this is NOT how i was taught to emegency descend. My CFI had my dropping at Vne until a couple hundred feet above the ground. then throwing in pitch, slips, whatever to slow down and park it in the field. it was WAY more aggressive than this manuever, and honestly I feel like it was the better way to get it down. especially in a fire.
If you saw the hundreds of bozos they bring in from all around the world to fly those Riddle Skyhawks in the some of the busiest training airspace in the country, you'd understand why they conduct things the way they do there, Florida's a different world. I would not trust my ex-roommate ploughing down a plane I'm about to fly at Vne followed by a slip, good God.
it is a simulation not a reality , my Instructor had me dropping at bottom of yellow arc with 90 degree turn for the traffic and for positive G and after shallow bank right left for check the traffic again ,and 1500' from the ground , should not be aggressive, normally incidents happen during the Training rather in the reality that is piece of cake for quantity , maybe he was wrong ? DPE could say that please
One thing I haven't seen anyone do yet, is moving the engine towards the rear, where some planes do have rear drive, but, similiar, put engine in rear, run a driveshaft to the front, so the nose can be much more aerodynamic. This is the 21st century, where no one thought about it. Maybe a team axle made of Special alloy or composite. Figure Russia made titanium Submarines, where it costs too much, but they did it. A transacted, do fast take off, then in the air, shift, for higher speed, which with variable pitch prop and better aerodynamics, it can be done. Then figure titanium Submarines and bicycles, 6Al/4V should be good. Where the wings can even be modified for more efficiency and speed. Which it'll probably take Toyota or Honda to imitate such a master piece.
They do, theyre called fighter jets, however placing the engine in the back makes the aircraft quite aft heavy and makes stalls much more difficult to recover from, and then it just adds added complexity which is not something you want either
This S-turn thing isn't really mentioned in the ACS. I can understand the worry about traffic, but can an examiner fail you for not flying the 30-45 degree bank for the entire descent? I've been teaching my students to look around them for traffic, make a 90-degree turn to look for traffic where their previous rear-blind-spot was, and then just bank over to 30-45 (preferably 45) degrees and pitch to about -10 to -15 degrees to achieve a speed near Vno (or Va if air is turbulent). And as the video said, use 10% of your vertical speed to know approximately when to begin the level-out.
I believe you are done for. Pray. opposite rudder to the spin as a placebo. power to idle . opposite aileron placebo as well. In advance of that situation. Avoid speeds and maneuvers that over stress the airframe. work to keep the wings and horizontal stabilizer intact and in place for continued use to your benefit
This maneuver is mostly used for fighting engine fires but if you were simply going for descent rate it might not be wise to execute a slip because your airspeed will have to be much lower and you might have a higher rate if you just stick with the high airspeed. I'm not sure about this since I haven't done the math but that would be my guess.
0:49 reference point 90 degrees of the starting point: portal to another world
1:31- I thought I've seen it all, until flying cows; that's a new one :)
Loved the little magic cards 😂
Awesome explanation, many thanks.
What's all this faffing, whack on 45 push nose down and spiral dive, pull gentle g.
this is NOT how i was taught to emegency descend. My CFI had my dropping at Vne until a couple hundred feet above the ground. then throwing in pitch, slips, whatever to slow down and park it in the field. it was WAY more aggressive than this manuever, and honestly I feel like it was the better way to get it down. especially in a fire.
lmao literally had u landing in some field >.
If you saw the hundreds of bozos they bring in from all around the world to fly those Riddle Skyhawks in the some of the busiest training airspace in the country, you'd understand why they conduct things the way they do there, Florida's a different world. I would not trust my ex-roommate ploughing down a plane I'm about to fly at Vne followed by a slip, good God.
it is a simulation not a reality , my Instructor had me dropping at bottom of yellow arc with 90 degree turn for the traffic and for positive G and after shallow bank right left for check the traffic again ,and 1500' from the ground , should not be aggressive, normally incidents happen during the Training rather in the reality that is piece of cake for quantity , maybe he was wrong ? DPE could say that please
One thing I haven't seen anyone do yet, is moving the engine towards the rear, where some planes do have rear drive, but, similiar, put engine in rear, run a driveshaft to the front, so the nose can be much more aerodynamic. This is the 21st century, where no one thought about it. Maybe a team axle made of Special alloy or composite. Figure Russia made titanium Submarines, where it costs too much, but they did it. A transacted, do fast take off, then in the air, shift, for higher speed, which with variable pitch prop and better aerodynamics, it can be done. Then figure titanium Submarines and bicycles, 6Al/4V should be good. Where the wings can even be modified for more efficiency and speed. Which it'll probably take Toyota or Honda to imitate such a master piece.
They do, theyre called fighter jets, however placing the engine in the back makes the aircraft quite aft heavy and makes stalls much more difficult to recover from, and then it just adds added complexity which is not something you want either
The Bell P-39 Airacobra was designed this way in 1939...
I thought this maneuver you should slow the aircraft,ll Lower the flaps and pitch down while remaining in the white arc.
Being a student pilot, to me the point is to descent fast, and a faster airspeed is better than a slower airspeed in this regard.
This S-turn thing isn't really mentioned in the ACS. I can understand the worry about traffic, but can an examiner fail you for not flying the 30-45 degree bank for the entire descent?
I've been teaching my students to look around them for traffic, make a 90-degree turn to look for traffic where their previous rear-blind-spot was, and then just bank over to 30-45 (preferably 45) degrees and pitch to about -10 to -15 degrees to achieve a speed near Vno (or Va if air is turbulent). And as the video said, use 10% of your vertical speed to know approximately when to begin the level-out.
How about carb heat for any part of the decent ?
I think all the G1000 Skyhawks are fuel injected.
What can I do if the whole wing brakes lose?
Prepare to meet your Maker, unless you're flying a Cirrus, then deploy the chute.
I believe you are done for. Pray. opposite rudder to the spin as a placebo. power to idle . opposite aileron placebo as well. In advance of that situation. Avoid speeds and maneuvers that over stress the airframe. work to keep the wings and horizontal stabilizer intact and in place for continued use to your benefit
Whatever it is do it quick.
@@nealhere so, fall straight to ground right?
Pray
Can you do a forward slip here to get more drag ?
Yes, but you'll have to be below maneuvering speed.
You don't want more drag you mostly want the high airspeed for an engine fire
@@17-. I meant this to expedite the descent and land as fast as possible, not really fighting the fire.
This maneuver is mostly used for fighting engine fires but if you were simply going for descent rate it might not be wise to execute a slip because your airspeed will have to be much lower and you might have a higher rate if you just stick with the high airspeed. I'm not sure about this since I haven't done the math but that would be my guess.
This is a text book geek...it's all wrong...
45 degrees turn ? seriously?
We do 60
We do 1000000