Looking back at the airspeed should be instinctive

[Pilotdaddy]

Looking at the ASI during a slip will just cause you to read (and maybe react to) an inaccurate airspeed reading, especially if you only have one static port.

[Raincoast]

Hmm, who to listen to here? Three guys with a bunch of instructing time between them, or a dogmatic crank with a ghoulish fascination with accident reports??

[Big Pistons Forever]

. We do know the Asiana report though. 24 seconds of not looking at the ASI prior to the loss of control. And people actually think that looking at the ASI more would not have helped.

My thought was to comment that the Asiana crash has little relevance to GA flying as the human factors elements are centered around automation dependency and managing technology. However on further reflection the primary factor in the undesired aircraft state that the Asiana pilots allowed to develop was covered in Lesson Plan 2 of the PPL syllabus. Attitude + Power = Performance. In this case they failed to recognize that there was not enough power to, with the set attitude maintain the required performance. The aircraft energy diminished to such an extent that the aircraft was not able to make the end of the runway.

Large aircraft like the Asiana 777 have a lot of inertia. Lack of early recognition of the uncommented low power setting was the critical problem. By the time the aircraft had started slowing down they were already in big trouble as the deacceleration had to be arrested and then the airplane had to start accelerating again all of which takes significant time. So even this accident which superficially seems to support your argument, I would suggest ultimately is a better example of the importance of knowing and understanding the total aircraft performance not being fixated on just one, lagging indicator

Not only too slow but almost certainly badly uncoordinated

You are correct I should have said Not only too slow but almost certainly unintentionally badly uncoordinated

[pelmet]

Hmm, who to listen to here? Three guys with a bunch of instructing time between them, or a dogmatic crank with a ghoulish fascination with accident reports??

Take your choice. Just remember, every pilot flying who was part of the 1500 people who died over a ten year period due to loss of control accidents(most of which involved stalls) spent a significant amount of time learning from what in total was a large number of instructors across the U.S.

As for your statement about what I will call....an interest in accident reports....sounds like just about every aviation safety officer/investigator/reporter/etc. Something I doubt you will ever be able to be, based on that statement. Some I suppose, just need to re-invent the wheel instead of observing that it is round.

[pelmet]

In this case they failed to recognize that there was not enough power to, with the set attitude maintain the required performance. The aircraft energy diminished to such an extent that the aircraft was not able to make the end of the runway.

Exactly.

Despite the differences in inertia, the basics of flying the GA aircraft and the 777 are basically the same. One can be manually flying as they were or on autopilot. If you don't monitor your speed, your energy may get to low. Look at the airspeed in reasonable intervals and you will be aware of your energy(without getting into all the real energy stuff that glider pilots use) and be able to take appropriate action. The exact same thing can happen to a GA aircraft on final approach depending on circumstances such as drag.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Pelmet


I would suggest you read what I actually wrote......

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Very good thoughts in this thread - but let me give a couple of examples of how relying on pitch attitude can be difficult (bearing in mind that I have extremely limited experience).

Both the examples I can think of involve flying circuits - at YTZ and at YOO.

At YTZ on a hazy day, flying south towards the lake, the horizon can almost disappear - even in VMC - making it extremely difficult (especially for someone of my experience) to discern pitch. At YOO, there is higher terrain to the north which makes the aircraft feel more nose down than it is. It's quite noticeable at circuit altitude. In both cases I've needed to rely on the ASI to verify I was at the correct pitch. Bearing in mind that I have not yet figured out how to accurately use the attitude indicator to give me pitch information, this may be an example of how relying on the horizon may be insufficient.

These are edge cases, but I can see how they might be used as an argument to rely more on the ASI in some conditions. This may just be a lack of experience speaking though.

[l_reason]

Just as BPF said “For me, this is a good example of getting the "what" i.e. look at the airspeed; ahead of the "why" i.e. maintaining the desired aircraft state.”

