VMC Rollover, ever done it?

[88_MALIBU]

Has anyone actually ever experienced this at altitude? I am wondering if there is somewhere you can go with professionals that will show it to you with safety and control. Is there such a thing with VMC?> The reason I ask is, when getting ME training we are only allowed to go so far before we retard the throttle. I dont plan on getting in a expensive sim anytime soon, so thats out... Just wondering if it is indeed recoverable once you go over and how much altitude it would take. Not having an MEI, I have no experience teaching in twins.

 

[mnixon]

I know of a certain DPE who would do it with applicants in the old seminoles. With the new seminole the 430 doesnt handle inverted ops well so he doesnt do it anymore. I think it should be shown to every student so they can recognize the "point of no return". But keep in mind this should only be done by someone who is EXTREMELY familiar with the a/c as well as the maneuver,

 

[88_MALIBU]

I agree, I was told I was crazy by another CFI for wanting to understand it more... I dont plan on doing it, I just dont know much about it-what it feels like. At least in aerobatics they show you the maneuvers... If anyone knows where this type of real world stuff is taught I am interested in hearing.

 

[Sig]

I know of a certain DPE who would do it with applicants in the old seminoles. With the new seminole the 430 doesnt handle inverted ops well so he doesnt do it anymore. I think it should be shown to every student so they can recognize the "point of no return". But keep in mind this should only be done by someone who is EXTREMELY familiar with the a/c as well as the maneuver,

Er hmm
ErHMM HMM HMM

**HAbullschitt!!!**

There are too many holes in this single paragraph than even I can let slide. Since some folks around here (not really you two, but somebody reading this) are potentially smoking holes themelves, lemme illustrate:

1. Who cares if there is in fact some silly rogue DPE that lets you get cat-arsed in a Vmc demo?

2. However, I care if you BS about some mythical DPE that supposedly espouses turtling an older Seminole versus a new one becauuuusssssssssse:
a. They have a further aft CG
b. The 430 can be switched off
c. Somebody might think they know what they're doing and try it.


Learn a few more facts before dropping silliness like this.

The Seminole will Vmc. You can lose control, you can go into a flat spin. The likelihood of this happening is higher in an older model; worrying about the avionics in the newer one shows a tremendously misplaced sense of mortality. That, and a fScking moron behind the yoke.

The two instructors I've compared notes with on spinning Seminoles (yes, you can recover- only my former roommate didn't recover one time AND THAT'S WHY I'M ANGRY) all have the same story: a military pilot arm-locked on the demo, it turtled in about two seconds, and the next thing you know you're blasting through Vne because it was a nose-heavy (thanks, Garmin!!) new model. Antispin inputs are almost instantaneous, and recovery is more of a function of a shallow pullout than stopping the spin. The mode is very nose down, mostly roll.

I get very, very angry about this topic. There is ZERO reason to show some kind of "point of no return." Why be able to recognize it? POINTLESS. It is part of some silly half-baked curriculum that short-changes a multiengine student, espoused by the hangar-flying mouthbreathers. Yes, I'm MAD about it!

Wanna be effective as an MEI? Get your students so jacked up, ready for a failure on each takeoff that they think that a takeoff where everything works is weird. Sound goofy? That's how them [us] fellers in the 121 world do it.

Sorry for ranting, it wasn't personal. You were looking for some input, you got some, but I really hope nobody got some ideas on how to add some spice to their lesson plans.

 

[wheelsup]

Get your students so jacked up, ready for a failure on each takeoff that they think that a takeoff where everything works is weird.

What's funny about that statement is I had a student actually pull the throttles and call abort on me the other day, without me failing anything - he was so paranoid about me failing the engines. It works though - they stay on their toes .

~wheelsup

 

[Sig]

Sorry about the p!ssy rant.


A few Negra Modelos....

 

[Thedude]

Back when I was working on my MEI, I did have the PA-23 Apache start to do a VMC rollover on me. It got to about 60 degree of bank before I got enough rudder authority get control back. Needless to say, that scared the CRAP out of me. I wouldn't want to ever do a full VMC rollover unless I had at least 10,000' and I am not sure if i would really want to.

 

[mnixon]

But keep in mind this should only be done by someone who is EXTREMELY familiar with the a/c as well as the maneuver,

Theres my disclaimer....I have never done it and never will but there are some that might want to, and if it is safe why not. Don't get out of line on me and say I am blowing smoke because you have an opinion.

 

[rubberducky]

Not to sound like one of those old timers, "let me tell ya son...", but here’s my .02. I experienced this one time inadvertently and believe me you don't want to try this! Through my own stupidity I let a student demonstrate Vmc too far and next thing I know, we went through 120 degrees of bank. I retarded both throttles and rolled it back to wings level (performed an inadvertent barrel roll). I was instructing aerobatics at the time as well and to compare the two I would say this. It wasn't as rapid as say a snap roll, but it was quicker than a barrel roll, either way though it scared the schiit out of me...

 

[88_MALIBU]

Thanks alot guys. This is exactly the kind of replies I was looking for.

 

[CarjCapt]

vmc

Unless my memory is just plain wrong, I remember that none of the multi-engine aircraft certified in the last 40+ years have never been tested and certified for spins of any kind.

To do a VMC demo and let it go too far can lead to a spin that you can't recover from at normal demo altitudes.

Again from memory, Piper did some spin test with the then new PA-30 (twin comanche) and found it took in excess of 10000 feet to recover.

Some one with a better memory please correct me if I'm wrong.

But I would never spin a multi-engine twin of any kind intentionly or get it in a situation that could lead to a spin.

 

[Vik]

I own a PA-30 and while researching the plane I found out that it received a bad rep because it was then used as the Seminole is now .. and during training, way back when, multi students had to do VMC demos at 500 AGL or something *ridiculous* like that. Many PA-30's crashed and now the PA-30 has stall strips on the leading edges and the FAA had redline moved higher by 5-10mph .. which CLEARLY isn't true if you fly the plane because the plane wants to DESPERATELY fly below redline.

What I do is just hold it in ground effect (don't want to allow the nose wheel to over-stress and break) and then once I'm past redline, resume climb. Many PA-30 pilots hold it onto the runway and the mx bills for that nose gear must be brutal.

Lastly, yes, the PA-30 used up a lot of altitude to recover and you *can* put it into a flat spin. In icing, the tail stalls FIRST ..

Its a great airplane though .. no one makes a twin that nice anymore.

Unless my memory is just plain wrong, I remember that none of the multi-engine aircraft certified in the last 40+ years have never been tested and certified for spins of any kind.

To do a VMC demo and let it go too far can lead to a spin that you can't recover from at normal demo altitudes.

Again from memory, Piper did some spin test with the then new PA-30 (twin comanche) and found it took in excess of 10000 feet to recover.

Some one with a better memory please correct me if I'm wrong.

But I would never spin a multi-engine twin of any kind intentionly or get it in a situation that could lead to a spin.

 

[CarjCapt]

As I remember the Twin Commanche had VMC speed changed from 80IMPH to 90IMPH and that was before I go my multi-engine rating in the pa-30 in 1970

 

[Stepclimb]

CarjCapt's picture reminds me of the days when all of the CONUS NOTAMS were posted on a large vertical obelisk in Base Ops.

What's going on in that picture?

 

[minitour]

...What's going on in that picture?

All the mx squawks from my flight school?

-mini

 

[CarjCapt]

[QUOTE What's going on in that picture?[/QUOTE]

That is CMR's management TA piled in front of the Chief Pilot's office prior to our strike.

 

[Rook]

A beautiful picture indeed.

Rook

(one of the 89 Hostages)

 

[mayday1]

Again from memory, Piper did some spin test with the then new PA-30 (twin comanche) and found it took in excess of 10000 feet to recover.

Some one with a better memory please correct me if I'm wrong.

But I would never spin a multi-engine twin of any kind intentionly or get it in a situation that could lead to a spin.

a question.. why is a multi so much more difficult to deal with in stalls, spins? My instructor never let us get anywhere near a full stall or spin in our geronimo, but never really explained why a spin was so much more dangerous in twin..? Does retarding the throttles, level wings, and forward elevator not work as well for some reason? Or does it just take a lot more altitude?

 

[Thedude]

Correct me if I a wrong but from what I remember the Vmc for a PA-23 is hihger than stall speed.

 

[PropsForward]

a question.. why is a multi so much more difficult to deal with in stalls, spins? My instructor never let us get anywhere near a full stall or spin in our geronimo, but never really explained why a spin was so much more dangerous in twin..? Does retarding the throttles, level wings, and forward elevator not work as well for some reason? Or does it just take a lot more altitude?

Don't see the problem with the full stall. But spins are prohibited in most twin engine aircraft.

You also need to realize that you are most likely learning how to fly a machine that your instructor can barely fly himself. Do you really want to test his VMC skills if an engine is lost during recovery from a full power off stall?

 

[PropsForward]

I also like to teach VMC as an emergency, much like a stall. I found that most people I run into sees VMC as a checkride procedure to demonstrate loss of directional control and thats it.

So, I like to teach a simulated go-around at altitude with a pilot, get them near stall, then have them go around. I fail an engine and look for the VMC recovery. I do it on stall recovery as well.

 

[TDTURBO]

You also need to realize that you are most likely learning how to fly a machine that your instructor can barely fly himself.

One of the most true and frightening statements I have ever read.

 

[minitour]

One of the most true and frightening statements I have ever read.

...you must have missed the thread about flying a 182RG in known ice...

(I'm just f*ckin with ya)

-mini

 

[DaveJ]

Newton's Laws must be respected.

[font=helvetica,geneva,arial]I. Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

[/font]One of the reasons a spin is more dangerous in a twin is because of the mass of the engines out on the wings make it much more difficult to stop the spin's rotation.

 

[paulsalem]

At our flight school we do not do full stalls in our Baron 55. (It may even be against our training regs.) I've talked to many MEIs and they say its too risky. However, if you retarted both throttles to idle, stalled the plane then recovered holding off on the power until above Safe Single Engine Speed I don't see the problem. I guess the biggest risk would be an ucoordianted stall.

I've talked to some NJA IPs who have to stall test their A/C after MS is done to the leading edge bleed air anti-ice system to reconfigure the stall warning system. And they have to do full stalls.

I'm going for my MEI right now so any comments would be helpful.

 

[CarjCapt]

Baron 55

About 30 years ago, while living in KMCI, there was a crash of a Baron 55 that was doing VMC demos with a student and a very experienced instructor.

The aircraft was found in a fully developed corn field and the corn wasn't disturbed in any direction around the aircraft. That, ladies and gentlemen, is the results of a VMC demo gone bad and the aircraft going into a flat spin.

It is valid to do VMC demos but the results of going any further than just a demo can take you into the experimental catagory.

 

[avbug]

Stalls in a multi engine airplane are a non-issue, so long as they are performed symmetrically. An assymetrical thrust situation in a stall can lead to trouble, and there is no good reason to perform it.

Why not perform loss of control demonstrations to a full loss of control? Isnt' that a little like asking why not try cocaine to learn why one shouldn't take it? Or getting shot in the leg to learn that firearms really can hurt you?

We teach kids to say no, to not try the coke. We teach range safety to preclude getting shot. That ought to do.

Years ago, multi engine training did include pushing Vmc and doing single engine stalls. A truism is that more people were getting killed doing training than in actual engine failure scenarios. Today, we rightly concentrate on taking the appropriate action at the first sign of a control loss, rather than waiting until it's out of control to do something.

When I was doing structure fire, we were put twice a year through what was called a Swede Prop, also called a Flashover simulator. A flashover occurs when the ambient temperature in a structure or environment reaches a point at which everything begins to burn simultaneously. Usually at a minimum of about eleven hundred degrees F. The atmosphere around you burns, the fuels ignite, everything burns. It's beautiful to watch, but deadly, and unsurvivable.

In the swede prop. we were put in an environment in which it got really hot. Our helmets were too hot to touch for some time after we exited the container. The air in our SCBA tanks was very hot; it sometimes hurt to breathe. I saw masks melted, and nomex burned off of people's faces with some mild second degree burning beneath. To say it was realistic and intense might be an understatement. It was also a thing of beauty. The air around us caught fire in what were referred to as "snake flames;" the atmosphere merely began burning, and soon everything around us was burning. We felt thermal expansion of water in the heat, the steam burning, watched the effects of upsetting the thermal balance, and even watched a firehose contribute to and ignite the fire...and as the water left the hose and turned to oxygen and hydrogen, we saw water appear to burn.

We didn't go in there to practice surviving a flashover. We went in there for one reason,and one reason only. To recognize the signs of rollover, heat, thermal balance, and other things that are encountered in a hot environment leading up to a flashover. We learned to turn our heads and feel the burning in our ears as a sign of what was coming. We learned the sights, the sounds, the circumstances the contributing factors. We sat through hours of class before and after, watched filsm of burned firefighters who died in flashovers, listed to the testimonies of their buddies on the line.

Our sole reason for being there was to recognize the flashover before it happened, and to get out. That was it. Hours of training and intensity burned down to one thing; recognize it and get out.

Training for Vmc is the same way. Vmc can kill you, even in training. You have one mission in life for the period of time in which you train in that one, important maneuver. Recognize the signs and stop it before it starts. No need to burn in, no need to roll over, no need to lose control. You have one reason for drawing breath and for living when you teach that to a student; to teach the student to recognize the situation reduce power on the good engine(s), and to reduce the angle of attack. Your one purpose for drawing breath and for living when you teach this exercise is to provide the student the resources to recognize Vmc and to have the privilege of drawing breath himself or herself after the fact.

 

[paulsalem]

AV bug do you have a link to a video of any of this (flashover)? Sounds pretty cool, doesn't sound like somthing I'd want to be in the middle of.

Pardon my vast ignorace, but does anyone do aerobatics in a piston twin?

 

[avbug]

I don't know of any particular videos detailing flashovers, but I'm sure they're out there. There was one particular training film that was regularly shown, and I'm sure is available from the industry, though I don't have it. It detailed a several alarm fire that put four firefighters inside a wearhouse, fighting a fire in an office at the rear. They knocked it down, thought they had the fire, and were exiting the building when it flashed. One made it to a doorway, all four died where they stood, and the clothing, including all their heavy turnout fire resistant gear, was vaporized off their bodies. their SCBA packs fell on the ground, the straps holding them in place simply gone. The most striking picture fo the entire presentation was what was left of their uniforms and gear arranged just as they'd have worn it, one alongside the other, on the ground. They were fried.

Somoeone sitting alongside me asks "what's the deal with the vaporized uniforms...how can they be arranged on the ground if they're vaporized?"

Rather than come back to explain that, I'll do so now. The packs fell off their bodies, and their turnout gear was destroyed, right down to melted and burned helmets. The straps holding on their gear were completely burned up, and the tattered remains of those four firefighters were arranged in the same position on the ground for the film that they would have been had the entire corpse been there, still wearing the gear...except no corpse. The bodies weren't vaporized, but what was left of them had been trucked away...the scene was still very sobering.

Someone else loaned me a video, though I'm sure it's not on the web, detailing the use of nomex in aircraft flash fires. I found it very convincing. It's an older army video detailing an incident that took place during the vietnam conflict. The person who loaned it to me noted a certain distain I had for full personal protective equipment in a hot cockpit, and wanted to see if the video might encourage me to wear everything...it did. I do.

I know that Bob Hoover did his routine in the Shrike Commander with both engines, then one shut down, and finally both shut down. I've seen other piston acts at airshows over the years in piston twins. There is no good reason why an aerobatic act can't be done in a piston twin, any more than a piston single, but certainly greater care must be taken, and greater potential for rapid change is there in the event of an engine failure. I've seen it done in a cri-cri, and other novelty acts, as well as certificated aircraft. I even saw a man with no legs perform an airshow act in a Cessna 337 mixmaster.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

a question.. why is a multi so much more difficult to deal with in stalls, spins? My instructor never let us get anywhere near a full stall or spin in our geronimo, but never really explained why a spin was so much more dangerous in twin..? Does retarding the throttles, level wings, and forward elevator not work as well for some reason? Or does it just take a lot more altitude?

Most light twins have the tendancy to go flat in a spin. Once it does go flat, you may or may not be able to recover. And even if it is recoverable, it eats up a lot of altitude doing it.