Thirsty

Pretty much what I teach volksy. Having said that my one and only engine failure so far happened opposite the threshold 3/4 of the way downwind and I'd just spent the last hour practicing engine outs with a student! Dropped a valve and the engine went bang, bang, bang before I shut it down. Landed back on the departure runway on a nil wind day and even managed to roll off the rway onto the taxiway. Sometimes things just work out in a bad situation.

Yeah with taildraggers (and the Jab LSA55's I fly) you need to keep your feet moving too - like peddling a bike :) Also Kyle hit the nail on the head re: where to look - make a conscious decision to look at least halfway down the strip not just in front of you. One last thing - try flying along the runway just off the ground after the flare. Add a tiny little bit of power after the flare and try not to land, you'll probably find you'll do greasers every time doing that.

The one thing I see in new students (not saying you fit that category just saying) who can't land well is that they flare OK then they just sit there with the stick in one place waiting for the landing. If the stick isn't constantly moving around, even just a little, then the landing won't be nice in all likelihood. It's hard to work out how we can land one day and not the next. Must be a mindset or frame of mind thing I 'spose.

Yes I agree the cct will depend a lot on the local foibles of where you are flying. If I were teaching in Wollongong for instance there's no way I'd do wide ccts all day long! Another point that no-one seems to have touched on - we talk about turning base early enough that you could glide to the runway but what about the turn onto downwind? If the engine stopped just as you turned downwind you'd be looking at a downwind landing if you were to go back to the strip you just took off on. Is that preferable to a landing in a paddock into the wind? (Taking into account a builtup area then yes it would be probably but in the event there are other places to go what would you do?)

Thing is we don't only fly circuits. When we go away from the cct area we are taught to always have somewhere to go. You can do the same thing in the cct if you fly somewhere that isn't builtup like I do. I'm not going to die if the engine stops and I can't make the runway! Just as I'm not going to die if the engine stops anywhere else because I'm always looking for somewhere to go. Btw I fly all sorts of cct shapes depending on the aircraft and my mood I'm more talking about teaching students. In the aircraft we fly we turn downwind at 1000' and that puts the runway at about two thirds the way up the strut thus we are about the right distance out and this is pointed out to students.

Andy just to clarify I wasn't the pilot who put the plane in the paddock,,it was a mate of mine. Another thing I forgot to add was that on the day it happened we had a crosswind on the strip he was using and his base leg would have had a fair headwind component. I was thinking about all this last night and I remember my ga instructer constantly pulling power on me in the circuit and once when about halfway downwind he did it and I was looking for somewhere to go he said "what about the runway?" Bt it definitely wasn't the norm. That stands out because that was the first time he said that so I was definitely trained to not try and get back to the runway. Mind you I did my ppl in the 80's so maybe the hinting has changed somewhat.

And just to add to this where I fly there are paddocks everywhere so there is no real worry about getting it down safely in the event. I flew my normal cct pattern at Wollongong on 16 (I think it was 16, the southerly runway anyway) and yes, if I had an engine failure particularly on long final (over the power station) there would have been trouble :) And Andy, yes he definately is as am I :)

This is the problem as I see it. I can't go and teach students indepentaly cause I'm not a CFi and I don't have a flight school! So I teach what I'm told which just happens to be what I was taught years ago. I can see the benefits of the way you teach andy but it must be hard on students initially? At least we have some numbers to work to and not have to worry about judgement early on :). I doubt my CFi will change the way he wants us doing things so I guess we're in the height school of thinking!

It's standard to turn base when the threshold is 45 degrees over your shoulder, there's no argument there right? You might choose to turn sooner to keep in closer but again, this is not how i was taught. i can understand climbing out more than 500' on upwind to keep it tighter as well but I wasn't taught that way. I initially learnt to fly at Canberra in a c152 and I was taught to turn at 500' onto xwind then turn onto dwind at 1000'. I'd like to hear from others about this to see what the consensus is. Any CFis around care to comment? My CFi taught me the method I've outlined and that's what I now teach.

Tomo, you were taught ga recently, how was it explained to you?

I think this subject needs its own thread!

So how do I teach when to turn downwind? There has to be something I can use particularly if a student flies different aircraft types. I teach my students to trim the aircraft straight and level at 1000' and then turn downwind. That's what I was taught in ga and also in ra when I came back to aviation. I see you're an atpl Howard, I'm surprised you weren't taught this way.

I reckon we'll get another and take footage inside and out at the same time and stitch it together later. The only downsides to this camera are there is no external audio in and you can't get it to flip the video while it records of you happen to hang it upside down as we did, has to be done later on the pc. The biggest upside is that it has wireless built in as standard and there is an app that you can use to control the camera wirelessly and it is really small compared to the hero cams.

I don't agree that the turn onto base should be within glide distance. Let me try and explain how I was taught and how I teach. A circuit has to be standard shape and height otherwise how will we teach it? Take off, climb to 500' turn onto crosswind and climb to 1000', turn downwind. The aircraft performance in this case will dictate the circuit size. If you don't do it this way you are not flying a standard circuit pattern. I'd be very surprised if you lot are turning downwind before reaching 1000' because that is how you would have been taught. In a jab at close to mtow you'll be turning downwind a fair distance from the runway such that gliding back will not likely be possible on the base turn if you keep parallel with the runway. I teach that unless you are in line with the threshold of the runway plus or minus a couple of hundred meters you shouldn't be looking to make the runway if the engine stops. All my flying experience supports this and all I was taught as well so if someone has some other method I'm all ears. The pic in this incident has about 70 hours all up.

Hey Tim, yeah I was worried about the crop too cause we had to take our car in there and tow the plane to a better spot but he said barley will bounce back so no harm done. I flew over the area the next day and you'd never know we were in there!

Depends on the wind. I was taught ga and except for a small area on downwind you probably won't make it back to the runway. I also now instruct and I teach my students the same thing. Most of the way around the circuit you'll be looking for a paddock. That is unless you fly a nonstandard circuit and keep in close in which case you might well make it back.

That was funny! I sort of agree with him but not for new students. Keep it standard until you can do it well then mix it up.

Yeah but does it cost $150? Nothing against the hero cameras I just think they're a little overpriced.

Yeah in this case it's not the jab that's the problem. This engine has actually been running perfectly up til this incident.

Yeah it was a bit marginal. No chance of wheelbarrowing as I had the stick well back. Notice the flaps were up as I started the roll - less drag to get me going! We also emptied everything out of the plane except a few litres of fuel and me :)

Well we had the piston circlip issue sorted out a few weeks ago and while doing the test flight the pilot pulled the power back on the base turn and the engine stopped! It wouldn't restart so he put it down in a barley crop not far from the runway. We've had a problem with the carb on this plane for a while where after cruising and pulling the throttle back the engine would start to die like it was starving for fuel. It would then recover after a couple of seconds and all would be well until the cruise portion. Anyway, we swapped the carb out and the problem went away. Jab supplied the carb under warranty so all good now. I suspect the slide is not sliding properly or the diaphragm has a hole. To end this story I flew the plane out of the crop and my mate took a video of the event. You'll notice I pull it into the air at a fairly slow rate of knots - this was due to the plane not accelerating anymore so I used the short field technique of dropping full flap as I was rolling and just getting it off the ground but still in ground effect then accelerating and flying away. Very exciting!

Well I've received my camera (LIC Ego) and have taken a video with it attached to my plane. Resolution is 720P at 60FPS (though I think Youtube does something to videos 'cause it looks better on my computer). 27 minutes of starting, 3 circuits and a shutdown. Very happy with it so far. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnTdGj-en6w

I've had icing in a jab as well. Engine starts to run roughly for no apparent reason the first thing to do is put on carb heat. If the rough running goes away it was probably carb ice. I'm pretty sure the jabs run unfiltered hot air. The carb heat fitting on the airbox directs the hot air behind the filter.

Love that, not above 500'! Can't fly under 500' so it really means fly at exactly 500' :).

Not saying I'm not impressed, just saying it's basically the same jump 18,000ft higher - how is that not more of the same?? The way everyone is going on you'd think no-one has ever been anywhere near this jump before. Besides I'd say with the lack of technology in 1960 that earlier jump is way more impressive than this one.