Stabilized Approaches

[Greg Bockelman]

There was a thread either here or on AOPA about Stabilized approaches as opposed to "chop and drop". I can't seem to find it. Can anyone help?

 

[jshawley]

I'm fairly certain it was on the red board; can't remember the title, though. I'll look tonight.

Jim

 

[ScottM]

Don't recall seeing it here.

But I did get to watch a guy come in for a landing at KBUU Runway 29 this weekend. he was high and tried the chop and drop. Of course his speed was too high and he touched down about 3/4 of the way down the runway. Then he knew he could not stop so he lifted off with full flaps and just muddled along without any altitude gain. I thought for sure I was about to witness my second landing accident.

 

[Bill]

he was high and tried the chop and drop. Of course his speed was too high and he touched down about 3/4 of the way down the runway.

Just curious, what kind of plane?

 

[ScottM]

Just curious, what kind of plane?

Cessna 172

But I'll tell you after the insanity of 06C on Sunday that was the least dangerous thing I saw that day. There was a fly-in at 06C and people were doing both right and left pattern work. Two guys were on the CTAF discussing football scores making it hard for people to even make position reports.

 

[Bill]

Cessna 172

For shame. I'd understand a high and fast Mooney or similar having trouble, but a 172? Maybe a student pilot?

 

[ScottM]

For shame. I'd understand a high and fast Mooney or similar having trouble, but a 172? Maybe a student pilot?

Based on the radio calls I heard a student would be my guess too.

 

[Ken Ibold]

I love chop and drops in some airplanes. I was in the Pitts Friday and the tower had me do a "wide" right 360 on downwind to let some departures out. I came back around and got a short approach from abeam the numbers downwind. I held 1000 feet agl until a half mile final, then chopped power and slipped it to a fine landing in the first quarter of the runway. Wheeeeeee!!!!!!

 

[Bill]

Based on the radio calls I heard a student would be my guess too.

Well, then good for him. I mean, (s)he screwed up the approach, but showed good decision making on doing the go-around. Although I'd have been gone at the 1/2 way point and never even touched down.

 

[Bill]

I held 1000 feet agl until a half mile final, then chopped power and slipped it to a fine landing in the first quarter of the runway. Wheeeeeee!!!!!!

What kind of decent rate were you showing on the VSI? Sounds like that Pitts drops like a rock when you slip it.

 

[ScottM]

Well, then good for him. I mean, (s)he screwed up the approach, but showed good decision making on doing the go-around. Although I'd have been gone at the 1/2 way point and never even touched down.

IMHO and I agree, the go around was the right call, but the bad part was forcing the touch down and then waiting to go again. Also not raising the flaps to 20% was a bad thing and caused some climb issues. Had it been a high DA day that could have been really bad. LIVE and learn.

 

[ScottM]

I love chop and drops in some airplanes. I was in the Pitts Friday and the tower had me do a "wide" right 360 on downwind to let some departures out. I came back around and got a short approach from abeam the numbers downwind. I held 1000 feet agl until a half mile final, then chopped power and slipped it to a fine landing in the first quarter of the runway. Wheeeeeee!!!!!!

Isn't that pretty much the normal way to land a Pitts? I have nver flown them but a I see couple at my home field and that is how they tend to land most of the time.

 

[fgcason]

But I did get to watch a guy come in for a landing at KBUU Runway 29 this weekend. he was high and tried the chop and drop. Of course his speed was too high and he touched down about 3/4 of the way down the runway.

Speed control is everything...especially if you're flying inside too small of a box.

I love flying obstructed approaches where attempting a boring stabilized approach would be the most dangerous thing you could possibly do... They're fun!!

 

[Ken Ibold]

What kind of decent rate were you showing on the VSI? Sounds like that Pitts drops like a rock when you slip it.

VSI? Ain't got no VSI.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Isn't that pretty much the normal way to land a Pitts? I have nver flown them but a I see couple at my home field and that is how they tend to land most of the time.

I've often thought the invention and common installation of flaps on GA planes is one of the highest contributors to so many pilots not being able &/or willing to aggressively slip an airplane forward to a landing. There's so many of them and they really miss out on some real flying, to the overall detriment of their skills, both for the routine and emergencies.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Isn't that pretty much the normal way to land a Pitts? I have nver flown them but a I see couple at my home field and that is how they tend to land most of the time.

