I had a quick read. This caught my eye:
"..... then gliding at VL=Dmax until touchdown."
If one does this, yes, the plane will get there, but you cannot effectively flare to land. Any attempt has to be perfectly executed for the least hope of success there is no room for poor judgement. Like autorotations, I notice that pilots tend to get very nervous seeing the ground rush up a them, and begin to flare early. With no engine power to fix that error, it gets bad fast. I learned this decades ago, with my STOL equipped C 150. It'll glide like a parachute if you want - you can glide at 45MPH if you want, but the arrival is stunningly poor. You need the stored energy for the flare, and some planes need a lot of it.
Chances of survival are inversely proportionate to the angle of arrival. Two of my friend learned this for a nano second, the third is still in a back brace. I would rather flare well, and dissipate the energy into a less than ideal "scene", than slam in beside the runway downwind unarrested.
I was checking out a friend on his new 182RG the other week. Practicing forced approaches from high final. He glided slow, and flared high. I had to keep fixing it with power - objective not met. The last one was good enough that I just let it happen - stall warning 5 feet up, and thump. I told him to practice more - he is a former glider pilot!
It's one thing to get the plan to the intended landing spot, it another thing to land it there from a flare - particularly power off in a stressful situation. I have never said it cannot be done, I have always said that in an emergency, it should not be attempted.
I agree it is not an easy option, but in some cases you do not have much choice so you should be consider it (if well practiced at higher altituded or in the SIM).
In 98% of the cases, the best is to land straight ahead or to pull the chute.
However, Barry Schiff is advocating training for the impossible turn and promoting it through his video. It is maybe the same story as with spin/stall recovery training. In the training more people died than were saved from knowing how to recover, so they went to spin avoidance training instead.
It is maybe the same story as with spin/stall recovery training. In the training more people died than were saved from knowing how to recover, so they went to spin avoidance training instead.
Well, it is a certainty that a pilot who is not very proficient with spin recovery should not even consider a turnback. The big difference between training for a turnback, and spin training, is that a turnback is a deliberate maneuver, which could result in an accidental spin. If you do not start a turnback, it will not happen. A spin can happen through simple carelessness or inattentiveness.
I am a strong proponent of spin training by a well qualified and experienced instructor. Every pilot should have the basic flying skill to recognize and recover from a spin. I feel the same way about skid training for drivers. Both spins and skids can occur when the maneuvering is taken a little too far, and they happen fast. Recognition, and rapid recovery are life saving skills that every pilot should have.
If you have chosen to takeoff (because takeoff is ALWAYS a choice) from a runway where landing straight ahead is an undue hazard, to have chosen to takeoff toward an undue hazard, because turning back will never be less a hazard!. Friend two whose lifeless body I helped lift from his crashed plane had done the turnback, I presume because years earlier, his EFATO from the same runway put him in the lake (I was there for that one too). He came back wet, and with a cut on his nose (no shoulder harness in the amateur built), but otherwise unharmed. I guess the second time, he did not want to get wet, so he's dead.
Considering how much challenge it seems to be for some pilots to simply land from a power off approach straight in, the immense complications introduced by a circling, downwind forced approach are very much too risky to even consider. The risks of a turnback so far outweigh any small benefit, turnbacks are not even worth practicing from lower than 1000 feet AGL for power pilots.
Would one of these AoA sensors help?
Unfortunately it is a major mod for Part23 aircraft.... Alpha Systems can be installed as a minor mod apparently....
The risks of a turnback so far outweigh any small benefit, turnbacks are not even worth practicing from lower than 1000 feet AGL for power pilots.
I agree with that (although I don't have your experience). I would never consider anything other than landing straight ahead below 1000. And in practice prob not below 1500.
Would one of these AoA sensors help?
If this is about avoiding the stall, I don't think so, sine the pilot already is ignoring attitude, airspeed, and the stall warner.
If this is about flying the manoeuvre with precision (i.e., steep turns with best glide AoA), maybe. However, I am with Pilot DAR if it comes to the wisdom attempting this in the first place, regardless of instrumentation.
as with spin/stall recovery training. In the training more people died than were saved from knowing how to recover>
There can be no record of the number of lives saved by recovery from a spin/incipient spin.
I am a strong proponent of spin training by a well qualified and experienced instructor. Every pilot should have the basic flying skill to recognize and recover from a spin.>
I strongly agree. Might it be possible to enter a spin in severe turbulence? Two NTSB spin accidents from altitude made me think about this.
On two runways I use, after lift-off I immediately make a gentle turn towards a suitable area for landing/ditching. Consider also the runway threshhold you are turning back towards - if that is raised, an undershoot would be a disaster.
Would one of these AoA sensors help?
Not the AoA sensor again ;-) !
Do you really think somebody manoeuvering close to the ground at fairly steep angles of bank and looking frantically around to regain the runway threshold will think about looking at his AoA indicator? Chuck Yeager maybe, but I can't imagine that he follows this forum.
I will have a report on the AoA shortly, we have in stalled one in the 182 amphib, it's just a little late being readied for test flight. However, the usefulness of an AoA in a forced approach will be for a very short period of time during the flare. To safely approach in the best L/D, which is where you want the AoA giving you information, requires power. Yes, you could glide in on the precise point of the AoA, and the plane would do it, but when you go to flare, instant stall and settle into the ground unarrested. Therefore, an AoA set up for optimum approaches with power is of little use during forced approaches, particularly near aerobatic ones!
I will report the AoA this coming week I hope, I will not report a turnback....
