X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com
Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 00:21:22 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-949482@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <sportform@cox.net>
Received: from fed1rmmtao10.cox.net ([68.230.241.29] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5)
  with ESMTP id 949349 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 18 May 2005 19:50:48 -0400
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.29; envelope-from=sportform@cox.net
Received: from [10.0.1.2] (really [68.5.208.199]) by fed1rmmtao10.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP
          id <20050518235002.XSNZ20235.fed1rmmtao10.cox.net@[10.0.1.2]>
          for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Wed, 18 May 2005 19:50:02 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622)
In-Reply-To: <list-943448@logan.com>
References: <list-943448@logan.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-49-714047507
X-Original-Message-Id: <f4e85a0006d379ab650a8665d212a1fb@cox.net>
From: Barry Hancock <sportform@cox.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Emergency Landings
X-Original-Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 16:50:00 -0700
X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622)


--Apple-Mail-49-714047507
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=ISO-8859-1;
	format=flowed

On May 13, 2005, at 6:35 PM, RicArgente@cs.com wrote:

> Subsequently, I learned about the flat plate drag of a windmilling=20
> prop and ever since, I never get too far from the runway in the=20
> pattern and I'll always be sure to have a height buffer if/when it=20
> happens again.=A0

Kinda validates my previous point about quality of instruction.  What=20
the heck are 172's doing in the next area code before turning base? =20
Your pattern should never take you further from a safe touchdown point=20=

than can easily be reached after a catastrophic engine failure.  When=20
you do this with others in the pattern, you force them to either follow=20=

you into the danger zone, or execute a 360 on downwind....

Overhead patterns were originally designed to get as many aircraft on=20
the ground as quickly as possible, but they are also, when properly=20
executed, the safest way to get to the ground as they have the highest=20=

margin for error in the event of power loss, which is most likely to=20
occur during a power change.  Not to mention they look cool, and that=20
never hurts, either.  ;)

Barry

--Apple-Mail-49-714047507
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset=ISO-8859-1

On May 13, 2005, at 6:35 PM, RicArgente@cs.com wrote:


=
<excerpt><fontfamily><param>Arial</param><color><param>0000,0000,DDDC</par=
am><smaller>Subsequently,
I learned about the flat plate drag of a windmilling prop and ever
since, I never get too far from the runway in the pattern and I'll
always be sure to have a height buffer if/when it happens again.=A0=20

</smaller></color></fontfamily></excerpt>

Kinda validates my previous point about quality of instruction.  What
the heck are 172's doing in the next area code before turning base?=20
Your pattern should never take you further from a safe touchdown point
than can easily be reached after a catastrophic engine failure.  When
you do this with others in the pattern, you force them to either
follow you into the danger zone, or execute a 360 on downwind....


Overhead patterns were originally designed to get as many aircraft on
the ground as quickly as possible, but they are also, when properly
executed, the safest way to get to the ground as they have the highest
margin for error in the event of power loss, which is most likely to
occur during a power change.  Not to mention they look cool, and that
never hurts, either.  ;)


Barry


--Apple-Mail-49-714047507--