Mistakes not to be repeated

[carbeerater]

Everyone who flies has at least a few "I won't do that again" experiences. I don't want this to become a Willy waving contest, more of a "I did something stupid and don't want anyone else to $hit themselves for the same reason."

I'll go first: A long time ago at the ripe old age of seventeen, with a fresh ppl (-1 week) I was on a solo night cross country flight when I did something stupid. I did a spin.

I did my ppl in a 172 and in order to get a decent spin I was taught to simultaneously apply full back pressure, full rudder and full power at the buffet. Yes, FULL POWERThe airplane I trained in simply would not spin to the right so we always went left.

Of course 152s are cheaper to fly so after some training (all night) in the 152. I was off on my first solo night xcntry. The weather was beautiful albeit dark and so I decided to practice my favorite exercise!

Long story short, a 152 definitely does not require full power to enter a spin and as a matter of fact does a beautiful snap roll type entry into a very aggressive spin.

I was somewhat stunned and my"recovery" led instantly to a right hand spin which of course I had never experienced in a powered aircraft.

I never busted any limitations with the possible exception of the entry which felt pretty wild and am here to talk about it. When I told my instructor I thought he was going to pass out. A/c went in for inspection and I had a very serious debrief with my instructor, the cfi and the owner.

I'll never do that again.

[digits_]

To all the people who want to rent an airplane at a club/company they are not familiar with: make sure you get what they promise you. Not every modification or change to the airplane is recorded in the documents (even though it should). It scared the bejeezes out of me when I started a take-off roll at max takeoff weight, 35°C outside at an elevation of about 2000 ft, only to find out after the flight that the airplane had an engine power that was substantially less than in the official manual.

[Checklist]

A spin at night! I honestly lol'd. Must be tough walking around carrying those gonads.

Shortly after I was done my ppl, I went into a small airstrip in the spring without checking the notams. The grass more closely resembled an African wetland than an airstrip. Landed anyway-first good decision of the day. On takeoff (another excellent decision) the grass bogged me down and it was questionable if i was going clear the trees at the end. Looked like I was barely going to make it and breathed a sigh of relief when I experienced a partial power loss. After knocking a few pine cones out of the trees and ruining my favourite underwear I opened my eyes and found I had climbed away. PDM needed a little work back then. So I would suggest you guys check the notams for airport closures, and it never hurts wearing your lucky underwear

[Bede]

I got talked into doing a ski trip onto the Beaufort sea in a ski plane because the regular ski guy was sick by my boss. "I wouldn't send you if I didn't think you could do it." A few problems: 1) I had never flown on skis. 2) I had never flown the type. 3) I had no idea that "snow drifts" on open water are 12" ice speed bumps.

I touched down in the wrong area and got banged around really good. I returned to base thinking I damaged the landing gear, but all was OK. Those Cessna's are near indestructible. I enjoy ski flying now that I know something about it.

[carbeerater]

Awesome posts guys... and with all due respect checklist, I would like to reiterate that I am not proud of this particular event. No gonads required for this maneuver, and even less brains.

As I alluded to i was not yet even night rated, had esentially no time on type, ink still fresh on my ppl and decided it would be ok to do a spin! AT NIGHT!!!!!!!!!

Some people do spins at night, they are either amazing Aerobatic pilots or dead. I fall somewhere in between: lucky

[sky's the limit]

Just wondering... Does the airplane know it's spinning at night?

[carbeerater]

Nope, but I sure did, especially when I didn't apply forward stick at the right time and switched directions

I'm pretty sure my face looked like that "smiley"

[akoch]

During my PPL training, one of the first "local x-country" solos ran into a windy and bumpy approach I never experienced before and was a bit too much for my skills at that point. Could not stabilize the approach, just before landing decided to overshoot and with all the bumps/distractions flipped the flaps all the way from LND to CRUISE. Which naturally pretty much stalled me near the ground, the airplane veered a lot to the left off the runway. Nonetheless, I did not touch the ground, kept the nose low and recovered, climbed away.

Now I always select my flaps with a thumb and finger (as oppose to just flipping it), making sure it is where I need it to be.

The rest of flying so far was uneventful.

[Rookie50]

Well, long ago, far away from home area, I got some experience with real wind shear. I (VFR) approached an airport in a terrain area from the north, not the preferred landing direction due to the terrain but required that day due to 28 kts wind, and learned what wind can do to a light airplane when affected by terrain.

I went from being fairly high and 15kts fast -- not a bad idea considering the wind and a 5000' runway with an unforgiving rocky hillside right in front of it --- to hearing the stall warning and a sinking trend towards that lovely rock in a split second. The wind just died at 300 agl. -- instant react full power; brought me back on trend and a safe landing -- but wow what a ride for a second or 2.

[trampbike]

My most stupid mistake so far happened a couple of years ago in a Grumman AA1c.
Related to this thread about overconfidence: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=65250&p=619150&hili ... ce#p619150

A few days ago, I had to deal with my very first stall close to the ground. Hopefully it was the first and the last one. I felt it would be a good idea to bring that old thread up.

I was practicing, as usual, short field landings, in a Grumman AA1, flying at high angle of attack, power-on, a couple knots above stall. Actually the stall warning is singing pretty often when I practice these approach. That time though, when coming close to the runway threshold, there was a sudden wind reduction and the airplane dropped very fast, with the stall warning screaming. I pushed the nose down even though the ground was rushing at me and opened the throttle fully. The recovery took place about 20 feet AGL.

I obviously was getting myself out of my comfort zone doing such approaches, and being a low timer with basically no experience, it was not a good idea, even though I felt confident in my control of the airplane (having practiced of course at higher altitude before).

I just wanted to say that by reading a lot and being told again and again to reduce the angle of attack FIRST when stalled, I did not break the airplane and was unharmed. Would I have opened the throttle first, that little Grumman would probably have flipped on his side.

[carbeerater]

I seem to recall an instructor who was posting here years ago who strongly disagreed with the idea of lowering the nose close to the ground. Despite all of the advice from pilots with oodles of experience he refused to accept that the first thing you need to do when approaching the stall was lower the nose and rather was advocating applying full power first. I'm too lazy to find the quotes but it boiled down to him not liking the picture out the window in such a scenario. I wonder if inverting that picture with full power would make him more comfortable? Haven't seen a post from him in a long time so maybe he found out.

[trampbike]

Our dear 767,
I think this is the thread you are thinking about: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=60211

[pelmet]

Beautiful sunny day with no cloud and endless visibility. Went on a 25 minute cross country flight down to the US but only after checking the forecast. Not too bad, just the occasional thunderstorm according to the terminal forecast at each airport. After a couple of hours at destination we headed back with only one CB to be seen in the clear blue sky. It was right on our route though. American FSS said destination weather was good but had no radar info for Canada. There was no internet stuff back then.

We headed northwest to destination and a plan for a quick deviation but the pax wanted to see a town offroute to the west, so no problem. We will just go westbound and then around the back side of the CB northbound. As we were passing south of the CB, it became hazier but no problem so we continued. Ahead of us in the haze was what appeared to be a dark line of smoke on the horizon ahead. I wondered what had caused the smoke. We eventually got to this town and we were now just passing the back side of this huge CB so I looked to the north where I planned to go and saw a lineup of massive thunderstorms. Meanwhile the dark smoke ahead was the bases of more big ones. Oh oh.

A call to Canadian FSS brought a report of heavy thunderstorms over destination airport and the other one nearby plus radar echoes of many more to the west. There was a nearby airport and while it had stuff approaching, I dropped the gear, did a quick advisory and landed. Customs could be dealt with later. We ended up getting a drive home as the massive cold front had loads of CB's into the evening.

A later check of the Area Forecast, which I had not checked earlier was quite straightforward in displaying this front. In other words, it was not just the occasional daytime heating thunderstorm. The flight centre where I rented the plane had its parking lot flooded out and the same front caused a bunch of tornados in the US which killed a whole bunch of people. And there I was flying around in it. It was cool seeing that wall of CB's though.

Checking the weather more carefully is a good idea.

[carbeerater]

Our dear 767,
I think this is the thread you are thinking about: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=60211

Yep that's the one! Could hardly believe what I was reading! How did it not get caught earlier? He was actually teaching that to abinitio students for over a year... at least ten students as someone pointed out I hope he kept his promise to change his technique.

[carbeerater]

All of these anecdotes are excellent guys, keep 'em coming.

[carbeerater]

Pelmet: I have noticed that nearly all accident reports that result from wx encounters contain something similar to the following

"The pic did not obtain a (free) interperative weather briefing"

I remember harumphing to an instructor about calling the fic on a cavok day and he said "Why not talk to someone who knows more about the weather than you? You might just learn something"

I make a habit of calling every time I fly, even for local practice.

[pelmet]

Pelmet: I have noticed that nearly all accident reports that result from wx encounters contain something similar to the following

"The pic did not obtain a (free) interperative weather briefing"

I remember harumphing to an instructor about calling the fic on a cavok day and he said "Why not talk to someone who knows more about the weather than you? You might just learn something"

On that day I only did a self-briefing. I'm sure FSS would have given me a good warning. It sure was a nice clear day. What could go wrong.

[carbeerater]

Ahh Yes the old self brief. I too have been subject to its "favorable outlook" It sounds like you made the right decision in the end and that's what it's all about right? I think these types of stories really hit home with most pilots. I will share some more of my own when I have an actual keyboard in front of me.

[C208]

This one is short and sweet. Never give control to someone when the aircraft is out of trim. I use this today with pilots who have 25K+ hours and some with 500. I was taught this on a particular flight somewhere around 29 hours doing unusual attitudes. 3700 Later. Im surprised I have to mention it still, It may not sound dramatic, but, its the truth.

[carbeerater]

This one is short and sweet. Never give control to someone when the aircraft is out of trim. I use this today with pilots who have 25K+ hours and some with 500. I was taught this on a particular flight somewhere around 29 hours doing unusual attitudes. 3700 Later. Im surprised I have to mention it still, It may not sound dramatic, but, its the truth.

Although very serious, it is in someway ridiculously funny, for me to read this. Like in a really dirty trick kinda way.

208 I assume you were the student when you learned this lesson?

[pdw]

Our dear 767,
I think this is the thread you are thinking about: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=60211

What 767 essentially tried to say there is that if you are so near the ground when accidentally nearing stall (not sure exactly how near you are to stall in that first second you're caught by surprise seeing a quickly-lost low airspeed) your power then is primary too ... as lowering the nose without it will get too close / too quick after 500ftAGL in seriously decaying IAS. (You're caught between a rock and a hard place there ... whether you like it or not)

767 also implies there that up in the practise area you are getting to know what stalls are all about for the very reason that when you're low you can avoid them, but that up in the safe altitudes of the practise area it doesn't matter about height ... where the early students won't be able to imagine yet how rapidly the first 300ft are gone near to the ground.

Pushing the nose down near the ground too much (ie with both hands still on yoke) reduces airspeed for the first second or two as there's lessening relativewind towards/nearer to the ground/surface plus the steepening angle slows you as the AC changes pitch axis with out the early knots from new thrust ... yet adding power immediately (where one hand went to the throttle first while the other stayed to check pitch/down as needed) gleans some pf those thrust-seconds immediately adding to pull you thru the slow spot. "767" is always repeating there to get to the power quick ... as near to the ground it reallty matters that you do; he sure didn't seem to want to give in-to that you apply power second and thus risk going past the beginning-of-stall when so low to the ground ... and there I agree having seen this with my own eyes:

The account of my mistake of coming in with no flap on a straight-in with a Cardinal is among my posts (the near-ground shear experience ). Just to add that all airports are affected in different ways by terrain, ... so at every airport an instructor is facing slightly different obstacles to shape their ongoing experience of how weather effects near-ground airspeed-safety. Was this the case with 767 ?

The unique thing about our airport (within the lower lakes basin) is that there's on-occasion a significant negative shearzone without mechanical turbulence in late approach 24 when there's a strong breeze overhead the airport area from the southwest ... while on the ground is quiet or already starting to change for 06 (ie a lakebreeze under-pinning us from northeast/below the flightpath for the rwy24 landing as warmer air is moving southwest overhead).

The speed at which the stall neared in late final on that night still haunts me ... I gave it max power immediately from 1500rpm and quickly lowered the nose just a bit ... but man did it ever want to sink so I wouldn't dare let the nosedown much at all. I believe it would have nosed right in with that load had I done the opposite (add power even a second later) ... but you can essentially say it was "both" at the same time. Never 'repeated' that mistake of coming in with no flap .. like on that real nice cloudless night in perfect weather.

[trampbike]

Should I really feed the troll..?

What 767 essentially tried to say there is that if you are so near the ground when accidentally nearing stall (not sure exactly how near you are to stall in that first second you're caught by surprise seeing a quickly-lost low airspeed) your power then is primary too ... as lowering the nose without it will get too close / too quick after 500ftAGL in seriously decaying IAS. (You're caught between a rock and a hard place there ... whether you like it or not)

And that would be just plain wrong. Power will never be primary on a stall recovery. Never. Doesn't matter how low you are, what kind of aircraft you fly or the super special decreased performance windshear you might encounter.

767 also implies there that up in the practise area you are getting to know what stalls are all about for the very reason that when you're low you can avoid them, but that up in the safe altitudes of the practise area it doesn't matter about height

And this would be just as wrong. Even when practising at a safe altitude, minimizing the height loss and regaining positive control asap is still paramount to that exercise.

Pushing the nose down near the ground too much (ie with both hands still on yoke)

Both hands on the yoke? Why would you fly like that?

reduces airspeed for the first second or two as there's lessening relativewind towards/nearer to the ground/surface (plus the steepening angle slows you as the AC changes pitch axis with out the increase);

Please tell me what is it you are smoking. Looks like it is good stuff.

yet adding power immediately (where one hand went to the throttle first while the other stayed to check pitch/down as needed) gets max thrust going immediately to pull you thru the slow spot.

Using power as the primary control to "pull you thru the slow spot" gets people killed every year.

767 is always repeating there to get to the power quick ... as near to the ground it reallty matters that you do.

It really matter what you do, and especially what you teach, no matter the altitude. Physics is physics, so please lower the nose to reduce AoA first. It doesn't matter how close to the ground you are.

so we might also not want to forget that every instructor is facing slightly different obstacles for near-ground airspeed safety depending where they teach. Was this the case with 767 ?

What kind of obstacles would make your aircraft behave differently in flight, so much so that power becomes your primary control for stall recovery?

The unique thing about our airport (within the lower lakes basin) is that there's on-occasion a significant negative shearzone without mechanical turbulence in late approach 24 when there's a strong breeze overhead the airport area from the southwest ... but on the ground is quiet or already starting to change for 06 (a lakebreeze under-pinning us from northeast/below ... warmer air moving southeast overhead).

Nothing unique there. Nothing relevant to the stall recovery technique.

but man did it ever want to sink so i wouldn't let the nosedown much at all.

If you really were stalled, then pushing the nose enough to break the stall first is the only good way to arrest your sink.

Never 'repeated' that mistake of coming in with no flap ....

What kind of aircraft were you flying that made flaps so important and absolutely necessary to conduct a safe landing? Flaps are a good tool, but on most aircraft, they are far from essential.

[Beefitarian]

Never 'repeated' that mistake of coming in with no flap ....

What kind of aircraft were you flying that made flaps so important and absolutely necessary to conduct a safe landing?

A Cardinal.

[trampbike]

Yeah, but it must have been a very special Cardinal don't you think? Probably the late model that was so prone to stall when faced with a low level upper front coupled with a steep lapse rate and a backing wind that veers when you look at it too hard.

Sorry for the thread drift, please keep the mistakes stories coming!

[Beefitarian]

Maybe. Possibly pdw just has a special way of telling the story.

I think he's suggesting using flaps makes the nose come down for better looky loo out the front and can let him get a bit slower before the stall. After the event he described he felt that was much more important than before it.

You're probably right suggesting he may have been farther from stalling than he thought when he experienced the noticeable change in vertical speed.