Best way to lose altitude

MAKG1 said:
Try it at altitude before you believe that.

Slips drop the top wing. In a 172, it's slow enough that you could recover after the WTF stage, but that shock may last long enough to put you in the ground. In some airplanes, it will invert you quickly, and Bruce Air has some nice YouTube videos demonstrating that. Good luck recovering from inversion close to the ground with no training.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between holding top rudder in a steep turn and a cross controlled forward slip. I haven't seen the videos mentioned but don't forget we practice spins from straight and level flight most of the time. An aerobatic airplane can be made to spin from any attitude including cruise flight.

I've been trying to poke holes in the Flight Training Handbook for years. It's very well done and pretty much the bible of flying. If the FAA seems to think it's perfectly safe to slip an airplane on final all the way to touchdown it probably isn't that dangerous of a manuver. In order for a spin to develop one wing must stall first setting up a rapid rotation which holds the tail down and keeps the inside wing stalled. That just doesn't happen in a cross controlled forward slip. Of course you still don't want to stall on final and the FAA cautions against that noting that the airspeed indicator isn't accurate in a slip and pilots should use all of their senses to avoid getting slow and stalling.
 
Last edited:
Another thing you can do, and it works particular well with a 172, is to pull airspeed back to less than best glide (backside of the power curve) and you can create a fairly steep decent angle that way. I wouldn't do that at pattern altitude but I might do that to lose a lot of elevation from a high altitude to get to pattern altitude.
 
schmookeeg said:
Huh, that's a new one on me... I sort of want to go try it at altitude now... in something docile :)

I just treat "ball out of cage" as "danger zone" wrt stalls turning into spins.
Click to expand...

Skid=spin, slip =bobble.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Another thing you can do, and it works particular well with a 172, is to pull airspeed back to less than best glide (backside of the power curve) and you can create a fairly steep decent angle that way. I wouldn't do that at pattern altitude but I might do that to lose a lot of elevation from a high altitude to get to pattern altitude.
Click to expand...

I use that technique in anything, it's much easier on the passengers than slipping.
 
Full flaps, power back, point the nose at the ground if you have 40° barn door flaps. If 30° is all the flaps you have, a little slippage might be necessary. Sounds like you had a crap load of runway though, so I'd just fly it down normally. I pretty much always do steep descents with 40° flaps to power off landing. I'm usually at idle over the fence and flaring over the grass to drop it on the numbers. Certainly not a procedure you need to use on a 2 mile runway. i just like to make sure I can get off on the taxiway at 1500 ft without hammering the brakes.
 
Sgu2-22 said:
There is a difference between holding top rudder in a steep turn and a cross controlled forward slip.
Click to expand...

Yep, most airplanes will not spin (or even stall properly) out of a full deflection low airspeed slip to land configuration. In most airplanes, the elevator is sufficiently blanked by the fuselage during a hard slip to prevent stalling/spinning. Just be sure to you don't center the ailerons without removing the rudder. That will cause a skid and you can easily snap it over. Slips are very spin resistant unless you yank the controls from high airspeed and snap roll the airplane. That is different from accidentally getting too slow in a slip to land configuration.
 
OkieFlyer said:
Full flaps, power back, point the nose at the ground if you have 40° barn door flaps. If 30° is all the flaps you have, a little slippage might be necessary. Sounds like you had a crap load of runway though, so I'd just fly it down normally. I pretty much always do steep descents with 40° flaps to power off landing. I'm usually at idle over the fence and flaring over the grass to drop it on the numbers. Certainly not a procedure you need to use on a 2 mile runway. i just like to make sure I can get off on the taxiway at 1500 ft without hammering the brakes.
Click to expand...

You're much better off full flaps, close the throttle, pull the nose up to the stall horn and watch the PAPI/VASI/slope, then lower the nose (add a touch of throttle if you need) as you start to come on slope and pick up some energy for 1.2Vso.
 
tehmightypirate said:
The end result was I crossed the threshold at 110 knots, 10 degrees flaps, and about 900 feet above the field. My solution was to enter a slip and pull up (e.g. hit the brakes), dump in 30 degrees flaps, and then enter a steep descent at around 70 knots. Bounced the landing and was generally unimpressed with myself for the sloppy approach.
Click to expand...

Changing topics a little..

"Bounced the landing" as in you bounced off the runway once, managed an upward attitude and then touched down on the mains or "Bounced the landing" as in you bounced, then bobbled pitchwise several times down the runway, kind of bouncing back and forth between the nosegear and mains?

As far as the best way to lose altitude, it needs distance, I think your best option was "tower, going around, request downwind so I can get set up right". Better to fly a little longer, right?
 
redtail said:
:yeahthat:
Always enjoyed slips but I don't think I truly appreciated them until I started flying the Super D. Slip it like you mean it:)
Click to expand...

Slipping hard at the runway is fine for solo pilots or hauling pilot, or passengers well versed in GA, there's nothing dangerous about it. For the majority of passengers though, if you full slip at the runway, you will cause a mess, emotionally for sure, physically quite likely.

Look at your Best Glide airspeed. Any speed below that will increase your rate of descent and decrease your rate of forward motion, often referred to as "flying behind the power curve" because you have to add throttle to maintain altitude as you slow down.

With no throttle in and the stall horn chirping, most GA planes are dropping at a nice steep angle with no excess energy to the point of building strain forces causing stress on the plane, or having to misalign forces and vectors causing stress on your passengers. Just slow down and your drag increases, simple and smooth.
 
redtail said:
:yeahthat:
Always enjoyed slips but I don't think I truly appreciated them until I started flying the Super D. Slip it like you mean it:)
Click to expand...

Yep, if you've flown nothing but Cessnas, you might think they come down fast power off, full slip, and full flaps. Then if you get some experience in certain old taildragger or aerobatic types, you realize that Cessnas don't slip or come down worth a crap. :)
 
kgruber said:
Were you out of gas? Just go around. No need of aerobatics in the traffic pattern.
Click to expand...


This right here, I would have just gone around and set up for a better and controlled approach.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
RoscoeT said:
Yep, most airplanes will not spin (or even stall properly) out of a full deflection low airspeed slip to land configuration. In most airplanes, the elevator is sufficiently blanked by the fuselage during a hard slip to prevent stalling/spinning.
Click to expand...
Without some pretty impressive source to the contrary, I'm saying this kind of thinking kills.

dtuuri
 
redtail said:
Slip it like you mean it:)
Click to expand...

During primary my instructor would have me fly the pattern in the 172, but stay at pattern altitude until the base to final turn was complete. THEN slip like I described above and pitch for the numbers. Works just fine, and I thought it was fun.
 
dtuuri said:
Without some pretty impressive source to the contrary, I'm saying this kind of thinking kills.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Not knowing how to fly your airplane kills. What I said is true. I did not say all airplanes or that folks should assume this is true of their airplane. Maybe it will cause someone to go up with an instructor (if not comfortable themselves) and see for themselves how their airplane behaves, and that you will not necessarily spin just because the ball is way off center, despite what some other CFI may have told them. Everyone should be familiar with how their INDIVIDUAL airplane behaves. Or you can go your flying career fearfully and unnecessarily flying within a very tiny portion of the performance envelope because you never learned any better.
 
In training in a 172 my instructor had me come in high and slip all the way down final until the beginning of rounding it out just over the numbers. I'd round it out and release the slip and be amazed by how much we'd float. This was with no flaps but I've done it with flaps as well. Less float after releasing the slip with flaps. The maneuver always kind of freaked me out but became a fun challenge.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
172s also have a large (~10 knot) airspeed error in a full slip. Because there is only one static port, it's (very) different right vs. left. Airplanes like 182s that have two static ports have much, much smaller airspeed errors.
 
RoscoeT said:
Not knowing how to fly your airplane kills. What I said is true. I did not say all airplanes or that folks should assume this is true of their airplane. Maybe it will cause someone to go up with an instructor (if not comfortable themselves) and see for themselves how their airplane behaves, and that you will not necessarily spin just because the ball is way off center, despite what some other CFI may have told them. Everyone should be familiar with how their INDIVIDUAL airplane behaves. Or you can go your flying career fearfully and unnecessarily flying within a very tiny portion of the performance envelope because you never learned any better.
Click to expand...

So, you have no reference to back up what you said? In my experience, I've owned a couple aerobatic airplanes in my life and done thousands of stalls (including cross-control stalls) in various primary trainers, it isn't at all true.

dtuuri
 
Sgu2-22 said:
There is a difference between holding top rudder in a steep turn and a cross controlled forward slip. I haven't seen the videos mentioned but don't forget we practice spins from straight and level flight most of the time. An aerobatic airplane can be made to spin from any attitude including cruise flight.
Click to expand...

I've done departure stalls "straight ahead" in a slip, like what you might do if you overdid a crosswind short field takeoff. In a 172, if you know what it looks like, you can recover easily, as it's a slow enough wing drop. If you don't know what it looks like, you might not recover.

Try this before you quote a source as authoritative, even a good one. It's not the whole picture.

The AFM also says that you can stall at any attitude and at any airspeed. The correct statement is that you can stall at any attitude or at any airspeed. There are combinations of the two that aren't going to stall you. You might break the airplane, but you won't stall. An example is a steady straight ahead descent just below Vne.
 
Last edited:
dtuuri said:
So, you have no reference to back up what you said? In my experience, I've owned a couple aerobatic airplanes in my life and done thousands of stalls (including cross-control stalls) in various primary trainers, it isn't at all true.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Airplanes **I've** been unable to spin from a full deflection power off slip at typical approach speeds - Decathlon, Citabria, C-172, J-3, RV-4, Pitts S-2C. I have not tried this with every airplane in existence. I've heard others mention many more types that they could not spin from a slip.

So I'm curious...which airplanes have you been able to spin from a full deflection, power off slip, configured as you would for landing - low airspeed, with your hand creeping back as if you let it get too slow?

I'm not talking about just a "cross controlled stall". Hopefully your reading comprehension skills will allow you to pick up on this. Yeah, in most airplanes you can snap the airplane into a spin with the controls crossed with power on, higher (than approach) airspeed, and abrupt control movements. But this does not simulate the slip to land configuration.
 
dtuuri said:
So, you have no reference to back up what you said? In my experience, I've owned a couple aerobatic airplanes in my life and done thousands of stalls (including cross-control stalls) in various primary trainers, it isn't at all true.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Jesse actually has video proving the fact.
 
RoscoeT said:
So I'm curious...which airplanes have you been able to spin from a full deflection, power off slip, configured as you would for landing - low airspeed, with your hand creeping back as if you let it get too slow?
Click to expand...
I've had a couple of Citabrias and have stalled Decathlons and 172s on your list. If you can't make them spin from a slip with full rudder, for a reasonable fee I'll show you how.

RoscoeT said:
I'm not talking about just a "cross controlled stall". Hopefully your reading comprehension skills will allow you to pick up on this.
Click to expand...
It would be nice to engage in a dialog with you sometime without need to ignore your insults.

RoscoeT said:
Yeah, in most airplanes you can snap the airplane into a spin with the controls crossed with power on, higher (than approach) airspeed, and abrupt control movements. But this does not simulate the slip to land configuration.
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about snap rolls.

dtuuri
 
dtuuri said:
I've had a couple of Citabrias and have stalled Decathlons and 172s on your list. If you can't make them spin from a slip with full rudder, for a reasonable fee I'll show you how.
Click to expand...

Yep, and I know how you'll do it - you'll remove the aileron deflection while keeping the rudder in. That is not a slip - that's a skid from which you will spin. If you're saying that in your Citabria (or the Decathlon and 172) you could be in a full deflection, power off, ~1.3Vso slip, then move the elevator to the aft stop without changing aileron and rudder and enter a spin, I will say that your memory is failing you.

dtuuri said:
It would be nice to engage in a dialog with you sometime without need to ignore your insults.
Click to expand...

Sorry, just past experience with you talking in circles AROUND the points (not directly TO the points) I have made before.
 
I probably would have gone around given the circumstance on that approach, flew around the patch and tried a more stable approach.
 
denverpilot said:
You didn't say how far out you were when this started, nor the field elevation of your home airport, so the information isn't there to simply figure out time, speed, distance, and descent rate to see if you were doing something sane or dumb. ;)

First things first: What the tower told you to do, has zero bearing on it. You're the pilot. Don't ever use what a tower told you to do as an excuse for poor piloting and planning. Aviate. Always.

Lets assume the worst on your numbers, and do some head math....
Click to expand...

I've bookmarked this! Do you have a blog? This should be copy/paste. :)
 
corytx8 said:
This right here, I would have just gone around and set up for a better and controlled approach.
Click to expand...

Ryanb said:
I probably would have gone around given the circumstance on that approach, flew around the patch and tried a more stable approach.
Click to expand...

Well that's the BOOK answer ;)

Now the FUN response is: "Tower, Extra 123 requesting a fly by in lieu of go around":lol:
 
Sgu2-22 said:
A note on slips from the FAA Airplane flying handbook:

"Unlike skids, however, if an airplane in a slip is made to stall, it displays very little of the yawing tendency that causes a skidding stall to develop into a spin. The airplane in a slip may do little more than tend to roll into a wings level attitude. In fact, in some airplanes stall characteristics may even be improved."
Click to expand...

This and the follow ups people posted is quite interesting. I knew a slipped stall was not a major spin risk but have never actually tried one. My next flight is planned to be a solo exercise in crosswind landings, I'll add slipped stalls to the list as well. I'll bring my go pro and report back.
 
bflynn said:
Changing topics a little..

"Bounced the landing" as in you bounced off the runway once, managed an upward attitude and then touched down on the mains or "Bounced the landing" as in you bounced, then bobbled pitchwise several times down the runway, kind of bouncing back and forth between the nosegear and mains?

As far as the best way to lose altitude, it needs distance, I think your best option was "tower, going around, request downwind so I can get set up right". Better to fly a little longer, right?
Click to expand...

Good question. Wind was gusting at 20 knots 20 degrees off of the runway heading. Touchdown was a little fast but smooth, gust pushed me back up a foot or so vertically and plopped me back on the runway, a little bouce or two after from gusts/suspension in the mains. Entirely my fault for not letting the speed bleed off more but as bounces go out was minor, just sloppy and embarrassing.
 
kgruber said:
Were you out of gas? Just go around. No need of aerobatics in the traffic pattern.
Click to expand...

Well, yes. However, no safety was compromised in the slightest, but I will sheepishly admit that I was trying to set a personal speed record from my departure to the destination. Again didn't do anything unsafe but, yes, I was screwing around somewhat. So, you're entirely right and if this wasn't a huge runway I wouldn't have hesitated to setup the approach again.
 
Last edited:
dtuuri said:
So, you have no reference to back up what you said?
Click to expand...

Aside from actual experience, I totally missed that the almighty hallowed FAA text indicates the same thing. ;) I thought you were one of those who likes to thump the text. :lol:

Sgu2-22 said:
FAA Airplane flying handbook:

"Unlike skids, however, if an airplane in a slip is made to stall, it displays very little of the yawing tendency that causes a skidding stall to develop into a spin. The airplane in a slip may do little more than tend to roll into a wings level attitude. In fact, in some airplanes stall characteristics may even be improved."
Click to expand...
 
Interesting thread on different thoughts on this. My experience in a situation where I feel rushed on approach or uncomfortable and due also to usually having someone along as passenger, would be to reply going missed, or in theory. Of course I usually try to land it by one of the various ways talked about anyway and end with same results as OP.
 
If you wanted to set a speed record you should have descended sooner and ended up using that energy to gain ground speed for longer.
 
Denverpilot, thanks for those explanations!
 
If you were really 900 feet AGL at the threshold and did all that just to get down, well, bravo...

I would have gone around.

These days I dislike using slips to dump altitude because it means I've mismanaged my energy and it also scares the everloving **** out of passengers (that can occasionally be desirable but seldom :D ).

For my airplane, power off, gear down, full flaps and 80 knots gets me down in a hurry - I call it "space shuttle mode". It takes a lot of nose down to reach 80 knots with full flaps and no power.

I have had to do that a few times but never from 900 feet over the threshold. :confused: I mean maybe with a very long runway or a certain type of airplane, but still 900 feet is a pretty high. The super pilots on here will disagree but I'd go around. Call me a ()
 
Depends on what your flying. In a light tail dragger, champ, Luscombe , cub, champ,etc. put rudder to floor , opposite full stick and slip it down to runway. Comes down quickly. Stearman in same situation drops like a stone! In a mooney you either slow it down to begin with or go around. In ground effect it just keeps on flying if your too fast. Managing the speed on final is everything, as is being comfortable with what your flying. ( knowing the aircraft well) I've often been high in the pattern on purpose just for the fun of slipping it to the runway, like to five feet above it.
 
Last edited:
ja_user said:
If you wanted to set a speed record you should have descended sooner and ended up using that energy to gain ground speed for longer.
Click to expand...

I sort of intended to do that. Descended at bottom of the yellow arc and kept the speed as long as I could. Problem is I am used to a 110 knot cessna, not a 160 knots groundspeed (weeeee!) aircraft; so my descent was started late. As I was in the G1000 Cessna 172 the wonderful little cyan arc told me that I screwed up as soon as I started to descend. ETA and experience confirmed that this was going to be a high approach.

I figured that with a wide base leg I could make it work but the ATC wanted me to keep it in close. While I wont let ATC tell me how to fly the plane I thought I could make it work (descend at yellow arc then dump the flaps and speed at the runway, land long, and keep my "record" time). This did work but wasn't pretty. Thus, my pondering if there was a better way than slipping it in. Obviously, the best choice is better descent planning.
 
petrolero said:
If you were really 900 feet AGL at the threshold and did all that just to get down, well, bravo...

I would have gone around.

These days I dislike using slips to dump altitude because it means I've mismanaged my energy and it also scares the everloving **** out of passengers (that can occasionally be desirable but seldom :D ).

For my airplane, power off, gear down, full flaps and 80 knots gets me down in a hurry - I call it "space shuttle mode". It takes a lot of nose down to reach 80 knots with full flaps and no power.

I have had to do that a few times but never from 900 feet over the threshold. :confused: I mean maybe with a very long runway or a certain type of airplane, but still 900 feet is a pretty high. The super pilots on here will disagree but I'd go around. Call me a ()
Click to expand...

I had a commercial pilot passenger in the right seat (and also my father) so no worries about scaring them. Non-pilot passengers would have been an immediate go-around. I don't need any puke to clean up off the G1000.

I had a gopro pointed out the side window and had the autopilot (off) set for 1400 feet if I recall. You can see the airport environment right when you hear the Otto call out "altitude", which means that I was 200' below the selected altitude. So it was 900 to 1100 at the threshold, give or take.

And with a 12,000 runway I still landed with about 7,000 remaining so it wasn't that bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top