Lazy 8s --- Ground Reference Maneuver or Not?

[davidgfern]

I spent about 2 hours this weekend with my CFI working on commercial maneuvers, and spent some time working on Lazy-8s (the bane of my existence, at least right now!). My CFI is having me use a road as a reference line about which to do the maneuver, however I am having difficulty with this method as it requires looking down at several points throughout the maneuver. I can understand why he states using a road as a reference line, but is the maneuver easier to perform by simply using a reference "point at infinity" on the horizon (like a mountain peak) and having the reference be when the wings are pointed right at the reference point?

 

[Bill Watson]

I spent about 2 hours this weekend with my CFI working on commercial maneuvers, and spent some time working on Lazy-8s (the bane of my existence, at least right now!). My CFI is having me use a road as a reference line about which to do the maneuver, however I am having difficulty with this method as it requires looking down at several points throughout the maneuver. I can understand why he states using a road as a reference line, but is the maneuver easier to perform by simply using a reference "point at infinity" on the horizon (like a mountain peak) and having the reference be when the wings are pointed right at the reference point?

I’m afraid you end up losing the wind drift effects. ‘But I’m not a CFI.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[davidgfern]

I’m afraid you end up losing the wind drift effects. ‘But I’m not a CFI.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That's the essence of my question ----- there is nothing in any description of a Lazy-8 that talks about wind drift. If the maneuver is performed with reference to a line on the ground, if there is a crosswind component present the maneuver will not be symmetric about that reference line, and the loops of the 8 done on the upwind side will always be smaller than the loops on the downwind side.

 

[davidgfern]

Here is the ACS discussion on Lazy-8s: There is no discussion of performing the maneuver with respect to a reference line on the ground.....

 

[midwestpa24]

Lazy 8s are not a ground reference maneuver from the standpoint you are not trying fly a path in reference to anything on the ground. You should however pick visual reference points at 45, 90, 135, and 180 degrees through the maneuver so you know when the point of steepest bank and pitch are expected.

 

[CC268]

You absolutely need to watch this video on Lazy 8s. Let the airplane do the work - use overbanking tendency to your advantage. It is actually one of the easier maneuvers. You'll find if you follow this video, the aircraft will practically fly the maneuver itself.

 

[davidgfern]

You absolutely need to watch this video on Lazy 8s. Let the airplane do the work - use overbanking tendency to your advantage. It is actually one of the easier maneuvers. You'll find if you follow this video, the aircraft will practically fly the maneuver itself.

Yes ---- I've watched this video and actually tried it in my Cessna 182. What I have found is that the 182 needs to be "actively managed" in a far more aggressive manner than does the svelte and petite 152 in the video. The overbanking tendency of the plane is much stronger on one side than the other, requiring a bit of opposite aileron. In addition, the nose has to be held down somewhat aggressively approaching the 135 degree point.

 

[AggieMike88]

I was just about to post that same video...

Something else that is helping me are these books. I picked them both up for my library so no matter which I fly or teach in, I can remind myself of the particulars.

Each photo is hyperlinked to the ASA webpage.

 

[davidgfern]

Lazy 8s are not a ground reference maneuver from the standpoint you are not trying fly a path in reference to anything on the ground. You should however pick visual reference points at 45, 90, 135, and 180 degrees through the maneuver so you know when the point of steepest bank and pitch are expected.

This is my thought on the maneuver as well ---- I just sent an email to my CFI discussing this issue. By attempting to fly the maneuver with a reference line on the ground AND the 45, 90, and 135 degree points on the horizon, you have "over-constrained" the problem ---- if there is any crosswind component present, you will NEVER be able to coordinate reaching the 0 and 180 degree points of the maneuver and be over the ground reference line.

 

[CC268]

Yes ---- I've watched this video and actually tried it in my Cessna 182. What I have found is that the 182 needs to be "actively managed" in a far more aggressive manner than does the svelte and petite 152 in the video. The overbanking tendency of the plane is much stronger on one side than the other, requiring a bit of opposite aileron. In addition, the nose has to be held down somewhat aggressively approaching the 135 degree point.

Ahh your in a 182. Okay...well it worked very nicely in my Cherokee and in the 172s.

 

[davidgfern]

Ahh your in a 182. Okay...well it worked very nicely in my Cherokee and in the 172s.

Another thing about my 182 is its idiosyncratic behavior ----- it was in an accident many years ago and had a wing replaced, so it needs some left rudder input to fly straight in level flight. In slow flight the airplane actually likes to go to the right instead of the left.......

 

[midwestpa24]

This is my thought on the maneuver as well ---- I just sent an email to my CFI discussing this issue. By attempting to fly the maneuver with a reference line on the ground AND the 45, 90, and 135 degree points on the horizon, you have "over-constrained" the problem ---- if there is any crosswind component present, you will NEVER be able to coordinate reaching the 0 and 180 degree points of the maneuver and be over the ground reference line.

