Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

This is the place where we can all meet and speak about whatever is on the mind.
new reply
Alfredson007
Technical Sergeant
Posts: 519
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Location: Finland

Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post Alfredson007 »

Okay, let's suppose that we are on BASE leg. Our stall speed is 50 knots, our altitude is pretty spot on, maybe very slightly on the low side, now we notice that we are too slow, say, 57 knots. (Or what ever speed that is considered too low, but not downright dangerous)

Would you:

1) Lower the nose to gain airspeed and to decrease AoA, getting you even lower on the pattern... but you'd fix the issue fastest
2) Just increase throttle, prevent nose up, stay at the correct altitude and gain speed that way

User avatar
Oracle427
Chief Master Sergeant
Posts: 3815
Joined: 02 Sep 2013

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post Oracle427 »

Both.

Adding in some in some throttle and lowering the nose, will provide you the most immediate results to correct the situation. It takes very little pitch down to get an effect thanks to gravity. If you are very slow, you may be developing a high sink rate, and it might take a lot of throttle to overcome a lot of drag.

Once the airplane is flying at a lower angle of attack and at an appropriate airspeed, just maintain altitude to re intercept the approach and resume descending.

If you are really low and sinking fast to begin with, it is best to just go around and try again.

Some aircraft can develop a prodigious sink rate of you get slow during the approach. With the flaps out, it can take full throttle just to arrest the sink rate and regain enough airspeed to level off, much less climb. Trading a little bit of altitude to recover energy might get you out of the situation more quickly than throttle alone.

For an example, I was on short final in a 182 on a stable approach with a strong crosswind. The wind was coming over a dense treeline from the left near the runway. This provided two clues to me. The first was that my strong head and cross wind would likely go away as I descended below the trees. The second was that I would encounter a strong downdraft from the eddy formed by the wind going over the trees . In anticipation, I unscented the throttle friction lock to allow faster movement. The "bottom dropped out" at about 50 feet AGL , with the stall horn going off and the airplane sinking very quickly. A brief burst of almost full throttle combined with letting the airplane pick up speed with the nose slightly low, extended the landing, but the airplane was flying again and a controlled landing was made. It felt like I went from flying to falling in those last 50 feet.
Flight Simmer since 1983. PP ASEL IR Tailwheel

Alfredson007
Technical Sergeant
Posts: 519
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Location: Finland

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post Alfredson007 »

Oracle427 wrote:
26 Jul 2019, 06:55
Both.
So the answer would be "1" (with throttle), because the point on option "2" was not to sacrifice altitude for speed (again, in a situation where we are not in DANGER, but just way slow).

User avatar
Oracle427
Chief Master Sergeant
Posts: 3815
Joined: 02 Sep 2013

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post Oracle427 »

I don't see it as a choice between two options, I see it as all of the above as addimg throttle will be accompanied by a change in pitch anyway. It's a dynamic situation.

If you add power and don't lower the nose, you will soon find yourself too high.
Flight Simmer since 1983. PP ASEL IR Tailwheel

Alfredson007
Technical Sergeant
Posts: 519
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Location: Finland

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post Alfredson007 »

Oracle427 wrote:
26 Jul 2019, 07:52
I don't see it as a choice between two options, I see it as all of the above as addimg throttle will be accompanied by a change in pitch anyway. It's a dynamic situation.

If you add power and don't lower the nose, you will soon find yourself too high.
Yes, but if you'd go only a tad slower as intented, you would add throttle and keep vertical speed unchanged by applying a tad forward pressure to prevent noseup, right? You would not go lower altitude in the pattern unless you're down to more dangerous speed? So that would be an option at certain speed. I hope you get what i mean.

User avatar
DHenriquesA2A
A2A Chief Pilot
Posts: 5101
Joined: 27 Mar 2009
Location: East Coast United States

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post DHenriquesA2A »

Alfredson007 wrote:
26 Jul 2019, 06:36
Okay, let's suppose that we are on BASE leg. Our stall speed is 50 knots, our altitude is pretty spot on, maybe very slightly on the low side, now we notice that we are too slow, say, 57 knots. (Or what ever speed that is considered too low, but not downright dangerous)

Would you:

1) Lower the nose to gain airspeed and to decrease AoA, getting you even lower on the pattern... but you'd fix the issue fastest
2) Just increase throttle, prevent nose up, stay at the correct altitude and gain speed that way
As a flight instructor the answer to this question is the first thing I dealt with when taking a new student into the pattern.
Rule number 1; There is seldom, when flying an airplane, an either/or issue when it comes to controls and how they link with airspeed and altitude. This is nowhere more present than in the pattern.
Think of it this way. In the pattern, airspeed and altitude are LINKED TOGETHER. You can't correct one without affecting the other. Once you begin to think this way your pattern work will immediately smooth out and begin to get better. The simple truth of it all is that you consider ANY correction required whether it be airspeed or altitude as a FLUID CORRECTION affecting BOTH. Start viewing the physical flying of the plane as a constant series of small corrections to solve for both airspeed and altitude. You are constantly playing one against the other............trading back and forth to reach a certain spot in the sky with the right numbers. All correction is based on this trade off.
Pick a target airspeed for example. Are you fast or slow? Where are you on altitude as you consider this? Are you a bit high or a bit low?
Where are the trade offs in this equation? Can you trade a bit of altitude for airspeed or can you trade a bit of airspeed for altitude?
Think this way and you will have the problem licked in no time.
Hope this helps a bit.
Dudley Henriques

Alfredson007
Technical Sergeant
Posts: 519
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Location: Finland

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post Alfredson007 »

Thank you for your answer Dudley.

