Actually, IRL I was the most conservative pilot imaginable: never in a million years would I ever have contemplated getting into IF conditions. I mentioned this as a curious tidbit about C172 behaviour. My personal opinion? Anybody who banks on something like this or a non-instrument rated pilot remotely considering descending through cloud is a complete and utter idiot.
2 Likes
I have recently done some (close) stall flight practises IRL and I really can‘t imagine that that would work well. I didn’t do these exercises in a Cessna but all the planes I flew would have taken their nose down a lot, even with the trim back. I didn’t let the controls go though.
The C172 has a significant tendency to drop the left wing and you really get your rudder to use to keep it in a more or less stable straight stalled flight. I can‘t imagine a healthy outcome out of that advice. Really don‘t add fuel to your list of problems if you‘re trapped over the clouds.
If it ever was to happen the best solution is to ask ATC for help. That bit of instrumentation in front, even if not equipped and educated for IMC, offers a much better chance to get out unharmed than letting Fortuna judge over you. ^^ always keep in mind, Murphy has a word too 
What I was thought is a bit different.
First stage of flaps just before you turn base. Unless the base leg is very long, then you do it on the base leg.
Then when on final you gradually lower the flaps to whatever landing configuration you pick. You pull out the throttle when you’re passed the threshold and gradually level off just above the runway.
I don’t think there are strict rules. In general you should be on the first stage of flaps, approach speed (65-70kt) and an appropriate altitude when starting final. Appropriate altitude means you should be able to maintain a constant attitude and speed all the way down.
In practice, when I was flying in my area, there were very few airports with a standard traffic pattern. Most of them had some noise abatement procedure and altitude (top and bottom) constraints. So each needed to be approached individually. No general rules.
1 Like
I assure you that, with at least one specific C172, this worked once when I did it on the advice, and in the presence, of an instructor. I would have to assume that this was based on broader experience on her part. Maybe the next time you fly a 172 with an instructor you can ask them to try it? In a controlled situation with a competent instructor there is no harm in trying it. FWIW I just checked my logbook: this was actually in a C172RG Cutlass but I do not believe the plain vanilla 172 would be any different.
Would I stake my life on it? Of course not. As a non IF pilot, would I stake my life on asking ATC for advice and then descending through cloud in bad conditions? Of course not: any new real life pilot should read the AOPA study report “178 seconds to live”.
Bottom line is that if you get in that situation you have a major problem. I think we can all violently agree that it is by far the best to never get in that position in the first place.
Before gyroscopic instruments, a not-totally-uncommon way to get through a shallow, not too low cloud layer or a small hole in the deck was to enter a spin to descend through. Given an airplane that is stable in a spin, descending slowly enough, and a high enough cloud base that allows altitude for recovery, I can see how this would work. The hardest part is to not let it become a spiral dive.
However, this was in the barnstorming era when instrument flight was not yet a gleam in anyone’s eyes. I would absolutely NOT recommend this method today. Get your IR and remain proficient or avoid IMC.
Trimming full back sounds like a recipe for disaster on the recovery, though.
If this is referring to what I was describing you misunderstood: the aircraft never stalls, it just goes into a slow, totally stable spiral descent at around 50kts IIRC. When (if) you reach clear air you just straighten up, apply power and level out while rapidly applying nose down trim. No drama at all. And definitely not a disaster.
1 Like
Offer only valid if your spiral doesn’t tighten up and you are really good at adding power, re trimming, and staying coordinated in whatever space you have left to recover.
I can only comment on that which I experienced, i.e. a continuous, gentle spiral descent at low speed. And as I mentioned a couple times now, I do not know if that is “normal” for a 172, but given the instructor’s comments I suspect it might not be all that unusual for 172s.
Space to recover is obviously crucial: if you have no/insufficient space then what will be will be. But if you have a few hundred feet, the recovery is certainly no more - and maybe even less - dramatic than a normal stall recovery, which all PPLs are completely familiar and competent with. Right? 
But again: I mentioned this as a curiosity an instructor suggested I try, no more, no less. Rule 1: don’t get into that situation as once you are, there are no good options.
1 Like
Clouds with rocks or IMC right down to ground level may ruin your day however.
I think it‘s an interesting aerodynamical experimentbut I wouldn’t try it as a life saving measure. ATC and gyro instuments, even if not trained and certified, offer a better chance than a smiling Murphy 
Anyway, @SlabsFly I hope you know we‘re not criticising you, this is just a discussion about how aircraft behave 
and a good one I think
A couple things. Without flaps 50kts is just a hair above stall speed. And then you’re in a spiral at some bank angle. This just begs for a spin if you’re not extremely cautious.
Second, at just about 1,000FPM, no matter what your indicated speed is, you’re dead once you hit something solid. We (humans) have very little tolerance for vertical impact. That’s why stall/spin is such a dangerous thing and it’s always better to fly the plane into the crash, even if you hit something in front of you.
I get it. It’s an interesting aerodynamic experiment but never ever would I use it as a technique to get out of IMC.
That’s just my 2 cents. As you said, avoid IMC and you don’t have that problem. However, I’m sure many more capable pilots than me have said that before end ended up in IMC, though.
1 Like
1000 fpm sounds a lot, but it is merely 5 m/s, which equals to half a second of accelerating freefall. And theoretically it is like falling from 1.25 meters with buts on the ground first. Just guessing, you would have a better chance of survival if your landing gear absorbs some impetus and you do not knock your head on the ceiling. I heard that most of the injuries occurred because you bump into something in the head.
1 Like
Thank you. Point taken. However, you’re sitting in a 2,500lbs aircraft with quite some kinetic energy to dissipate. You’re suddenly hitting something with almost no time to dissipate that energy. Unlike cars, there really isn’t much cushion. I really don’t believe that you can equate this to falling on your butt from 1.5m.
Your survival probably might be higher than what I suggested. However, I still don’t like the odds. Look at CFIT accidents, many occur while descending. Often at even smaller descent rates. Granted, some might be going faster and horizontally impact the terrain, but still, the engergy gotta go somewhere and you’re just being smashed.
It also doesn’t change my opinion that this is a dangerous maneuver that I would never exercise when encountering IMC. There are just better options with better odds.
Again, my 2 cents and mostly an opinion. I have not done actual calculations. Might be wrong and maybe it’s more survivable than I think
1 Like
The whole argumentation starts with the situation that you ended up 1) above a closed cloud layer with 2) no fuel left. That‘s… a lot to take in for any trained certified pilot. Someone who really gets there wouldn’t probably have many options anyway so if they believe, they might pray and go into that mountain, vertically or horizontally because, frankly, this is what will happen anyway some errors just can‘t be fixed anymore lol
The idea behind all that might be to have as little kinetic energy as possible on impact with the landing gear absorbing as much as possible.
2 Likes
A little more in-depth than the technical “how to lose altitude consistently” but if you’re interested in actual flight scenarios, read on.
From a cross-country perspective, I’m a “time to destination” kind of guy, whereas some people like to begin a descent at a predetermined “distance”. The problem with that (IRL) is that weather, ATC vectoring or altitude instruction (if you’re getting flight following) nearly always wrecks a perfectly planned VFR flight.
My process for descending IRL (and sim) is this:
Take your cruise altitude and subtract the pattern altitude at your destination airport. E.g. 7,500 - 1,500 = 6,000’ divide that by 500 and you get a descent time of 12 minutes. (I like to add a minute). So 13 minutes out, I’ll begin my descent, and usually enter the pattern at the appropriate altitude.
——————
Technical Answer to OP:
In a Cessna 172, I’ll slowly pull the power from say 2,400rpm to approximately 2,150rpm and trim down ever so slightly. The power reduction affects altitude, the trim pitch affects speed. Start with 2,150 & play around with the trim to see how it affects things. Those settings will usually net a nice 500fpm descent, AT THE SAME AIRSPEED, so the time to destination doesn’t change.
——————
IF as stated above, ATC has you closer to the airport than 500’ per minute will suffice, just pull the power back slowly to settle into whatever descent rate you need.
——————
EDIT: Pattern work.
Know the numbers. Beeee the numbers, lol. Seriously though, knowing rpm settings and desired airspeeds for each phase is a game-changer for repeatable, stabilized approaches and smooth landings.
After a full-power takeoff and turns to Crosswind, then Downwind (parallel to the runway) my Downwind settings (C172) are 2,100 rpm, no flaps, trim for level & 90/95kts.
Abeam the end of the runway / touchdown spot I’ll pull quickly back to 1,750’ish RPMs, hold the nose level (will feel like pulling back slightly, but you don’t want to climb… you’re just holding level & bleeding off speed to get inside the white flap operation arc.) At the edge of the white arc, add one notch of flaps, trim slight nose-DOWN to establish 80kts & adjust power slightly to establish 500 rpm, if you need to.
“Trim for 80, power for 500” is what I actually verbalize.
(NOTE: ALL power adjustments should be very slight from here on out. We’re looking for a smooth, coordinated descent, and that’s difficult to do when yanking the power around by 100’s of rpm.)
Once 80 kts and 500’ish RPM are established, you should be in a good spot to turn to Base. So, make a purposeful (30 degree) turn to Base THEN another notch of flaps. (Don’t add flaps IN the turn) Be sure to keep the nose down and you should settle into 70’ish kts without messing with power. Don’t balloon with flaps, and don’t get slow. If you do find you need to tweak power to maintain 500’ish fpm… make small adjustments!
This is where I like to run through my GUMPS checklist.
Make a purposeful turn to Final and ascertain where you are on the glide slope by referencing the PAPI or VASI lights. (Google it.) if you’re too high, take out a little power. To low? Add a little power, but MAINTAIN 70’ish knots by keeping your nose down. DON’T get slow. That’s how stalls happen.
On short final / approaching the fence you’ll want to start easing the power out holding the nose level to go ahead and slow down. 60 over the numbers is safe enough, and at this point slowly pull out ALL the power, and as you get closer to the ground gradually pull the yoke back, back, baaaaaack…… and Touchdown!
If you hear the stall horn before touchdown, you get bonus points. 
3 Likes
The only airplane I know, where a similar procedure is actually written in the handbook, is the Antonov AN2.
Throttle closed, flaps full and full up elevator….but it does say to maintain wings level according to the artificial horizon. She should settle into a survivable landing….
I have flown a few Cessna singles, 150 to 210, and in none of them would I recommend that procedure.
And in none of the Pipers either, for what it is worth.
On Topic – worth a read
https://www.avemco.com/news-events/pirep-blog/hood-time-for-the-ppl