![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 28, 10:00*am, Clark wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote in news:e238c979-3550-4a59-87f1- : On Sep 28, 8:36*am, Clark wrote: D Ramapriya wrote in news:2f5fa47a-a9a0-4d76-897e - : Jeez, in most videos I've seen of yours, the stall horn has sounded just before touchdown. I bet you like hairy landings ![]() Just an educational point: a perfect landing includes a full stall about a foot off the ground. Typically the stall horn will sound about 5 to 10 kn ots above the actual stall. Alan's landings appear to be quite good. In other words, there is no harm in stalling within a few inches of the runway. On the other hand, there can be great harm in attempting to land way to fast. Thanks, mate. Won't this lead to dodgy finals in a situation where the headwind tails off for some reason (a gust or some such)? Final is typically flown at 1.3*Vso which translated means 30% above stall speed. The extra velocity is lost in the roundout at the bottom of the approach. If the winds are gusty then 1/2 the gust factor is added to the approach speed. The gust factor is the difference between the base wind velocity and the maximum gust velocity. Folks have been doing this for a long time and the numbers work really well. Correct me if I'm wrong but there may also be the possibility that in aircraft where the computer doesn't correlate data from the AOA sensor, you'll probably get a slightly slower airspeed indication than actual during the flare, in which case even the stall horn would be a kind of false alarm ![]() Ramapriya |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "D Ramapriya" wrote in message ... On Sep 28, 10:00 am, Clark wrote: D Ramapriya wrote in news:e238c979-3550-4a59-87f1- : On Sep 28, 8:36 am, Clark wrote: D Ramapriya wrote in news:2f5fa47a-a9a0-4d76-897e - : Jeez, in most videos I've seen of yours, the stall horn has sounded just before touchdown. I bet you like hairy landings ![]() Just an educational point: a perfect landing includes a full stall about a foot off the ground. Typically the stall horn will sound about 5 to 10 kn ots above the actual stall. Alan's landings appear to be quite good. In other words, there is no harm in stalling within a few inches of the runway. On the other hand, there can be great harm in attempting to land way to fast. Thanks, mate. Won't this lead to dodgy finals in a situation where the headwind tails off for some reason (a gust or some such)? Final is typically flown at 1.3*Vso which translated means 30% above stall speed. The extra velocity is lost in the roundout at the bottom of the approach. If the winds are gusty then 1/2 the gust factor is added to the approach speed. The gust factor is the difference between the base wind velocity and the maximum gust velocity. Folks have been doing this for a long time and the numbers work really well. Correct me if I'm wrong but there may also be the possibility that in aircraft where the computer doesn't correlate data from the AOA sensor, you'll probably get a slightly slower airspeed indication than actual during the flare, in which case even the stall horn would be a kind of false alarm ![]() Ramapriya Small aircraft do not use any computers to actuate the stall horn. Instead, there are ports on the leading edge of the wing in a precise location so that the air moves from one to the other at stall only, which blows a reed horn, or some have a little flap that blows over at the leading edge that turns on a switch to sound an electric horn. In either case, it is aerodynamic airflow that triggers the stall horn. -- Jim in NC |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 30, 3:13*am, Clark wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote in news:2c0fab6a-a8d4-4889-a0ef- : As for the accuracy of the airspeed indicator, well we generally stall the aircraft in training and proficiency flights so we know exactly when the stall occurs even if the indicated airspeed might be in error. As an aside, the aircraft will usually tell you through handling characteristics and vibration that it's going to stall. The aircraft that don't tell you about the impending stall are the ones with which to be very careful. Thanks, especially for the above bit. Don't know if it's because someone once told me or something I'd read somewhere but I was under the impression that when flying and if you didn't have external visual references of the ground, there's NO way that a pilot can know the airspeed of his aircraft. On another matter, everything I've read so far about the AF447 crash suggests that the aircraft was upset because it flew too slow (iced pitot leading to erroneous airspeed readings) and pretty much went down like a bag of cement and possibly hit the water at a nearly level attitude! Ramapriya |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 29, 9:29*pm, D Ramapriya wrote:
Thanks, especially for the above bit. Don't know if it's because someone once told me or something I'd read somewhere but I was under the impression that when flying and if you didn't have external visual references of the ground, there's NO way that a pilot can know the airspeed of his aircraft. Visually, you are correct and even "sensually" (feeling), while IMC there is no way to tell speed or what direction the nose of the plane is pointed (up, down, right or left). The instrumentation is the only source of information you have telling you what direction the ground and sky points to. With regards to airspeed, there are other clues to be watched for airspeed besides the airspeed indicator and one is engine RPM. Generally speaking, under normal flight attitudes, the engine RPM will increase as you point down which subsequently means your airspeed is building. You hear this increase just as if you hear the engine noise level go down, that would normally indicate the nose of the plane is pointed up and your airspeed is decreasing. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 30, 9:42*am, BeechSundowner wrote:
On Sep 29, 9:29*pm, D Ramapriya wrote: Thanks, especially for the above bit. Don't know if it's because someone once told me or something I'd read somewhere but I was under the impression that when flying and if you didn't have external visual references of the ground, there's NO way that a pilot can know the airspeed of his aircraft. Visually, you are correct and even "sensually" (feeling), while IMC there is no way to tell speed or what direction the nose of the plane is pointed (up, down, right or left). *The instrumentation is the only source of information you have telling you what direction the ground and sky points to. With regards to airspeed, there are other clues to be watched for airspeed besides the airspeed indicator and one is engine RPM. Generally speaking, under normal flight attitudes, the engine RPM will increase as you point down which subsequently means your airspeed is building. *You hear this increase just as if you hear the engine noise level go down, that would normally indicate the nose of the plane is pointed up and your airspeed is decreasing. Even under the hood as one approaches the stall or slow flight in general aviation airplanes the controls are really soft -- little bits of pressure make for large excursions. One should not depend on those kinds of clues when there is no outside visual reference (that by the way is LOT different than being in IMC) but it from a sensation standpoint is pretty much like waving an oar in air instead of in water. At cruise speeds the yoke has a certain 'stiffness' that is is largely gone at lower airspeeds. Absent a working airspeed gauge because you might have driven the pitot tube into a seagull of something, the link between manifold pressure, RPM, and pitch attitude is a pretty reliable indication of airspeed for a given airplane configuration. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 1, 2:42*am, BeechSundowner wrote:
On Sep 29, 9:29*pm, D Ramapriya wrote: Thanks, especially for the above bit. Don't know if it's because someone once told me or something I'd read somewhere but I was under the impression that when flying and if you didn't have external visual references of the ground, there's NO way that a pilot can know the airspeed of his aircraft. Visually, you are correct and even "sensually" (feeling), while IMC there is no way to tell speed or what direction the nose of the plane is pointed (up, down, right or left). *The instrumentation is the only source of information you have telling you what direction the ground and sky points to. With regards to airspeed, there are other clues to be watched for airspeed besides the airspeed indicator and one is engine RPM. Generally speaking, under normal flight attitudes, the engine RPM will increase as you point down which subsequently means your airspeed is building. * Yes, for a fixed pitch prop. With a CSU its not so. Airframe noise does increase but that's subtle for small speed excursions and I have no idea if you can pick that up with noise cancelling headsets.. Cheers |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ILS approach and VOR Alpha Approach video | DOCTOR Mary Ellen Hall McIntire Yasay, Ph.D, (Div.) | Piloting | 3 | May 22nd 08 01:52 PM |
ILS approach and VOR Alpha Approach video | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | May 22nd 08 02:15 AM |
ILS approach and VOR Alpha Approach video | [email protected] | Piloting | 4 | May 17th 08 01:19 PM |
First approach to minimums | Steven Barnes | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | October 21st 05 07:47 PM |
CAT II Minimums on a CAT I Approach | Giwi | Instrument Flight Rules | 11 | July 24th 03 07:46 AM |