orvil

For those of you who might be interested, you should take a look at the UAL thread. "ALPA Taking Sides"

Looks like one of our own's consulting business might be in a little trouble. He might have to go back to flying the line full time.



http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ua...ing-sides.html

Check Essential

Sorry if I sounded argumentative Carl. I respect your test experience and I understand the maneuver you're describing. It's certainly a better option than doing nothing.

Just to continue the academic discussion though --
I disagree a little bit with "the fact that we're talking about a wide body has no relevance". Certainly you would agree a 747 is not a T-38. The fundamentals of aerodynamics and physics may be constant for all aircraft but there are huge differences in roll rate and thrust to weight ratio, etc.
Executing that procedure in a 750,000 lb. airplane at 500 feet with the gear and flaps out just doesn't seem likely.

At any rate, I agree that it would all depend on how far the CG shifted. The video from Bagram looks like the event was so bad that the airplane went nearly vertical and then pretty much fell out of the sky. Whatever broke on that jet, it left them with basically no control effectiveness at all. Those poor guys were just along for the ride.

Check Essential

That's an unnecessary cheap shot. Carl is putting out good info for discussion.
I don't see where he has ever claimed to be "the man" or superior to anyone else.

scambo1

While I find it a little distasteful for a "union guy" to get an ALPA consulting gig while still in the employ of an airline, IMO, any bias or liability falls squarely on his shoulders - assuming his "consulting business" is properly set up. Also, the DPA writer raises some valid questions at the end of his article.

I do find it interesting that the DPA writer posted this in the UCAL thread. This board doesn't really have teeth. The letter might have been more appropriately written to ALPA, NLRB, or the arbitrators. Is it possible that his consultation is as effective as (one guy's) opinion in the late stages of the AA bankruptcy?

iaflyer

I would expect that the UAL MEC was aware that individual DPA is harping about was a Delta pilot. Obviously they didn't have any concerns and hired him for his expertise.

What's DPA next concern - that ALPA members are providing support to the company Training department with reviewing FOQA data? That we provide FCRs that assist the company? I can just read it now, "ALPA members are volunteering their time to help the company when they file FCRs - this must stop now!"



DPA has devolved into a bunch of bitter people throwing **** at the wall, seeing what sticks.

TeddyKGB

It was good info and glad Carl shared it. I was only joking. Should have added a smiley face

Carl Spackler

No question it's a damn hard maneuver.

Stalling past 60 degrees bank (or any other bank angle) isn't an issue since you're not putting on any additional G's during the maneuver, thus not changing angle of attack. On the video, it looks like their altitude peaked at over 1,000 feet AGL which comports with my experience during the test. We initially peaked about 1,300 feet above the start altitude (during the ballistic phase), then lost about 800 feet at the end of the first roll reversal for a net gain of about 500 feet.

Sim training will help a little, but the vast majority of sims (both military and civilian) aren't certified past about 70 degrees of bank angle and about 40 degrees of pitch. Past these points, sims are just not realistic and they definitely don't simulate departing controlled flight correctly. IMO, there's no substitute for aircraft training with this...but it's definitely high risk.

Carl

LeineLodge

Can someone refresh me on the lineholder Greenslip trigger?

I seem to be remembering ALV or 75 hours, whichever is lower? Is that correct?

Also, I think we're allowed to use up to 5 hours of bank to reach the trigger? Still correct?

Thanks

80ktsClamp

Interesting discussion, all. It's my understanding with jet upset that in such low airspeeds the rudder needs to be used (but not aggressively, obviously) to assist with limited aileron effectiveness. While what Carl stated on the recovery is exactly what I though it would be (and what we should all come to understand about unloading the aircraft in upset recovery), I'm a bit surprised that he stated that the recovery was with no rudder input. Is the dutch roll that bad on a swept wing at that low speed with rudder input? That part goes contrary to what I've been taught (and experienced).

Of course, I'm lacking in the real world test flight experience that Carl has.

Thanks to all for their great input on this discussion!

Scoop

I always thought it was 75 hours - don't know about ALV. Yes you can definitely take up to 5 hours out of your bank to hit the threshold - I have done that.

Scoop