Neat experience today.

Nope, not me either...

'79 Warrior..... no "stiction"...flare is a two finger exercise.

If my yoke is back, a slight push, it will "coast" all the way to the
panel with the engine stopped..

I would check the lubricant situation on the yoke tube...or something
ia REALLY out of whack....

Dave


On Mon, 29 May 2006 17:11:30 -0500, "JJS" jschneider@re
movecebridge.net wrote:



In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:
snip

Often when flying Pipers I know slowly "pump" the controls during the
flare. One of the aviation columnists recently wrote about using this
technique and the advantages of it. I never needed it much in my 182 as I
could gradually pull back the wheel in it. The Arrow isn't nearly as
smooth and a low amplitude, high frequency "pumping" of the wheel tends to
allow smoother arrivals at closer to stall speed.


Matt

Okay, survey time. We have a lot of Piper pilots on the newsgroups. How
many of you find it necessary to "pump the yoke"to get a smooth low speed
landing? I'll go first... not me. Is something wrong with my airplane or
just every other Piper in the world?

Joe Schneider
N8437R



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Viperdoc" wrote in news:byMeg.7634$GM.2024
@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com:

You sound like one of those folks who argues for the sake of
argument. Your post contradicts itself.

If those "experienced and mature individuals, and not risk takers"
still managed to damage their planes, it sounds like a case of
"**** happens". If you are lowering the threshold to that level,
what's to say that in any situation we go through life won't
end up killing us in a "**** happens" type situation? What's to
say that on Matt's flight that some manufacturing defect decided
to rip one of hte wings off? **** happens. Would Matt's presence
on the flight or not have had any bearing?

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Bingo. On my old Tomahawk, I had to dip the tip of my index finger into
engine oil and spread it on both yoke shafts about once every six months
to keep everything moving easily. The difference between pre and
post-lube stiction was noticable.

I'll bet a little lithium grease would work better, longer, and be less
mess.

Of course, you seldom will have a bit of lithium grease on your dipstick,
when you need it! g
--
Jim in NC

Matt,

but the acceleration was sluggish and
that has nothing to do with the wing


If you want acceleration on the ground, get a sports car ;-)

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Viperdoc,

I would never fly with a stranger in an
unknown airplane.


And you fly alone a lot? What I'm trying to get at is: How would you
ever get a passenger to fly with you if they all thought like that?


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jjs,

I'll go first... not me.


Me neither.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Matt,

He said it was constant speed, but you wouldn't know it flying it as it
has just the throttle lever. No prop control, no mixture control


It is CS, but the speed is linked to the throttle position. Not something
I like, but a try at simplification. Mixture is normal, there should have
been a second lever as usual.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Peter,

Still different from the use of a center-mounted yoke, granted...but I had
plenty of leverage and found the controls quite natural and easy to use


Concur.
--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Matt,


but the acceleration was sluggish and
that has nothing to do with the wing



If you want acceleration on the ground, get a sports car ;-)

To tow the Cirrus to rotation speed?
:-)

Matt

Matt,

I recently sold my C310 (after about 650 hours in it). The C310 was a
joy to fly, when trimmed it almost flew hands off. The plane had no
autopilot, so all those hours where hand flown.

I joined OurPlane and have been flying a SR22G for the last 6 months. I
found that the ground roll is about the same as my twin Cessna, but the
climb performance is probably better.

I also found that there was very little effort in transitioning from the
yoke to the side stick. However, the SR22 does not like to be hand flown
because the trim controls are not responsive enough. It only has an
electric trim, no hand trims. The plane likes to flown on autopilot.
With all this in mind, it remains a wonderful plane to fly.

Cary

Matt Whiting wrote:
snip
The rudder came alive pretty quickly on the takeoff roll, but
acceleration was sluggish compared to a 182, but probably similar to the
club Arrow I know fly, which I also consider sluggish. I don't know the
typical weight of the SR20, but it probably is nearly as heavy as the
182 with 30 less HP. The rotation speed is similar to the Arrow (65
knots was what the owner recommended) and a fair bit higher than the
182. Climb was sluggish, again much like the Arrow and at a similar
speed (90K). Once at 3500' I leveled off and the speed built up nicely.

The side stick would take some getting used to, but it wasn't bad. I
found the controls to be more sluggish than my 182, but less so than the
Arrow.

snip

I suspect that flying an SR22 might change my opinion as the main
thing with the SR20 is that it felt underpowered, just like the Arrow.
After flying a Skylane for 6 years, I really miss the performance,
particularly on takeoff.


Matt