Sloppy Piloting

[Judah]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:Bj5gj.287919$Fc.120969@attbi_s21:

> Another example: Practice can make perfect, but repetition can also make
> you forget things, over time. Mary and I were recently discussing the
> fact that neither one of us could remember the precise V speeds for
> Atlas -- a plane we've flown every few days for six years. They've all
> become automatic and ingrained in our muscle memory -- but we'd have to
> look at the panel placards to tell the exact speeds. Sloppy.

Actually, I think this is not a function of being sloppy. I think it's a
function of being human.

Having your V-Speeds on a placard (or in my case on my Checklist) is more
important than remembering them. Especially for those of us that might have
the opportunity to fly more than one type of plane - in my club there are 3
different types of planes and I don't remember all the VSpeeds anymore. But
I have them on the checklists and know exactly where to find them - often
having a glance before takeoff just to be sure.

IMHO, the mark of a sloppy pilot is one who flies in the face of the tools
that are presented to him. One who refuses to use checklists because he
thinks he can remember it all.

As for not looking at a sectional - again it's about the tools you have and
need. If you really have no need to look at a sectional because of the GPS
you have, then I would say no problem. Our planes have GNS-480's, and they
are really good. But I find that every once in a while I still have to look
at the sectional to prepare, for example, to know the airspace boundaries
of Class-D and Class-C airports that I might be flying near, or even more
importantly the boundaries and schedules of Restricted Areas on my flight
path.

The point is, I don't think it's sloppy to be willing to use new
technology. Certainly it's important to make sure that you don't forget how
to use the old technology in case one day you find yourself with a dead
battery or what not. But if you still can figure out how to read a
sectional, even if you haven't looked at one in a year, I wouldn't call you
sloppy for it...

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this month
entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many interesting points
about things that can affect good piloting.

Precision is part of being a good pilot, and it seems that good ones are
always striving for perfection, even though they know it's unattainable. As
pilots we are always one mistake away from bent metal (or worse) so this is
a good thing.

In my own flying, I strive to avoid the pitfall of becoming sloppy -- but I
have to confess that it's easy to fall into bad habits. When you've droned
VFR between Iowa and Wisconsin 500 times, it's easy to become sloppy about
altitude -- I mean, who cares if you're off by 100 feet? And heading?
Well, shoot, we're just following the magenta line on the display, right?
Sloppy.

Another example: Practice can make perfect, but repetition can also make you
forget things, over time. Mary and I were recently discussing the fact that
neither one of us could remember the precise V speeds for Atlas -- a plane
we've flown every few days for six years. They've all become automatic and
ingrained in our muscle memory -- but we'd have to look at the panel
placards to tell the exact speeds. Sloppy.

Interestingly, the definition of sloppy piloting has changed somewhat over
the years I've been flying. It used to be that you could spot a sloppy
pilot by the way they read a sectional chart; nowadays, many pilots don't
ever look at a sectional, and a sloppy pilot is defined by how much they
fumble with the knobs of their Garmin 1000...

As I'm typing this, I'm trying to remember the last time I opened my
sectional chart. With a Lowrance 2000c on the pilot's yoke, and a Garmin
496 in the panel, there is literally no reason for us to EVER open a
sectional anymore. Both of those instruments have far more information than
a chart could ever display -- yet I feel sloppy for not having opened my
paper map in the last dozen or so flights.

With two pilots on board, we have a good system to offset any inclination to
get too sloppy -- it's called "spouse pressure". For example, if I fly a
non-rectangular pattern, I'm sure to hear about it -- and vice versa. But
even after 30 years we can't read each other's minds, and -- especially
after a long lay-off from flying -- it's easy to develop sloppy thought
processes. Piloting requires linear thinking, and much of it is habit
developed over time, so it's the first thing to go when you haven't flown
much.

I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency toward
sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you might employ?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:Bj5gj.287919$Fc.120969@attbi_s21:


> Interestingly, the definition of sloppy piloting has changed somewhat
> over the years I've been flying. It used to be that you could spot a
> sloppy pilot by the way they read a sectional chart;


Really? Do tell. How do you rea a chart sloppily?

>
> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency
> toward sloppiness?

No you aren't. You killfiled me, remember?


Bertie

[Kevin Clarke]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency
> toward sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you
> might employ?

Discipline.

Every one of my flights follows the same pattern. I always have the
latest sectionals, low altitude en route charts, AF/D and approach
plates. I plot my course, review the charts. I file DUATS, get my
briefing from FSS (which *is* getting better).

My preflight is the same every time. Open the hangar, get my GATTS jar
(whatever it is called), grab the checklist, do my cockpit checks and
then around the plane right wing, nose, left wing, tail, roll the plane out.

Checklist sez, get the ATIS, ASOS whatever, copy it. Follow the
checklist. I won't go thru the whole thing as I suspect a few of you
may have done this once or twice yourselves! :^)

But that is the net of it. Follow the checklist. The checklist should
have your V speeds, your emergency procedures, your pre flight, takeoff,
cruise, approach, descent, pre and post landing and shutdown procedures
clearly documented. Do that and flying becomes almost like a cookbook
(that's a joke folks, breathe).

my 2 cents.

KC

[Shirl]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

I love some of the threads you start, Jay. :-)

[snip]
> As I'm typing this, I'm trying to remember the last time I opened my
> sectional chart. With a Lowrance 2000c on the pilot's yoke, and a Garmin
> 496 in the panel, there is literally no reason for us to EVER open a
> sectional anymore. Both of those instruments have far more information than
> a chart could ever display -- yet I feel sloppy for not having opened my
> paper map in the last dozen or so flights.

