Aerobatics books (Bertie, Dudley)

wrote in news:5352dadf-1422-4ac0-b8f1-
:

I'm assuming an accidental encounter between a large wake and a
smaller
aircraft. They do happen. If it happens too low for a recovery you've
ignored all the info that's out there about avoidance. In other
words,
you've flown into one from a preceding aircraft taking off or
landing.

Bertie

Damn straight. If they happen to you it is sheer sh1t pantz terror.
Bertie's descriptions are 100% spot on.

I think the FAA should put warnings in big FAT red type in their
publications. The reality is far more threatening than gets drilled
into student pilot's heads.

In her student pilot days my instructor came in for a landing on a
runway parallel to where a big jet had landed a couple minutes before.
While she was still at 400 - 500 feet, I believe, she suddenly found
herself in a knife-edge orientation. She righted herself before really
thinking about it. Jet turbulence had drifted over and got her.

A coworker of mine, a CFI (though no longer current), was on a 737 on
approach as a passenger. He said suddenly the plane was at about 70
degrees or more of bank (actually I think he said 90 but am no longer
sure). The pilot corrected immediately. He said most of the people had
no idea what had happened. There'd been a few gasps but that was it.

On my second solo flight I was doing T&Gs at KAUS (Austin Bergstrom).
My hands and feet and brain were completely occupied just with trying
to land and takeoff correctly. Bad place for a spankin' newbie to
practice. ATC routed me to the 12000 foot runway. As I was downwind
they cleared a 737 to take off. Then when I was abeam the numbers they
cleared a 757 to land. After that ATC cleared me but I extended my
downwind some for what I *thought* was adequate separation & delay. In
theory I might have shot for the space between where the one landed
and the other rotated. In theory I could have asked ATC to extend my
downwind to allow wake turbulence avoidence.

I did neither. Bout 3 minutes after the 757 I landed okay near the
numbers, accelerated and climbed. I was maybe 30 - 40 feet in the air
when a gigantic invisible fist slammed the plane. Nose up, wing over.
It seemed like I saw the top of the sky from the front windshield and
the runway out the right side window. Close -- very close.

I didn't think fear could shoot through the body that fast nor have I
ever so radically and accurately corrected aircraft attitude. I don't
think I lost a single knot.

It was one of those moments where my bag of luck still had something
in it when I sure as hell didn't effectively use my knowledge of wake
avoidance. If the x-wind had been a bit slower and my judgement a
little worse -- presto, upside down and squished or burned to death.
It was a lesson to me I shall not forget -- the scariest of a few I've
had so far.

It's always worth asking ATC for more space / time / altered course if
there's risk of wake turbulence. Landing or taking off behind a single
big jet is one thing. But I will never again accept a clearance to
land in such circumstances (one heavy takes off, another lands, or
vice versa). I'll ask to extend.


Yes, time is the best healer for wake turbulence. It also pays to have a
thorough understanding of how they behave and how they drift in wind.
It's also one of the most common problems you can have where aerobatic
experience would be a huge help.
disagree that the FAA doesn't put enough emphasis on wake education,
though. There is plenty of info on it out there and it is very good
info.
If you've ever seen the FAA's film about it, the one with the 747's
straming smoke and passing through the smoke emitted by towers, it's
well worth seeing..

Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
wrote in news:5352dadf-1422-4ac0-b8f1-
:

I'm assuming an accidental encounter between a large wake and a
smaller
aircraft. They do happen. If it happens too low for a recovery you've
ignored all the info that's out there about avoidance. In other
words,
you've flown into one from a preceding aircraft taking off or
landing.

Bertie

Damn straight. If they happen to you it is sheer sh1t pantz terror.
Bertie's descriptions are 100% spot on.

I think the FAA should put warnings in big FAT red type in their
publications. The reality is far more threatening than gets drilled
into student pilot's heads.

In her student pilot days my instructor came in for a landing on a
runway parallel to where a big jet had landed a couple minutes before.
While she was still at 400 - 500 feet, I believe, she suddenly found
herself in a knife-edge orientation. She righted herself before really
thinking about it. Jet turbulence had drifted over and got her.

A coworker of mine, a CFI (though no longer current), was on a 737 on
approach as a passenger. He said suddenly the plane was at about 70
degrees or more of bank (actually I think he said 90 but am no longer
sure). The pilot corrected immediately. He said most of the people had
no idea what had happened. There'd been a few gasps but that was it.

On my second solo flight I was doing T&Gs at KAUS (Austin Bergstrom).
My hands and feet and brain were completely occupied just with trying
to land and takeoff correctly. Bad place for a spankin' newbie to
practice. ATC routed me to the 12000 foot runway. As I was downwind
they cleared a 737 to take off. Then when I was abeam the numbers they
cleared a 757 to land. After that ATC cleared me but I extended my
downwind some for what I *thought* was adequate separation & delay. In
theory I might have shot for the space between where the one landed
and the other rotated. In theory I could have asked ATC to extend my
downwind to allow wake turbulence avoidence.

I did neither. Bout 3 minutes after the 757 I landed okay near the
numbers, accelerated and climbed. I was maybe 30 - 40 feet in the air
when a gigantic invisible fist slammed the plane. Nose up, wing over.
It seemed like I saw the top of the sky from the front windshield and
the runway out the right side window. Close -- very close.

I didn't think fear could shoot through the body that fast nor have I
ever so radically and accurately corrected aircraft attitude. I don't
think I lost a single knot.

It was one of those moments where my bag of luck still had something
in it when I sure as hell didn't effectively use my knowledge of wake
avoidance. If the x-wind had been a bit slower and my judgement a
little worse -- presto, upside down and squished or burned to death.
It was a lesson to me I shall not forget -- the scariest of a few I've
had so far.

It's always worth asking ATC for more space / time / altered course if
there's risk of wake turbulence. Landing or taking off behind a single
big jet is one thing. But I will never again accept a clearance to
land in such circumstances (one heavy takes off, another lands, or
vice versa). I'll ask to extend.


Yes, time is the best healer for wake turbulence. It also pays to have a
thorough understanding of how they behave and how they drift in wind.
It's also one of the most common problems you can have where aerobatic
experience would be a huge help.
disagree that the FAA doesn't put enough emphasis on wake education,
though. There is plenty of info on it out there and it is very good
info.
If you've ever seen the FAA's film about it, the one with the 747's
straming smoke and passing through the smoke emitted by towers, it's
well worth seeing..

If that's the one where they fly a 182 up the middle of the wake from behind
the wide body, I certainly agree. Been around a long time, but every pilot
should see it.

If that's the one where they fly a 182 up the middle of the wake from behind
the wide body, I certainly agree. Been around a long time, but every pilot
should see it.- Hide quoted text -


All right. Never heard of that film before. It's gotta be on the web
somewhere. Thanks, will find.

"Maxwell" wrote in
:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
wrote in news:5352dadf-1422-4ac0-b8f1-
:

I'm assuming an accidental encounter between a large wake and a
smaller
aircraft. They do happen. If it happens too low for a recovery
you've ignored all the info that's out there about avoidance. In
other
words,
you've flown into one from a preceding aircraft taking off or
landing.

Bertie

Damn straight. If they happen to you it is sheer sh1t pantz terror.
Bertie's descriptions are 100% spot on.

I think the FAA should put warnings in big FAT red type in their
publications. The reality is far more threatening than gets drilled
into student pilot's heads.

In her student pilot days my instructor came in for a landing on a
runway parallel to where a big jet had landed a couple minutes
before. While she was still at 400 - 500 feet, I believe, she
suddenly found herself in a knife-edge orientation. She righted
herself before really thinking about it. Jet turbulence had drifted
over and got her.

A coworker of mine, a CFI (though no longer current), was on a 737
on approach as a passenger. He said suddenly the plane was at about
70 degrees or more of bank (actually I think he said 90 but am no
longer sure). The pilot corrected immediately. He said most of the
people had no idea what had happened. There'd been a few gasps but
that was it.

On my second solo flight I was doing T&Gs at KAUS (Austin
Bergstrom). My hands and feet and brain were completely occupied
just with trying to land and takeoff correctly. Bad place for a
spankin' newbie to practice. ATC routed me to the 12000 foot runway.
As I was downwind they cleared a 737 to take off. Then when I was
abeam the numbers they cleared a 757 to land. After that ATC cleared
me but I extended my downwind some for what I *thought* was adequate
separation & delay. In theory I might have shot for the space
between where the one landed and the other rotated. In theory I
could have asked ATC to extend my downwind to allow wake turbulence
avoidence.

I did neither. Bout 3 minutes after the 757 I landed okay near the
numbers, accelerated and climbed. I was maybe 30 - 40 feet in the
air when a gigantic invisible fist slammed the plane. Nose up, wing
over. It seemed like I saw the top of the sky from the front
windshield and the runway out the right side window. Close -- very
close.

I didn't think fear could shoot through the body that fast nor have
I ever so radically and accurately corrected aircraft attitude. I
don't think I lost a single knot.

It was one of those moments where my bag of luck still had something
in it when I sure as hell didn't effectively use my knowledge of
wake avoidance. If the x-wind had been a bit slower and my judgement
a little worse -- presto, upside down and squished or burned to
death. It was a lesson to me I shall not forget -- the scariest of a
few I've had so far.

It's always worth asking ATC for more space / time / altered course
if there's risk of wake turbulence. Landing or taking off behind a
single big jet is one thing. But I will never again accept a
clearance to land in such circumstances (one heavy takes off,
another lands, or vice versa). I'll ask to extend.


Yes, time is the best healer for wake turbulence. It also pays to
have a thorough understanding of how they behave and how they drift
in wind. It's also one of the most common problems you can have where
aerobatic experience would be a huge help.
disagree that the FAA doesn't put enough emphasis on wake education,
though. There is plenty of info on it out there and it is very good
info.
If you've ever seen the FAA's film about it, the one with the 747's
straming smoke and passing through the smoke emitted by towers, it's
well worth seeing..

If that's the one where they fly a 182 up the middle of the wake from
behind the wide body, I certainly agree. Been around a long time, but
every pilot should see it.


I haven't seen that one, but they'd all be the same.. The one I was
thinking of was done at NAFEC n the sixtis and they used a Colt. I knew
one of the guys who was doing it.

Bertie

wrote in
:

If that's the one where they fly a 182 up the middle of the wake from
behind the wide body, I certainly agree. Been around a long time, but
every pilot should see it.- Hide quoted text -


All right. Never heard of that film before. It's gotta be on the web
somewhere. Thanks, will find.


I found a few clips on youtube. Mostly jets streaming smoke. None of actual
encounters, though.
Anyhow, everyone knows what happens when yuo encounter the stuff..

Bertie.

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .

I haven't seen that one, but they'd all be the same.. The one I was
thinking of was done at NAFEC n the sixtis and they used a Colt. I knew
one of the guys who was doing it.


I belonged to a flying club in 73 or so, that borrowed several 16mm movies
from the GADO office. One was on wake turbulence. I remember the smoke
towers, how the smoke would slowly start to swirl and then suddenly zing
down the eye of the vortex maybe 100 yards as it passed. I don't recall
which wide body they used, but it passed a few hundred feet below a 182
moving the same direction. After it passed at approach speed, the two guys
in the 182 dropped down until they found the vortex. Seems they did two if
not three rolls in the vortex with the alerons on full opposite lock.
Certainly got the point across.

"Maxwell" wrote in
:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .

I haven't seen that one, but they'd all be the same.. The one I was
thinking of was done at NAFEC n the sixtis and they used a Colt. I
knew one of the guys who was doing it.


I belonged to a flying club in 73 or so, that borrowed several 16mm
movies from the GADO office. One was on wake turbulence. I remember
the smoke towers, how the smoke would slowly start to swirl and then
suddenly zing down the eye of the vortex maybe 100 yards as it passed.
I don't recall which wide body they used, but it passed a few hundred
feet below a 182 moving the same direction. After it passed at
approach speed, the two guys in the 182 dropped down until they found
the vortex. Seems they did two if not three rolls in the vortex with
the alerons on full opposite lock. Certainly got the point across.



Yes, it would..

I know one of the FAA's pilots involved in that program (Dudley might as
well, he worked at NAFEC) They did it in a Colt. He thought it was great
fun, but he was a very experienced aerobatic pilot as well as a lunatic.
(He crashed a Luscombe at an airshow drunk once and cleaned up the mess
before the FAA got there, denying all knowledge of the event, know him?)
I did it a few times in a 'Lakes. It was actually incredibly smoooth,
but completely overpowering, even for an airplane with a good roll rate.
There just isn't anythign you can do except get out of it ( you won't
get a lot of choice here, as you'll be tossed out) and recover from
whatever attitude you've would up in. Even going in fully expecting a
high roll rate, I could barely slow it down with full deflection. Each
time I was tossed out past 90 degrees at least and often more. I even
tried rolling with it just for fun, but it was very hit and miss staying
in the vortice.
An unsuspecting pilot in a standard lightplane would end up in roughly
the same position, but without the sreserves of strength nd
manueverability.
Crossing them at right angles or nearly so is another story entirely. I
once flew a Mooney 231 across the wake of a C-141, IMC (ATC were to
blame here, it wasn't intentional) And he bump you receive doing this at
high speed is not a bit pleasant and I could easily see it fracturing a
wing spar.

