Power Off 180, CFI Says X, I Say Y

[dtuuri]

Aren't tangents outside the circle?

That sounds like a near miss.

The problem given was you are on the base to final turn and are high, do you slip?

Not with the wind as given. There is a better way. @MauleSkinner might in a Hawker, but I bet even he would find a better way.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Not with the wind as given. There is a better way. @MauleSkinner might in a Hawker, but I bet even he would find a better way.

Power off 180s were more of a Falcon 10 thing. Hawkers do really nice Lazy 8’s, though.

Nothing wrong with switching sides to a slip on final, IMO. But again, that was probably what the OP’s instructor was actually asking about.

 

[dtuuri]

Hawkers do really nice Lazy 8’s, though.

I bet. Yaw dampers help some planes do nice aileron rolls too, so I've heard.

 

[Mikey52]

So when you enter a forward slip your heading doesn’t change?

Heading changes, and the track might to.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Turning slips base to final should absolutely be in your toolbox. Go to your practice area and stall the plane in a turning slip to feel more comfortable. You already know what you risk stalling in a skidding turn. Better yet, fly a plane that doesn't have flaps and you'll use turning slips base to final much more often.

This! My suspicion is the OP has either never flown or has very little time in flapless airplanes like Citabrias, Cubs, biplanes...

 

[Fearless Tower]

You are also in a turn, where stall speed is already increased due to load factor and the reduced vertical component of lift. Introducing a slip and cross-controlled inputs would further increase stall speed and increase the risk of exceeding the critical angle of attack.

That is not exactly true - at least not the extent that you seem to think it is. Load factor and stall speed noticeably increase in a turn when you are trying to maintain altitude because of the reduced vertical component of lift.

The ole 60 degree turn equals 2gs is for a LEVEL 60 degree steep turn.

But in the power off 180, you are in a descending turn - working with an unloaded wing so to speak. You aren't typically operating at a high AOA unless you get low and do something stupid like yank the yoke/stick back.

The fact that your scenario has you high on the approach is even more reason that you are not putting a significant load on the wing, even though you are turning.

 

[Barrett50]

This was maybe session 5 or 6 in my primary training in the Citabria(no flap). Right rudder, left stick(yoke), not too much back-pressure to insure the inside wing doesn't stall. Wind is helping to push the plane left already. In a high or low wing, in a left slip, a portion of the right inboard wing is blanked by the fuselage, thus making the stall limits relatively the same on each side(with respect to the right wing moving faster than the left wing).

 

[Ed Haywood]

I'll join the dogpile. A slipping turn is just fine, a useful tool in many aircraft, and considered nearly mandatory in a few. Pitts and carrier landings in a Corsair come to mind.

A slipping turn is also useful to demonstrate you know what a skidding turn is.

 

[dtuuri]

A slipping turn is also useful to demonstrate you know what a skidding turn is, which is absolutely mandatory.

So, what is a turn where you're banked one way and use so much rudder you turn the other way? A slidding turn? A skipping turn?

Btw, we could use your services over in the commercial maneuvers thread. Search for "Citabria".

 

[tonycondon]

Wind direction has no impact on whether youre in a slip or not.

Top rudder is the only answer.

Skidding the turn to final while believing they're slipping is a very popular way to fail a practical test.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Skidding the turn to final while believing they're slipping is a very popular way to fail a practical test.

“But I did two of them in training! I’m proficient!”

 

[texasclouds]

I love slipping turns! Great tool and I use it every landing in my Cessna 170.

 

[dtuuri]

Top rudder is the only answer.

Nope. See:

You can use increased bank or top rudder.

 

[loganjvx]

Hey Y’all,

Thank you for all of the replies and the insights. I apologize for the earlier error when discussing a slip versus a skid. In my personal experience flying the C172, slipping in a turn has not been a tool I have used often, and it has not been necessary in most situation that I've encountered throughout my training. I have approximately 200 hours in single engine aircraft and around 50 hours in multi engine aircraft, and I recognize that I still have much to learn as I continue my CFI training and prepare to teach others. The C172 will most likely be the primary trainer in which I am giving instruction, as well as the Piper PA-44 Seminole.

