Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Don’t tell Evan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    The truth may be in the middle, but I don't feel the same need as Evan to make the pilot out as an idiot.
    Not an idiot, perhaps, but a pilot trained for wake turbulence upset recovery on a very different DC-9. Different because the smaller wingspan of a DC-9 allows for the possibility of severe wake upset attitudes where both ailerons can be inside the vortex and the only means of addressing roll at such extreme attitudes may be rudder. Even so, not with rapid reversals. When pilots who had previously flown with this pilot observed his very active use of rudder, they later remarked to investigators that it was disturbing to watch. Like you, this pilot failed to understand the role of rudder on large transport category airplanes and this got a lot of people killed. The sensitivity of the rudder pedals is not the fatal factor, it's the rudder reversal behavior that caused the fin to depart. When you use rudder to induce roll, there is a delayed effect. Therefore it becomes very easy to overcontrol and get into an escalating PIO situation. It's a terrible substitute for ailerons. At least one, and probably both, ailerons remained effective on the A300 during the event. But even they weren't needed. The prudent thing to do on an A300 (or any aircraft of that size) is let the airplane's lateral stability naturally correct itself. Maybe some gentle aileron but not rudder. The pilot responsible is now dead and will never learn from this quite blatantly demonstrative lesson. What is your excuse 3WE?

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    When the A-330 crashed in New York back in 2001, after the tail broke off...
    A300. And the difference is not minor. This accident would likely not have happened in an A330.

    [B]He used the rudder because that's a kinda fundamental control to manage yaw
    Well, the problem is that apparently (and yes this is a stretch) he did not use rudder because to control yaw, but he thought that wake turbulence could flip the plane so he had to use upset recovery procedures and he attempted to use rudder to control roll rather than yaw (at least initially). Which goes back to...

    the pilot, in response to poor training...

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post

    And what now is the thing that Evan shouldn't know?
    When the A-330 crashed in New York back in 2001, after the tail broke off...

    Evan feels that the pilot, in response to poor training and screening, deliberately slammed the rudder back and forth, repeatedly, because he specifically wanted to be a cowboy, improvising pilot and wanted to use rudder BECAUSE it goes against the Airbus A300B4-605R FCOMPOHQRH.

    3BS feels that the pilot felt some wake turbulence and made some modest, appropriate rudder inputs (Maybe 1.25" and 10 lbs...not_unlike the landing fake cub in this video). He used the rudder because that's a kinda fundamental control to manage yaw in lots of airplanes in lots of circumstances. Unfortunately, his modest light inputs were grossly amplified to the full, available rudder deflection by a poorly designed airplane, resulting in an unfortunate, systematic oscillation which broke the cheap-ass composite tail off of the airplane.

    The truth may be in the middle, but I don't feel the same need as Evan to make the pilot out as an idiot.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    As usual useless dribble.

    Leave a comment:


  • LH-B744
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    Rudder usage…

    [..]
    For people who don't necessarily operate the French language in their signature, we should probably explain the most important words within a Cessna 152 or within a Boeing B744:
    rudder (dt. Seitenruder) >> The pedals at your feet, in a Cessna or in a B744. For use only with care and when ct has published the weather for you on final.
    aileron (dt. Querruder) >> The difference between a Cessna and an A320. Stick or not, this is the question.
    elevator (dt. Höhenruder) >> Ask Flight Captain Sullenberger, with this stick you can be a hero, or dead on impact (cp AF-A332).

    And what now is the thing that Evan shouldn't know?

    Dear greetings my friend.

    Leave a comment:


  • kent olsen
    replied
    Well rudders are a flight control just like ailerons and elevators. If you are in a position where you need max deflection on any one, you shouldn't be there. When i started flying jets I was told you don't need the rudders.

    Here's another one: when transitioning into the Hawker 1000 we had to do some landings in the a/c. The instructor told us to trim the nose down on final so that in the event of a go-around you wouldn't have to trim as the flaps retracted to 20 deg. 'Distraction' boom! ground contact. don't believe everything you hear.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by kent olsen View Post
    …Now you have been working the rudders on final and at the flare...
    I hope you never transitioned from left to right, or vice versa…

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan
    Input rudder. Remove rudder.


    1.25” pedal reversals (kind of seen in the OP) are generally not_a structural nor even a comfort issue. (Mild sarcasm may be present with one word)

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    And Evan always forgets to mention how light, 2” pedal inputs give full rudder deflections on some types.
    And 3WE forgets to mention that doing so is structurally safe from neutral to either direction. But not reversing from one side to the other. Which is not something an airline pilot would ever need to do in flight. Input rudder. Remove rudder. It's not a paddle boat.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    And your point is?
    Well-controlled sideslips are cool to watch.

    And, although I’m an outsider, rudders might have some value for yaw control.

    And Evan always forgets to mention how light, 1.25” pedal inputs give full rudder deflections on some types.

    Light, 1.25” pedal inputs result in light rudder deflections in this type.
    Last edited by 3WE; 2023-03-01, 13:11.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    That who knows, knows. That who doesn't, is the boss.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    For those of you that have never worked inside the industry, there is an old saying.

    "Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach."
    Fixed.

    Those that can't teach, teach gym.

    Old saying.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    For those of you that have never worked inside the industry, there is an old saying.

    "Those that can do, those that can't teach. Those that can't teach become management"

    Leave a comment:


  • kent olsen
    replied
    Well try this on for size. Teaching in the DC-8 and 747, IOE, Initial Operating Experience. Both a/c are very susceptible to sucking up things with the outboard engines while reversing on landing, especially the DC-8 so you need to land in the middle of the runway. So the way I taught landings and especially Xwind landings was to line up on final, keep the wings level with the ailerons and use the rudders to crab into the wind. Making small crab angles allowed you to stay on the centerline. Especially on the 747 you could stay lined up and move 10-15 ft and when you eased off on the rudder it would stop right there. If you tried banking to move 10-15ft you had so much inertia it would continue moving left or right. Now you have been working the rudders on final and at the flare you can feel just how much rudder to remove the crab for the landing.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    Made no sense to me either. I thought it was my Cub at first! It's actually not a real Cub. It's a Carbon Cub. It has lights and an electric system. Probably has an electric starter ​​and probably cost 150k!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X