Crazy Turbulence After Take Off | Video + Audio

[Romeo Juliet Whiskey]

Hi Dutchroll, what were you flying? And do you pick up a drop wing wing with co-ordinated rudder as well as 'sidestick' in those conditions?

 

 

[dutchroll]

Hi Dutchroll, what were you flying? And do you pick up a drop wing wing with co-ordinated rudder as well as 'sidestick' in those conditions?

An Airbus A330! Nope. No rudder. You do not use rudder on a swept-wing jet unless

1) an engine has failed, or

 

2) for directional control while on the runway

 

In a small plane like the one I fly for fun, I would use rudder for yaw control, not roll control. That is what it is for (turn coordination is essentially the same thing - you are preventing adverse yaw). Wing drop is a roll, and you would primarily use the things which control roll to fix it - ailerons. Stalling is a separate issue which requires a whole different discussion. They're my thoughts anyway.

 

 

[Robbo]

Spot on.Taking off to the south with possibly up to a 15 knot westerly on the ground, then we turn left (east) into a known 20 knot easterly, then a few seconds later hit a 45 knot easterly. Up to 35 knots of wind change in the first thousand feet, then a definite (as these were recently pilot reported winds) 25 knot change in the next thousand feet. That's a whopping shear rate.

 

A recipe for getting thrown around, especially with local orographic effects of easterly winds at Perth added into it, so discussed in the briefing were windshear aspects, a warning to the hosties that it might be pretty rough soon after takeoff, and turbulence speeds.

 

.....and get thrown around we did! Almost full left sidestick at one point to pickup a wing drop at about 700 ft, then large speed fluctuations before we finally got to turbulence speed (240 kts) and eventually climbed out of it.

 

I would describe it as moderate turbulence, moderate windshear. Just glad we were leaving, not arriving!

I bet the dunnys were busy after the seat belt sign went off.

 

 

[dutchroll]

Passengers who travel a lot are pretty resilient, especially if they're already strapped in. The newbies are the problem! Also it was very brief - probably over in a minute or less at our rate of climb. It's usually prolonged turbulence which makes people sick.

 

 

[Nightmare]

BKN or OVC cloud at 1000AGL or less,

 

Severe Turbulance,

 

Visibility less than 5000m,

 

Any mention of Mountain Waves or

 

Any mention of SIGMET's in the area.

 

Hey Richard, don't be afraid cancel and to pick another day to fly if these conditions feature in your area.... I'd even hum and ha about taking off in MOD Turbulence. Remember, we are recreational pilots who for it for the fun of it. It's no fun in those conditions. Learn about the minimums required for VFR flight, stay in VMC. Learn to read the aviation forecasts, ARFOR's and TAF's, they are your friends. Better to find out from the forecast than after you get into the air. It is good airmanship to fly another day if the conditions are no good or marginal. Besides, it is mandatory to obtain a aviation forecast when leaving the vicinity of the aerodrome...... I get one before I do any flying.

 

Tony

 

 

[Romeo Juliet Whiskey]

All good advice Tony. Its not something Id do by myself or for fun but wanted the experience just in case. I'm a weather nerd - I get the ARFORs and TAFs everyday even when Im not flying! I work outside so Ive got an excuse :)

 

 

[Nightmare]

All good advice Tony. Its not something Id do by myself or for fun but wanted the experience just in case. I'm a weather nerd - I get the ARFORs and TAFs everyday even when Im not flying! I work outside so Ive got an excuse :)

You should breeze through your xc endorsement then, a lot of it is weather related, you'll love it.

 

 

[flying dog]

RJW:Ultimately, turbulence can get strong enough to rip the tail off a Boeing 707 as happened over Mt Fuji in Japan ... But neither you nor I would be flying in those conditions and it's not something to become obsessed with.

Funny, I thought it was a 74'.

 

 

[David Isaac]

Funny, I thought it was a 74'.

It was, and it failed at a previous repair weakness, but his point is still valid.

 

 

[dutchroll]

The one lost in turbulence near Mt Fuji was a BOAC B707 in 1966.

 

The B747 which lost its tail due to structural failure from a poor repair over pre-existing damage was a bit north of there at Mt Takamagahara.

 

Both took off from Tokyo Haneda.

 

 

[facthunter]

The B 707 was due to turbulence from the mountain and the 74 was a structural failure due pressurisation cyclic loads on an incorrectly repaired bulkhead becoming fatigued. Nev

 

 

[facthunter]

Flying fast with a low wing loading plane will give you the most severe bumps. If you encounter severe turbulence pull the power back to get to the safe turbulence penetration speed then reapply a lower power setting to suit the lower.speed and fly as we have been discussing. You might then think of what is causing the turbulence and IF going to another level is worth it, or just sit it out.. Clouds if you know how to interpret them can be a clue. A mountain range upwind of your position, a frontal system coming through. A SEA breeze going against a prevailing wind in the later part of the day. At the time it changes can be some interesting effects. Inland you will find an inversion layer that rises till about 4 PM and it's rough below that layer on a hot inland day because of the active thermals.. So get up early and get going if it's going to be a hot one. Turbulence in the vicinity of thunderstorms. You won't be near one if you have any brains and the DUST Devil, Mini cyclone that can really make your landing interesting. The dust associated with it helps but if it's been raining or it's a well grassed you won't get the dust to warn you. Nev

 

 

[Camel]

Good flying, just notice your using a lot of aileron to keep it straight and level and curious on how much rudder are your using?

It also was what I was thinking, I was glad you were keen to do turbulence which I think was a great idea and I think what I saw was all good and I think you have a very good instructor although Im biased as I know him and you are a good student for wanting to do what you did. I would suggest that doing a refresher on adverse yaw to understand the effect of the correction of the controls make to the plane especially in turbulence. Again what is in the video is fine but a good understanding of adverse yaw is often forgotten as it is an early lesson. Great video and keep it up, I hope my view is of benefit to you.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

It was, and it failed at a previous repair weakness, but his point is still valid.

For those who haven't watched the doco about that JAL crash, it's worth it. The pilot did a remarkable job but had no elevator or rudder. 14 people survived the crash into Fuji, but only about 3 made it thru the night.

For me the most remarkable snippet was when a Boeing engineer discovered that when the damaged tail panel was replaced they used only single rows of rivets. Boeing's testing predicted it would only have lasted (from memory) 10,000 hours. It lasted over 12,000. Impressive.

 

 

[facthunter]

When considering pressurisation matters with aircraft , Cycles as well as flying hours come into play . Nev

 

 

[Romeo Juliet Whiskey]

Thanks for your feedback Camel. I'm going to have a chat with my instructor next time I see him on the use of aileron and adverse yaw in turbulent conditions.

 

 

[Camel]

Thanks for your feedback Camel. I'm going to have a chat with my instructor next time I see him on the use of aileron and adverse yaw in turbulent conditions.

The instructor mentioned the key thing about not trying to fight the turbulence and that is the point ! I'm sure he will explain it well ! Like I said, good on you for doing it for the experience and I'm sure most would not fly in a westerly of 30knots at Wollongong.

 

I have experienced many turbulent days and I avoid it as much as I can now, I think I know what it is like inside a washing machine