Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #38520
From: John McMahon <blackoaks@gmail.com>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: for the record - Useful speculation on accidents
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 15:10:51 -0500
To: <lml>
Good info Scott,
Another .02 for consideration.

Then, all things being equal, an upwind (East) turn would have shaved off 600' from his turn width and they would have made it..  For this reason, I was always taught that if caught in a box canyon the upwind direction was the preferred direction to turn in order to minimize the width of the turn.  I suspect that they never thought of themselves as being in a box canyon because there were no rocks!  But their mental attitude of avoiding calling LGA and not violating the corridor did in fact put them in that situation. 

Personally at some point in the turn, I'd have said the hell with the corridor, widened the turn, missed the building and filed a  NASA report. 

On 11/14/06, Sky2high@aol.com <Sky2high@aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 11/14/2006 11:49:32 A.M. Central Standard Time, kevin@airforcemechanical.com writes:

 it seems that the PIC just didn't want to contact La Guardia tower for transit through their airspace as the VFR defined corridor was coming to an end.  The claim is that the 180 degree turn had to be done in less than about 1700 feet of horizontal space with an approximate loss of about 300 feet because of crosswind drift and at a constant bank of over 50 degrees at the estimated speed of 97 Kts, reducing the width to about 1400 feet.  Well and good as this seems to be the box canyon problem.  Do you know the turn radius of your aircraft at several speeds and bank angles? 


--
John McMahon
Lancair Super ES, N9637M
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster