RA-Aus's Understanding of Safety Videos

[peterg]

33 minutes ago, djpacro said:

It is a fairly common cause, however.

Quote

"Handing over" and "taking over" are not standard phrases.

They are. Refer CASA's Flight Instructor Manual.

 

I learnt to fly in a Chippie in the '60's (also some Tiger Moth flying) and not only were the phrases standard but they were essential in tandem aircraft

 

Still used by pro instructors - clear and easily understood

 

 

[APenNameAndThatA]

1 hour ago, djpacro said:

Good discussion. Great work APenNameAndThatA

It is a fairly common cause, however.

They are. Refer CASA's Flight Instructor Manual.

Point taken about the second point. Stuck controls after they have checked free and full movement though? I take the point that leaving the control lock in kills people. That is defs true. 

[APenNameAndThatA]

42 minutes ago, peterg said:

 

I learnt to fly in a Chippie in the '60's (also some Tiger Moth flying) and not only were the phrases standard but they were essential in tandem aircraft

 

Still used by pro instructors - clear and easily understood

 

 

Duly noted. 

[djpacro]

8 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

Stuck controls after they have checked free and full movement though?

I agree, not as common as control locks left in, but FOD moving during flight and jamming controls in aerobatic airplanes is a well known hazard. It has happened to myself and several others that I know over the years.

[Garfly]

PenName said:

"Point taken about the second point. Stuck controls after they have checked free and full movement though? I take the point that leaving the control lock in kills people. That is defs true." 

 

 I'd agree that "Locked up Controls" doesn't quite fit the "Loss of Control" category.

Typically, in the former, the pilot's the victim and in the latter, typically the problem.

Edited November 6, 2022 by Garfly

[facthunter]

Control locks engaged gives you very little control left.  Most examples go IN spectacularly Same with CARGO/ Load shift.. Control MISHANDLING is worthy of consideration. If you are weightless chances are you have already installed and certainly your drag is reduced. Throttles are  another thing to consider  In a very powerful plane too much may make you roll at high AoA's. If you get vertical nose down when low you may not be able to pull out of the resultant dive due to lack of required height.  Nev

[Garfly]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

Control locks engaged gives you very little control left.  Most examples go IN spectacularly Same with CARGO/ Load shift.. Control MISHANDLING is worthy of consideration. If you are weightless chances are you have already installed and certainly your drag is reduced. Throttles are  another thing to consider  In a very powerful plane too much may make you roll at high AoA's. If you get vertical nose down when low you may not be able to pull out of the resultant dive due to lack of required height.  Nev

 

As far as the film goes, I think PenName's point was that it seems bizarre to kick-off with the 'locked-up controls' story given that it's such a special LOC-at-take-off case; more NOC-at-take-off (as in no control). 

It seemed like the various talking heads felt themselves forced into waffle mode, scratching around to fill their time with useful, on-point LOCATO stuff.  And yet, airspeed, per se, as has been said, hardly gets a mention. I was also surprised that loss of control at Go-Around was not canvassed. It may well be covered in a later chapter (Landing?) but it could easily have gotten a guernsey here, since a go-around is, after all, for most intents and purposes, a take-off.

Edited November 6, 2022 by Garfly

[facthunter]

To me it seems just a grab here and there without a common theme  or story being put together. Every pilot should do a "controls Free" check before rolling. That's BASIC. The "IN correct Sense" should be done preflight but it's done while taxiing in One Plane (Airbus) including every spoiler panel .Nev

Edited November 6, 2022 by facthunter

[Thruster88]

After watching the vid a second time, one theme appeared to be "control energy". They did not explain this concept.  Have been flying for 39 years now and it is a new one for me, perhaps it means FLY CORRECT AIRSPEED. Who knows. 

 

Except for broken aircraft or really freaky weather (both rare) loss of control on takeoff,  climb and in the circuit occurs due to insufficient airspeed or insufficient control input, it really is that simple.

Edited November 6, 2022 by Thruster88

[facthunter]

I've mentioned it a few times and got NO response. To me it's you can be low and you can be slow but don't be both at the same time. (in simple terms). Also add power entering a turn as you'll have more drag and you need a bit more speed to retain your stall margins OR descend to use your potential energy (excess height). where you have it instead of adding power. That's briefly the energy bit.. .. If you're climbing and wish to turn  as well, reduce your climb rate and go a bit faster. Leave power where it is.  Nev

[Thruster88]

15 minutes ago, facthunter said:

I've mentioned it a few times and got NO response. To me it's you can be low and you can be slow but don't be both at the same time. (in simple terms). Also add power entering a turn as you'll have more drag and you need a bit more speed to retain your stall margins OR descend to use your potential energy (excess height). where you have it instead of adding power. That's briefly the energy bit.. .. If you're climbing and wish to turn  as well, reduce your climb rate and go a bit faster. Leave power where it is.  Nev

Facthunter,  every experienced thinking pilot is always  aware  of the energy state of their aircraft and what control input is needed to increase or reduce said energy state for the next whatever time frame of flight. I don't think that is what they were talking about in the video. As I said they did not explain the concept.  

[facthunter]

I've not said they RAAus have done it well. The "experienced ' Pilots who have not maintained speed in turns obviously did not manage energy well. These things keep on happening. (as well as turning with unbalanced controls perhaps in some cases because of the 30 degree max bank angle)  Nev. 

[turboplanner]

5 hours ago, facthunter said:

I've not said they RAAus have done it well. The "experienced ' Pilots who have not maintained speed in turns obviously did not manage energy well. These things keep on happening. (as well as turning with unbalanced controls perhaps in some cases because of the 30 degree max bank angle)  Nev. 

