Captain Kangaroo...

"Let's see... if I just keep inducing the porpoising, it'll dissipate the energy before I run out of runway or the nosewheel... oh crap."

:D
 
A good example of pilot induced oscillation, and also an old one (though not seen before on these pages). If I'm ever feeling down about my skills I can watch stuff like this. Cherokees are seriously easy to land. It takes a really ham-fisted pilot to porpoise one.
 
steingar said:
A good example of pilot induced oscillation, and also an old one (though not seen before on these pages). If I'm ever feeling down about my skills I can watch stuff like this. Cherokees are seriously easy to land. It takes a really ham-fisted pilot to porpoise one.
Click to expand...

Actually not. All it takes is too much speed of final and a freeze reaction on the first hit. In this case the guy got set up for it in his training by being taught to use reduced flaps for windy conditions.
 
Henning said:
Actually not. All it takes is too much speed of final and a freeze reaction on the first hit. In this case the guy got set up for it in his training by being taught to use reduced flaps for windy conditions.
Click to expand...

All you have to do is hold it off. Cherokees are draggy, they loose speed easily and want to come down. My standard technique for gusty crosswinds is to come in fast and bleed off speed in ground effect. Works on long runways, not so good on short.

Easy to porpoise a Skyhawk or Skylane. They want to fly.
 
steingar said:
All you have to do is hold it off. Cherokees are draggy, they loose speed easily and want to come down. My standard technique for gusty crosswinds is to come in fast and bleed off speed in ground effect. Works on long runways, not so good on short.

Easy to porpoise a Skyhawk or Skylane. They want to fly.
Click to expand...

Why not use extra throttle for the extra energy than extra speed? With full flaps you can add a health dollop of throttle increasing your tail effectiveness without the speed increase that prolongs your exposure to the hazard zone of 'not quite flying and not quite driving' in variable conditions?

Holding it off is the correct action to prevent a bounce, but he took a bounce, happens to everyone occasionally. What he didn't do after the first bounce is what got him in trouble.
 
Henning said:
Why not use extra throttle for the extra energy than extra speed? With full flaps you can add a health dollop of throttle increasing your tail effectiveness without the speed increase that prolongs your exposure to the hazard zone of 'not quite flying and not quite driving' in variable conditions?
Click to expand...

In strong winds the problem is keeping lined up on approach, the winds can overcome rudder effectiveness and start pushing you to the side. By coming in faster you increase rudder effectiveness allowing you to maintain control.

Once you enter the runway environment in a low wing the winds are far less effective as they're weaker close to the ground. Since the airplane is draggy by nature, it really isn't difficult to hold it off and slow down to landing speed. Chews up runway, but most places that' just fine.

I have to admit, last time I landed WV62 I used all 3000 feet of the runway. Had it been 2900 I would have had an excursion. Then again, had it been 2900 I would have probably landed elsewhere. That was a tough day.
 
steingar said:
In strong winds the problem is keeping lined up on approach, the winds can overcome rudder effectiveness and start pushing you to the side. By coming in faster you increase rudder effectiveness allowing you to maintain control.

Once you enter the runway environment in a low wing the winds are far less effective as they're weaker close to the ground. Since the airplane is draggy by nature, it really isn't difficult to hold it off and slow down to landing speed. Chews up runway, but most places that' just fine.

I have to admit, last time I landed WV62 I used all 3000 feet of the runway. Had it been 2900 I would have had an excursion. Then again, had it been 2900 I would have probably landed elsewhere. That was a tough day.
Click to expand...

Throttle and drag combined will increase your tail effectiveness more than excess speed without incurring the extra risks. To take up a 3000' runway with a Cherokee in any conditions is ludicrous. Let the prop wash create the extra wind, you can turn prop was off in an instant. Speed takes time to bleed, especially in ground effect where a large source of drag has been eliminated.
 
Not sure I even know how to do that.

Again, just soloed, but I was taught to come in 30 degrees of flaps, approach above normal speed at whatever the gusts are (so if 15 mph wind, with gust up to 20 mph, come in 5 mph higher), and power off to the flair.

