Getting used to the Arrow...and I like it...a lot!

If EVER there was an airplane that didn't float it would be an Arrow II. I
was fortunate enough to instruct in the entire Piper line for a couple of
years (with Bob Gardner!) Except Bob went on to become rich and famous and I
just had to fly for food.

Arrow II does not "float"

Best,
Karl


"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Turbo Arrow" wrote in message
...
I have not have problems with thermals making me float down the runway


An airplane impervious to ground effect?

Matt Barrow wrote:

"Turbo Arrow" wrote in message
...
I have 2 ways of flying my arrow, in the winter I come in with no
flaps
and
summer I use full flaps because of the change in air density,if I
used
full
flaps in the winter I would float sometimes


More likely you would float during the summer from the thermals
associated
with ground heating.

"kage" wrote in message ...
If EVER there was an airplane that didn't float it would be an Arrow II. I was fortunate enough to instruct in the
entire Piper line for a couple of years (with Bob Gardner!) Except Bob went on to become rich and famous and I just
had to fly for food.

Arrow II does not "float"

Best,
Karl


Yup, if airplanes floated, they would be airships. ;-)

It is all a matter of airspeed control...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
"Turbo Arrow" wrote in message
...
I have not have problems with thermals making me float down the runway

An airplane impervious to ground effect?

What does ground effect have to do with thermals?

Nothing, that's what.

Turbo Arrow wrote:
I see its a 1971, is that an Arrow II ?
Nope...'72 is the first year for the Arrow II. So, I have an Arrow 200B.

Its a nice looking plane BTW
Thanks. It flies as nice as it looks.

--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-IA Student
Student Arrow Owner, N2104T

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

"john smith" wrote in message
...
One of aviation's Rules of Thumb...
an approximate best approach speed is found halfway between the top and
bottom of the white arc.

It's certainly never going to kill you, but it doesn't make any adjustments
for being light (say 1 pilot, and minimal fuel) - which can make approx 13
knots difference to the ideal approach speed in the Arrow (and 10 knots
difference to your dirty stall speed).

Since I started calculating approach speeds I've been amazed at how the
consistancy of my landings has improved - even 5 knots makes a difference.

Turbo Arrow wrote:

just a note, on decents, instead of reducign power to come down, you can just
pull the prop back, it will cause more drag so you can decend but keep engine
from shock cooling (BTW this is out of the manual)

"pulling the prop back" increases drag? Do you mean pulling on the propeller
control knob? How does that increase drag? Maybe you meant that it reduces power?

Dave

"Dave Butler" wrote in message
news:1113855718.630798@sj-nntpcache-3...
Turbo Arrow wrote:

just a note, on decents, instead of reducign power to come down, you can
just
pull the prop back, it will cause more drag so you can decend but keep
engine
from shock cooling (BTW this is out of the manual)

"pulling the prop back" increases drag? Do you mean pulling on the
propeller control knob? How does that increase drag? Maybe you meant that
it reduces power?

Dave

No, it doesn't necessarily reduce power. Typically it will increase the
manifold pressure. If there is not a concomitant reduction in RPM the power
will increase. However, you will likely move the prop away from the optimum
pitch for the airspeed/RPM combination. This will reduce the effectiveness
of the horsepower to thrust conversion that you use the propellor for. That
means that more power will be required for the same thrust. This allows you
to maintain the thrust selected for the desired descent while producing
sufficient power to keep the cylinders warm and working.

However, I would not recommend that technique for all engines, even if it
would probably work alright for a geared engine. "pulling the prop back"
implies to me that you are increasing the pitch of the prop. With the
throttle setting unchanged this will result in a decrease in RPM and an
increase in Manifold Pressure. This moves you closer to the detonation
margin and could result in engine damage.

The normal procedure for increasing the pitch of a controllable or constant
speed prop is to reduce the throttle before increasing the pitch. With a
controllable prop you control the pitch directly. With a constant speed
prop you increase the pitch by reducing the RPM with the prop governor
control. High manifold pressure and low RPM is comparable to starting off
with your car in high gear. It lugs the engine.

Highflyer
Highflight Aviation Services
Pinckneyville Airport ( PJY )

Highflyer wrote:
"Dave Butler" wrote in message
news:1113855718.630798@sj-nntpcache-3...

Turbo Arrow wrote:


just a note, on decents, instead of reducign power to come down, you can
just
pull the prop back, it will cause more drag so you can decend but keep
engine
from shock cooling (BTW this is out of the manual)

"pulling the prop back" increases drag? Do you mean pulling on the
propeller control knob? How does that increase drag? Maybe you meant that
it reduces power?


No, it doesn't necessarily reduce power.

snipped good stuff about how to operate your engine

No disagreement there. I was trying to give Turbo Arrow a way to get out of his
assertion. Do you support Turbo Arrow's assertion that "pulling the prop back"
increases drag? I didn't think so.

Dave