The reason why i am asking this is, that in a SIM, where death is not an option, if i am perfectly positioned on traffic pattern, but for some reason i am too slow, i might just add power so that i will NOT ruin my perfect altitude on pattern, so i just add throttle, prevent nose up, gain speed, but my altitude has not changed, or my vertical speed has not changed (if i already was descenting a bit for instance). Would this be considered bad behaviour in real life? (if our speed is not dangerously slow). Just trying to avoid learning bad habbits. Not sure how i would deal in real life vs sim, i've made 2 approaches in real life and my speed was spot on.

User avatar
DHenriquesA2A
A2A Chief Pilot
Posts: 5101
Joined: 27 Mar 2009
Location: East Coast United States

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post DHenriquesA2A »

Alfredson007 wrote:
26 Jul 2019, 08:58
Thank you for your answer Dudley.

The reason why i am asking this is, that in a SIM, where death is not an option, if i am perfectly positioned on traffic pattern, but for some reason i am too slow, i might just add power so that i will NOT ruin my perfect altitude on pattern, so i just add throttle, prevent nose up, gain speed, but my altitude has not changed, or my vertical speed has not changed (if i already was descenting a bit for instance). Would this be considered bad behaviour in real life? (if our speed is not dangerously slow). Just trying to avoid learning bad habbits. Not sure how i would deal in real life vs sim, i've made 2 approaches in real life and my speed was spot on.
For a slight correction you could do this but be aware that any increase in airspeed will require a reduction in pitch to maintain altitude. (The trade off in action :-) When you increase airspeed you increase lift, hence the necessity to hold the nose down.
DH

User avatar
TBryson2
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 334
Joined: 15 Sep 2015
Location: Central Florida. USA

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post TBryson2 »

Just watch a video of the cockpit view of an F/A-18 on approach to a carrier landing. His throttle AND stick are a constant ballet of motions so they get their speed and decent rates as perfect as possible!

Their actions are a lot faster than would be required of a GA approach, but the principle is the same.

TB2
TB2
Ocala Flight Sim Club
United States Marine Corps

User avatar
AKar
A2A Mechanic
Posts: 4534
Joined: 26 May 2013

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post AKar »

Alfredson007 wrote:
26 Jul 2019, 06:36
Okay, let's suppose that we are on BASE leg. Our stall speed is 50 knots, our altitude is pretty spot on, maybe very slightly on the low side, now we notice that we are too slow, say, 57 knots. (Or what ever speed that is considered too low, but not downright dangerous)

Would you:

1) Lower the nose to gain airspeed and to decrease AoA, getting you even lower on the pattern... but you'd fix the issue fastest
2) Just increase throttle, prevent nose up, stay at the correct altitude and gain speed that way
Perhaps due my background in gliders and engineering, I want to make every descend and approach an energy management problem. Both in the sim, and what I've flown in real life. When you've got enough intuition to get the 'flow feel' into what you're doing, you just know what you're doing. The problem, of course, is how to get and maintain that level of feel on what you're doing! :mrgreen: In real life, you are rarely in a prefect situation, at least for too long anyway, so that adjusting just a single parameter would have much of meaning.
TBryson2 wrote:
26 Jul 2019, 09:57
Just watch a video of the cockpit view of an F/A-18 on approach to a carrier landing. His throttle AND stick are a constant ballet of motions so they get their speed and decent rates as perfect as possible!
I've only tried flying it in a full-cockpit tactics trainer (I'd love to try the real flying one, of course!), but the bird is quite different to land than your average GA. For a couple of reasons, actually. You're at very near the CLmax when on the approach speed. Also, the stick in approach/landing configuration is basically a direct alpha control, due to the FBW control augmentation. The result is that pulling has no effect but slowing you down fast (and very quickly thereafter, it makes you sink). And pushing also makes you to sink. Further, your engines spool rather quickly, and easily manage your descend - but with just some lag on your target alpha, which is your primary indication (instead of the airspeed number). You end up - or so you hope! - having a kind of mental picture of your energy, and hunting the wanted quasi-stable approach state with the throttle. There is an AoA bracket on your HUD in landing configuration - it reacts immediately to the slightest longitudinal stick input (the stick, again, being an almost direct alpha control). The thing is as sensitive as....well, I leave that, but it surely is twitchy - even with the good throw stick, which is the best I've ever tried in any airplane or simulator. Very easy to land, but flies rather differently on approach than, say, a small Cessna.

-Esa

n421nj
Chief Master Sergeant
Posts: 3540
Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Location: KCDW

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post n421nj »

Good thread lot of good informative
Andrew

ASUS ROG Maximus Hero X, Intel i7 8770K, Nvidia GTX 1080, 32GB Corsair Vengeance 3000 RAM, Corsair H90i liquid cooler.

All Accusim Aircraft
Accu-Feel, 3d Lights Redux

pjc747
Senior Master Sergeant
Posts: 2219
Joined: 04 Jan 2011

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post pjc747 »

Assuming this question is geared towards flying light GA airplanes, I would say why are we even paying that much attention to the airspeed on base/base-to-final? If we are familiar with our machine at all, we should already be familiar with how the plane presents in a given situation as that. Feeling the response and behavior of the airplane should dictate how we approach pitch and power, as our main concern when landing is groundspeed. Obviously we can find ourselves in planes which cannot be flown this way as weight, performance, and unique characteristics arise, but assuming a VFR traffic pattern in a single, fixation on something inside the plane can complicate things.

nojwod
Senior Airman
Posts: 105
Joined: 06 Feb 2011

Re: Which procedure would be preferred IRL...?

Post nojwod »

I've found the best way to get comfortable in the circuit is to go into failures and disable all instruments.

Then practice a few circuits flying by MK1 eyeball alone.

After that you should be doing what a pilot should be doing in the first place, flying the plane, instruments only there to act as a confirmation if required.

new reply

Return to “Pilot's Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests