A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

flying with different instructors



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 1st 05, 03:58 PM
Rob Montgomery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

2100 is for when you're level (i.e. before you're abeam the numbers) and
trimming the airplane. Once you're abeam the numbers, you bring the power
back to something that gives you the rate of descent you'd like (and where
the previous posters point holds true... do get too fussy, look out thte
window at the airplane entering the pattern on an extended base or a long
final), put in your flaps, and slow to approach speed. Also keep in mind
that the actual power setting may vary from airplane to airplane.

Good luck,

-Rob

"G. Sylvester" wrote in message
news
I have to try your method. Maybe I can get my pattern flying without
'thinking' at all. Right now it is semi-smooth but completely not
mindless.

In a Warrior-II, 152 or 172P with just an instructor and a student,
setting 2100 RPM on downwind, and trimming for hands off flight seems to
set the airplane up for a normal approach speed when using 20-deg of
flaps, and the short-field approach speed with 30-deg of flaps.


Are you sure about the RPM? The method I've been taught is
drop the RPM to 1600-1700 (weight depending) when abeam the
numbers and throw in one notch flaps and pitch for 90 KIAS.
On base, 2 notches of flaps and pitch for 80 KIAS
and on final 3 notches and pitch for 70 KIAS. At 2100 RPM,
I'd still a few hundred feet off the ground.

Gerald







  #2  
Old January 1st 05, 04:26 PM
Roy Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Rob Montgomery" wrote:

2100 is for when you're level (i.e. before you're abeam the numbers) and
trimming the airplane. Once you're abeam the numbers, you bring the power
back to something that gives you the rate of descent you'd like (and where
the previous posters point holds true... do get too fussy, look out thte
window at the airplane entering the pattern on an extended base or a long
final), put in your flaps, and slow to approach speed. Also keep in mind
that the actual power setting may vary from airplane to airplane.


The way I look at the pattern, what's really important is airspeeds, not
power settings. Power settings are just a way to get the airspeed you
want.

The most critical airspeed in the pattern is your final approach speed.
Everything else is just executing a controlled transition from cruise
speed to final approach speed. For most light planes, if you fly base
10 kts faster than final, and downwind 10 kts faster than base, you
should be doing OK. This should give you a good target speed for
downwind.

The problem is, you can't set airspeed directly, you can only set power.
So, it's a good idea to have a target power setting for downwind. For
most typical trainers, somewhere in the 1900-2100 RPM range is about
right, but ask your instructor for a good number to use for whatever
you're flying. You set that when entering the pattern (along with
whatever other configuration changes you're going to make, like gear and
flaps), and give the plane a little time to settle into a stable
airspeed. Then you can adjust the power if needed if you didn't get the
airspeed you wanted.

Keep in mind that you need to fit in with the existing traffic flow.
You may normally fly downwind at 90 kts, but if you're following
somebody going slower, you need to do something to avoid crawling up his
exhaust pipe. This can get really interesting as the mix of types gets
extreme (Bonanza following a Cub, for example).
  #3  
Old January 1st 05, 07:03 PM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
The most critical airspeed in the pattern is your final approach speed.
Everything else is just executing a controlled transition from cruise
speed to final approach speed. For most light planes, if you fly base
10 kts faster than final, and downwind 10 kts faster than base, you
should be doing OK. This should give you a good target speed for
downwind.


Means and ends are in the eye of the beholder. The way I look at the
pattern, what's really important are airspeed and altitude. Power settings
allow me to adjust either, but once I've begun my descent (usually from
abeam the numbers, but not always depending on traffic concerns) power
settings are just a way to get the *altitude* I want, and the descent angle
I want. I use my pitch controls (elevator and elevator trim) to adjust
airspeed at that point.

Of course, they all interact. It's like asking "Bernoulli or Newton". But
don't discount someone else's mental paradigm just because it's different
from yours.

The point that started this whole subthread was simply that students (and
even full-fledged pilots for that matter) can fixate on setting a particular
RPM, when that's not really all that important. A particular RPM setting is
only going to work on a "standard pattern day" (i.e. no wind, no traffic,
exactly 800' or 1000' or whatever feet AGL you pick as standard, turns at
precisely 45 degrees and final, etc.).

Any variation from this standard is going to require adjustments to throttle
to maintain the desired performance for the conditions. So why waste time
and concentration getting the throttle at exactly some particular setting,
when getting it in the ballpark using muscle memory (i.e. general knowledge
of the "correct" position) and audible feedback (sound of the engine)?

I believe that Bob was saying just that, and I think his comment was right
on the mark. It's funny the turns this thread has taken, but I disagree
with Rob's attachment to precision in this case (even though I do generally
believe that precise control of the aircraft is very important), and I don't
understand what debating the *actual* specific RPM settings does to address
the original point.

The problem is, you can't set airspeed directly, you can only set power.


I beg to differ. I set the airspeed all the time. I can manipulate the
elevator directly to obtain the desired airspeed, and I can then set the
trim to allow the airspeed to remain at that desired.

So, it's a good idea to have a target power setting for downwind. For
most typical trainers, somewhere in the 1900-2100 RPM range is about
right, but ask your instructor for a good number to use for whatever
you're flying. You set that when entering the pattern (along with
whatever other configuration changes you're going to make, like gear and
flaps), and give the plane a little time to settle into a stable
airspeed. Then you can adjust the power if needed if you didn't get the
airspeed you wanted.


If you simply adjust power, you won't get the airspeed you want, ever (well,
not counting a sudden decelleration at the end of a descent induced by a
power reduction). You have to change your pitch in order to get a new
airspeed that will produce the performance you want at the new power
setting.

More relevant to where this subthread started, yes it's good to have a
target power setting for downwind, and for the descent as well. But there's
no need to spend 30 seconds (or whatever) fiddling with the throttle to get
the power setting "just so". You smoothly, calmly, and quickly set the
throttle to the general vicinity of the correct spot, and then make
adjustments as necessary during the approach. Adjustments you would have to
even if you managed to hit the exact throttle setting you had targeted.

Pete


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 02:26 PM
Routine Aviation Career Guy Alcala Military Aviation 0 September 26th 04 12:33 AM
Flight instructors as Charter Pilots C J Campbell Piloting 6 January 24th 04 07:51 AM
Announcing THE book on airshow flying Dudley Henriques Piloting 11 January 9th 04 07:33 PM
U.S. NAVY TO TEST FLYING SAUCER Larry Dighera Piloting 0 December 22nd 03 07:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.