The RAA max bank angle is 60 degrees, above which is classified aerobatics.

[Garfly]

 

As I read it, Nev's 30 degrees max bank angle is the one discussed here (as example):

 

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/jx5zzb/c172s_base_to_final_maximum_bank_angle/

 

 

 

C172S — Base to Final: Maximum bank angle?

kelleytom ·2 yr. ago

  ... the common advice is to limit bank angles to 30 degrees in the pattern. This is probably good practice. But technically, it is MORE important to always remain COORDINATED in your turns (rudder keeping the ball centered). You will see there is a lot of discussion on pilot bulletin boards about a situation where a pilot turns base to final in too shallow of a turn, but then tries to correct with adding inside rudder in an attempt to line up with the runway. THIS is a setup for an unrecoverable spin, and especially if you are going too slow.

I believe the best practice is to limit turns to 30 degrees but insist on keeping turns coordinated, AND maintaining the correct minimum speed considering the impact of a 30 Degree turn on stall speeds (keeping a wide margin above that stall speed). My 2 cents.

 

DeluxeBurger01

·2 yr. ago

 

CFII

Just a fun fact: According to "Aerodynamics for Naval aviators" published in '65, there isn't a noticeable increase in stall speed until you exceed 30 degrees of bank. This would explain why 30 degrees is often taught.

[Garfly]

 

The same issue gets covered in the "Don't Pull Back" video: 

 

"Typically, a skidded turn happens because a pilot needs to turn quickly and he is operating under the erroneous and dangerous notion that adding more rudder than is necessary to maintain coordination will make a tighter turn.  For instance, if there was a strong tailwind on the base leg at the base to final turn, the pilot may find himself overshooting the runway. In this situation a go-around is always the best choice, but if you must make a tight turn, perhaps to avoid an obstacle, then increasing bank angle while using just enough rudder to maintain coordination is much better than skidding your turn. This is because the airplane is much less likely to stall to begin with, and if it does stall, then it will not spin, so recovery can be effected immediately, with minimal loss of altitude, simply by getting the control yoke forward."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJQsAxB7E4Q&t=907s

[Garfly]

 

And in this new Jason Miller video, the same issue is addressed but he also discusses the unloaded-wing factor in a descending turn which allows for a higher bank angle (in a canyon when you have enough air beneath you).

 

 

 

[facthunter]

This is very on the edge stuff No room for error. In a canyon you'll lose your horizon reference and if you replace it with the canyon wall it's OVER Rover.  You'll need to frequently  reference your artificial horizon when you don't have the real one.. All the points made there are correct as far as it went. A V shaped valley is not a lot different except you run out of room more as you lose height. Nev

[Garfly]

12 minutes ago, facthunter said:

This is very on the edge stuff No room for error. In a canyon you'll lose your horizon reference and if you replace it with the canyon wall it's OVER Rover.  You'll need to frequently  reference your artificial horizon when you don't have the real one.. All the points made there are correct as far as it went. A V shaped valley is not a lot different except you run out of room more as you lose height. Nev

 

It's on the edge because it's an emergency manoeuvre. 

 

Jason Miller is suggesting that it's a skill all pilots should have in their tool-kit.

 

The big difference with the V-shaped valley (as he demonstrates) is that you don't have room beneath you so you can't reduce the load factor by descending into the turn so you're limited to a level turn which means to a shallow bank angle.  (Which is where we came in, right?)

 

 

 

 

[facthunter]

My Point was the risk of a false horizon reference and how precise the whole thing is. Flap will reduce the turn radius too but not too much of the drag variety. These are all serious points and you often hit what you are looking straight at.  Nev

[jackc]

Motorcycle riding experience teaches you the same…..

[turboplanner]

Also hunting deer does too.

[Garfly]

 

Nev, I'd have guessed you'd have "liked" rather than "cautioned" that video because, as I saw it, it goes right to your "30 degree bank angle" point.

 

Maybe I've misunderstood you. 

 

Anyway, in the video, Miller discusses that 'Cory Liddell' turn-radius accident in New York City (04:57) thus:

 

"They had plenty of altitude, they could have rolled into a more aggressive bank and allowed the horizontal component of lift to pull the airplane away from the building ... the only thing I can think is that perhaps they were not comfortable with that type of manoeuvre"

 

So the message is: being able (mentally and otherwise) to operate "on the edge" when needed is a life preserving skill. 

 

There are times when excessive timidity is what needs to be cautioned.

[facthunter]

MY Caution was immediately followed by an extensive explanation. My main reason for being on this site is to prevent unnecessary risks where people are not given enough information to be fully situationally aware to be as safe as reasonably possible. NOT having a normal horizon for reference is a real hazard.   Nev

[Garfly]

Okay, let's drop your "30 degree bank" issue then.  Maybe Turbo's response to that was on the money.

Nobody disagrees on the NOT having a normal horizon thing but you can have a normal horizon in a canyon and in a mega-city and still be in trouble (with bank angle and minimum radius).

 

 

 

 

Edited November 7, 2022 by Garfly

[Garfly]

A CTLS LOC in the French Alps.

 

There's a new home-made Air Crash Investigation channel for GA that's turning out some interesting stuff. 

Especially when paired with the official reports that it links to - in this case, from the BEA (in English).

 

BEA2021-0294.en.pdf

 

Maybe this should have its own thread but it fits very well into the discussion here.