Bonanza (A36) Approach Speeds

On Dec 17, 3:04 pm, john smith wrote:

They do say that *most* Bo pilots land far too fast. With 10 hours of
class room (ground school) they drilled into us we would NOT be
landing too fast.:-)) You should have heard the complaints when we
were informed we'd be calculating the approach and departure speeds
(for VFR) based on aircraft weights and flying those within a couple
MPH/knots.

What does that tell you about the quality of instruction prior to the
ABS course?

Or they have read too much of Collins bad advise

On Dec 17, 6:01 pm, Newps wrote:
wrote:
On Dec 17, 3:05 pm, Newps wrote:

wrote:

BUT -- 70 KIAS is not a power -off landing speed. There's insufficient
energy to flare, so a bit of power is required to arrest the descent.

What? Did the tail fall off? I have plenty of elevator at 70 kts, no
power and a forward CG in a 35 Bo.

I fly a 1947 Model 35 as well.

Not the same airplane as an A36, the topic of this thread.

Doesn't matter.

Care to elaborate?

The A36 and Straight 35 are exactly the same, except for the different
wings, different weights, different powerplants, different CGs,
different loading envelopes, different gear, different prop governors,
different empennage, and a few thousand other minor differences.

I guess that doesn't matter?

Dan



Dan

wrote:
On Dec 17, 6:01 pm, Newps wrote:

wrote:

On Dec 17, 3:05 pm, Newps wrote:

wrote:

BUT -- 70 KIAS is not a power -off landing speed. There's insufficient
energy to flare, so a bit of power is required to arrest the descent.

What? Did the tail fall off? I have plenty of elevator at 70 kts, no
power and a forward CG in a 35 Bo.

I fly a 1947 Model 35 as well.

Not the same airplane as an A36, the topic of this thread.

Doesn't matter.


Care to elaborate?

The A36 and Straight 35 are exactly the same, except for the different
wings,

Wings are the same.



different weights,


The 36 weighs 31 pounds more than the same year model 35.

different powerplants,


Same powerplant as mine.



different CGs,
different loading envelopes,


Yes and it is beneficial.



different gear,


Same gear, just heavier duty than the straight 35, exactly the same as mine.


different prop governors,

Irrelevant.



different empennage,


Duh.



and a few thousand other minor differences.

I guess that doesn't matter?



No, it doesn't change the fact that at 70 knots you are not out of
elevator. I land at less than that speed, power off and it flares just
fine.

On Dec 17, 10:36 pm, Newps wrote:
wrote:
On Dec 17, 6:01 pm, Newps wrote:

wrote:

On Dec 17, 3:05 pm, Newps wrote:

wrote:

BUT -- 70 KIAS is not a power -off landing speed. There's insufficient
energy to flare, so a bit of power is required to arrest the descent.

What? Did the tail fall off? I have plenty of elevator at 70 kts, no
power and a forward CG in a 35 Bo.

I fly a 1947 Model 35 as well.

Not the same airplane as an A36, the topic of this thread.

Doesn't matter.

Care to elaborate?

The A36 and Straight 35 are exactly the same, except for the different
wings,

Wings are the same.

different weights,

The 36 weighs 31 pounds more than the same year model 35.

different powerplants,

Same powerplant as mine.

different CGs,
different loading envelopes,

Yes and it is beneficial.

different gear,

Same gear, just heavier duty than the straight 35, exactly the same as mine.

different prop governors,

Irrelevant.

different empennage,

Duh.

and a few thousand other minor differences.



I guess that doesn't matter?

No, it doesn't change the fact that at 70 knots you are not out of
elevator. I land at less than that speed, power off and it flares just
fine.

Please re-read the thread an you will see I am referring to a 1947
Model 35, which is significantly different in every respect I
mentioned.

I have not found that the A36 has enough energy left to flare and
arrest the descent at 70 KIAS.

Dan

A36 GW on same wing as 33 or 35, is 200 pounds greater.

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
|
|
| wrote:
| On Dec 17, 6:01 pm, Newps wrote:
|
| wrote:
|
| On Dec 17, 3:05 pm, Newps wrote:
|
| wrote:
|
| BUT -- 70 KIAS is not a power -off landing speed. There's
insufficient
| energy to flare, so a bit of power is required to arrest the descent.
|
| What? Did the tail fall off? I have plenty of elevator at 70 kts, no
| power and a forward CG in a 35 Bo.
|
| I fly a 1947 Model 35 as well.
|
| Not the same airplane as an A36, the topic of this thread.
|
| Doesn't matter.
|
|
| Care to elaborate?
|
| The A36 and Straight 35 are exactly the same, except for the different
| wings,
|
| Wings are the same.
|
|
|
| different weights,
|
|
| The 36 weighs 31 pounds more than the same year model 35.
|
| different powerplants,
|
|
| Same powerplant as mine.
|
|
|
| different CGs,
| different loading envelopes,
|
|
| Yes and it is beneficial.
|
|
|
| different gear,
|
|
| Same gear, just heavier duty than the straight 35, exactly the same as
mine.
|
|
| different prop governors,
|
| Irrelevant.
|
|
|
| different empennage,
|
|
| Duh.
|
|
|
| and a few thousand other minor differences.
|
| I guess that doesn't matter?
|
|
|
| No, it doesn't change the fact that at 70 knots you are not out of
| elevator. I land at less than that speed, power off and it flares just
| fine.
|

The CG range on the A36 is very different from the 33/35 models. Without
passengers in the middle or rear, the CG is further fwd and the force
required to flare is greater.



wrote in message
...
| On Dec 17, 10:36 pm, Newps wrote:
| wrote:
| On Dec 17, 6:01 pm, Newps wrote:
|
| wrote:
|
| On Dec 17, 3:05 pm, Newps wrote:
|
| wrote:
|
| BUT -- 70 KIAS is not a power -off landing speed. There's
insufficient
| energy to flare, so a bit of power is required to arrest the
descent.
|
| What? Did the tail fall off? I have plenty of elevator at 70 kts,
no
| power and a forward CG in a 35 Bo.
|
| I fly a 1947 Model 35 as well.
|
| Not the same airplane as an A36, the topic of this thread.
|
| Doesn't matter.
|
| Care to elaborate?
|
| The A36 and Straight 35 are exactly the same, except for the different
| wings,
|
| Wings are the same.
|
| different weights,
|
| The 36 weighs 31 pounds more than the same year model 35.
|
| different powerplants,
|
| Same powerplant as mine.
|
| different CGs,
| different loading envelopes,
|
| Yes and it is beneficial.
|
| different gear,
|
| Same gear, just heavier duty than the straight 35, exactly the same as
mine.
|
| different prop governors,
|
| Irrelevant.
|
| different empennage,
|
| Duh.
|
| and a few thousand other minor differences.
|
|
|
| I guess that doesn't matter?
|
| No, it doesn't change the fact that at 70 knots you are not out of
| elevator. I land at less than that speed, power off and it flares just
| fine.
|
| Please re-read the thread an you will see I am referring to a 1947
| Model 35, which is significantly different in every respect I
| mentioned.
|
| I have not found that the A36 has enough energy left to flare and
| arrest the descent at 70 KIAS.
|
| Dan
|

Jim Macklin wrote:

A36 GW on same wing as 33 or 35, is 200 pounds greater.

It can be.

Jim Macklin wrote:

The CG range on the A36 is very different from the 33/35 models. Without
passengers in the middle or rear, the CG is further fwd and the force
required to flare is greater.

The CG range is a little larger on the 36 but otherwise similar. With
pax only in front of the 35 the CG is near forward limit, same as the 36.

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:05:10 -0700, Newps wrote:



wrote:

BUT -- 70 KIAS is not a power -off landing speed. There's insufficient
energy to flare, so a bit of power is required to arrest the descent.


What? Did the tail fall off? I have plenty of elevator at 70 kts, no
power and a forward CG in a 35 Bo.

It's not an elevator authority issue, but rather one of energy.

Book figures for the 33 are ~ 80 knots (varies a bit from year to
year) for a no power landing. It's 78 (90 MPH) for mine. Normal is 70
(80 MPH) minus one mph for each 100# under gross. The POH states the
power off landing is faster as there is not enough energy to safely
flare at the normal power on landing speed.

Depending on the year the 36 is slightly longer than the 35/33 to a
fair amount longer (18" IIRC). CG covers a much wider range on the 36.
As I recall the wing is the same with some minor differences in the
tips, stall strips, and rivet patterns (flush and round head). OTOH
they are not interchangeable. Early 33s had a number of variations in
the tank arrangement(s). I've had mechanics swear the aux tanks on
mine were after market as they are forward of the spar, but it came
from the factory that way.

The early 35s are considerably lighter than later 33s and 36s.
Later 36s are heavy.

Roger (K8RI)

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 06:02:38 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:


105 is what they had me flying the ILS in the Deb/F33 at Columbus.
As the foggles/break out did not come off until the MM (200 feet) the
reconfiguration was rather short and quick.

So you broke out at minimums and then configured for landing ? If I
were you I would find a different instructor next year.


Was this during the ABS Bonanza training??

Yup


Does seem like stuffing 10 lbs into a 5 lb bag...

It really isn't all that bad.
It'd be really easy if the trim weren't hidden under the instrument
panel requiring the pilot to lean over to adjust. OTOH it's *coarse*
and takes little movement of the trim wheel. They fixed that around
CD-60 or so.

Roger (K8RI)


Dan