MERGED power curve / floats posts

[TeePeeCreeper]

There is nothing wrong with your technique especially in that it is what you are most comfortable with.

I can't remember if I ever used the slip on approach method as my teachers taught me the crab method and pointed out how natural crabbing s as you are flying with the controls balanced and not sitting at an angle to your flight path and being pushed sideways in the seat.

However we all have different likes and dislikes and as long as safety is not compromised what ever technique works for each of us is O.K.

I find the "slipping on approach" to be better when learning as it is merely a matter of increasing the deflection during the flare and landing. The only time I use it now is if the crosswind is such that I'm not sure I will have enough control authority to stay on the centerline after landing. If I need full control deflection to maintain track on approach, chances are I need to find another runway to land on!

Very useful information Blakey!

I am sure that the pundits here will disagree.... shoot me an email when you have a chance. We might be able to grab a coffee!

[noflex]

This guy thinks he’s a test pilot.
Dream on Flarewrongcasuperqueef.

Best troll yet

[Meatservo]

This guy thinks he’s a test pilot.
Dream on Flarewrongcasuperqueef.

Best troll yet

"Flare Wrongca Super Queef"....

I don't care what anybody else thinks of this insult. You, my friend, are in the wrong business. You should be writing for "South Park". There are lots of pilots in the world. This kind of genius only appears once or twice a generation.

[Oldguystrtn2fly]

Agreed. Well done.

[aeroncasuperchief]

This guy thinks he’s a test pilot.

I know what/who I am and I am NOT a career test pilot, As mentioned before, it is 1 of my duties in my job description . For those too ignorant to understand, Not all pilots who "test" A/C wear those $365.00 Ray-bans, the $2000.00 flight suit, Tom Cruise flight helmet, and a certificate from so-and-so test flying school. Some of US AMEs / Commercial pilots have a duty to test Aircraft post maintenance, when mods have been done , to prove a newly assembled A/C , even aft an engine has been overhauled! I DO have pretty blue eyes, so that totally qualifies me to test fly ANY A/C on this planet

[PilotDAR]

Some of US AMEs / Commercial pilots have a duty to test Aircraft post maintenance, when mods have been done , to prove a newly assembled A/C , even aft an engine has been overhauled!

As clarified for me by Test Pilots who supervised the design approval test flying I have done, post maintenance "test" flying is more correctly referred to as a "check flight". A test flight is flown in accordance with a flight test plan, which probably has been approved by Transport Canada. A purpose of a test flight may be to determine a characteristic which is not known. A maintenance check flight is flown to confirm an aircraft is airworthy as already expected, though can only be confirmed in flight. For example, setting up the stall warning horn following the installation of a STOL kit is not "test flying", it's just maintenance. If you go flying, and find it's correct, it's a maintenance check flight.

That said, having done decades of both those types of flying, maintenance check flying can be every bit a demanding (and risky ) as formal test flying. I think I've had more scares during maintenance check flights than test flights.

[aeroncasuperchief]

I guess I will need to amend my JLB entries to check flight satisfactory from test flight satisfactory then !

[aeroncasuperchief]

test flight
/ˈtes(t) ˌflīt/Submit
noun
a flight during which the performance of an aircraft or its equipment is tested.

Test flight definition: the first flight of a plane or rocket for the purposes of testing its equipment | Meaning, pronunciation, translations and examples.

an occasion when a plane or rocket (=vehicle for travelling into space) is flown for the first time in order to test its equipment.

To me and these foolish dictionaries, a test flight is a flight to test ( STUFF ) If I took my wife to 6000 feet and made love to her , I would qualify it as a test flight .. A flight to test whether or not I could make love to her at 6000 feet !

A check flight is a flight to check, check what? A test flight is a flight to test, test what?

Gee, according to the dictionaries, the second or third flight cannot be a test flight !

[aeroncasuperchief]

test1
/test/Submit
noun
1.
a procedure intended to establish the quality, performance, or reliability of something, especially before it is taken into widespread use.

flight
/flīt/Submit
noun
1.
the action or process of flying through the air.

