L-39 Glass Cockpit ILS and Closed Pattern 

I’ll

Hey! Just curious on if you actually ended up getting an L-39. It's a wonderful plane and surprisingly relatively affordable. I hope your dream came/comes true :)

@@freakyninjaman3 Cost less than a brand new 172 lmao

Not to mention cost of training, certification, and maintainence. Dude reckons he's getting in touch with a random RU-vidr for advice when he goes shopping for a fast jet, sure, lol.

Ahah probably, but aren't we talking about someone litterally owning an L-39 ahah

@@maxlebest003 they go for like $300k so it's not that bad vs. a new Piper Seneca V lol

@@nks487 ahah actually saw that while checking the prices, that's still 300k, but you got the point

@@maxlebest003 lol yes I got the point.

That is the G-meter, which remains at 1G until the pullup.

There are actually quite a few types of privately-owned military fighters and trainers that are operated in the USA: L-29, L-39, T-33, Iskra, Galeb, Casa, Alpha Jet, Fouga, S.211, T-38, A-4, F-4 F-5, F-100, MiG-15/17/21/23 -- just to name a few. Google "Classic Jet Aircraft Association" for more information.

Wow! MIG-23? Surprised...

@@code1aviation594 there's a guy near Washington DC that owns a Harrier! He was a former Harrier pilot & had to get special clearance & approval from the Federal Government (needless to say they had some issues with a STOVL fighter aircraft in private hands that close to the nation's capital, WH etc). www.wearethemighty.com/intel/art-nalls-marine-harrier-jet

Because it has to work in three dimensions, not just two.

No reason it can have a steering wheel. But most don’t.

@@colinsouthern ok, thanks

Klaus Buchberger - Eulenthal Stud There is a company in Switzerland, they fly this type and the Mig-29...

полетное задание . карта. справочная информация . порядок действий при отказах . гражданский авиоклуб прицел не нужен

прицель на мониторе. он в монитор смотрит и целится как в симуляторе штурмовик ил-2. может даже зашторится и летать смотря в монитор :))

Чек лист,план полетов

@@user-hr9lo9tu1b чек листа там нет. всё по памяти. это не гражданский самолёт и не американский. мы никакого чек листа не читали. да и выполнение задания не всегда записывали. всё по памяти.

@@vertkrut2412 мой инструктор тоже все по памяти говорит. Чек лист есть на любом типе ВС,так же как и в РЛЭ ВС

No idea what ur trying to say but the approach looked perfectly standard for a high performance aircraft - have u ever flown one in a - you know - real aircraft? Nice closed pattern btw - i used to love those.

The L-39 does have some mild dutch roll tendencies that cause some movement about the vertical axis in moderate turbulence, but you get used to it. A later version of the airplane (the L-159) was actually equipped with a yaw damper. But it's one more thing to maintain and fix.

Even if you have a yaw damper it is normally disengaged on approach.

v armádě měla

Bryan Max That would fucking suck ass

Absolutely not!

Pilots wear noise-cancelling headphones and it sounds very quiet.

Helicopters are more sensitive are they not?

@@DJSbros Actually DJ its the PIlots that are more sensitive. We like to poke fun at wing wipers whenever we can. In reality, most hydraulic assisted flight controls, such as in a Huey, require very little pressure to move. What you see in the movies is not a great representation for helicopter pukes.

@kingair001 Hmmm, another wing wiper of King Air variety jumps on. Hmmmm. I forgive you sir, even the US Army utilizes your namesake, the King Air....but I digress. Do you realize how much skill a Huey pilot has to have in order to maintain a Huey on an ILS approach with a whopping (Pun intended) 90 knot airspeed? It takes us forever to fly an approach.....wing wipers can sneeze and miss the entire airport...geeez..you guys are so sensitive. Anyone care to talk about doing autorotations to the ground at night with NO LIGHTS on? Ha ha. I do sense a mutual respect for our individual talents I dare say.

Calling BS on autos at night. Either you’re very lucky or very stupid.

@@Bartonovich52 Hey Bartonovich your age is showing. If you were anywhere near the US Army Home of Aviation at Fort Rucker in the late 70's you would understand "Nighthawk". The beginning of the night fighting capability and that meant learning to do autorotations TO THE GROUND with no exterior search lights. That was so much fun we decided to start using full face night vision devices and once again, autorotations became possible. Loved doing night autos with new pilots. Absolutely the most confidence building maneuver a helicopter pilot can do. So, to give you a little room, sir, you are propbably of the multi-engine generation of helicopter knowledge. The two engine variety rarely require an auto to the ground anymore. For those of us who did it for a living...I say...I have the largest penis in the group! HOOWAH.

There is literally no correlation between your comments and reality. The landing gear was lowered over two minutes before landing which, in this airplane, is 4 to 4.5 miles (7.4 to 8.3 km) from the runway. There was no landing on the first approach, just an intentional go-around. What followed was a textbook single-engine military jet traffic pattern flown as perfectly as you will ever see--including the descent rate, aimpoint, and threshold crossing height. You got one thing right---the landing was very smooth, as you would expect from a pilot who has been flying military jets for 31 years.. Please do not compare anything you experience in a General Aviation airplane or a flight sim with this type of flying. It is not the same at all. If you have any further questions, please ask, rather than speculate. We'd be happy to clarify any other misunderstandings you might have.

Hello Michael. That pilot was me. If you have ever flown a precision ILS in an L-39 on a gusty, windy day (and I'm guessing you have not), you would know that it requires a fair amount of stick movement to maintain a precise heading and track the localizer with any degree of accuracy. If you have any specific further questions about flying L-39s, please feel free to ask.

@@skywardmedia7529I have commented your flighty as I have seen and based on observation. I am not trying to criticize just for sake of it, you can improve your skills on both approaches (I mean visual) and on ILS and this is why I did commented the video. However, just for your information: I am retired Polish military pilot with rank of Colonel and I have flown many jets on gusty windy approaches in IMC in Polish military, such as: TS11 Iskra, I22 Idyra, Mig-21 Fishbed, SU-27 Flanker and F-16 Falcon. I had no chance to fly L-39 yet, but it is not so different from the jets I have flown anyway. So summarizing, your guess was incorrect, you are jerking this plane in all dimensions and your approach looks like an amateur on his first flight on jet and that is a statement of fact. When I have moved to Canada I became a flight instructor and I can recognize a novice when I see one, you are one of them. You never have had military flight training and that is obvious when you see your approach. It looks worse than aerobatics, such approach would make me feel dizzy. ILS or visual approach it does not matter, you should have full control over the aircraft with minimum input on final, anticipate winds and ground effect yet you are just desperately trying to get to the runway and touch down. Your flying skills are not good enough to fly high performance aircraft, I can bid that on Lancair you would have similar problems and seeing your approach even piston plane such as Extra300 is way too much for you to handle. Kind Regards

@kingair001 I am not rude, I can be direct and I always say what I think without hesitation, no bull... I am describing things as I do see it from my perspective and I do have a right to do so. If you would do same movements on this approach I would comment you exactly same way as it is clearly overuse of controls on approach and that is absolutely not necessary. They say "Any landing that let you walk out in one piece is a good one" came from countries where you are practicing controlled crashes rather than landings. You should be able to establish direction and strength of the wind upon initial approach, compensate slowly and approach with minimum input up until flare point, then really minimal input is needed. If you are unable to do it you are not ready for the approach and you are panicking trying desperately correct your approach or you did not prepare to the approach properly or finally you have no skills (or not enough skills) to handle the plane you are flying! Once again, this is my opinion whether you like it or not, but I care less if you disagree with me to be very honest! Kind Regards and Happy Landings

@kingair001 My opinion is different, for me it looks like the plane is violently thrown from one direction to another, possibly due to the pilot who was trying to approach using ILS only and was over correcting his position relative to runway. This pilot do not need to be defended, he just need a bit more of practice to master same results with less input and smoother movements. Remember if you do ILS approach, the closer you are to the runway the more sensitive your ILS is.

@kingair001 It was somewhat turbulent but within aircraft limits, once again I will NOT change my mind regarding this flight as my point of view remains the same, I consider this pointless conversation closed.

Вы очень ревнивы. маленький мальчик.

И я с Вами согласен. Какой там ИЛС. Выход на прыямую, ныряние под глиссаду, посадка с недолетом