A normal landing is power to idle abeam the numbers on downwind at 1000 ft agl, then 180-degree turn at 90-95 mph right to the numbers. You roll out of the turn at about 20 feet agl and the runway disappears. Sink a few more feet (depends on the runway width) and you can see the sides of the runway behind the wings.

In this particular case, I was much closer to the numbers when I started my descent and I probably had some excessive speed, too. But it shore were fun!

 

[vontresc]

I agree on the slipping comment. I am working on my tailwheel endorsement right now, and not hving flaps on the champ was a bit of an adjustment for me. Heck the other day I was high in the 182 and slipped it in instead of using the barn door size flaps on it.

Pete

 

[Ken Ibold]

I agree on the slipping comment. I am working on my tailwheel endorsement right now, and not hving flaps on the champ was a bit of an adjustment for me. Heck the other day I was high in the 182 and slipped it in instead of using the barn door size flaps on it.

Pete

The nice thing about slipping is that it is infinitely controllable. You can put some in, take a little out, add a touch, add a bunch, take out some etc as the wind conditions change during that close-to-the-ground summer turbulence. Maybe you could do that in a Piper with manual flaps, but electric flaps just can't keep up.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

The nice thing about slipping is that it is infinitely controllable. You can put some in, take a little out, add a touch, add a bunch, take out some etc as the wind conditions change during that close-to-the-ground summer turbulence. Maybe you could do that in a Piper with manual flaps, but electric flaps just can't keep up.

Amen.
The general decline of the average pilot, flying around with his wings nearly level all the time, can be traced directly back to the invention and implimentation of them new-fangled electricated flaps.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I agree on the slipping comment. I am working on my tailwheel endorsement right now, and not hving flaps on the champ was a bit of an adjustment for me. Heck the other day I was high in the 182 and slipped it in instead of using the barn door size flaps on it.

Pete,

Where'd you find the Champ? I've been thinking about getting the TW but I don't feel like having to go to RYV every time I want to fly.

 

[gprellwitz]

Pete,

Where'd you find the Champ? I've been thinking about getting the TW but I don't feel like having to go to RYV every time I want to fly.

Kent, we're a bit further from you than RYV, but we have one here at 1C5. COme on down! I'll treat you for lunch at Charlie's some weekend.

And to tie this back (a little) to Greg's original question, if you pull the power in a Champ, do you drop quickly?

I'm going to get myself checked out in it after I do the G1000 DA-40. (It'll make a nice backup trip plane in case the 182 is unavailable.)

 

[vontresc]

I am taking the dual in a Champ out of Lone Rock.

Pete

 

[cwyckham]

The nice thing about slipping is that it is infinitely controllable. You can put some in, take a little out, add a touch, add a bunch, take out some etc as the wind conditions change during that close-to-the-ground summer turbulence. Maybe you could do that in a Piper with manual flaps, but electric flaps just can't keep up.

I learned to use the slip extensively when flying gliders and then later a Champ. I remember flying a Diamond DA-20 for the first time with an instructor and ending up high due to the great glide ratio. When I threw in a slip, the instructor complimented me.

Fast forward a few months and I'm flying with an instructor in New Zealand since I'd moved down here and needed to convert my US PPL to a NZ PPL. We were doing a simulated engine failure and I ended up too high (because I'm a wimp and I tend to stay to close to the field). I threw in a slip and the instructor freaked out and took control of the airplane away from me. I think she was genuinely afraid. She was an experienced flight instructor with about 2000 hours. I checked around and discovered that they don't teach forward slips in New Zealand.

When I asked her what I was supposed to do with a failed engine when I was too high, she said that I should lower the nose. When I pointed out that I would then arrive in a small field with way too much speed and just float into the trees, S-turns were suggested. Anything but a slip!

She even brought up the dreaded "oscillations of doom" in "many" aircraft (referring to the benign oscillations in some models of 172). It seems from my enquiries that this isn't one instructor, but the prevailing attitude here. I think that really reduces a pilot's chances of a successful forced landing if you're never taught a forward slip.

Chris

 

[Areeda]

She even brought up the dreaded "oscillations of doom" in "many" aircraft (referring to the benign oscillations in some models of 172). It seems from my enquiries that this isn't one instructor, but the prevailing attitude here. I think that really reduces a pilot's chances of a successful forced landing if you're never taught a forward slip.

