Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 38 of 38

Thread: At about 50 feet AGL you'll receive some clips around the ears...

  1. #21
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    That would be ACTUAL intelligence.
    Ya know, a whole other angle on all of this craziness is that currently, we have Doppler thingies that are generating "Wind shear ahead" warnings. I THINK this is keying off of 'air' and not water droplets.

    If it is working off of air- imagine a super duper Doppler radar + a super computer that is telling the plane extremely accurate estimates of the winds and wind gusts/changes/shears it will encounter.

    Thus for the day when 90% of the cowboys are landing the first time, while 10% go around- the plane can genuinely detect whether it will see totally controllable wind gusts, or wind gusts that make you drop 10 feet and bank 'steeply*' both at the same time.

    Instead of the plane showing you the 'cautious judgement' you desire, it's giving a black and white of either we can make it or we can't (or at least can't make it without a little safety margin)...



    *Steeply = not actually all that steep, but steep enough to threaten engines or wing tips based on the particular type.
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,887

    Default

    And how does this...

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel
    Another thing that I feel computers are not so good at, yet, is at looking at the big picture to make a judgement and define a strategy.
    compares with this...

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan
    This is something that AI is being developed for... in the very near future, we could develop autopilots that CAN reliably make the decisions you mention... as I said, we just aren't there yet
    ?

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

  3. #23
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    And how does this...



    compare with this...



    ?
    The difference is tone and hidden intent.

    Gabriel: Computers are not there yet, well-honed pilot skills are still important. (Evan likely objected to that second, inferred 'statement')

    Evan: Pilots are reckless cowboys, unfortunately their replacement computers are not there yet.
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  4. #24
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    And how does this...

    Another thing that I feel computers are not so good at, yet, is at looking at the big picture to make a judgement and define a strategy.

    compares with this...?
    Well, if you want to get into semantics, you stated this...

    Another thing that I feel computers are not so good at, yet, is at looking at the big picture to make a judgement and define a strategy.

    Yes, they are still far from perfect at this—still not good enough to apply to autonomous autopilots—but they are pretty good at looking at the big picture to make a judgement and define a strategy right now.

    I think it's both a matter of time and a matter of will to get there. The hurdles are technological and economical, but if this could significantly decrease the number of rejected landings, maybe the economics works as well.

    I just hope that, if it comes to this, the AI is instilled with a cautious disposition and a NON-HAL algorithm that prioritizes the value of human life over the mission.

    You notice all the other traffic on this slice of the day went around at 50' or above.

  5. #25
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    You notice all the other traffic on this slice of the day went around at 50' or above.
    Not giving you "all", BUT, I somewhat concur.

    As much as I think that landing in a gusty crosswind is cool and that Super Genius pilots can land nicely in most crosswinds, there's a few things standing out here:

    -Many airlines have crosswind limits
    -As you say, it seems like there were lots of go-arounds
    -As for the guy who landed...the plane looks kinda sorta not under 100% control as we would like.
    -The videos from the ground sure seem to show some blistering winds.

    You look at all of this and have to ask, that if a landing in these conditions doesn't have a small risk of bending metal and injuring people...in an industry where you do all sorts of borderline insane things in the interest of utmost safety...what's wrong with this picture...

    ...are there not enough indications here (indicated winds, numerous go abounds) that that day was just a little bit dangerous (and at the same time grossly over the normal uber-safe line) and shouldn't it all have been shut down until the winds calmed to something more reasonable?

    Counter argument: There is rarely a foul with LEGALLY going and taking a look...maybe hitting a calmer period...but on this day, it does appear that the winds were pretty relentless and that it's unlikely that normal, uber-safe conditions would occur (or not reoccur at the worst possible time like it did for that one excellent landing.)
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    Not giving you "all", BUT, I somewhat concur.

    As much as I think that landing in a gusty crosswind is cool and that Super Genius pilots can land nicely in most crosswinds, there's a few things standing out here:

    -Many airlines have crosswind limits
    -As you say, it seems like there were lots of go-arounds
    -As for the guy who landed...the plane looks kinda sorta not under 100% control as we would like.
    -The videos from the ground sure seem to show some blistering winds.

    You look at all of this and have to ask, that if a landing in these conditions doesn't have a small risk of bending metal and injuring people...in an industry where you do all sorts of borderline insane things in the interest of utmost safety...what's wrong with this picture...

    ...are there not enough indications here (indicated winds, numerous go abounds) that that day was just a little bit dangerous (and at the same time grossly over the normal uber-safe line) and shouldn't it all have been shut down until the winds calmed to something more reasonable?

    Counter argument: There is rarely a foul with LEGALLY going and taking a look...maybe hitting a calmer period...but on this day, it does appear that the winds were pretty relentless and that it's unlikely that normal, uber-safe conditions would occur (or not reoccur at the worst possible time like it did for that one excellent landing.)
    I would say the roll instability on short final was enough to ward them off.

    I think we need yet another new acronym: STCSFYC

    SAVE THE COWBOY STUFF* FOR YOUR CESSNA (or CUB)

    *other s-words may be substituted here

  7. #27
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    I would say the roll instability on short final was enough to ward them off.

    I think we need yet another new acronym: STCSFYC

    SAVE THE COWBOY STUFF* FOR YOUR CESSNA (or CUB)

    *other s-words may be substituted here
    That's just kind of wrong, man.

    When winds get nasty, light planes should be the first to park.

