“Go around wasn’t an option”

Discussion in 'Hangar Flying' started by davidb, Nov 6, 2018.

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

  1. Nov 8, 2018 #41

    davidb

    davidb

    davidb

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,663
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    Vacaville, CA
    Agreed but a bad approach, a bad landing, and a failure to go around are all a result of bad piloting. A go around decision is good piloting in that one realizes it’s time to stop the bad stuff before it gets worse. Until we achieve perfection it’s best we have a go around option. Is that any different than a glider pilot having an alternate landing area should he misjudge something? Even though you probably strive to fly with the utmost precision throughout your flight, you probably don’t put yourself in a position where one minor miscalculation would seal your fate to an unsuitable crash site.
     
    MadRocketScientist likes this.
  2. Nov 8, 2018 #42

    davidb

    davidb

    davidb

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,663
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    Vacaville, CA
  3. Nov 8, 2018 #43

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,538
    Likes Received:
    6,311
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Could be poor training, but I have known some pilots who could perform quite well per their training, but could not react to a situation that wasn’t exactly like the training scenario. Some people just aren’t meant to be pilots.


    BJC
     
  4. Nov 8, 2018 #44

    davidb

    davidb

    davidb

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,663
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    Vacaville, CA
    What’s that training report quote? Something like, “there aren’t enough bananas on the boat to train this monkey to fly.”
     
  5. Nov 8, 2018 #45

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    12,037
    Likes Received:
    2,347
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
    There may have been some risk to a go around in her situation. If your airplane suddenly came into view in front of her she may not have wanted to apply full throttle and retract flaps and retrim and increase speed and risk over-running you or sinking on top of you. An evasive maneuver to the side could result in stall also. The Cessna 150 manual describes a go-around (Balked landing) as a critical situation where "undivided attention to the airplane is required". It was her call at that instant.
     
  6. Nov 8, 2018 #46

    davidb

    davidb

    davidb

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,663
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    Vacaville, CA
    Without being in her airplane and seeing things from her perspective, I’ll keep an open mind to your thoughts. I just imagine that at the point of visual acquisition we were several hundred feet agl and must have had a few hundred feet nose to tail separation. Were I the trailing aircraft at that point, I would have gently maneuvered to the side of the lead aircraft’s flight path being sure to keep him in sight. While doing that I would be adding power to arrest my descent rate while maintaining approach speed. Once satisfied I was well clear to the side and safe to overtake, I would commence with the full power go around to include raising the flaps gradually and accelerating to best climb speed. We practice slow flight in the landing configuration. This is no different. Perhaps I’m more proficient than the average pilot, but I don’t see this as challenging. I do have 60 hours in 150/2s but most of that was 40 years ago. I’m fairly certain I could get that thing to climb with 40 flaps and an O320. What I wouldn’t do is try to land close behind another airplane especially if I didn’t know how slow it could fly or how quickly it could stop.
     
  7. Nov 8, 2018 #47

    pictsidhe

    pictsidhe

    pictsidhe

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2014
    Messages:
    6,857
    Likes Received:
    1,843
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Yes, the don't know how slow the lead aircraft will go is the bit that really bothers me. If it was a STOL that suddenly dropped flaps and slowed to 20mph, she could have been in real trouble. A lot of STOLs look like boring high wings from behind. Landing close also puts you at risk from vortices.
     
    davidb likes this.
  8. Nov 8, 2018 #48

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,538
    Likes Received:
    6,311
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Having done quite a bit of formation flying in my A152 (left wing) with a C120 (lead) and a PA-18 (right wing) I can testify that the deceleration rate of those airplanes is much higher than the 152. That difference is the greatest risk, especially when landing.


    BJC
     
    davidb likes this.
  9. Nov 8, 2018 #49

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    12,037
    Likes Received:
    2,347
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
    So the concern was how close she was in trail? I guess you didn't know how close she was but you said you landed long so I imagine she was comfortable landing in the space available. I have seen C-150 dragged in with full flaps and stopped before the numbers in Alaska, and turn off the runway. She may have landed on the numbers and then added power to get to the next turnoff so the guy behind her can get down. That's what I did at my busy airport.
    I don't know if there are any separation rules. Or rules banning two on the runway at once. They do it at Airventure.
     
