![]() |
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 |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 15, 8:49 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
The examiner wouldn't allow him to slip because he reckons they are dangerous with the flaps out and that he should wiggle the ailerons back and forth to lose height. He didn't even want him to slip clean. Jesus wept. This examiner had had a fright in a 172 (this was an archer anyway) and did not alow anyone to slip with flaps out. While I am firmly in the camp that says some cessnas can get a litle fuzzy in pitch with full flaps, this is just stupidity incarnate. Shoot. We do slips with full flaps all the time in 172s, have done so for years, and never had a scare. I wonder if that "Avoid Slips With Flaps Extended" applied to some earlier models? I'll have to check the TCDS sometime. Dan |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ernest Christley wrote in news:47142123$0$32479
: Bertie the Bunyip wrote: It's the same either way. Cooling and heating are two sides of th esame coin. It takes time to disapate heat and it's not so much the passage of heat from one area to another (or the disappation, it's irrelevant) but the speed at which the cooling or heating is taking place and thus the gradient across the material. In short, you take a frozen lump of metal and apply a torch to one side you have a problem. Take a cherry red pice of metal and put some ice on side and you have the same problem (more or less, and disregading crystalisation) It is the same if the same delta T is present, but my point is that it is easier to heat something quickly than cool it quickly. Even at 250 C, you are only 523 degrees above absolute zero. So, this the absolute largest delta T you can induce for cooling, and it is very hard to get absolute zero, so you are more likely to have a cool temp closer to 0 C yielding a delta T of only 250 degrees. On the hot side things are more open-ended. It isn't too hard to get 450 C exhaust gas temperatures. For an engine that is started at say 20 C ambient temperature, you now have a delta T of 430 degrees which is much greater than the 250 likely on the cooling side of the cycle. With the heating, you only have the few hundred CFM of air passing through the engine to heat it. With the cooling, you have all of the great outdoors to do the trick. To tie it into your anology, you have a butane lighter to heat the metal, and the Atlantic Ocean to cool it. Kind of besides th point. you coudl say the same thing about an oxy acetylene setup and we all know what that will do to a bit of metal. Bertie |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Morgans" wrote in news:LdUQi.347$SQ2.280
@newsfe12.lga: "Bertie the Bunyip" wrote Seriously, though, they will increase engine life considerably. 'Specially for the guy that is only flying his plane 50 or 100 hours per year. Yes, absolutely. Bertie |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 16, 12:43 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:1192492570.300275.289550 @i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com: On Oct 15, 8:49 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote: The examiner wouldn't allow him to slip because he reckons they are dangerous with the flaps out and that he should wiggle the ailerons back and forth to lose height. He didn't even want him to slip clean. Jesus wept. This examiner had had a fright in a 172 (this was an archer anyway) and did not alow anyone to slip with flaps out. While I am firmly in the camp that says some cessnas can get a litle fuzzy in pitch with full flaps, this is just stupidity incarnate. Shoot. We do slips with full flaps all the time in 172s, have done so for years, and never had a scare. I wonder if that "Avoid Slips With Flaps Extended" applied to some earlier models? I'll have to check the TCDS sometime. Dan Dunno. the manual in a 172 makes reference to a possibility of degraded elevator control, but I think it's only a bit of a nod, really. The Bird dog suffers from this ailment big time, though. it has, essentially, the 172's wing, but the flaps go to 60 degrees. I can tell you first hand that blanking of both the rudder and elevator are a very real characteristic of that airplane if you slip it ith full flaps. I did it once close to the ground and never even thought about it again.. Here's what the Type Certificate Data Sheet says: .................................................. ................................... D. On flap handle, Models 172 through 172E (1) "Flaps - Pull to extend Takeoff Retract 0° 1st notch 10° Landing 0° - 40° (2) "Avoid slips with flaps down." E. Near flap indicator Models 172F (electric flaps) through 17271034, excluding 17270050) "Avoid slips with flaps extended." .................................................. ......................................... The applicable models, 172 through 172F, were built between 1956 and 1964 ('65 model?). There's no mention of the slip with flaps thing for later models. I wonder if the addition of the back window changed the airflow enough to keep the elevator flying? Dan |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Souns about right. The Bird dog's reaction was anything but mild, but with
60 degrees of flap it's not surprising really. Teh 172 this DE claims to have had problems with was a relatively late one, but I could have been anything that caused it. Some turbulence or maybe his mimagination coupled with the horrow stories about it. |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Seems if one must use full flaps AND slip in landing, I would say the
approach was an abortion that lived. I prefer slips to flaps as you can instantly remove a slip but the same can't be said for flaps... Just MY personal opinion...not trying to slam anybody. Scott Bob Moore wrote: Bertie the Bunyip wrote This examiner had had a fright in a 172 and did not alow anyone to slip with flaps out. While I am firmly in the camp that says some cessnas can get a litle fuzzy in pitch with full flaps, this is just stupidity incarnate. About once-a-year I post the following excerpt from "Cessna, Wings for the World", a book by William D. Thompson. Bill Thompson is an Aeronautical engineer from Purdue University and worked for Cessna Aircraft Company for 28 years as an engineering test pilot and later as the Manager of Flight Test & Aerodynamics. ------------------------------------------------------------------- "With the advent of the large slotted flaps in the C-170, C-180, and C- 172 we encountered a nose down pitch in forward slips with the wing flaps deflected. In some cases it was severe enough to lift the pilot against his seat belt if he was slow in checking the motion. For this reason a caution note was placed in most of the owner's manuals under "Landings" reading "Slips should be avoided with flap settings greater than 30° due to a downward pitch encountered under certain combinations of airspeed, side-slip angle, and center of gravity loadings". Since wing-low drift correction in cross-wind landings is normally performed with a minimum flap setting (for better rudder control) this limitation did not apply to that maneuver. The cause of the pitching motion is the transition of a strong wing downwash over the tail in straight flight to a lessened downwash angle over part of the horizontal tail caused by the influence of a relative "upwash increment" from the upturned aileron in slipping flight. Although not stated in the owner's manuals, we privately encouraged flight instructors to explore these effects at high altitude, and to pass on the information to their students. This phenomenon was elusive and sometimes hard to duplicate, but it was thought that a pilot should be aware of its existence and know how to counter-act it if it occurs close to the ground. When the larger dorsal fin was adopted in the 1972 C-172L, this side- slip pitch phenomenon was eliminated, but the cautionary placard was retained. In the higher-powered C-172P and C-R172 the placard was applicable to a mild pitch "pumping" motion resulting from flap outboard-end vortex impingement on the horizontal tail at some combinations of side-slip angle, power, and airspeed." -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1959 C-172 Notice that this prohibition appears in Section III, Operating Details of the C-172Owner's Manual and NOT in Section IV, Operating Limitations. It is NOT an FAA limitation. Sounds more like "Lawyer" talk to me. "LANDING Normal landings are made power off with any flap setting. Slips are prohibited in full flap approaches because of a downward pitch encountered under certain combinations of airspeed and sideslip angle." --------------------------------------------------------------------- I wear my "Slips with Flaps" T-Shirt proudly! Bob Moore 12 years instructing in Skyhawks -- Scott http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/ Gotta Fly or Gonna Die Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version) |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 16, 7:52 am, wrote:
On Oct 16, 12:43 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote: wrote in news:1192492570.300275.289550 @i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com: On Oct 15, 8:49 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote: The examiner wouldn't allow him to slip because he reckons they are dangerous with the flaps out and that he should wiggle the ailerons back and forth to lose height. He didn't even want him to slip clean. Jesus wept. This examiner had had a fright in a 172 (this was an archer anyway) and did not alow anyone to slip with flaps out. While I am firmly in the camp that says some cessnas can get a litle fuzzy in pitch with full flaps, this is just stupidity incarnate. Shoot. We do slips with full flaps all the time in 172s, have done so for years, and never had a scare. I wonder if that "Avoid Slips With Flaps Extended" applied to some earlier models? I'll have to check the TCDS sometime. Dan Dunno. the manual in a 172 makes reference to a possibility of degraded elevator control, but I think it's only a bit of a nod, really. The Bird dog suffers from this ailment big time, though. it has, essentially, the 172's wing, but the flaps go to 60 degrees. I can tell you first hand that blanking of both the rudder and elevator are a very real characteristic of that airplane if you slip it ith full flaps. I did it once close to the ground and never even thought about it again.. Here's what the Type Certificate Data Sheet says: .................................................. .................................. D. On flap handle, Models 172 through 172E (1) "Flaps - Pull to extend Takeoff Retract 0° 1st notch 10° Landing 0° - 40° (2) "Avoid slips with flaps down." E. Near flap indicator Models 172F (electric flaps) through 17271034, excluding 17270050) "Avoid slips with flaps extended." .................................................. ........................................ The applicable models, 172 through 172F, were built between 1956 and 1964 ('65 model?). There's no mention of the slip with flaps thing for later models. I wonder if the addition of the back window changed the airflow enough to keep the elevator flying? Dan Wait a minute. I just noticed something, and it's not clear from the way Cessna put it on the TCDS. It says under "E" that the avoid slips thing applies to the 172F through 17271034. That serial number is the end of the 1978 172 N production, so the warning applies to a lot more that I though it did. I hope nobody's gone out and hurt themselves, now. But we still slip with full flaps. Dan |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 16, 11:25 am, Scott wrote:
Seems if one must use full flaps AND slip in landing, I would say the approach was an abortion that lived. I prefer slips to flaps as you can instantly remove a slip but the same can't be said for flaps... Just MY personal opinion...not trying to slam anybody. Need to know how to do it for forced approaches. The stress of an actual failure (I've had two) will make things difficult enough, and slipping with flap might be the only way to get down soon enough in the only field available. I miss manual flaps. They were handy. You could dump them right at touchdown and get weight on the mains for braking. Electric flaps are so slow that they are passing through 20°, the max-lift/min drag position, just when you want to brake, so it's better to leave them alone. My old Auster had huge Zap flaps that lowered the stall by a wide margin, and dumping them right at a minimum-speed touchdown allowed full braking and stopping in unbelievably short spaces. Dan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Topi - Mig29 engine failure during practice - "topi.wmv" (14/26) 6.0 MBytes yEnc | Immaterial | Aviation Photos | 0 | January 6th 07 09:15 PM |
Topi - Mig29 engine failure during practice - "topi.wmv" (13/26) 6.0 MBytes yEnc | Immaterial | Aviation Photos | 0 | January 6th 07 09:15 PM |
Topi - Mig29 engine failure during practice - "topi.wmv" (11/26) 6.0 MBytes yEnc | Immaterial | Aviation Photos | 0 | January 6th 07 09:15 PM |
Practice Engine-Out Landings | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 52 | July 14th 05 10:13 PM |
A PIREP: engine-out turn-back - some practice in the haze | Nathan Young | Piloting | 15 | June 17th 05 04:06 PM |