn to final due to other traffic,
and I was trying to comply. (Yes, I know I could have refused or gone
around; I just figured at the time I could do it with no problem.)
Since I had a 10,000+ ft runway I knew I had plenty of room to keep
coming around and still be able to land, if a bit long.

Private wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Private wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Any stall in the pattern can be a serious problem. You need stall and
yaw rate to induce spin. Of all the possible scenarios to have if you
manage to be ham handed enough to get into a stall in the pattern, a
stall from a slip is the most anti-spin. Then comes a coordinated stall
with no yaw induced at the break, and finally the worst condition is a
stall from a skidding turn. No matter which scenario, angle of attack
MUST be lowered, and any yaw rate MUST be neutralized IMMEDIATELY!


--
Dudley Henriques
Can you please elaborate on the stall from a slip condition.

I am fond of the bush pilot style pattern, using180 degree constant
slipping turn to final and would also be interested in your thoughts on
these.

TIA
Happy landings,
I see no problems at all with a constant slipping turn approach, and in
fact favor this type myself when flying prop fighters such as the P51 and
the F8F and even the Pitts Spcial due to the better visibility during
these approaces over the nose and ahead and inside the turn as the
approach is flown.

Slips are basically anti spin. You can actually increase the angle of
attack available in front of your critical angle of attack as you deepen a
slip. The ultimate example of this would be knife edge flight where
forward stick pressure is required to reduce angle of attack to near the 0
lift point on the wing.
Of course you won't be doing any knife edge flight on a slipping approach,
but the slip you are in is still anti spin.
Even if you stall the airplane in a slip, the likely result will be a
break over the top, which is a much better stall break than a skidding
stall break which will usually break under the bottom. You have much more
time to recover from a slipping stall entry than you do from a skid entry.

The bottom line is that it's quite safe to fly a slipping approach if you
are aware, flying properly and watching what you are doing.

--
Dudley Henriques

Thanks for the reply. Why is the stall from a descending slipping turn more
likely to result in a break over the top? Will this also be the likely
break in a descending straight slip? I suspect that fuselage shadowing may
play a role?

Seems like I need to go do some more, nothing is as good fun as real world
practice on the left side of the envelope.

Happy landings,


Yes, the fuselage tends to blank out the upside wing as critical aoa is
reached causing it to stall first.
Something else about slips, the roll/yaw couple needed for pro spin
input is actually wider apart than it is in level flight. This is as
anti spin as it gets :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:08:30 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Vaughn Simon wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Exactly. The difference between a loaded turn and simply allowing the nose to
fall through with reduced back pressure.
snip for brevity

I consider the imparting of this attitude in a student pilot a critical
aspect of stall recovery training.
I can't emphasize it's importance enough to new instructors.

After following many of these threads over the years I am truly
thankful for the instructors who followed these tenants in my primary
training.

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

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Private wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Any stall in the pattern can be a serious problem. You need stall and
yaw rate to induce spin. Of all the possible scenarios to have if you
manage to be ham handed enough to get into a stall in the pattern, a
stall from a slip is the most anti-spin. Then comes a coordinated stall
with no yaw induced at the break, and finally the worst condition is a
stall from a skidding turn. No matter which scenario, angle of attack
MUST be lowered, and any yaw rate MUST be neutralized IMMEDIATELY!


--
Dudley Henriques

Can you please elaborate on the stall from a slip condition.

I am fond of the bush pilot style pattern, using180 degree constant
slipping turn to final and would also be interested in your thoughts on
these.

TIA
Happy landings,
I see no problems at all with a constant slipping turn approach, and in
fact favor this type myself when flying prop fighters such as the P51 and
the F8F and even the Pitts Spcial due to the better visibility during
these approaces over the nose and ahead and inside the turn as the
approach is flown.

Slips are basically anti spin. You can actually increase the angle of
attack available in front of your critical angle of attack as you deepen a
slip. The ultimate example of this would be knife edge flight where
forward stick pressure is required to reduce angle of attack to near the 0
lift point on the wing.
Of course you won't be doing any knife edge flight on a slipping approach,
but the slip you are in is still anti spin.
Even if you stall the airplane in a slip, the likely result will be a
break over the top, which is a much better stall break than a skidding
stall break which will usually break under the bottom. You have much more
time to recover from a slipping stall entry than you do from a skid entry.

The bottom line is that it's quite safe to fly a slipping approach if you
are aware, flying properly and watching what you are doing.

--
Dudley Henriques

Thanks for the reply. Why is the stall from a descending slipping turn more
likely to result in a break over the top? Will this also be the likely
break in a descending straight slip? I suspect that fuselage shadowing may
play a role?

Seems like I need to go do some more, nothing is as good fun as real world
practice on the left side of the envelope.

Happy landings,

Roger wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:08:30 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Vaughn Simon wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Exactly. The difference between a loaded turn and simply allowing the nose to
fall through with reduced back pressure.
snip for brevity

I consider the imparting of this attitude in a student pilot a critical
aspect of stall recovery training.
I can't emphasize it's importance enough to new instructors.

After following many of these threads over the years I am truly
thankful for the instructors who followed these tenants in my primary
training.

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

Me too !

--
Dudley Henriques

"WingFlaps" wrote in message
...
On Mar 13, 11:14 am, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk At Wow Way
D0t C0m wrote:


Note: as others are beating to death - stall speed doesn't change with
bank.

Do you really mean that?

Cheers

Yes, he does; and yes, he is correct.

You have gone back to thinking in only two dimensions; and therefore
ignoring the effects of vertical acceleration.

Just as a theoretically simple example; consider the case of an aircraft
flying around in a circle, but the circle is an inclined plane relative to
the surface of the earth--rather than being horizontal. In that case, since
we speak of bank angle relative to the horizontal (referenced to the earth
at that location) the G-load (and therefore the stall speed) will be
greatest at the point on the circle where the bank angle is least--and this
will remain true even in the special case where the aircraft is able to fly
around the circle at a constant speed.

Peter

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...

Something else about slips, the roll/yaw couple needed for pro spin input
is actually wider apart than it is in level flight. This is as anti spin
as it gets :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

Thanks, this will give me something to think about and research, I need to
do some book review before commenting.

Happy landings,

On Mar 12, 7:59*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Well trained pilots will fly the approach treating it as a constantly
changing dynamic. They will be planning for the next anticipated action
based on all prevailing cues. Along with this they will have an
accompanying exit plan keyed by any expected parameter not being met by
any of these cues.
The go around trigger should occur if a critical parameter isn't met.
Each pilot will have a different trigger level based on various human
factors involving the pilot's training and his/her mental processing in
play on the approach.
This is the pedantic version of "If it don't look good, it usually ain't
no good......take it around!! :-))"

--
Dudley Henriques- Hide quoted text -

Bertie, WJR andDudley,
I like these explanations, even if not highly technical. I would
characterize my thinking at the time (if you can call it that) as the
"critical parameters" being (1) the ball being centered, (2) the speed
being above 70k, (3) keeping the nose down, not "yanked", to permit
the plane to sort of fall into a descent at 400-500 ft.min. and (4) my
position (altitude/heading) at every point during the turn.
Obviously, I wasn't thinking in terms of "critical parameters', but
the turn "felt" and looked OK (according to those criteria). I was
constantly prepared to level the wings, shove in the thrrottle and
break off the approach at any time things didn't feel or look right or
stay within the criteria I set. Right hand was on the throttle at all
times. I guess my original question was really "how much of a comfort
factor, if any, is a coordinated turn vs a slip or skid while turning
at that point in the approach?"