X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 14:47:30 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from smtp105.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.198.204] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) with SMTP id 1111994 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 13 May 2006 13:29:19 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.142.198.204; envelope-from=elippse@sbcglobal.net Received: (qmail 31810 invoked from network); 13 May 2006 17:28:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO Computerroom) (elippse@sbcglobal.net@75.15.126.77 with login) by smtp105.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 May 2006 17:28:34 -0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <001401c676b2$ac324630$4d7e0f4b@Computerroom> From: "Paul Lipps" X-Original-To: "Marv Kaye" Subject: engine failure on TO X-Original-Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 10:28:37 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01C67677.FEC3ABE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C67677.FEC3ABE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A friend of mine just investigated this in a Cherokee 180 with the = following results: So I went to the local FBO and rented a Piper Tomahawk (the same model = of plane I learned to fly) and climbed to 5,000' ASL (about 4,750 AGL). = It was a "normal" central California spring day, pretty close to = standard, so I felt comfortable that weather wasn't going to skew my = attempts to find my own answer to this "controversy". All maneuvers were executed a total of 4 times, twice to the left and = twice to the right. All turns were 180=B0, using roads as my reference. = The plane was trimmed to 70 kts and flown S&L for several seconds after = returning to 5,000' before entering each turn, to allow all the = instruments to quiet down and to make sure I wasn't in an inadvertent = climb or dive. Carb heat was used as a precaution when the throttle was = reduced to idle.=20 First, of course, I tried what I was taught: power to idle, 70 knots, = standard rate turn (3=B0 per second). I didn't pay any attention to the = bank angle but suffice it to say, it was rather shallow. The VSI was = reading 800 FPM, and of course, after turning 180=B0, I lost 800 feet.=20 The second test was exactly the same except I did not add any = back-pressure to maintain speed. As I turned, the nose dropped and the = ASI indicated 75 KTS. VSI was reading 1,000 FPM, and since I was = maintaining a standard rate turn (bank angle again ignored) I lost = 1,000' making the 180=B0 turn.=20 Next I tried 45=B0, using the attitude indicator and ignoring the rate = of turn. Holding back-pressure to maintain 70 KTS, the VSI was = indicating 1,000' FPM, but as expected, the stall warning horn came = alive with its burbling, not a full horn. I got around the turn in well = under 60 seconds, netting an altitude loss of only 600'.=20 Then I tried the same as above, but I didn't hold any back-pressure. = The nose dropped to 95 kts which is a fairly steep nose-down attitude, = one which would alarm anyone who is close to the ground. VSI jumped to = 1,500 FPM, again, something that would freak-out anyone trying this = close to the ground who has never tried it before. Getting around the = turn took very little time, netting only a 300' loss in altitude. I was = impressed. So now it was on to the 60=B0 bank that was recommended in the letter I = responded to. Let me tell you, that was one wild ride, certainly not one = that anyone would want to try for the first time during an engine-out = emergency. It was also difficult for me to execute the maneuver exactly = the same way during each of the four attempts (I'm not an aerobatic = pilot), so my reporting on the numbers contains a few ambiguities.=20 At (or about) 60=B0, there was no maintaining 70 kts. Had I tried it, = I'm sure I would have entered a full stall. And this basically proved my = point, that of someone melded the two practices, one being maintain a = specific speed as trained, but adding in the suggested 60=B0 bank, bad = things would happen if not experienced with this maneuver, but I = digress. About the best speed I could maintain while at the 60=B0 bank = angle was 80 kts, with the stall warning horn blaring. I totally gave up = on the idea of controlling airspeed at 60=B0, it was just too dangerous, = so I went on to just letting the nose drop. At a 60=B0 bank with no back-pressure, the ASI jumped to just over 100 = kts (nearing the yellow arc). The nose-down attitude was uncomfortably = steep as I saw through the eyes of someone 700' from the ground trying = this maneuver for the first time. My windscreen was filled with farms, = roads and buildings and not much in the way of a horizon. The 180=B0 = turn was accomplished very fast, so fast that the VSI never stopped = moving. It peaked at well over 1,500 fpm, close to 2,000. As I pulled = out of the dive/turn, I picked up 100'-150' while converting the excess = airspeed to altitude, netting a total loss of 500'. Although a 500' loss = seems ok, I had to lose close to 700' to get it. If the ground was 600' = below me when I started the turn, I would have been a smoking hole in = the ground.=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C67677.FEC3ABE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A friend of mine just investigated this in a = Cherokee 180=20 with the following results:

So I went = to the local=20 FBO and rented a Piper Tomahawk (the same model of plane I learned to = fly) and=20 climbed to 5,000=92 ASL (about 4,750 AGL). =20 It was a =93normal=94 central California spring day, pretty close = to=20 standard, so I felt comfortable that weather wasn=92t going to skew my = attempts to=20 find my own answer to this =93controversy=94.

All = maneuvers were=20 executed a total of 4 times, twice to the left and twice to the right. = All turns=20 were 180=B0, using roads as my reference. The plane was trimmed to 70 = kts and=20 flown S&L for several seconds after returning to 5,000=92 before = entering each=20 turn, to allow all the instruments to quiet down and to make sure I = wasn=92t in an=20 inadvertent climb or dive. Carb heat was used as a precaution when the = throttle=20 was reduced to idle.

 First, of=20 course, I tried what I was taught: power to idle, 70 knots, standard = rate turn=20 (3=B0 per second). I didn=92t pay any attention to the bank angle but = suffice it to=20 say, it was rather shallow. The VSI was reading 800 FPM, and of course, = after=20 turning 180=B0, I lost 800 feet.

 The second=20 test was exactly the same except I did not add any back-pressure to = maintain=20 speed. As I turned, the nose dropped and the ASI indicated 75 KTS. VSI = was=20 reading 1,000 FPM, and since I was maintaining a standard rate turn = (bank angle=20 again ignored) I lost 1,000=92 making the 180=B0 turn. =

 Next I tried=20 45=B0, using the attitude indicator and ignoring the rate of turn. = Holding=20 back-pressure to maintain 70 KTS, the VSI was indicating 1,000=92 FPM, = but as=20 expected, the stall warning horn came alive with its burbling, not a = full horn.=20 I got around the turn in well under 60 seconds, netting an altitude loss = of only=20 600=92.

 Then I tried=20 the same as above, but I didn=92t hold any back-pressure. The nose = dropped  to 95 kts which is a fairly = steep=20 nose-down attitude, one which would alarm anyone who is close to the = ground. VSI=20 jumped to 1,500 FPM, again, something that would freak-out anyone trying = this=20 close to the ground who has never tried it before. Getting around the = turn took=20 very little time, netting only a 300=92 loss in altitude. I was=20 impressed.

 So now it=20 was on to the 60=B0 bank that was recommended in the letter I responded = to. Let me=20 tell you, that was one wild ride, certainly not one that anyone would = want to=20 try for the first time during an engine-out emergency. It was also = difficult for=20 me to execute the maneuver exactly the same way during each of the four = attempts=20 (I=92m not an aerobatic pilot), so my reporting on the numbers contains = a few=20 ambiguities.

 At (or=20 about) 60=B0, there was no maintaining 70 kts. Had I tried it, I=92m = sure I would=20 have entered a full stall. And this basically proved my point, that of = someone=20 melded the two practices, one being maintain a specific speed as = trained, but=20 adding in the suggested 60=B0 bank, bad things would happen if not = experienced=20 with this maneuver, but I digress. About the best speed I could maintain = while=20 at the 60=B0 bank angle was 80 kts, with the stall warning horn blaring. = I totally=20 gave up on the idea of controlling airspeed at 60=B0, it was just too = dangerous,=20 so I went on to just letting the nose drop.

 At a 60=B0=20 bank with no back-pressure, the ASI jumped to just over 100 kts (nearing = the=20 yellow arc). The nose-down attitude was uncomfortably steep as I saw = through the=20 eyes of someone 700=92 from the ground trying this maneuver for the = first time. My=20 windscreen was filled with farms, roads and buildings and not much in = the way of=20 a horizon. The 180=B0 turn was accomplished very fast, so fast that the = VSI never=20 stopped moving. It peaked at well over 1,500 fpm, close to 2,000.  As I pulled out of the = dive/turn, I=20 picked up 100=92-150=92 while converting the excess airspeed to = altitude, netting a=20 total loss of 500=92. Although a 500=92 loss seems ok, I had to lose = close to 700=92=20 to get it. If the ground was 600=92 below me when I started the turn, I = would have=20 been a smoking hole in the ground.=20

------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C67677.FEC3ABE0--