X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 22:27:24 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nm48.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com ([98.138.120.55] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.7) with SMTP id 6649901 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 22 Dec 2013 22:16:17 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.138.120.55; envelope-from=chris_zavatson@yahoo.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] by nm48.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Dec 2013 03:15:40 -0000 Received: from [98.138.101.129] by nm48.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Dec 2013 03:12:40 -0000 Received: from [98.138.86.157] by tm17.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Dec 2013 03:12:40 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1015.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 Dec 2013 03:12:40 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-4 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 183232.18796.bm@omp1015.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 86010 invoked by uid 60001); 23 Dec 2013 03:12:40 -0000 DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Kf0xiHdTosrHrmiFuYF3LJVCR+h6Q6UylblYf9bRgi6sWtzG1/wHyorZHRrQXHZjnLvW7TDDdYIVH49rIhLkjeWoLgmhMXi1qlM4iH/iBdBEkrZhji7hQwukSbtkNWNkp+5vxjT0ELF6a05O4dq6A6WlZJK4ESogmU0tEL6ICj8=; X-YMail-OSG: S6r33wEVM1nsCQ4TR6_YMFoBEZiXyfbPwY1B5T7rMLSjxy1 rxXkFqHMvHrS2DqoFOvJM0h5Q7GTI1GMfD3vOFjQTTg-- Received: from [172.14.16.72] by web121603.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 22 Dec 2013 19:12:39 PST X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001,SSBoYXZlIHNlZW4gdGhpcyBhcnRpY2xlIGJlZm9yZS7CoMKgV2hpbGUgdGhlIG92ZXJhbGwgbWVzc2FnZSBpcyBjbGVhciAtIHRoZSB2YWx1ZSBvZiB0eXBlIHNwZWNpZmljIHRyYWluaW5nLCBhwqBmZXcgdGhpbmdzIGp1bXBlZCBvdXQgYXQgbWUgYXMgb2RkLgpGaXJzdCwgdGhlIHRocmVlIGFjY2lkZW50cyBxdW90ZWQgd2VyZSBub3QgcmVhbGx5wqB0eXBlIHNwZWNpZmljLsKgIEFueSBwbGFuZSBjYW4gcnVuIG91dCBvZiBnYXMgb3IgYXR0ZW1wdCBhZXJvYmF0aWNzLgpUaGUgb3RoZXIgdGhpbmcgdGhhdCABMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.172.614 References: X-Original-Message-ID: <1387768359.72493.YahooMailNeo@web121603.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> X-Original-Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 19:12:39 -0800 (PST) From: Chris Zavatson Reply-To: Chris Zavatson Subject: Re: [LML] Re: 1992 "HOW TO KILL YOURSELF IN A HOMEBUILT" X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-1682663710-131269126-1387768359=:72493" ---1682663710-131269126-1387768359=:72493 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have seen this article before.=A0=A0While the overall message is clear - = the value of type specific training, a=A0few things jumped out at me as odd= .=0AFirst, the three accidents quoted were not really=A0type specific.=A0 A= ny plane can run out of gas or attempt aerobatics.=0AThe other thing that s= truck me is=A0odd was the section on steep approaches.=0AFirst the high des= cent rate after engine failure is mentioned (Glasair III, 2,600 fpm).=A0 Th= is is=A0immediately followed=A0by suggesting that approaches should be flow= n at a 'normal' approach angle with power like a twin turbine.=0A=0A"Pilots= were being told to fly steep approaches which caused landing accidents. Yo= u fly the plane like a turbine corporate twin, say the experts, with a norm= al approach angle and carrying a bit of power right down to the pavement."= =0A=0A=A0A twin corporate turbine can still fly an ILS at 3 degrees after a= n engine failure.=A0 The high performance single does not have that option.= =A0 Engine out training should provide enough familiarity with steep approa= ches to make them feel routine.=A0 The effectiveness of the flaps on the 36= 0 provides much versatility in approach=A0angles.=A0 A 3 degree ILS (600 fp= m), a 6 degree routine VFR pattern (1,200 fpm) or a maximum power off desce= nt of 11 degrees and 2,000 fpm.=A0 Controllers=A0requesting=A0a short appro= ach appreciate it when you can go from 140 KIAS on downwind to dropping lik= e a rock, to greasing it on over the numbers followed by taking the very fi= rst turn-off.=A0 In general, any airplane can glide power off to a landing = whether it be a Piper Cub, F-16=A0or a 767.=A0=A0It is all just a matter of= energy management.=0AType specific training is definitely key in improving= our safety record.=0A=0AChris Zavatson=0AN91CZ=0A360std=0Ahttp://www.n91cz= .net/=0A=A0=0A=0AOn Sunday, December 22, 2013 6:12 PM, "vtailjeff@aol.com" = wrote:=0A =0AJohn, =0A=0AYou hit on a good point. You = should have respect for the hazards that can bite you -- but fear? No. If y= ou are properly prepared with the right training and aircraft preparation e= verything should go reasonably well. I know you were at Greeneville. Did yo= u meet Jay Elliot there? He is retired Marine aviator and military test pil= ot. He is currently a LOBO CFI, flies a 320=A0and lives=A0near Charleston ,= SC. I am sure he can help you get ready for first flight. =A0Did you atten= d Bob Pastusek's seminar on preparing for your first flight at the Greenvil= le fly-in? If you have any questions we are standing by to assist. =0A=0AMe= rry Christmas, =0A=0AJeff Edwards =0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: J= ohn Cooper =0ATo: lml =0ASe= nt: Sun, Dec 22, 2013 4:59 pm=0ASubject: [LML] Re: 1992 "HOW TO KILL YOURSE= LF IN A HOMEBUILT"=0A=0A=0APeter-- With all due respect, since I know you'v= e been flying Lancairs for a =0Along time, do you think that those of us wh= o haven't flown yet really =0Awant to hear how the Lancair is a dangerous p= lane and chances are good =0Athat we're going to die on our first flight - = or most certainly by the =0Asecond one? I understand that your intention in= posting that Falco piece =0Awas to prod people into getting some flight ti= me in a similar aircraft =0Abefore launching off, but I'm really getting si= ck of people telling me =0AI'm going to die soon. I've built the best plane= I knew how and fully =0Aintend to get some stick time in a 360 before I fl= y mine. What I could =0Ause right now, though, is a little moral support. F= rom my 6 hours at the =0Acontrols of Clarence Grubbs 69CG, the 235 is a swe= et flying plane and =0Anot dangerous at all if one respects the differences= from a C-172. But =0Ait seems that all I get more experienced pilots is FU= D [Fear, =0AUncertainty, and Doubt]. Several months ago I attended an EAA m= eeting at =0AAsheville, NC, and it was the same with those guys (mostly spa= m-can RV =0Abuilders). I went there for some support, and all I got was FUD= . I =0Ahaven't been back since. /rant --=0AFor archives and unsub http://ma= il.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html ---1682663710-131269126-1387768359=:72493 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have s= een this article before.  While the overall message is clear - th= e value of type specific training, a few things jumped out at me as od= d.
First, the three accidents quoted were not really=  type specific.  Any plane can run out of gas or attempt aerobati= cs.
The other thing that struck me is odd was t= he section on steep approaches.
First the high desce= nt rate after engine failure is mentioned (Glasair III, 2,600 fpm).  T= his is immediately followed by suggesting that approaches should = be flown at a 'normal' approach angle with power like a twin turbine.

"Pilot= s were being told to fly steep approaches which caused landing accidents. You fly the plane like a turbine corporate twin, say the expert= s, with a normal approach angle and carrying a bit of power right down to t= he pavement."

 A twin corporate turbine can = still fly an ILS at 3 degrees after an engine failure.  The high perfo= rmance single does not have that option.  Engine out training should p= rovide enough familiarity with steep approaches to make them feel routine.&= nbsp; The effectiveness of the flaps on the 360 provides much versatility i= n approach angles.  A 3 degree ILS (600 fpm), a 6 degree routine = VFR pattern (1,200 fpm) or a maximum power off descent of 11 degrees and 2,= 000 fpm.  Controllers requesting a short approach appreciate= it when you can go from 140 KIAS on downwind to dropping like a rock, to g= reasing it on over the numbers followed by taking the very first turn-off.  In general, any airplane can glide power off to a landing = whether it be a Piper Cub, F-16 or a 767.  It is all just a = matter of energy management.
Type specific training is definitely key in improving our safe= ty record.

<= /div>
Chris Zavatson
N91CZ
360std
ht= tp://www.n91cz.net/
 
<= div style=3D"font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, = Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">
On Sunday, December 22, 2013 6:12 PM, "vtailjeff@aol.com" <vtailjeff@aol.c= om> wrote:
=0A
John,
=0A=0A
 
=0A=0A
You hit on a goo= d point. You should have respect for the hazards that can bite you -- but f= ear? No. If you are properly prepared with the right training and aircraft = preparation everything should go reasonably well. I know you were at Greene= ville. Did you meet Jay Elliot there? He is retired Marine aviator and mili= tary test pilot. He is currently a LOBO CFI, flies a 320 and lives&nbs= p;near Charleston , SC. I am sure he can help you get ready for first fligh= t.  Did you attend Bob Pastusek's seminar on preparing for your first = flight at the Greenville fly-in? If you have any questions we are standing = by to assist.
=0A=0A
 
=0A=0A
Merry Christmas,
= =0A=0A
 
=0A=0A
Jeff Edwards
=0A=0A
=0A=0A=
=0A=0A
-----Original Message-----
=0AFrom: John Cooper <s= nopercod@comporium.net>
=0ATo: lml <lml@lancaironline.net>
= =0ASent: Sun, Dec 22, 2013 4:59 pm
=0ASubject: [LML] Re: 1992 "HOW TO KI= LL YOURSELF IN A HOMEBUILT"
=0A
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A
=0A=0A
Peter--=0A=0AWith all due respect, since I know you've bee=
n flying Lancairs for a =0Along time, do you think that those of us who hav=
en't flown yet really =0Awant to hear how the Lancair is a dangerous plane =
and chances are good =0Athat we're going to die on our first flight - or mo=
st certainly by the =0Asecond one? I understand that your intention in post=
ing that Falco piece =0Awas to prod people into getting some flight time in=
 a similar aircraft =0Abefore launching off, but I'm really getting sick of=
 people telling me =0AI'm going to die soon. I've built the best plane I kn=
ew how and fully =0Aintend to get some stick time in a 360 before I fly min=
e. What I could =0Ause right now, though, is a little moral support. From m=
y 6 hours at the =0Acontrols of Clarence Grubbs 69CG, the 235 is a sweet fl=
ying plane and =0Anot dangerous at all if one respects the differences from=
 a C-172. But =0Ait seems that all I get more experienced pilots is FUD [Fe=
ar, =0AUncertainty, and Doubt]. Several months ago I attended an EAA meetin=
g at =0AAsheville, NC, and it was the same with those guys (mostly spam-can=
 RV =0Abuilders). I went there for some support, and all I got was FUD. I =
=0Ahaven't been back since.=0A=0A/rant=0A=0A=0A--=0AFor archives and unsub =
http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.h=
tml=0A
=0A
=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A
=0A

---1682663710-131269126-1387768359=:72493--