The 777 guys would have been better off looking at the N1 20 seconds earlier NOT the AI. They needed to fill in the part of the Attitude + Power = Performance equation to know the speed was going to bleed off. In a transport category airliner you must pay even more attention to A+P=P as you have to anticipate power changes and it’s difficult to hear how much power you are making. You can’t just react to the AI as the engines take so long to spool up/down. Far better to do this —> "why" i.e. maintaining the desired aircraft state.” For the record I’ve never flown the triple, only it’s little siblings.

When teaching in the circuit I find it more useful to cover the AI with my hand when the student starts to screw up. Lets say the target speed is 65, 20 flap down and 1500rpm. Student starts letting the nose come up in the turn, speed rolls back to 60, they don’t do anything. Toss your left hand out over the AI and say “how is your speed doing?” The student should be able to tell that they are not in a good state and react accordingly; pitch, power or both. Get this, they won’t need to know what the speed was. You can do the same thing in the climb out. In the end you’ll have a pilot that will think why is my nose so high in this base turn like photofly, rookie, BPF, Bede, PilotDAR.... would be thinking.

[Heavy Rayn]

This was a great thread to read through. My initial take away from the first post is simple: pitch for airspeed, power for altitude. Doesn’t get much simpler than that.

For the student pilots (or anyone) reading this thread I also wanted to touch on base to final turns and the stall/spin scenarios that are the major killer in GA. Based off my instructing experience these base to final loss of control issues likely result in pilots leaving the turn to final too late and then trying to over bank the aircraft while already low and slow relative to the ground. The aircraft I did the majority of my instructing in stalled at 36 dirty, approach 55. Over banking into steep turn region can result in an increase of stall speed by 1.41 in a 60° turn, resulting in our new stall speed of being approximately 51 knots. If a pilot is already slow on approach and then over banks the base to final turn this situation becomes very dangerous very quickly, and then add in other factors such as but not limited to wind gusts it can go from bad to worse.

TLDR: if you turn late from base to final, don’t develop a habit of over banking at all, but especially without adjusting your pitch (pitch controls airspeed), maintain a moderate bank angle, allow the aircraft to cross through the final approach course (within reason) and then bring the aircraft back around to intercept final all while maintains a safe bank angle. If anything doesn’t look good or gets too far out of whack just overshoot and try again. Don’t force anything.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Don’t force anything.

I can relate to this from my junior years in IT, building and fixing desktops, replacing hardware: If you're forcing it, you're doing it wrong.

[photofly]

You are all so funny. Fetishizing bank angle is as bad as fetishizing the airspeed indicator. A zero-hours pilot can make a 75 degree banked turn to final perfectly safely. It’s the crappy teaching (or more likely the crap you’ve taught yourselves) in the next twenty hours that makes you dangerous.

The stall control is in your hand, and no airplane will stall at low power unless you pull back on it. If you don’t want to stall, don’t pull back on the yoke. It never needs to get more complicated than that.

[youhavecontrol]

I've read more than I care to about airspeed v/s pitch and bank turning final.. blah blah blah.. I think we are more or less on the same page here with that.

A big issue I see is distraction in general. You don't know your attitude if you're not paying attention to it, nor your airspeed. Base to final can be deadly when the pilot is looking too much at that runway off their wing and turning while staring at it, often unaware of how steep they are turning or how much they are skidding. That's when I often see the mistakes begin. An experienced pilot has a better idea of their energy even when looking sideways, but that skill is weak in new pilots, as well as those that don't fly often.

Not just in turns, but even on long final approaches... when you're mesmerized by the lights or you're fixated on that student you are hoping will continue to hold short. I remember flying with a student in the Seminole during a long final. We were waiting for a landing clearance as an Alpha Jet was taking off in front of us. The students eyes were fixated on the jet as it teared through the air, climbing at a ridiculous angle. I gave the student a nudge and cautioned, "It's pretty cool, but fly your own plane!" as the student's speed started to bleed off.

[pelmet]

This was a great thread to read through. My initial take away from the first post is simple: pitch for airspeed, power for altitude. Doesn’t get much simpler than that.

Actually, in my opinion it is irrelevant to my intention of the thread. Don't take this the wrong way. What method you use to control your speed can be an important subject but is separate. If you are flying sloppy but at a safe speed, it is much better than the person using the preferred method for airspeed adjustment but stalled the aircraft in because power was low/drag was high and the preferred method was not followed. I'd rather be a passenger of the first pilot.

The simple thing is.....monitoring your speed on a regular basis while maneuvering/climbing must be done on a regular basis and it should be instinctive so that when it hasn't been done for a 'significant' period of time, you just naturally look without even thinking about it.

Get in the habit of regularly monitoring your speed so that a distraction doesn't affect your monitoring in a significant way.

[Pilotdaddy]

Biggest takeaway from this thread is repeating your point over and over and over again eventually tires out everyone else, making your point eventually correct... not because it is, but because everyone else tired out.

[pelmet]

Biggest takeaway from this thread is repeating your point over and over and over again eventually tires out everyone else, making your point eventually correct... not because it is, but because everyone else tired out.

That is the whole point(although all instructors should be doing it).

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/us ... rstanding/

1500 lives lost over ten years.

[Pilotdaddy]

Biggest takeaway from this thread is repeating your point over and over and over again eventually tires out everyone else, making your point eventually correct... not because it is, but because everyone else tired out.

That is the whole point(although all instructors should be doing it).

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/us ... rstanding/

1500 lives lost over ten years.

I think you meant to paste this article...

https://www.wired.com/2017/02/dont-beli ... le-repeat/

[rookiepilot]

Biggest takeaway from this thread is repeating your point over and over and over again eventually tires out everyone else, making your point eventually correct... not because it is, but because everyone else tired out.

+100.

[pelmet]

Biggest takeaway from this thread is repeating your point over and over and over again eventually tires out everyone else, making your point eventually correct... not because it is, but because everyone else tired out.

That is the whole point(although all instructors should be doing it).

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/us ... rstanding/

1500 lives lost over ten years.

I think you meant to paste this article...

https://www.wired.com/2017/02/dont-beli ... le-repeat/

So now you think I am lying when I say that a pilot should ensure that they monitor their airspeed during distraction.

Student pilots, ignore the dangerous people who can easily result in your death. 1500 people died in ten years in the US due to loss of control accidents. Almost everyone of them would be alive today if airspeed had been properly monitored.

Your life depends on it.

If your way of controlling speed is by methods recommended by others here, that is fine. Just remember to monitor airspeed at regular intervals, especially when maneuvering.

[digits_]

Or to paraphrase:

"1500 people died in ten years in the US due to loss of control accidents. Almost everyone of them would be alive today if they didn't lose control."

Or, more general:

"The best way to not die in a crash, is by not crashing."

[Squaretail]

You are all so funny. Fetishizing bank angle is as bad as fetishizing the airspeed indicator. A zero-hours pilot can make a 75 degree banked turn to final perfectly safely. It’s the crappy teaching (or more likely the crap you’ve taught yourselves) in the next twenty hours that makes you dangerous.

The stall control is in your hand, and no airplane will stall at low power unless you pull back on it. If you don’t want to stall, don’t pull back on the yoke. It never needs to get more complicated than that.

Indeed. I think Langeweiche posits the silver chain theory to make the airplane stall proof. Pilots stall planes not because they aren't looking at the airspeed, they stall them because they haven't been taught not to yank on the stick when they shouldn't be.

When I think of my own flying, I rarely consult the airspeed indicator on the approach. I think the main place I do is to make sure I'm not too fast when the wheels go down. Otherwise its a combination of knowing the combination of power and attitude is where I want it for what's necessary for that particular performance that segment of the approach warrants. Thus its really hard for me to say to another pilot they need to watch the airspeed more when that's not what I do to get what I want.

Pilots lose control of airplanes when they are behind what the airplane is doing. If there's a part of your mind that needs to be looking at the airspeed to determine that the airplane isn't where you want it, your problems are larger. Not that I haven't encountered pilots that somehow managed to be licensed and flew this way, so they are out there. At the end of it, the basics of flying just aren't that difficult. The airplane only does what you make it do.