Return-Path: Sender: "Marvin Kaye" To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 10:42:20 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net ([204.127.202.64] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.2) with ESMTP id 422194 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 20 Sep 2004 08:15:33 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=204.127.202.64; envelope-from=mjrav@comcast.net Received: from MJR (h000094c615c2.ne.client2.attbi.com[65.96.140.242]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with SMTP id <2004092012145101600mpe8ue>; Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:15:01 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <009001c49f0c$2090c900$f28c6041@ne2.client2.attbi.com> From: "Mark Ravinski" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: More AOA X-Original-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 08:19:40 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008D_01C49EEA.9356ED60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_008D_01C49EEA.9356ED60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Perhaps I was not understood. Let me try another approach. I am not referring to carrier landings, airliners or basic trainers. For practical purposes, the differences between AOA and airspeed = indications are small in my L2C.=20 =20 There is getting to be more emphasis towards AOA as evidenced by = comments about a recent crash - "did he have an AOA?" - as well as all = the responses to my post. =20 If you look at the Lancair accident reports again, you can see that = roughly half of them involve some sort of loss of control in flight. = This does not suggest to me the need for more hardware with minor = advantages. =20 I don't imagine the Navy trained pilots (who I respect immensely) are = likely to have any lack of training or ability as regards basic aircraft = control - AOA or not. I do suspect that someone who advanced up from = basic pilot training where he was taught stall avoidance may have some = problems if not downright misconceptions. It is outrageous to see AOA = suggested to be the cure. Mark Ravinski N360KB 1302hrs =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_008D_01C49EEA.9356ED60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Perhaps I was not=20 understood.  Let me try = another=20 approach.

I am not referring to = carrier=20 landings, airliners or basic trainers.

For practical = purposes, the=20 differences between AOA and airspeed indications are small in my = L2C. 

 

There is getting to = be more=20 emphasis towards AOA as evidenced by comments about a recent crash  - =93did he have an AOA?=94 - = as well as all=20 the responses to my post.

 

If you look at the = Lancair=20 accident reports again, you can see that roughly half of them involve = some sort=20 of loss of control in flight.  = This=20 does not suggest to me the need for more hardware with minor = advantages.

 

I don=92t imagine the = Navy trained=20 pilots (who I respect immensely) are likely to have any lack of training = or=20 ability as regards basic aircraft control - AOA or not.  I do suspect that someone who = advanced=20 up from basic pilot training where he was taught stall avoidance may = have some=20 problems if not downright misconceptions. =20 It is outrageous to see AOA suggested to be the cure.

 

Mark=20 Ravinski

N360KB  1302hrs

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_008D_01C49EEA.9356ED60--