Precise consistent landings

I watching for the video when he bends the plane and can’t get insurance.
 
As always, I'm on the fence. On one hand, it's amazing flying, on the other hand, I think it causes people to think this is a normal or safe way to fly. I have no problem with experienced pilots doing this kind of thing, knowing the hazards present and skills needed, but someone new to the hobby can kill themselves very quickly attempting this sort of thing. Slapping an AOA on a plane is not enough to make this safe.
 
Clip4 said:
I watching for the video when he bends the plane and can’t get insurance.
Click to expand...
Why couldn't he get insurance? My policy has no exclusion for off airport landings.
 
Salty said:
As always, I'm on the fence. On one hand, it's amazing flying, on the other hand, I think it causes people to think this is a normal or safe way to fly. I have no problem with experienced pilots doing this kind of thing, knowing the hazards present and skills needed, but someone new to the hobby can kill themselves very quickly attempting this sort of thing. Slapping an AOA on a plane is not enough to make this safe.
Click to expand...
I guess we shouldn't allow fighter pilots or aerobatic pilots to make flying videos either then. :rolleyes:
 
Mtns2Skies said:
I guess we shouldn't allow fighter pilots or aerobatic pilots to make flying videos either then. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I think you need to read my post slower next time. It's the packaging that makes it seem so normal / mainstream / easy that bothers me.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Why couldn't he get insurance? My policy has no exclusion for off airport landings.
Click to expand...
Do you have a previous accident from an off airport landing while making videos?

I am not against back country flying with a purpose. If you flying in fishing, camping, hunting and practicing technique off season go for it.
 
Salty said:
As always, I'm on the fence. On one hand, it's amazing flying, on the other hand, I think it causes people to think this is a normal or safe way to fly. I have no problem with experienced pilots doing this kind of thing, knowing the hazards present and skills needed, but someone new to the hobby can kill themselves very quickly attempting this sort of thing. Slapping an AOA on a plane is not enough to make this safe.
Click to expand...
If said person is dumb enough to be influenced by a YouTube video, to attempt maneuvers beyond their skill set, then there isn’t much you can do. Every pilot should know their own limitations and if they don’t, they shouldn’t be flying in the first place.
 
Salty said:
I have no problem with experienced pilots doing this kind of thing, knowing the hazards present and skills needed, but someone new to the hobby can kill themselves very quickly attempting this sort of thing.
Click to expand...

I had about 3 hours of training and 10 landings before I was sent off to carry paying passengers for off airport landings. Kinda scary to think about....

While I have seen folks new to off airport landings bend up the plane, I have also had to rescue very experienced pilots that made a small mistake on landing. Mostly the tail wheel hitting something and breaking off.

Hopefully anyone wanting to learn off airport landings will first seek out an instructor that has off airport experience.

I have flown a plane with an AOA on it. All it did was tell me I was doing it correctly when landing on pavement. I didn't have time to look at it when landing on the beaches.
 
I look at these videos as what “can” be done..with extensive training and practice perhaps.
I am not delusional thinking that after watching one of those vids I’m going to take our stock c182-H and be a bush pilot and land on a gravel bar. I hope ppl don’t get that idea.
They are fun to watch. Cool to see. But not for me to even consider trying.
We don’t see the time that goes into making planning and practicing this stuff.
 
I like his fancy angle of attack gizmo. I think it would make a great training tool.
But.....
It's a substitute for what you should have learned how to do with your own eyes.
We used to call it "sight picture". Do CFIs use that expression anymore?
The problem with the sight picture approach, is:
1. It's different in every airplane. Even the cushion thickness can affect it.
2. It's different for every runway. Except maybe in the Midwest, where curbs count as a change in the horizon.
Some people never do figure it out.
Hence the useful gadget. It eliminates some variables. If it keeps someone from rolling a plane up into a tin foil ball, I'm all for it.

