Most Dangerous Maneuver/Situation?
Posted by bob152637485@reddit | flying | View on Reddit | 29 comments
Perhaps some aerobatic pilots can chime in, but I was trying to imagine what the most dangerous mid-air scenario would be for a plane, assuming no issues plane(aka, purely pilot error and bad maneuvering putting you in that situation).
My initial thought was a fully developed flat spin stall, but I would assume that with a functioning engine, it should be fairly doable to get enough airflow over the wings to stop the turn, and then push nose down to regain control.
My best theory now would be a fully developed stall in a tail down/nose up spin(I'm picturing a very tight, axial spin). I would think that unless your engine can produce more thrust than the weight of your plane, you would have a very difficult time maneuvering the plane back into a stable configuration.
I'm looking forward to what your thoughts are!
Dry_Statistician_688@reddit
Actually demonstrating the Approach Turn Stall during Navy Primary in the T-34C scared the hell out of me so much, 20{ years later as a CAP observer, my eye rarely comes off the airspeed indicator when in the pattern. IP’s would demonstrate it at 8,000 ft. Finding yourself upside down and 2,000 ft lower in a couple of seconds was enough for me!
bob152637485@reddit (OP)
Oof, I'm gonna have to look up a video clip of that one, sounds scary!
Dry_Statistician_688@reddit
I browsed YouTube and did see the maneuver demonstrated by my old squadron in the new T-6’s but they demonstrated identifying and preventing rather than a full “Oh Sh**” I fully stalled in the turn. I guess the Texan isn’t supposed to do it? The turbo mentor (a.k.a ‘Tormentor’) was violent and abrupt, and there you are inverted -2,000 ft.
Dry_Statistician_688@reddit
That was the purpose. There’s “discussing” it, and there’s actually being in the seat and experiencing it. Even with all the training to date, the latter made me want to pee my flightsuit knowing a few too knots light on the base to final turn could turn you into a smoking hole in the ground. It’s a tight race between this one and one IP not paying attention to another T-34 overshooting a TACAN arc and the image of the student’s helmet comm connector going by at less than 100 ft burned into my brain. I can attest if you see a dot against the sky and it’s not moving, you need to be nervous!
SSMDive@reddit
"I would think that unless your engine can produce more thrust than the weight of your plane, you would have a very difficult time maneuvering the plane back into a stable configuration."
You misunderstand spins and spin recovery... You don't use power to recover from a spin. Adding power to a spin makes the spin worse, not better. To recover from a spin you need to stop the bad yaw (power can be bad yaw) and unstall the wings.
bob152637485@reddit (OP)
I guess falling "backwards" is just hard for me to wrap my head around is all.
Prestigious-Pace7772@reddit
Do you mean "falling backwards" as in vertical with the tail pointed towards the ground and nose pointed towards the sky with the airplane moving "backwards" towards the ground? Aerobatic pilots do this all the time, it's called a tail slide. Hard to imagine when you're a new pilot, but when the airplane is falling backwards, it's not even stalled. It's just flying backwards. You can fly at zero knots and still not be stalled. Your stall speed is a function of your wing loading or G loading. At zero G, your stall speed is zero. Most instructors do a disservice to their students in teaching stalls, mainly because they don't fully understand them either, and focus way too much on airspeed.
bob152637485@reddit (OP)
This is what I meant indeed! Are you saying that it's essentially impossible to be stalled in such a configuration?
I also had another comment point out that it's not really a configuration possible for a plane to be stuck in, since the plane is balanced in such a way that it would be an unstable equilibrium, verses a nose down configuration.
Prestigious-Pace7772@reddit
First of all, the only thing impossible in aviation is to leave an airplane in the sky. I'm not an aerobatic pilot (yet) so take what I say with a grain of salt, but if you could stay in zero G (you can't) you wouldn't be able to stall it. I imagine flying this kind of maneuver it would be incredibly easy to stall, it just takes the slightest loading of the wing. With that being said, I did once go for a ride in an extra 330 and he made the hammerhead maneuver look pretty freaking easy. That's where they fly straight up to near zero airspeed and rudder/yaw over into a nose first vertical dive. He had that thing between 5-10 knots and there wasn't even a chirp of stall horn.
It's not a configuration, it's a state of energy.
