On 2/6/2022 at 6:17 PM, Garfly said:

 

STOL Pilot Warned To ‘Lower Your Nose’ Before Crash

 

By Russ Niles    Published:June 1, 2022

 

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/stol-pilot-warned-to-lower-your-nose-before-crash/

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Ch3o26Y5_0E

This kind of illustrates why I think it is best to train for stalls by putting the stick well forward and fast. If you are practicing stalls, easing the stick forward will break the stall, but if you are taken by surprise, you need to act faster and more. When the plane started turning left, things were so far gone that big correction was needed and fast. The last thing that guy needed was a memory of his instructor chiding him for losing too much height on recovery. 

I am not worried that you might lose 200 ft when you are 100 ft above the ground. Even a full stalled aircraft has a MUCH bigger horizontal velocity that a vertical velocity. Hitting the ground fully stalled is way better than hitting the ground nose first.  

If you are descending at 500 fpm, you are descending at 5 knots. So if you hit the ground before you have broken the stall, you will survive unless you hit something. If you spin in at 40 kts, you hit at 40 kts. 

This is a safety issue, so I welcome dissenting views..   

Is there any use for these things if you have gps in your iPad? Genuine question. 

So, how much? 

600 mph is 520 kt. 

I wonder if trying to land nose-high will cause accidents by people accidentally running out of lift when they are too high and stalling? 

On 9/5/2022 at 4:48 AM, turboplanner said:

No doubt that's the cause of a few of them.

A variant on that is the hundreds of students, particularly in C150 and C152 who skim almost the full length of the runway in ground effect before touching down, and a few of those, seeing the end of the runway may shove the stick forward thinking they can force the aircraft down.

 

However, by far the worst group of instructors are the ones who for some reason actually teach the point and shoot method of landing where the yoke is used to control altitude, pointing at the proposed touch down point and the throttle is used to control speed. Using this method you're almost certain to touch down nose wheel first often.  We had a group of instructors on this site about a decade ago who vehemently argued for this method because it was used n parts of the military, and blasted anyone who said different.When that debate was on a cople of the members bent nose legs. Those instructors moved on from here but I know at least one of the is out there lurking and probably teaching the same thing.

IMHO, the big problem with this technique is what will happen when the engine fails… 

Suppose you take off into the wind, have an engine failure and turn 180 degrees as you descend. In this case, your tail wind will decrease as you approach the ground, thereby actually increasing your performance!

The air moves slower closer to the ground. And Im not sating the effect is big. It’s like the Stinson crash, climbing with a tail wind, but different. 

F10 is incorrect (as we all are from time to time) but at least he’s polite about it! 

7 hours ago, F10 said:

But even more critical, you will have to be able to accelerate in the turn to maintain a safe IAS, as you turn downwind.  

This is not true. It definitely feels true, and I didn’t realise your mistake until I read Thruster’s comment.  

On 16/5/2022 at 10:16 PM, Kyle Communications said:

Caboolture will soon have Mogas available for anyone. Avgas run by Viva has been onsite for 15 years or more. We hope to have it all installed by August.

The club members over whelmingly want it. The cost is pretty staggering though but it will become a revenue stream for the club directed to airfield maint...also the price will be the same or a little better than local garage pricing.

The advantage is the fuel will be super clean..not like you get from the local servo. It is a fully speced aviation grade tank with all the right stuff internally for water peel off and super filtering and also I think it draws about 900mm from above the bottom of the tank it has with CC facilites and will be available 24/7. We expect a lot of flyins to get their fuel as well as the local members. It has been a mamoth exercise with a year in the planning. There is a lot of hoops to jump through. If you get Viva or IOR to just drop and go and look after it themselves then fuel pricing is not that good at all. Managing it yourself as a club by getting the right equipment first is a much better way to go

 

Mark

 

How much will it cost to install? 

first decide what size you want. I have a high wing and putting the ipad on the wing root above the passenger’s head keeps it out of the glare. 

On 15/5/2022 at 7:06 AM, turboplanner said:

Power output is directly related to the amount of air each piston compresses.

The warmer the air, the less gets into the combustion chamber, so less power is produced so the engine has to work harder to get the same result, and has a shorter life, or produces a lesser result.

Intercoolers and aftercoolers cool air before it enters the combustion chamber, so more gets in and there's more to expand and push the pistons down, so power is increased.

 

There is plenty of information available on identifying conditions where carb icing may occur in transit so I won't cover that.

