Maplefit,

You're right, of course. We are locked into the 1.3 Vso stabilized approach thing down here. Not actually required. We shot the ILS in really bad weather in Hueys at 40 Kts to be sure and make it. We had the legal alternate plus 30 min fuel reserve, but that wasn't far away from destination weather at 2,5 hours total fuel. I never missed in a Huey. Just too scary. You are right about cheating and just staying on the glideslope. Two pilots makes a huge difference. One is on the gauges and one is in contact with the earth. I forgot about the IFR approach actually called "contact" as well. Thanks for keeping me honest. I will use almost anything to illustrate a point of view. My computer graphics are not even as good as Dan Gryder's.

I was just using the ILS as a visual to make a point. Probably a poor visual.

I did full flaps and full slips with every Cessna I flew, including the 172 with the O-300. I don't remember which model 170s but used all the flaps they gave me in whatever airplane. I have read threads here talking about LOC. That never happened with me. Just the pitching up and down a bit. Understand that in the turn portion of the energy management turn the nose goes well down. The only times I had to use full flaps with full slip with rudder to the stop was during forced landing, but I taught the technique to students. And I made several forced landings. At low altitude, all available landing zones will be very close. If we maintain maneuvering airspeed at low altitude, I did, and we trade for altitude in the energy management turn to acceptable landing zone, I did, we will usually be high and fast to that landing zone, I was about ten times or so. So I used full flaps and full slip to be able to touch down slowly and softly in the beginning of those landing zones, most of the time. I cartwheeled a CallAir but I was high on Parathion and behind the airplane. That, also, was my excuse for starving the engine with 5 gallons of gas in the other wing.

Anyway, I probably never did that in a 170B, maybe. With my nose well down, I don;t know that I would have noticed anyway.

Slips are prohibited in full flap approaches on the 170B because of a downward pitch encountered due to blanking the tail.

The Cessna 170B AFM should be used in lieu of any advice read elsewhere.

For any that don't believe, get a whole lot of altitude and try it.

I've done it in 4 different 170B's, and all 4 behaved slightly differently but they all confirmed why Cessna placards the aircraft AVOID SLIPS WITH FULL FLAPS.

After you try this experiment to move the controls and see what they do, you will see that "avoid slips" should have been placarded "do not slip".

With 4000 landings in my 170B, there is absolutely no situation wherein I see the need to slip with full flaps. Not even the power off spot landing after engine failure.

If you want to slip a 170B, do it with less than full flaps.

OK.

FLY BY WIRE https://www.amazon.com/dp/031265538X/re ... T1EKZBD9AD

Thanks Tbag. I'm reading it. Good read.

A 170B with 40 degrees of flap available (some have an "extra" notch) comes down like a Simonized brick. I can't imagine a slid slip will add much more to the effort but it could very easily created a world of hurt for ya.

During several engine failures at low altitude, I moved the controls until I got what I needed to make a near LZ. Cessnas have marvelous flaps.

This thread was awkward to me, because when writing my dribble about lading power on / off, I distinctly remembered a thread long ago about a pilot that 'landed out' while in the pattern at GEU due to an engine failure.

In that thread I remarked something to the nature of ... if he had more dead stick landing time he probably wouldn't have had to tear up an airplane landing in a parking lot while in the pattern This did not sit well with many of the seasoned, old salts of the then BCP, who have
mostly all moved on now.

It was also awkward to me because virtually every young pilot who has sought advice from me (don't know why anyone would think that was a good idea?) about flying ag, I have advised to first pursue a commercial glider rating, and possibly a few hundred hours towing banners next. These two are on virtually opposite ends of the spectrum in power management, but both need the wing to keep flying.

So the notion of being proficient at manipulating things when it all goes quiet is not foreign to me.

Since the days of that thread (which was old enough to be when BCP was on a different platform), I have come to realize, that if you compartmentalize your flying too much, you short change yourself in the long run, maybe even set yourself up for failure at some point.

When you boil it all down, since we don't flap our wings and bend their shapes instantly like a bird, (regardless of their orientation) we rely on airspeed across them. To get that airspeed requires energy. In Contact's case, that energy may be in the form of zoom reserve, in Maple's case it may be in the form of that thermal parked under that cloud or a wave rolling along.

Sure I recognize that in different regimes, flight controls, including the throttle start to change or even reverse rolls, but as long as you are in flight, the wing still needs fed energy.

I believe that pilots who fly the wing rather than the procedure, (these things are not space shuttles) generally don't have a hard time deciding where they're going to extract that energy from.

I also believe that pilots who spend an inordinate amount of time stuck in one corner of the box, focused whether on ea. landing should be a 3pt. or wheelie, power on or power off, which hand the throttle or yoke is in, or which way to pull/push goes up and when, tend to be the guys that at some point will pull past the breaking point, force a poor landing technique, or flame out their new Air Tractor because they're used to a Thrush, (fuel condition lever, and prop control are in reversed positions)...

I believe the three best things we can do for ourselves to maximize or flying longevity is learn to fly the wing (What a seasoned fellow like JP is practicing landing engine out), learning as broad of a spectrum of flying machines as possible. Because they all seem to have preferences on how they like their wings to be fed, and learn to never say never or always, never full flap/slip a 170 abcxyz? Phooey... maybe not as a normal procedure, but you can bet your ass if I am flamed out, and need to park it on a 150' island that's zipping under me because I was too low on the river to make it to the shore, I am going to hit that island. flaps, slip and all....

Take care, Rob

Exploring the corners of the envelop offers some valuable lessons, if for no other reason you learn the size of your envelop and how to play within it. Equally many of those skills and the new found levels of awareness are transferable to other forms of flight. Get out and learn the size and shape of your envelop, you may be surprised how it grows and changes.

Mapleflt wrote:Exploring the corners of the envelop offers some valuable lessons, if for no other reason you learn the size of your envelop and how to play within it. Equally many of those skills and the new found levels of awareness are transferable to other forms of flight. Get out and learn the size and shape of your envelop, you may be surprised how it grows and changes.

Very well said, using much less bandwidth

Rob wrote:

Mapleflt wrote:Exploring the corners of the envelop offers some valuable lessons, if for no other reason you learn the size of your envelop and how to play within it. Equally many of those skills and the new found levels of awareness are transferable to other forms of flight. Get out and learn the size and shape of your envelop, you may be surprised how it grows and changes.

Very well said, using much less bandwidth

Agreed. Very well said.

You'll get the test before you ever have a chance to study the material.

Make sure you have lots of altitude and ready for that 170B to point abruptly downward during your full flap slip.

Hopefully you're as sharp as William Thompson.

Aryana wrote:You'll get the test before you ever have a chance to study the material.

Make sure you have lots of altitude and ready for that 170B to point abruptly downward during your full flap slip.

Hopefully you're as sharp as William Thompson.

Nah...,

you're just getting stuck on semantics, as clearly you broke the rules you are preaching your own self at least 4 times

and I say, good on you for doing just that.

Take care, Rob

Aryana wrote:You'll get the test before you ever have a chance to study the material.

Make sure you have lots of altitude and ready for that 170B to point abruptly downward during your full flap slip.

Hopefully you're as sharp as William Thompson.

Sometimes learning from other is just better, thanks Aryana

I didn't pay attention to model numbers and I didn't always read the Owner's Manual and I was always at low altitude, but I remember dynamically equal pitch up after the pitch down. As soon as I levelled the wing over obstructions, both went away. I'm either alive only because I have never flown the 170B or if I demonstrated full slip with full flaps to a 170B owner, it chose to act exactly like the other Cessnas. In every case, the airplanes flew as at a down pitch attitude exactly between the down and up oscillations.

And yes, in forced landings I have desired to go down like a rock to make a near landing zone when too high and too fast to make the beginning of the LZ. Yes Cessna flaps do a good job, when speed is actually controlled, getting one in steep and slow. I only used both because I needed both. I teach as I have learned from experience. I don't ask anyone to do anything they are uncomfortable with.

My question is have any 170B pilots or test pilots who have experienced the uncontrollable pitch down in the 170B flown the other Cessna's in similar configuration for comparison?

Another example of using the controls to make the airplane go where we want to go, and are able to go, is the recent Cirrus midair with the Metroliner at Centennial Airport in Denver. If tower puts us into a downwind base pointed at a parallel runway centerline beyond our centerline, 20 degree of bank to final is just not always going to be safe. We need to turn at whatever bank will make that happen in our lane. If in tight traffic we are told to follow the 182, we need to turn at whatever bank will make that happen. And we don't need to induce load factor, just let the nose go down as it was designed to do. If we crank in low behind the 182, we can adjust descent rate appropriately. We do not have to stay up in the pattern, We do not have to maintain altitude in the turn, in any turn. The runway is at 0' AGL.

This so careful that we are really unsafe stuff is getting out of hand. Yes, avoidance is good judgement. No, it is not good training for the real thing.

If tower changes us from one parallel to the other, there is a reason. Yes, we can avoid maneuvering by rejecting the clearance. So we go around, he gets excited and goes around, and crap begins to pile up. At some point the safer thing might be to maneuver. Initial, concurrent, and recurrent training should make maneuvering a nada.

When we maneuver low level (in the pattern) without cognition of the law of the roller coaster, we have put ourselves in a very small and dangerous box.