Unusual Recoveries, II

We compared the Neutral Recovery Controls and the Hands-Off methods of spin recovery to the tried-and-true NASA Standard recommendations in Part I of this series (June 2007). Well now look at recovery strategies for airplane upsets specifically involving excessive angles of bank. Since leading supporters of Neutral Recovery Controls steadfastly maintain the method works in any attitude and in any airplane, well compare this strategy as well as the instinctive Split-S reaction (i.e., "Just pull, baby!") to a more traditional roll recovery as embodied in the Power-Push-Roll procedure.

Key Takeaways:

• The article compared "Neutral Recovery Controls" and "Split-S" methods against the traditional "Power-Push-Roll" technique for airplane upsets involving excessive bank across three simulated scenarios.
• The traditional "Power-Push-Roll" method consistently outperformed the alternatives, achieving safer and quicker recoveries with significantly less altitude loss and avoiding dangerous conditions like accelerated stalls or physiological effects.
• "Neutral Recovery Controls" and "Split-S" frequently failed to recover the aircraft, exacerbated the upset, or resulted in significant altitude loss, high G-loads, and stall buffeting, proving potentially more dangerous.
• The findings reinforce the importance of traditional upset recovery principles for both light and transport category aircraft, emphasizing the critical need for hands-on, scenario-based training to counter instincts and ensure proper recovery.

Key takeaways sponsored by Aviator Pro | Start Your Training ->

See a mistake? Contact us.