Tex

Well, no harm in asking. :black_eye:

 

 

Thanks Spin, indeed that is why I would have liked to have made it... to show some support.

 

Just recently (a few months ago) I was ready to try and 'infiltrate" the club down there, in spite having also heard some spurious reports about it being 'private' and restrictive, I already had some understanding of the real situation. Then the latest situation presented itself and I have been waiting to see what eventuates.

 

Let me know when you want to start catching bugs in your teeth... 2 way syndicate?

 

 

But where is the discussion?

Between you and your students:bye:

 

 

Its the second time ive had to answer questions from students because our training methods aren't the same as he publishes.A little annoying.

Discussion of different methods can only be a good thing surely :big_grin:

 

 

Going flying sounds like a fair excuse, Tex! Not sure on the Drifter angle, I know there is one syndicated down there and Drifterdriver on the forum certainly had one in his school, but I don't think that is the case any longer. I'll ask around and get back to you, an LP taildragger is next on my list once I've sorted out my PPL.

Yeh won't complain too much!

Thanks for asking as well.

 

Just how LP are you gonna go?

 

I thought there was a major problem with the owner at Heck Field has it been resolved?

Yes heard about that, how is it working out?

 

 

Bugger I would have loved to have come... but alas...going flying.

 

Anyone with a Drifter for hire down there Spin?

 

 

What do you think of the windmills on the tail. I wanted to promote it as an Australian product and I reckon that does it well.Scotty

Lovely! Seriously, you have reformed me, never liked yellow (or its shades), the colour scheme (orange strengthening to red) and decals just work so very well and complement each other magnificently. Great choice and job

 

 

It is the orange and red stripes that set it off, pure yellow is terrible

 

 

Never been a fan of yellow...

 

UNTIL NOW! Looks great

 

 

Hi :wave:psst.... Escape while you still have a chance (and your sanity)

 

 

No not aware of the mod policies, rightly so... we are so far off topic.... like this guy>>>

 

 

That was a joke BTW....FYI

OH I get it

 

 

Your so vain MM... I was (ambiguously) referring to your assertion that:

 

It is the students thread.

Astounding position... Not useful info? (Yet it was on your CPL) One wonders why:popcorn:

 

 

I caught that before you amended it MM :pokerface:

 

No pressure cficare. Everything I said was correct:thumb up: too advanced? but YMMV

 

 

No

 

What about you?

 

 

Thanx again and sorry if I upset you.

Your welcome and I was in no way upset, I was however quite bemused at how entirely you misrepresented what I had posted (with some support and understanding I thought) adding to any ambiguity and confusion.

 

but ambiguity breeds confusion, and confusion is a serious impediment to the learning process.

Yes indeed it does, I did however take this thread to be offering more than education to students, anticipating a significantly higher base level of knowledge amongst a discussion by more experienced pilots. I have reread my posts in order to remove any ambiguity but they are as clear as I can make them with my admittedly inept literary talents.

 

clarity of thought, knowledge and presence of mind is crucial.

I fixed this last bit for you

 

 

Yes, but i think there is some confusion here. Tex said in an earlier post that if best glide wont let him reach a landable area, then minnimum descent rate will??Best glide is best glide. Take out variables and this speed will get you the best distance. Minnimum descent will not improve glide performance, ie, it will not stretch the glide out to a new (better)ratio. Changing what the ratio is measured in (from an earlier post of 6:1 to 12:1) does not count. You cant measure glide ratio in height lost over distance covered, and then say you can get a better glide ratio by holding speed for minnimum descent speed. All this is doing is changing what the ratio is measuring, ie, now your talking about VSI over IAS or something like that.

Minimum descent speed will NOT stretch a glide (distance).We need to be very clear about this. It will infact make it worse.

 

In most high performance ultralights id only recommend holding minimum descent speed at altitude. For instance the J160 clean stall speed is 58 kts, and the best glide speed is 65. Minimum descent speed is going to be somewhere around 62 kts. And I would point out, in most lighties minimum descent speed is not quoted in the flight manual. Why do you think that is??

 

cheers

I never said anything of the sort...:baldy: All you have said above is a demonstration of how one dimensional your thinking is. Emergencies rarely are one dimensional.

 

Lets all just theorise about Jabs and use that as the benchmark. (Ignore flaps while you are at it... they wont help at all...)

 

Yes! Minimum sink WILL NOT get you to glide further, but NO ONE has said it would, certainly not me. Knowledge of it and how use that knowledge will! You have completely miscomprehended what I wrote (and ALL theory and practice supports). I guess that is what I get to take away from this: K.I.S.S. Though I thought it was... my apologies if it was my delivery that complicated the matter.

 

"You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can not make him think."

 

In 'Training for flights over water but close to the coast' (or anywhere else) during an engine failure - select best glide (whatever that is?).

 

Tex Out:book:

 

 

 

No but sail plane pilots generally use kts, Hangliders and Paragliders used to use fpm but recently there has been a trend (out of Europe) to use mps AND meters for altitude I actually use kph, km, fpm and feet for altitude when hang gliding - but obviously standard units for all powered flying

 

knts to fpm is pretty easy... 1kts x 101fpm

 

knts to mps x .5

 

 

 

Need as much time as I could get, I would have a lot to confess If I was coming up 10ft to low to make it over that last tree or breaking wave I would confess I wish I knew more about speeds to fly!

 

 

TTIUWOP

 

(This thread is useless with out pictures)

 

 

Thanks for the link RGMWA it is very enlightning and just goes to show how much you forget.Now I do have a few concerns, I have never seen a polar curve nor minimum sink speed published (in flight manual) for any aircraft that I have flown. To me this suggests that the difference between published glide speed and minimum sink is so small that it would be almost impossible for us mere mortals to maintain with any accuracy.

 

Should we be advocating flying below 'best glide speed' when the actual figure for minimum sink is not specified? What speed do we fly? Do we need to consider the consequences of flying below minimum sink speed?

 

Now I freely admit that I am not a glider pilot, but when I was younger I did a lot of flying in the US, where the PPL/CPL syllabai is a lot different to Australia. In Australia we do a lot of stalling and a lot of navigation, in the US they do a lot of low speed flight, I have done more short/soft field landings, eights on pylons, pylon eights, lazy eights and chandelles than I care to remember. In all that time no mention was ever made of minimum sink speed, but a lot of the training was spent flying behind the drag curve. What I learned from this was that I never want to be caught in that position with no power.

 

My own opinions aside, it would be fairly simple to work out the minimum sink in a powered aircarft. Firstly fly along at best glide speed and note the power required to maintain altitude. Then fly along 5 knots slower and note the power required to maintain that speed. If the power setting required is higher (which I expect it will be) then the 'minimum sink speed' is between the two speeds. If the power setting is less, then try reducing a further 5 knots and note the new power setting. Using this process of elimination you will be able to work out an approximate minimum sink speed.

 

NB: My advice in an engine out situation would still be to maintain 'best glide speed', this will give you the best range, greater control authority and adequate buffer above stall.

 

Cheers, Mark.:thumb_up:

 

PS: A great article here regarding flying behind the drag curve (aka below minimum sink).

Valid and worthy considerations... Your method for working out speeds to fly in a powered configuration has merit and would work in that set up .

The best way to work out best glide/min sink if they are not published is to plot your own. In a perfect world that is done in neutral air (neither lifting nor sinking airmass, so sunrise is the best) with the engine off, off course that is not practical (for everyone). Next best would be at idle. All you do is select an air speed (a fair bit above best glide) note sink rate, 5 knots slower, note sink rate etc and plot on graph for your polar curve. Of course spinning prop etc and general air plane config make it all variable.

 

Just selecting A best glide speed is rather pointless as it is a function of wing loading, which changes everything! (The polar curves moves right with more weight). Usually published best L/D should state at what percentage of MTOW, if it is for less than MTOW and then you just select best glide when HEAVY (correction) you are probably actually closer to min sink! Confused yet HAHA

 

Yes default to what you know (if that is all you know), best glide for best range with an engine failure

 

If I am punching along over tiger country (or the ocean) knowledge of this is priceless when best glide still may not be enough to get you to a land-able area.

 

One critical point to make it simpler as as well... any speed between best glide and min sink is a BETTER SINK RATE than best glide. You should be able to fly your aircraft comfortably between to min sink and best glide with out fear of stalling it. If you can't.....

 

 

a bit like arguing about best range(distance) vs best endurance(time aloft)...from 500' in a glide both would not make much difference..

That is true, not much difference, still very useful knowledge in anticipation that all (if any) of your emergencies may not happen as low at 500'. After all this thread is not about just being at 500'. I have read a few times on this forum "summoned the sum total of his knowledge and skill". When I think coastal I think ridge lift, might not be much, but that extra little puff of offshore wind blowing up a cliff face might be enough to get you around the headland (at 500') to a beach, but do you fly best L/D or Min sink? Just a little more in the memory bank can not hurt to answer that question. I hope you or I never need it in an emergency...

YES, as an aside the knowledge will also help you save fuel too can never have enough of that stuff

 

Here you go, with graphs:http://www.gliderbooks.com/downloads/H_Ch4.pdf

rgmwa

Sorry Mark... what can I say... it is all in here, no point in me trying to repeat it less eloquently:clap:

As I said elsewhere: Gliding is the natural and ordinary state of flight. Just because you add an engine does not change the fact, that at its base level, you are flying a glider.

 

 

Sure Mark will do... At work until about 9pm then will oblige. In any case the theory is the same for all aircraft (with more variables involved for rotary) gliders, hang gliders, RAA, GA... Do quick search on 'polar curve', everyone aircraft has it's own... Will post some graphs etc later when I get off the iPhone.

 

 

i regularily achieve 'minimum descent'..immediately prior to touchdown.