Jump to content
  • Welcome to Recreational Flying!
    A compelling community experience for all aviators
    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in
Sign in to follow this  
APenNameAndThatA

Jacobson Flair

Recommended Posts

I'm impressed Turbo......I've never noticed that you had a sense of humour before. This thread seems to have demonstrated you are actually capable of comprehending and using tongue in cheek sarcasm.

 

At least I hope that's what it is.....

 

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Depends on whether the controls are powered and the rate of response to the controls being applied. High inertia aircraft will stay tracking on centreline for longer then lighties that get blown away by the wind. as soon as the wings are level. Hence the "land on one wheel" manner of doing it. Many jets have a clearance problem with flap trailing edges or underslung engine nacelles touching the runway at relatively small bank angles.. A highwing gives maximum opportunity to Counter the X wind component as long as the you don't run out of rudder effect and you are game enough to go there. Nev

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems you have to have lots of technical graphs and mental maths to be able to land an aircraft, how did people manage in the olden days? I opened that file on the Jacobson flair and  couldn't get past the second paragraph without falling asleep.

 

Referencing the olden days again the advice to land a Tiger was throttle off and land, that was all. No dire warnings about shock cooling or standard or non standard glide slopes. Seems it was all very easy, how did they manage without the Jacobson flair?

 

All the theory is too much for me, I just land the aircraft, learning from each one. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seems you have to have lots of technical graphs and mental maths to be able to land an aircraft, how did people manage in the olden days? I opened that file on the Jacobson flair and  couldn't get past the second paragraph without falling asleep.

 

Referencing the olden days again the advice to land a Tiger was throttle off and land, that was all. No dire warnings about shock cooling or standard or non standard glide slopes. Seems it was all very easy, how did they manage without the Jacobson flair?

 

All the theory is too much for me, I just land the aircraft, learning from each one. 

 

I suspect your the one that will get from point A to point B way faster. He first has to start with a flare.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suspect your the one that will get from point A to point B way faster. He first has to start with a flare.

 

My last pair of flairs were decommissioned in 1978, is that what you mean?

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My brain hurts. Too much overload and too hot to go flying☹️

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seems you have to have lots of technical graphs and mental maths to be able to land an aircraft, how did people manage in the olden days?

 

When aircrafts were small and slow, when they did not fly in crosswind at all... Imagine how to drive Ford T comparing to modern Focus RS.

 

But as soon as they became high-performance (ie military) and had to fly any weather, any airfield, any time - to loss 1-2% due to crash landings on every sortie appeared to be normal

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No probs Antonts, still much the same these days.

 

Just go and fly, simple

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice that the issue of slipping approaches - the perceived safety of them - has come up again in this thread.

 

Those who've been on here for a while will remember that 5 years back there was an epic thread started by pmccarthy.

 

It stretched to more than 400 posts and generated lots of heat and light.

 

It was called Steering on Final with Rudder.

 

For those who've got a few days to spare (and since it's too hot to go flying)  here's a link to it:

 

 

 

 

 

But for me, the in-a-nutshell, take-home-message was this part of DJP's post on Page 5 (#112):

 

'From the USA FAA's Airplane Flying Handbook "Unlike skids, however, if an airplane in a slip is made to stall, it displays very little of the yawing tendency that causes a skidding stall to develop into a spin. The airplane in a slip may do little more than tend to roll into a wings level attitude. In fact, in some airplanes stall characteristics may even be improved (p. 8-11)."

 

From Noel Kruse's Book #1, Aerodynamics and Other Stuff page 224 at http://www.flybetter.com.au/

 

"Well many instructors believe that a sideslip is a precursor to a spin (!) because the speed is low and the controls are in a similar ‘out of balance’ position. This is a misconception brought about by their lack of understanding of spinning. Let me put it simply; you can no more spin off a properly ‘set up’ side slipping approach than you can off a properly set up ‘straight’ approach."

 

From Rich Stowell's book, Stall/Spin Awareness page 335: "A properly executed slip takes us further from the critical angle of attack than even wings-level, coordinated flight. Furthermore, the yaw and roll coupling needed to drive a spin not only is missing, but yaw and roll as as far from coupled as possible during a slip. Slipping actually provides a greater stall/spin margin than even normal cruise flight."

 

Depending on the aeroplane type there may be some uncommanded roll enough to scare some-one the first time he/she encounters it nevertheless sideslips are inherently spin resistant.

 

(Of course, I and the authors above only ever refer to behaviour of certified aircraft.)'

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No probs Antonts, still much the same these days.

 

Just go and fly, simple

 

 Landing on 70-80 kn what we are doing today is not the same as landing on tiger moth which cruises on 60 and lands on 30. It differs. Some things are easier (crosswind), some things are much worse due to speed.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

All the theory is too much for me, I just land the aircraft, learning from each one. 

 

 ... and from what I know about your flying career so far, Mr.Glenn, I reckon you'd have had way more than 100,000 of those lessons by now.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Landing on 70-80 kn what we are doing today is not the same as landing on tiger moth which cruises on 60 and lands on 30. It differs. Some things are easier (crosswind), some things are much worse due to speed.

 

Yes flying a Tiger is different to modern machines, my take on the subject is that flying and landing in general is over complicated unnecessarily these days, especially ultralight/light aircraft/recreational fliers.

 

I do fly heavier/faster machines and the basic procedure is still the same, throttle off and land.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 ... and from what I know about your flying career so far, Mr.Glenn, I reckon you'd have had way more than 100,000 of those lessons by now.

 

Getting on for 170,000 conservative estimate Mr Garfly but still learning every one. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later for your post to be seen If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...