Steep Turn Base to Final

[jetdriven]

48 minutes ago, teejayevans said:

I have a placard "avoid RPM 1500-1900 and MP

Avoid continuous operation.  Which from the prop maker means continuous.  1 minute doesn't qualify 

[Mooneymite]

Perhaps, this thread has run its "useful" course?

I don't see how this discussion is going to make anyone a safer pilot by trying what 201er is advocating.  Certainly, 201er is entitled to his opinion and I wish him good luck in his future career as a test pilot, but the rest of us are probably going to remain accident free without his advice.  As for the AOA, there have been many threads already discussing its attributes.

YMMV.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Mooneymite

[jetdriven]

The 2G stall speed is around 100 MPH. Don't pull 2G's below 100 MPH, it's that simple.  And you won't be pulling 2G in a descending turn.  It's not test pilot territory, it's within the certified limits. 

[AndyFromCB]

34 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

The 2G stall speed is around 100 MPH. Don't pull 2G's below 100 MPH, it's that simple.  And you won't be pulling 2G in a descending turn.  It's not test pilot territory, it's within the certified limits. 

92.5knots in a long body with flaps up, 80 with flaps down, never slow down below 100knots, until established on final, and you never have to worry about it. No AOA indicator required, no thinking required. Pilots are like emergency room surgeons, thinking while operating is detrimental to outcomes. There is plenty of time to think when not holding the yoke or scalpel, but in action, follow flow charts. Especially in emergency when one is already working with half the equipment available. Or maybe flow charts are just for STUPID pilots and/or surgeons. 

P.S. With 1/2 mile final, she will slow down down just fine from 100knots to between 70 and 75 over the fence with 4inch power reduction. Like I said before, leave 20inches of MP in a Bravo and you don't even have to look at your airspeed until after final turn unless we're talking about landing somewhere in KS or WY with 30knot+ headwind. And if that's the case, leave it at 24. Or use 18, 20, 22, 24 for each 10 knots your hear on ATIS. 

Edited September 6, 2016 by AndyFromCB

[gsxrpilot]

I'm sure many have given up on this thread already, but I'm going to jump in and throw my support to 201er and the way he flies.  I fly with as many pilots as I can, as often as I can. And at the risk of a gross generalization here, I find there are pilots who fly the numbers and pilots who fly the wing. I was taught to fly by a 50K hour retired 747 captain. He also has over 20K hours of right seat instruction time, and most of it in single engine Pipers. I've run into more than a few CFI's around Texas who have his signature in their log books. He was a big advocate of fly the wing and ignore the numbers. 

I believe I fly much like 201er does and can fly AOA just fine without an AOA gauge. As the Chuck Yeager quote mentioned earlier goes, Yeager said he didn't need an AOA gauge because thats what his eyes were for. And I'll agree with Chuck on this one. 

I don't have any idea what speed I fly the pattern, the approach, or landing. I put 400 hours on my C and don't know the speeds in that either. Now I fly a K and amazingly it lands exactly the same way. I just look out the window and fly the wing and AOA. My ASI could be covered up and my patterns, approach and landing will be the same. I can make a 1000 ft turn off if I have too, or can hit the captain's bars and roll it out long if runway permits. The only time I ever look at the ASI in the landing environment is when I'm flying Lead in a formation flight and I need to maintain a steady 90 kt approach speed.

So I'm with Mike (201er). I fly the wing and not the numbers. I also fly a tight pattern so to be able to make the runway from anywhere in the pattern or approach (VFR) in the event of an engine loss. It works for me, your mileage may vary.

[Lance Keve]

Intermission amusement:

 

[PTK]

I think we should be able to fly the plane without ASI. 

1 hour ago, gsxrpilot said:

I'm sure many have given up on this thread already, but I'm going to jump in and throw my support to 201er and the way he flies.  I fly with as many pilots as I can, as often as I can. And at the risk of a gross generalization here, I find there are pilots who fly the numbers and pilots who fly the wing. I was taught to fly by a 50K hour retired 747 captain. He also has over 20K hours of right seat instruction time, and most of it in single engine Pipers. I've run into more than a few CFI's around Texas who have his signature in their log books. He was a big advocate of fly the wing and ignore the numbers. 

I believe I fly much like 201er does and can fly AOA just fine without an AOA gauge. As the Chuck Yeager quote mentioned earlier goes, Yeager said he didn't need an AOA gauge because thats what his eyes were for. And I'll agree with Chuck on this one. 

