Peter wrote:
All at once.
What was the outcome? I hope not a mayday radio call 
Arne wrote:
But again it’s one thing to know the engine idling is coming and having a real engine failure and the drag of a stopped prop
The drag of a stopped prop is lower than the drag of a windmilling prop, so you’ll be better off if the prop stops.
Arne wrote:
As in the video, the surprising part is how steep a turn you need to do, managing your speed and flaps, and beware of stall.
This research report has been referred to earlier in this thread, but it was several years ago. It concludes that the optimum bank angle is 45° and the speed in the turn just over stall.
How practiced you are in landing directly from a tight turn also would affect outcome. Some pilots may always have been stabilised at 300’ before landing, even with low-inertia aircraft.
Airborne_Again wrote:
It concludes that the optimum bank angle is 45° and the speed in the turn just over stall.
Yes, and the optimum way to kill yourself is a speed in the turn just below the stall.
Airborne_Again wrote:
It concludes that the optimum bank angle is 45° and the speed in the turn just over stall.
Yes, somewhere around 45 degres gives you minmun hight loss for 360 turns with speed being min sink speed but most people will undershoot/overshoot with regards to stall or min sink…
By the way you dont stall in spirling 45 turn as you do in 45 level turns…
By the way you dont stall in spirling 45 turn as you do in 45 level turns…
It’s a bit more subtle… To protect yourself from stalling by descending, the VS has to increase continually. A constant VS will still be 1G on the wings. So if you need to make a tight turn (e.g. to avoid a hill, or turning in a canyon), and you have height to spare, you unload the wings during the turn, but this needs a continually increasing VS (a constant downward acceleration). It is a very good maneuver to understand and practice.
Peter wrote:
It is a very good maneuver to understand and practice.
It is difficult to do, because we never get trained to keep 1G on the wing while getting in and getting out of manoeuvres (neither bank or speed are constant but they relate to a fixed 1G wing loading) and most of PPL theory on PoF subjects, even “accelerated turns”, are studied on constant ASI
In practice, you need a lot of aileron/elevator timing and coordination (you roll-bank//pitch-down//roll-level//pitch-up) to avoid getting into spiral dives or accelerated stalls, personally given the difficulty I have coordinating ailerons with other controls I will rather go for pitch-down//roll-bank//roll-level//pitch-up…
I disagree, ubloading the wings when approaching a stall is practiced all the time, it is the first item in the standard stall recovery, we just rarely do it without power.
And doing it in a turn widens the radius and decreases the rate of turn. A 45 degree turn flown at 1 g is wider than at 1.4 g and accelerates you downwards quite a bit.
They are taught and practiced in the RAF Grob 115E for instructors only. Normal best glide is 75kts, but for a turn back 80kts is immediately selected and max 45 degree angle of bank used. RPM Low is also selected straight away. The turn is made into any crosswind. Approx 350ft will be lost in a 180 turn and you need to start levelling the wings at 200ft to complete the last 100ft wings level – aircraft integrity will not survive a high rate banked touchdown. Starting anything less than 500ft will be unsuccessful and that’s pre briefed, with a startle factor you are looking at 700ft safe starting point.
The manoeuvre is only really any use when the landing area ahead is dangerous as others have said, and it is just to get back to the safer airfield surface area not specifically the reciprocal runway.
Countless accidents have happened in trainingand for real because a significantly high rate of descent can quickly develop in the turn which cannot be arrested in time to climb away or safely land for real.
http://www.ukserials.com/pdflosses/maas_19990305_xx666.pdf
[ local copy ]
