Awesome! That's some high quality camera work, nice to have a camera ship like that

The cross controlled rudder turns in ground effect, short final and just after takeoff, were professional and impressive. The great shots, from the camera mans point of view, of the coordinated turns, just before landing or just after takeoff, were not professional. They were engine dependent and dangerous.

contactflying wrote:They were engine dependent and dangerous.

I often hear of instructors teaching that "engine dependent" operations are bad and dangerous. From the instant that you leave the ground, aren't you depending on your engine?

Watch a Boeing 737 on initial climb out. That is as dangerous and unprofessional as any action that can be taken in an aircraft following this logic, yet it happens thousands of times per day and practically never ends in catastrophe.

I fly across the mountains in good VFR weather often where there are few to no viable landing options, but I am comfortable with it because I have learned to depend on my engine. I maintain it well and it pays me back with reliable service. Powerplants and firewall forward installations are generally designed to be very forgiving. Designers analyze potential failure modes and reduce the probability of failure to the "extremely remote" likelihood of occurrence by design.

Some backcountry instructors teach steep approaches where you can glide to landing if your engine quits, even for strips that are super short with no go around options. I have brought in too much energy across the threshold and been on the binders so hard that hitting a depression would have landed me ass up in my chair. If I need to stick it on landing, I'm counting on my engine and dragging it in.

Besides, airliners taking off. Airliners use power all the way through approach down to the deck, most often over built up populated areas . Not only do the pilots and pax lives depend on the engines, so do the people living below the flight paths. If you want to be free of engine dependency, get a glider.

I was unclear on the problem. I depended on engines 17,000 hours at 6" to 200' AGL spraying and flying pipeline. The problem with putting a wing down near terrain and obstructions is that we will cartwheel and damage things badly. He made a very fine curving approach in low ground effect by keeping the wing level with aileron and using rudder to make the turn (cross controlled skidding turn.) He didn't have any curved takeoffs, that I remember. The technique is the same however. Stay in low ground effect, keep the wing level with aileron and use rudder to push the nose where you want to go. We need to keep the wing level when in ground effect. The extra energy from ground effect more than makes up for the loss of lift do to skidding or slipping.

When cruising low level on a crooked route (pipeline, creek, etc.), it is much safer to anticipate the turn, bring the nose up to slow down and gain altitude, turn at whatever bank is necessary to stay in the creek or on the pipeline, allow the nose to go down naturally to prevent load factor, level the wing prior to pull up, pull up to the same altitude and cruise to the next turn. Repeat. This energy management turn technique makes an accelerated stall impossible and keeps a wing from hooking something.

Your posts are always very interesting, Contact. After I read them and cogitate on them a while, I often realize you have stated something I have been doing but never really had to put into words or thought about much, just did it because it seemed to work.

Courierguy,

I have found what you said to be true, over the years. I have trained many crop dusters and known many older ones who would make excellent instructors. They just never express the stuff they know.

Good maneuvering flight techniques are common sense. The problem is they have been taboo for long enough that many who know are unwilling to say. The FAA, who bears responsibility for training, considers we who know as "Those of whom we do not speak."

The guys in the video knew well what they were doing. Putting the wing down near the ground make exciting viewing and they knew they had the power to risk it. What irks me, as an instructor, is that it is a poor example. There are those with little engines that might try the same and mush into a cartwheel when terrain and perhaps a downwind reaches out to bite them. The airplane, as the big boys say, doesn't care which way the wind is. When low and encountering terrain at much faster ground speed than he wishes, the pilot does. The airplane can in no way stall itself. The pilot can. Rather than hit the terrain or obstruction in a steep turn with a down wind pushing him toward it faster, he will pull back on the stick. Any of us would. The trick is to pull back on the stick wings level while at cruise to trade airspeed for altitude. The slower we go, the faster we turn. The faster we go, the slower we turn. That altitude can be exchanged for gravity thrust simply by allowing the nose to go down when we turn. It just takes situational (outside) awareness and staying ahead of the airplane and allowing the airplane to help you make the turn. No bank is too steep unless you pull back on the stick in the turn. Pull back before the turn.

These guys are going to get after you. You got me going.

Contact

contactflying wrote:Courierguy,

I have found what you said to be true, over the years. I have trained many crop dusters and known many older ones who would make excellent instructors. They just never express the stuff they know.

Good maneuvering flight techniques are common sense. The problem is they have been taboo for long enough that many who know are unwilling to say. The FAA, who bears responsibility for training, considers we who know as "Those of whom we do not speak."

The guys in the video knew well what they were doing. Putting the wing down near the ground make exciting viewing and they knew they had the power to risk it. What irks me, as an instructor, is that it is a poor example. There are those with little engines that might try the same and mush into a cartwheel when terrain and perhaps a downwind reaches out to bite them. The airplane, as the big boys say, doesn't care which way the wind is. When low and encountering terrain at much faster ground speed than he wishes, the pilot does. The airplane can in no way stall itself. The pilot can. Rather than hit the terrain or obstruction in a steep turn with a down wind pushing him toward it faster, he will pull back on the stick. Any of us would. The trick is to pull back on the stick wings level while at cruise to trade airspeed for altitude. The slower we go, the faster we turn. The faster we go, the slower we turn. That altitude can be exchanged for gravity thrust simply by allowing the nose to go down when we turn. It just takes situational (outside) awareness and staying ahead of the airplane and allowing the airplane to help you make the turn. No bank is too steep unless you pull back on the stick in the turn. Pull back before the turn.

These guys are going to get after you. You got me going.

Contact

Agree 100%. I see some pictures and videos of the pilot-pleasing fly-bys in a 45 degree bank with the wing tip 4 feet off the ground and it scares the Begeebers outta me. Ag guys don't do this, I figure there's probably a reason.

Very entertaining footage and I enjoyed it, but not my way of flying.

I only land my Maule off airport (particularly in remote areas) if I have a reason to go there. Otherwise I can practice landings on numerous grass strips in this area. I work very hard to keep my airplane in pristine shape and see no need to damage it for cool footage.
Just sharing my personal view...and I have been criticized for it before...

BTW at a point in my life I owned "Aerial Terminator Ltd." a 702 aerial work operating certificate so aerial application and low flying is not foreign to me. Flying below the tree line in a canyon is no matter how you slice it riskier than applying product.

contactflying wrote:No bank is too steep unless you pull back on the stick in the turn. Pull back before the turn.

I like that analogy. I realize that it's not always the case, and you CAN pull back on the stick in a turn as long as you understand that more airspeed is needed to maintain altitude. As well as stay within the structural limits of the airframe.

But it makes sense from an energy management standpoint.

Been there did that 1000 times, minus the water landings. Never gets old No better way to break up a boring day flying pax for $$ then flying home empty 10 feet off the ground thru Lake Clark Pass in the fall.