On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 5:17:58 PM UTC-8, Steve Leonard wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2017 at 4:17:08 PM UTC-6, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
While a slip is considered aerodynamically coordinated, not sure ...

Crabbing is coordinated. Slipping is not. By any book, stretch of the imagination, or even alternate fact. It may be aerodynaimcally "balanced", as there is no steady state pitch, roll, or yaw RATE. But, not coordinated..

Thanks, Steve. I was getting twitchy on this one (but not pitchy). But hey,
Charlie M. wasn't the only one to say a slip was 'coordinated' in this thread.
Youch.

A fair range of opinions, and fewer with some slipping experience at altitude that then allows application at lower altitudes with familiarity and confidence.
I find it pretty common that pilots will lower their nose "a bunch" when slipping and then getting down to the chosen angle and unslipping to find they have ~ten more knots than they wanted.

Pretty soon it will be the "Silly Season". This sounds like a good topic for spring brush ups with a CFI - doing slips in 32:1. Balanced slips ( on a track), turning slips, and doing either with no speed change on entry and recovery. Can you tell your CFI what descent rate you can manufacture with your slip in your ship in calm air? It's a helpful data point, rather than conjecture.

My alternative aerodynamics fact is to be happy with pilots who slip, crab, S-turn, buttonhook, angle in or out, min sink loiter, full-spoiler parasitic drag plummet or even make a perfectly coordinated circle to address spacing and slope to satisfy the situation in a pattern. If it is done well, there are lots of ways to 'approach'. Adaptability is a good thing.

Best,
Cindy B