Should I be scared -- C172 over Gross

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in
:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

Funny that where ever you post there seems to be a "treehouse club"
that thinks you are a twit.

I consider it more sad than funny. There are a lot of mean people in
the world, and for some reason cyberspace encourages them to show
their true colors.

It's always someone else's fault, isn't it?





1


Bertie

2

WingFlaps wrote in
:

On Apr 23, 5:39*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Sure it is in a simulatated world.

Or if you hit the ground just beyond the runway in the real world
because
you
took off overweight.

I've flown a 172 more loaded that!

Cheers


I've flown one on a ferry that was probably about 300 or 400 lbs
overweight, but off very long runways and in a quite cold region. No
problem, but I wouldn't do it as routine and I wouldn't do it if
performance was an issue. A couple of pounds overweight is one thing,
but it doesn't take much to reach a point where the airplane won't go up
at all, particularly if it's a relatively low powered aircraft like a
172 in the first place. The degradation is not linear, so if there's a
100 FPM loss with a 100lb overload, it does not mean that there will be
a 200 lb loss with a 200 lb overload. Obvious, I know, but it's
something often forgotten when wishful thinking takes the place of a
rational approach to the problem.

Bertie

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Gee, isn't is sad that the every where Anthoney goes all the meanies
gang up on him through no fault of his own?

That's not the sad part. The sad part is that there are so many mean people.
It seems that only the threat of punishment or retribution keeps many mean
people in line. When these threats are absent, they freely behave terribly
towards their fellow human beings.

Have you ever wondered why you always seem to have this problem?

Have you ever wondered why few people other than you have this problem?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Yeah, right.

As usual.


Yeah, right.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

gatt writes:

If actual pilots here need advice they'll get it from pilots.

Since a lot of actual pilots ignore any advice that doesn't agree with
their own beliefs, it doesn't really matter where it comes from.


Nope, wrong again, fjukkwit.


Bertie

On Apr 23, 5:01 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
george writes:
Uh. 30 pound over is burned off in about 30 minutes.

Unfortunately, take-off is over in 30 seconds.

With a modern runway in front of me around 700m long and no
obstructions above 200 feet for a km or so I will be safely off the
ground and established in the climb at 30 seconds.
30 minutes I will be clear of the circuit at my (C172) cruising
altitude and on track for my destination.

On Apr 23, 5:39 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Sure it is in a simulatated world.

Or if you hit the ground just beyond the runway in the real world because you
took off overweight.

You are demonstrating as to why you are the group clown.
If an aircraft impacts the ground after takeoff it will be engine
failure or loss of control (spin off departing turn) nothing to do
with load..

Mate of mine is an ag pilot.At 72+

"gregvk" wrote in message
...
Bertie the Bunyip wrote in news:fuo1ls$iga$1
@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in
:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

Funny that where ever you post there seems to be a "treehouse club"
that thinks you are a twit.

I consider it more sad than funny. There are a lot of mean people in
the world, and for some reason cyberspace encourages them to show
their true colors.

It's always someone else's fault, isn't it?





1


Bertie

"Results 1 - 10 of about 1,280 for group:rec.aviation.piloting
author:Maxwell"

Erm, better start the counter at 1,281.

Ahh, give it a rest Bertie. Your sockpuppet routine isn't fooling anyone,
just showing how lame you really are.

Besides, your statistics are waaaay off.

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in
:


"gregvk" wrote in message
...
Bertie the Bunyip wrote in news:fuo1ls$iga$1
@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in
:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

Funny that where ever you post there seems to be a "treehouse
club" that thinks you are a twit.

I consider it more sad than funny. There are a lot of mean people
in the world, and for some reason cyberspace encourages them to
show their true colors.

It's always someone else's fault, isn't it?





1


Bertie

"Results 1 - 10 of about 1,280 for group:rec.aviation.piloting
author:Maxwell"

Erm, better start the counter at 1,281.

Ahh, give it a rest Bertie. Your sockpuppet routine isn't fooling
anyone, just showing how lame you really are.

Besides, your statistics are waaaay off.



Uh, yeh, sure k00kie boi.


I thought you were running away? Forget something?




Bertie

On Apr 22, 10:16*am, tman inv@lid wrote:
tman wrote:

, and also the day turned out to be +20F hotter than I thought
it would. *I've experienced that heat not only hurts the planes
performance, but the pilots too. *Oh yeah, a slightly gusty xwind too.
Pretty happy I planned on leaving one pax behind.

If you look very closely at the take off performance data of a 172
( which I have) you will find that higher temperature actually
improves performance, for the same air density. Now I know that
contradicts what we get taught in flight school, and while it is
generally true that when temperature is lower the air will be more
dense , the atmosphere is a dyanmic system and pressure and
temperature can vary independantly. So it is possible to have the
same air density , or density altitude at 2 different temperature and
the day with the higher temperature wil give you better performance.
It is related to engine performance and the best explanation I have
got is that at the same density on a higher temperature day, the
pressure will also be higher ( since density = PM/RT where M is
molecular wt, R is gas constant, P and T press and temp), and the
higher pressure provides a greater driving force to suck air into the
engine. If you do the same analysis on the landing distance you see
no such temperature effect because landing distance is not power
related , only lift related.
In the next few days I will get around to providing a link to this
data, but you can easily prove it yourself if you have the Cessna
takeoff distance tables..
Terry
PPL Downunder