BTW: Just my humble opinion. In real life, the stabilized approach is (mostly) a myth.
It assumes there is a "perfect" way to land the airplane, every time. I advocate learning what is and isn't a viable approach, then figure out how to nail the landing from what you have to work with.
Sort like playing poker. You have to learn to play the hand you are dealt.
 
Clip4 said:
I watching for the video when he bends the plane and can’t get insurance.
Click to expand...

I didn’t see anything dangerous, he landing spots were welllll within the planes limits, I didn’t see any thing fancy, I’d go so far as to say the standard issue flight school and weekend warrior landing at warp speed because you’re afraid of XY and Z is more dangerous.
 
Clip4 said:
Do you have a previous accident from an off airport landing while making videos?

I am not against back country flying with a purpose. If you flying in fishing, camping, hunting and practicing technique off season go for it.
Click to expand...

I’m the same way, if you really need to land at a large class C airspace airport for a good reason I don’t see the issue, but beating your tires up, landing waaay over vref, risking flying around tons of other traffic, risking landing at a airport that’s so often right next to the “hood”, risking being shot or beat up by a crazy cop, risking being financially assaulted by government or a FBO, I’ll play it safe and stay in the backcountry, thanks
 
benyflyguy said:
I look at these videos as what “can” be done..with extensive training and practice perhaps.
I am not delusional thinking that after watching one of those vids I’m going to take our stock c182-H and be a bush pilot and land on a gravel bar. I hope ppl don’t get that idea.
They are fun to watch. Cool to see. But not for me to even consider trying.
We don’t see the time that goes into making planning and practicing this stuff.
Click to expand...
The learning curve may not be as steep as it may seem. I’m not seeing any special, difficult to master technique or anything. It can obviously be done without an AOA indicator (I assume this is a marketing video but don’t know).

Methinks the key is just frequent practice. The discipline required to practice my be a challenge. Necessity can fix that whether it be for a job, a fishing spot or a remote hunting cabin.

For me, flying a Maule taildragger on a daily basis for 2 months took me to a level of proficiency I never had before or since. Getting it to 3 point consistently (3 pointers are optimal for the Maule) was a challenge over my years of ownership. Two landings a day for two weeks made it easy. Two more weeks and I could 3 point it on a downhill spot from a steep approach, a dragged in approach or a deep side slip. I could also 2 point it pretty consistently but it’s not the Maule’s favorite thing.

I sold it some months later and noticed that my skills had eroded a bit. But flying the RV10 was so easy in comparison that it took a year and a half before I even came close to a bobble or a bounce.

Generally speaking, frequent practice = proficiency. I think that’s what the pros have and us amateurs often lack.

An audio stall warning is good thing. Perhaps an audio AOA would be much better.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Bill Watson said:
The learning curve may not be as steep as it may seem. I’m not seeing any special, difficult to master technique or anything. It can obviously be done without an AOA indicator
Click to expand...

That would be correct. The hardest part, among others, is not the landing, it is combination of the set up to approach, judging the landing surface and learning to determine wind speed and direction without benefit of a wind sock. And as Sheppard mentioned above, it used to be called ''sight picture''.

If I can learn to do it, (I am not the sharpest tool in the shed) then so can many of the folks here.

I enjoy watching the video, it is getting me interested in going back to Alaska.
 
Shepherd said:
BTW: Just my humble opinion. In real life, the stabilized approach is (mostly) a myth.
It assumes there is a "perfect" way to land the airplane, every time. I advocate learning what is and isn't a viable approach, then figure out how to nail the landing from what you have to work with.
Sort like playing poker. You have to learn to play the hand you are dealt.
Click to expand...
I agree...but I’d add that it’s an excellent starting point for figuring out what is or isn’t a viable approach.

I used to start my copilots out at the FAF, on speed, configured, with target power. Stabilized for an excruciating 5 miles. Then I’d let them cut that in half...stabilized by 2.5 miles. Then cut that some more. The end goal was to recognize that as long as you were at 50 feet over the end of the runway, configured, on speed, and at idle, the landing would be the same. Whatever they did to get there (within reason) was fine, but that was the window they had to fly through to land.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I agree...but I’d add that it’s an excellent starting point for figuring out what is or isn’t a viable approach.