I don't have any idea what speed I fly the pattern, the approach, or landing. I put 400 hours on my C and don't know the speeds in that either. Now I fly a K and amazingly it lands exactly the same way. I just look out the window and fly the wing and AOA. My ASI could be covered up and my patterns, approach and landing will be the same. I can make a 1000 ft turn off if I have too, or can hit the captain's bars and roll it out long if runway permits. The only time I ever look at the ASI in the landing environment is when I'm flying Lead in a formation flight and I need to maintain a steady 90 kt approach speed.

So I'm with Mike (201er). I fly the wing and not the numbers. I also fly a tight pattern so to be able to make the runway from anywhere in the pattern or approach (VFR) in the event of an engine loss. It works for me, your mileage may vary.

I think we should be able to fly and land the plane without the ASI. I cover mine up occasionally just for the fun of it. No ASI and no aoa gadget. And it is a lot of fun. Feel what the plane is doing and fly the conditions. 

That's different from promoting steep turns down low to salvage a botched base to final turn however. That I cannot agree with.

[ArtVandelay]

Intermission amusement:

 

I learn to fly at age 51, I fly less than 200 hrs/yr, I am not going try that.

[Browncbr1]

1 hour ago, Lance Keve said:

Intermission amusement:

 

 

 

BOLD

Edited September 6, 2016 by Browncbr1

[carusoam]

More proof that....

1) we are all different.

2) have different levels of training.

3) different levels of skill.

4) different levels of practice.  

5) different levels of senses. Ability to feel 1g vs. 0.9g ..?

6) different levels of cognitive skill. The ability to scan instruments and stay ahead of the plane.

7) different levels of retention of these memory skills.  Rust sets in faster for some people than for others...

8) Some Mooney pilots are perfect.  They probably fly formation just for fun...

9) other Mooney pilots are near perfect.  They hang out at various Mooney fly-ins...

10) I'm going to strive to see how close I can get.  I've got a ways to go.

It's good to see the various open presentation of people's thoughts on this subject.  Maintaining respect for the presenters is important to keep the input alive.

follow-up question: How do you guys unweight the wings for a steeper turn?  Is it as simple as point down hill, or do you use the attitude indicator?  Or can you really feel it in the seat?

Is anyone not participating in this conversation because of fear of writing something that they may be held accountable for later?

PP thoughts,  I am not a CFI.

Best regards,

-a-

 

 

[carusoam]

I have seen a pilot fly like Lance's video. Very steep turn on final. He grew up at the airport...

Seeing that gives me the confidence that staying in my envelope of flight is going to be quite comfortable. 

Best regards,

-a-

[Guest]

Neat video, it's connected with Red Bull. Need we say more about the flying.

Clarence

[AndyFromCB]

Just now, M20Doc said:

Neat video, it's connected with Red Bull. Need we say more about the flying.

Clarence

I'm willing to bet a grand the fellow flying that aircraft has a SAC card in his wallet. I'm willing to bet 201er doesn't. 

[kpaul]

http://www.boldmethod.com/blog/lists/2016/09/how-a-bad-approach-to-landing-happens/

Came across this article today, somehow seemed fitting.

[Marauder]

I'm sure many have given up on this thread already, but I'm going to jump in and throw my support to 201er and the way he flies.  I fly with as many pilots as I can, as often as I can. And at the risk of a gross generalization here, I find there are pilots who fly the numbers and pilots who fly the wing. I was taught to fly by a 50K hour retired 747 captain. He also has over 20K hours of right seat instruction time, and most of it in single engine Pipers. I've run into more than a few CFI's around Texas who have his signature in their log books. He was a big advocate of fly the wing and ignore the numbers. 

I believe I fly much like 201er does and can fly AOA just fine without an AOA gauge. As the Chuck Yeager quote mentioned earlier goes, Yeager said he didn't need an AOA gauge because thats what his eyes were for. And I'll agree with Chuck on this one. 

I don't have any idea what speed I fly the pattern, the approach, or landing. I put 400 hours on my C and don't know the speeds in that either. Now I fly a K and amazingly it lands exactly the same way. I just look out the window and fly the wing and AOA. My ASI could be covered up and my patterns, approach and landing will be the same. I can make a 1000 ft turn off if I have too, or can hit the captain's bars and roll it out long if runway permits. The only time I ever look at the ASI in the landing environment is when I'm flying Lead in a formation flight and I need to maintain a steady 90 kt approach speed.

So I'm with Mike (201er). I fly the wing and not the numbers. I also fly a tight pattern so to be able to make the runway from anywhere in the pattern or approach (VFR) in the event of an engine loss. It works for me, your mileage may vary.

