Badly judged FL, how to survive?

[vee-tail-1]

I fly a slippery aircraft which floats for ever if too fast over the hedge.
Have been practising PFLs and would like comments on this situation:
Engine fails with only one possible landing option (perhaps a small field in a built up area) I set up a glide circuit but misjudge the wind and arrive on final too fast and/or too high. How to get into that field and avoid the bricks & mortar around it? Do I dive and force the aeroplane to touch down at high speed? Or deliberately stall the aeroplane (very benign stall on this aircraft) and hope to flare before touch down. Yes I know, with more flying and more practice this situation might not arise.:ouch:

[IO540]

One way to deliberately worsen one's glide performance is by doing S-turns. These are easy and you can do them in (probably) any aircraft type.

Another way is a sideslip, but you can't do that in some types.

If you have a CS prop, setting it to fully-fine will also worsen glide performance.

[gasax]

Obviously practice helps but...

Make sure you always trim the aircraft and let it fly itself in pitch - you are now not going to arrive with too much speed - so some of the problem goes away.

If you're too high hoepfully your aircraft will sideslip reasonably well - that removes height at some rate on many types. May make too much height go away.

Find yourself a big grass airfield and practice these things onto the ground.

If none of this works my preference is to arrive on the ground slowly, so forcing it on is a no no. Stalling it on in a sub-optimal place is probably better - but again it needs a bit of precision otherwise you're going to get hurt. If you cann't make the field normally then stallling at the right height is probably a bigger challenge....

[sir.pratt]

what's the aircraft? bonanza?

you need to read the side slipping thread.

[the dean]

neither. both will certainly hurt and may kill you.

you cannot force an aeroplane on to the ground. pushing will just increase the speed and you may hit the wall or ditch at the other end ( that is if you make it into the field at all ).

stalling it in may be fatal at the beginning of the runway.

you'll just have to practice it, and do'nt tell me the plane is fast and slippery and you can't get the speed under control. thats just an excuse for letting the aeroplane fly you.it is a basic requirement that you control the speed by whatever means at your disposal...

first rule of engine failure on a flight test...trim to the best glide speed...if you have not done that then you have no business moving on to the second...establish a glide at that speed and find a field, and if you have time try to find the fault and try a restart.

SO...i have to ask, if you have trimmed to the correct speed, then why should you arrive at any field at the wrong speed..:confused::ugh:

look at your technique again...maybe time to take a refresher ride with an instructor.

i have come across many techniques such as circling and many will swear by whichever they like.there is no perfect way but personally i like to keep it simple. find the wind and put yourself on a downwind or base so you can turn in when you like. circles make the approach more difficult to gauge and simply ( i think ) introduce another dimension...but whatever you like to do, practice, practice and practice..AND...keep the speed right all the way down.

good luck.:ok:

the dean.

[vee-tail-1]

Sideslipping not recommended on my aircraft, but timely S turns would certainly help. But just suppose the only option is a field surrounded by buildings. Is it possible to make a semi stalled steep approach and last minute flare.

[sternone]

Is it a diamond ?

[Fuji Abound]

I am not happy with a lot of the posts on this thread.

We need to know what type of aircraft it is.

There are things you can do in some close to the ground, but it others that may well kill you.

Moreover, the situation you paint is a dire one. IF there is only one "field" into which a landing would be remotely possible in your hypothetical scenerio and the alternatives are houses, then more dramatic solutions might be justified, but again the type of aircraft may be a factor.

[wombat13]

Forget the aircraft type, just tell us why you want to keep the type a secret. We will probably be able to work it from there.

The Wombat

[vee-tail-1]

Hmnn.. thanks for reminding me of the basics. Guess practice is the answer..only managed 6 hours this year. Amazing how rusty flying skills get if not used. :{

[BackPacker]

Sideslipping not recommended on my aircraft


And missing the only emergency landing field in the neigborhood in an engine-out scenario is?

I don't know what sort of airplane you fly, but as far as I know, the main reason for sideslipping not to be recommended (or forbidden outright) is typically that either the rudder and/or the fuselage, in a sideslip, blanks part of the elevator, so elevator authority is reduced. At low speed, possibly to the point of losing authority altogether. But if you sideslip at best glide speed or a little above that, in the given scenario, it might be your safest option.

In any case, if you need to lose height to make the field, remaining at "best glide" speed is NOT what you want. If you slow down to just a few knots above stall speed (in the buffet, but not into the full stall) or speed up to a higher speed, by definition your glide path will be steeper than at "best glide" speed. Although speeding up means that you need to lose that energy on final again. Granted - I would leave the aircraft trimmed at best glide speed, and force it onto another speed with the stick or yoke.

[vee-tail-1]

No secret it's a Robin ATL.

[Fuji Abound]

Ah, a Robin.

Coincidentally, I was just talking to my mechanic on the 'phone, literally half and hour ago.

I have never flown a Robin and we were discussing the characteristics of different aircraft. He was telling me that Robins are thought of as having benign handling - however he was convinced that was far from true. He reckoned they will and do drop a wing unpredictably and significantly. I dont know which type(s) he was specifically referring to.

Getting the "best" out of an aircraft close to the ground is in my opinion very type specific, some generalisation can (and have been made), but if you want a real good feel for what you can do with the aircraft close to the ground if you are unlucky enough to get yourself into a very tight spot (and I think that is what you are suggesting when the normal FL has gone badly wrong and you have run out of alternatives - or only had one to start with) listen to what those who have experience on tyoe have to say.

BP has a good point, but spinning in, in consequence of an unexpected wing drop at low level from which you have little hope of recovery, may jsut be worse than missing the field altogether but at least landing in a "controlled" manner.

I always recall the brain surgeon who ran out of fuel in his twin. He kept control of the aircraft and landed literally in some ones very very small back garden (having gone through the roof). He had very minor injuries. Lucky - well yes, but his luck was in part due to maintaining control.

[Slopey]

But just suppose the only option is a field surrounded by buildings.

Then you should probably be observing rule 5 and be able to glide clear to somewhere with less buildings :hmm:

[RatherBeFlying]

Practise PFLs from downwind aiming to land on a chosen spot on the runway (not necessarily the numbers) at the right speed.

This will familiarise you with managing the energy the last thousand feet down and allow you to determine what works best in your a/c.

Gliders are even more slippery, but have spoilers. My first and so far last outlanding was 100 yards in from the wires with a 50 yard ground roll. Do not try going between trees to get in tighter as there's often a wire there:uhoh:

[Rod1]

Fuji,

Most UK Robins are DR400 wooden wonders with bent up wingtips. The handing is very safe and they side slip very well, this is specifically mentioned in the pilot operating notes. The ATL is a very different beast which I know nothing about.

The example given is so extreme that a side slip would still be worth considering.

Rod1

[dublinpilot]

Guess practice is the answer..only managed 6 hours this year.

I know that not everyone can afford to do lots of hours every year, but if you are only doing 6 hours per year, then you need to understand the limitations that that places on your skill and currency level.

Finding unorthodox solutions to get around the lack of currency is not such a good idea. If you can only do 6 hous per year, then either do all six with an instructor, or do the first 3 with an instructor to get you back up to speed, and shortly after (not months after) do the other 3 solo, now that you're up to speed.

dp

[DubTrub]

trim to the best glide speed
Not always a good thing. If your best glide speed is say 60 and the headwind is 40, then you are in a situation where you have fewer fields ahead. In the same wind, if your glide speed is 40, then the only place you are going to is underneath you (unless you can turn around).

It requires some practice to determine optimum speeds to reach a chosen field with differing wind conditions.

[Fuji Abound]

Then you should probably be observing rule 5 and be able to glide clear to somewhere with less buildings

Yep, hopefully he knows that, but the question was hypothetical - unfortunately sh*£ happens (even if it shouldnt) so the question is valid.

Have you been over one of those huge forests in Europe that go on for ever with the odd green patch in the middle that might make a good landing? Shouldnt ne there in the first place - maybe not, but it happens.


The example given is so extreme that a side slip would still be worth considering.

Yes, it might well be, but not specific type advice can be dangerous, hence my comment about talking to those who have plenty of experience on type. Treat any other advice as an invitation to do something at lower level that might just have a worse outcome than missing the field and landing in the trees (or houses).

[DeeCee]

What's a semi stalled steep approach?

I fly a Robin and they handle very well in a glide approach. If you are too high try proper s turns (not little ones), dive a little and turn away, turn back onto track whilst pulling back to regain best glide speed.

However, above all, maintain the recommended best glide and at least you will remain in full control of the aeroplane. It is not a good idea to experiment when you have an emergency.

A Robin is not especially slippery. Control the speed on approach, bleed it off over the hedge, round out, hold off and land and you will use up the minimum distance. A low speed collision at the end of the run is preferable to a stall on approach.

[mm_flynn]

It is worth remembering that even a 'brick wall' has more deceleration distance than stalling onto the ground (your seat will only collapse a few inches whereas the nose probably has 3-4 feet of give) and your body generally survives spin loading very poorly. 20 feet of crash way gives roughly the same body load as hitting the ground in a 1000ft/min stall descent. This is why the doctor in Shoreham walked away after crashing into the house. Strategies like stall descent, spin through the clouds and recover, etc. are for novel writers not for real life.

[Rod1]

When I was gliding in the 80’s it was common practice to use s turns, but people were dying as it was causing them to spin. The BGA carried out a study and the advice was changed to side slip and not UNDER ANY CURCUMSTANCES to use S turns. I have been out of gliding for some time, but I thought I would pass this on.

Rod1

[Crash one]

I agree with Rod1
I also used to glide in the 80s. It is a pity that a/c are not fitted with speed limiting airbrakes. An instructor once demonstrated a technique to me, 1000ft over the trees at the boundary, pull into a stall, as the nose dropped pull full brakes, stand on the rudder pedals almost vertical, max 70knots to 200ft, round out, & close the brakes to land as required from about 80yds inside the fence. Estimate the 200ft because the alt took a while to catch up! (A.S.K 13). It probably wouldn't work in a modern glass ship.

[Whirlybird]

At a CAA safety evening a couple of years ago, we were told that if you can't land safely in a field, "Hit the softest object you can find at the lowest possible speed".

I remember hearing of a pilot who had engine failure over a city centre. He apparently (this is going to sound unbelievable) calmly flew through an office block window, taking off the wings but making a controlled landing, and walked away with only minor injuries.

I've also read that microlight landing accidents are rarely fatal because they tend to be at low speed.

Moral of all of the above - land at the lowest safe speed you can, under control, and you'll probably walk away. Stall or spin and you'll probably die.

[PompeyPaul]

IF there is only one "field" into which a landing would be remotely possible in your hypothetical scenerio and the alternatives are houses, then more dramatic solutions might be justified, but again the type of aircraft may be a factor.
Sounds like you are flying illegally, having broken Rule 5. Isn't it 1000ft or high enough to glide clear of built up areas, which ever is the higher ?

SO...i have to ask, if you have trimmed to the correct speed, then why should you arrive at any field at the wrong speed
I think the question was more about fluffing the circuit and arriving at the field to high, rather than to fast....

[bigfoot01]

I was taught that S Turns were a good way of loosing height if you needed to and you were stuck and provided an more aggressive way of loosing height. S Truns effectively mean you have to travel through more air to reach your destination. I was also taught, however, that you have keep your airspeed up, so a good shove forward on the yoke generally corresponds with these moves.

As a self confessed master of overshooting runways! I usually know quite a way up that an overshoot is coming and in a pfl situation I would act then and decisively to keep myself out of the wall. (Assuming I had forgotten my tin of nervergetyourselfintothat).

I think these hypothetcial discussions are useful and interesting points for a discussion board. I am now going to suggest if I was low and fast - how about planting the tail or wing into the field to effect a controlled crash. Or if there were a nice couple of trees at the other end of the field pointing the middle of my aircraft between the two. (Worked for James Bond in Golden Eye!)

I fully understand that such a suggestion means I should go and spend the rest of the year with an instructor, practise more. I am answering the question - what would I do if I was there...

[dublinpilot]

IF there is only one "field" into which a landing would be remotely possible in your hypothetical scenerio and the alternatives are houses, then more dramatic solutions might be justified, but again the type of aircraft may be a factor.

Sounds like you are flying illegally, having broken Rule 5. Isn't it 1000ft or high enough to glide clear of built up areas, which ever is the higher ?


Not necessarly. Perhaps there were a number of options available at the time of engine failure, but by the time the pilot realised that they had messed up the approach (and perhaps field selection) their altitude had reduced to a point where the other options were no longer available.

dp

[foxmoth]

A number of options have been mentioned, side slipping,S turns; another one that no one has mentioned is fishtailing - keep your speed and kick rudder left/right/left as much as you need - height will drop off very rapidly. Whichever method you use try it first with an instructor or someone who knows what they are doing.

[vee-tail-1]

Again many thanks for responses. It is a hypothetical scenario, but as Fuji says s$..t happens and it is good to have options.
Discussed this with my instructor who came up with a novel plan (as well as suggesting a bit of normal PFL practice). The Robin ATL has small drag flaps which move very quickly. We plan to set up a glide approach using best glide speed and 1/2 flap. If all goes well leave the flaps as set. If undershooting pull in the flaps, if overshooting put out full flap. Effectively using the flaps like a gliders speedbrakes. I take the point that this might be a way of compensating for my lack of recency, but it does seem like a useful exercise.

[Mad Girl]

The Robin ATL has small drag flaps which move very quickly. We plan to set up a glide approach using best glide speed and 1/2 flap. If all goes well leave the flaps as set. If undershooting pull in the flaps, if overshooting put out full flap.

OK - I'm quite green, so be gentle with me please...

I've been told that once you have the flap on, pulling them in will result in sink - which you will probably not want if you're undershooting anyway.

I fly a PA28 - so is this due to aircraft differences or instructor differences???

I'm interested in this, as I've missed a fair bit of flying recently and my PFL's have suffered as a result.

My solution to the too high scenario - rightly or wrongly - is sideslip.... as soon as I recognise the problem, to get rid of the height. But the PA28 can do that.

If I was too low - pray!!!!!!!!!

[tonyhalsall]

If all else fails..............
Just make sure that you are on the ground before you hit something, it is invariably safer to hit something at ground speed than air speed.

[sunday driver]

I also can't afford as many hours as I would like / need.

BUT

For the price of 4 hours I have just had a full week at Lasham where every landing is a PFL.

Techniques and attitudes are a revelation, and a completely different world from my gliding solos of yore.

Has totally opened my eyes to PFL possibilities and was also VERY challenging.

SD

PS - side slips are my fave.

[Rod1]

Mad Girl

I always approach too high with full flap and then slip off the extra height. It is then very unlikely you will get too low, provided you aim 1/3 of the way in. In most aircraft a side slip is a very useful tool.

Rod1

[Humaround]

"I also used to glide in the 80s. It is a pity that a/c are not fitted with speed limiting airbrakes. An instructor once demonstrated a technique to me, 1000ft over the trees at the boundary, pull into a stall, as the nose dropped pull full brakes, stand on the rudder pedals almost vertical, max 70knots to 200ft, round out, & close the brakes to land as required from about 80yds inside the fence. Estimate the 200ft because the alt took a while to catch up! (A.S.K 13). It probably wouldn't work in a modern glass ship."

My instructor demo'ed this from 2000'. if I hadn't been in the front seat and seen it all, I wouldn't have believed it. This was in a Puchacz (GF 2 seat trainer).

We started at 2000' above the threshold hedge, came down vertically (it felt like) under full control, and the ground roll stopped about 75 yards after the same hedge. :eek:

Amazing.

I have to say that much of the glider pilot's bravado viz "every landing's a forced landing, old boy" would look a bit silly without the extremely effective air-brakes fitted to most gliders, combined with an excellent glide ratio (natcherly).

[Piltdown Man]

How about gliding at the proper speed (1.3Vs)? By definition, you can't have too much energy.

PM

[Knight Paladin]

Stuffing the nose down and fllying faster than best glide speed while dangling as much stuff off the aeroplane as you possibly can - full flap, gear, anything else you've got will cause you to bleed more energy than you'd lose by flying at best glide speed. True, you'll arrive at the ground with more airspeed than you would do at best glide, but you'll arrive significantly nearer the start of the field, and with less energy overall compared with the solid object at the other end - not my best piece of science, but you all know what I mean!

I fully appreciate it's a long way from ideal - yes, you'd ideally want to be flying your perfect approach at best glide into a perfect field, but we're talking hypothetical situations here, where you just HAVE to make it into THAT field from this particular combination of geographic and vertical position and airspeed.

Oh, and for god's sakes don't do a fully held off landing - if stopping distance is an issue stick it down so you have the benefit of rolling friction as well as aerodynamice braking. Yes, you risk breaking the gear, but again, we're talking worst case here - and to be honest, sliding it on its belly may give you some extra friction you'll appreciate! But don't bounce the bloody thing, potentially an issue if you're trying to plant the aeroplane onto terra firma at a possibly high airspeed.

As previously mentioned though - sidelsip is a powerful thing, anyone not familiar/current with it should go see an instructor and change that state!

[Fly-by-Wife]

sunday driver

For the price of 4 hours I have just had a full week at Lasham

Was that a residential course? How many in the group? Winch / aerotow - or both? How many circuits did you get?

FBW

[Mark1234]

Some very 'interesting' comments on this thread... particularly as a glider pilot who's doing a PPL at the moment..

Typical modern glass ships approach a *LOT* flatter than the 150 I'm flying.. and gain / retain energy a lot better too - we don't have it *that* easy :)

That aside, some comments - the 3 pretty much cover what I'd be trying to do in order of action. Maybe I'm wrong!

Powered pilots (generalisation) tend to fly regular rectangular circuits. Gliders fly a continuously variable circuit, judging the angle all the way - high? push out, fly base angled a little away etc. Low, cramp it in, and in extreme cases, turn in early, land 1/2 way up the runway. Or even crosswind. Better to have an accident on the ground than one in the air which will eventually meet the ground. Once in PFL mode, I'm treating it like a glider - no complaints from my instructor so far.

Using flaps isn't novel! I've been taught to extend progressively to control the approach once you're sure you're in (i.e. above glide), and aim to land on full flap. Retraction is strictly against the 'book', but instructor suggests it can be considered if desparate, so long as it's done well above clean stall speed, and a bit at a time. Anything you throw out that increases drag will worsen the glide. C150 on 40degrees of flap assumes the glide angle of a somewhat homesick brick at 60kt.

I would not want to be anywhere near stall, anywhere near the ground. You're vulnerable to gusts, turbulence, and lord knows what. *Gliding* training is if faced with an over small field to get it on the floor (fly it on) and brake hard. If the fence is looming, kick in the rudder, put a wing down and ground loop - all that energy that goes into pulling the wings off, rolling, and otherwise remodelling the airframe is dissipated in a way that doesn't involve the human body in a sudden stop.

Never had to do it. Sounds good in theory, but anyone who's been in a ground loop may disagree :)

[sunday driver]

Fly-by-wife
£500 got me
5 days full-time non-residential (we live 45 mins from Lasham)
1 wet day with one aero-tow and sessions on their excellent simulator
4 glorious days with 4 aerotows, 24 winch launches
Flight times ranging from 1 minute to 1 hour
Included an end-of course hour in a DG1000 with aeros and more
Group of four students of mixed abilities with 2 dedicated excellent instructors
Side benefits are a first class club house, a good restaurant, a nice bar, lots of aviation nostalgia, more laughs than several evenings in Jongleurs.
Oh yes, it was quite hard work, physically and intellectually (dumping those nice square circuits and learning what those convenient footrests are really for)
Mrs Driver has often said she'd like to try flying, so we went together (another 500 quid but cheaper than a week's self catering holiday). We're so impressed that today I'm off to book another week.
:D
SD

[IO540]

I've been told that once you have the flap on, pulling them in will result in sink

That's true in the short term but the overall effect is that the glide performance (the distance you will travel before hitting the ground) will improve.

What you have to watch is stall speeds. Let's say Vs at max flap is 55kt but with half flap is 70kt. If you are doing 65kt and pull the flap in, you will stall, so that wasn't a good idea! But if you are doing 90kt then it's fine. That's why knowing "the numbers" for the type is desirable.

It would take a lot of ba11s to pull in flaps and gear to improve one's glide, when already close to the ground.

The converse also applies: let's say you are gliding at 90kt. My Vs is 95 so for me that's reasonable. Let's say that very close in I am not quite going to make it over some hedge. Pulling in full flap drops my Vs to 59kt (or less if below MTOW) and together with the balooning this will allow a significant trade from speed to height - a very short term thing which amounts to flogging the family silver.

Much depends on circumstances of course. In a desperate case of having to plant the thing in a tiny spot I would land gear up and go full-flap on short final - pushing down on the yoke to prevent it balooning up which is what happens on my type when going full flap. I hope to never have to do this - simply due to the way I fly, as high as possible, but it may be necessary in mountainous terrain where there are usually plenty of little fields down below.

In any lesser emergency I would land gear down, with a stabilised approach, into a spot picked early on. If done right, it will reduce a minimum-£30,000 insurance claim (of a gear up) to the cost of getting the thing out of there - £3,000 or so if the wings have to come off & a trailer, or nothing if it can be flown out.

The whole forced-landing business is very debatable and no two people will give the same answer.

Some teach the "RAF method" which is to pick a field down below, aim for left base at 1500ft AGL and glide in from there. Some would prefer to pick a series of fields straight ahead (if they exist) and that is certainly the easiest one to do - except that they can't be inspected beforehand the way you can inspect one directly below. But what the hell; this is an emergency...

I think a good way to get reasonably good at this, in your own time and under no pressure, is to - subject to traffic - try to not fly the square circuits but fly ovals, and make the base leg a glide approach on little or no power.

[sailing]

Used to fly a 172 commercially, mainly scenics, occasional charter, aerial photography. If my pax were a bit nervous/wind was gusty I would do a normal GA 'drag it in with power' approach. For all the rest(90%) I would pull power opposite the threshhold on downwind and fly the rest as a PFL. (Probably a result of learning to fly on 2-stroke ultralights, as well as some gliding)
Result of all this was I was very confident about dealing with an engine failure as most of my approaches were flown that way.
I could nail most approaches so that I didn't use more than 300m of the strip, with no hard braking, and I often used sideslip to get it where I wanted it. The other bonus was that I wasn't worried about the engine failing on base/final. If you approach with power, and it quits on final, you are going to eat the fence!!
Practice makes perfect, and every approach you fly is a chance to practice a PFL.

[gasax]

Given that the aircraft is a ATL then I'm not sure what is driving the concern. A ground roll of not much over a hundred metres from anormal landing and precious little energy even if you do hit something.

It sounds much more like this is driven by the add 5 knots is good so 10 must be better school of thinking. My aircraft (ch601hd) weighs about the same and even if you hit a wall on touchdown there is enough structure to crumple that I would be very disappointed not to step out of it.

As for a steep semi-stalled apporach - more likely to turn into a proper stall/spin or arrive at a very unfortunate rate of descent if there is any misjudgement or gusts etc - which will really hurt.

Playing with the flaps is probably not a bad plan but it would be better to fly glide approaches and arrive in the right place at the right speed. If it won't sideslip then S turn but really the constant aspect approach is the one to aim for. As many before me have said!

[3 Point]

I'm worried about this "semi stalled" approach and late, hard flare idea!

Think about stalling and what it means, if the suggestion is to fly at the maximum lift angle of attack then the glide will certainly be steeper than flying at the best lift/drag angle but; how do you flare and reduce the rate of descent prior to touchdown?

If the wing is already at the maximum lift angle of attack any increase in aoa will redice the lift, ie there is nothing left for the flare! If you chose to fly right on the stall you will hit the ground hard and, almost certainly injure yourself.

You should not consider flying a deliberately slow "semi stalled" approach; fly the right speed and use sideslip and/or s turns to loose height.

Happy landings

3 Point

[Knight Paladin]

Faster than best glide - maybe, as I discussed earlier.
Slower than best glide - no way!

IMHO!

[IO540]

I think slower than Vbg is OK.

What matters is that you are always faster than Vs.

At any time above Vs, you can do a last-ditch trade of speed for a bit of altitude. At Vs, you are stuffed and the only option is nose-down to pick up a bit of speed.

Vbg is just a figure, and the glide performance doesn't normally vary much for a good few kt either side of that figure. For example if your Vbg is 95kt, the glide range is barely different for 90 or 100kt. But at 100kt you have a lot more spare kinetic energy (than you would have had at 90kt) which you can trade for a bit of extra obstacle clearance at the last moment.

[redbarron55]

My question would be - If there is no viable place to land what are you doing there in a single engined airplane.
Flying where there is no place to land means that you have thought about the consequences and have already decided that at the very least you are willing to destroy the aircraft and risk injury and death if there is a problem.
If you are willing to take that risk then deal with the consequences. If you haven't thought of it that way then you should think about the primary duty of the pilot which is to conduct a safe flight and plan accordingly.
Your limitations and those of the aircraft enter into the equation and must be taken into account.
You also have a duty to those on the ground to not place their lives and property at risk for your enjoyment.

Now for a suggestion on control of glide path.
Each aircraft has a speed for max L/D for a particular weight. You should fly above and below what is usually best rate of climb ar low power settings to determing this point. You can "see" and feel this point with enough experience as the angle of attack changes a little bit here.
If you fly your approach slightly slower than this speed you have options that you would not otherwise have.
If you are flying into the wind (as you should be when making an emergency off field landing) you can slow up slightly to land shorter and you can drop the nose to best L/D to streach the glide. If the wind is higher lowwering the nose more will allow you to penetrate into the wind better for each lost foot of altitude up to the point where the additional drag offsets the gain into the wind.
I would suggest that some training in gliders would be of use since every landing is made dead stick.

Good luck and think about where you are and the consequences of your decisions before hand.

[bigfoot01]

I was unconcious as a result of a freak accident completely beyond my control. During this time, the well trimed plane glided towards a city, I woke up just in the nick of time to recover the situation, unfortunately the unable to restart the engine...

[FakePilot]

Would it be possible to I believe "yoyo?", or, "vertical S-turn?"
Descend a bit, up a bit, repeat wasting energy on the unfair conversion rate?

[gasax]

Well if a constant aspect, constant rate of approach is too difficult then one with a non-constant vertical aspect and rate should be really interesting.

Smacks of some of the crazy flying routines I've seen (and lousy approaches is strong wind!)

[foxmoth]

Would it be possible to I believe "yoyo?", or, "vertical S-turn?"
Descend a bit, up a bit, repeat wasting energy on the unfair conversion rate?

Possible - yes, but with so many better ways of doing it I would not do that myself. As I said before, if you do not know how to lose height, go with an instructor and find out how.:hmm:

[Spitfire78]

Newbie here! (read: freshly minted PPL)
Once during my training the instructor pulled the throttle for a PFL, which was > 1200ft AGL on a short final position with "Greatest field ever" ... I think it was actually a farm strip. So I nearly wet myself for having spotted it, confirmed tiny headwind, but how to get in? Ended up picking another field in a panic because I was going to touch down at the far end of said strip if I went for it. (As much as I love the sideslip, even that wasn't gonna do)
Afterwards the instructor asked why I didn't go for the one that was straight ahead. "Too high", I said. "What about an orbit?", he asked? At first I thought he meant a overfly, turn crosswind, turn base, then glide approach. But even I could tell there wasn't enough height for that one. Then I realised he meant doing an orbit RIGHT THERE, on short final, at best glide speed.
I guess you'll have to practice doing a 10deg bank at Vbg from a very safe height to see exactly how much you'd lose in perfect conditions during one complete orbit, and various degrees of head and cross wind.
Any mileage in this one, or a widow maker?
SF78

[Gingerbread Man]

I was taught to use the flaps to 'make the field'. So no flaps for a forced landing unless you need to use them to stop you overshooting. Obviously this requires some forward planning and isn't much use in an 'over the hedge' scenario.

[Knight Paladin]

Spitfire: Yes, orbits can be useful, but we're talking a fairly significant height loss for every 360 deg of turn. Will vary according to the AoB you use, generally, the more AoB, the less the height loss (and potential for the wind to displace you laterally). However, even up at 60 deg AoB ,where most GA pilots seem to think the wings will fall off, we're still talking height loss so significant that you wouldn't even think about it on an EFATO. You may well think about a turnback though, if suitably trained and with, say, an absolute minimum of 500'agl to play with. However:
DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT A TURNBACK UNLESS YOU ARE THOROUGHLY TRAINED AND CURRENT IN THEM.
Because otherwise you'll die. Just like that.

[Spitfire78]

Knight,

Understood ... but we're not talking about EFATO, are we ? I thought the original question was regarding a forced landing, with only one field as an option, and finding yourself high and fast.

SF78

[Knight Paladin]

Spit - Errrrr, aren't we ..... dammit, I forgot where we started! Sorry if I've gone off topic!

[vee-tail-1]

Wow! All the info I need right here on PPRuNe. Particular thanks for disabusing me of the semi-stalled idea. And making every approach a glide approach if possible is also good. :ok:

[Knight Paladin]

VeeTail - I'm sure you don't need me to remind you of this, but for chrissakes don't take evreything you read on here as gospel! My best advice to you would probably be to read everything with an open mind, then go and try ot out in your own aircraft in as benign an environment as possible - away from terra firma at least initially, and fairly obviously always with an 'out'. See what works not only for your aeroplane, but also for you. Many who post here are talking out of orifices other than their mouths, or lack actual experience to back up their thoughts. Listen to all but trust nobody!

[AC-DC]

I also fly a slippery aircraft which floats for ever if too fast over the hedge. It took time to learn how to do it thr right way. During that time I just used to raise the flats, thic killed the float. Make sure that it is not the gear that you play with.