Oscillations of Doom, I like that name even though I slip 172's with full flaps any time it seems appropriate.

I wonder what they do in a Citabria, Decathalon or any of the planes without flaps?? Have you asked Bonanza (Stephen) on the AOPA forums?

Joe

 

[tonycondon]

i think it tends that airplanes without flaps have big rudders, and therefore are excellent at slipping

 

[Bill]

i think it tends that airplanes without flaps have big rudders, and therefore are excellent at slipping

I think it is more related to taildraggers. Most taildraggers have large rudders and more rudder travel. Makes for good slippin'

 

[tonycondon]

could be, but i guess that most airplanes without flaps are taildraggers, save the ercoupe, which doesnt slip very well at all!

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Wow, that's an unbelievable story! Sad too. I thought the only dumb ass CFIs were here in America!

I learned to use the slip extensively when flying gliders and then later a Champ. I remember flying a Diamond DA-20 for the first time with an instructor and ending up high due to the great glide ratio. When I threw in a slip, the instructor complimented me.

Fast forward a few months and I'm flying with an instructor in New Zealand since I'd moved down here and needed to convert my US PPL to a NZ PPL. We were doing a simulated engine failure and I ended up too high (because I'm a wimp and I tend to stay to close to the field). I threw in a slip and the instructor freaked out and took control of the airplane away from me. I think she was genuinely afraid. She was an experienced flight instructor with about 2000 hours. I checked around and discovered that they don't teach forward slips in New Zealand.

When I asked her what I was supposed to do with a failed engine when I was too high, she said that I should lower the nose. When I pointed out that I would then arrive in a small field with way too much speed and just float into the trees, S-turns were suggested. Anything but a slip!

She even brought up the dreaded "oscillations of doom" in "many" aircraft (referring to the benign oscillations in some models of 172). It seems from my enquiries that this isn't one instructor, but the prevailing attitude here. I think that really reduces a pilot's chances of a successful forced landing if you're never taught a forward slip.

Chris

 

[ScottM]

save the ercoupe, which doesnt slip very well at all!

That is an understatment. I know a couple of guys with traditional Ercoupes and asked them about cross wind landings. They told me with the super rugged gear on the Ercoupe you just crab and land. It will straighten out when the wheels hit the ground. Talking to the mechanics that work on those guys airplanes they told me that they have yet to do anything but routine maitenance to the gear and that the gear is truly bullet proof.

 

[ScottM]

Wow, that's an unbelievable story! Sad too. I thought the only dumb ass CFIs were here in America!

I travel the world, CFI or not dumb people are everywhere. Most seem to work as security at airports or behind the counters of hotels in my sphere though

 

[tonycondon]

yea that was the funnest thing about flying the ercoupe in my club. touching down in a crab took a little getting used to but it really can handle a LOT of crosswind component. some of my top 10 funnest hours were in that ercoupe.

 

[poadeleted20]

could be, but i guess that most airplanes without flaps are taildraggers, save the ercoupe, which doesnt slip very well at all!

Howard "Eye of the Examiner" Fried once wrote that his method of landing an Ercoupe in a crosswind was to roll down the window and lean his shoulder out to provide some drag to counter the proverse yaw from the interconnected rudder. However, he never said what he did about crosswinds from the left -- either solo (perhaps he unstrapped and swapped seats), or how he explained to a passenger that the passenger was going to have to lean out the window during the approach and landing.

 

[gismo]

I
Fast forward a few months and I'm flying with an instructor in New Zealand since I'd moved down here and needed to convert my US PPL to a NZ PPL. We were doing a simulated engine failure and I ended up too high (because I'm a wimp and I tend to stay to close to the field). I threw in a slip and the instructor freaked out and took control of the airplane away from me. I think she was genuinely afraid. She was an experienced flight instructor with about 2000 hours. I checked around and discovered that they don't teach forward slips in New Zealand.

When I asked her what I was supposed to do with a failed engine when I was too high, she said that I should lower the nose. When I pointed out that I would then arrive in a small field with way too much speed and just float into the trees, S-turns were suggested. Anything but a slip!

Even if you aren't too high, I'd think you'd need to slip at some point on any crosswind landing (Ercoupes aside). How do they teach pilots to handle a big crosswind down under???