Flying mag also did an experiment around 1970, I think. I can't remember
if it was a Reed Cub or a Citabria, but they went and played around the
glideslope at Teterboro, I think. I can't remember what the article had
to say now, but it wouldn't be hard to guess..

One tip, though. If you suddenly smell burnt kerosene, brace yourself.
Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .

I know one of the FAA's pilots involved in that program (Dudley might as
well, he worked at NAFEC) They did it in a Colt. He thought it was great
fun, but he was a very experienced aerobatic pilot as well as a lunatic.
(He crashed a Luscombe at an airshow drunk once and cleaned up the mess
before the FAA got there, denying all knowledge of the event, know him?)
I did it a few times in a 'Lakes. It was actually incredibly smoooth,
but completely overpowering, even for an airplane with a good roll rate.
There just isn't anythign you can do except get out of it ( you won't
get a lot of choice here, as you'll be tossed out) and recover from
whatever attitude you've would up in. Even going in fully expecting a
high roll rate, I could barely slow it down with full deflection. Each
time I was tossed out past 90 degrees at least and often more. I even
tried rolling with it just for fun, but it was very hit and miss staying
in the vortice.
An unsuspecting pilot in a standard lightplane would end up in roughly
the same position, but without the sreserves of strength nd
manueverability.
Crossing them at right angles or nearly so is another story entirely. I
once flew a Mooney 231 across the wake of a C-141, IMC (ATC were to
blame here, it wasn't intentional) And he bump you receive doing this at
high speed is not a bit pleasant and I could easily see it fracturing a
wing spar.

Flying mag also did an experiment around 1970, I think. I can't remember
if it was a Reed Cub or a Citabria, but they went and played around the
glideslope at Teterboro, I think. I can't remember what the article had
to say now, but it wouldn't be hard to guess..

One tip, though. If you suddenly smell burnt kerosene, brace yourself.

Yeah, I certainly wouldn't want anyone to think I would recommend the
practice. IIRC, these guys were carrying some pretty expensive measurement
gear, and wearing back pack parachutes. They could have easily broken that
airplane flying in the easy way. Much less if you punch a fresh one
perpendicular to your flight path. You could easily remove the wings.

"Maxwell" wrote in
:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .

I know one of the FAA's pilots involved in that program (Dudley might
as well, he worked at NAFEC) They did it in a Colt. He thought it was
great fun, but he was a very experienced aerobatic pilot as well as a
lunatic. (He crashed a Luscombe at an airshow drunk once and cleaned
up the mess before the FAA got there, denying all knowledge of the
event, know him?) I did it a few times in a 'Lakes. It was actually
incredibly smoooth, but completely overpowering, even for an airplane
with a good roll rate. There just isn't anythign you can do except
get out of it ( you won't get a lot of choice here, as you'll be
tossed out) and recover from whatever attitude you've would up in.
Even going in fully expecting a high roll rate, I could barely slow
it down with full deflection. Each time I was tossed out past 90
degrees at least and often more. I even tried rolling with it just
for fun, but it was very hit and miss staying in the vortice.
An unsuspecting pilot in a standard lightplane would end up in
roughly the same position, but without the sreserves of strength nd
manueverability.
Crossing them at right angles or nearly so is another story entirely.
I once flew a Mooney 231 across the wake of a C-141, IMC (ATC were to
blame here, it wasn't intentional) And he bump you receive doing this
at high speed is not a bit pleasant and I could easily see it
fracturing a wing spar.

Flying mag also did an experiment around 1970, I think. I can't
remember if it was a Reed Cub or a Citabria, but they went and played
around the glideslope at Teterboro, I think. I can't remember what
the article had to say now, but it wouldn't be hard to guess..

One tip, though. If you suddenly smell burnt kerosene, brace
yourself.

Yeah, I certainly wouldn't want anyone to think I would recommend the
practice. IIRC, these guys were carrying some pretty expensive
measurement gear, and wearing back pack parachutes. They could have
easily broken that airplane flying in the easy way. Much less if you
punch a fresh one perpendicular to your flight path. You could easily
remove the wings.



True enough. Jack told me that he found it good fun, though. G forces
were fairly normal for the type of manuevering done. They did wear
chutes ( so was I, BTW) and I know the Colt had a quick release door.

I do believe most encounters over a few hundred feet would be
survivable if he pilot had aerobatic training, though, just in case that
point has been lost!

Bertie

Even going in fully expecting a
high roll rate, I could barely slow it down with full deflection.

Wouldn't a good technique be to pull "up" once you are near 90 degrees?
It would pull you out of it. Or would you end up stalling?

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.