The FAA has changed its thinking on spin train at least once. It was taught then not taught and now upset training is back in.

The FAA has also changed its thinking on maneuvering flight, or maneuvering the aircraft near the ground. We naturally taught pilots to maneuver near the ground because it was necessary to take off, to land, to crop dust, to operate in some bush or backcountry situations, to conduct low level visual reconnaissance and, with low powered airplanes, to operate in the mountains. And then it was declared very taboo.

Since maneuvering flight has become taboo, we instructors have lost a lot of ground keeping pilots trained and current with these types of operations. Since becoming taboo, the number of maneuvering flight accidents and fatalities seems to have risen. For these reasons, I believe we should return to giving more pilots good training in maneuvering flight operations.

Consider the typical buzzing or droppings objects from a flat turn. Stall training that emphasises recovery gives the student the wrong mind set for maneuvering flight. Here the student must be taught to to immediately release the back pressure and level the wing with rudder. Even more importantly, the student need be taught to never pull back on the stick in a maneuvering flight turn. If kinetic energy of pressure airspeed is available, the pull back comes when the wing is level before the turn. During the turn, the nose is allowed to go down as designed. This prevents load factor, mush,and stall problems.

I'm glad you brought it up Jim. I'm not sure how much folks here will take an interest in the topic but there certainly has been a lot of heartache of late regarding this issue. My uncle once told me when I first started flying that if I would just stay out of weather beyond my capabilities or the capabilities of the airplane and don't bust FAA regs with regard to flight near the ground I would eliminate most of the good ways to die fast in an airplane.

I'm not sure I understand the reason for flying around throwing candy out the window or circling to take pictures of a moose. I'm just too chicken for that stuff I guess.

I fully understand the edicts of your Dad and the FAA. Avoidance improves safety greatly for those who can avoid or who choose to avoid.

My concern is for those who can not avoid and for those who choose not to. For those I have written "Safe Maneuvering Flight Techniques.". It is free. Email jadulin@gmail.

Consider low level flight down a river or pipeline right of way. We could pull back to climb enough to keep the down wing from hitting something in the turn. This would create load factor in the turn. Much safer, we should anticipate the turn, pitch up wings level, and allow the nose to go down naturally in the turn.

It is for these reasons why I still teach my primary students proper spin recovery techniques, accelerated stall recovery techniques, and turning stall techniques. I won't bust the FARs by demonstrating a full spin, but I will allow the aircraft to enter the incipient stage and recover, to at least show them what a spin entry sounds and feels like. I am amazed when I pick up students from other instructors, even within the same company and I ask them if they know how to recover from a spin, or have ever stalled in a turn and they have no idea!

The belief that we can recover from a stall or spin while at very low altitude can be deadly. The belief that we can turn quickly enough to miss things while maintaining altitude can be deadly.

The energy management turn is the very safest maneuvering flight turn.

Maneuvering flight requires wind management.

Consider approaching an obstruction in your airplane at cruise airspeed with a twenty MPH tailwind. That makes your ground speed or rate of closure cruise plus twenty. That makes your radius of turn greater requiring a much greater bank angle to miss the obstacles. Staying ahead of the airplane and pitching up prior to the turn so that you can allow the nose to go down naturally in the turn is critical.

Consider a short field where terrain or obstacles require a dogleg approach on short final. We can't make the first couple of hundred feet of the LZ with a steep approach over the terrain or obstacles. We can't make the first couple hundred feet of the LZ and clear obstacles with the down wing if we put a wing down to line up. The safest approach would be making the dogleg with a rudder turn while holding the wing level with cross ailerons.

I find it strange that many pilots who regularly make cross controlled side and forward slips to landing believe only coordinated turns can safely be made on final. Coordinated turns on final cause wing wagging and problems with longitudinal alignment. The use of rudder for longitudinal alignment with cross controlled ailerons for keeping the wing level or banked into any crosswind is appropriate for all landings.

Energy management involves not just taking advantage of free energy like ground effect kinetic energy or cruise kinetic energy, gravity thrust of altitude, orographic lift, and thermal lift. It also involves getting rid of the kinetic energy of pressure airspeed and gravity thrust of altitude on approach to landing. We use mechanical devises like flaps, gear, spoilers, speed brakes, and drag chutes to do this. We also use cross controlled forward and side slips to do this.

We manage wind, during maneuvering flight, by organizing our work so that headwind components decrease ground speed or rate of closure with obstructions, reduce the radius of turns and increase the rate of turns. That is why we fall off or depart a ground target downwind so that we may more quickly get back on target in an upwind turn. This turn will happen faster and our flight path over the ground will be pushed toward the target by the head and then cross wind.

Because we return to the spray strip low and directly to the approach end, we maneuver so as to make the base to final turn into a headwind and crosswind component where possible. This requires much less down wing to line up because the head and cross wind is helping make the turn. This also set us up to angle across wide runways from downwind corner to upwind sideline.

Consider the next twenty thousand takeoffs and perhaps three engine failures. Would you want to be in a very high pitch attitude near stall speed at 200'? Or would you rather be level at 2' and near cruise speed? I chose the latter the last twenty thousand takeoffs and more spray runs and had three engine failures level at 2' and near cruise speed. I was pleased with the options in every case and only damaged one Pawnee landing in tall cotton.

Your book and my tailwheel instructor dramatically changed the way I fly.
On takeoff, I leave it in ground effect until there is no more room to land if the engine quits.
If I feel like I need to tighten a slow flight turn (and I have room) I let the nose drop to release the load on the wing.
I try to make every landing at idle (doesnt always happen cuz I was initially taught to fly a fairly low pattern with power)
I practice turning stalls and keeping the plane as close to the edge of a stall as I can. Make the plane fall like a leaf and swing the nose back and forth with the rudder pedals.

It's made me SO much more comfortable and confident in my flying. Before, I was afraid below 60mph. Not, it's fun.

Slipping a 170b Or any 170 with 3 or 4 notches of flaps0 below 200 feet is deadly to the pilot and passengers. The tail gets blanked out and the spin is not recoverable. Low, slow and cross controlled is not advised.[imgcaption][/imgcaption]

Bagarre,

I am pleased you are getting some good out of it. I was lucky enough to have some loose instructors who would let me look at possibilities. I have tried to pass the same along.

Moss Farmer,

I've only done it several thousand times all below 200' AGL. The nose pitches up and down some in a dynamically controlled envelope. No stall, no spin. No the up/down wobble can not be controlled. No it doesn't cause stall or spin unless the pilot pulls back on the stick enough to stall or spin. All of my low level forced landings in Cessna 172s required full flaps and full slips to make the beginning of the landing zone. From 2' to 200' the choices are limited and close and every thing happens fast. Too fast without full flaps and full slip.

I don't try to make normal students or review pilots fly in any way that is uncomfortable to them. For spray or pipeline or any student who will be working at very low altitudes, I insist that they learn to level the wing before going over a wire or obstruction with a wing still down. Going into a crop field or very short landing zone, we need get the wings level before putting a wing into something. We also need to turn sufficiently to miss things. When we are going down anyway and have gravity thrust of altitude and perhaps engine thrust producing sufficient kinetic energy of pressure airspeed to prevent stall, we can push the nose where we need to go while keeping the wings level.

However, I teach all students to control drift or keep the wings level with aileron while maintaining the center line with rudder. I teach this because coordinated turns on final are one of the major longitudinal alignment problems. We can maintain dynamic proactive longitudinal alignment with coordinated turns, but we are continually making gross aileron corrections. It is so much easier for the student to maintain longitudinal alignment with fine rudder corrections. Even if we don't try to maintain wings level with aileron, the rudder doesn't cause much wing wagging. The aileron, whether coordinated with rudder or not, causes much wing wagging. The aileron lifts a wing whereas the rudder alone just speeds a wing up a bit. The aileron reduces the lift of the other wing whereas the rudder alone just slows a wing down a bit. The aileron drags a wing back whereas the rudder alone just yaws the airplane a bit. TRY USING RUDDER ONLY FOR LONGITUDINAL ALIGNMENT IN THE AIR AND ON THE GROUND AND I GUARANTEE YOU WILL LIKE IT. Also you won't be trying to touch down in a coordinated turn in a crosswind.

I appreciate your comment. We should take nothing for granted. Every instructor should have to justify what he teaches. Saying that is what I was taught or that is what the book says just doesn't cut it.

Contact

Moss farmer wrote:Slipping a 170b Or any 170 with 3 or 4 notches of flaps0 below 200 feet is deadly to the pilot and passengers. The tail gets blanked out and the spin is not recoverable. Low, slow and cross controlled is not advised.[imgcaption][/imgcaption]

I know better than to slip a B with full flaps.

It doesn't stall the airplane and may not even go into a spin. But if you blanket the tail just right, the tail stops flying and causes the plane to pitch down. The person who experienced it (and lived to tell) said it was like being thrown into the windshield without warning.
It's been discussed at length on the 170 forum and I'm convinced.

The condition is specific to the B model with the big flaps.
The 172 didn't experience the same violent pitch down because it has a higher aspect tailplane which, evidently, isn't as susceptible.

The 170B shouldn't be slipped with full flaps. It has been discussed here and elsewhere numerous times. The flaps can blank out the horizontal stabilizer and elevator causing a sudden nose down pitch, which can be deadly at low altitude. It's hard to duplicate but I know of many people who have experienced it. I've had it start to happen to me once, I immediately released rudder pressure and recovered. I know a guy who crashed his 170B killing himself and his wife a few years ago. It's suspected that he was high on final approach and went into a slip. The airplane went straight into the ground short of the runway. I won't ever slip with full flaps in my 170, it's not worth the risk. If I feel the need to slip, I'll retract the flaps to 20 and won't pull full flaps until I'm releasing the slip and entering the flare or I'm back at an appropriate altitude to continue my landing.

Delete

Thanks Bagarre and Robw56. My experience has been with all the C-172s through M model. I don't want to get anybody into trouble. The POH in all those models said not to slip with full flaps but I found no problem with it and found it to be life saving more than once.

Indoctrination is one of the strongest forms of teaching. We do have to be careful what we indoctrinate.

Experience is also a strong teacher. Often, however, we miss interpret what we have experienced. I know from personal experience in combat that each of us interpret a traumatic experiences differently. After being shot down, I ran one way to the nearest LZ and Bart ran a different way to the same. I woke up out in the bush but Bart doesn't remember putting me there. The scout, lift, and C and C bird pilots involved in picking us up all remember things somewhat differently.

I wish Wolfgang were still alive. He was a Cessna test pilot. Anyway, I have found both full (rudder on the stop) slip and full flaps to be safe and useful in any airplane I have flown. I have not flown a 170B that I remember.

Here is a video of what your talking about I think, Scares the hell out of you , You can see it comming!! Pay attention, don't BS to much when manuvering!! CRM!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt9sR-F ... pp=desktop

M6RV6 wrote:Here is a video of what your talking about I think, Scares the hell out of you , You can see it comming!! Pay attention, don't BS to much when manuvering!! CRM!!

Good argument for the "sterile cockpit" rule.