 

[cwyckham]

Even if you aren't too high, I'd think you'd need to slip at some point on any crosswind landing (Ercoupes aside). How do they teach pilots to handle a big crosswind down under???

I haven't asked enough people about that. We never had a crosswind while I was doing the few hours needed to transfer my license. It seemed to me that they mostly do the "crab and kick" method, but I have seen one NZ textbook that talks about straightening up and dropping a wing towards the end of the final approach. I'll ask around a bit more.

It's been my experience in the US that most people don't really understand that a forward slip is aerodynamically identical to a side slip. It wouldn't surprise me at all to find that people here were unfamiliar with forward slips but used side slips routinely. I'll let you know what I find out.

I should add a disclaimer that I have access to a few experienced instructors at my aero club (most in NZ seem to get a lot more hours than in the US before moving on to other flying jobs), but I'm hardly able to do a scientific poll. There is some sort of CAA (like the FAA) document about what they're supposed to teach, though. I'll try to get my hands on a copy.

Chris

 

[cwyckham]

There is some sort of CAA (like the FAA) document about what they're supposed to teach, though. I'll try to get my hands on a copy.

I got my hands on a copy. They do talk about slips, but only as a last resort (after increasing speed and doing S-turns), and spend most of the time discussing how scary they are.

Chris

 

[gismo]

I got my hands on a copy. They do talk about slips, but only as a last resort (after increasing speed and doing S-turns), and spend most of the time discussing how scary they are.

Chris

Wow, it's hard to believe that a whole country's lot of pilots and CFI's could be so traumatized by a simple, useful, and safe maneuver. Just goes to show how powerful an (incorrect) idea can be if enough people believe it in.

 

[MauleSkinner]

i think it tends that airplanes without flaps have big rudders, and therefore are excellent at slipping

A good example was the PA-12 that the Silent Knights used to tow with...I could put in about 70-80 degrees of bank, full top rudder, stick back and spiral down at over 4000 fpm.

They got a Super Cub, and the time between tows slowed down

Fly safe!

David

 

[tonycondon]

yep, now its only 2000 fpm down, but the super cub still slips way better than most!

 

[Areeda]

I got my hands on a copy. They do talk about slips, but only as a last resort (after increasing speed and doing S-turns), and spend most of the time discussing how scary they are.

Chris

I asked Stephen (Bonanza on AOPA) this:

Question for you. On the PoA boards was a post by a US pilot that went to New Zealand and (after more typing than I'm willing to do) said it was common knowledge that you weren't supposed to intentionally slip an airplane not a 172 but you know "occilations of doom" (god I've finally got to work that into a conversation, next a lesson).
Any comments?

Never heard this one, it is certainly not a NZ thing. I owned and operated one of the largest commercial flying schools in NZ and every student was taught to slip as part of the normal syllabus. He probably hooked up with some maverick instructor who had misread the C172 POH.

Joe

 

[cwyckham]

Thanks, Joe.

The plot thickens. As I said above, my sample size is small. I've only asked a few instructors at one organization. One freaked out when I did a forward slip, the other said that he first saw a forward slip to landing when giving a BFR to a Canadian pilot and has since learned to love them. One of these two checked with the chief instructor who pointed out the CAA's (like the FAA) position, which is that the order of corrective action to take when too high on a glide approach is:

Flap first, then increase airspeed, so that a safe margin over the stall speed is maintained during the following manoeuvres, then S turn or sideslip (if applicable).

(I couldn't disagree more with increasing the airspeed while on an emergency approach to a potentially small and ugly landing area. The only way to judge the quality of your approach is if it's as much the same as any other landing as possible. The last thing you want to do is come over the fence too fast and float into the trees.)

The more detailed section on slips (note that they continually call forward slips sideslips) can be found on the CAA website. Check page 231. It spends a lot of time talking about how a slip can develop into a spin and how in some aircraft it can result in total loss of elevator effectiveness resulting in pitch down while close to the ground.

I have just discovered the section in the PTS that says that they'll test slips if it's appropriate to the aircraft, which backs up what Stephen said.

Given that the instructors I talked to had about 2000 hours each and had trained in very different parts of the country, perhaps we can conclude that there is some dissent in New Zealand about the use of slips and that some teach them (Stephen's crew) and others don't.

Chris