I understand and agree with the argument for flying aircraft without flaps and gliders that will not descend adequately without a hearty slip. In my limited experience flying a vintage J-3 Cub (awesome bird by the way), slips in both turns and level flight are critical to success.

That said, when teaching inexperienced low time student pilots, I struggle to see the benefit of introducing a slipping maneuver in a turn at low altitude. In this scenario, the airplane is at best glide, low to the ground, and already experiencing an increased stall speed due to load factor in the turn, even despite the fact that we are descending and the wings are in an "unloaded" state. Adding cross controlled inputs increases student pilot workload and reduces margin for error during a critical phase of flight.

My larger concern is what happens when those same students are endorsed for solo. If we normalize slipping in a turn at low altitude as an acceptable correction, we have to assume they might attempt that maneuver alone, without an instructor in the right seat. A developing student pilot who is still refining coordination and stall recognition may not fully appreciate how quickly a cross controlled stall can develop in a turning environment close to the ground. At that point, there is no safety net.

If a pilot finds themselves high and needing a slip in the turn to make the runway, I believe the approach was mismanaged earlier. I would rather emphasize disciplined pattern planning, early trend recognition, timely ground track adjustments, and proper configuration/energy management before the situation becomes compressed.

My concern is less about whether an experienced pilot can execute the maneuver safely, and more about the habits and standards we instill in students who will soon be operating solo.

I appreciate the continued feedback and perspective.

 

[decalogue]

Hey Y’all,

Thank you for all of the replies and the insights. I apologize for the earlier error when discussing a slip versus a skid. In my personal experience flying the C172, slipping in a turn has not been a tool I have used often, and it has not been necessary in most situation that I've encountered throughout my training. I have approximately 200 hours in single engine aircraft and around 50 hours in multi engine aircraft, and I recognize that I still have much to learn as I continue my CFI training and prepare to teach others. The C172 will most likely be the primary trainer in which I am giving instruction, as well as the Piper PA-44 Seminole.

I understand and agree with the argument for flying aircraft without flaps and gliders that will not descend adequately without a hearty slip. In my limited experience flying a vintage J-3 Cub (awesome bird by the way), slips in both turns and level flight are critical to success.

That said, when teaching inexperienced low time student pilots, I struggle to see the benefit of introducing a slipping maneuver in a turn at low altitude. In this scenario, the airplane is at best glide, low to the ground, and already experiencing an increased stall speed due to load factor in the turn, even despite the fact that we are descending and the wings are in an "unloaded" state. Adding cross controlled inputs increases student pilot workload and reduces margin for error during a critical phase of flight.

My larger concern is what happens when those same students are endorsed for solo. If we normalize slipping in a turn at low altitude as an acceptable correction, we have to assume they might attempt that maneuver alone, without an instructor in the right seat. A developing student pilot who is still refining coordination and stall recognition may not fully appreciate how quickly a cross controlled stall can develop in a turning environment close to the ground. At that point, there is no safety net.

If a pilot finds themselves high and needing a slip in the turn to make the runway, I believe the approach was mismanaged earlier. I would rather emphasize disciplined pattern planning, early trend recognition, timely ground track adjustments, and proper configuration/energy management before the situation becomes compressed.

My concern is less about whether an experienced pilot can execute the maneuver safely, and more about the habits and standards we instill in students who will soon be operating solo.

I appreciate the continued feedback and perspective.

I first soloed in a plane with no flaps. I used slips like most use flaps

Yes you can “always go around” and “safety first” problem is these days people use that as a crutch for lack of basic skills

 

[loganjvx]

Sir, I think the point of my post may have been missed. I was not referring to slipping as an issue of skill or any discomfort with executing the maneuver. Aircraft configuration drives technique, which is why I specifically referenced teaching primary students in Cessna 172s.

