Couldn't Get it Down

[Jay Honeck]

No, this is not a story about Viagra's side effects... ;-)

Amazingly, today dawned clear and sunny -- against all predictions. Thus,
once the kids were at school, it was time for us to head to our favorite
"$100 Breakfast" in Muscatine, IA.

Conditions seemed perfect, but I knew some weather was predicted to move in
later. Thus, a call to flight service was in order, even though Muscatine
was just 20 minutes away. (It's always a good idea to check on GW's
location during this election season, too...) To my surprise, Ft Dodge
Flight Service was calling the surface winds at 15, gusts to 20, from 180.
We had just walked our daughter to school, and the winds were light -- but
obviously there was a big low pressure center moving in from the north,
causing an increasing southerly flow.

Still, the winds were right down the runway in Iowa City, and 60 degrees off
of runway 24 in Muscatine. So, I figure it would be a piece of cake...

We departed normally, lightly loaded with just the two of us and climbing
out at better than 1400 feet per minute. Immediately we were buffeted by
moderate turbulence, but nothing we hadn't felt a hundred times before. In
a few minutes we were enjoying the smooth ride at 3000 feet.

As we proceeded southeasterly, we noticed our flight path across the ground
was quite different from the direction we were facing. The crab angle was
severe, and incredibly our ground speed during the climb out was just 54
knots! Even after we leveled off we were seeing just 95 knots -- a
quartering headwind at 45+ knots!

Still, the ride above the haze layer was smooth, and we weren't going far.
As we enjoyed the ride I tuned in Muscatine's AWOS.

"...wind 180 at 19, gusts to 27..." Uh-oh. This could be more
interesting than I anticipated.

Coming from the north we'd have to cross over the field to enter the
downwind for 24, and the wind would be pushing us in toward the runway at a
good clip. Thus, I set up to cross over just southwest of the field, and
entered a much wider than normal downwind.

I started to get an inkling of what was in store when I had to maintain a 45
degree crab angle in order to fly a parallel downwind. After we descended
to pattern altitude the turbulence had returned with a vengeance, including
some rare "triples" -- the kind of air that bumps you up and down three
times in rapid succession, almost as if you were hitting multiple railroad
tracks in a car at high speed.

Mary had grown strangely quiet, and was rocking from side to side in sync
with the wings rocking, in a vain effort to maintain her upright balance.
I was so busy trying to keep from being blown back over the airport on
downwind that I hadn't noticed the violent rocking until I saw her motions
out of the corner of my eye.

This *was* going to be interesting.

Turning onto base, it seemed like the plane didn't want to turn or descend.
I'd get Atlas set up for a 90 knot descent, only to be tossed up and see my
air speed erode to 75. Then, after correcting a moment later we'd be
instantly at 100. A stabilized approach was simply out of the question.

Turning onto final was like turning a boat. With the wind trying to push me
past the runway, the instinct was to steepen the bank angle -- but a
thousand landings had taught me not to over-do that! Thus, my turn to
final was an exercise in will, banking, over-banking, correcting, banking,
over-banking, correcting. Instead of the usual graceful, sweeping turn onto
final, it was a series of 20 little banks, all connected together by my
furrowed brow.

I was really working now.

Sliding down on final, keeping my airspeed at 100 knots, sort of, I realized
that I was having to hold an impossible left crab angle to maintain runway
alignment. Kicking in right rudder, and opposite aileron helped, but soon
the runway was drifting to the left in the windshield again.

More aileron, more right rudder, more crab...

Now I was *really* working. Curtly I commanded Mary to turn the cabin heat
down. It was already off.

Soon I had full rudder deflection, full opposite aileron, AND a 45 degree
crab. At last the runway was remaining steadfastly in front of me -- but I
realized that if I were to touchdown in that crab, my A&P would be making
yet another upgrade to his 42 foot yacht...

Worse, since I was already at full deflection on the rudder AND aileron,
there was nothing left with which to kick out! In a flash a greasy
breakfast served by an ugly waitress didn't seem like a valid reason to fly
anymore. Applying full power and releasing my aileron and rudder, I was
astounded to see the runway literally *fly* away from us -- sideways!

For the first time in I can't remember when, I executed a go-around...

Once safely at altitude and out of the bumps, I realized my hands were
hurting. I slowly pried them off of the yoke, marveling at how different
this trip -- taken so many times before -- could suddenly change for the
worse. I remarked to Mary how much "fun" this was, but she had another term
for it.

Needless to say, the trip back to Iowa City was quick. And even with the
wind directly on the nose, I had one helluva time making an acceptable
landing. What a day...

Once the plane was in the hangar, we sat and enjoyed the sunny skies. No
one driving by could possibly have a clue how treacherous that pretty blue
sky was today...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Mike Weller]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 02:23:25 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

<snip>

>
>For the first time in I can't remember when, I executed a go-around...
>

I've only done one go-around in the last 35 years of flying. When I
was younger, that was not an option.

As long as you fly, there will be an occasional rougue wave poised to
smite you.

Mike Weller

[Jim Baker]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01...
> No, this is not a story about Viagra's side effects... ;-)
>
> Amazingly, today dawned clear and sunny -- against all predictions. Thus,
> once the kids were at school, it was time for us to head to our favorite
> "$100 Breakfast" in Muscatine, IA.
>
<snip fun story>

Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
A great day! You got to fly, analyze a deteriorating situation, exercise
judgment that probably saved you from mayhem, and got home again. The
flight didn't kill you, so you must be stronger (and demonstrably better as
a pilot)! :-)

Cheers,

JB

[BTIZ]

with that much wind.. if you really needed to be there... ask to land on the
cross taxiway..

BT

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01...
> No, this is not a story about Viagra's side effects... ;-)
>
> Amazingly, today dawned clear and sunny -- against all predictions. Thus,
> once the kids were at school, it was time for us to head to our favorite
> "$100 Breakfast" in Muscatine, IA.
>
> Conditions seemed perfect, but I knew some weather was predicted to move
in
> later. Thus, a call to flight service was in order, even though Muscatine
> was just 20 minutes away. (It's always a good idea to check on GW's
> location during this election season, too...) To my surprise, Ft Dodge
> Flight Service was calling the surface winds at 15, gusts to 20, from 180.
> We had just walked our daughter to school, and the winds were light -- but
> obviously there was a big low pressure center moving in from the north,
> causing an increasing southerly flow.
>
> Still, the winds were right down the runway in Iowa City, and 60 degrees
off
> of runway 24 in Muscatine. So, I figure it would be a piece of cake...
>
> We departed normally, lightly loaded with just the two of us and climbing
> out at better than 1400 feet per minute. Immediately we were buffeted by
> moderate turbulence, but nothing we hadn't felt a hundred times before.
In
> a few minutes we were enjoying the smooth ride at 3000 feet.
>
> As we proceeded southeasterly, we noticed our flight path across the
ground
> was quite different from the direction we were facing. The crab angle was
> severe, and incredibly our ground speed during the climb out was just 54
> knots! Even after we leveled off we were seeing just 95 knots -- a
> quartering headwind at 45+ knots!
>
> Still, the ride above the haze layer was smooth, and we weren't going far.
> As we enjoyed the ride I tuned in Muscatine's AWOS.
>
> "...wind 180 at 19, gusts to 27..." Uh-oh. This could be more
> interesting than I anticipated.
>
> Coming from the north we'd have to cross over the field to enter the
> downwind for 24, and the wind would be pushing us in toward the runway at
a
> good clip. Thus, I set up to cross over just southwest of the field, and
> entered a much wider than normal downwind.
>
> I started to get an inkling of what was in store when I had to maintain a
45
> degree crab angle in order to fly a parallel downwind. After we descended
> to pattern altitude the turbulence had returned with a vengeance,
including
> some rare "triples" -- the kind of air that bumps you up and down three
> times in rapid succession, almost as if you were hitting multiple railroad
> tracks in a car at high speed.
>
> Mary had grown strangely quiet, and was rocking from side to side in sync
> with the wings rocking, in a vain effort to maintain her upright balance.
> I was so busy trying to keep from being blown back over the airport on
> downwind that I hadn't noticed the violent rocking until I saw her motions
> out of the corner of my eye.
>
> This *was* going to be interesting.
>
> Turning onto base, it seemed like the plane didn't want to turn or
descend.
> I'd get Atlas set up for a 90 knot descent, only to be tossed up and see
my
> air speed erode to 75. Then, after correcting a moment later we'd be
> instantly at 100. A stabilized approach was simply out of the question.
>
> Turning onto final was like turning a boat. With the wind trying to push
me
> past the runway, the instinct was to steepen the bank angle -- but a
> thousand landings had taught me not to over-do that! Thus, my turn to
> final was an exercise in will, banking, over-banking, correcting, banking,
> over-banking, correcting. Instead of the usual graceful, sweeping turn
onto
> final, it was a series of 20 little banks, all connected together by my
> furrowed brow.
>
> I was really working now.
>
> Sliding down on final, keeping my airspeed at 100 knots, sort of, I
realized
> that I was having to hold an impossible left crab angle to maintain runway
> alignment. Kicking in right rudder, and opposite aileron helped, but soon
> the runway was drifting to the left in the windshield again.
>
> More aileron, more right rudder, more crab...
>
> Now I was *really* working. Curtly I commanded Mary to turn the cabin
heat
> down. It was already off.
>
> Soon I had full rudder deflection, full opposite aileron, AND a 45 degree
> crab. At last the runway was remaining steadfastly in front of me -- but
I
> realized that if I were to touchdown in that crab, my A&P would be making
> yet another upgrade to his 42 foot yacht...
>
> Worse, since I was already at full deflection on the rudder AND aileron,
> there was nothing left with which to kick out! In a flash a greasy
> breakfast served by an ugly waitress didn't seem like a valid reason to
fly
> anymore. Applying full power and releasing my aileron and rudder, I was
> astounded to see the runway literally *fly* away from us -- sideways!
>
> For the first time in I can't remember when, I executed a go-around...
>
> Once safely at altitude and out of the bumps, I realized my hands were
> hurting. I slowly pried them off of the yoke, marveling at how different
> this trip -- taken so many times before -- could suddenly change for the
> worse. I remarked to Mary how much "fun" this was, but she had another
term
> for it.
>
> Needless to say, the trip back to Iowa City was quick. And even with the
> wind directly on the nose, I had one helluva time making an acceptable
> landing. What a day...
>
> Once the plane was in the hangar, we sat and enjoyed the sunny skies. No
> one driving by could possibly have a clue how treacherous that pretty blue
> sky was today...
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Chris Hoffmann]

Those winds arrived here in Wisconsin this morning. Tomorrow, I get to go
practice landing in them! Yippee!

[Jay Beckman]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01...
> No, this is not a story about Viagra's side effects... ;-)
>
> Amazingly, today dawned clear and sunny -- against all predictions. Thus,
> once the kids were at school, it was time for us to head to our favorite
> "$100 Breakfast" in Muscatine, IA.
>
> Conditions seemed perfect, but I knew some weather was predicted to move
in
> later.>

<Snip Nail Biter...>

> Once the plane was in the hangar, we sat and enjoyed the sunny skies. No
> one driving by could possibly have a clue how treacherous that pretty blue
> sky was today...
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

Jay,

I hope I turn out to be as smart and judicious a pilot as you've proven
yourself to be wtih this situation.

Thanks for writing it up.

Regards,

Jay Beckman
Student Pilot - KCHD
4.5 Hrs ... Nowhere to go but up!

[Trent Moorehead]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01...
> No, this is not a story about Viagra's side effects... ;-)
>
> Amazingly, today dawned clear and sunny -- against all predictions. Thus,
> once the kids were at school, it was time for us to head to our favorite
> "$100 Breakfast" in Muscatine, IA.

Great writeup! Thanks for posting.

In my limited experience, I've found that if you can't get the plane pointed
down the runway on final and you're applying full rudder, you can't land the
plane on that runway. Or shouldn't at least. I've had this happen only once
so far and it was a real eye opener. Up to that point, I had always wondered
if I would be able to tell when a crosswind was too much for the plane,
since I had never experienced it. I was relieved to find that it's a real
no-brainer and doesn't require tons of judgement.

-Trent
PP-ASEL

[Maule Driver]

"Trent Moorehead" >
> In my limited experience, I've found that if you can't get the plane
pointed
> down the runway on final and you're applying full rudder, you can't land
the
> plane on that runway. Or shouldn't at least. I've had this happen only
once
> so far and it was a real eye opener. Up to that point, I had always
wondered
> if I would be able to tell when a crosswind was too much for the plane,
> since I had never experienced it. I was relieved to find that it's a real
> no-brainer and doesn't require tons of judgement.
>
Agreed. After initial training, I've never considered kicking the crab out
an acceptable way to land if you can't maintain alignment in a slip. Time
to do something else (which Jay did).

The one time I ran out of rudder while slipping was Key West. There really
aren't any suitable xwind taxi way options or anything else to land on.
Turned out that within 10 feet or so of the ground, the wind gradient
reduced the xwind enough so that full rudder allowed me to keep it straight.
I was ready to abort and return to Miami. But taxiing the 'ol butt dragger
was another matter.

Good stuff as always Jay!

[Jim Harper]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01>...
> > (Lotsa good stuff snipped)
> For the first time in I can't remember when, I executed a go-around...

Hey, Jay: I've been lurking on this newsgroup so long that I feel like
I know you and a bunch of others.

Just wanted to make one point. Go arounds are a reflection of the
excellent pilot exercising excellent judgement.

I had an older instructor many moons ago who told me that every
landing where you actually land should be a pleasant surprise. He
taught that one should plan every approach with the full expectation
of going around...and if, perchance, one finds oneself with one's
ducks all in a row over the numbers, well, go ahead and land, and good
luck for it.

I am not suggesting that I go around all that often, but I think a lot
of pilots get in the "I'm gonna get this damn thing on the ground
regardless..." mindset, and that leads to problems after they manage
that feat. Our airplanes rarely get damaged up there in the sky. Most
of the really dangerous bits are associated with the ground. Land when
you are well prepared to land. Otherwise go up and take another shot
at it.

Of course, when I fly my glider, going around is a lot harder! :-)

Jim

[Rick Durden]

Jay,

Welcome to spring, when they take down the wind socks and put up the
log chains and wind shear is a frequently used noun.

It's also a good time to point out that it's perfectly legal to land
on a taxiway, and sometimes a good idea when it's pointed into the
wind and the runway isn't.

Just a thought: there's no reason to fly a "stabilized" approach in a
piston engine airplane, that is a jet concept developed for the slow
power response of the early jets. It should not be applied rigidly to
piston pounders as it's rarely wise to fly a constant airspeed
throughout the approach (you'll die of old age first <g>). There's a
good article on it in the Feb or March issue of IFR magazine.

Hope all is well.

Warmest regards,
Rick

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01>...
> No, this is not a story about Viagra's side effects... ;-)
>
> Amazingly, today dawned clear and sunny -- against all predictions. Thus,
> once the kids were at school, it was time for us to head to our favorite
> "$100 Breakfast" in Muscatine, IA.
>
> Conditions seemed perfect, but I knew some weather was predicted to move in
> later. Thus, a call to flight service was in order, even though Muscatine
> was just 20 minutes away. (It's always a good idea to check on GW's
> location during this election season, too...) To my surprise, Ft Dodge
> Flight Service was calling the surface winds at 15, gusts to 20, from 180.
> We had just walked our daughter to school, and the winds were light -- but
> obviously there was a big low pressure center moving in from the north,
> causing an increasing southerly flow.
>
> Still, the winds were right down the runway in Iowa City, and 60 degrees off
> of runway 24 in Muscatine. So, I figure it would be a piece of cake...
>
> We departed normally, lightly loaded with just the two of us and climbing
> out at better than 1400 feet per minute. Immediately we were buffeted by
> moderate turbulence, but nothing we hadn't felt a hundred times before. In
> a few minutes we were enjoying the smooth ride at 3000 feet.
>
> As we proceeded southeasterly, we noticed our flight path across the ground
> was quite different from the direction we were facing. The crab angle was
> severe, and incredibly our ground speed during the climb out was just 54
> knots! Even after we leveled off we were seeing just 95 knots -- a
> quartering headwind at 45+ knots!
>
> Still, the ride above the haze layer was smooth, and we weren't going far.
> As we enjoyed the ride I tuned in Muscatine's AWOS.
>
> "...wind 180 at 19, gusts to 27..." Uh-oh. This could be more
> interesting than I anticipated.
>
> Coming from the north we'd have to cross over the field to enter the
> downwind for 24, and the wind would be pushing us in toward the runway at a
> good clip. Thus, I set up to cross over just southwest of the field, and
> entered a much wider than normal downwind.
>
> I started to get an inkling of what was in store when I had to maintain a 45
> degree crab angle in order to fly a parallel downwind. After we descended
> to pattern altitude the turbulence had returned with a vengeance, including
> some rare "triples" -- the kind of air that bumps you up and down three
> times in rapid succession, almost as if you were hitting multiple railroad
> tracks in a car at high speed.
>
> Mary had grown strangely quiet, and was rocking from side to side in sync
> with the wings rocking, in a vain effort to maintain her upright balance.
> I was so busy trying to keep from being blown back over the airport on
> downwind that I hadn't noticed the violent rocking until I saw her motions
> out of the corner of my eye.
>
> This *was* going to be interesting.
>
> Turning onto base, it seemed like the plane didn't want to turn or descend.
> I'd get Atlas set up for a 90 knot descent, only to be tossed up and see my
> air speed erode to 75. Then, after correcting a moment later we'd be
> instantly at 100. A stabilized approach was simply out of the question.
>
> Turning onto final was like turning a boat. With the wind trying to push me
> past the runway, the instinct was to steepen the bank angle -- but a
> thousand landings had taught me not to over-do that! Thus, my turn to
> final was an exercise in will, banking, over-banking, correcting, banking,
> over-banking, correcting. Instead of the usual graceful, sweeping turn onto
> final, it was a series of 20 little banks, all connected together by my
> furrowed brow.
>
> I was really working now.
>
> Sliding down on final, keeping my airspeed at 100 knots, sort of, I realized
> that I was having to hold an impossible left crab angle to maintain runway
> alignment. Kicking in right rudder, and opposite aileron helped, but soon
> the runway was drifting to the left in the windshield again.
>
> More aileron, more right rudder, more crab...
>
> Now I was *really* working. Curtly I commanded Mary to turn the cabin heat
> down. It was already off.
>
> Soon I had full rudder deflection, full opposite aileron, AND a 45 degree
> crab. At last the runway was remaining steadfastly in front of me -- but I
> realized that if I were to touchdown in that crab, my A&P would be making
> yet another upgrade to his 42 foot yacht...
>
> Worse, since I was already at full deflection on the rudder AND aileron,
> there was nothing left with which to kick out! In a flash a greasy
> breakfast served by an ugly waitress didn't seem like a valid reason to fly
> anymore. Applying full power and releasing my aileron and rudder, I was
> astounded to see the runway literally *fly* away from us -- sideways!
>
> For the first time in I can't remember when, I executed a go-around...
>
> Once safely at altitude and out of the bumps, I realized my hands were
> hurting. I slowly pried them off of the yoke, marveling at how different
> this trip -- taken so many times before -- could suddenly change for the
> worse. I remarked to Mary how much "fun" this was, but she had another term
> for it.
>
> Needless to say, the trip back to Iowa City was quick. And even with the
> wind directly on the nose, I had one helluva time making an acceptable
> landing. What a day...
>
> Once the plane was in the hangar, we sat and enjoyed the sunny skies. No
> one driving by could possibly have a clue how treacherous that pretty blue
> sky was today...

[Jay Honeck]

> Just a thought: there's no reason to fly a "stabilized" approach in a
> piston engine airplane, that is a jet concept developed for the slow
> power response of the early jets. It should not be applied rigidly to
> piston pounders as it's rarely wise to fly a constant airspeed
> throughout the approach (you'll die of old age first <g>).

That's interesting. From my student days I was always taught to fly a
stabilized approach, from abeam the numbers on crosswind, all the way till
the flare.

As the years have gone by, I've experimented with any number of methods,
and -- while they all work out in the end -- none of them can as easily
yield the consistent greasers of a stabilized approach.

My definition of "stabilized" has evolved over time, however. I used to set
up 80 mph on downwind, and hold that speed precisely all the way around.
Combined with the huge patterns I used to fly as a student, the landing
pattern could become a journey unto itself! :-)

Nowadays, I'll come into the pattern much faster -- at say, 100 knots -- and
stabilize it at 90 knots before I turn base. Then I'll let the speed
gradually erode to 80 or so, and hold it all the way round. My patterns
are MUCH tighter as well.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Mike Z.]

Please forward photo of yacht!

Mike Z


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01...
HUGE SNIP--


but I
> realized that if I were to touchdown in that crab, my A&P would be making
> yet another upgrade to his 42 foot yacht...


Rest of good story snipped>

> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Jay Honeck]

> I hope I turn out to be as smart and judicious a pilot as you've proven
> yourself to be wtih this situation.

Thanks, Jay.

It's funny how your perspective changes with age. As a student, I was
exposed to extremely high winds with my instructor. (Peak gust: 62 knots!)

I was too stupid to be afraid. In fact, I had a great time on that flight,
and at the time felt that it was one of my best lessons...

Until years later, when I realized what a foolish thing it was to do.
True, the winds had come up abruptly, but we didn't check the weather very
thoroughly before departing, either. I find it hard to believe, in
retrospect, that those extreme winds weren't predicted, and we could easily
have bent metal that day.

Then, after I got my ticket, I flew out of a little, single-strip airport in
Wisconsin. There was ALWAYS a cross-wind, and the runway was just 30 feet
wide, so by necessity I got pretty danged good at nailing it in just about
any kind of wind.

However, after a few excursions into the parallel grass strip (and a few
real scares on pavement), my respect for crosswinds increased. I was still
good at handling them, but -- having lived through a few hundred landings --
I was learning my limitations.

Now, for the past seven years I have flown out of an airport with 3
intersecting, 150-foot wide runways. Needless to say, my cross-wind skills
are not what they were, and -- although I think I'm still pretty danged
good -- I've learned that there are more important things in life than
landing.

Most importantly, however, is the knowledge that I must pay for any repairs!
It's *amazing* how that changes your perspective!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Mike Z.]

I was flying a tiny electric model one day in a light wind. I thought I was pretty cool slowing down until I could land vertically.

Pretty cool that is, until the wind abruptly stopped when I was 8 foot up. Can you say splat?

Mike Z


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:g6%3c.6559$Gm5.17364@attbi_s04...
> It's funny how your perspective changes with age. As a student, I was
> exposed to extremely high winds with my instructor. (Peak gust: 62 knots!)
>
> Big Snip
--
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Gene Seibel]

There are three kinds of landings - those that are work, those that
are a piece of cake, and those that are a piece of work. ;)
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.



"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01>...
> No, this is not a story about Viagra's side effects... ;-)
>
> Amazingly, today dawned clear and sunny -- against all predictions. Thus,
> once the kids were at school, it was time for us to head to our favorite
> "$100 Breakfast" in Muscatine, IA.
>
> Conditions seemed perfect, but I knew some weather was predicted to move in
> later. Thus, a call to flight service was in order, even though Muscatine
> was just 20 minutes away. (It's always a good idea to check on GW's
> location during this election season, too...) To my surprise, Ft Dodge
> Flight Service was calling the surface winds at 15, gusts to 20, from 180.
> We had just walked our daughter to school, and the winds were light -- but
> obviously there was a big low pressure center moving in from the north,
> causing an increasing southerly flow.
>
> Still, the winds were right down the runway in Iowa City, and 60 degrees off
> of runway 24 in Muscatine. So, I figure it would be a piece of cake...
>
> We departed normally, lightly loaded with just the two of us and climbing
> out at better than 1400 feet per minute. Immediately we were buffeted by
> moderate turbulence, but nothing we hadn't felt a hundred times before. In
> a few minutes we were enjoying the smooth ride at 3000 feet.
>
> As we proceeded southeasterly, we noticed our flight path across the ground
> was quite different from the direction we were facing. The crab angle was
> severe, and incredibly our ground speed during the climb out was just 54
> knots! Even after we leveled off we were seeing just 95 knots -- a
> quartering headwind at 45+ knots!
>
> Still, the ride above the haze layer was smooth, and we weren't going far.
> As we enjoyed the ride I tuned in Muscatine's AWOS.
>
> "...wind 180 at 19, gusts to 27..." Uh-oh. This could be more
> interesting than I anticipated.
>
> Coming from the north we'd have to cross over the field to enter the
> downwind for 24, and the wind would be pushing us in toward the runway at a
> good clip. Thus, I set up to cross over just southwest of the field, and
> entered a much wider than normal downwind.
>
> I started to get an inkling of what was in store when I had to maintain a 45
> degree crab angle in order to fly a parallel downwind. After we descended
> to pattern altitude the turbulence had returned with a vengeance, including
> some rare "triples" -- the kind of air that bumps you up and down three
> times in rapid succession, almost as if you were hitting multiple railroad
> tracks in a car at high speed.
>
> Mary had grown strangely quiet, and was rocking from side to side in sync
> with the wings rocking, in a vain effort to maintain her upright balance.
> I was so busy trying to keep from being blown back over the airport on
> downwind that I hadn't noticed the violent rocking until I saw her motions
> out of the corner of my eye.
>
> This *was* going to be interesting.
>
> Turning onto base, it seemed like the plane didn't want to turn or descend.
> I'd get Atlas set up for a 90 knot descent, only to be tossed up and see my
> air speed erode to 75. Then, after correcting a moment later we'd be
> instantly at 100. A stabilized approach was simply out of the question.
>
> Turning onto final was like turning a boat. With the wind trying to push me
> past the runway, the instinct was to steepen the bank angle -- but a
> thousand landings had taught me not to over-do that! Thus, my turn to
> final was an exercise in will, banking, over-banking, correcting, banking,
> over-banking, correcting. Instead of the usual graceful, sweeping turn onto
> final, it was a series of 20 little banks, all connected together by my
> furrowed brow.
>
> I was really working now.
>
> Sliding down on final, keeping my airspeed at 100 knots, sort of, I realized
> that I was having to hold an impossible left crab angle to maintain runway
> alignment. Kicking in right rudder, and opposite aileron helped, but soon
> the runway was drifting to the left in the windshield again.
>
> More aileron, more right rudder, more crab...
>
> Now I was *really* working. Curtly I commanded Mary to turn the cabin heat
> down. It was already off.
>
> Soon I had full rudder deflection, full opposite aileron, AND a 45 degree
> crab. At last the runway was remaining steadfastly in front of me -- but I
> realized that if I were to touchdown in that crab, my A&P would be making
> yet another upgrade to his 42 foot yacht...
>
> Worse, since I was already at full deflection on the rudder AND aileron,
> there was nothing left with which to kick out! In a flash a greasy
> breakfast served by an ugly waitress didn't seem like a valid reason to fly
> anymore. Applying full power and releasing my aileron and rudder, I was
> astounded to see the runway literally *fly* away from us -- sideways!
>
> For the first time in I can't remember when, I executed a go-around...
>
> Once safely at altitude and out of the bumps, I realized my hands were
> hurting. I slowly pried them off of the yoke, marveling at how different
> this trip -- taken so many times before -- could suddenly change for the
> worse. I remarked to Mary how much "fun" this was, but she had another term
> for it.
>
> Needless to say, the trip back to Iowa City was quick. And even with the
> wind directly on the nose, I had one helluva time making an acceptable
> landing. What a day...
>
> Once the plane was in the hangar, we sat and enjoyed the sunny skies. No
> one driving by could possibly have a clue how treacherous that pretty blue
> sky was today...

[Teacherjh]

My most memorable go-around was a trip to Montauk Point at about 4AM or so. As
a fairly new pilot, I was taking some friends to a fishing charter that had
already been arranged, and in the earlier weather briefing I was concerned
about fog (because fog happens down there). I arrived, there was no fog at
all. However the winds were such that I was holding full rudder and full
aileron to keep the nose paralell to the runway. I was just about doing it
too, and a twin on the ground (the rest of the party) was reporting 20 kt
direct crosswind. Well, lets take a look. But coming in low over the dunes we
got bounced around quite a bit and I decided that this wasn't going to work
out. I gave it one other shot and thentold the twin that the wind exceeded the
capability of this aircraft. I decided we'd go on to Nantucket or Martha's
Vinyard and just bum around there for the day.

Upon later reflection, I realized I might have been able to make it in coming
the other way, over the town rather than over the dunes. But better to be down
here wishing you were up there....

In any case, although it was disappointing (and there was quite a bit of
pressure to get down), the friends with whom I'd been flying had a lot more
respect for me as a pilot for abandoning the approach rather than trying again
and again and maybe changing the shape of the aircraft. And they say that to
this day.

