Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1778990
Rob P wrote:I think forum discussions are valuable, but they just make up part of the whole of your personal knowledge base. We will each have different takeaways from the same discussion.

Rob P

Absolutely agree they can be valuable. :thumright: On re reading my post I see my meaning may not be clear. It was a follow on from my previous post asking whether the lack of options ahead would prevent individuals using a particular airfield. It did not relate to actions in the event of an EFATO. :D

My gut feeling is not many would decide never to fly to a particular airfield due to lack of options on climb out.
User avatar
By skydriller
#1778991
Miscellaneous wrote:Seeing that pic, I'm surprised they get permission.

Why? There are licenced aerodromes and airports with far fewer options should it all go quiet... I suspect most of us try not to think about it.

Quite frankly I think that in reality, EFATO below 300-400ft anywhere is going to be "stuff down the nose, runway remaining or anything green imediately ahead". Anything happens at 400-500ft or more and you might be able to think a bit more. Locally you might know what crops are in fields around the aerodrome, but anywhere else its guesswork and I dont think Google earth is going to help you as much as some may think.

Regards, SD..

Edit: @Rob P has just posted his thoughts about his "event". I think it backs up what Im saying, its that instant reaction to stuff down the nose that overrides things initially, then you think, but how much height do you have left at that point?
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1778995
skydriller wrote:Why? There are licenced aerodromes and airports with far fewer options should it all go quiet

That's easy, because a pop up fly-in is an entirely different thing. :D
skydriller wrote:I suspect most of us try not to think about it.

I agree, great to, and FTOD useful to discuss on a forum, but not particularly considered in practice. Hopefully forum discussion can influence that.
skydriller wrote:I dont think Google earth is going to help you as much as some may think.

I'd suggest it's probably worth a look, however I agree and would go so far as to suggest it could be misleading.
skydriller wrote:Edit: @Rob P has just posted his thoughts about his "event". I think it backs up what Im saying, its that instant reaction to stuff down the nose that overrides things initially, then you think, but how much height do you have left at that point?

Agree again, however if there is 'nowhere' to go…
User avatar
By Rob P
#1778999
Miscellaneous wrote: ... asking whether the lack of options ahead would prevent individuals using a particular airfield.
My gut feeling is not many would decide never to fly to a particular airfield due to lack of options on climb out.


Apologies, I did indeed answer a different question.

Speaking personally, and even with an experience in the locker, I can't offhand think of any airfield whose surroundings would prevent me going there if there was a good reason; half price bacon butties or whatever. I am not sure I'd ever return to Barton, but that has more to do with it being a destination with little to recommend it even before their ludicrous reinterpretation of the rules, I hated the low level route, and the horribly unattractive accent of the denizens. I do fly in and out of Cambridge from time to time and will continue to do so if I can ever catch them open.

Sandra HATES Rochester

Rob P
Miscellaneous liked this
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1779006
Rob P wrote:...I can't offhand think of any airfield whose surroundings would prevent me going there if there was a good reason; half price bacon butties or whatever.

And I believe that is true of 99.9% of pilots. :thumright:
kanga liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1779007
Rob P wrote:.. .. Barton, .. horribly unattractive accent of the denizens...


Denizens of how large an area ?

[now socially nervous Liverpudlian with accent modulated/mitigated by ~50 years in Gloucestershire .. :) ]
User avatar
By Rob P
#1779012
Basically 'Mancs'

Civilisation happens a bit west of Haydock Park :lol:

Rob P
User avatar
By Rob P
#1779016
Rob P wrote:
Civilisation happens about six miles west of Haydock Park :lol:



v2.0
User avatar
By Kemble Pitts
#1781939
Had a go at the 180 degree turn at the weekend.

Jodel 1050 with O-200, nearly full fuel, 1 PoB (so about 1300 lb v 1653 lb MAUW), test started at about 1800' AGL.

With the engine at idle and having slowed to 65 KIAS I made a steeply banked (maybe 55-60 degrees) turn keeping 65 KIAS. Tried it a couple of times and lost 300' each time.

Afterwards I thought I ought to have started at 80 KIAS (best ROC speed) and ending up at 65 KIAS (normal approach speed) after 180 degrees. In theory that could have given me less height loss and might have been a more representative profile.

More experimentation required. Will try with engine shut-down and using the 80/65 KIAS profile note above.
By Longfinal
#1781950
Why the random selection of speeds? For a given angle of bank, at what speed does your aircraft stall? So at approximately what speed will you get max lift?

Of course the stall is dependent on AoA not speed but you can get a better idea of what you should be aiming for at a given AoB.
User avatar
By Kemble Pitts
#1781953
Longfinal wrote:Why the random selection of speeds? For a given angle of bank, at what speed does your aircraft stall? So at approximately what speed will you get max lift?

Of course the stall is dependent on AoA not speed but you can get a better idea of what you should be aiming for at a given AoB.


What makes you think they are random? 80 KIAS is best ROC (so this is where you are when the engine fails) and 65 KIAS is the approach speed (so this is where you want to end up when you've completed the turn).

I might experiment with finding the stall speeds at various AOBs, but suggest that is not a realistic task for an EFATO situation. Rather more sensible to aim for known speeds in the 'heat of the moment'.
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
#1781955
Kemble Pitts wrote:
I might experiment with finding the stall speeds at various AOBs, but suggest that is not a realistic task for an EFATO situation. Rather more sensible to aim for known speeds in the 'heat of the moment'.


If you are turning it i s a good plan to know the stall speeds at the various bank angles.

1G Stall speeds are very different from those in a steeper turn, fixating on known 'normal' numbers not good.
flyguy liked this
By Longfinal
#1781959
Kemble Pitts wrote:
Longfinal wrote:Why the random selection of speeds? For a given angle of bank, at what speed does your aircraft stall? So at approximately what speed will you get max lift?

Of course the stall is dependent on AoA not speed but you can get a better idea of what you should be aiming for at a given AoB.


What makes you think they are random? 80 KIAS is best ROC (so this is where you are when the engine fails) and 65 KIAS is the approach speed (so this is where you want to end up when you've completed the turn).

I might experiment with finding the stall speeds at various AOBs, but suggest that is not a realistic task for an EFATO situation. Rather more sensible to aim for known speeds in the 'heat of the moment'.


Might I suggest that you go back to your theory so that you understand a little more about what you are experimenting with. Your 65 kts is likely to be about 1.3 Vs at MauW but at 60 deg AoB your stall speed increases by 1.41.
flyguy liked this
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10