Your position over a reference point, and wind correction, have nothing to do with lazy 8s. The real goal of lazy 8s is to be able to smoothly manipulate the controls in all 3 axis simultaneously while managing energy to end up at the entry altitude at the 180 degree point. The only value in visual reference points during the maneuver is to be able to visually locate the before mentioned points through the maneuver.

 

[davidgfern]

Your position over a reference point, and wind correction, have nothing to do with lazy 8s. The real goal of lazy 8s is to be able to smoothly manipulate the controls in all 3 axis simultaneously while managing energy to end up at the entry altitude at the 180 degree point. The only value in visual reference points during the maneuver is to be able to visually locate the before mentioned points through the maneuver.

Thanks for your input on this ---- I agree with you!

 

[dmspilot]

I spent about 2 hours this weekend with my CFI working on commercial maneuvers, and spent some time working on Lazy-8s (the bane of my existence, at least right now!). My CFI is having me use a road as a reference line about which to do the maneuver, however I am having difficulty with this method as it requires looking down at several points throughout the maneuver. I can understand why he states using a road as a reference line, but is the maneuver easier to perform by simply using a reference "point at infinity" on the horizon (like a mountain peak) and having the reference be when the wings are pointed right at the reference point?

You are correct. You should start and end the maneuver with a wingtip on a selected reference point as distant as possible, preferably the infinity point. Same with chandelles. These two maneuvers are definitely not ground reference maneuvers, you could in theory do them under the hood.

 

[aftCG]

The idea is to choose a reference line that is parallel to the direction of the wind and use it to your advantage to keep symmetry.

You're taking a commercial check ride which is intended to demonstrate your mastery of the aircraft.
So demonstrate that you can judge the effects of wind.

Not trying to beat you up . The lousy 8 was elusive for me too. The reason it is so unnatural is because it is yet another example of a cool manuever that has been watered down by the friendly aviation association.

The manuever we train for and demonstrate can hardly be described as maximum performance and certainly doesn't need to be highlighted in the "approved acrobatics" section.

Done old school it is more like back to back crop duster turns.

 

[davidgfern]

The idea is to choose a reference line that is parallel to the direction of the wind and use it to your advantage to keep symmetry.

You're taking a commercial check ride which is intended to demonstrate your mastery of the aircraft.
So demonstrate that you can judge the effects of wind.

Not trying to beat you up . The lousy 8 was elusive for me too. The reason it is so unnatural is because it is yet another example of a cool manuever that has been watered down by the friendly aviation association.

The manuever we train for and demonstrate can hardly be described as maximum performance and certainly doesn't need to be highlighted in the "approved acrobatics" section.

Done old school it is more like back to back crop duster turns.

I get that ---- however the ACS says nothing about the loops being symmetric ---- in direct contrast to the "S-turns across a road" maneuver that is required for the PPL. Doing a Lazy-8 with its axis aligned with the wind is a way to make the ground track symmetric about the reference line, however the ACS does not state that as a requirement.

 

[davidgfern]

The only "true" ground reference maneuver for the CPL checkride is Pylon-8s (and you could also argue that Steep spirals is also a ground reference maneuver). The definitive test to determine if a maneuver is a ground reference maneuver or not is if the maneuver requires looking at the ground in order to complete it correctly. In principle, neither the chandelle nor the Lazy-8 meet this criterion ---- they could both be performed solely by reference to instruments.

 

[Dr. O]

If your ship is out of rig the lazy 8 is going to be really tough to keep smooth. Why make your life unnecessarily hard?
Find a mechanic who understands how to rig an airframe (getting to be hens teeth anymore)
The more power you have the more upsetting that power is. Lazy 8 in a 150 or a J3 is more intuitive than in an Extra 400.

 

[mondtster]

Let’s start with the basics. What section of the ACS is the lazy 8 in? It ain’t in the ground reference section, therefore it is not a ground reference maneuver.

 

[Kritchlow]

Never could do a lazy 8. That said, always understood it to be an “air” maneuver, not ground reference. Way, way back in the day I recall using the tick marks in the DG as my references.

 

[texasclouds]

Put some canards on that 182 with a Peterson Conversion. You can thank me later.

 

[davidgfern]

If your ship is out of rig the lazy 8 is going to be really tough to keep smooth. Why make your life unnecessarily hard?
Find a mechanic who understands how to rig an airframe (getting to be hens teeth anymore)
The more power you have the more upsetting that power is. Lazy 8 in a 150 or a J3 is more intuitive than in an Extra 400.

I appreciate your passion, however your response is equivalent to me asking you for the time of day, and you giving me instructions on how to build a watch.

 

[bluesideup]

Hi.
L-8 is a ground reference maneuver only to the extent that you have to have a ground reference, typically on you wing tip. The things to keep in mind is that at 90 deg/ 30 deg bank your nose should slice to the horizon, you are not in a pitch up attitude, your highest/ lowest pitch are at 45, 135, most people are having a difficult time with that point.
Your CFI may be correct in that you can use a road, but you should Not have to look at it under the acft, look at it waaay out in the distance. It is one of the most difficult maneuvers to do right, most people that think it's easy they likely never done one correctly. When you are done you should have a symmetrical sideways 8 described on the ground, after you do it in both directions. Get a device that you can record your track and view it. If there is wind, if done correctly there will be some adjustment for that also, but most of the time not much attention is given to that, as long as it feels right.
In most acft the overbanking tendencies will Not get you a decent L-8, you have to get the mental picture in your mind, know where your high, low, steep points are and probability the most important is start at the correct airspeed, to end up at the same speed, and altitude. Due to many factors in the acft you use the left or right will require slightly different inputs. When you get it right it's like a beautiful sky dance, you may never want to stop doing it.

