What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Full power for chandelle?

jcarne

Well Known Member
Patron
Hello everyone, starting work on my commercial now after passing the IR. Went up today to try and figure out the chandelle. Entered at Va and to be within 10kts of a stall it took a 22.5 degree nose up pitch. At that attitude this short guy loses an awful lot of visual references. haha

So the question to anyone who did this in their RV, did you use full power for the maneuver or something else? Suppose I could ask my DPE what he wants but figured I would ask the brain trust first. Thanks!
 
Definitely check with your DPE.
What I learned as a Chandelle is nothing like what they want to see.
 
The ACS calls it a "maximum performance climb", so if that's the pitch attitude, that's the pitch attitude. DPE's of course might have all kinds of preferences, so go with that, but from a practical standpoint, it's really about showing mastery of the airplane with constantly changing variables as you go through the maneuver.

Any higher performance airplane that's not a trainer, is going to get uncomfortable in these maneuvers because of what they can do, and is going to require that much more attention to detail. What might be a sloppy execution in a Warrior might put you in a spin in an RV for example.

I would practice them "by the book" until or unless you hear different from your DPE. If your DPE regularly does check rides in RV's, they are already familiar with what it will feel like doing these maneuvers in a higher performance airplane.

Flying your RV for your IFR ride should already tell you that things happen quick, so keeping an eye out for what's around you is that much more important (for example don't do Chandelles under a Bravo shelf :D)
 
Yup, full power, you can reduce power after your turn is made. Use wingtip references, that’s part of the game. No need to look out the front as your setting up the low speed turn at the top. Do another one the opposite direction and you have a lazy eight.
 
Jereme,
I just took my commercial check last month in my 180hp 7A. I explained to my DPE that max performance would take the chandelle far steeper than he probably can bear watch, so I offered him (and he accepted) 26” at 2400 rpm. An 18 degree max pitch chandelle worked perfectly as I finished approaching the stall.

BTW, it was over 100 degrees F. If the day is cooler, those numbers would vary.

For your consideration.
 
Last edited:
Awesome, thanks guys, I will go ahead and check with the DPE on his thoughts and post back for others.

Scroll, glad you got it done in the RV man!

Weird to be back flying while looking outside the window! haha
 
Why guess? The FAA’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge says:
1. Enter at Va (or manufacturer’s recommended speed)
2. On rolling into the initial turn, increase power to normal cruise or climb setting (CS prop). (For fixed pitch props, use max RPM)

So no, in a 14 with CS prop, full power is not required. As you noted that will result in very high pitch angles. I find ‘cruise climb’ (24”/2500 rpm) is plenty in the -10.

PS. In my experience most DPE’s just watch to see that you keep the ball centered, bank angle constant (first half), pitch angle constant (second half), and end up somewhere near stall speed. They don’t seem to mind too much if you ‘cheat’ a bit, e.g., as you near the finish, if airspeed is too high, slow your roll out rate, and vice versa if your airspeed is too low. But don’t stall it, and especially don’t stall it uncoordinated. They really don’t like that!
 
Last edited:
DPE

Catherine C's article in AOPA pilot is a good read. Pathetic lack of knowledge among some DPE's and Instructors. One small example:" aircraft will not stall with nose below horizon."
 
Catherine C's article in AOPA pilot is a good read. Pathetic lack of knowledge among some DPE's and Instructors. One small example:" aircraft will not stall with nose below horizon."

Apologies for thread drift. But I have to ask, who would make such a ridiculous statement?
 
I have stalled an airplane going straight down at a 90 degree dive angle with full power. It's a necessity for doing a snap roll on a downward vertical line during IAC competition.
 
Oh Man

Catherine had herself a couple of live ones there. Honestly, why do we keep needing to have this conversation over and over? When will pilots understand stalls? There’s SO MUCH great info out there that’s so easy to access. Catherine Cavagnaro is one, there’s Rich Stowell’s books, Sammy Mason’s stuff, Langewiesche and that’s just a start. Where is all this baloney coming from?
 
Where is all this baloney coming from?

A big part of it is incestuous flight instruction.

When I was teaching Aviation Safety (not flight or ground instruction) at a big name aeronautical university in Arizona, I had a CFI - employed at the university, taught to fly there by CFIs who also learned to fly there - tell me that with a forward c.g., spins are more likely to go flat. Hmm. He also was surprised to learn that the airspeed for best glide distance is different, upwind and downwind.

Another young friend got most of his training at a huge, national three letter flight school. As he was studying for his CFI, he asked me the difference between a spin and a spiral.

And, of course, there's pressures to graduate as many students as possible, to be politically correct, all at the expense of excellence.

I don't know, but I suspect that the FAA has lots of ex-military folks who have paid wonderful dues in that arena but have limited experience in general aviation. That doesn't help the overall picture, either.
 
throttle back...

I used 12-15 in manifold for all of my commercial maneuvers... worked predictably within the anticipated bank and pitch angles.
 
This is very sad. Is the correct conclusion that the FAA’s attempt to fix the cfi ‘problem’, back circa 1989, by requiring initial cfi applicants to go to the fsdo for their initial check rides (later changed to a ‘specially approved’ DPE), a complete failure?

I simply can't comprehend how a private pilot let alone a CFI would think something like what was mentioned in that article.

Catherine had herself a couple of live ones there. Honestly, why do we keep needing to have this conversation over and over? When will pilots understand stalls? There’s SO MUCH great info out there that’s so easy to access. Catherine Cavagnaro is one, there’s Rich Stowell’s books, Sammy Mason’s stuff, Langewiesche and that’s just a start. Where is all this baloney coming from?

One maneuver that really hit home with me was the falling leaf exercise, ingrains in ones brain to keep working the feet; especially when slow.

A big part of it is incestuous flight instruction.

BINGO!!! Same reason people think LOP is going to blow up an engine; because someone before them said it.

I used 12-15 in manifold for all of my commercial maneuvers... worked predictably within the anticipated bank and pitch angles.

Interesting, when did you take your ride? Not sure how the PTS was written but I don't know if I could get away with that under ACS standards; would be nice though. haha
 
Why guess? The FAA’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge says:
1. Enter at Va (or manufacturer’s recommended speed)
2. On rolling into the initial turn, increase power to normal cruise or climb setting (CS prop). (For fixed pitch props, use max RPM)

So no, in a 14 with CS prop, full power is not required. As you noted that will result in very high pitch angles. I find ‘cruise climb’ (24”/2500 rpm) is plenty in the -10.

PS. In my experience most DPE’s just watch to see that you keep the ball centered, bank angle constant (first half), pitch angle constant (second half), and end up somewhere near stall speed. They don’t seem to mind too much if you ‘cheat’ a bit, e.g., as you near the finish, if airspeed is too high, slow your roll out rate, and vice versa if your airspeed is too low. But don’t stall it, and especially don’t stall it uncoordinated. They really don’t like that!

I taught aerobatics for many years and Chandelles, lazy eights were part of the initial training as they required good stick and rudder skills. You can do these maneuvers with no power, partial power or full power. They are not aerobatics but a good precursor. If someone with the FAA or another instructor feels the maneuvers are two extreme using full power I’d say that flying must be pretty dumb downed these days.
 
I taught aerobatics for many years and Chandelles, lazy eights were part of the initial training as they required good stick and rudder skills. You can do these maneuvers with no power, partial power or full power. They are not aerobatics but a good precursor. If someone with the FAA or another instructor feels the maneuvers are two extreme using full power I’d say that flying must be pretty dumb downed these days.

Ya I don’t mind doing them at full power, I just want to be practiced in whatever power setting is expected, after all, it’s a $600 test. Haha
 
Jereme

I would recommend practicing this maneuver at various entry speeds and power settings ... explore the envelope!

Don't be afraid to feel the buffet and fly the plane on the edge a little. My feeling is that this is the intent of the maneuver, demonstrating your comfort level and SA during some slightly unusual attitudes.

In the end you want to be comfortable with anything the examiner asks for. Maybe easier said than done, but you'll get it soon and it'll pay benefits along the way!

Cheers
 
Ya I don’t mind doing them at full power, I just want to be practiced in whatever power setting is expected, after all, it’s a $600 test. Haha

Agreed, as you increase the power and increase the climb angle and your airspeed decreases you need more right rudder. All these subtle changes required is what makes that rather simple maneuver an excellent training choice. Not withstanding that it adds a bit more fun to the game. Also your learning new reference points…wing tip reference is constantly being used in aerobatics and is an excellent add on for the non aerobatic pilot. :)
 
DPE is just fine with the full power pitch angle. He pointed out the ACS says no more than 30 degrees but is also flexible on power settings somewhat. Most importantly he said we would discuss power settings before the flight so that everyone is on the same page. Great guy
 
If you brief your DPE prior to flight, while discussing the maneuver, he/she will appreciate it. It will show you understand both the maneuver and your airplane. If you think you have a compelling reason to, you might practice it both ways; with full power and some less than full power setting and have the lesser power setting in your back pocket. Many situations in professional flying, including during check rides, can deviate from standard procedure if the reason is sound and the non-standard procedure to be used is briefed ahead of time. That said, be prepared to do it "maximum performance" per the book. Nothing wrong with that.
 
As a DPE, here's the deal. Regarding power/airspeed, the ACS simply says "Establish the appropriate entry...power, and airspeed". The word "appropriate" is found 156 times in this ACS; it generally means appropriate to the airplane. So...it is advisable to discuss your planned settings with the DPE, but if you don't and perform the maneuver at a power setting and airspeed of your choice AND meet skills CA.V.C.S1 through 8, the DPE has no grounds to disapprove you. If he/she does, you can contest the disapproval with the FSDO.
For commercial ASEL checkrides, I just say "show me a chandelle" and make sure the maneuver is performed within the stated limits. Power/speed is immaterial. I do caution applicants before flight - semi-humorously, that one overarching requirement is to not scare the examiner. If an applicant were to pitch up above 30 degrees I would tell them to discontinue the maneuver and tell me what their intentions are (I am an aerobatic/unusual attitudes wimp).
As for my flight review, I set 16" manifold pressure, prop high, and perform the maneuver.
 
As a DPE, here's the deal. Regarding power/airspeed, the ACS simply says "Establish the appropriate entry...power, and airspeed". The word "appropriate" is found 156 times in this ACS; it generally means appropriate to the airplane. So...it is advisable to discuss your planned settings with the DPE, but if you don't and perform the maneuver at a power setting and airspeed of your choice AND meet skills CA.V.C.S1 through 8, the DPE has no grounds to disapprove you. If he/she does, you can contest the disapproval with the FSDO.
For commercial ASEL checkrides, I just say "show me a chandelle" and make sure the maneuver is performed within the stated limits. Power/speed is immaterial. I do caution applicants before flight - semi-humorously, that one overarching requirement is to not scare the examiner. If an applicant were to pitch up above 30 degrees I would tell them to discontinue the maneuver and tell me what their intentions are (I am an aerobatic/unusual attitudes wimp).
As for my flight review, I set 16" manifold pressure, prop high, and perform the maneuver.

Thanks for the response! Love to see DPEs involved in the conversations. After talking to my DPE out here I think we are both on the same page and happy with full power as it won't put us outside 30 degrees or really even close to it.

Now if only the ACS was a little more clear on what "just above a stall airspeed" was. haha I know what it means to me but I'm betting quite a few of us would have slightly different answers.
 
The Chantelle was developed as an evasive maneuver in WW1…..a climbing turn to reverse course by 180 degrees and gain the most altitude possible so therefore it was always done under full power. Full power does require more skill to coordinate the controls and in the 1960’s when I got my Commercial license that’s what they wanted to see. I guess these days things have changed so doing them with lower power should make it a bit easier. We all had to recover from spins in a variety of different entries but those are no longer taught either. Times change!:)
 
We all had to recover from spins in a variety of different entries but those are no longer taught either. Times change!:)

Sad I know, I remember doing spin training in a 152 for my PPL in 2004, it was a lot of fun. Training not required for commercial anymore but it is for CFI thank goodness.
 
The Chantelle was developed as an evasive maneuver in WW1…..a climbing turn to reverse course by 180 degrees and gain the most altitude possible so therefore it was always done under full power. Full power does require more skill to coordinate the controls and in the 1960’s when I got my Commercial license that’s what they wanted to see. I guess these days things have changed so doing them with lower power should make it a bit easier. We all had to recover from spins in a variety of different entries but those are no longer taught either. Times change!:)

I can’t say for sure that this is an old wives tale, but the Chandells that we do aren’t the most efficient way to change direction and climb.. it’s purely a maneuver to demonstrate coordination. I can’t imagine a fighter doing the maneuver we perform on our commercial check rides as an evasive maneuver.
 
Military background (nothing to do with commercial checkride!)

The modern military version of the chandelle is a "pitch back." You keep the lift vector constant throughout. Roll into about 45 degrees of bank, max power, high G pull. Since the lift vector (where the lift is pointing) remains constant, you end up at about 120 bank 180 degrees off your start heading. Overall energy remains constant throughout the maneuver--you've traded speed for altitude. RV's have sufficient power loading to fly 3-4G pitch back from Vno. Think of the first half of a loop angled 45 degrees to the horizon. If you fly the maneuver in a descending plane (e.g., starting at 120 degrees of bank), it's called a "slice back." You start a slice at a lower airspeed: corner (maneuvering speed) and maintain it with G. G's are required to make lots of lift to generate sufficient induced drag to keep airspeed under control in a slice. From a turn rate/radius management standpoint, this type of "orthogonal" maneuvering can be more efficient than a purely horizontal or vertical turn (Immelmann or a Split-S), depending on your tactical objective.

Cheers,

Vac
 
I can’t say for sure that this is an old wives tale, but the Chandells that we do aren’t the most efficient way to change direction and climb.. it’s purely a maneuver to demonstrate coordination. I can’t imagine a fighter doing the maneuver we perform on our commercial check rides as an evasive maneuver.

This came from WW1 so today it’s very unlikely that a fighter might use this maneuver but hey….you never know.:)
 
Just wanted to update this in case anyone else in the future is looking. Hope it helps

Passed my commercial check ride back in December and these are power settings I liked.

Chandelle - full power

Lazy 8 - about 14 inches resulting in an entry speed of 105-108 take the time to get the speed right! It becomes a very difficult maneuver when you have too much power and limited to 30 deg bank.

Steep Spiral - 100 KIAS (no speed will really allow you to see your point)

Power off 180 in 29kts of wind on the checkride - immediate turn abeam :D

Pretty much anything else - about 15-17 inches to keep it below Va
 
Last edited:
Back
Top