Just for the record, this video at 1:01 has what Chuck Yeager had to say about AOA indicators.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Marauder said:

Just for the record, this video at 1:01 has what Chuck Yeager had to say about AOA indicators.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Watching the video clears another myth. Take off was with flaps extended.

Clarence

[Hank]

10 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

Watching the video clears another myth. Take off was with flaps extended.

Clarence

He started out taxiing with flaps down

But it's not a Mooney . . . .

[N9201A]

http://www.boldmethod.com/blog/lists/2016/09/how-a-bad-approach-to-landing-happens/

Came across this article today, somehow seemed fitting.

Exactly, this is what I was trying to express about five pages of posts ago:

The common denominator? A pilot who doesn't understand the wing--cross controlling and pulling back to hold attitude because "too steep in the pattern = certain death!!" Bank isn't the enemy per se, neither is being less than 100 knots. But exceeding critical AoA is.

[N9201A]

Won't restate earlier comment on "tone" because - like corpses and coffins - the guys who need it the most are the least aware of it.

Am compelled to comment on Anthony's link between perfection and formation flying. l have yet to meet the perfect pilot (have met Mr. Hoover, and he is quick to point out his mistakes, read his book to see for yourself).

But I can say formating has improved my flying. I bet most who've stuck with it do so at least in part because it improves theirs.

And a common denominator in formation flying is humility. Out of position is out of position. Your system or beliefs don't matter, if you're sucked you're sucked. Fix it.

No one has all the answers. But when you think you do, flying in proximity of equally dedicated aviators as committed as you are to being as good as they can be will cause you to rethink what you thought you "knew."

The aerodynamics and physics underpinning this discussion are inarguable...yet there continues to be debate. Since nothing goes with a bonfire like more gasoline....

So, how about that global warming thing?

[N9201A]

Thanks for posting the video. It would appear that Gen. Yeager has the last word on any angle of attack controversy: "If you don't know what it is, you shouldn't be flyin'!!"

Amen, General.

[Jerry 5TJ]

44 minutes ago, N9201A said:

Thanks for posting the video. It would appear that Gen. Yeager has the last word on any angle of attack controversy: "If you don't know what it is, you shouldn't be flyin'!!"

Amen, General.

I watched, and I think Yeager's answer meant "if you don't know what an AoA indicator is you shouldn't be flying"

Any other interpretation seems nonsensical: How do you know your AOA without a measurement device?

You may know your plane's stall speed vs G load vs weight, sure.  But if your airspeed is, say, 27 knots above 1G gross weight stall, but you're in a 19 degree bank loaded to 1.56G at 342 pounds below gross do you know your AOA?   

My POH doesn't provide information needed to calculate AOA in even one specific case, let alone for a cross-control descending turn.

However, my basic aerobatics text advises how to enter a snap roll:  load up the wing and yaw the plane, and around you go.  

Just don't do it turning base to final.  

 

 

[N9201A]

Anyone can have their opinion, but what he says is pretty clear:

He says "stupid instrument...it tells you what your angle of attack is. If you don't know what it is, you shouldn't be flyin'!"

The "it" would seem to be AoA, not AoA indicator--hence the reference to "stupid instrument."

Again, reinforces that it's about AoA...and if you don't know what your AoA is, well...

[N9201A]

Lack of AoA awareness kills a lot of pilots. But lack of an AoA indicator isn't the same as lack of AoA awareness.

Yeager, Hoover and others flew P51s in combat without AoA indicators. That's doesn't mean they didn't have any awareness of AoA. One can have AoA awareness without a gizmo...not precise, admittedly, but enough that this awareness enhances your flying and safety.

[Guest]

I had to listen to it several times, I'm pretty sure he said "I wouldn't fly a Mooney without one"

Clarence

[jetdriven]

6 hours ago, Jerry 5TJ said:

I watched, and I think Yeager's answer meant "if you don't know what an AoA indicator is you shouldn't be flying"

Any other interpretation seems nonsensical: How do you know your AOA without a measurement device?

You may know your plane's stall speed vs G load vs weight, sure.  But if your airspeed is, say, 27 knots above 1G gross weight stall, but you're in a 19 degree bank loaded to 1.56G at 342 pounds below gross do you know your AOA?   

My POH doesn't provide information needed to calculate AOA in even one specific case, let alone for a cross-control descending turn.

However, my basic aerobatics text advises how to enter a snap roll:  load up the wing and yaw the plane, and around you go.  

Just don't do it turning base to final.  

 

 

1.56G is really yanking it for a 19 degree bank.  That load is more appropriate for a bank of around 50 degrees, and more if it's an unloaded turn such as descending on base to final. 

Edited September 7, 2016 by jetdriven