 

[ja_user]

The airplane flying handbook actually covers this as well.

It isn't ground reference, you aren't looking or even considering a specific ground track.

You do however need a way to find the key points, and you need to be looking outside to fly this maneuver well.

 

[Salty]

I appreciate your passion, however your response is equivalent to me asking you for the time of day, and you giving me instructions on how to build a watch.

Perhaps a better analogy would be that you asked why you are having difficulty telling time on your watch that is not set to the correct time, and he suggested you set your watch to a known accurate setting before attempting to use it to tell time.

 

[davidgfern]

Perhaps a better analogy would be that you asked why you are having difficulty telling time on your watch that is not set to the correct time, and he suggested you set your watch to a known accurate setting before attempting to use it to tell time.

One can also apply a correction to the watch knowing that it is incorrect.....it is an added step, but a perfectly legitimate one.

For whatever reason, there is a tendency for people on forums like this to respond to requests for information on a specific topic with non-sequiturs that are intended to point out how much smarter and more enlightened they are than the one who is posing the question. I asked about Lazy 8s, and I know that my aircraft is out of rig. Responding to a question about how to properly execute a Lazy 8 by saying I should get an aircraft mechanic to take my airplane apart and put it back together is a waste of internet bandwidth.

 

[FastEddieB]

Agreed that it’s not a ground reference maneuver. That said, one does choose a horizon reference, so at least in some small way one does reference the “ground”, albeit at a distant point. Ground reference maneuvers tend to keep you roughly over or very close to the points being referenced.

Personally, I’ve always found the first half pretty easy, and the second half frustratingly hard. It just seems the second half drags on a lot longer and needs to be nursed through.

 

[Salty]

One can also apply a correction to the watch knowing that it is incorrect.....it is an added step, but a perfectly legitimate one.

For whatever reason, there is a tendency for people on forums like this to respond to requests for information on a specific topic with non-sequiturs that are intended to point out how much smarter and more enlightened they are than the one who is posing the question. I asked about Lazy 8s, and I know that my aircraft is out of rig. Responding to a question about how to properly execute a Lazy 8 by saying I should get an aircraft mechanic to take my airplane apart and put it back together is a waste of internet bandwidth.

You admit that the rigging is making it more difficult to do a maneuver that you are struggling with, but are mad when someone suggests you fix the problem to make it easier on yourself.

Enjoy your training.

 

[davidgfern]

You admit that the rigging is making it more difficult to do a maneuver that you are struggling with, but are mad when someone suggests you fix the problem to make it easier on yourself.

Enjoy your training.

I am not mad or angry --- I am simply stating that suggesting that I spend tens of thousand of dollars to fix a minor inconvenience when my original question was about the salient points of performing a Lazy-8, is a waste of internet bandwidth. I could care less what the poster of the reply thinks about the state of A&P mechanics these days, and I am even less interested in listening to someone bloviate about a topic that is irrelevant to this thread.

With that said, I will step off my soapbox and go finish my Captain Crunch before it all turns soggy.

 

[ateamer]

Tens of thousands to put a Cessna in rig? That’s it, I’m going to A&P school.

Right after drama lessons.

 

[davidgfern]

Tens of thousands to put a Cessna in rig? That’s it, I’m going to A&P school.

Right after drama lessons.

No, tens of thousands to straighten the fuselage.

 

[CC268]

One can also apply a correction to the watch knowing that it is incorrect.....it is an added step, but a perfectly legitimate one.

For whatever reason, there is a tendency for people on forums like this to respond to requests for information on a specific topic with non-sequiturs that are intended to point out how much smarter and more enlightened they are than the one who is posing the question. I asked about Lazy 8s, and I know that my aircraft is out of rig. Responding to a question about how to properly execute a Lazy 8 by saying I should get an aircraft mechanic to take my airplane apart and put it back together is a waste of internet bandwidth.

Ha welcome to PoA. I feel your pain. Sometimes it is laughable at how you could ask the simplest question and you get pages worth of answers that are over-complicated or not relevant. Most the time its worth digging through BS to get to the good answers. I don't think Dr. O was trying to be rude or offer silly advice though (not that it is the best solution for you at this point).

 

[Sam D]

My CFI also thought the lazy 8 was a ground reference maneuver. He was a great primary CFI. Just didn't do a lot of commercial instruction. During my checkride, the DPE (after I had demonstrated the maneuver within standards) mentioned a couple of things regarding the maneuver that led me to conclude, if I were to do it all over again, I'd go with someone who did a lot of commercial training.