Ada Elle

This still confuses me. A propeller produces maximal thrust at zero speed (static thrust) and has its thrust reduce as the aircraft speeds up. An aircraft that is climbing at an angle S has: - thrust aligned with oncoming air - a drag component of weight (W sin S) - lift orthogonal to the oncoming air - lift equal to W cos theta - aerodynamic drag (induced + parasite) where thrust = aerodynamic drag + W sin S Best angle of climb occurs at maximal S, which is at an angle and speed where thrust minus drag (thrust available) is maximised. See, for example, http://code7700.com/images/climb_performance_thrust_atc_51-3_figure_2.21.jpg (taken from http://code7700.com/v-x.html). Changing the aircraft weight will shift the drag curve to the left (because of decreased induced drag). I can't see that the maximised thrust available occurs at a single AoA.

Junior Senior Instructor - now that's a contradiction! I also was wondering about cross country flights that include circuits - do I log the circuit time separately as non cross country flight, or does the fact that there's a 30nm leg in it mean the whole thing can be logged as XC?

Sorry, I didn't quote the last sentence, which was also in V6. I actually found the section that authorises this - it's now moved to section 19; SIs can now approve solo navs (previously had to be approved by CFIs). That was the information I was after - whether an SI can send a student on a solo nav.

Thanks, I'd read a lot of this elsewhere but it's hard to find instructors, for example, who teach that the elevators control AoA rather than pitch. Does BRoC and BAoC really happen at a fixed angle of attack, in a variable angle prop? I thought that they were dependent on the properties of the prop combined with the properties of the wing/aircraft: - BAoC is thrust available - thrust needed - BRoC is power available - power needed but since power is a speed related variable, as you change weight/CoG/etc the power needed changes and you might change AoA for BRoC.

The old ops manual (v6) says: CROSS COUNTRY FLYING 4. No Pilot Certificate holder shall act as pilot in command of a recreational aircraft at a distance greater than 25 nautical miles from the point of departure unless: a. an RA-Aus Cross Country endorsement has been issued; or b. flight training exercises are being conducted under the supervision and control of a CFI. The new ops manual says: . No Pilot Certificate holder shall act as pilot in command of a recreational aeroplane at a distance greater than 25 nautical miles from the original point of departure unless holding a RA-Aus Cross Country (X) Endorsement. Consecutive flights of 25 nautical miles do not comply with this requirement. Does this mean that I can't log solo navigation training time as PIC? Who is the PIC in the case of a solo nav?

Dual. 275/hr plus landing fees.

Are they still there? What are they flying now, the Golf?

Dave wasn't happy with the performance of his lightwing, and at least one of the SRFC lightwings was looking fairly unloved.... I've never seen any of them flying.

I'm not asking about after EFATO! I'm asking about how to fly, on climbout, that maximises your choices after EFATO. The possible/impossible turn is a distraction. Imagine (assuming that I've tested it in an aircraft and I lose 400ft on the turn): - climbing at Vx, the height at end of runway is 700'. The impossible turn becomes possible. - climbing at Vy, the height at end of runway is 500'. The impossible turn is impossible. Should I climb at Vx so that I have the option of turnback? This is the question.

Where can I get cheap tailwheel time around Sydney? I'm paying $300/hr for citab time...

I've read it. It doesn't address the question I originally posed. http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/e-f-a-t-o-reference-thread-quality-information-only.40773/#post-429411 describes the notion of the 'non-maneuvering area'. My question originally posed, is: - Does climbing at Vx reduce the non-maneuvering area? - Does it reduce it by enough that the decreased stall margin is made up for?

You take v^2/a = r for the radius of the turn; in a coordinated turn a = g tan (aob) and the time taken to turn 180 degrees is pi * r / v. Substitute it all in... Push the nose down a few degrees. 60's a lot. The simulator trials suggest that theoretical optimal is 45, and 35 is probably better for most pilots. http://www.csgnetwork.com/aircraftturninfocalc.html says that at 60 knots, with a 45 knot stall speed, and a 35 degree angle of bank, you can do a rate 4 turn (180 degrees in 15 seconds), increasing the stall speed to 50 knots. If your VSI is reading -600, you've lost 150ft during the turn. I'm not talking about a turnback at 500ft, I'm talking at a turnback when I only have 1500ft of runway left. If I'm at 300ft at YWOL, I'm going to land straight ahead because there should be 3500ft of runway left if I've done the takeoff right, so I'm going to land straight ahead At 700ft, landing straight ahead on remaining runway is no longer an option but the turnback should be an option at this point, _ I think_. These numbers differ between aircraft and runways, of course. (I'm usually at about 800ft at the end of the runway when doing a climb at 80 knots, which is a sort of performance climb situation; 15 faster than BROC). I was asking about the aerodynamics of the stall in this situation, not the numbers on the instruments. I've not flown anything heavier than a Warrior.

Bumpy??? It was a little breezy in the morning (about 8-10kt of headwind) but the afternoon was pretty calm. I missed the best of the afternoon thermals, though, could hardly get any lift. Need to book a time to do a CTA/CTR navex to YSCB in one of the Warriors next week. Just hanging out for the pipersport to get its engine back.

Rate 1 is pretty slow turn in these aircraft. Time taken to turn 180 degrees should be pi * v / (10 tan(bank angle)), where v is in m/s (1 m/s == 2kt, roughly). so at 30 degrees of bank, it should take roughly 20s at 60 knots. Not necessarily better, but faster. 80kts should only get you 180ft though (assuming you have 40kt of airspeed at the end of the zoom. This confuses me. If you have the plane trimmed for flight in a particular regime (say at Vx) and you suddenly cut power, two things should happen: 1. The reduced airflow over the tail should induce a nose down pitching moment 2. As the plane slows and noses over, the winds unload and the stall speed is reduced by this reduction in wind loading If your stick isn't in the stick stall position, how does it stall?

I don't trim on the turn. The plane should not be accelerating steadily with a fixed trim / elevator position - it should stabilise at a given AoA/airspeed. So you should be able to trim for a cruise speed, then use small throttle changes to keep the vario at zero. On cross countries where I'm trying to maintain a TAS, I will use a touch on the trim to increase or decrease airspeed, dampen out the phugoid, and then change the throttle to regain altitude. This is in the 2-3 knot range, mind you, and electric trim.

I did a class in human factors & automation, taught by an aeronautical engineering department (professors were: ex-American Airlines, ex-USN F-18) during my long-since-abandoned PhD studies. misidentification of controls has been a factor in incidents in the past, and having a degree of tactile feedback through shaping is an established way of reducing this.

I almost fly on trim these days - almost wish there was some way to stiffen up the stick pitch control so that I didn't inadvertently pitch up and down once I had it trimmed for a certain AoA. The Citabria's trim on the door is is a pretty good spot reach-wise for me, but the three door levers (trim, carby heat, and throttle) had me pitch down violently trying to put the carby heat on. Need shaped knobs so you can tell which one you have by feel.

This discussion came from flying an aircraft that is near glider territory (17:1) off long runways, and doing some gliding. I don't have any actual experience trying to simulate this, but I will try the next time I have an instructor in the plane (currency revalidation etc). http://williams.best.vwh.net/turnback_seminar_Oct_2008.pdf says this: 'You can turnback if: 1) you height when crossing the departure end of the runway exceeds the altitude required to make the turn, AND 2) Climb ratio is more than glide ratio.' Traditional GA aircraft tend to not meet this criteria. Most high performance RA types (100hp rotax, or amazing wings) do.

I heard that Belmont was reopening...

The glider rope-break procedure seems to have two decision points: 1. Is there enough runway to land straight ahead? 2. Is there enough altitude to turn back? In a sufficiently high performance aircraft or long runway, these might overlap - so you might have enough altitude to turn back, as well as runway to land ahead. but if they don't, how can we fly to minimise the time between (1) and (2)? because that is the region where you might not have options (houses etc straight ahead).

The traditional attitude regarding turnbacks is in aircraft with lower performance than the ones we fly, though. How many GA aircraft can be at 1000ft while still over the runway? (not counting runways sized to take A380s).

so many noise complaints that the majority of airports I've flown out of do right hand circuits at least part of the time, or the other reason is contracircuits for parallel runways (YSCN and YSBK).

Osprey, were you in -PBS late in the afternoon? I think I saw you in the circuit as I was coming back in -SXQ. I'm not good enough at picking a degree or two in attitude so I've been trimming to airspeed (ie hold the nose constant, let the airspeed stabilise, then trim a little bit before or past that depending on the relationship of the airspeed to the desired airspeed), then changing engine power based on RoC and using the elevator to dampen the phugoid. It's not pretty, but if I'm paying attention I can get it to work. Nev - the wing relation sight picture is different between the left and right wings when seated in the left seat. In the citab it was a lot easier except for the need to really use the right foot doing all those powered right hand turns.

Citab was fun, but I couldn't work out if the (sort of incipient, maybe up to a turn) spin was inverted or normal. came out of it just by pushing the stick forward, didn't need to do very much with the rudder.