  10. Nov 8, 2018 #50

    davidb

    davidb

    davidb

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,663
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    Vacaville, CA
    Right, I don’t know how close she was on approach or landing. I just know she was within 100 feet of me when I turned off. We both took the turn-off 2000 feet down. I was flying 60 knots, touched 500 feet down and kept my speed up until the turn-off. I could have flown 45 knots and stopped 300 feet from the threshold. Your supposition of what she may have done would be impossible since she basically joined with me at the turn-off and I got there quickly.

    As for the regulations, nothing prohibits one from sharing the runway at an uncontrolled field and the prohibition to close proximity is just not so close so as to present a collision hazard. That last one is subjective and the subject of this thread.

    Add: If go around wasn’t an option at 400 feet agl, what would she do at 10 feet agl with an airplane stopped 300 feet in front of her?
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2018
  11. Nov 8, 2018 #51

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,538
    Likes Received:
    6,311
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    As to regulations, one that possibly might apply:
    but, as you said, it is very subjective.

    A good face to face discussion with the other pilot might be the best action.


    BJC
     
  12. Nov 8, 2018 #52

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    12,037
    Likes Received:
    2,347
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
    Ok, I read post 1 again. She admitted braking hard to avoid hitting you. So the separation distance was tight but not impossible. The C-150 manual lists 60mph approach speed with 40°flaps. And a ground roll of 445 feet at standard sea level. Since you landed 500 feet long she should have had plenty runway if she was aiming for the threshold.
    But her inability to touchdown on the threshold required heavy braking.

    Sure, in hindsight a go-around is often best choice if done in time. But at some point it might be best to just land and not stall. It's a tough call without the details.
     
  13. Nov 9, 2018 #53

    davidb

    davidb

    davidb

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,663
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    Vacaville, CA
    With regard to avoiding a collision, I agree that at some late decision point, the best action might be to land and brake hard with a backup option of swerving into the grass. FTR, even a student pilot should be able to perform a go around without stalling before being allowed to solo.
     
    bmcj likes this.
  14. Nov 9, 2018 #54

    Voidhawk9

    Voidhawk9

    Voidhawk9

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2012
    Messages:
    250
    Likes Received:
    138
    Location:
    Timaru, NZ
    It isn't challenging. I got cut-off by a clueless retired ATP on base to final during my third solo, and had no issue dealing with the situation.
    In this case there is a severe lack of skill and/or knowledge, IMHO. That pilot made an undesirable situation into a dangrous one.
     
    pictsidhe, BoKu and davidb like this.
  15. Nov 9, 2018 #55

    davidb

    davidb

    davidb

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,663
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    Vacaville, CA
    Haha, that’s probably what she is telling her friends.
     
    pictsidhe, Tiger Tim, bmcj and 3 others like this.
  16. Nov 10, 2018 #56

    mcrae0104

    mcrae0104

    mcrae0104

    Armchair Mafia Conspirator HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,986
    Likes Received:
    1,986
    Location:
    BDU, BJC
    This discussion has gone on far too long without this inspiring diddy:

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 20, 2019
  17. Nov 18, 2018 #57

    Rockiedog2

    Rockiedog2

    Rockiedog2

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2012
    Messages:
    2,280
    Likes Received:
    1,604
    from OP
    >>>Recently had a C152 pilot claim she couldn’t go around because she was at flaps 40 and too low. Conditions were sea level, no terrain, no obstacles. Just wondering why someone would think such a thing?

    she didn't say the plane couldn't go around she said SHE couldn't go around. I 'spect she was right. Good pilots know their limitations, right?
    Maybe her IP knew it too and taught her. Squirrel...

    Maybe somebody said it...unless it's changed (and I doubt it as it's been that way since I started in the 60s) there's only one regulation concerning landing at uncontrolled airports and that's when approaching to land make all turns to the L unless designated otherwise. Everything else is merely recommended. AIM type stuff not FAR.

    It was mentioned that the 150 would stop prior to the numbers if flown "creatively". That's right. 40 F, 45 IAS, tell student to brace on the glare shield, touch down on the end with the brakes locked, add power to reach the numbers. Not recommended; zero margin.
    Pore airplane.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2018
    bmcj likes this.
  18. Nov 19, 2018 #58

    Monty

    Monty

    Monty

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    478
    Location:
    Fayetteville, AR / USA
    Of all the most cringe-worthy landings on that video....forget elevator and throttle....watch the rudder.......nothing....nada....zilch.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 20, 2019

Share This Page

arrow_white