Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Piloting the T-6 II trainer

Maybe a pilot wouldn't have to be intimately familiar with the T-6 to know...you tell me.

My question is, would a descent rate of 2000 feet per minute without any negative pitch be impossible, dangerous, or even against generally accepted procedures?

I'd rather not explain my reason for asking in this open forum, but will do so in a PM if asked. Thanks

What was your AOA? What was your altitude, AOB. lots of questions. I have a few hours in the T6 when it first came to Pensacola and I was the COS for Trawing6. My then boss Commodore "Dyke" Vandenberg and I really liked the platform, but NOT as a substitute for a T-45.

Edited to add: Maybe Burnholio can come in and offer his expertise..

Sent you a PM Jorge.

Negative pitch is relative. E.g., in the T-45at 300 kts the pitch indicator (the little airplane) on the attitude indicator is on the horizon. At 250, it’s about 2-3 above the horizon an the attitude indicator.

In level flight with the gear and flaps down the attitude when at “on-speed” angle of attackis is 6 degrees nose up on the attitude indicator. On a GCA or an ILS approach with a 3 degree glidepath, the attitude is 3 degree’s lower or 3 degrees nose up on the attitude indicator. So if in the landing configuration, level, your nose is 6 degrees above the horizon but you lower the nose 3 degrees, it’s 3 degrees up but still above the horizon and you’re descending at three degrees. Clear as mud? 😊

Is a 2,000 feet per minute rate of descent possible or useful? Depends on configuration, power setting and what you’re trying to do. Without knowing more details it’s hard to know what you’re asking.

The only information I have is the complaint that the aircrew knew they were descending at 2000 fpm, but their EADI indicated straight and level flight. I have no idea whether this was on approach or what their altitude was or what phase of the mission they were in.

I can imagine reducing airspeed enough that there is an altitude loss while keeping the nose on the horizon, but I don't know how quickly you could shed altitude by doing that while keeping up enough airspeed to maintain control of the aircraft. It's really just a curiosity thing. I see a LOT of attitude-related complaints coming out of the T-6 program and we deal with it. This one is just a bit unusual.

Every airspeed and configuration has an attitude that will maintain level flight. At a given airspeed, if you raise the nose above the level flight attitude you will climb until you stall. If you lower the nose below the level flight attitude you will descend until you hit the ground.

If you reduce power, to maintain level flight you have to gradually raise the nose and you can do that until, once again, you stall.

OTOH if you reduce power and maintain the same attitude, you will descend. The rate of descent will be determined by how much power you take off.

It sounds like you’re trying to troubleshoot a problem where the crew says their attitude indicator was where it should be for level flight but they had a 2000 fpm rate of descent. If that’s the case there should be a discrepancy between the main attitude indicator which might be erroneous and the standby attitude indicator which might indicate something else. (I’m assuming the a/c has a standby gyro).

I’m speaking in generalities since I don’t have any time in the T-6 but attitude indicators can do strange things especially ones on a multi-function display.

——My question is, would a descent rate of 2000 feet per minute without any negative pitch be impossible, dangerous, or even against generally accepted procedures- -



Im no expert, but I currently fly a couple types of jets, Kings Airs and heavy piston twins, and a 160hp super cub. I’ve not flown a T-6, and your question is asked about T-6’s, but I like to talk Aviation so here’s what I can offer. TIFWIW.

I believe the quick answer is; to get a 2000fpm decent the nose needs to be trimmed down, at least in clean configuration. Impossible? Probably not. Dangerous? No. Against generally accepted procedures? Yes, at least the aircraft I’m familiar with.

The planes I fly, to get even 1000fpm decent, the nose gets trimmed down. How many degrees down, I don’t know, but I’ll try it tomorrow, stow my magazine and pay attention.

I wonder if I could even get my cub into a 2000fpm descent without some effort. Can't say I've really tried to descend that quickly in it. Of course I'm usually not more than 1000ft AGL, so things would come to a halt pretty quick if I did.

.com/gp/61286670N08/2728DGE8in].com/gp/61286670N08/2728DGE8in]Untitled by .com/photos/61286670N08/]Sharps Man, on [bleep]

Hehe...these are what I'm talking about. They're based on the Pilatus PC-9:

RR, this is what I was talking about in my last PM....

Yes, there is a standby gyro in the aircraft. By the way the complaint is written, I interpret it to mean they were intentionally descending.

Unfortunately, technology has moved so far forward and so quickly that common understanding of the devices we use on a daily basis can't possibly keep up. In the case of the glass cockpit and some other aircraft systems, it's a whole new world and a lot of traditional lore and understanding is no longer relevant.

I find it ironic as hell that the B-52 remains a mainstay, and is expected to possibly remain in service to the point of amassing a 100-year record...but so many of the systems that have been developed in the last decade will be obsolete long before they quit flying BUFF.

To me---

Excellent post, beats the hell out of the PM I sent you!

Just an aside, but it's interesting reading and learning from people with a lot of hands on experience when the thread doesn't get cluttered up with Wikipedia experts trying to prove how smart they are.

This is all very technical and interesting.
But from just an old Sub drivers point of view, if you get a chance to take a ride and actually work the stick, do it.
The most fun you can have with your clothes on. Great plane.

That's the T-6. The OP refers to the T-6 II, which is the current basic trainer for the USAF; it's a turboprop. It's pictured somewhere up above.

I'd be happy to ride either. Or any, for that matter---I love to fly, just not on airliners.

Navy too….

Is this the one that was being developed with a little control wizardry, such that you didn’t need to use the rudder to counteract the torque of the engine? So that pilot trainees didn’t have to unlearn when transitioning to Jets?

In the T-45 on one of the pages you can access allows you to change the position of the little watermark (or airplane) on the attitude indicator. IIRC, SOP in the training wing here was for the watermark to be set at 3 degrees nose up when on the ground.

I mentioned earlier that with it set that way the attitude at 300 was with the wings of the watermark on the horizon. At 250 it would be about 3 above the horizon. In the landing configuration, gear and full flaps at “on-speed” angle of attack, in level flight, the attitude was 6 up. Then when doing an instrument approach or in the groove for a normal landing with a 3 degree glideslope the nose would 3 degrees lower BUT still 3 degrees up on the watermark.

We start teaching from day one that power controls rate of descent and nose controls airspeed/angle of attack. But on an early Basic Instrument (Bi) hop, I always liked to ask, “what’s most important in controlling rate of descent, power or nose? They would 9 times out of ten answer “power” because that’s what has been drilled into them.

“Nope, it’s the nose.” And they would give the “dog with the tilted head look.” 😁 Yes, we want you to use power to control rate of but we assume you have the correct attitude.

So if you have the perfect attitude and a reasonable power setting, you’ll have very close to the correct rate of descent. At least for a little while, but if you have the wrong attitude you’ll have wrong rate of descent RIGHT NOW.

It all revolves around working at the boat. We want to keep the relationship between the eyeball and the hook point to be consistent so if you keep your eyeball on the projected visual glidepath with the proper attitude you can predict where the hook point will plop down on the deck.

For safety, if you’re at the boat and take off a little too much power, the LSO can hear it and see the smoke go away and he has time to give a “power” call and help you anticipate the settle. But if you drop the nose you’re coming down right now with no warning….don’t pass GO, don’t collect $200, you hit the ramp.