Three more newbie Qs, if you don't mind :)

"Ramapriya" wrote in message
om...
Also, I'm 37 and 64 inches tall, both prohibitive minuses to even
think of flying lessons, from what I've heard.

When I first read that sentence, I thought you were 101 inches tall. That
definitely would cause problems.

However, being 37 certainly has nothing to do with taking flying lessons (it
might keep you out of an airliner cockpit, that's about all), and your
height, while admittedly lower than average, is no shorter than many others
who pilot airplanes. Most airplanes do have adjustable seats, some other
airplanes have fixed position seats with adjustable rudder pedals, and not
all airplanes are created equal. Just as with cars, some are better suited
to smaller pilots, while others are better suited to larger pilots.

Even in a plane where you don't fit right off the bat, there are ways to
work around the issue. I've heard of at least one pilot wearing what amount
to platform shoes, for example.

Anyway, access to affordable training sounds like the biggest impediment,
and for all I know in India that's enough to prevent you from learning to
fly. But certainly nothing about your age or height would.

Pete

(Ramapriya) wrote in
om:

Er... actually I'm from India, where flying is affordable to a very
small section of the populace, and I've never been in that category.
Poverty hasn't helped keep my interest for flying down, although it
hasn't helped in making that actually happen :\

Also, I'm 37 and 64 inches tall, both prohibitive minuses to even
think of flying lessons, from what I've heard. One guy (a pilot) had
said I wouldn't be able to reach the rudder pedal with my short
stature, making me wonder if planes don't have adjustable seats like
cars do

Ramapriya




I don't think 5'4" is a problem. I have taught students who were about that
height. You can pull the seats forward, but the rudder is at a fixed depth
behind the panel, and if you pull too far forward your face will be too
close to the panel. You may also face a problem with seeing over the panel.
For that you may need a seat cushion.

37 is not old. Some have started that late and even gone on to airline
jobs, but admittedly that is not very common. There are plenty of people
who took their first lesson past 30 and went on to earn all the ratings and
are very active in aviation. In fact, I would suspect that the majority of
GA pilots started in their 30's or later.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

"Ben Jackson" wrote in message news:45Vid.468979$mD.64699@attbi_s02...
In article ,
G.R. Patterson III wrote:
The aircraft will accelerate most rapidly by keeping the wings nearly level and
keeping the nose or tail wheel off the ground, however, the plane will still
accelerate if the nose is held higher.

There are some jets that will rotate into a high drag configuration and
never gain enough speed to fly. I remember reading about an accident where
an inexperienced pilot (maybe a new owner of ex-Soviet equipment?) ran off
the end of the runway like that.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

F-86, Sacramento, CA, quite a while ago...

Ramapriya wrote:
Er... actually I'm from India, where flying is affordable to a very
small section of the populace, and I've never been in that category.
Poverty hasn't helped keep my interest for flying down, although it
hasn't helped in making that actually happen :\

Also, I'm 37 and 64 inches tall, both prohibitive minuses to even
think of flying lessons, from what I've heard. One guy (a pilot) had
said I wouldn't be able to reach the rudder pedal with my short
stature, making me wonder if planes don't have adjustable seats like
cars do

64 inches --- so what? Lots of shorter people fly. I'm only 66 in
and fly with no problem -- pillows or telephone books!

37 years old -- so what? We're not talking flying for a major airline
in the US, just aviation knowledge.

You can probably finds books about aerodynamics and aviation in
a school library. Is there an airport nearby? Talk to people there
about working/helping.

Ramapriya wrote:

Also, I'm 37 and 64 inches tall, both prohibitive minuses to even
think of flying lessons, from what I've heard.

In this country, you could still manage to have a career of ten years or more as an
airline pilot, with a bit of luck. You are definitely not too old to learn to fly.
While there are a few aircraft in which you would have trouble reaching the rudder
pedals (mine is one), you would have no problems in many aircraft. They also make
extensions for the pedals for very short people, and these could be mounted in
aircraft like mine, which would let you fly them.

I have read that flying is very expensive in India, however, and there's no way
around that. Better move.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

In article , Morgans wrote:

Anybody have a clue what would be happening, if an Airliner took off,
settled back to the runway, and took off again? Mis-calculated rotation
speed? Seems hard to understand, to me.

I think you are asking how this could happen. One way I can think of is if the
wind died partway down the runway. Another would be some sort of boo boo
as you speculated. Rotated too soon and decided to lower the nose to pick
up speed, for instance.

I've taken off twice in one run down the field before, but I think it was always
when I was trying to get off of a wet field or some other high-friction condition.
Not in an airliner, of course....

Mike Beede

In article , Peter Duniho wrote:

First, thrust during takeoff is relatively constant, from the beginning of
the takeoff roll, to actually leaving the runway. This is more true for
jets, but is reasonably close to the truth even for propeller-driven
airplanes.

At least ones with constant-speed props. It seems to me that you get
much better thrust at low speed with a CS prop. My understanding,
which may be defective, is that at low speed much of the fixed-pitch
prop is stalled. I'd like to see a plot of airspeed vs. thrust for this, but
don't have any idea where to look for one. Any suggestions?

Mike Beede

"Mike Beede" wrote in message
...
At least ones with constant-speed props. It seems to me that you get
much better thrust at low speed with a CS prop. My understanding,
which may be defective, is that at low speed much of the fixed-pitch
prop is stalled.

My answer was intentionally oversimplifying the issue. It is true that prop
efficiency and total thrust generated depends not only on engine power
(which itself depends on RPM, which may be limited with a fixed prop
installation), but airspeed as well.

But over the course of an entire takeoff run, assuming thrust remains
constant as a first approximation is perfectly reasonable, especially for
the purposes of the question asked.

Pete