Blimey folk. I think you are all being a bit harsh on me here. I make no claim to be a sky god; I am possibly the least experienced PPL on here. But I was really hoping for some thoughts on how the margins of error could have been increased in this incident. It looks scary to me. I can't tell how high or far she was when she started her descent, but in practice engine outs I would have been very heavily criticized by my instructor for that. I do believe a better planned approach would have been safer, am I evil for asking for thoughts on that? Of course I make no claim that I could have done better. In my GFT, I was criticized by the examiner for not landing on the numbers in a practice engine fail, which I felt was a bit harsh. And most especially, I was hoping for thoughts on how to handle the situation when absolutely committed to land, but still high, with 40deg flaps and the runway disappearing behind me. To repeat. I don't claim I would have done better. I am innocently asking why a much more experienced instructor did not do better. If the group opinion here is, that under pressure and in a real emergency, that's a good job - fine, I accept that. But please don't rip into me for asking you opinions! I did look horrible to me, but I am very willing to listen and learn.
Originally Posted by
Pilot DAR
I second that, it's saved an imperfect forced approach for me a couple of times. Yes, a 172 can be safely slipped with flaps extended.....
Thanks, that's the sort of input I was hoping for,