    All pilots (and airplanes- sort of) have wind limits where you cross a magic line into too-dangerous-to-be-operating.

    And, you make the inference that light plane guys are reckless.

    I worry as you force me to say that this is somewhat black and white- if the winds are too nasty, don't fly (of course, that's NOT_a type-specific comment- so I don't feel like a total Evan). (Soon, some real pilot will bring up the real world of what happens when you take off and then the weather is not as-forecast and that it's not THAT simple...my reply- Acknowledged, but I think we saw a plane get bent here and the brass is gonna find a scapegoat!)
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post

    I think we need yet another new acronym: STCSFYC
    Meaning—of course—save the unnecessary confidence-inspired risk-taking to those flights where you are only gambling with your own airplane and your own ISGPOTM neck.

    And on the flights where you are entrusted with many, many lives and have not consulted each of them about whether they are in the gambling mood, play it safe instead.

    In this particular case, if things are that turbulent on final and gusting surface crosswinds exceeding limits are known to be present, go around before 50'. Even if you are FEELING CONFIDENT.

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    697

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    And, you make the inference that light plane guys are reckless.
    Well, based on crash statistics and similar things like frequency of busting TFRs, they are. Or at least much more so than the commercial types.
    Be alert! America needs more lerts.

    Eric Law

  10. #30
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elaw View Post
    Well, based on crash statistics and similar things like frequency of busting TFRs, they are. Or at least much more so than the commercial types.
    Ban-worthy, personal, expletive-laden flame launched directly at you and your family for bringing facts to the discussion.

    Evan had to get his jab in that light plane guys are all cowboys.

    I THINK that most light plane guys stop short of landing in 30 kt winds (crossed or aligned) and generally do not do stuff that is pretty clearly, over-the-top dangerous.

    Yes, the eye-rolling events happen and happen more in the light plane world (including relentless pull ups after diving on the girlfriends house or steepening a wind-crimped base-to-final turn.)

    Crash stats....know what, Light planes are way way way over the magic line of 'airline-uber-safety'.

    Much of it is not only single engine, but single, much-less-reliable-reciprocating-single engine aircraft.

    Much of it is single pilot...it's scary to think just how much the concept of PM brings to safety.

    Thunderstorms, Icing- you don't have your own radar to look for it and bad-ass jet engines to avoid or blow through it.

    IMC, you (generally) don't have badass FMS Autopilots Evan-level automation.

    You don't GET PAID to go to a simulator every 6 months and get a good ole double dose of Safety Kool Aid administered above and below along with hands-on training.

    And, etc.....
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  11. #31
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    ***YOUR CESSNA***
    Since you bring up the subject, here's a somewhat analogous YouTube. Tempted to double-post this the rudder reversal thread, but...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxoacmb7zxY
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  12. #32
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    Since you bring up the subject, here's a somewhat analogous YouTube. Tempted to double-post this the rudder reversal thread, but...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxoacmb7zxY
    Why? I don't see any rudder reversals there.

  13. #33
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Why? I don't see any rudder reversals there.
    They aren't always visible... but may be used around touchdown.
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  14. #34
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,887

    Default

    A Near-Fatal Touch Down. Damage to the aircraft is unknown.
    Is this the headline of...
    a) Daily Mirror
    b) AvHerald
    c) Flying Magazine?

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

  15. #35
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,887

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    Since you bring up the subject, here's a somewhat analogous YouTube. Tempted to double-post this the rudder reversal thread, but...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxoacmb7zxY
    Come on, these are little GA piston single planes. Several of them. Why isn't ANYBODY there de-crabbing and touching down with the left gear first?

    These are perfect landing by definition, but "uglily" executed.

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

  16. #36
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    Come on, these are little GA piston single planes. Several of them. Why isn't ANYBODY there de-crabbing and touching down with the left gear first?
    Duh! They were all trained by puppy-mill-wanna-be-airline-pilots-in-the-instructor-phase ROTE TRAINING: Try not to dip the wing much at all lest you scrape engines and wing tips...Stall warning...power up...15 degrees ANU...Questions?...No questions...

    Ok, slightly more serious: I noted that too...and in one instance I also noted the proper rudder input, but the plane still had to crab (more of a kick out than a slip, though)...but indeed, I would have expected more 'leaning into the wind'. In that video it was largely absent.

    Also, I recall that type specific memory checklist POHFCOMQRH items for the 172M were that you wanted good aileron input, lest the wind 'pick up the wing' in an unwanted manner- not sure if that applies to the 172S or not.
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  17. #37
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    ***Near Fatal Touchdown***

    Is this the headline of...
    a) Daily Mirror
    b) AvHerald
    c) Flying Magazine?
    Remember...there could be right main shimmy-damper failure, runway departure, some other bent stuff, some spilled fuel and sparks and a plane full of Evan's and 3BS's grabbing their laptops as a fire is spreading rapidly....

    ...The headline may be embellished a bit, but not 100% sure there isn't a small shred of truth...
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  18. #38
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    Is this the headline of...
    a) Daily Mirror
    b) AvHerald
    c) Flying Magazine?
    Heart attacks can be fatal...

    I think the real issue is this: that old adage "Any landing you walk away from is a good landing" doesn't apply to passenger transport.

    Rule #1: Don't kill the passengers

    Rule #2: Don't terrify the passengers

    Rule #2b: Don't gamble with other people's money

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •