Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Safety (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/safety/)
-   -   Not understanding AoA indicators... (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/safety/84956-not-understanding-aoa-indicators.html)

bozobigtop 06-14-2016 02:11 PM

I have about 10 hours in Cirrus aircraft after flying jets, turboprops, and other GA aircraft. I can tell you some of these models are very unforgiving if you're a sloppy pilot or a pilot who flies once in a blue moon. This aircraft will make you fly it like a jet aircraft or else such as plan ahead with your traffic patterns and air work. It's very easy to strike the tail or prop on landing if you mismanage the airspeed/sink rate. My biggest problem with this aircraft besides not being comfortable are the marketing techniques used by Cirrus attempting to market this aircraft to anybody. If you can afford the baseprice of about $800,000 and you want to go faster than a C-172 or PA-28 then Cirrus want you as new recruit! I am tired of seeing the accident reports for this aircraft because the aircraft was more than what the pilot can handle.

cardiomd 06-15-2016 03:09 PM


Originally Posted by Adlerdriver (Post 2145091)
I'm not faulting the Tower controller. If he felt that his workload allowed the extra attention required to handle this particular pilot, that's his call. I disagree with your claim he had no reason to question her abilities after seeing what transpired between the 04 go-around and finally getting on final to 35.

Thanks, excellent response and I agree.

In my experiences in aviation (except by a few vocal idiots on APC, most of whom are not professionals) almost everybody is extremely professional and "nice" to fellow pilots on the ground and especially in the air, as we should be. A few moments of his time would have been well-invested to help the lady in the controller's mind, and it would be harsh to forcibly tell her to exit bravo etc... I have certainly heard more clueless types on the air.

Perhaps he should have seen the incompetence, but if he wasn't watching the turns he might have assumed it was his own doing or she just was brining up a plate for 35 or something for a second and had to look down.

Ironically, a LESS competent tower controller may have had a better outcome as she would have been given a long pattern and not tried to help her as much. This guy was really my style, just trying to help her get down in creative ways and recognizing what a sharp GA pilot should be able to do.


Originally Posted by Adlerdriver (Post 2145091)
I didn't mean my comment as a "dig". You've been pretty clear in your opinion on the AOA gauge in GA aircraft.

The SR20 seems to fall into the GA category (but maybe not). I really was just curious about what made this particular aircraft different enough that you might consider using one.

"Spring loaded to neutral"?
-What benefit does that offer (if any)?
-Are the controls still conventional, direct cable style?
-I guess in flight, it wouldn't be much different than a conventional GA aircraft since airloads would return controls to neutral in those too, correct?

If you hand me my 182 in flight without ASI or manifold I can probably tell you within 10 kts how fast I am going. Even without a stall horn, the aircraft really speaks to you when you are getting slow - the control feel, the sounds, etc. There is almost ALWAYS a large lift reserve (e.g. pull up, get more lift) in flight conditions. It is really easy to bleed off the excess energy with slip or flaps. With the Cirrus, none of those is true.

You need to nail speeds farther out, and not rely on lift reserve if you have a gust or need to arrest a high sink rate. I feel very comfortable making some loading maneuvers in the pattern in my plane, but with a cirrus you run the risk of this classic video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nm_hoHhbFo


Originally Posted by bozobigtop (Post 2145108)
I have about 10 hours in Cirrus aircraft after flying jets, turboprops, and other GA aircraft. I can tell you some of these models are very unforgiving if you're a sloppy pilot or a pilot who flies once in a blue moon. This aircraft will make you fly it like a jet aircraft or else such as plan ahead with your traffic patterns and air work. It's very easy to strike the tail or prop on landing if you mismanage the airspeed/sink rate. My biggest problem with this aircraft besides not being comfortable are the marketing techniques used by Cirrus attempting to market this aircraft to anybody. If you can afford the baseprice of about $800,000 and you want to go faster than a C-172 or PA-28 then Cirrus want you as new recruit! I am tired of seeing the accident reports for this aircraft because the aircraft was more than what the pilot can handle.

I agree with you. Same here, around 10 hours IIRC in the cirrus (I'll go back and look.) The plane is not for the 40 hour per year pilot, or somebody that doesn't want to take the time to understand how a plane flies.

The SR20 is substantially less than $800,000. When I was shopping you could get it well equipped for less than half of that. You may be thinking of the SR22.

PurpleToolBox 06-15-2016 04:35 PM


Originally Posted by cardiomd (Post 2145660)
You need to nail speeds farther out, and not rely on lift reserve if you have a gust or need to arrest a high sink rate. I feel very comfortable making some loading maneuvers in the pattern in my plane, but with a cirrus you run the risk of this classic video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nm_hoHhbFo

My two cents.

If you're not in the military or in an aerobatic airplane doing aerobatics safely at altitude, then don't fly like that.

In the video you posted, the accident happened with the aircraft at 60 degrees AOB and 17 degrees ANU at 223' AGL. Not smart. You're at the aircraft limit with no altitude for recovery.

If I was flying with you in your Cessna (or any other aircraft) and you tried to get anywhere near these parameters in the traffic pattern, I would become very vocal and directive at you. I don't care what you think your airplane can or can not do.

When I flew T-34s with the USNs, they limited us to 30 degrees AOB for traffic patterns. If you needed more than that, you screwed up.

In the business jets, B1900, and heavies I've flown since, I have always been taught to never exceed 30 degrees AOB in the pattern.

Again, my two cents.

cardiomd 06-15-2016 06:08 PM


Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox (Post 2145714)
My two cents.

If you're not in the military or in an aerobatic airplane doing aerobatics safely at altitude, then don't fly like that.

In the video you posted, the accident happened with the aircraft at 60 degrees AOB and 17 degrees ANU at 223' AGL. Not smart. You're at the aircraft limit with no altitude for recovery.

If I was flying with you in your Cessna (or any other aircraft) and you tried to get anywhere near these parameters in the traffic pattern, I would become very vocal and directive at you. I don't care what you think your airplane can or can not do.

When I flew T-34s with the USNs, they limited us to 30 degrees AOB for traffic patterns. If you needed more than that, you screwed up.

In the business jets, B1900, and heavies I've flown since, I have always been taught to never exceed 30 degrees AOB in the pattern.

Again, my two cents.

Yes, that is exactly my point. Most military craft, a T-34, business jet, B1900, a heavy, or CIRRUS should not be flown like a slow low performance airfoil or a semi-symmetrical aerobatic wing. Teaching "no more than 30 degrees bank" is probably reasonable but I would insist on more knowledge of what presents the actual dangers from any aviator (that is: it is not the bank itself that is a problem).

There are numerous cases where a poor stick tries to salvage a base to final overshoot by using rudder BECAUSE they were told "no more than 30 degrees bank" with fatal results. Somebody that can understand those principles is a much safer and knowledgeable pilot than somebody who recites.

Know thy craft, and fly it properly. What you can do well within performance envelopes in a cub vs 182 vs a cirrus are not the same, and this must be understood by the pilot.

USMCFLYR 06-15-2016 06:30 PM


Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox (Post 2145714)
My two cents.

If you're not in the military or in an aerobatic airplane doing aerobatics safely at altitude, then don't fly like that.

In the video you posted, the accident happened with the aircraft at 60 degrees AOB and 17 degrees ANU at 223' AGL. Not smart. You're at the aircraft limit with no altitude for recovery.

If I was flying with you in your Cessna (or any other aircraft) and you tried to get anywhere near these parameters in the traffic pattern, I would become very vocal and directive at you. I don't care what you think your airplane can or can not do.

When I flew T-34s with the USNs, they limited us to 30 degrees AOB for traffic patterns. If you needed more than that, you screwed up.

In the business jets, B1900, and heavies I've flown since, I have always been taught to never exceed 30 degrees AOB in the pattern.

Again, my two cents.

Or 45 degrees at NAS Corpus Christi :D.

bozobigtop 06-16-2016 11:09 AM


Originally Posted by cardiomd (Post 2145660)
Thanks, excellent response and I agree.

In my experiences in aviation (except by a few vocal idiots on APC, most of whom are not professionals) almost everybody is extremely professional and "nice" to fellow pilots on the ground and especially in the air, as we should be. A few moments of his time would have been well-invested to help the lady in the controller's mind, and it would be harsh to forcibly tell her to exit bravo etc... I have certainly heard more clueless types on the air.

Perhaps he should have seen the incompetence, but if he wasn't watching the turns he might have assumed it was his own doing or she just was brining up a plate for 35 or something for a second and had to look down.

Ironically, a LESS competent tower controller may have had a better outcome as she would have been given a long pattern and not tried to help her as much. This guy was really my style, just trying to help her get down in creative ways and recognizing what a sharp GA pilot should be able to do.



If you hand me my 182 in flight without ASI or manifold I can probably tell you within 10 kts how fast I am going. Even without a stall horn, the aircraft really speaks to you when you are getting slow - the control feel, the sounds, etc. There is almost ALWAYS a large lift reserve (e.g. pull up, get more lift) in flight conditions. It is really easy to bleed off the excess energy with slip or flaps. With the Cirrus, none of those is true.

You need to nail speeds farther out, and not rely on lift reserve if you have a gust or need to arrest a high sink rate. I feel very comfortable making some loading maneuvers in the pattern in my plane, but with a cirrus you run the risk of this classic video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nm_hoHhbFo



I agree with you. Same here, around 10 hours IIRC in the cirrus (I'll go back and look.) The plane is not for the 40 hour per year pilot, or somebody that doesn't want to take the time to understand how a plane flies.

The SR20 is substantially less than $800,000. When I was shopping you could get it well equipped for less than half of that. You may be thinking of the SR22.

I am thinking of the SR22 models, use to do engine inspections on both models for the engine manufacturer.

tomgoodman 06-16-2016 11:15 AM


Originally Posted by USMCFLYR (Post 2145821)
Or 45 degrees at NAS Corpus Christi :D.

Was the A-4 pitchout 60 degrees, like the T-38?

Yoda2 06-16-2016 11:51 AM

I was thinking USMC's reference was still a little weak, until I got to the smiley face!

USMCFLYR 06-16-2016 02:04 PM


Originally Posted by Yoda2 (Post 2146228)
I was thinking USMC's reference was still a little weak, until I got to the smiley face!

Got to read the whole thing! ;):)

NAS Whiting Field has the course rules from HELL, and NAS Corpus Christie had the 45 deg AOB break. Good stuff all around - but I'm still glad I went to NASCC. I got enough of the P-cola area later in life!

TG - I don't remember a target AOB in the TA-4Js. Had to be at least 60 deg+ I'd say. I didn't do it any different in the 'Scooter' than any other jet airplane.

PurpleToolBox 06-18-2016 10:18 AM


Originally Posted by cardiomd (Post 2145797)
Teaching "no more than 30 degrees bank" is probably reasonable but I would insist on more knowledge of what presents the actual dangers from any aviator (that is: it is not the bank itself that is a problem).

Preventing traffic pattern stalls. This is the actual danger and why you don't want to get near a stall when you are at a low altitude. Come on doc, you're smarter than that.

This is the first thing I learned when learning to fly. I think everyone I know was taught this way. You don't "wrap it up" or "kick the rudders" to compensate for an overshooting turn to final.

Too many GA crash this way. Even if the aircraft has the performance capability, 60 degrees at 223' ... IN THE TRAFFIC PATTERN ... is not safe.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:12 AM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2022 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright 2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands