Garfly

Hey, Officer Brandolini, that ain't no excuse for leaving the guy's charge-sheet blank. ;- )

"Nobody thinks it will happen to them. But before you know it, there you are. Low, slow, and approaching a stall. And how well you react in those few seconds makes all the difference in the world. Often times, it's the difference between a safe recovery and a fatal crash." "So who are these stall-spin accidents happening to? According to the ASF study, student pilots and ATPs were the least likely pilots to have a stall-spin accident. That leaves the majority of stall-spin accidents to private and commercial pilots." Source: https://www.boldmethod.com/learn-to-fly/maneuvers/here-is-where-stall-spin-accidents-happen-the-most-often-in-flight-phase/

At 14:50 in this vid Perdue teaches Beggs/Mueller recovery, among other methods, in the Bonanza (and mentions that it doesn't work in the C150)

I imagine that if upset recovery training could imprint on pilots' reflexes nothing more than "In fear and doubt, don't pull back!" then lives might be saved. Maybe even in the circuit. After all, can we not assume that most of those stall/spin fatals began with a wobble - that was somehow saveable? Hard to know for sure. The evidence of Air France 447 is not encouraging. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jsch6vFlcE4

Actually I just got back to OzRwys Support asking if they'd heard of any progress on that and I received this reply: " I don't have any news unfortunately. I tried to find information on review online but didn't have any luck. Interestingly I did find this article from CASA's Flight Safety Australia magazine: https://www.flightsafetyaustralia.com/2020/07/missing-the-message/ This article was written in 2020, but to me it suggests our Australian authorities may be waiting on recommendations from ICAO that will fix the NOTAM problems. Big wheels turn slowly, but it sounds like progress! " I hadn't seen that article before, it's called Missing the Message. It's a good read but disappointing to see so little improvement since.

Can you be more specific?

Can you be more specific? PenName's argument seems more pedagogical in nature than aeronautical - per se. Is that what you're disagreeing with?

As the Sharkcallers of Kontu (PNG) well knew. They also knew a thing or two about propellers. (Action from 01:45 )

Here are some interesting posts from the YT Comments: danofzanzibar 9 months ago So true. I issue NOTAMs and train others on issuing NOTAMs. There are NOTAMs that may be technically required, but really serve no useful role other than cluttering up the NOTAM retrieval pages and hiding the NOTAM's that actually are important. So I'm left trying to figure out ways to creatively minimize the NOTAM's I issue and then make the decision between doing what is the right and useful course of action and the action prescribed by regulation. Craig Good 3 years ago First thing is that NOTAMs and weather should be in plain English. This dense code is stupid in an age when we aren't using 30 BAUD teletypes. Matthew Butler 3 years ago I think the issue is that in order to pick out and determine which are applicable to you, you still have to read each in its entirety. For example the one they read regarding taxiway barred, it didn't say who it all applied to until the very end (aircraft with wingspan larger than...) Andrew Truax 1 year ago Realistically, if every airline pilot went over every relevant NOTAM for every flight in a single day, they would have literally no time for other tasks. Tom Nguyen 2 weeks ago (edited) NOTAMS need to be prioritized and filtered so that the important ones aren't lost in the layers of more insignificant NOTAMS. Plus the raw text is awful to read.

I've long been exasperated by the way (obligatory) NOTAMs are presented to pilots, so I was glad to find this video recently. It seems to me that their purpose is less about having time-critical info understood by pilots than it is about covering the backsides of bureaucrats; to have the blame fall exclusively onto pilots when things go wrong. The crown prosecutor can point to the relevant NOTAM of the day (having had ample time to dig it out and have it decoded) "See, your honour, they simply should have known" and the judge, on the face of the clear 'evidence' can but sagely nod. "Guilty as charged." Last year I wrote to OzRwys support about the way NOTAMs are handled in their SmartBrief feature" "I’m curious about how and by-whom notams get selected/ordered? Is there a way around having to wade through tons of dross to get to the few morsels that matter. For example in this little (test) plan, I was interested to see if the notam about the grass strip at Taree being unavailable, due soft and wet, would turn up. I reckon that this would be, perhaps, the most important piece of info for anyone flying in who didn’t otherwise know that. Well yes, it does turn up ... but right at the bottom of the very long list - at #58 in this particular instance." (15/7/21) OzRwys reply: "This is because NOTAMs are very poorly sorted by the authorities (currently under a big review by CASA) and we are not given geographical information to link them more logically for users." OzRwys does what they can by offering a way for the user to give a star or a thumbs-down to individual messages: https://docs.ozrunways.com/ozrunways/4a_brief-smartbrief-page.html#notam-grading-system but this process would, itself, take a long time and I guess is useful mainly for pilots who fly the same route often - so they don't have to wade through the same rubbish every time - with the ever attendant risk of missing the biggy. I'm curious to know what has come of CASA's 'big review'. (I'm not holding my breath)

This 2-part video does a pretty good job of explaining wake turbulence and how to avoid it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFhD2W1UeLo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae5jAhQcmqo

Yes, which is why Perdue in the video above says we must push when we're surprised to find ourselves nose-low hanging from the straps. But any student doing Lesson One "Effects of Controls" will have nowhere, yet, to put that knowledge. Insisting on it so soon would put 'em in a pedagogical spin. In the end, all learning is self-teaching. And no matter what your instructor or text book has said about what the elevator does, it is only your muscle memory that will determine how you act in a crisis. And it's not your instructor who is to blame for your muscles thinking that pulling will make the ground go away. Every $100 hamburger run you've done since passing your test will imbed that idea. As Perdue says you need to do upset training (and re-training) so that your muscles will do the right thing - quick enough - to save the day, in an emergency.

Yeah, well according to the test-pilot in the AN2 vs. Robin DR400 video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktqo2Mqqdlk ) and also Scott Perdue in the A320 vs. SR22 one ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q16rdw6oUEE&t=658s ) if you happen to fly into the core of a strong vortex close to the ground there's nothing much to be done (like rearranging the deck chairs in the washing machine. ;- ) But in an upset where there is time to recover, Perdue has some interesting analysis and tips in this one:

I don't see anything amiss with what the book says. It doesn't say "pulling back is what makes you go up". In my experience instructors are always at pains to point out that it's the throttle wot makes you climb - not the elevator (nomenclature notwithstanding ;- ) But yes, some things are drilled into ab initio flyers that do need to be undrilled, a bit, later, but I suppose it could hardly be otherwise. Another example might be the exaggerated fear of banking instilled in beginners (clearly for good reasons). It's often said that excessive bank-shyness can lead to the dangerous habit of ruddering around the base to final turn. In any case, this is why advanced training - such as you did - is such a good idea. I suppose all learning requires some unlearning along the way. After all, what Jupiter is allowed, might not be permitted the cattle.

Yes, 'Don't yank and bank' sounds weird. The advice is surely better conveyed as 'Do not apply excessive up-elevator forces whilst simultaneously making large aileron deflections.' And don't get me started on the old and bold. ;- ) Yanking And Banking Rolling G forces-pitching and banking at the same time-can overstress the airframe. Instead, do one, then the other. https://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/features/yanking-and-banking/

Not much that's really new in aeroplanes since the Wrights gave wing-warping away. And that 'driving force' might just be that: "They’re interested in the details of the airplane’s design and testing because it’s just plain interesting—and it involves dedicated and determined people making progress toward a worthwhile new airplane." (AOPA, above).

From (US) AOPA News: Not long ago, news of a kit manufacturer flying a prototype airplane would have been a minor footnote at EAA AirVenture Oshkosh. "... Sure, this is the EAA convention, so you’d expect the tribe of aircraft home builders to get fired up about a new model. But the level of interest in the RV–15 reaches way beyond rivet bangers. Pilots who have no intention of building an RV–15 welcome its arrival because they can see themselves buying one, eventually, on the used market. They’re interested in the details of the airplane’s design and testing because it’s just plain interesting—and it involves dedicated and determined people making progress toward a worthwhile new airplane. It also spurs their imagination about the dynamic and challenging brand of adventure flying the RV–15 is made for." https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2022/august/02/the-year-everything-changed

For those with the time, here is an entire 70' video about EFATO:

A reminder here about not yanking and banking - at the same time."

E-Props demonstrate the Glorieuse CS on their Skyranger test machine.

Those king-post mounted views are great Frank, perfect for some shots - especially the ones manoeuvring near your strip and along the river. But in some shots the framing gets a bit awkward, the top edge hovering just below the horizon; there's a feeling that we'd really like it to tilt up a bit. One solution would be to get a second cam so that you have two views to choose between - and cut between - for each flight. And/or you could upgrade to a 360 degree camera where, basically, all viewing directions are covered at once. Then you get to pan and zoom around the scene, just as you like, later, in the comfort of your edit suite. You can see an example of a 360 cam in use in the video below. From around 01:00 to 01:20 is a good one. This guy commonly uses 4 or more cameras for his videos. But I doubt you want to bother with so elaborate a set up. Just the same, one 360-cam mounted at various places on your drifter might be fun to experiment with. The editing would surely keep you off the mean streets of Deeral between flights. ;- ) BTW, to get shots of the entire aircraft, this guy uses a 360 cam on a wing tip stick; software can be used to photoshop-out the stick itself. Heaps of his other films can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W0bb8-_vmBud5e0DbGeuQ/videos

Lots of crossed wires here. Never mind.

No problem. We like a good joke on this site.