Thread
:
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
View Single Post
#
113
January 17th 08, 07:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]
external usenet poster
Posts: 3,851
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:742db77b-27c0-433a-a541-
:
On Jan 17, 10:02*am, " wrote:
The point of an approach is to land.
Using that logic aerobatic pilots should not wear chutes since the
point is not to jump out of the plane.
If a missed is required, the 285 HP and 10 degrees nose up will
maintain 96 KIAS (Vy) with gear and flaps down.
The drill is simple:
Prop is already full forward, so MP goes to 25"
Confirm Vy and positive rate of climb -- Flaps Up
Confirm Vy and positive rate of climb -- Gear Up
All this happens in sequence, with no rush required.
But I don't see the benefit unless you are flying something that does
not fly very stable at approach speed wo flaps (737 perhaps)
No, they're perfectly stable without flaps. Three problems, though. The
pitch attitude is quite high making it difficult to see the runway
properly. You'll have very little drag and you won't really be able to
spool up muc and of course you'll be going 200 knots over the threshold!
Bertie
Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]
View Public Profile
View message headers
Find all posts by Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]
Find all threads started by Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]