 

When power is reduced, vacuum in the carby increases, dropping air pressure, and we know from physics that this lowers the air temperature immediately.

 

It's effectively the same as a refrigerator valve. If you've ever fitted a vacuum gauge on a petrol engine as a fuel saver, you'd be familiar with the slow movement of the needle at cruise, falling back slowly with power demands into wind and on hills and snapping to maximum instantly when you lift your foot to slow down. The temperature drop is instant when the throttle butterfly valve is snapped shut, and you can see the carb body instantly ice up, then thaw when power is applied then ice up again when you close the valve.

 

The potential is there for icing when you pull the throttle back pre-landing which is why you apply full carb heat for the downhill run, then turn it off around 300' so you'll have full power for a go round.

 

 

It does get mixed up in the diagnosis on recreational aircraft where there may be issues with fuel supply lines, float levels, jetting and ignition being less than optimum.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think four “i” symbols in response to a post is a record. 

And this is the convo.

Hello
are you working for rotax?
if not , do you like this monopoly , since 30 years ?
don't you like a good competition?
, in order to get some better engines , with lower price??
Le 14/05/2022 à 04:24, Andrew Nielsen a écrit :

You are scum.

To clarify. Air K is retailing the motors which are made in China. 

Too, the sooner the nose is down, the sooner you can add power. 

51 minutes ago, Mike Gearon said:

In USA it isn’t buffet. It’s full on stall and the nose can’t be kept up for both power on and power off stalls. Usually you’ll try to balance with rudders but likely a left wing dip as the nose drops.

Which, of course, is the opposite of recovery with no/minimal loss of altitude. If I remember correctly, airline pilots are taught to get a bit of negative G with stall recovery. I (with all my 170 hrs) think that it is better to train to get the stick well forward so the airplane is definitely flying again than to finesse it. In a stall on final or take off, the last thing you need is your instructor’s words in your ear stopping you putting the nose down. 
 

A flying instructor told me they recently had a student put the plane nearly vertically down on stall recovery. I think in general, with stall accidents, the issue is always the stick not far enough forward, not too far forward.  

39 minutes ago, Mike Gearon said:

In USA it isn’t buffet. It’s full on stall and the nose can’t be kept up for both power on and power off stalls. Usually you’ll try to balance with rudders but likely a left wing dip as the nose drops.

If I recall correctly, in a Decathlon, if you have power on and pull the stick straight all the way back, you get buffet straight away and if you keep it pulled back, you might get a tail slide, which is not what it is rated for. I’m not saying you couldn’t be examined for a power on stall in a Decathlon. 

11 hours ago, pmccarthy said:

It all depends how deeply you choose to enter the stall to define it as a stall before starting recovery.

Very true. I half think that if an examiner asks for a stall, you should ask, “Would sir like a buffet or a wing drop?”

Airport regulations are too large to all be in the ERSA. I suspect that if you kept violating councils rules, they could ban you from the airport and that CASA would get you under some general rule about flying safely. Disclaimer: I dont know what Im talking about.

On 6/5/2022 at 5:03 PM, Thruster88 said:

I am firmly in the Dan Gryder camp, prevention (fly correct airspeed)  is better than a cure (trained in spin recovery)  that may not work due altitude. If we spent as much time and training recognizing distractions (gear not retracting etc) as we do on practising international stalls things may get better. I have recovered from many spins and enjoy stalling. 

 

 

 

The solution is AND, not OR. In other words, they are not mutually exclusive. Furthermore, practicing slow flight and stalls could help you recognise decaying airspeed. 

I suggest you ask CASA in writing ( unless someone here thinks that that could do more harm than good) 

51 minutes ago, djpacro said:

I know of some instructors who chicken out of required flight exercises for an RPL per Part 61 (see attached image). I see that the RPC syllabus is far less comprehensive. I see some aeroplanes used in training that are prohibited from accelerated stalls so unable to do all of the required Part 61 stall exercises.

 

Seems like an argument for UPRT. See https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/airplane_handbook/06_afh_ch5.pdf

 

There is no space between stall and spin. Suggest that you read the reference above - the pages on stalling are followed by pages on spinning. There is a stall recovery template and a spin recovery template, nothing in between.

Excellent. Now can you tell me *exactly* where it is that a stall ends and a spin starts? 

People are saying to maintain your airspeed, and that is the long and the short of it. That is true. BUT the central principle of safety is to have backups so that if one thing goes wrong something else will prevent an accident. That is the basis of the Swiss cheese model, where, if the holes line up, an accident happens. So, the safe thing to do is concentrate on airspeed AND recovering from stalls and from spins.

People who have done spin training reckon it is useful. People who haven’t don spin training reckon it isn’t. What does that tell you?

Benefits if spinning includes making it less likely that you will freeze if you get out of usual attitude. And it makes that zone between stalling and spinning less mysterious. The way people on here talk, you’d think there was no space between stall and spin. 

Another way of looking at this is that since people are still dying from stall and spin, whatever the training there probs should be more. The more/better the training, the safer you are. 

8 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

The problem is the difference between an intentional stall which we can all do, versus an unintended stall occurring while the pilot is distracted by a moose, engine failure, rising terrain, sick passenger or some other issue. As flywires vid shows the time from stall to wing drop and rotation is not long more so in high performance aircraft, a distracted pilot could be a quarter turn into a spin before the shock/denial is overcome and a recovery is initiated. The only sure way to avoid dying in a stall spin "accident" is fly correct airspeed. We learn the aviate, navigate, communicate order of priority in any stressful situation, the most important aspect of aviate is airspeed.  

The above is certainly true. 

Stalls are scarier than spins. There's your proof. 😀

On 22/4/2022 at 10:31 PM, rgmwa said:

I think the real builders are the scratch builders who start with a few drawings and sheets of aluminium or a load of timber. They're the ones I really admire! 

 

Kit builders are essentially aircraft assemblers rather than builders. Putting a kit together is certainly a big project that requires a fair degree of determination and some skill, but it's not particularly difficult if you choose a high quality kit, like a Vans. Good kits are certainly not cheap, but the saving in time is very substantial. We have one builder at Serpentine who fairly recently completed a superb scratch-built Piel Super Diamant, but it took him 38 years!

One of the main reasons I chose the RV-12 was that it came complete with engine, prop, avionics, wiring, hardware etc. I also knew up-front what it was going to cost, which was another big advantage. A further consideration was that it could be registered either VH or RAA, so if I couldn't maintain a CASA medical, there was still an opportunity to keep flying it. Also a bigger market if I ever sold it.

 

Building taught me a lot about aircraft, and I also made new friends along the way which was a bonus. I was also fortunate to buy when the dollar was high. Now it would cost me at least another $30-$40k to finish one.

Consequently I consider myself lucky to have a relatively high performance, relatively cheap and very economical aircraft that looks good and flies superbly. Vans like to claim their planes have `total performance', but however you do it, building and flying your own aircraft gives you a `total experience'.

 

This reminds me of an article by an economist that appeared in about 1970. He pointed out that it is not really possible for someone to make a pencil. Between getting the wood and the graphite, and making the rubber and the metal for the tip, there would be too much to do. I suppose that if someone learnt enough about chemistry, economics and cultural anthropology, it would be possible to understand a pencil. That contrasts with an iPhone. It is impossible for anyone to understand more than a small fraction of an iPhone. 

Scratch build? Nah. There is no point unless you design the aircraft yourself. And, guess what? You can't design an aircraft yourself. If you designed a good one, it would be an iteration and slight change on others' designs, and you couldn't design a new engine or avionics or even a new way of operating flaps or a new type of rivet. And, as for scratch building, if you were skilled enough to "assemble" a kit, you would then be able to learn in an afternoon how to operate a computer-controlled laser cutter. I dips my lid to you all, having myself built a tree house. 

Reminds me of (so-called) primitive cultures like the traditional one of the Australian Aboriginal. Western people probably do have a wider world view, but are not more sophisticated in their skills, just more specialised and dependent on others and technology. The flip-side of the wider world view is the specialised knowledge of a small part of the world, and the intricate religious beliefs and cultural practices.  

On 25/4/2022 at 3:46 PM, KRviator said:

Taking a leaf from the C182 POH "If it fits, it flies" I'm getting ready early, as I'm away in the Democratic Peoples Republic of McGowanland in the lead-up to Raglan (for the first time in 11 months, mind you 🤬), by test packing now before I get home from my swing and run out of time.

 

So, in the back of the RV we now have:

One folding camp table

Two full-size swags

Two folding camp chairs

Two adult sleeping bags

One bag of tie-down gear

One fly-away kit

One (normally fitted anyway) first aid kit

Two umbrellas

One head lamp

QTY Cyalume sticks and;

Books for Mini-Me to read enroute

 

To still go on top are

2 pillows

Soft overnight bag

My normal flight bag

2 hats & sun cream

Probably more as I think of it.

Wow