Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pulling up hard...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pulling up hard...

    ...but not relentlessly.

    Flight Chops CONTESTS! A new contest EVERY month; shared prizes from all our sponsors totalling over $2000! AND this month thanks to iCloth Avionics, we're i...
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  • #2
    I like the 700hr "experienced pilot" bit.

    Comment


    • #3
      More experienced than a 699-hour pilot!

      Personally I find the emphasis (in this context) on "personal minimums" kind of funny - if you ask me it's more about physics. If there's a situation where on takeoff an aircraft can only reach 25' AGL at a place where there's a 50' tree, it doesn't matter what person is flying the plane - bad stuff gonna happen.
      Be alert! America needs more lerts.

      Eric Law

      Comment


      • #4
        ...we almost need an Evan-absolute-never-ever-deviate-15%?-extra-safety-buffer for "legal" takeoffs, instead of "just don't hit anything".

        As I recall, "the book" lists halfway accurately what the plane will indeed do (with a fresh engine) (Give or take the exact airplane, pilot weight, subtle technique, minor weather variations).

        The point about old a$$ planes with old a$$ engines, yada yada might be a big hole in slice of Swiss cheese.

        Apologies for referring to "we".
        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

        Comment


        • #5
          Key thing here is that he didn't pull into a stall even with tree tops above the flight path. You can train a pilot to have this instinct. In terms of developing this instinct, hours, apparently, become irrelevant after a certain number. That number is apparently less than 700.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Evan View Post
            Key thing here is that he didn't pull into a stall even with tree tops above the flight path. You can train a pilot to have this instinct. In terms of developing this instinct, hours, apparently, become irrelevant after a certain number. That number is apparently less than 700.
            What?

            1) How do you know it's instinct. For all we know his instincts were telling him to pull up MORE while his cognitive side told him, no, this can lead to a stall which means much less lift, so ease up when that beeper goes off.

            2) Sorry to put words in your mouth, but you sound like this is supposed to be some fundamental concept that is ingrained into your mind and you never forget. This would be the wrong way to do things. The proper way would be to train on the type specific procedures. So when the flat panel display goes Y2K you push the right buttons. Knowing a general rule to NOT pull up has nothing to do with it.
            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Evan View Post
              Key thing here is that he didn't pull into a stall even with tree tops above the flight path. You can train a pilot to have this instinct. In terms of developing this instinct, hours, apparently, become irrelevant after a certain number. That number is apparently less than 700.
              How do you know that you can?

              Take 100 prospect pilots, train all them like this pilot was trained, put all of them in the same real-life situation (not within a training session), and if in the heat of situation none of them panics and pulls up slightly more to try to avoid the trees and stalls in the process, then you can say that the data suggest that, with the proper training, less than 1% will fail (and not even that if you can do it statistically correct and take sampling variation into account).

              By the way, not stalling was about the only right thing that this pilot did. It saved the situation this time, but he was lucky, Had the trees been 100ft closer, 10 ft taller, the pressure 0.1 in HG lower, the temperature 10°F hotter, or the plane 100 lb heavier, probably the pilot would have still attempted the take-off and the fate would have been very different even without stalling. Then we have the technique. The pilot should have accelerated to Vx on the ground, or at at least in ground effect, and then climb at Vx, instead of trying to lift off and climb out as soon as possible and flying in the boundary of the stall all the time. Not to mention considering not taking off in that condition to begin with (remove some fuel, wait until the early morning when the temp would have been quite cooler, etc...).

              --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
              --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

              Comment


              • #8
                The best action taken involving this takeoff was the forethought of whoever cut that lane in the trees.....because without it that aircraft would have been a smoking wreck.
                If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                  What?

                  1) How do you know it's instinct. For all we know his instincts were telling him to pull up MORE while his cognitive side told him, no, this can lead to a stall which means much less lift, so ease up when that beeper goes off.
                  1) I use the word 'instinct' in the colloquial sense. As in a cognitive instinct, a learned cognitive decision made instantly without the need to deliberate, the reactionary instinct. The ancient human instinct may have been to pull away from the ground.

                  2) Stall avoidance procedure in close ground proximity is universal. Don't pull up or induce pitch, don't reconfigure, fly in and out of the warning regime and pray for airspeed before obstacles.

                  3) As I said, I think that flight schools could impress upon pilots that to stall = to fall, thus to pull up after a stall warning = to drop out. Then, in the heat of the moment, with the pilot instinctively not wanting to lose altitude, his cognitive reaction would be to not do the thing that would result in the quickest and most certain loss of altitude.

                  4) This pilot may have been a total jackass, but that only proves that even a total jackass can be taught not to stall.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
                    The best action taken involving this takeoff was the forethought of whoever cut that lane in the trees.....
                    Probably the last pilot who tried this stunt.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                      ...By the way, not stalling was about the only right thing that this pilot did. It saved the situation this time, but he was lucky, Had the trees been 100ft closer, 10 ft taller, the pressure 0.1 in HG lower, the temperature 10°F hotter, or the plane 100 lb heavier, probably the pilot would have still attempted the take-off and the fate would have been very different even without stalling...
                      Do not Concur.

                      By all appearances he did calculate the weight and look at the weather conditions and determine the takeoff distances.

                      It would appear he followed the procedures as trained! (As I was trained too!)

                      And he cleared the trees- no luck whatsoever, pure planning and it went as planned...it just turned out to be more entertaining than he expected.

                      Now, I'm not defending the incident as OK, safe or a good idea.

                      Instead, I look at this and see faulty procedures. Whereas good airmanship might lead you to be a cowboy and pad your distances by 20%, I have never seen any "rule" that you indeed do that...just that it's a good idea (not unlike choosing a common cruise power and attitude if you loose airspeed).

                      I'm sure that some airline ops / procedures might include a little fudge factor, but then again- aside from a few less trees, are the margins that much greater here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu91oZ2_Vag

                      (And I'm searching youtube for a 747 takeoff where they lift off about at the piano keys)

                      Edit: Here's a good one...liftoff with less than 1000 ft of runway. Are the margins that much better than our Bonaza boys? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPJiOareZnA

                      (PS, I do concur that the Bonanza guys should have stayed on the ground longer on the takeoff roll and then "rotated-with-authority" as they were reaching Vx...as opposed to what appears to be dragging it off the ground and transitioning from mushy flight to a mushy climb- possibly on the back side of the drag curve.)
                      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                        And he cleared the trees- no luck whatsoever
                        If you define 'the trees' as most pilots would do: those immediately past the runway on the runway heading, then no, he most definitely did not clear the trees. If you define 'luck' as: a sudden opening to the left of the trees, then yes, complete luck, whatsoever.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Evan View Post
                          If you define 'the trees' as most pilots would do: those immediately past the runway on the runway heading, then no, he most definitely did not clear the trees. If you define 'luck' as: a sudden opening to the left of the trees, then yes, complete luck, whatsoever.
                          Noted.

                          But standing firm that the aircraft performed closely to what the book told them as they followed good procedure and checked weight, density altitude and performance charts to see if the takeoff was possible.
                          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            At the beginning of the video, the pilot states that he intends to use "every inch" of runway, but then peels off with at least a few hundred feet left.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by ATLcrew View Post
                              At the beginning of the video, the pilot states that he intends to use "every inch" of runway, but then peels off with at least a few hundred feet left.
                              And yet he doesn't pull up and stall.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X