Test flight :

Credits: NASA. a flight made to test an aircraft, rocket or spacecraft.

I feel like I am trying to teach a baby how to crawl !

[PilotDAR]

I feel like I am trying to teach a baby how to crawl !

Teach what, that I should disregard what the Flight Test Department tells me in favour of an AME/pilot on the internet?

[trey kule]

Pilot Dar.

I would expect mr. wannabe test pilot has no idea what PilotDar refers to, or that we are laughing at him.

And while I do enjoy laughing at his posts (and him) I have to wonder sometimes the pathology of trolls. Do they really think they are fooling anyone? Anyway, cut him some slack...he obviously needs it. Maybe even start a bo fund me page to buy him a T shirt that says. “I am a test pilot because I think I am “

[floatman]

No. Classical crosswind takeoff technique is to start the roll ailerons into the wind, smoothly bringing them them to arrive at neutral aileron when the airspeed reaches five or so knots faster than a regular takeoff speed with a small amount of forward pressure, then back elevator to crisply unstick the aircraft from the ground with level wings, after which one allows or assists the aircraft to nose into the relative airflow and assume a crab which represents coordinated flight, tracking the runway centreline.

This may open a can of worms with some float pilots but it hasn't been mentioned yet so I'll chime in.

When on a runway on amphibs, I will use the method as above but with the ailerons maintained slightly into wind, however I have been using another technique for years on SE float planes.

When I have a tight space and good breeze (a right crosswind is preferable since the weathervane effect balances out or counteracts the p-factor and asymmetric exhaust thrust in some airplanes) I will start the slide into wind in order to assist in getting on the step and then gently start a turn away from the wind (to the left in this case) with the ailerons still neutral. This is done by just releasing a bit of the right rudder that you are using to keep it straight. (you are managing the direction with your feet alone). You will then be in a slight (or more) left turn, basically carving a left-hand arc with ailerons still neutral. You are waiting to feel that slight pickup from the upwind-side wing/float. As soon as you feel the upwind float starting to lift, you simply allow it to happen and bump the ailerons right to pop the left float out. You are now nicely in a crab back into wind and you fly it out with wings level.

This is definitely not something to try for new float pilots as it is what I would consider an advanced technique, requiring great familiarity with the particular airplane you are flying as well as an acute awareness of what the float actually breaking the water feels like. It should also not be done in extremely gusty winds for the obvious reasons. This was taught to me by a very experienced individual and I have been using it successfully for decades. It is hard to quantify exactly, but I would guess that I can get an aircraft off the water 20% quicker (in a 208 amphib, maybe 5-6 seconds) using this procedure than by using a method of just picking a line and positioning ailerons into wind for a "normal" crosswind technique. When space is a factor, 5 or 6 seconds is huge and can mean the difference of using a line that doesn't require you to taxi for another 10 minutes to get back into wind or having to take a straight cross-wind.

Just a bit of food for thought.

[aeroncasuperchief]

On the backside argument, I quote sources and my own experience. Concerning a simple phrase, I quote sources. I am happy to agree with many pilots who have an "industry" definition of test flight and check flight . I guess I am a check pilot If I only do a check flight BUT then doesn't that confuse people who are REAL check pilots ( checking other pilots out? ) In the end, I am check flying while in the company of people who think that, and test flying in the company of people who thinks that! And those who want to argue, make fun of and attempt character assassination over nothing , I couldn't care less

[aeroncasuperchief]

This may open a can of worms with some float pilots but it hasn't been mentioned yet so I'll chime in.

When on a runway on amphibs, I will use the method as above but with the ailerons maintained slightly into wind, however I have been using another technique for years on SE float planes.