Not a Cherokee, so that might be different. Not sure.
 
steingar said:
In strong winds the problem is keeping lined up on approach, the winds can overcome rudder effectiveness and start pushing you to the side.
Click to expand...

By the way, my comments in this thread are not authoritative. I am just hear to learn...

That being said, why not crab into the wind all the way in, and straighten it up right at the end?
 
This reminds me of this crazy skilled (and just plane crazy) pilot video:

 
Mafoo said:
By the way, my comments in this thread are not authoritative. I am just hear to learn...

That being said, why not crab into the wind all the way in, and straighten it up right at the end?
Click to expand...

I usually straighten up to a slip on short final.
 
Mafoo said:
By the way, my comments in this thread are not authoritative. I am just hear to learn...

That being said, why not crab into the wind all the way in, and straighten it up right at the end?
Click to expand...

That is the normal approach to landing in a crosswind. But when you have the rudder all the way to the stops and you're still going sideways, its time to do something different.

What a CFI would tell you is go land a runway more aligned to the prevailing wind, and I would agree. I am similarly not an authority, but I have done something different in my own airplane that works for me. I increase my approach speed by a few knots, whatever keeps me aligned with the runway centerline. Once I am in ground effect I allow the speed to bleed off before I attempt to land the aircraft. Chews up runway, but gets the job done.

Every pilot has his or her own way to deal with things. So long as the airplane isn't being asked to do something it can't do and everyone is happy, I think it's all good. If you are only beginning in your aviation adventure I would tell you to do whatever your CFI says and keep out of strong gusty crosswinds until your CFI considers it safe for you to try them.
 
steingar said:
That is the normal approach to landing in a crosswind. But when you have the rudder all the way to the stops and you're still going sideways, its time to do something different.
Click to expand...

Not sure I follow. On approach, the rudder is centered. Are you saying in that aircraft, if at end you put full left rudder on a crosswind coming from the right (dip the wing to keep from sliding), it's not enough to turn the nose?
 
Mafoo said:
Not sure I even know how to do that.
Click to expand...
Nobody ever tries to do it, or even thinks they're doing it... :wink2: (assuming you mean the crazy porpoising).
It may happen to you eventually no matter what you fly, but if you either go around or just stop trying to flare and get rid of some energy first (depending on runway remaining or whatever), it will just be a bounce or two and not a disaster.

This pilot could have even waited until the fifth or sixth bounce to go around... it's really a shame. :nonod:

If you were referring to what Henning said about power and flaps, you should see about working on that. Kinda sounds like you're already being taught to use power and flaps properly, but his point was that if you're looking to keep some extra speed, better to do it with throttle than to use less flaps and less (up) pitch.
 
Last edited:
Mafoo said:
Not sure I follow. On approach, the rudder is centered. Are you saying in that aircraft, if at end you put full left rudder on a crosswind coming from the right (dip the wing to keep from sliding), it's not enough to turn the nose?
Click to expand...

When landing a crosswind, normally you bank the aircraft into the wind and use the rudder to correct the resulting yaw motion. The rudder can only correct so much, which is why aircraft have crosswind limitations.
 
gkainz said:
what airplane and engine is this? Sounds like a 40 horse Evinrude outboard! :)
Click to expand...

In a Highlander it's very likely the turbocharged 3 cylinder Suzuki similar to the ones the Geo Metro used, it's a popular engine with those guys and seems to work quite well.
 
steingar said:
When landing a crosswind, normally you bank the aircraft into the wind and use the rudder to correct the resulting yaw motion. The rudder can only correct so much, which is why aircraft have crosswind limitations.
Click to expand...

Ahh, The way I am being taught, is I weather vien it all the way down, so when I am over the runway, I am at an angle, but tracking down the center.

At the very end, I apply rudder and ailerons to straighten out.

Might just be for now, so I understand better what's going on, and then in the future I am taught something else.
 
Last edited:
Mafoo said:
Ahh, The way I am being taught, is I weather vien it all the way down, so when I am over the runway, I am at an angle, but tracking doen the center.