Jose




--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Michael 182]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> <snip>
> In any case, although it was disappointing (and there was quite a bit of
> pressure to get down), the friends with whom I'd been flying had a lot
more
> respect for me as a pilot for abandoning the approach rather than trying
again
> and again and maybe changing the shape of the aircraft. And they say that
to
> this day.
>
> Jose

You were right, you made the right decision, and all that stuff... But as a
somewhat fanatical striped bass (or rockfish, if you are from the
Cheasapeake) fisherman I'd have asked you to do a low pass so I could jump.
Fishing Montauk with a good charter captain is one of the best of all
possible days.

Michael

[Jay Honeck]

> Please forward photo of yacht!

Actually, I've got some pix if you'd like. He treated us to a day on the
lake last summer.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[G.R. Patterson III]

Gene Seibel wrote:
>
> There are three kinds of landings - those that are work, those that
> are a piece of cake, and those that are a piece of work. ;)

I like that!

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

[R. Wubben]

I was going to go pick up my 172 today, thinking that it SEEMED like
such a pretty day with the sun shining.

One listen to the weather report quashed those thoughts...The winds
aloft were impressive.

I'll try again tomorrow.

Ryan in Madison, WI

[Jack Davis]

On 11 Mar 2004 06:26:20 -0800, (Rick Durden)
wrote:

>Just a thought: there's no reason to fly a "stabilized" approach in a
>piston engine airplane, that is a jet concept developed for the slow
>power response of the early jets.

Good point, however it was Jay's valiant attempt at flying a
stabilized approach that clearly illustrated to him that a landing
wasn't a good idea. (That's not to say that he wouldn't have come to
the same conclusion had he dropped it in.)

It's much easier to accurately size up the situation during a
stabilized approach. Of course, I cut my teeth (and a few other
things!) on 727s so YMMV.

-J

Jack Davis
B-737


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Dave Katz]

Until they resurfaced and reopened runway 10-28 at KSAF last year,
crosswinds were a fact of life, as when things kick up the prevailing
winds are usually out of the west and the other runways form a narrow
"X" (15-33 and 2-20). We usually lost a couple of planes a year to
runway lights and flips.

My hairiest landings were one winter day a few years back when the
winds started at 260@20G28, then 260@28G34, then I decided to do one
more for the heck of it but had to do a long downwind because neither
I nor the tower could see the incoming Lear making opposite traffic;
by the time I got back it was 260@38G44. I did manage to get the nose
cranked over with rudder and sort of hover-taxied down about half of
the 8000' of pavement waiting for a lull, then plunked it down.

I also landed in Amarillo into a gust front leading a huge storm, with
winds 34 gusting 44, 30 degrees off runway heading. The landing
wasn't too bad; the hard part was the taxi to get fuel (and get out of
there as quickly as possible before the storm hit.) The takeoff was
easy; taxi to the right side of the runway and point into the wind.
The runway was 300 feet wide and the stall horn was blaring while I
was sitting still. ;-)

Both were in a Cirrus, which in addition to its other qualities turns
out to be a wonderful airplane for crosswinds. (The demonstrated
crosswind component is 20 knots; I called a friend at the company to
mention that it was a tad conservative, and his response was "yeah, we
know, but we didn't want to print the real number in case some idiot
tried it.")

[Teacherjh]

>>
You were right, you made the right decision, and all that stuff... But as a
somewhat fanatical striped bass (or rockfish, if you are from the
Cheasapeake) fisherman I'd have asked you to do a low pass so I could jump.
<<

The wind and waves turned out to be too much for the tuna charter as it turned
out. They cancelled that and went out less far for bluefish or something.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Mike Z.]

Jay, I thought your were joking about the boat.

Mike Z

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:n204c.8060$YG.71790@attbi_s01...
> > Please forward photo of yacht!
>
> Actually, I've got some pix if you'd like. He treated us to a day on the
> lake last summer.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Toks Desalu]

Great writing!
I experienced a side landing once back in my training and I wasn't even
flying at that time. My instructor misjudged on how much she needed to yaw
and we landed sideway. I am warning you that you do not want to feel the
pain in your neck as the plane impact the runway sideway. The instructor's
quick actions after the impact saved our butt.

[Roger Tracy]

That's interesting as regards the comments on a stabilized approach. I've
not used one for years. What I DO use is a target for short final. I have
an airspeed/configuration target I work towards based on weight
and conditions. I then use constant gradual speed reductions and
and increase in flaps so that I'm on my target on short final.

The exception to this is power off landings where I'm using best
glide speed.


"Rick Durden" > wrote in message
m...
> Jay,
>
> Welcome to spring, when they take down the wind socks and put up the
> log chains and wind shear is a frequently used noun.
>
> It's also a good time to point out that it's perfectly legal to land
> on a taxiway, and sometimes a good idea when it's pointed into the
> wind and the runway isn't.
>
> Just a thought: there's no reason to fly a "stabilized" approach in a
> piston engine airplane, that is a jet concept developed for the slow
> power response of the early jets. It should not be applied rigidly to
> piston pounders as it's rarely wise to fly a constant airspeed
> throughout the approach (you'll die of old age first <g>). There's a
> good article on it in the Feb or March issue of IFR magazine.
>
> Hope all is well.
>
> Warmest regards,
> Rick
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:<x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01>...
> > No, this is not a story about Viagra's side effects... ;-)
> >
> > Amazingly, today dawned clear and sunny -- against all predictions.
Thus,
> > once the kids were at school, it was time for us to head to our favorite
> > "$100 Breakfast" in Muscatine, IA.
> >
> > Conditions seemed perfect, but I knew some weather was predicted to move
in
> > later. Thus, a call to flight service was in order, even though
Muscatine
> > was just 20 minutes away. (It's always a good idea to check on GW's
> > location during this election season, too...) To my surprise, Ft Dodge
> > Flight Service was calling the surface winds at 15, gusts to 20, from
180.
> > We had just walked our daughter to school, and the winds were light --
but
> > obviously there was a big low pressure center moving in from the north,
> > causing an increasing southerly flow.
> >
> > Still, the winds were right down the runway in Iowa City, and 60 degrees
off
> > of runway 24 in Muscatine. So, I figure it would be a piece of cake...
> >
> > We departed normally, lightly loaded with just the two of us and
climbing
> > out at better than 1400 feet per minute. Immediately we were buffeted
by
> > moderate turbulence, but nothing we hadn't felt a hundred times before.
In
> > a few minutes we were enjoying the smooth ride at 3000 feet.
> >
> > As we proceeded southeasterly, we noticed our flight path across the
ground
> > was quite different from the direction we were facing. The crab angle
was
> > severe, and incredibly our ground speed during the climb out was just 54
> > knots! Even after we leveled off we were seeing just 95 knots -- a
> > quartering headwind at 45+ knots!
> >
> > Still, the ride above the haze layer was smooth, and we weren't going
far.
> > As we enjoyed the ride I tuned in Muscatine's AWOS.
> >
> > "...wind 180 at 19, gusts to 27..." Uh-oh. This could be more
> > interesting than I anticipated.
> >
> > Coming from the north we'd have to cross over the field to enter the
> > downwind for 24, and the wind would be pushing us in toward the runway
at a
> > good clip. Thus, I set up to cross over just southwest of the field,
and
> > entered a much wider than normal downwind.
> >
> > I started to get an inkling of what was in store when I had to maintain
a 45
> > degree crab angle in order to fly a parallel downwind. After we
descended
> > to pattern altitude the turbulence had returned with a vengeance,
including
> > some rare "triples" -- the kind of air that bumps you up and down three
> > times in rapid succession, almost as if you were hitting multiple
railroad
> > tracks in a car at high speed.
> >
> > Mary had grown strangely quiet, and was rocking from side to side in
sync
> > with the wings rocking, in a vain effort to maintain her upright
balance.
> > I was so busy trying to keep from being blown back over the airport on
> > downwind that I hadn't noticed the violent rocking until I saw her
motions
> > out of the corner of my eye.
> >
> > This *was* going to be interesting.
> >
> > Turning onto base, it seemed like the plane didn't want to turn or
descend.
> > I'd get Atlas set up for a 90 knot descent, only to be tossed up and see
my
> > air speed erode to 75. Then, after correcting a moment later we'd be
> > instantly at 100. A stabilized approach was simply out of the question.
> >
> > Turning onto final was like turning a boat. With the wind trying to
push me
> > past the runway, the instinct was to steepen the bank angle -- but a
> > thousand landings had taught me not to over-do that! Thus, my turn to
> > final was an exercise in will, banking, over-banking, correcting,
banking,
> > over-banking, correcting. Instead of the usual graceful, sweeping turn
onto
> > final, it was a series of 20 little banks, all connected together by my
> > furrowed brow.
> >
> > I was really working now.
> >
> > Sliding down on final, keeping my airspeed at 100 knots, sort of, I
realized
> > that I was having to hold an impossible left crab angle to maintain
runway
> > alignment. Kicking in right rudder, and opposite aileron helped, but
soon
> > the runway was drifting to the left in the windshield again.
> >
> > More aileron, more right rudder, more crab...
> >
> > Now I was *really* working. Curtly I commanded Mary to turn the cabin
heat
> > down. It was already off.
> >
> > Soon I had full rudder deflection, full opposite aileron, AND a 45
degree
> > crab. At last the runway was remaining steadfastly in front of me --
but I
> > realized that if I were to touchdown in that crab, my A&P would be
making
> > yet another upgrade to his 42 foot yacht...
> >
> > Worse, since I was already at full deflection on the rudder AND aileron,
> > there was nothing left with which to kick out! In a flash a greasy
> > breakfast served by an ugly waitress didn't seem like a valid reason to
fly
> > anymore. Applying full power and releasing my aileron and rudder, I was
> > astounded to see the runway literally *fly* away from us -- sideways!
> >
> > For the first time in I can't remember when, I executed a go-around...
> >
> > Once safely at altitude and out of the bumps, I realized my hands were
> > hurting. I slowly pried them off of the yoke, marveling at how
different
> > this trip -- taken so many times before -- could suddenly change for the
> > worse. I remarked to Mary how much "fun" this was, but she had another
term
> > for it.
> >
> > Needless to say, the trip back to Iowa City was quick. And even with
the
> > wind directly on the nose, I had one helluva time making an acceptable
> > landing. What a day...
> >
> > Once the plane was in the hangar, we sat and enjoyed the sunny skies.
No
> > one driving by could possibly have a clue how treacherous that pretty
blue
> > sky was today...

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay, I thought your were joking about the boat.

Nope -- dead serious.

It's the biggest boat you'll ever see on an inland lake. Hell, it would be
considered good sized on the Great Lakes.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> I experienced a side landing once back in my training and I wasn't even
> flying at that time. My instructor misjudged on how much she needed to yaw
> and we landed sideway. I am warning you that you do not want to feel the
> pain in your neck as the plane impact the runway sideway. The instructor's
> quick actions after the impact saved our butt.

As a newly minted pilot I managed to royally screw up a couple of crosswind
landings. One in particular stands out in my mind:

We were in a rental Cherokee 140, and the winds were gusty and howling
nearly as bad as yesterday. We were landing in Rockford, IL -- Class D, big
runways, plenty of room for meandering off the center line. Shoulda been a
piece of cake.

Well, I meandered all right. At touchdown I had full left rudder, and full
right aileron in -- a perfect set up for a perfect crosswind landing.
Unfortunately I forgot to neutralize the rudder as the nosewheel touched
down.

In a Cherokee, the rudder is directly connected to the nosewheel. Our
sudden and abrupt veer to the left was as violent as it was surprising.

Damn near took out the runway lights on a 200 foot wide runway. Now *that*
would have been embarrassing!

Mary still brings *that* one up, whenever I needle her about a bad landing!
:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Morgans]

"Dave Katz" > wrote

> My hairiest landings were one winter day a few years back when the
> winds started at 260@20G28, then 260@28G34, then I decided to do one
> more for the heck of it but had to do a long downwind because neither
> I nor the tower could see the incoming Lear making opposite traffic;
> by the time I got back it was 260@38G44.

Dave, I couldn't get these links to work. Any ideas?
--
Jim (ducking <g>) in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.608 / Virus Database: 388 - Release Date: 3/3/2004

[Dave Katz]

"Morgans" > writes:

> Dave, I couldn't get these links to work. Any ideas?
> --
> Jim (ducking <g>) in NC
>
They're links to fake web sites, asking you to give me all of your
financial information or your rec.aviation.piloting account will be
disabled. ;-)

[G.R. Patterson III]

Jack Davis wrote:
>
> It's much easier to accurately size up the situation during a
> stabilized approach.

For the most part, that's correct, and I never use a crab approach in the Maule,
but it is a fact that the wind will frequently be gentler below 50' AGL. If you
abandon the approach at 100' or so, you'll never find this out.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> That's interesting. From my student days I was always taught to fly a
> stabilized approach, from abeam the numbers on crosswind, all the way till
> the flare.

That's because most CFIs are building time for the majors and they tend to train
you as if you were planning to fly jets too. If you get a CFI who isn't planning
on doing anything except flying light aircraft and convince him that you don't
intend to do anything else either, you frequently get different instructions.
Even if this is not the case, if you ask a CFI why he recommends a particular
course of action, the answer frequently is that you need to get in the habit of
doing <whatever> 'cause you need to do it that way "when you upgrade to higher
performance aircraft".

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

[Jay Honeck]

> For the most part, that's correct, and I never use a crab approach in the
Maule,
> but it is a fact that the wind will frequently be gentler below 50' AGL.
If you
> abandon the approach at 100' or so, you'll never find this out.

Very true. There were many approaches into little Sylvania Field (C89)
where I was just *barely* able to maintain runway alignment, until about 30
feet off of the runway. Then things routinely would smooth out nicely.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Andrew Gideon]

BTIZ wrote:

> with that much wind.. if you really needed to be there... ask to land on
> the cross taxiway..
>

Ask whom?

At a towered airport, can the tower approve this? What about at a
nontowered airport?

- Andrew

[Andrew Gideon]

G.R. Patterson III wrote:

> Even if this is not the case, if you ask a CFI why
> he recommends a particular course of action, the answer frequently is that
> you need to get in the habit of doing <whatever> 'cause you need to do it
> that way "when you upgrade to higher performance aircraft".

Sometimes, though, that's the right answer. After reading the POH for the
retract that was to be the first complex I'd ever fly, I mentioned to my
CFII "so *that's* why you want me to tap on the brakes on departure".

- Andrew

[Andrew Gideon]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>> Jay, I thought your were joking about the boat.
>
> Nope -- dead serious.
>
> It's the biggest boat you'll ever see on an inland lake. Hell, it would
> be considered good sized on the Great Lakes.

I smell a new website: The toys my plane helped my A&P to buy.

- Andrew

[Newps]

Andrew Gideon wrote:
> BTIZ wrote:
>
>
>>with that much wind.. if you really needed to be there... ask to land on
>>the cross taxiway..

The answer will be no.


>>
>
>
> Ask whom?
>
> At a towered airport, can the tower approve this?

No. The airport manager however, can.


What about at a
> nontowered airport?

Who cares, just land.

[Newps]

Andrew Gideon wrote:

> G.R. Patterson III wrote:
>
>
>>Even if this is not the case, if you ask a CFI why
>>he recommends a particular course of action, the answer frequently is that
>>you need to get in the habit of doing <whatever> 'cause you need to do it
>>that way "when you upgrade to higher performance aircraft".
>
>
> Sometimes, though, that's the right answer.

Only if you are going to move to a different aircraft soon. If not then
it's a bunch of BS.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Newps wrote:
>
> Only if you are going to move to a different aircraft soon. If not then
> it's a bunch of BS.

One of the advantages of flying a Maule is that no CFI criticizes you for raising
the flaps on the runway.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

[Corky Scott]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 15:51:27 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>
>
>Newps wrote:
>>
>> Only if you are going to move to a different aircraft soon. If not then
>> it's a bunch of BS.
>
>One of the advantages of flying a Maule is that no CFI criticizes you for raising
>the flaps on the runway.
>
>George Patterson

Hmm, what's wrong with flaps up on the runway? That's the way I was
taught to land a Cessna 172, touch down, flaps up. I can see how it
might make for the possibility of retracting the gear instead of the
flaps if you have retractible gear and the levers are both located
near each other, but fixed gear? What could be the harm?

Thanks, Corky Scott

[G.R. Patterson III]

Corky Scott wrote:
>
> I can see how it
> might make for the possibility of retracting the gear instead of the
> flaps if you have retractible gear and the levers are both located
> near each other, but fixed gear? What could be the harm?

To quote various CFIs I encountered when I flew Cessnas, "because there's too
much risk of hitting the gear up by mistake when you upgrade to higher
performance aircraft". A poster rec.aviation.something last year claimed that
there's even an examiner out there who will fail you if you raise the flaps in
a 172 while still on the runway.

I agree with you, however. I feel you should fly the plane you're in at the
moment; not one that you might be able to buy sometime in future.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

[Frederick Wilson]

Makes me thankful to be a helicopter pilot. I can shot the approach any way
I like. Although last Thursday the ole Huey demonstrated what it is like to
run out of right pedal at a hover.

Great job Jay. Thanks for sharing


Fred


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:x4Q3c.2179$YG.23444@attbi_s01...
> No, this is not a story about Viagra's side effects... ;-)
>
> Amazingly, today dawned clear and sunny -- against all predictions. Thus,
> once the kids were at school, it was time for us to head to our favorite
> "$100 Breakfast" in Muscatine, IA.
>
> Conditions seemed perfect, but I knew some weather was predicted to move
in
> later. Thus, a call to flight service was in order, even though Muscatine
> was just 20 minutes away. (It's always a good idea to check on GW's
> location during this election season, too...) To my surprise, Ft Dodge
> Flight Service was calling the surface winds at 15, gusts to 20, from 180.
> We had just walked our daughter to school, and the winds were light -- but
> obviously there was a big low pressure center moving in from the north,
> causing an increasing southerly flow.
>
> Still, the winds were right down the runway in Iowa City, and 60 degrees
off
> of runway 24 in Muscatine. So, I figure it would be a piece of cake...
>
> We departed normally, lightly loaded with just the two of us and climbing
> out at better than 1400 feet per minute. Immediately we were buffeted by
> moderate turbulence, but nothing we hadn't felt a hundred times before.
In
> a few minutes we were enjoying the smooth ride at 3000 feet.
>
> As we proceeded southeasterly, we noticed our flight path across the
ground
> was quite different from the direction we were facing. The crab angle was
> severe, and incredibly our ground speed during the climb out was just 54
> knots! Even after we leveled off we were seeing just 95 knots -- a
> quartering headwind at 45+ knots!
>
> Still, the ride above the haze layer was smooth, and we weren't going far.
> As we enjoyed the ride I tuned in Muscatine's AWOS.
>
> "...wind 180 at 19, gusts to 27..." Uh-oh. This could be more
> interesting than I anticipated.
>
> Coming from the north we'd have to cross over the field to enter the
> downwind for 24, and the wind would be pushing us in toward the runway at
a
> good clip. Thus, I set up to cross over just southwest of the field, and
> entered a much wider than normal downwind.
>
> I started to get an inkling of what was in store when I had to maintain a
45
> degree crab angle in order to fly a parallel downwind. After we descended
> to pattern altitude the turbulence had returned with a vengeance,
including
> some rare "triples" -- the kind of air that bumps you up and down three
> times in rapid succession, almost as if you were hitting multiple railroad
> tracks in a car at high speed.
>
> Mary had grown strangely quiet, and was rocking from side to side in sync
> with the wings rocking, in a vain effort to maintain her upright balance.
> I was so busy trying to keep from being blown back over the airport on
> downwind that I hadn't noticed the violent rocking until I saw her motions
> out of the corner of my eye.
>
> This *was* going to be interesting.
>
> Turning onto base, it seemed like the plane didn't want to turn or
descend.
> I'd get Atlas set up for a 90 knot descent, only to be tossed up and see
my
> air speed erode to 75. Then, after correcting a moment later we'd be
> instantly at 100. A stabilized approach was simply out of the question.
>
> Turning onto final was like turning a boat. With the wind trying to push
me
> past the runway, the instinct was to steepen the bank angle -- but a
> thousand landings had taught me not to over-do that! Thus, my turn to
> final was an exercise in will, banking, over-banking, correcting, banking,
> over-banking, correcting. Instead of the usual graceful, sweeping turn
onto
> final, it was a series of 20 little banks, all connected together by my
> furrowed brow.
>
> I was really working now.
>
> Sliding down on final, keeping my airspeed at 100 knots, sort of, I
realized
> that I was having to hold an impossible left crab angle to maintain runway
> alignment. Kicking in right rudder, and opposite aileron helped, but soon
> the runway was drifting to the left in the windshield again.
>
> More aileron, more right rudder, more crab...
>
> Now I was *really* working. Curtly I commanded Mary to turn the cabin
heat
> down. It was already off.
>
> Soon I had full rudder deflection, full opposite aileron, AND a 45 degree
> crab. At last the runway was remaining steadfastly in front of me -- but
I
> realized that if I were to touchdown in that crab, my A&P would be making
> yet another upgrade to his 42 foot yacht...
>
> Worse, since I was already at full deflection on the rudder AND aileron,
> there was nothing left with which to kick out! In a flash a greasy
> breakfast served by an ugly waitress didn't seem like a valid reason to
fly
> anymore. Applying full power and releasing my aileron and rudder, I was
> astounded to see the runway literally *fly* away from us -- sideways!
>
> For the first time in I can't remember when, I executed a go-around...
>
> Once safely at altitude and out of the bumps, I realized my hands were
> hurting. I slowly pried them off of the yoke, marveling at how different
> this trip -- taken so many times before -- could suddenly change for the
> worse. I remarked to Mary how much "fun" this was, but she had another
term
> for it.
>
> Needless to say, the trip back to Iowa City was quick. And even with the
> wind directly on the nose, I had one helluva time making an acceptable
> landing. What a day...
>
> Once the plane was in the hangar, we sat and enjoyed the sunny skies. No
> one driving by could possibly have a clue how treacherous that pretty blue
> sky was today...
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Corky Scott]

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 00:56:30 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>
>
>Corky Scott wrote:
>>
>> I can see how it
>> might make for the possibility of retracting the gear instead of the
>> flaps if you have retractible gear and the levers are both located
>> near each other, but fixed gear? What could be the harm?
>
>To quote various CFIs I encountered when I flew Cessnas, "because there's too
>much risk of hitting the gear up by mistake when you upgrade to higher
>performance aircraft". A poster rec.aviation.something last year claimed that
>there's even an examiner out there who will fail you if you raise the flaps in
>a 172 while still on the runway.
>
>I agree with you, however. I feel you should fly the plane you're in at the
>moment; not one that you might be able to buy sometime in future.
>
>George Patterson
> Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
> not yield to the tongue.

Well that makes sense, although failing someone for innocently
following the procedures he was taught seems overly harsh.

A friend of mine just acquired a V tailed Bonanza, and while sitting
in the cockpit the other day I noticed that both the flaps and gear
handles are not far from each other, and while the handles are
slightly differently shaped, they are both the same color and are at
the same height. So one is as easy to grab as the other. In
addition, this Bonanza has the dual yokes option, and in this case it
means a cross bar that blocks the lower part of the instrument panel
from sight. So it would pay to be very careful about grabbing the
gear or flap handles in this airplane.

I chose to put the flap handle of my homebuilt on the ceiling, so that
when the flaps are down, so is the handle. The gear is fixed so
raising the flaps upon touchdown will become a normal part of landing.

Corky Scott

[Roger Halstead]

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:39:13 GMT,
(Corky Scott) wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 00:56:30 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Corky Scott wrote:
>>>
>>> I can see how it
>>> might make for the possibility of retracting the gear instead of the
>>> flaps if you have retractible gear and the levers are both located
>>> near each other, but fixed gear? What could be the harm?
>>
>>To quote various CFIs I encountered when I flew Cessnas, "because there's too
>>much risk of hitting the gear up by mistake when you upgrade to higher
>>performance aircraft". A poster rec.aviation.something last year claimed that
>>there's even an examiner out there who will fail you if you raise the flaps in
>>a 172 while still on the runway.
>>
>>I agree with you, however. I feel you should fly the plane you're in at the
>>moment; not one that you might be able to buy sometime in future.
>>
>>George Patterson
>> Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
>> not yield to the tongue.
>
>Well that makes sense, although failing someone for innocently
>following the procedures he was taught seems overly harsh.
>
>A friend of mine just acquired a V tailed Bonanza, and while sitting
>in the cockpit the other day I noticed that both the flaps and gear

You missed the important thing though.
On the Bo the flap and gear handles are reversed compared to the rest
of the world. I happen to think they are right and the rest of the
world is wrong, but I learned to fly retracts in a Bo so it's no
biggie. For other pilots however, they run a very strong risk of
retracting the gear when they meant to retract the flaps.

>handles are not far from each other, and while the handles are
>slightly differently shaped, they are both the same color and are at
>the same height. So one is as easy to grab as the other. In
>addition, this Bonanza has the dual yokes option, and in this case it
>means a cross bar that blocks the lower part of the instrument panel
>from sight. So it would pay to be very careful about grabbing the
>gear or flap handles in this airplane.

Even with the throw over yoke it will be in the wrong position at the
wrong time and blocks the view of those handles, the vacuum gage, and
fuel gages.
>

Wait till you reach for the heater and pull the parking brake. (they
are side by side the same shape and the same color) I did that and it
was cold enough that I couldn't get the brake to release so we got to
land with the brakes locked. It was an interesting exercise.

The guy with me wanted to know if I was going to ease it on. I told
him no, this was going to be an arrival. A very firm arrival and with
luck the wheels would turn instead of skid. They did, but it was one
of the shortest roll outs I've ever had. Now that was truely a short
field landing.

As an added note, in the Bo I'd leave the flaps down anyway. I do full
stall landings and those big barn door flaps make for very steep
descents that require substantial power if you are going to fly as
slow as the book tells you. You can normally land over a 50 foot
obstacle and be stopped in 1200 to 1500 feet with little of no use of
the brakes. (except on hot days... or when you are out of practice
<G>)

>I chose to put the flap handle of my homebuilt on the ceiling, so that
>when the flaps are down, so is the handle. The gear is fixed so
>raising the flaps upon touchdown will become a normal part of landing.

I use the flaps for aerodynamic breaking and they are very effective.
Hence all landings are full flap and I have no inclination to raise
them on roll out. Besides, they are electric and by the time they
could be up I'm making my turn off.

I've only flown one airplane where retracting the flaps on roll out
had any effect and that was a Cherokee 180 with the old Johnson Bar
flap actuator. There was a plane you could land in an area so small
it would leave absolutely no doubt there was no use in even attempting
to fly out.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>Corky Scott

[Michael]

Newps > wrote
> >>with that much wind.. if you really needed to be there... ask to land on
> >>the cross taxiway..
>
> The answer will be no.

I find that fascinating, considering that I was cleared to land on a
taxiway at Dayton International.

Michael

[Dave Buckles]

Teacherjh wrote:

> But better to be down
> here wishing you were up there....

Wouldn't this be a case of "better to be up here wishing you were down
there?"

--Dave

--
Dave Buckles

http://www.flight-instruction.com

[Dennis O'Connor]

jeez, at oshkosh I always get stuck with the taxiway landing... guess my
reputation preceeds me... except the one year that I declared an emergency
due to a landing gear problem... Then they had me land on the grass runway
so the wreckage wouldn't block the taxiway...
denny

"Michael" > wrote in message
om...
> Newps > wrote
> > >>with that much wind.. if you really needed to be there... ask to land
on
> > >>the cross taxiway..
> >
> > The answer will be no.
>
> I find that fascinating, considering that I was cleared to land on a
> taxiway at Dayton International.
>
> Michael

[Roger Halstead]

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:36:11 -0500, "Dennis O'Connor"
> wrote:

>jeez, at oshkosh I always get stuck with the taxiway landing... guess my
>reputation preceeds me... except the one year that I declared an emergency
>due to a landing gear problem... Then they had me land on the grass runway
>so the wreckage wouldn't block the taxiway...


They were actually willing to risk that much good sod?

On concrete it just takes a few guys with brooms and maybe a mop.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

>denny
>
>"Michael" > wrote in message
om...
>> Newps > wrote
>> > >>with that much wind.. if you really needed to be there... ask to land
>on
>> > >>the cross taxiway..
>> >
>> > The answer will be no.
>>
>> I find that fascinating, considering that I was cleared to land on a
>> taxiway at Dayton International.
>>
>> Michael
>