Emergency Descents with ATC COMS - Video

On Aug 24, 4:02*am, BeechSundowner wrote:
On Aug 23, 10:49*am, Blanche wrote:

I was taught a steep spiral for getting down really fast in a very
small area.

I don't have the Sundowner POH but I just checked my Musketeer
POH - 2.9, Maneuver Limits: Bank Angles no more than 60 deg.

Of course on the following page there's the remark
"Minimum flight crew: One (1) pilot"

In my plane it's placarded allowed commercial maneuvers (Chandelles,
lazy eights come to mind). * I do need to check the POH.to double
check the bank limitations, but I don't remember seeing such a
limitation. *VNE is 152 knots.

I do remember seeing the same remark minimum flight crew of one
pilot. * I guess that is the legalese way of saying that a pre-solo
student can't fly the plane solo legally LOL

I think it follows from the definition of flight crew...

Cheers

On Aug 24, 1:59*pm, BeechSundowner wrote:
On Aug 23, 8:13*pm, "Peter Dohm" wrote:



"BeechSundowner" wrote in message

news:4a61563b-a2b2-4519-a3af-

...
On Aug 23, 5:21 pm, John Smith wrote:
a wrote:
I still maintain the fastest way down is a strong slip.

Just curious A,

What's the POH say for emergency descent speeds for the Mooney?

I know for sure, that I cannot do 152 knots (POH says 152 for
emergency descents) doing a slip in my Sundowner with all that drag.
I couldn't even get to VNE nose down within my own safe parameters
without bank.

Again, the purpose of this exercise for me was emergency descent for
collision avoidance. *I wanted to get a feel for what the plane would
do under non emergency situations and it was a huge lesson learned for
me.

Be carefull up there!

I have been told several times that the the vertical tail is the weak link
on most aircraft--not just the Airbus 320--and that the maximum speed
permissible for full rudder deflection is frequently less than the stated
"maneuvering speed.

Assuming the above is true, I have no idea how to determine the maximum
speed for full rudder deflection.

Peter

Agree Peter,

I would never hang any parts of the plane outside the white arc :-)))
much less do a slip for emergency descent..

*I learned from this exercise that I can't even get to VNE without
bank without an excessive amount of forward pressure on the yoke. *I
am a believer in NOT forcing the plane to doing something it won't
do. *Bank sure took care of that problem :-))

The need for forward pressure is because you were trimmed for a much
lower airspeed... In your vid, the ASI rapidly goes into the yellow
arc and off the screen, and you said something like "Jeez went over".
Do you hit/pass VNE? Here's another thought, in that high speed
descending attitude what if you hit wake from the other aircraft? Now
some hypergonadotrophic pilots may call me overcautious (I happily do
aerobatics every week) but I like to err on the safe side and I hope
you do too. So, bottom line, do you think that this is a good maneuver
for collision avoidance (in which case it would not be illegal of
course)?

Cheers

On Aug 24, 10:43*pm, John Smith wrote:
Peter Dohm wrote:
I have been told several times that ... the maximum speed
permissible for full rudder deflection is frequently less than the stated
"maneuvering speed.

You have been told rubbish. Up to maneuvring speed it is safe to
instantly and fully deflect any ****rol, also the rudder.

Is this still true at MTOW?

Cheers

On Aug 26, 2:27*am, Robert Moore wrote:
Ricky wrote



Jeeze...grumpy, retired, ex-military, old men.......lighten up. Your
experience and knowlege is very valuable here, but it would be much more
well received with some grace and kindness.

When someone "preaches" as much BS as Flaps_50! did in his post, someone
needs to call it BS in no uncertain terms.


Ah, I see YOU say BS 'cos you think the newsgroup is american. LOL

Cheers

Flaps_50! wrote:

You have been told rubbish. Up to maneuvring speed it is safe to
instantly and fully deflect any control, also the rudder.

Is this still true at MTOW?

Of course. This is the very definition of maneuvring speed. The
maneuvring speed may change with the actual weight, though.

On Aug 31, 1:21*pm, John Smith wrote:
Flaps_50! wrote:
You have been told rubbish. Up to maneuvring speed it is safe to
instantly and fully deflect any control, also the rudder.
Is this still true at MTOW?

Of course. This is the very definition of maneuvring speed. The
maneuvring speed may change with the actual weight, though.

The good thing about this thread is at least some pilots may have
gained second thoughts about on purpose steep banks. The principal
posters have made their points, to which I might add "legal" does not
mean "wise" and the hope is we have become somewhat wiser.

On Sep 1, 5:21*am, John Smith wrote:
Flaps_50! wrote:
You have been told rubbish. Up to maneuvring speed it is safe to
instantly and fully deflect any control, also the rudder.
Is this still true at MTOW?

Of course. This is the very definition of maneuvring speed. The
maneuvring speed may change with the actual weight, though.

Yes, that's my point, "" means less than.

Cheers

Flaps_50! wrote:
Up to maneuvring speed it is safe to
instantly and fully deflect any control, also the rudder.

Is this still true at MTOW?

Of course. This is the very definition of maneuvring speed. The
maneuvring speed may change with the actual weight, though.

Yes, that's my point, "" means less than.

Thanks, I know what means. But it wasn't your point.

On Aug 31, 5:46*am, "Flaps_50!" wrote:

You can do aerobatics in controlled airspace without a waver from the
director?

What in the world are you talking about? I was in an area where
sudden changes of flight is expected (practice area) I advised ATC in
the very beginning I would be making rapid altitude changes in the
practice area which I seriously doubt most other pilots would have
thought of doing. Your thoughts of wake turbulence is even further
out of wack as in my area, they don't send commercial traffic through
the practice area nor was anybody above me in the practice area..

Oh yeah, what defines aerobatics in your head? Please provide
references as I am below.

I called my local FSDO regarding my video. Aerobatics is NOT defined
by a number for pitch and roll. 91.303 Aerobatics are defined by
ABRUPT changes in pitch and roll, The word ABRUPT is subjective just
like reckless and carelessness. Unusual attitude in .303 is
subjective and again not defined by a degree of pitch or bank.

Practicing emergency maneuvers, commercial maneuvers or practicing
unusual attitudes (for IMC work or even stalls - think greater then 30
degree pitch) are NOT considered aerobatic per my FSDO. Don't believe
me, call your local FSDO equivelant.

30 degree pitch 60 bank refers to parachute requirements ONLY and
parachutes are ONLY required if I am carrying passengers (instructors
and crew are not considered passengers). 91.307 I confirmed this
with the FSDO so again if you don't believe me, call your local FSDO.

On Aug 31, 1:18*pm, a wrote:

The good thing about this thread is at least some pilots may have
gained second thoughts about on purpose steep banks. The principal
posters have made their points, to which I might add "legal" does not
mean "wise" and the hope is we have become somewhat wiser.

Very well stated. As you stated legal doesn't mean wise for those
exceeding their capability. I did not feel I exceeded my piloting
capabilities and still remained within legal parameters of FARS 91.303
and 91.307. Outcome speaks for itself.

A lesser bank for inexperienced pilots would be potentially a fatal
manuever.

As I stated earlier, I have no need to do this again, but in an
emergency at least now I am a little better prepared for how things
can happen quickly.

Why NOT learn without the duress of an actual emergency?