How not to fly an instrument approach to mins

James331 said:
Well many people would have said the same about Bob Hoover

I mean I can only imagine the hate that guy in the video would have got if instead he was doing low level aerobatics in said piston twin
Click to expand...

The difference is the line between someone who knows what they're doing and how to exercise the edges of the envelope, and one who is going there anyway.

In this case, Wagner is giving all of the information needed to show that he really doesn't know what he's doing, or else has a wanton disregard for procedures. He's shown this in other videos as well, although in this one it's clear that he's not good at what he's doing, it's also clear that he doesn't realize he's not good at what he's doing. You can see that he's not only not stabilized, but he's not making corrections to try to get stabilized. This is especially obvious when he zooms in on the G600, and it shows everything you need to see right there.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Gee....so the whole dead foot thingy was wrong? :confused:
Click to expand...
I stopped watching when he confirmed the dead foot thingy by checking the fuel flow and MP gauges. That only showed a difference because the engine HAD NOT FAILED but merely had the throttle closed. If the engine had failed for real (short of seizing up entirely) that wouldn't have told him a thing. I stopped watching at that point.
 
I wonder if people compliment him on the accuracy of his instruments?
 
flyingron said:
I stopped watching when he confirmed the dead foot thingy by checking the fuel flow and MP gauges. That only showed a difference because the engine HAD NOT FAILED but merely had the throttle closed. If the engine had failed for real (short of seizing up entirely) that wouldn't have told him a thing. I stopped watching at that point.
Click to expand...

That depends on the reason for the failure and the specific engine. If you have a turbocharged engine and it fails, MP will go from boosted to ambient. This can also end up being a wastegate failure going to full open, so you're not actually failed just part power. Fuel flow will go down with this as well. On a naturally aspirated engine, no difference in either.

UNLESS the fuel pump fails, in which case you will see the fuel flow go down.
 
Looks inexperienced. That approach should have been broken off long before.

all the gee-whiz equipment is pretty neat, but if you can't follow basic instrument flying, it doesn't do you any good. this is why the FAA drug their feet for so long on synthetic vision because they knew people would watch that instead of their instruments.

I hope this guy does a better job when practicing single-engine, because if not, I suspect he will be the next chapter in, "twins are more dangerous than singles" book.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
mwagg737 said:
Looks inexperienced. That approach should have been broken off long before.

all the gee-whiz equipment is pretty neat, but if you can't follow basic instrument flying, it doesn't do you any good. this is why the FAA drug their feet for so long on synthetic vision because they knew people would watch that instead of their instruments.

I hope this guy does a better job when practicing single-engine, because if not, I suspect he will be the next chapter in, "twins are more dangerous than singles" book.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
FAA says he's been a commercial pilot since 06. I sure wouldn't get in that airplane...
 
ktup-flyer said:
FAA says he's been a commercial pilot since 06. I sure wouldn't get in that airplane...
Click to expand...
Might be much earlier. "Date of issue" is not the date the commercial certificate was first received. It's the date the last piece of plastic was created. For example, my "date of issue" is 3/25/2013 after I moved and changed my address. My commercial checkride was 18 years earlier.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Might be much earlier. "Date of issue" is not the date the commercial certificate was first received. It's the date the last piece of plastic was created. For example, my "date of issue" is 3/25/2013 after I moved and changed my address. My commercial checkride was 18 years earlier.
Click to expand...
Giving him the benefit of the doubt lol....not that that really improves anything. You've been a CP longer than I've been alive :eek:
 
mwagg737 said:
Looks inexperienced. That approach should have been broken off long before.

all the gee-whiz equipment is pretty neat, but if you can't follow basic instrument flying, it doesn't do you any good. this is why the FAA drug their feet for so long on synthetic vision because they knew people would watch that instead of their instruments.

I hope this guy does a better job when practicing single-engine, because if not, I suspect he will be the next chapter in, "twins are more dangerous than singles" book.
Click to expand...

All the gee-whiz gadgets are useful safety enhancers IF you use them properly. I can fly steam gauges just fine, but that doesn't change the fact that I want glass in the MU-2 and that's on the roadmap.

He had another video showing his OEI skills... or lack thereof. It was from a few years ago in what I think was an old 320.

ktup-flyer said:
I sure wouldn't get in that airplane...
Click to expand...

Neither would I...
 
That playback on GP he showed...is that a function of GP, or just some app that records his screen? I would like to do the same (the playback, not the flying). Suggestions?
 
Dive and drive baby!!!

