A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

How Low to Spin??



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #171  
Old September 8th 04, 07:43 AM
Bruce Hoult
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Nyal Williams wrote:

I suspect that you may be confusing the 'best speed
to cover the most
ground in a headwind' with 'the best speed to make
a safe approach to
landing'.

Tony,


As I read his question it, he was asking for 'best
speed to cover the most ground in a headwind. Actually,
he seemed to confuse the two in the question.


And why earth would you want to know that when you were in the circuit?
You are surely not going to go *that* far downwind that you need best
L/D into wind in order to get back.

The extra speed with wind is to provide extra guard against a tail gust
stalling you (though the +10 knots or *1.3 does a lot of that), but
mostly I think so that and likely wind gradient still leaves you with
flying speed.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------
  #172  
Old September 8th 04, 10:34 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tony Verhulst wrote:

The fault was clearly my failure to use a proper landing checklist.


stops laughing long enough to nod head in agreement with this
wise, but slightly obvious statement :P

I'm MUCH better at using a landing check list now :-). Still, when I bought
the LS6, the first thing I did was to install a gear warning.


I'm at the point that I don't know if I'll ever fly anything without
it. I've never landed gear up, and don't want to.
--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd
  #173  
Old September 8th 04, 10:41 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bruce Hoult wrote:

And why earth would you want to know that when you were in the circuit?
You are surely not going to go *that* far downwind that you need best
L/D into wind in order to get back.


Apparently this is a significant cause of crashes (undershot
landing from overshot downwind).

On another subject, can someone describe the
45/V type approach that I've heard is used in
some countries? Is it like this?

-------------------------------\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
/
/
/
/
/
----------------- | /
| | /
| | | /
The Runway | --+----| ----/
| | |
| |
----------------- |

--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd
  #174  
Old September 9th 04, 04:37 AM
Nyal Williams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

At 07:06 08 September 2004, Bruce Hoult wrote:
In article ,
Nyal Williams wrote:

I suspect that you may be confusing the 'best speed
to cover the most
ground in a headwind' with 'the best speed to make
a safe approach to
landing'.

Tony,


As I read his question it, he was asking for 'best
speed to cover the most ground in a headwind. Actually,
he seemed to confuse the two in the question.


And why earth would you want to know that when you
were in the circuit?
You are surely not going to go *that* far downwind
that you need best
L/D into wind in order to get back.

The extra speed with wind is to provide extra guard
against a tail gust
stalling you (though the +10 knots or *1.3 does a lot
of that), but
mostly I think so that and likely wind gradient still
leaves you with
flying speed.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------


I wouldn't. He proposed the scenario and asked why
1/2 the wind speed added to the best L/D was the best
speed to cover the ground to insure getting back.
He went on to say that that seemed to be the universally
accepted figure and that no one had ever explained
it.

My suggestion to look at the polar was only about the
above formula for best speed to cover ground. I took
it as an incidental question aside from the main question
and chose to address that only. I hope my answer was
not taken as a suggestion about how to fly a pattern!




  #175  
Old September 9th 04, 10:16 AM
Bill Gribble
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mark James Boyd writes
On another subject, can someone describe the 45/V type approach that
I've heard is used in some countries?


Not sure what a "V type" is, but the circuit I've been taught to fly
here in the UK, in contrast to what I understand to be the conventional
right-angled power circuit, includes a "diagonal leg" flown between the
downwind and base...

____
/ |
/ v
| ====
|

The specific purpose, as I understand it, is to keep the intended
landing point in sight of the pilot at all times enabling the pilot to
continually asses the angle between himself and the landing area and
thus ensure he stays within reach, cutting (or at least minimising) the
risk of an undershoot.

Essentially, you fly your downwind leg as normal, and as the landing
area begins to disappear under the nearside wing, you turn 45 degrees in
and fly the diagonal leg. At the appropriate point along the diagonal
you turn onto and fly the base then make your final turn and land as
normal.

The length of the diagonal leg, the point you turn onto it, and how far
back you go before turning onto base is entirely dependent upon
conditions and circumstance. Though presumably that's true of any glider
pattern, as we don't generally have the option of hitting the throttle
to fix a balls up?


--
Bill Gribble

/---------------------------------------\
| http://www.ingenuitytest.co.uk |
| http://www.cotswoldgliding.co.uk |
| http://www.scapegoatsanon.demon.co.uk |
\---------------------------------------/
  #176  
Old September 9th 04, 08:58 PM
Tony Verhulst
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mark James Boyd wrote:
Tony Verhulst wrote:

The fault was clearly my failure to use a proper landing checklist.



stops laughing long enough to nod head in agreement with this
wise, but slightly obvious statement :P


OK, OK :-). My point was that although there were extenuating
circumstances, I'm not making exuses.

Although the glider wasn't damaged, my pride was. This happened at a
club outing to another field and EVERYBODY was there. If I hear the
saying "there are 2 kinds of pilots...." just one more time, I'm going
to spit :-).

Tony V.

  #177  
Old September 9th 04, 09:17 PM
Jim Vincent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Funny, one of the instructors at my club landed gear up...he and his cronies
said the gear collapsed. Seems to me, had the gear collapsed, he would have
had at least some damage to the gear doors or had the ship checked out
afterwards. IMO, he just Skipped the checklist.

Jim Vincent
N483SZ
illspam
  #178  
Old September 10th 04, 06:20 PM
Robert Ehrlich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jim Vincent wrote:

Funny, one of the instructors at my club landed gear up...he and his cronies
said the gear collapsed. Seems to me, had the gear collapsed, he would have
had at least some damage to the gear doors or had the ship checked out
afterwards. IMO, he just Skipped the checklist.


I had a gear collapse in a Discus, without any damage to the gear doors.
This was due to both a worn locking mechanism and a bounce on landing,
probably helped by a rabbit hole (we have a lot of them here). The
sailplane was flying again when the gear retracted and so the gear
doors properly closed in the air and the aircraft landed again on the
CG hook. I remember the feeling of something moving in my peripheral
vision field while I was looking on the runway in front of me, of
course when I understood it was the gear handle moving backward, it
was to late.
  #179  
Old September 10th 04, 06:55 PM
Chip Bearden
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Funny, one of the instructors at my club landed gear up...he and his cronies
said the gear collapsed. Seems to me, had the gear collapsed, he would have
had at least some damage to the gear doors or had the ship checked out
afterwards. IMO, he just Skipped the checklist.


I'm sure there's more to this than is written above. But in the
absence of any more data, this would accurately describe many LS-1/3/4
landing gear incidents. My old LS-3 gear retracted itself twice on
landing, on grass, with no damage whatsoever. The gas spring in the LS
undercarriage that allows this to happen when it's worn and/or the
outside air temperature is cold and/or there's dirt/friction in the
landing gear mechanism has been discussed at length in this forum.
Experienced owners no longer get anxious when it happens; they just
get angry.

The incident described may, indeed, have been a gear up landing. But
there's nothing definitive in the description to indicate so. Which
makes the term "IMO" particularly apt: it is just one person's
opinion. That's consistent with the tone. Substitute "other
experienced pilots" for "his cronies" and you send an entirely
different message.

Just trying to be fair,
Chip Bearden
  #180  
Old September 12th 04, 04:04 PM
Graeme Cant
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

No. It's more like this:

------

--------
------
----
--
-
-
-
-
-
----------------------------

The base leg blends into downwind.

Graeme Cant


Mark James Boyd wrote:
Bruce Hoult wrote:

And why earth would you want to know that when you were in the circuit?
You are surely not going to go *that* far downwind that you need best
L/D into wind in order to get back.



Apparently this is a significant cause of crashes (undershot
landing from overshot downwind).

On another subject, can someone describe the
45/V type approach that I've heard is used in
some countries? Is it like this?

-------------------------------\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
/
/
/
/
/
----------------- | /
| | /
| | | /
The Runway | --+----| ----/
| | |
| |
----------------- |

--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 03:26 PM
SR22 Spin Recovery gwengler Piloting 9 September 24th 04 07:31 AM
Spin Training JJ Sinclair Soaring 6 February 16th 04 05:49 PM
Cessna 150 Price Outlook Charles Talleyrand Owning 80 October 16th 03 02:18 PM
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Piloting 25 September 11th 03 01:27 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.