X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 14:27:03 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta21.charter.net ([216.33.127.81] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.3) with ESMTP id 2923238 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 15 May 2008 10:45:27 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.33.127.81; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net Received: from aarprv04.charter.net ([10.20.200.74]) by mta21.charter.net (InterMail vM.7.08.03.00 201-2186-126-20070710) with ESMTP id <20080515144443.WPAL23078.mta21.charter.net@aarprv04.charter.net> for ; Thu, 15 May 2008 10:44:43 -0400 Received: from axs ([75.132.241.174]) by aarprv04.charter.net with SMTP id <20080515144443.VNAS4495.aarprv04.charter.net@axs> for ; Thu, 15 May 2008 10:44:43 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <004001c8b69a$37381420$6401a8c0@axs> From: "terrence o'neill" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Crash, fueling nozzles and training X-Original-Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 09:44:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003D_01C8B670.4E1599D0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Chzlrs: 0 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003D_01C8B670.4E1599D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bill, right. Practice the procedure. How do yoou know how close your = wing is to its stall AOA Terrence L235/320 N211AL ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Bill Kennedy=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 05:38 PM Subject: [LML] Re: Crash, fueling nozzles and training I practice these simulated engine failure turns from time to time. I'd = far rather land on or parallel to the runway than in the whatever off = the ends of the runway. There is a big difference between a maximum = performance turn at 100 KIAS and a 60 degree bank turn. My experience = suggests that the turn rate is so fast at max performance, that timing = the rollout becomes a problem. Max performance puts you on the edge of a = stall, so brain overload is a problem too. However, a 60 degree bank = produces a very brisk turn rate without overtaxing my brain. I can still = hold my 100KIAS and time my rollout perfectly. To reiterate: 1. Max performance turns at low altitude suck. 2. 60 degree bank turns are easy if you maintain your airspeed. 3. Practice, or don't plan to do it for real. The key things are to = maintain your airspeed and keep the ball in the middle. Almost all say they'd land "straight ahead". Almost all attempt to = return to the airport when it actually happens. The one's who don't = practice often die. -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 11:35:42 -0400 From: tom.gourley@verizon.net Subject: [LML] Re: Crash, fueling nozzles and training "check this out for training..... http://www.aerobats.com/seminar_02-07.html " I can't dispute the results shown in the video, but I gotta wonder. = I understand that a steep bank with low airspeed results in a high turn = rate, i.e. completes the turn in the least amount of time, but it leaves = no margin for error. In a real engine out situation, high pucker = factor, probably distractions, maybe some turbulence, lots of = adrenaline, is a 60 degree bank with the stick pulled back so that = you're getting some stall buffeting really a good idea? I don't think = so; especially not in a Lancair, and probably not in several other types = of aircraft. A few years ago I watched the pilot of a Mooney 231 = attempt to make a steeply banked turn to a runway after loss of power at = low altitude. (Yes, it turned out to be fuel exhaustion.) He was = trying to turn a total of 120 - 135 degrees. He had turned about 90 = degrees when the right wing and nose dropped noticeably; a stall-spin = entry. He stopped the rotation immediately with opposite rudder but was = too low to fully recover. The impact was fatal. I think an off airport = landing with the aircraft under control would always be better than an = uncontrolled descent. Yes, I realize an AOA would help tremendously in this situation, = assuming the pilot isn't completely paniced and is capable of flying the = AOA accurately. Training and practice sounds like a good idea. Tom Gourley ------=_NextPart_000_003D_01C8B670.4E1599D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bill, right.  Practice = the=20 procedure.  How do yoou know how close your wing is to its stall=20 AOA
Terrence
L235/320 N211AL
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Bill Kennedy
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 = 05:38=20 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: Crash, = fueling nozzles=20 and training

I practice these simulated engine = failure turns=20 from time to time. I'd far rather land on or parallel to the runway = than in=20 the whatever off the ends of the runway. There is a big difference = between a=20 maximum performance turn at 100 KIAS and a 60 degree bank turn. My = experience=20 suggests that the turn rate is so fast at max performance, that timing = the=20 rollout becomes a problem. Max performance puts you on the edge of a = stall, so=20 brain overload is a problem too. However, a 60 degree bank produces a = very=20 brisk turn rate without overtaxing my brain. I can still hold my = 100KIAS and=20 time my rollout perfectly.

To reiterate:
1. Max performance = turns at=20 low altitude suck.
2. 60 degree bank turns are easy if you maintain = your=20 airspeed.
3. Practice, or don't plan to do it for real. The key = things are=20 to maintain your airspeed and keep the ball in the = middle.

Almost all=20 say they'd land "straight ahead". Almost all attempt to return to the = airport=20 when it actually happens. The one's who don't practice often=20 die.



To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 11:35:42 = -0400
From:=20 tom.gourley@verizon.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Crash, fueling nozzles = and=20 training

"check this=20 out for training.....
http://www.aerobats.com/seminar_02-07.html "
=
 
I can't dispute the results shown = in the video,=20 but I gotta wonder.  I understand that a steep bank with low = airspeed=20 results in a high turn rate, i.e. completes the turn in the least = amount of=20 time, but it leaves no margin for error.  In a real engine = out=20 situation, high pucker factor, probably distractions, maybe some=20 turbulence, lots of adrenaline, is a 60 degree bank with = the stick=20 pulled back so that you're getting some stall buffeting really a = good=20 idea?  I don't think so; especially not in a Lancair, and = probably=20 not in several other types of aircraft.  A few years ago I = watched the=20 pilot of a Mooney 231 attempt to make a steeply banked turn to a = runway=20 after loss of power at low altitude.  (Yes, it turned out to be = fuel=20 exhaustion.)  He was trying to turn a total of 120 - 135 = degrees. =20 He had turned about 90 degrees when the right wing and nose dropped=20 noticeably; a stall-spin entry.  He stopped the rotation=20 immediately with opposite rudder but was too low to=20 fully recover.  The impact was fatal.  I think an off = airport=20 landing with the aircraft under control would always be better than = an=20 uncontrolled descent.
 
Yes, I realize an AOA would help = tremendously=20 in this situation, assuming the pilot isn't completely paniced and = is=20 capable of flying the AOA accurately.  Training and practice = sounds=20 like a good idea.
 
Tom Gourley
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_003D_01C8B670.4E1599D0--