When I have a tight space and good breeze (a right crosswind is preferable since the weathervane effect balances out or counteracts the p-factor and asymmetric exhaust thrust in some airplanes) I will start the slide into wind in order to assist in getting on the step and then gently start a turn away from the wind (to the left in this case) with the ailerons still neutral. This is done by just releasing a bit of the right rudder that you are using to keep it straight. (you are managing the direction with your feet alone). You will then be in a slight (or more) left turn, basically carving a left-hand arc with ailerons still neutral. You are waiting to feel that slight pickup from the upwind-side wing/float. As soon as you feel the upwind float starting to lift, you simply allow it to happen and bump the ailerons right to pop the left float out. You are now nicely in a crab back into wind and you fly it out with wings level.

.

Yes, I recall using that technique in a light to moderate crosswind ( NOT gusty) when taking off tight to an island ( in basic calm) to stay out of the rollers coming down the long lake. You really must know the wind as you hit the end of the island , because the combination of that increase in windspeed and the rocking rollers, can assist you, with your up-wind wing raised, It can also quickly leave you with a submerged A/C. Right after take-off, the upwind wing gets lowered to slight wing low position ( in case a wind lull decides to set you on the rollers!) Again, I suggest that this technique is not for the green float pilot. As a rule, I have avoided taking off and landing in big crosswind rollers on a big lake. ( Too risky)

As mentioned before, I have done your type of take-off and this one also . Bravo that pilots are learning advanced maneuvers !

[aeroncasuperchief]

It is acceptable to do tailwind, crosswind, headwind take-offs, Tail to cross TO cross to into wind TO into to cross, cross to tail etc take-offs, Yall just need to know the procedure and do it within limitations. On a small lake , many amplified procedures can and are used

[PilotDAR]

I guess I am a check pilot If I only do a check flight BUT then doesn't that confuse people......

Aeronca, I'm delighted that you're a pilot. To begin to attach labels to that exceeds what I need to know, I'll let others speak for themselves.

I too am a pilot, and unrelated to that, a DAR. To me, being a "pilot", is about as specific as being a person who can move their fingers well. Maybe you're a pianist, maybe you're a surgeon, maybe you're watchmaker, or perhaps another calling whose dexterity is important. "Pilot" is a very broad term, and no one is a pilot of everything. We all know that, and there will always be a pilot with more skill and experience, to look up to, I have mine here.

So, I don't call myself a test pilot, though other people I have worked for have called me that - I am not formally trained as a test pilot. I don't call myself a check pilot, though I have checked many planes, and many pilots - a few did not pass. I didn't call myself an instructor, as I don't have that rating, until another very qualified member here explained to me that I am an instructor in a floatplane - but I still don't call myself an instructor - it disrespects those who do have the rating. Soon, I may call myself an experienced pilot, as I approach half the flying time of some pilots here who I admire. Okay, I could call myself a jump pilot, as a lot of people in colourful suits took off with me, but got out before I landed! Woohoo! I'm a [former] jump pilot - an Uber driver with a vertical component!

Readers here may judge me by what I write, I don't need to be judged by what I say I am....

[C.W.E.]

Readers here may judge me by what I write, I don't need to be judged by what I say I am....

I used to like to write about aviation but I am hesitant to continue to write because according to a poster on Avcanada I am senile now and I don't want to embarrass my family and friends writing rambling nonsense about flying.

Here is his opinion:::

. why don't you go to Palm Springs like every other octogenarian. Your senile ranting and rhetorical questioning here is getting old.

When are you coming out this way again PilotDAR?

I am in the process of starting to build a CX4 and I am sure you would like to see it.

A nice thing about senility is I am almost always meeting new people.

[aeroncasuperchief]

One of my job descriptions is a test pilot and yes, I do take the A/C to the near limits where I am told, one should never go to !

This was my first post about test flying an aircraft. Or is that check flying an aircraft . I do check out pilots and the last pilot, I /we decided to not continue with the "check-out" Why? The pilot had not flown for over 12 years, was in his sixties , never had flown a taildragger or higher performance plane and couldn't see the inst. panel properly. I do sympathize for him but, I am NOT an instructor just as I am NOT a career test pilot, proving a new fighter type with a parachute on my back and sitting on an ejection seat ! It was obvious that , even though I constantly coached the pilot to get current again with a school instructor, get a basic taildragger check-out and maybe even get some EFIS/ Constant speed time, it was not going to happen, and so the inevitable happened when this pilot jumped into a short coupled, pitch sensitive, CS 260 HP EFIS equipped taildragger for the first time to be " checked out" I would not put myself in a CF-18 to test fly it unless I had all the required training etc.

I too am a pilot, and unrelated to that, a DAR. To me, being a "pilot", is about as specific as being a person who can move their fingers well. Maybe you're a pianist, maybe you're a surgeon, maybe you're watchmaker, or perhaps another calling whose dexterity is important. "Pilot" is a very broad term, and no one is a pilot of everything. We all know that, and there will always be a pilot with more skill and experience, to look up to, I have mine here.

When someone asks me what i do, I may say AME ( most shake their head) but often say mechanic or wrench turner and work on aircraft, if they persue the line of questioning, I may say that I also fly or fly commercially ( NOT an airline pilot.
I dont have any problems denigrating myself when needed or being naturally humble ( I am BTW a mechanic first ) But even the terms AME and Commercial Pilot are misunderstood.

Engineers, as practitioners of engineering, are professionals who invent, design, analyze, build, and test machines, systems, structures and materials to fulfill objectives and requirements while considering the limitations imposed by practicality, regulation, safety, and cost.[1][2] The word engineer (Latin ingeniator[3]) is derived from the Latin words ingeniare ("to create, generate, contrive, devise") and ingenium ("cleverness").

Aint that a wonderful description of an ENGINEER ! Like Aircraft Maintenance Engineer ,,,,,,,,

NOT, I am not an ENGINEER BUT I do engineering duties like : Invent, design, build and test "I devise cleverly" I do NOT do mathematical and stress analysis/ calculations to determine whether what I built is within minimum standards ( I just over build it somewhat like MANY other AMEs who do a little "engineering" )

But within the company of AME s and in Canadian aviation I call myself an AME To Americans I say I am an A/P IA equivalent.

If I say Im a commercial pilot to someone on the street, they may ask : WOW, What airline do you fly for?
Well, I fly for hire, I am allowed to accept re-numeration to fly, that is all ( and other conditions)

It is nonsense to say that I cannot test fly an A/C if I have not been to test pilots school just as its nonsence to say that I am not a commercial pilot if I have not been flying commercially in the last 6 months, ( regardless of whether my medical is Cat 1/3)

So, I don't call myself a test pilot, though other people I have worked for have called me that - I am not formally trained as a test pilot. I don't call myself a check pilot, though I have checked many planes, and many pilots - a few did not pass. I didn't call myself an instructor, as I don't have that rating, until another very qualified member here explained to me that I am an instructor in a floatplane - but I still don't call myself an instructor - it disrespects those who do have the rating. Soon, I may call myself an experienced pilot, as I approach half the flying time of some pilots here who I admire. Okay, I could call myself a jump pilot, as a lot of people in colourful suits took off with me, but got out before I landed! Woohoo! I'm a [former] jump pilot - an Uber driver with a vertical component!

That is wonderful humility ! I can call you a test pilot, check pilot, instructor pilot jump pilot.
You are welcome to call me a tp/cp/ip/bp but we both have an understanding that we are not belittling anyone whose main income/profession is in any one of these fields of endeaver. AND YES, IN everything that I do, I can be assured that MANY will and can do better than me, that is obvious. It is not about ego but rather about expression for you and me!

[aeroncasuperchief]

My wife just pointed out to me that it is not just aviation that has nit-picking, egotistical, fault finding, immature folks, it is everywhere !

[C.W.E.]

My wife just pointed out to me that it is not just aviation that has nit-picking, egotistical, fault finding, immature folks, it is everywhere !

For some reason aviation seems to attract these types.

And the perceived anonymity brings out the worst of this breed.