Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Discussion of aviation issues which are not safety related (airline operations, pilot contracts, aviation industry news, etc.)

Moderators: el, FrankM, Dmmoore

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4286
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby 3WE » Mon Jul 24, 2017 6:38 pm

ACTUALLY, this is one of those mega RC aircraft crashes...I blame a go-around.

Warning: 8:20 total length on the video- might want to jump to 7:30 after you get past the parking area model porn and into endless circles and fly-bys.

Article: https://www.cnet.com/news/cartoon-bunni ... our-brain/

Direct link to YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yey3JSmHjTk

I love that the article cites Parlour talk on youtube:
On YouTube, commenters -- some who might even know what they're talking about -- weighed in to offer their judgments. Some immediately lurched to the right and blamed the pilot. Others insisted that bad things can happen to good pilots and that it's impossible from the video to tell what happened.
As you can tell from my title- I see a go-around, loss of power, an aircraft struggling in a low speed state, followed by the classic stall-spin-crash (no fire), but the plane and the presumably the miniature Dummy Pilots* somewhat did died. (Didn't note Dummy Passengers...based on how these modelers work, I'm sure the toll is somewhat higher).

*Not DSGDPOTM, but generic Dummy Pilots
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby Gabriel » Mon Jul 24, 2017 10:17 pm

"loss of power" is an understatement in this case. He lost 66% of the power and was left with 33% of the power but highly asymmetrical, at a speed that was too slow to compensate with the flight controls (I would say below Vmc but I k now you don't like acronyms and symbols). Probably if he had lost all 3 engines the outcome would have been better.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby Gabriel » Mon Jul 24, 2017 10:24 pm

Now, the C-NET article seems to be not totally relevant...
Cartoon bunnies are hacking your brain
VR's mind tricks can teleport you into a Pixar-like world where your role and "smart" characters suck you deeper into the story.

elaw
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby elaw » Tue Jul 25, 2017 1:54 pm

Probably if he had lost all 3 engines the outcome would have been better.
Or if he hadn't expected the wing to produce lift at a 30-degree (estimated of course) AoA...
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4286
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby 3WE » Tue Jul 25, 2017 7:01 pm

Probably if he had lost all 3 engines the outcome would have been better.
Or if he hadn't expected the wing to produce lift at a 30-degree (estimated of course) AoA...
Let's not forget good ole tunnel vision.

It's great of us to sit here and arm-chair QB what he should have been thinking and should have been doing.

I'll speculate that he over corrected on his flare- and in a frantic effort to save his crazy-expensive plane sort of mentally locked onto full power and climb away...

...then as it increasingly (and rapidly) moved towards a loss of control, he was simply too slow on 'the type specific QRH/FCOM of just chop all the damn power and go for a gentle crash...instead, the mind focuses...the field of vision narrows...and you frantically work the controls...trying to get oh-so-precious altitude to circle back for another landing attempt...

Yeah, what a dumbass, I would never do anything like he did.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

elaw
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby elaw » Tue Jul 25, 2017 7:33 pm

That's a very good point. In addition, it's quite possible the "soft landing" option he envisioned would have taken the plane straight into that line of cars and he was trying to avoid that.

OTOH when I was a kid my friends and I used to fly control-line airplanes (yeah, go ahead, say it, it's lame). Most of us flew cheap store-bought ones but this one guy spent many hours building a balsa-wood model. He took it out, flew it in circles a few times, then tried to do a loop. He made it about 3/4 of the way through then slammed the plane into the ground, smashing it into approximately a million pieces. So he put an equal amount of effort into building another one... took it out, tried to do a loop, and turned it into airplane confetti. Same with a third and I think a fourth plane. My point being that having the skills to build an airplane doesn't necessarily mean you have the skills to fly it!
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4286
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby 3WE » Tue Jul 25, 2017 8:20 pm

...OTOH when I was a kid my friends and I used to fly control-line airplanes (yeah, go ahead, say it, it's lame). Most of us flew cheap store-bought ones....took it out, flew it in circles a few times, then...slammed the plane into the ground, smashing it into approximately a million pieces...My point being that...it doesn't necessarily mean you have the skills to fly it!
:lol:

Total truth here:

Young 3BS had a very pretty, shiny, albeit not super expensive trainer with a string controlled elevator...Lame, but what the hell...it was a genuine air-eee-oh-plane and flight is cool...period.

Cox two-stroke 'diesel' with a fuel adjustment needle valve for full power and best mixture....Glow plug on top and a big 1.5V dry cell battery...a wind up/recoil starter spring.

Young 3BS did not understand Phugoids at all whatsoever. Gabriel AND the Internet and Aviation discussion fora did not exist yet.

Whoh...too high...nose over....whoops too low pull up (relentlessly)....whoah, nose over (relentlessly)....pull up and the plane is just about dead over the top of my head with painfully little airspeed.

In spite of relentless pull ups (and adequate airspeed gained in the descent and no evidence of excessive AOA)...unable to recover from the resulting dive and SMACK!.

It WAS a trainer with rubber-band-wing and gear mounts- and maybe even some sort of engine disconnecting system.

Nose cone shattered, some pieces missing from here and there on the fuselage...lots of scrapes.

Years later (age 16 or so) after reading "Stick and Rudder" I went much more easy on the pitch inputs and was able to run the thing out of gas and land it half the time...not that the conventional gear didn't result in some bounces, NEAR disasters and sprung rubber bands.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

elaw
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby elaw » Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:08 pm

OMG this takes me back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MHJJhbCmdA

You have to love an airplane with a takeoff roll equal to about double the length of the fuselage... :clap:
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4286
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby 3WE » Tue Jul 25, 2017 11:32 pm

***OMG this takes me back***

Indeed

&
***Like***

One time as the pregame show for the Flyover Cardinal's Cricket team (US-style Cricket), was guys flying line control airplanes.

Predominately the show was guys having dog fights! Planes had a long streamer tied to the tail and the objective was to snip off lengths of the streamer.

Along with fairly skillful flying- was the equally skillful dance of NOT entangling the control lines...the guys had to go over and under each other.

AND, there were several TOTAL disasters where the planes did die....some of them miscues on maneuvers...some of them mix ups and tangled lines. I do not recall for sure if there was a mid-air. (Kind of sad to see nice flying machines smashed and broken).

Back to my Local NOT_Super Genius Line Pilot of the Decade experience- I also recall barely being able to stand after landing [I skipped the part that after the engine died, my plane could still be slung around and fly 'endlessley']...the slow rotation caused me some first class dizziness as my ear canals stabilized to consider spinning as normal.

PS- I THINK there was also an RC flying Snoopy dog house. :mrgreen:
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby Gabriel » Wed Jul 26, 2017 2:53 am

Probably if he had lost all 3 engines the outcome would have been better.
Or if he hadn't expected the wing to produce lift at a 30-degree (estimated of course) AoA...
I don't believe that he expected the wing to produce lift at a 30-degree AoA....

I am not even 100% sure that it was a stall. You can see that he was coming with full left ailerons and left rudder but the plane was still not responding to that. When you are in that situation, a further diminish of the speed or increase of the AoA will further reduce the surface controls effectiveness what will cause a sudden roll and yaw. There is a name for that that I can't remember now. Snap roll comes to my mind but I believe that's not the right term. It is what happens when you fly below Vmc with the critical engine producing full power. And it looks very similar to a spin but it is not because the cause of the entry is not a stall.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 4286
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby 3WE » Wed Jul 26, 2017 1:47 pm

Probably if he had lost all 3 engines the outcome would have been better.
...I am not even 100% sure that it was a stall...sudden roll and yaw...There is a name for that...Snap roll...it looks very similar to a spin but it is not because the cause of the entry is not a stall.
Bullcrap!

Going really slow with high AOA with full aileron deflection and crossed controls (yes the rudder is coordinated, but the one engine makes it essentially crossed control), and one wing suddenly drops from a sudden loss of lift, and this is not a stall-spin? Please re-read my the first word of my reply.

Snap roll is when you are going at a high rate of speed horizontally and pull up and rudder over relentlessly...(you can stall at any airspeed, right)...the plane stalls and spins...

Perhaps you have some uber-technical aeroengineer thing you will argue about...oh, is it an incipient spin?

Yeah, I'm just an agroengineer, but...

...Going slow at high AOA = reduced control effectiveness, potential disruptions to smooth airflow, and subsequent loses of lift, and sometimes ailerons stall and you have an engine generating and bending airflow over one wing and one wing going slightly faster than the other...blah blah blah...

I'm not sure it matters what you call it...the initiating factors are the same, the prevention is the same and the recovery is the same (if you have enough altitude and time).
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby Gabriel » Wed Jul 26, 2017 2:33 pm

I don't know if you really read my post or only isolated words of it (as you quoted it), but I said that:
- I was not 100% sure it was a stall. That is not the same than saying "it was not a stall". It may have been a stall but there are other possibilities.
- I did NOT think that "snap roll" was the right term for what I was describing.

Please note that a twin can lose control in a way that looks similar to a stall-spin (and typically evolves into one when the pilot pulls further up after NOT applying the correct corrective action, which involves reducing the power in the good engine and rolling wings level) but the yaw and roll is caused by the asymmetric thrust that the rudder cannot overcome and the asymmetric lift that the ailerons cannot overcome caused by two factors; the sideslip in combination with the dihedral effect, and the fact that one wing is being washed by the propwash (increasing the lift locally) while the other isn't. The plane doesn't need to stall to start this upset, and it can happen at 1G at a speed that is well above the stall speed and below the critical AoA, and even below the stall warning AoA, so the pilot may have no signal of an imminent stall (no stall horn, no buffet, airspeed looks healthy from the stall POV). Unlike stalls, that are a matter of AoA and only AoA and can happen at any airspeed, in this other kind of loss of control speed is critical and it can happen at any AoA.

User avatar
ocelot
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:26 pm

Re: Was it Dummy or V-Nav who said go-arounds are not to be taken lightly?

Postby ocelot » Sun Jul 30, 2017 9:23 pm

I don't think there was a stall there either, FWIW. The plane was neither slow nor nose-high (particularly compared to the wallow right after the go-around) ... and with stalls generally there's a specific point where the flow detaches and that gives a specific point you can identify in the a/c's motion... not always as obvious as the nose dropping suddenly, but generally it's there.

What I see is the pilot gooses the remaining engine (there's an audible gap in the engine noise) and the plane smoothly rolls onto its side and then faceplants. Too much asymmetric thrust... possibly without any attempt to compensate with the rudder. There are some other little things in the video that make me think the PF is not perhaps as skilled as he might have liked.

And then, the thing that sets up the crash is the gigantic skid to starboard. The PF decides to go around for some reason (we don't see one but maybe someone's dog ran in front off-camera or something) and pops up suddenly, then wallows for a bit, then there's this huge skid and the two inner engines flame out. The skid isn't caused by losing the engines; it happens first, and I'm guessing it caused the flameouts by disrupting the air inflow. (I have no idea how sensitive that type of engine is to such things, but it seems plausible...)

Although now I'm wondering if that skid wasn't the result of a stall. Or of the PF thinking "crap I pulled up too hard, stall recovery -> right rudder"...

also I don't see where you're getting 30 degree AoA from. The nose comes up some when the PF gooses the remaining engine, but nothing like that much.

Early in the video you can see into the windows at one point. Didn't see any model pax.


Return to “Aviation Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 7 guests