![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2008-04-24, WingFlaps wrote:
Let's work some real numbers for a 172 at 500'. Say climb was a Vx 59 knots. Firstly, I don't know anyone who routinely climbs out at Vx - certainly not at 500'. Secondly, this is 100 feet below the altitude I stated. IIRC, Vy is for a C172 is in the region of 65 knots - or best glide, and many pilots accelerate to around 70-75kts at 500 feet to get a better view forward, since best rate in many parts of the world isn't critical to maintain once you're above a couple of hundred feet. pilot carries out some trouble checks say 10s. Calls on the radio =10 s and plans his return. The sequence is aviate, navigate, communicate. Most pilots I know won't touch the radio with a problem at low altitude. The pilot I know who did make the turnback from 600 feet certainly didn't, he just turned back. However, in his situation it was pretty obvious the engine had lunched itself so there was no time spent 'debugging' the problem. (For the record, the only engine stoppage I had on takeoff was at 50 feet - the decision to land straight ahead was very easy and fast to make). Note that 20s have probably elapsed. The plane has already travelled ~0.4 miles and at a 10:1 glide ratio has lost 200' (assuming he did get it to best glide in the first place). Can he make 2 turns and land back -no way! If the pilot does that, then yes - no way. However, the pilots I've know who've had low engine failures have never yakked on the radio, nor have they spent 10s debugging the problem! you 35 seconds. 45 seconds lost = 450 feet! Now we add in the energy losses from having to accelerate with the wind and to glide speed. You do NOT have to accelerate with the wind! You are a creature of the air, turning downwind does not involve a loss of airspeed! I agree that the primary concern is to not stall. However, pilots must be prepared to make a decision rather than 'default straight ahead' - the decision, whatever it is, must be made quickly and you must not stall. And yes, sometimes, turning back to the runway is possible and this will depend on the situation - altitude and the suitability of terrain, pilot proficiency etc. When you're about to push the throttle forwards, you SHOULD have some kind of a plan if it goes pear shaped. What's the wind doing? Is there a crosswind? What's the terrain surrounding the airfield like? If you lose power at point X what is the best course of action, and at point Y what is the best course of action? The best courses of action (other than 'do not stall') may not be a fixed prescription. -- From the sunny Isle of Man. Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
lancair crash scapoose, OR | gatt | Piloting | 10 | October 26th 06 03:34 PM |
Lancair IV | Dico Reyers | Owning | 6 | October 19th 04 11:47 PM |
Lancair 320 ram air? | ROBIN FLY | Home Built | 17 | January 7th 04 11:54 PM |
Lancair 320/360 kit wanted!!! | Erik W | Owning | 0 | October 3rd 03 10:17 PM |
Lancair IVP | Peter Gottlieb | Home Built | 2 | August 22nd 03 03:51 AM |