My focus is on risk management philosophy when instructing inexperienced, pre solo students who DONT have the basic skills you mentioned. There is a difference between an experienced pilot choosing to slip in a given aircraft and teaching a low time student to introduce cross controlled inputs in a low altitude turning environment.

The discussion, in my view, is less about whether a proficient pilot can execute a slip safely and more about what we normalize and endorse for students who are still developing coordination, stall awareness, and pattern judgment.

 

[decalogue]

Sir, I think the point of my post may have been missed. I was not referring to slipping as an issue of skill or any discomfort with executing the maneuver. Aircraft configuration drives technique, which is why I specifically referenced teaching primary students in Cessna 172s.

My focus is on risk management philosophy when instructing inexperienced, pre solo students who DONT have the basic skills you mentioned. There is a difference between an experienced pilot choosing to slip in a given aircraft and teaching a low time student to introduce cross controlled inputs in a low altitude turning environment.

The discussion, in my view, is less about whether a proficient pilot can execute a slip safely and more about what we normalize and endorse for students who are still developing coordination, stall awareness, and pattern judgment.

Slipping is a BASIC skill

“14 CFR § 61.87 Solo requirements for student pilots

(14) Slips to a landing“

If a student is not proficient in slips to a landing they did not legally solo, they were not meeting the MINIMUM requirements for solo flight per the FARs

 

[dmspilot]

There is no additional risk of a stall/spin just because you are slipping. If there is then you haven't learned basic aircraft control.

 

[Lindberg]

That said, when teaching inexperienced low time student pilots, I struggle to see the benefit of introducing a slipping maneuver in a turn at low altitude. In this scenario, the airplane is at best glide, low to the ground, and already experiencing an increased stall speed due to load factor in the turn, even despite the fact that we are descending and the wings are in an "unloaded" state. Adding cross controlled inputs increases student pilot workload and reduces margin for error during a critical phase of flight.

My larger concern is what happens when those same students are endorsed for solo. If we normalize slipping in a turn at low altitude as an acceptable correction, we have to assume they might attempt that maneuver alone, without an instructor in the right seat. A developing student pilot who is still refining coordination and stall recognition may not fully appreciate how quickly a cross controlled stall can develop in a turning environment close to the ground. At that point, there is no safety net.

I hope you are teaching slips to proficiency prior to solo. How will the solo student land in a crosswind?

If a pilot finds themselves high and needing a slip in the turn to make the runway, I believe the approach was mismanaged earlier.

Back to the time-machine solution.

I would rather emphasize disciplined pattern planning, early trend recognition, timely ground track adjustments, and proper configuration/energy management before the situation becomes compressed.

Flying is all of those things, but it's not a "set it and forget it" activity. Go around aren't free, no matter what anyone tells you, and your students should be able to land from a less-than-perfect setup.

My concern is less about whether an experienced pilot can execute the maneuver safely, and more about the habits and standards we instill in students who will soon be operating solo.

A 14-year-old can solo a glider, but not until he can do it slipping all the way from downwind to final. Your students should be able to handle it.

I strongly suggest you practice this at altitude, because you seem to have a misimpression of the danger.

 

[Lindberg]

Slipping is a BASIC skill

“14 CFR § 61.87 Solo requirements for student pilots

(14) Slips to a landing“

If a student is not proficient in slips to a landing they did not legally solo, they were not meeting the MINIMUM requirements for solo flight per the FARs

In fairness, the regulation requires that the student receive instruction in the listed areas, not that he be proficient in them. Certainly there are some the student should be proficient in pre-solo (and I'd agree with this I've) but that's up to the instructor.

 

[Barrett50]

"He argues that using right rudder in a left turn to induce a skid can be accomplished safely with proper control and awareness."

You can rationalize your point all you want. Bottom line, the right pedal cross control from your instructor is correct.

 

[decalogue]

In fairness, the regulation requires that the student receive instruction in the listed areas, not that he be proficient in them. Certainly there are some the student should be proficient in pre-solo (and I'd agree with this I've) but that's up to the instructor.

