Lancair crash at SnF

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:05:06 +0200, Stefan sayeth:

Brian schrieb:

Your right in that many aircraft it is possible. But the problem is it
isn't possible for many pilots when the engine quits. It is not a
maneuver that is routinly practiced.

Now this problem could be solved.

You're suggesting instructors practice engine failures with their
students on takeoff? Oh boy, better hope Dudly doesn't see this...

Buttman schrieb:

You're suggesting instructors practice engine failures with their
students on takeoff? Oh boy, better hope Dudly doesn't see this...

Glider pilots do it routinely.

Hi,

In article ,
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:05:06 +0200, Stefan sayeth:

Brian schrieb:

Your right in that many aircraft it is possible. But the problem is it
isn't possible for many pilots when the engine quits. It is not a
maneuver that is routinly practiced.

Now this problem could be solved.

You're suggesting instructors practice engine failures with their
students on takeoff? Oh boy, better hope Dudly doesn't see this...

EFATO practice is normal during the PPL in the UK (simulated, obviously).
The instructor chops the throttle and you pick a landing sight and get set
up for it in much the same way as you would a PFL.

You do have a bit of warning when he announces 'fanstop' over the radio
though!

Andy

On Apr 25, 6:24*am, Andy Hawkins wrote:
Hi,

In article ,
* * * * * wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:05:06 +0200, Stefan sayeth:

Brian schrieb:

Your right in that many aircraft it is possible. But the problem is it
isn't possible for many pilots when the engine quits. It is not a
maneuver that is routinly practiced.

Now this problem could be solved.

You're suggesting instructors practice engine failures with their
students on takeoff? Oh boy, better hope Dudly doesn't see this...

EFATO practice is normal during the PPL in the UK (simulated, obviously).
The instructor chops the throttle and you pick a landing sight and get set
up for it in much the same way as you would a PFL.

You do have a bit of warning when he announces 'fanstop' over the radio
though!


The call here is "simulated failure, call climbing"

Cheers

Buttman wrote in news:fuqg20$hee$2
@registered.motzarella.org:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:05:06 +0200, Stefan sayeth:

Brian schrieb:

Your right in that many aircraft it is possible. But the problem is
it
isn't possible for many pilots when the engine quits. It is not a
maneuver that is routinly practiced.

Now this problem could be solved.

You're suggesting instructors practice engine failures with their
students on takeoff? Oh boy, better hope Dudly doesn't see this...


Good god you're a moron.


No wonder flying skills are going down the toilet.


Bertie

Buttman wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:05:06 +0200, Stefan sayeth:

Brian schrieb:

Your right in that many aircraft it is possible. But the problem is it
isn't possible for many pilots when the engine quits. It is not a
maneuver that is routinly practiced.
Now this problem could be solved.

You're suggesting instructors practice engine failures with their
students on takeoff? Oh boy, better hope Dudly doesn't see this...

One way to practice this would be to establish a "runway altitude" at,
say, 1000ft AGL, get the airplane into takeoff configuration on heading
at that altitude over a road or something, simulate a failure at a
specified altitude--say, 1,500 feet--and see what altitude you're at
when you get back to your reciprocal heading. If it's above your
starting altitude, you made it.

Wind, density altitude and aircraft weight are significant variables.

Of course, a proficient pilot will have considered all these variables
as well as the terrain downrange before takeoff, so they already know
what they will do if the engine quits at a specific altitude. On
probably as many checkrides and flight reviews as not, the instructor
has asked me what I will do if I lose power on takeoff so I already know
where there transmission lines are, about how far it is to the lake, etc.

-c

gatt wrote in
news:T-Sdnb-eo8vLtIzVnZ2dnUVZ_tWtnZ2d@integraonline:

Buttman wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:05:06 +0200, Stefan sayeth:

Brian schrieb:

Your right in that many aircraft it is possible. But the problem is
it isn't possible for many pilots when the engine quits. It is not
a maneuver that is routinly practiced.
Now this problem could be solved.

You're suggesting instructors practice engine failures with their
students on takeoff? Oh boy, better hope Dudly doesn't see this...

One way to practice this would be to establish a "runway altitude" at,
say, 1000ft AGL, get the airplane into takeoff configuration on
heading at that altitude over a road or something, simulate a failure
at a specified altitude--say, 1,500 feet--and see what altitude you're
at when you get back to your reciprocal heading. If it's above your
starting altitude, you made it.

Wind, density altitude and aircraft weight are significant variables.

Of course, a proficient pilot will have considered all these variables
as well as the terrain downrange before takeoff, so they already know
what they will do if the engine quits at a specific altitude. On
probably as many checkrides and flight reviews as not, the instructor
has asked me what I will do if I lose power on takeoff so I already
know
where there transmission lines are, about how far it is to the lake,
etc.

-c


More importantly, perhaps, is the fact that if you make nice gentle
turns in an average lightplane, you simply won't make it. You have to
make the turn at a very high angle of bank to have even a hope of making
it in time. If you make it at say, 30 deg of bank at about 65 you're
going to lose the guts of 800 feet just manuevering to line up with the
runway if you fly the airplane accurately. You're going to be very low
at the end of this manuever to say the least. The best way to do it is
with a steep bank. Very steep. This will, of course, mean a high sink
rate, but the time required to make the turn will be cut drastically and
you'll be closer to the centerline when you've come about, so less time
and alt wasted trying to get lined up. To do this you must be absolutely
completely comfortable doing a steep power off turn at a reltively low
airspeed when you do it. Not imagining you can do it based on experience
doing steep turns with the power on, you have to be able to
simultaneously offload the wing at a rate that won't get the nose too
low as to get an excessive alt loss and make this drastic turn at the
same time without stalling. All this while your brain has become akin to
that of a lizard looking a rather big snake. IOW, you have to have
practiced this and other aerobatic manuevers so that they are second
nature. It can be done and it can be done in almost any airplane, but it
requires a lot of practice, experience, careful planning and a lot of
luck. Better to go straight ahead if you can.


Bertie

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 01:27:52 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote in :

The best way to do it is with a steep bank. Very steep.


The bank angle may be quantified:


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...1d80a2e846a88b
John T. Lowry

Best turnaround bank angle phi (least altitude loss per angle
turned through) for a gliding airplane is given by:

cos(phi) = (sqrt(2)/2)*sqrt(1-k^2)

where k = CD0/CLmax + CLmax/(pi*e*A)
where CD0 is the parasite drag coefficient,
CLmax is the maximum lift coefficient for the airplane's flaps
configuration,
e is the airplane efficiency factor, and
A is the wing aspect ratio.

I know most ng readers hate those darned formulas, but that's the
way the world works. For GA propeller-driven airplanes, k is a
small number (0.116 for a Cessna 172, flaps up) and so the best
turnaround bank angle is very closely the 45 degrees cited by
Rogers and, much earlier, by Langewiesche (Stick and Rudder,
p. 358). For the above Cessna, for instance, it's 45.4 degrees.
For a flamed-out jet fighter, however, things are considerably
different. The formulas above, along with formulas for the banked
stall speed, for banked gliding flight path angle, and for the
minimum altitude loss in a 180-degree turn, can all be found in my
recent book Performance of Light Aircraft, pp. 294-296.
The following seven pages then treat the return-to-airport
maneuver, rom start of the takeoff roll to contact with the runway
or terrain, in excruciating detail. Including wind effects, the
typical four-second hesitation when the engine stops, etc.

John. -- John T. Lowry, PhD Flight Physics; Box 20919; Billings MT
59104 Voice: 406-248-2606

Senoirs have forulas for breakfast.
Larry Dighera expressed precisely :
I know most ng readers hate those darned formulas, but that's the
way the world works.

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 01:27:52 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote in :

The best way to do it is with a steep bank. Very steep.


The bank angle may be quantified:



Good grief Larry, you really are an idiot.
Of course it can be quatified, but the numbers only tell a minute part
of the story. I can categorically state that I can do a 180 with 70 deg
bank at VSO 1.2 deadstick and come out the other end in one piece. Can
you? Try it using those figures and send my the answer via my Ouiji
board.


Bertie