On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:20:28 -0600, Mike Rhodes
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:23:51 GMT, Roger Halstead
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:56:21 -0500, Peter R.
wrote:


His point was that the heavier the aircraft, the more the nose will come
slamming down on the runway in a stalled landing. This pilot has a lot of
experience in twins, as well, if that explains anything.

Actually the Bo won't do that, at least not if it's in ground effect.
To get it to stall usually takes a "relatively" nose high attitude.
When it stalls onto the runway "from a normal height" the nose does
not drop at all. It stays put and the mains drop down which is kind
of a strange sensation at first.

Because the typical Bonanza's cg has shifted to the rear on fuel burn?

No.
If you do your W&B calcs it's not a problem. The older Bo "Prior to
74 only had 1000# useful load and the CG shift isn't a problem like
the more recent models. However in either case it's not due to a CG
shift. When within the CG a Bo stalled "In Ground Effect" does not
drop the nose. I can load mine with 100 gallons (30 in the tip tanks,
50 mains, and 20 in the aux) and never have to worry about it going
out of CG) if I start in the middle.

If the worry isn't that it won't pound the nose on landing, then you
really need to watch that airspeed turning final. It won't go

You always need to watch the speed of any airplane.

nose-down when you really need it to. But its been stated that most

It will go nose down if you want it too, but why would you want it to
drop the nose. Speed and power = attitude. IF the airspeed indicator
goes out, you know that so many inches of MP and so many degrees up on
the AI are still going to get you where you want to go. With the
power set you rarely have to look at the instruments if you know what
it's supposed to look like outside.

When I land, I do full stall landings and I keep the nose in the air
until I no longer have enough elevator authority to keep it there and
that is down around 30 to 40 MPH which is well after touch down.
(Stall with me alone and half fuel is only 55 MPH) That would make
the last part of final at 71 MPH which is one steep descent.

pilots land it hot anyway. Seems there's a legit reason for it.

Pure baloney.
The Airsafety Foundation and American Bonanza Society teach the pilots
to fly "by the numbers" and that means sticking to the book figures.
They require every pilot taking their pilot proficiency course to
calculate the speed for each landing and take off and they expect to
see you fly it. They do not want to see pilots adding 5 for the wife
and another for the kids and maybe an extra 10 for comfort. They are
very adamant about excess speed on landing being a killer

If need be I can quote right from the ABS/ASF Pilot Proficiency
Training Manual as to their requirements. That class runs 10 hours of
class room and 4 to 5 hours of flight time.

There is no problem bringing in a Bo at 1.3 Vso in calm conditions. If
the winds kick up, add half the gust factor. The Bo is a very good
short field airplane for those who learn how to handle them.


Or have I missed something in this thread?

Could be?
According to the ABS the big problem is pilots who make their own
rules and add a bit of speed instead of following the POH.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


Mike