I used to start my copilots out at the FAF, on speed, configured, with target power. Stabilized for an excruciating 5 miles. Then I’d let them cut that in half...stabilized by 2.5 miles. Then cut that some more. The end goal was to recognize that as long as you were at 50 feet over the end of the runway, configured, on speed, and at idle, the landing would be the same. Whatever they did to get there (within reason) was fine, but that was the window they had to fly through to land.
Click to expand...


Depends on the approach
 
MauleSkinner said:
For example?
Click to expand...

Landing in a bending river with 50+ foot trees

Get down low ground effect early, bleed off some speed and add flaps in the turn to the land-able stretch touchdown and flaps out.

Or landing at a runway at the base of a hill, slip in down the side of the hill.

Etc

Vs flying a ILS at your favorite standard issue class charly/bravo airport.
 
James331 said:
Landing in a bending river with 50+ foot trees

Get down low ground effect early, bleed off some speed and add flaps in the turn to the land-able stretch touchdown and flaps out.

Or landing at a runway at the base of a hill, slip in down the side of the hill.

Etc

Vs flying a ILS at your favorite standard issue class charly/bravo airport.
Click to expand...
I never had copilots while doing those things.
 
Shepherd said:
I like his fancy angle of attack gizmo. I think it would make a great training tool.
But.....
It's a substitute for what you should have learned how to do with your own eyes.
We used to call it "sight picture". Do CFIs use that expression anymore?
The problem with the sight picture approach, is:
1. It's different in every airplane. Even the cushion thickness can affect it.
2. It's different for every runway. Except maybe in the Midwest, where curbs count as a change in the horizon.
Some people never do figure it out.
Hence the useful gadget. It eliminates some variables. If it keeps someone from rolling a plane up into a tin foil ball, I'm all for it.

BTW: Just my humble opinion. In real life, the stabilized approach is (mostly) a myth.
It assumes there is a "perfect" way to land the airplane, every time. I advocate learning what is and isn't a viable approach, then figure out how to nail the landing from what you have to work with.
Sort like playing poker. You have to learn to play the hand you are dealt.
Click to expand...

"Power plus pitch = performance." That is how my CFI taught me how to land a plane in the absence an ASI.
 
I take away from this is I need to do more 40 deg flap landings in the 182. I am guilty of using 20 more often then not as seems easier to really grease. But 40 does allow you really to put it on a spot. Admittedly not as pretty. But one of the club guys is short, really short. He jacks seat up and I forget to put it down all the way and found I like the sight pic of being a bit higher up!! Practice practice Practice.
 
benyflyguy said:
I take away from this is I need to do more 40 deg flap landings in the 182. I am guilty of using 20 more often then not as seems easier to really grease. But 40 does allow you really to put it on a spot. Admittedly not as pretty. But one of the club guys is short, really short. He jacks seat up and I forget to put it down all the way and found I like the sight pic of being a bit higher up!! Practice practice Practice.
Click to expand...

Also 40 with a different degrees of slips, as well as 0 with slips
 
Mtns2Skies said:
I guess we shouldn't allow fighter pilots or aerobatic pilots to make flying videos either then. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
James331 said:
I’m the same way, if you really need to land at a large class C airspace airport for a good reason I don’t see the issue, but beating your tires up, landing waaay over vref, risking flying around tons of other traffic, risking landing at a airport that’s so often right next to the “hood”, risking being shot or beat up by a crazy cop, risking being financially assaulted by government or a FBO, I’ll play it safe and stay in the backcountry, thanks
Click to expand...

Yea but they got fuel trucks and maintenance, which bets the hell out of hiking 20 miles out of the bush.
 
Clip4 said:
Yea but they got fuel trucks and maintenance, which bets the hell out of hiking 20 miles out of the bush.
Click to expand...

AP friends with bushplanes and a fuel cache for the win ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top