In all seriousness, good thing he was in a draggy twin. diving at the runway like that in a Mooney would have you floating to the end of the runway and having to go missed anyway.
 
Here's his turn to final from his latest video, so I'd say it's about par for the course.
 

Attachments

  • FinalTurn.jpg
    FinalTurn.jpg
    79.3 KB · Views: 128
Bill Jennings said:
Dive and drive baby!!!

In all seriousness, good thing he was in a draggy twin. diving at the runway like that in a Mooney would have you floating to the end of the runway and having to go missed anyway.
Click to expand...

Problem with dive and drive in this case is it was an LPV approach, not an LNAV only.

He's lucky it was in a 414. He wouldn't have been able to land a 310 like that... even a 340 I think is questionable. The 400 series is significantly draggier, especially the tip tank ones.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Controllers correct me if I'm wrong, but Part 91 you're allowed to try the approach. This isn't a bad thing. Sometimes the AWOS/ASOS/ATIS is wrong. It's also good practice to shoot approaches to a missed. For example, on Friday I was going to CXO and it was reporting 1/8SM FG VV002. Approach knew I was going to go missed, I knew I was going to go missed. Tower maybe wasn't sure. But the reason I did the approach wasn't because I thought I would get in, it was because I wanted the practice of doing a real ILS to missed. It was a good experience.

The decision making is in understanding when you likely won't get in, and understanding that's fine, you go somewhere else.
Click to expand...
I know he can try. But I find it funny that even the inexperienced passenger was voicing concerns about it in general.
 
benyflyguy said:
I know he can try. But I find it funny that even the inexperienced passenger was voicing concerns about it in general.
Click to expand...

Yeah, who knows. Maybe Jerry did things to make the passenger uncomfortable already.

Regardless, the point I was making was there can be legitimate reasons for shooting an approach that's at or below mins, especially knowing you won't get in. I think it's a fantastic training exercise if handled properly. The catch is handling it properly, which he didn't.
 
PPC1052 said:
Meh. Check this one out.

Click to expand...
OMG. Why make a 180 low slow with flaps out like that? You stall a wing and you are a twisting metal fireball.
What’s crazy is he seems to pull this off with relative ease.
What about that necessitated that kind of landing?!?
I get why ppl think he is all Boss as this crap can really impress someone who has never held a yoke as PIC. I makes me shutter.

When he upgrades to a turbine twin he’ll be better right?!! :eek:o_O
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Yeah, who knows. Maybe Jerry did things to make the passenger uncomfortable already.

Regardless, the point I was making was there can be legitimate reasons for shooting an approach that's at or below mins, especially knowing you won't get in. I think it's a fantastic training exercise if handled properly. The catch is handling it properly, which he didn't.
Click to expand...
That part I get. For training. In my IFR training we did purposely goto fields that were socked in with fog. Just to get the feeling of starting the approach VMC and descending into the thick of it..missing and doing the work and transition from approach to missed all in IMC. Great experience.
Plus I imagine it would work in future to log practice approaches for proficiency/currency.
 
benyflyguy said:
OMG. Why make a 180 low slow with flaps out like that? You stall a wing and you are a twisting metal fireball.
What’s crazy is he seems to pull this off with relative ease.
What about that necessitated that kind of landing?!?
I get why ppl think he is all Boss as this crap can really impress someone who has never held a yoke as PIC. I makes me shutter.

When he upgrades to a turbine twin he’ll be better right?!! :eek:o_O
Click to expand...

Remember that Twin Cessnas are exceptionally easy and forgiving planes to fly.

I hope he doesn’t contemplate an MU-2.
 
Last edited:
Watching that made me pucker and I'm not even in the plane...
 
Eric Stoltz said:
I'll just leave this here...
Click to expand...

That’s not even one of his good screen shots. Prior to Jerry deleting his YT vids, he had flights with 100 ft over neighborhoods and 300 ft on downtown SF Bay.
 
So with all the “air Wagner” videos and channel does he get paid from YT at all like for ads or anything like that??
 
benyflyguy said:
So with all the “air Wagner” videos and channel does he get paid from YT at all like for ads or anything like that??
Click to expand...

I thought he would, but apparently his videos are not monetized.

When he augers in, maybe someone puts it on pay per view.
 
benyflyguy said:
Appears fully deflected as well up until break out. Think he might be getting fixated on the synthetic vision???
Click to expand...

His syn vis had a FPM. Center the course, keep the FPM painted over the runway and the needles should have remained frozen. Looks like he did it in the wrong order (put the FPM over the airport before centering the course).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top