At the very end, I apply rudder and ailerons to straighten out.

Might just be for now, so I understand better what's going on, and then in the future I am taught something else.
Click to expand...

You're being taught to land an airliner which is the difficult method when in a small light plane. When learning you would be much better served to start into your slipping approach much further out to get it stable and learn how much input gets what result. The way you are doing it is not wrong, it's just putting the cart before the horse in the learning process. Next time try the wing down/opposite rudder slipping approach fro the time you turn final.
 
Henning said:
You're being taught to land an airliner which is the difficult method when in a small light plane. When learning you would be much better served to start into your slipping approach much further out to get it stable and learn how much input gets what result. The way you are doing it is not wrong, it's just putting the cart before the horse in the learning process. Next time try the wing down/opposite rudder slipping approach fro the time you turn final.
Click to expand...

Good to know. I have an hour solo Sunday, and all I can do is stay in the pattern. The weather is not really allowed to be bad enough for me to try this out, but if I get at least a minor one, I will practice what I can.

I guess that's why all my cross landings on Wednesday were crap :)
 
Mafoo said:
Good to know. I have an hour solo Sunday, and all I can do is stay in the pattern. The weather is not really allowed to be bad enough for me to try this out, but if I get at least a minor one, I will practice what I can.

I guess that's why all my cross landings on Wednesday were crap :)
Click to expand...

Time enough for everything. You need time and lots of landings to get really comfortable with what your aircraft will do.

Besides, after hundreds of hours and landings, my landings the other day sucked too.
 
Mafoo said:
Good to know. I have an hour solo Sunday, and all I can do is stay in the pattern. The weather is not really allowed to be bad enough for me to try this out, but if I get at least a minor one, I will practice what I can.

I guess that's why all my cross landings on Wednesday were crap :)
Click to expand...

You can actually practice it on Base by tracking a line. Runway in front of you is not required to practice drift control, just make a bit of a fat pattern so you have more time on base.
 
steingar said:
Time enough for everything. You need time and lots of landings to get really comfortable with what your aircraft will do.
Click to expand...

Well, the funny thing is Sunday is the last day I will fly that plane (for training anyway).

I have done everything so far in the C150. Next week I move to the C172, because that's the plane I will do my cross countries and check ride in.

The only reason I have been in the C150 up to this point, is it's $30 less an hour.
 
Henning said:
You're being taught to land an airliner which is the difficult method when in a small light plane. When learning you would be much better served to start into your slipping approach much further out to get it stable and learn how much input gets what result. The way you are doing it is not wrong, it's just putting the cart before the horse in the learning process. Next time try the wing down/opposite rudder slipping approach fro the time you turn final.
Click to expand...

This was the approach my initial instructor showed me how to do during PPL training, then after I demonstrated that it was quite easy for me to track it, he said "OK, now that I know you can do it, let's try starting that at 100' just before the flare" and I've been flying it that way ever since. It's not "wrong" or "right", and I'm not sure I would call one easier than the other, they are just different. Either way, done correctly, you end up in the same spot just before touchdown - it's just a question of when you do the transition.
 
Mafoo said:
Well, the funny thing is Sunday is the last day I will fly that plane (for training anyway).

I have done everything so far in the C150. Next week I move to the C172, because that's the plane I will do my cross countries and check ride in.

The only reason I have been in the C150 up to this point, is it's $30 less an hour.
Click to expand...

Perfect reason.
 
Mafoo said:
Well, the funny thing is Sunday is the last day I will fly that plane (for training anyway).

I have done everything so far in the C150. Next week I move to the C172, because that's the plane I will do my cross countries and check ride in.

The only reason I have been in the C150 up to this point, is it's $30 less an hour.
Click to expand...

Why switch? I did all my training in a 150. My 150. Sweet little airplanes.
 
Henning said:
You're being taught to land an airliner which is the difficult method when in a small light plane. When learning you would be much better served to start into your slipping approach much further out to get it stable and learn how much input gets what result. The way you are doing it is not wrong, it's just putting the cart before the horse in the learning process. Next time try the wing down/opposite rudder slipping approach fro the time you turn final.
Click to expand...

I learned to "kick out the crab" before touchdown, and consequently never got really good at X-wind landings - my timing wasn't great.

Then when I moved to Wisconsin my home class D airport closed down 18/36 for resurfacing for almost 6 months, leaving only 10/28. I just didn't fly for many days because of cross winds, until I said "this is rediculous." I got an instructor and we did a lot of 90 degree crosswind work using the wing down/opposite rudder slipping approach, starting at the completion of the base to final turn. To this day I will do that for most of my final approach, and haven't been shaken by a crosswind too badly since then.
 
The "crosswind" runway at my home field was out of service during most of my PPL training. Consequently, I actually sucked more at normal landings.
 
nddons said:
I learned to "kick out the crab" before touchdown, and consequently never got really good at X-wind landings - my timing wasn't great.

Then when I moved to Wisconsin my home class D airport closed down 18/36 for resurfacing for almost 6 months, leaving only 10/28. I just didn't fly for many days because of cross winds, until I said "this is rediculous." I got an instructor and we did a lot of 90 degree crosswind work using the wing down/opposite rudder slipping approach, starting at the completion of the base to final turn. To this day I will do that for most of my final approach, and haven't been shaken by a crosswind too badly since then.
Click to expand...

That's the problem that has come home to roost in the flight training industry as it stands. Most instructors are time builders heading for the airlines and they learned in a 141 program using the FAA's method for developing airline pilots. the FAA is a firm believer in primacy so the object is to teach them airliner technique from day one. I have no real objection to this if they let them then go direct to the right seat of an airliner at 250 hours with their commercial to fly with a senior captain their first year 1000 hrs. I think we would have much better airline pilots.

The problem comes in when they are building time as CFIs outside that airline programming route and teaching those who will remain GA spam can pilots. They have never learned the techniques that work best for spam cans in the training environment and the training environment is all they know because it's all the flying they've done.

It's really become a mess and the FAA training system needs to have a major split off between those going to Jets and going to GA. While 250hr CFIs are fine to keep in the 141 environment where everyone should be heading to fly jets. A part 61 CFI working with people who stay GA though should be a 1500 hr rating same as ATP.
 
Henning said:
That's the problem that has come home to roost in the flight training industry as it stands. Most instructors are time builders heading for the airlines and they learned in a 141 program using the FAA's method for developing airline pilots. the FAA is a firm believer in primacy so the object is to teach them airliner technique from day one. I have no real objection to this if they let them then go direct to the right seat of an airliner at 250 hours with their commercial to fly with a senior captain their first year 1000 hrs. I think we would have much better airline pilots.

The problem comes in when they are building time as CFIs outside that airline programming route and teaching those who will remain GA spam can pilots. They have never learned the techniques that work best for spam cans in the training environment and the training environment is all they know because it's all the flying they've done.

It's really become a mess and the FAA training system needs to have a major split off between those going to Jets and going to GA. While 250hr CFIs are fine to keep in the 141 environment where everyone should be heading to fly jets. A part 61 CFI working with people who stay GA though should be a 1500 hr rating same as ATP.
Click to expand...

Not that I have any clue about the trends of the industry, just to tell you about my CFI.

He used to work for Delta, and he is currently 26 years old, with about 6,000 hours. He is now doing CFI work, and starting up a charter company.

So he is not looking to just build hours at least :)
 
Mafoo said:
Not that I have any clue about the trends of the industry, just to tell you about my CFI.

He used to work for Delta, and he is currently 26 years old, with about 6,000 hours. He is now doing CFI work, and starting up a charter company.

So he is not looking to just build hours at least :)
Click to expand...

Delta or Delta Connection? Either way he's a jet jockey and the wrong person to be instructing you if you have no jet intentions. If you are looking to enter the airline or corporate jet world, stay the course, he's doing you right. He has just never learned or built a proper spam can skill set is all so he can't teach it to you.

I think this has a lot to do with 65hr+ to get a private, people are being taught things the hard way.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top