If any of you have never flown in a glider, please go and have a lesson, it will be the best £40 odd you will have ever spent on flying.

Sorry TonyR, you wouldn't get me in one of those if you paid me £40 a minute.

If I did go in one it would be under the following criteria....

1. It would have to be painted an obvious colour so I could at least be seen by powered pilots travelling at 140 kts.

2. I would make sure the pilot didn't "hang around" the exit areas from busy airspace and near VOR's like they all seem to.

3. I would have the radio OFF so all that 123.45 garbage wouldn't get in the way of someone actually trying to transmit something useful.

Apart from that would love to!! Any offers?!!!!!:}

Sorry, but I think the biggest problem and cause of bad PR in low level airspace is the gliding fraternity.

I never had a radio in any glider I was in but it is 20 years since I have sat in one, I must go for a flight soon,

There is the Ulster gliding club over here in "not so busy airspace", give me a call and fly over, they welcome GA and have a big 800 x 600 M field to land in any direction.

Tony

Every pilot should try to get sideslipping into their flying 'skills base'. Sideslipping the Chipmunk helps with short strips if you're a tad hot or high and the power's off and full flap's down, but that lovely round-section rear fuselage is not that draggy when presented a bit sideways to the airflow, so the ROD isn't dramatically increased.

But last week I was flying a friend's non-flap Citabria, and finding myseld a tad hot on short final, it was almost a reflex action to push rudder and slip the ship. She slips superbly, loads of added drag from that slab-sided fuselage, and we arrived over the numbers at the right height and speed.

There is a tendency when slipping to allow the nose to drop (as someone else said), which lets the speed build up, and you'll float past the end of the strip. You will need to haul back a tad on the stick when slipping to prevent this - and like evrything else in flying, continued practice makes it second nature.

SSD

TonyR,

Ah OK. I must admit that I only crab in a crosswind but will use crossed controls at takeoff to prevent wind-cocking. Doesn't result in sideslip though.

Can't speak for anybody else, but I have only ever flown according to the POH. For the AA5 that is around about the CAA recommended 1.3 x Stall speed. The C152 POH does have about a 5 knot margin over that which does seem a touch excessive. Not sure why, haven't asked. But it maybe due to its profile drag that slows the a/c quickly once you cut the power for flare. Must ask my instructor.

Since writing this half truth I went back to the text. The 1.3 x stall is for Vat across the threshold and not for the approach speed. It appears that POHs diverge here as the AA5 Vat is 10kts more than stall with full flap. Also, it would be induced drag and not profile that would be dominant below Vimd (in theory).

side-slip
 

Thanks Stik - very close.....but not quite


;)

Did some sideslipping today, The instructor was not too hot at it so we both had a lot of attempts at getting some serious "sink" with very little forward distance.

It felt good to do something different, that will be useful in the future.

Also did some "slow flying"

Ken

FNG - good idea for a thread!

Interesting to hear peoples' experiences of classic aeroplanes and the 'running out of rudder' tales...

If you really want to sideslip... try the Tiger Moth... beautifully controllable slip... and see what happens when you run out of... aileron!

It seems to me that

"Real" pilots would like the PPL syllabus to include full spins, side slipping, barrel rolls, etc (but surely one can do additional training for aerobatics)

Taildragger pilots would like every PPL to have taildragger training, so they can fully appreciate the fun of flying a taildragger (but surely you can get differences training for that)

Pilots who got into flying to go places (myself) want the PPL syllabus to include much better nav training, GPS, the IMC Rating, as well as wanting instructors that actually fly IFR for real, as well as being able to rent planes that aren't falling to bits, etc (no likely solution to this one; you have to do the IMCR / IR and then buy a decent plane)

ATCOs, judging from their regular moaning here and everywhere else anyone is likely to read it, would like people to (somehow) know where they are when they are flying. I suppose they want better nav training (but how much more certain of position can Mr Average Pilot get when all he's been taught is a stopwatch and a piece of string?). Nothing will change on this front until dead reckoning is abandoned or supplemented with something better.

None of these groups are going to get what they want, because the 45hr-min PPL syllabus is far too short to teach someone all this stuff, and any changes have to be internationally agreed. In 45hrs, you can learn to just about takeoff, fly level, and land, safely. It's no good complicating things beyond that. And one has to keep the 121.5 people in their jobs - if everybody got a GPS and used it correctly, they would be completely redundant :O

but that's just a MINIMUM.... no one says you can't, or should, do more. It's up to the instructors and schools to advise doing more... the minimum of 45 ist quite enough... anymore will just scare potential students from getting into flying to begin with. Once they get the flying bug, they often don't care how many more hours they need until getting that piece of paper....

my opinion..

Westy

Monocock,
You really should go to a Gliding club for a chip removal session.
Colour:- Most modern,(glass), gliders are white, so are an awful lot of modern light aircraft for the same reason. Gliders are usually either turning in a thermal, in which case they are easily seen due to the sun glinting off the wings,(assuming you are spending more time looking out than admiring your GPSDMEVORHDI), or they are flying 'on track' in which case their speeds are similar to most powered aircraft and the glider pilot has probably seen you anyway.
Exit areas:- Gliders do not generally enter controlled airspace so they will tend to be 'crushed against the fence' so to speak. If you are cleared to operate in airways, stay in there where it's nice and safe and cozy and leave the open airspace to those of us with eyes. Glider pilots don't know about VOR and wouldn't know where to find one to cluster around it in the first place. I suspect you are seeing gliders when you start doing a proper lookout, i.e. when you leave controlled airspace or approach a VOR and think "dodgy area, this, I'd better have a look out of the window."
Radio:- Most gliders are on Radio but they are on 130.4 or 130.1 or a few other dedicated glider frequencies. They have never heard of 123.4. Unfortunately, they also do not generally carry lists of frequencies and tend to get busy low down which is why they may land at your airfield without making any radio calls. In most cases it would be illegal for them to do so as they do not have radio licenses and are only allowed to use the gliding frequencies.
PR:- 99.95% of the general public have never seen a glider in the air. Non air-minded people do not look above head height unless a noise causes them to look.

I cannot remember the last Glider/Power mid-air and I will just about guarantee that the power aircraft concerned would have been a glider tug.

Mike W

Leaving aeros and spinning aside, the point of side slipping is indicated above, and it's surely something that every pilot needs to be famliar with. The point of recommending some tailwheel flying is that it may educate pilots out of attempting to land too fast, and reduce the number of bent nosewheels and props. My landings in nosewheel aircraft have improved greatly since I took up tailwheel flying, to the point that I don't recall mucking up a nosewheel landing since then. My tailwheel landings remain very variable in quality, but it's fun trying to get better.

Skylark4

Power/Glider collision see here: (1996) http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ty_502371.hcsp

Powered aircraft, an AA5, wasn't a tug. :rolleyes:

Rustle,
Quite happy to be corrected. What a sad story. From the reading of that, he would have been O.K. if he had pushed or pulled the stick rather than turned. The tip of his left wing hit the tip of the gliders right wing with the AA5 in a right turn. He was still unlucky in that the damage appeared to be minor but his mass ballance weight got jammed.
I don't know if that was the result of a search or if you remembered it. If that is the most recent one there is, it was ten years ago.( I am not trying to start a contest, it's just that I feel that this is an overrated risk)

Mike W

Thank g*d for that. I thought it was just me:{ :O

FNG

"the point of side slipping is indicated above, and it's surely something that every pilot needs to be famliar with. "

Do you really mean EVERY pilot? With gear down and max flaps, I can descend at about 2000fpm and if that isn't enough then I should have started the descent a few miles further back. It doesn't do the engine that good to do this, either. It's also a good way of making rear passengers sick.

"The point of recommending some tailwheel flying is that it may educate pilots out of attempting to land too fast"

Why not just teach them to fly the correct airspeed? If you can't teach a PPL to fly a specific airspeed (plus or minus say 5kt) on final, then he (or the instructor) doesn't have a hope.

Something vastly more important than side slipping is teaching people how to trim correctly. I know many people aren't taught this properly. I was shown how the trim wheel is used to cancel the yoke pressure, but was never told that the trim setting in effect determines the airspeed. Yet lack of this understanding is at the root of speed control problems.

Changing the student to a very different aircraft just to fix speed problems is very wasteful. Currency ON TYPE is so important. And if it is a PPL holder, the chances are that he isn't doing enough hours to stay current anyway.

Those that do lots of hours can of course play around and no doubt they will benefit, just as a car driver benefits from driving different vehicles. But these are not viable solutions to what is basically poor teaching, or trying to teach someone who is just wasting their own money.

I have done plenty of c**p landings (none heavy in the damaging sense; just very untidy, bouncing/balooning etc) and in hindsight 95% of them were the result of landing too fast. As for the other 5%, they don't worry me because perfection cannot be attained in this activity, certainly not in variable winds etc.

"The point of recommending some tailwheel flying is that it may educate pilots out of attempting to land too fast"

Why not just teach them to fly the correct airspeed? If you can't teach a PPL to fly a specific airspeed (plus or minus say 5kt) on final, then he (or the instructor) doesn't have a hope.


IO540

Tailwheel aeroplanes teach more than the importance of a correct approach speed. Far more important, IMHO, is that they teach a correctly held-off touchdown. If you fail to hold off enough, or hold off too high, do it too early or too late, you won't get away with it in a tailwheel machine - it is intolerant of sloppy technique. No matter how good your instructor, there is no finer teacher of landings than an aeroplane that demands correct technique. Every time.

In a nosewhweel aeroplane, you'll get away with quite appalling airmanship (within limits) - until the noseleg decides enough is enough. Then there will be another bent firewall, busted prop, bent panels, and shock-loaded engine.

SSD

I think its more important to:

a) Teach pilots to make critical decisions. If you come in too fast and are not going to make it, do something about it early on. I.e. if it doesn't look right, it probably isn't.

b) Teach pilots how to handle the result of their actions. Crossing the threshold at 100kts won't do any damage to the aircraft IF the pilot knows how to react, and there is sufficient runway remaining. If you keep holding it off, and holding it off, you can make a very nice, all be it long, landing.

They'll soon learn from their mistakes:D


(I can vouch for this, 5000' in a 172, and 7000' in a Seminole :O )

EA

Skylark4

Thanks for the advice. I am sorry I hit such a raw nerve with you. Had I known it was such a sensitive subject I probably would have never made my post so polite and would have really said what I felt.

As mentioned before, my tolerance of the gliding fraternity is quite low these days and this is not just due to a single event.

I have had two incidences of outdoors stock having to be shot after gliders landing on my land. One of them was a calf that had run into a fence and had its head stuck for three hours. The glider pilot was stopped about 50 yards from it and can't possibly not have heard/seen the problems this animal was facing. The wheel marks showed where the tug had arrived and flown off with the glider and left the poor little mite to strangle itself.

Three weeks of temporary stock fencing work destroyed by a lady glider pilot who didn't even apologise after ploughing through it on landing. She was more concerned about her fibreglass scratches.

Countless gliders actually land on my airstrip and then not say thanks when I offer to hold their wing on departure by tug.

Gliders sometimes circle over the approach to my strip at 400 ft waiting to see if they might just get a bit more lift before using it as a bolthole WHILE I AM SITTING WAITING TO DEPART!!!!

This thread is about sideslipping and I think it is an excellent thread. We have both made our points. There are enough Glider V Powered threads in the archives to keep us entertained for hours if we want that kind of thing. I should know, I posted on most of them.
;)

They must be nicer glider pilots in Ireland, I never had a problem and I fly into a gliding site and sometimes they land with me.

Its a bit like Those at the "Big airport" saying "dam those fu..ing microlighters, and the microlighter talking about the spam cans, the Pfa,ers hate everybody else and no one wants the poor old glider.

We gave up farming a few years ago and planted 30,000 trees, a good way to put the gliders off.

They do know how to sideslip though

Tony

Speed control is paramount when flying.

The fear of people to stall/spin is such that a lot of emphasis is put on not going to slow. This invariably leads to folks going too fast.

The fact that there are more folks going through the fence at the far end rather than landing short is the best proof of this.

And going back to the original thread; when you sideslip it is the attitude which is important to control speed. Anyone who thinks that the ASI gives any valuable information during the slip does not understand how the cookie crumbles.

FD

Monocock.
I have tried to send you an e-mail through this site but I suspect something may have gone wrong. Please contact me if you can.

Mike W

IO540, you say,

"With gear down and max flaps, I can descend at about 2000fpm and if that isn't enough then I should have started the descent a few miles further back. It doesn't do the engine that good to do this, either. It's also a good way of making rear passengers sick."

Suppose that your engine should mischievously stop and you find yourself too high to arrive safely in the only suitable field in range ? Go back and start the descent again? I agree, however, that not making your passengers feel even slightly woozy is far more important than not crashing. Why oh why can't they make aeroplanes properly so that they don't have to do that silly tippy uppy thing to go around corners?

It seems a shame to allow your rabid and endlessly reiterated hostility to all forms of aviation tradition to reduce your armoury of flying skills.

An alternative to sideslip is just do loads of S turns to increase the distance flown. Doesn't require any skill over and above PPL general handling.

S turns, exactly. Work very well.

As for FNG's comment, I have already said that someone who had done their PPL and has plenty of time/money, can learn additional skills at their leisure. My comments were clearely stated as relative to what can/should reasonably be taught in a basic PPL. As for engine failure... statistically this can happen anytime and there is a procedure for a forced landing, isn't there?

S turns are fine at height but do you REALLY want to do this below 200ft or so - if you learn to sideslip properly this can be kept up right to the flare if needed, it is also something that can be easily varied to increase/decrease the glide angle - a MUCH better tool IMHO than S turns.
I am also surprised nobody has mentioned "fishtailing", where you just hold your attitude and kick the rudder from side to side. Again not as good as a sideslip, but good to have all you can in the armoury AND you can do it in a Cessna full flap if needed.:ok:

Fishtailing?

Just using the rudder like that will induce skidding which if done slow enough is a recipe for a spin.

No place for this in anyone's armoury unless they want to spin.

Maybe approach to land is not the place for this.

If you are so high that you can not safely make the runway with the techniques you master and are appropriate for your aeroplane it is probably time to go around and give it another go.

FD

HWD

What causes a wing to stall? Angle of Attack.
Throwing in tight turns at low altitude in order to recover from too much height on the approach to a forced landing is not the answer. It increases your AoA and will require an increase in airspeed if you want to remain safe. If the landing area is tight excess airspeed on touchdown is the last thing you need.

Consider the S turn itself, you are lined up on the approach but too high so you turn away, let's assume you are way too high so you turn 90 degrees. Your landing area is now alongside the aircraft and moving backwards. To regain the approach you now have to turn 180 degrees and backtrack to the approach path then turn 90 degrees back on to the approach. By turning 90 degrees you have given yourself another 270 degrees to turn, during which you are going to lose a lot more height. Yes you could cut the corners but if you do that you are moving yourself closer in to the field. Believe me a sideslip is much easier. You stay pointing at the runway, you can stop it any time you want without leaving yourself with additional turns to do and it doesn't increase your airspeed.

When you do your renewal why not choose an instructor who can teach you the skill? (Maybe not one concentrating on his ATPL)

Mike

I'm a student PPL so may be missing something crucial in this discussion, but isn't the wing-down crosswind landing method just a side-slip?

And also confused about the Cessna thing mentioned, are people saying you should always use the crab method in a C150/152 flapped crosswind landing?

- Michael

Michael,

You did not miss anything.

I personally prefer the crab and kick-off method as it will work for any aeroplane and any crosswind.

But even with that you will cross control the last bit (which is fine)

Deliberate sideslipping to come in when too high is good fun and can be appropriate, depending on aeroplane and situation.

FD

Flyin'Dutch', is it correct that the only difference between the wing-down and crab approaches is where in the approach you transition to a side-slip attitude?

Given that, isn't it easier for inexperienced pilots to transition to wing-down further back in the approach so that they can get used to the cross-control feel for longer before touch-down?

- Michael

Totally correct - and if you fly the aircraft too slowly in a straight line it is the perfect recipe for a stall, which is why you keep your speed where it should be:hmm:

Chaps,

Cripes! I really did not mean to say S turns are better. I would not know (as you all know). Just that it is the only technique I was taught for giving myself more time to loose height. It has worked well in PFLs thus far. Obviously one does not throw one's a/c around the countryside, but just some turns back and fro. However, I know full well that a PFL is just that and is only preperation for the real thing. I like to think that I would not be tempted to depart from my training should the event happen for real. Odds are one day I will find out!

BTW, Thanks again to those for their kind offers of assistance. I will be enquiring about some extra training with my School so I am convinced it is a technique worth mastering. No argument there.

:ok: :D

Hmmm slideslipping and the PA18 - heaven.

Loved it so much, my instructor on the differences training asked me to lay off it for a bit.

Should it be on the PPL? Tricky one, but don't think so.

Personally, I feel 45 hours for the PPL isn't really enough. If we were to add in all the stuff we weren't taught, or was glossed over, it would be more like 75 hours, but that would seriously reduce the intake, so the desirable stuff has to be left out.

That said, the taildragging course, like the IMC rating, opened up new flying horizons for me.

My advice... Do the PPL, get some hours up showing the relatives their houses, then really learn to fly with IMC, taildragging, aeros etc.

KCDW

ps - the other real treat on a PA18 - really steep turns... 60 deg is for nancys!

I thought side slips were on the PPL....at least they were on mine, sideslipping to flapless landings an all that...

EA

Some references in this thread to "forward side slipping"

Whatever can that be?

Not too sure about the danger in lighties but with the bigger ones there can be some that will suffer from rudder over balance. There have been some even get their certification with rudder over balance so bad that at very high sideslip angles the rudder will lock over.

So be wary if the rudder force starts to diminish at high sideslip angles.

"Forward slip" and "side slip" not "forward side slip" ... two different things, although the same :\

I've never heard of rudder overbalence during a side or forward slip in a light aircraft ... but I may be wrong?

It's amazing how these sort of threads always come back to what or what should not be taught at PPL level. Or if one kind of skill is relevent to any other kind of flying. Does it really matter? You simply can't teach everything at an early stage (although side slipping would be worth it "oops, I'm at it too"). The point IS that side slipping is a VERY useful skill to know, takes little to learn, isn't that hard to perfect and could ... just could save you or your aeroplane during a forced landing. It's also good fun ... GO ON ... anyone who can't ... learn to do it next time you're up with an instructor :ok: (and if he/she doesn't know how to either at their stage in the game ... change instructor!!!)

SS

Michael,

I like slipping but not to set off a crosswind. I think the crab and kickoff method is better for that for the reasons set out above.

There is (IMO) little to be gained from kicking off high and then doing the wing low approach over a longer trajectory for students as:

1. You miss some of the visual clues which make the kick off easy to teach and understand when you are higher up and

2. Why teach something which you are not going to use later on.

By all means if people want to learn to sideslip do this initially higher up along ground references.

Foxmoth,

You are of course correct. But if you get your aerodynamics books out you will see that slipping is an inherently safe activity whereas skidding is not. A lot of stall spin accidents happen because folks try to rudder the aeroplane around the corner when slow and low rather than flying coordinated.

SS,

As you say the only thing that exists is slipping and whether that is sidewards of forwards depends on where you steer your ship.

Any other nomenclature only confuses the subject so that hangar fliers can make it sound more interesting and difficult than it is.

;)

FD

I would rather slip than S-turn on the final approach for a forced landing. I'd rather not be turning at that point, and certainly not away from my intended landing point.

I would agree with that but one does not necessarily exclude the other.

As with most things in life there is a time and place for everything.

FD