As for the airplane not wanting to stay in "backwards flight" that just really depends. An aerobatic plane is designed to be neutral in pretty much every angle, so it flies upside down as well as it does right side up. It probably flies backwards much better than a trainer does. I don't even want to think about a transport category aircraft flying backwards. But, in pure matters of physics, every airplane has it's neutral balance. If you could find it, it would stay in it until you changed it. But realistically speaking, yes it would not stay in that state of flying backwards.
SSMDive@reddit
Think about this… One wing is stalled, the other wing is MORE stalled. So the less stalled wing has more lift causing it to fly up relative the the more stalled wing (causing the roll), forward (causing the yaw), and the pitch change is simply because both wings are stalled.
The more stalled wing does not fall backwards, the less stalled wing just literally tries to fly circles around it.
bob152637485@reddit (OP)
This helps. Another comment also mentioned how planes aren't naturally also to fall straight tail down, due to it being an unstable equilibrium of sorts, which also helps.
vtjohnhurt@reddit
Engine fails. Pilot raises nose to make glide slope look better/normal. Plane stall spins. Final leg after engine failure looks much steeper than you expect. The stall spin can also happen above pattern altitude when you raise the nose to make the runway/hayfield look 'reachable'.
This is an incredibly easy mistake to make before you have experience with Power Off 180s (PO 180s). If I were a presolo student, I would request PO 180 experience before my first solo. That experience is usually postponed until after PPL checkride.
bob152637485@reddit (OP)
While I do understand how various failures(engines expecially)can lead to a variety of dangerous situations, I did mention in the post to assume a fully functional plane.
vtjohnhurt@reddit
In my experience as a pilot, when a single engine airplane engine stops, it remains a fully functional aircraft. The glide slope of a dead stick airplane landing is very similar to the glide slope of a normal glider landing. Gliders open spoilers in the pattern to steepen their glide slope. If it looks like you're going to land short of the runway, you close the spoilers.
BeechDude@reddit
Low-altitude spins are one of the leading causes of fatal accidents in aviation. While base-to-final stalls get a lot of attention, statistically, the most frequent low-altitude stall/spin happens just after takeoff. Takeoff stalls occur more often but tend to be less deadly than landing stalls. Still, takeoff stalls deserve just as much attention because the risks are significant.
As for your original question, the most dangerous situation, assuming no system failures, depends on the type of aircraft. In swept-wing aircraft, exceeding critical Mach speed at high altitude can lead to Mach tuck, a dangerous nose-down pitch that’s very hard to recover from without plenty of altitude. Low-speed upsets in swept-wing aircraft are also a big concern because recovery often requires thousands of feet, so altitude is your best friend.
In straight-wing aircraft, the risks come from both high-speed and low-speed upsets. Spins in straight-wing aircraft are actually pretty easy to recover from if the pilot is trained and the airplane is working properly. The real danger is altitude. If a spin happens below 500 feet AGL, even a perfect recovery probably won’t leave enough time to avoid a crash.
Spins are often misunderstood as being hard to recover from, but that’s mostly a myth perpetuated by Hollywood and general confusion about stalls and spins. Fatalities from stall/spin accidents are usually because of low altitude and lack of training. Flat spins, for example, are rare and don’t happen on their own. They’re typically caused by spinning with high engine power, which flattens the spin by raising the nose. The real danger of flat spins (and any spin) is running out of altitude before recovery. Reducing power is the key to getting out of a flat spin.
A tail-low spin doesn’t really happen naturally either. Planes are like lawn darts—they naturally want to fall nose-first. If you throw a dart backward, it might tumble for a second, but it’ll eventually stabilize nose-down. Airplanes behave the same way. Airshow maneuvers like tail slides or tail-low hovers might look like tail-low spins, but they’re actually controlled balancing acts by the pilot. The moment those balancing inputs stop, the plane will pitch nose-down like it’s supposed to.
Another dangerous situation is the graveyard spiral. If the bank angle exceeds about 30 degrees, the plane’s natural over-banking tendency can make the bank keep steepening. Without corrective input, the nose drops as the vertical lift decreases, causing airspeed to climb and the spiral to tighten. This cycle continues until the plane either hits the ground or exceeds structural limits. Unlike spins, spirals won’t recover on their own. Most light aircraft will naturally recover from a spin if you release the controls and reduce power, but a spiral requires the pilot to step in and stop it.
Unexpected weather encounters are another thing worth mentioning. Icing or storms can cause major problems, but usually it’s the in-flight upset caused by the weather that leads to an accident. A common example is a VFR pilot flying into IMC. Disorientation sets in, proper bank and attitude aren’t maintained, and the plane enters an over-banking condition. The spiral begins, and the cycle I described earlier takes over. Sometimes, after losing a lot of altitude, the plane exits the clouds, the pilot sees the ground, and they yank the wings level. By then, the airspeed is so high that the sudden change in lift vector from horizontal (in the spiral) to vertical puts a massive aerodynamic load on the plane. This often causes an in-flight breakup—and I’m not talking about your girlfriend.
This is a great topic, and I might actually make a stand-alone post about in-flight upsets and proper recovery techniques. Go out and get some UPRT, and you’ll understand these scenarios a lot better.
bob152637485@reddit (OP)
FANTASTIC writeup! No follow questions, as you explained everything very well. Thank you!
vtjohnhurt@reddit
Your description makes 30+ degree banks sound scary. True that many aircraft require high wing aileron and back pressure to prevent overbanking, but that's a fundamental stick and rudder skill, and not something to be apprehensive about.
An LS-8 glider will fly in a stable steep bank without any control inputs. A friend eats his sandwich two-handed while he's circling in a thermal. It's still possible for a gust or errant control input to put you into a spiral dive, but the POH recovery procedure is to apply high wing aileron to level the wings, then up elevator to return to level flight. Not rocket science. An unrecovered spiral dive will be fatal, but they're hard to enter and easy to exit.
BeechDude@reddit
Good point. My intention wasn’t to make pilots apprehensive about banking over 30 degrees, but rather to highlight that the positive dynamic stability of most GA airplanes only works up to about 30 degrees. Beyond that, without enough elevator input, an over-banking tendency can develop.
I completely agree that pilots shouldn’t be afraid of 30- or 45-degree banks. My aim is simply to remind folks that failing to apply the proper amount of back pressure in those situations can lead to an over-banking spiral. I encourage everyone to go up with a knowledgeable instructor who can demonstrate this in the plane. It’s often eye-opening to see how quickly you could find yourself in a spiral if you’re not actively managing the controls.
vtjohnhurt@reddit
All good. I just mentioned it because so many students get freaked out by steep banks.
nodajinho@reddit
great write up
XeroG@reddit
Botched VMC demo in a light twin
Phillimac16@reddit
Base to final accelerated stall most common, but a flat spin is probably the most difficult if not impossible to recover from.
SSMDive@reddit
A flat spin is 1. Not a spin that happens often by itself, you put it there. 2. In planes that are allowed to spin, not that difficult to recover from a flat spin... Just take out the opposite aileron and pull all power.
Top Gun 1 made it seem like a flat spin was common and somehow super deadly... And it didn't help that Art Scholl died filming the movie when he was in a Pitts shooting a spin and it is believed the camera moved shifting the CG too far AFT. A Pitts will easily recover from a flat spin as will most aircraft.
bob152637485@reddit (OP)
More so than my second scenario I put out there?
odinsen251a@reddit
Statistically, base to final in an ASEL with 175 hours TT.
PullTheGreenRing@reddit
I’d guess statistically overshooting and over banking the base to final turn, resulting in a spin. Too low to recover from if it develops at all.
bob152637485@reddit (OP)
Ah, good point, I didn't even think about all the low altitude stuff, which in hindsight is rather silly.
22Planeguy@reddit
Yup, that'd be my guess too. Accelerated stall/spin on an overshoot. Have a split second to react.
rFlyingTower@reddit
This is a copy of the original post body for posterity:
Perhaps some aerobatic pilots can chime in, but I was trying to imagine what the most dangerous mid-air scenario would be for a plane, assuming no issues plane(aka, purely pilot error and bad maneuvering putting you in that situation).
My initial thought was a fully developed flat spin stall, but I would assume that with a functioning engine, it should be fairly doable to get enough airflow over the wings to stop the turn, and then push nose down to regain control.
My best theory now would be a fully developed stall in a tail down/nose up spin(I'm picturing a very tight, axial spin). I would think that unless your engine can produce more thrust than the weight of your plane, you would have a very difficult time maneuvering the plane back into a stable configuration.
I'm looking forward to what your thoughts are!
Please downvote this comment until it collapses.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. If you have any questions, please contact the mods of this subreddit.