It would be unsat instruction if the student couldn’t demonstrate the skill they learned

If I poorly instructed in go arounds, the student couldn’t do one to save their life, later on a solo flight the poor student was told to go around and crashed, I would expect to have a less than fun time with the FAA, lawyers and insurance people

When I read the tasks in the FAR I make sure the student can demonstrate them before they are signed off, I thought that was what all the CFIs did.

 

[dmspilot]

In fairness, the regulation requires that the student receive instruction in the listed areas, not that he be proficient in them.

In fairness:

61.87
(c) Pre-solo flight training. Prior to conducting a solo flight, a student pilot must have:
...
(2) Demonstrated satisfactory proficiency and safety, as judged by an authorized instructor, on the maneuvers and procedures required by this section...

 

[Lindberg]

In fairness:

61.87
(c) Pre-solo flight training. Prior to conducting a solo flight, a student pilot must have:
...
(2) Demonstrated satisfactory proficiency and safety, as judged by an authorized instructor, on the maneuvers and procedures required by this section...

That means the level of proficiency in each area that the instructor feels necessary for solo. Which can be a level lower than you might expect later on, and might vary between maneuvers. That's all I was trying to communicate. YMMV.

 

[Lindberg]

If I poorly instructed in go arounds, the student couldn’t do one to save their life, later on a solo flight the poor student was told to go around and crashed, I would expect to have a less than fun time with the FAA, lawyers and insurance people

When I read the tasks in the FAR I make sure the student can demonstrate them before they are signed off, I thought that was what all the CFIs did.

There's a lot of room between "can't do it to save his life," "can demonstrate them," and "fully proficient." Some maneuvers I'd expect a pre-solo student to perform to ACS standards. Others not so much.

 

[Barrett50]

59: hope you are teaching slips to proficiency prior to solo. How will the solo student land in a crosswind?

60: In fairness, the regulation requires that the student receive instruction in the listed areas, not that he be proficient in them.

64: That means the level of proficiency in each area that the instructor feels necessary for solo.

65: There's a lot of room between "can't do it to save his life," "can demonstrate them," and "fully proficient."

How many times do you get to move this goalpost? Berate someone, then backtrack, the add gauze and smoke, then choose empirical judgement to the mix. ?

 

[Dan Thomas]

The ole 60 degree turn equals 2gs is for a LEVEL 60 degree steep turn.

But in the power off 180, you are in a descending turn - working with an unloaded wing so to speak. You aren't typically operating at a high AOA unless you get low and do something stupid like yank the yoke/stick back.

Nope. In a constant-descent or climb rate, that airplane is at the same load factor as it would be in level flight or a turn, as applicable. Only if the descent rate is constantly increasing will the load factor be less than in a level turn or level flight. In a climb, an increasing climb rate will raise the load factor, a decreasing rate will reduce it. A steady climb means a load factor of 1 in straight-ahead flight, or 2 G in your 60-degree banked turn.

 

[Lindberg]

59: hope you are teaching slips to proficiency prior to solo. How will the solo student land in a crosswind?

60: In fairness, the regulation requires that the student receive instruction in the listed areas, not that he be proficient in them.

64: That means the level of proficiency in each area that the instructor feels necessary for solo.

65: There's a lot of room between "can't do it to save his life," "can demonstrate them," and "fully proficient."

How many times do you get to move this goalpost? Berate someone, then backtrack, the add gauze and smoke, then choose empirical judgement to the mix. ?

I've berated no one, and I believe my posts are consistent. My comment about the regulation was in response to someone claiming that it would be illegal to solo a student who was not proficient in slips to landing. My response, which perhaps could have been more clear, was intended to convey that the regulation only requires that the student can perform them to the instructor's satisfaction.

 

[decalogue]

There's a lot of room between "can't do it to save his life," "can demonstrate them," and "fully proficient." Some maneuvers I'd expect a pre-solo student to perform to ACS standards. Others not so much.

If my student can slip in turns, slip on final, and slip to dump airspeed, this is basic and required for solo, pretty much all my students solo around 15hrs and I have no issue with them slipping it from base to the deck.

I would feel very uneasy signing someone off to PIC would couldn’t do a very basic thing like a deep slip, in fact I wouldn’t sign them off

 

[Barrett50]

I've berated no one, and I believe my posts are consistent. My comment about the regulation was in response to someone claiming that it would be illegal to solo a student who was not proficient in slips to landing. My response, which perhaps could have been more clear, was intended to convey that the regulation only requires that the student can perform them to the instructor's satisfaction.

If you say so. And so. And so. And so.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Sir, I think the point of my post may have been missed. I was not referring to slipping as an issue of skill or any discomfort with executing the maneuver. Aircraft configuration drives technique, which is why I specifically referenced teaching primary students in Cessna 172s.

My focus is on risk management philosophy when instructing inexperienced, pre solo students who DONT have the basic skills you mentioned. There is a difference between an experienced pilot choosing to slip in a given aircraft and teaching a low time student to introduce cross controlled inputs in a low altitude turning environment.

The discussion, in my view, is less about whether a proficient pilot can execute a slip safely and more about what we normalize and endorse for students who are still developing coordination, stall awareness, and pattern judgment.

If you’re teaching power off 180s to landing presolo (and many people do, although it has decreased dramatically in the last 40 years,) proficiency in slips is a necessary tool in the toolbox.

Like a lot of things, slips are only hard if someone tells you they are. They’re actually a good maneuver to show a student the exaggerated effects of not being coordinated so it’s easier to recognize the indications when they need to make adjustments to coordinated flight.

 

[Clip4]

I teach power off 180s utilizing slips quite often and some times with no flaps during the entire procedure to demonstrate the maneuver can be accomplished to commercial ACS standards without the use of any flaps.
When the pilot uses proper ADM prior to the point of power reduction to touch down, there is zero reason for and uncoordinated base to final turn. And let’s be clear, that accurately describes what forward slip in this turn is - nothing more than an uncoordinated turn.

If the pilot needs an uncoordinated base to final turn, it’s likely a result of 4 misjudgments (wind direction / velocity, distance laterally from the runway on the downwind, distance to turn from downwind to base and altitude immediately after they completed the turn to base) and insufficient knowledge of proper energy management concepts.

I do not teach an uncoordinated base to final turn because I am concerned it encourages a poor practice that can get any pilot in deep doo doo rather quickly. A CFI has to recognize the procedures they are teaching to rather low time commercial trainees are applicable to all make/model/gross weight/CG of every aircraft that trainee may latter fly. I am not going to teach using top or bottom rudder in the base to final turn because you mess it up, the results are catastrophic.

 

[Rick A]

My concern is less about whether an experienced pilot can execute the maneuver safely, and more about the habits and standards we instill in students who will soon be operating solo.

Habits and standards instilled in students are an important component when learning how to safely fly.

The only fear (IMO) to be instilled in students from the beginning of their lessons is to NEVER pull back on the yoke when it's not an appropriate time to do so. Then teach them when it is and isn't the right time, and why.

Slips and skids are just one category of many related lessons while learning stick and rudder skill sets. They are no more dangerous than any other maneuver to be learned before cutting them loose to solo.

 

[skyking3286]

Some upstream mentioned slow flight to increase drag and sink rate. The problem is that you can also run out of elevator control authority for the flair, as per the recent Beech forced landing on a runway through the power lines. Slips are fun and much more precise than flaps.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Some upstream mentioned slow flight to increase drag and sink rate. The problem is that you can also run out of elevator control for the flair, as per the recent Beech forced landing on a runway through the power lines.

Exactly what happened to the BA 777 that suffered an engine rollback on final. CA pulled the yoke back and had it in stick shaker the whole way down. Nothing left to flare with and the gear punched through the wings.

 

[ja_user]

Just use "Top Rudder", and stop considering the wind and which direction you are turning. You should be able to vary the amount of slip as required to hit your spot.

 

[dtuuri]

I teach power off 180s utilizing slips quite often and some times with no flaps during the entire procedure to demonstrate the maneuver can be accomplished to commercial ACS standards without the use of any flaps.
When the pilot uses proper ADM prior to the point of power reduction to touch down, there is zero reason for and uncoordinated base to final turn. And let’s be clear, that accurately describes what forward slip in this turn is - nothing more than an uncoordinated turn.

If the pilot needs an uncoordinated base to final turn, it’s likely a result of 4 misjudgments (wind direction / velocity, distance laterally from the runway on the downwind, distance to turn from downwind to base and altitude immediately after they completed the turn to base) and insufficient knowledge of proper energy management concepts.

I do not teach an uncoordinated base to final turn because I am concerned it encourages a poor practice that can get any pilot in deep doo doo rather quickly. A CFI has to recognize the procedures they are teaching to rather low time commercial trainees are applicable to all make/model/gross weight/CG of every aircraft that trainee may latter fly. I am not going to teach using top or bottom rudder in the base to final turn because you mess it up, the results are catastrophic.

Nicely stated @Clip4. Even on final, I wouldn't teach slipping in the same direction the wind is blowing you, so certainly not in a turn (see the OP's scenario). Just take out some bank.

 

[ja_user]

I teach power off 180s utilizing slips quite often and some times with no flaps during the entire procedure to demonstrate the maneuver can be accomplished to commercial ACS standards without the use of any flaps.
When the pilot uses proper ADM prior to the point of power reduction to touch down, there is zero reason for and uncoordinated base to final turn. And let’s be clear, that accurately describes what forward slip in this turn is - nothing more than an uncoordinated turn.

If the pilot needs an uncoordinated base to final turn, it’s likely a result of 4 misjudgments (wind direction / velocity, distance laterally from the runway on the downwind, distance to turn from downwind to base and altitude immediately after they completed the turn to base) and insufficient knowledge of proper energy management concepts.

I do not teach an uncoordinated base to final turn because I am concerned it encourages a poor practice that can get any pilot in deep doo doo rather quickly. A CFI has to recognize the procedures they are teaching to rather low time commercial trainees are applicable to all make/model/gross weight/CG of every aircraft that trainee may latter fly. I am not going to teach using top or bottom rudder in the base to final turn because you mess it up, the results are catastrophic.

Everything you teach a commercial student applies to every aircraft that they may fly, through their entire career?

 

[Barrett50]

Weird. When I towed banners, Id slip the Citabria down to maybe 150 AGL if need. Embarrasing if I have to call a go around... with no banner out back. DOH!

 

[Therookguy]

I see this a lot in aviation and it's one of those wrong things that keep showing up or getting passed down. Slips to landing are not dangerous, I'll tell you why.

1. As a glider pilot I have done slips from final all the way down to 5ft off the ground for no airbrake landings.
2. Many taildraggers have to do slips to landing for visual and no flaps reasons (see Extra 300).
3. The whole point of a forward slip is to lose altitude quickly, thus a pilot typically points the nose down to increase the descent rate, thus lowering the angle of attack. You're totally fine with regard to spins and stalls as long as you keep the nose down. Remember to spin you need to stall first.
4. My commercial checkride was on a very hot and thermally day. I had to slip to land for more than half my landings. The examiner didn't have much to say about it.
5. My homebase airport frequently gives you these crazy altitude restrictions in the Bravo that result in "slam dunk" approaches and I frequently have to use aggressive forward slips. I have done these in base to final turns and it's fine.

A couple of other comments: slipping turns are not as dangerous as skidding turns when it comes to a spin, point the nose downwind when there is a crosswind present <- this is what your instructor was asking.

Source I'm a CFI and somehow going into my CFI I somehow thought the answer was to point the nose into the wind but that's not true, Page 9-13 of the airplane flying handbook:

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/airplane_handbook/10_afh_ch9.pdf