I have a tandem aircraft (Varga), and the partner I fly with most
frequently and I each have portable Garmin 296s that we use on every
flight. The panel page gives the backseat pilot some instruments he/she
can't see on the actual panel, and it's a backup if the actual
instruments fail (we're planned to be only VFR).

In addition, if ALL GPS/nav equipment fails, I also make specific "nav
cards" for every flight designating the headings and altitudes to fly,
frequencies along the route, distance/pattern & runway info and
alternates; on the back, I make a copy of the sectional with a line
showing the route, and then I laminate the whole thing. Most cards are
half-page, and I keep them in a half-page size binder in the airplane.
Can fit most on ONE half-page, but use one for each leg of longer x-cs.
So...we always have the info/sectional backup if the other, more
convenient methods of navigation, fail. I make two of each laminated
card, so both front- and back-seat pilot have one.

This also saves having to write down the same info *every time* you go
to frequently chosen destinations, and having to unfold and find the
part of the sectional you need *if* you need it. It is especially
helpful when you make a longer flight that you haven't done in 2 or 3
years ... instead of trying to remember and argue about what route you
flew, you can just pull the cards and see what it was and it's easy to
update if need be (most of the time, it's all the same). Sometimes I add
info I didn't realize we needed until AFTER we've made the flight or
comments we should remember for next time.

> With two pilots on board, we have a good system to offset any inclination to
> get too sloppy -- it's called "spouse pressure". For example, if I fly a
> non-rectangular pattern, I'm sure to hear about it -- and vice versa. But
> even after 30 years we can't read each other's minds, and -- especially
> after a long lay-off from flying -- it's easy to develop sloppy thought
> processes. Piloting requires linear thinking, and much of it is habit
> developed over time, so it's the first thing to go when you haven't flown
> much.
>
> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency toward
> sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you might employ?

We use a system similar to what you describe as "spouse pressure" that
we refer to as "backseat piloting" (ala "backseat driving"). Pilot in
the backseat is responsible for reading the checklist to the frontseat
pilot as he/she calls for various sections of it, double-verifies the
steps, keeps a vigilant eye for traffic (I can't begin to say how many
times we've commented that without two sets of eyeballs in the cockpit,
it would be much more difficult to see-and-avoid *and* fly at the same
time, especially with the difficulty understanding the quality of
"English" spoken over the radio these days), and occasionally makes
suggestions that cause the threat of the backseat intercom to be shut
off!

Sounds like a lot of work, but being a relatively low-time pilot, making
the cards is a way for me to familiarize myself with the details of each
flight (I have a home office with all the equipment needed to make the
cards, so that makes it easier, too), and then all the info is readily
available for re-familiarizing each time. And my higher-time partner has
said it's helpful, too, so it works well for us.

Shirl

[Denny]

I will side with KC that check lists are necesary...
Many examiners will fail you if you fail to use check lists...
In the event of an accident - say a wheels up landing <not likely in
Atlas> - the FSDO will physically look for your check lists and will
ask you about using them...

Now, on the issue of trusting your GPS.. It's easy, it's fun, it's
fast, it's accurate, and I am just as human, and just as lazy, as
anyone... But I do - on cross country flights, night flights, and of
course when filed IFR - drag out Howie keefe and open it up, dial up
a relevant VOR, and keep a cross check on my position, even while
following the little arrow on the moving map...
I do not do this when bombing around vfr in the local area, I just fly
i.f.r. ( I Follow Roads - and water towers - and railroads, even a
flock of geese now and then ) I do tend to control my altitude though
- old IFR habit...

I think the best way to keep your 'precision' up is to work on a
rating... For you and Mary, this should be the instrument rating - as
that is probably more immediately useful than say, a float plane
rating... But any new rating will keep your mind focused on flying
more precisely...
Or, how about just getting some aerobatic time with an instructor...
Nothing like controlling speed/angle/bank/power/Gees on a constantly
changing flight path to improve the old straight and level...

denny

[kontiki]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency
> toward sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you might
> employ?

Being a CFI I tend to explain various operations and procedures
to my passenger as if I am instructing them. It seems to make
things be more interesting to them and also serves to put me
into "instructor mode". The result being you try to be more
precise as if you are demonstrating a maneuver or procedure
as you would with a student. I also enlist them in watching out
for traffic.

[[email protected]]

>
> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency toward
> sloppiness? * Any tricks that you might use, or methods you might employ?
> --


I don't have a GPS so I always use charts, plotters, and AFD.

I use dead reckoning, pilotage, VOR, and have even used ADF recently
<gasp>!!!

Maybe I'm too damned conservative but I've never even considered
flying without checklists. Until recently I did all flight plans
manually but have bought Voyager which I think is really excellent. It
will be better when you can plan on the sectional in Voyager, don't
know if that's in the works or not.

I always look at my selected checkpoints from the satellite view of
Google maps to ascertain the checkpoint's actual visibility from the
air. I found it also very useful to draw radials from my main class C
airport, KAUS, on the headings they typically vector you out on
leaving the immediate vicinity of the airport. It makes it very quick
and easy to locate yourself and get to the course line you actually
want to follow when they tell you to follow "own navigation".

I'm starting to believe that, however fun and relaxing flying can be,
each and every flight is a chance to prepare for the one where your
engine stops running (for whatever reason), so with that in mind it
generally keeps me on my toes.

That, however, does not mean that I loose any of the more serene
moments available up yonder.

[Bob Gardner]

I would recommend that you calculate Vx and Vy for various density altitudes
and weights rather that memorize a number that is valid only at sea level on
a standard day at gross weight.

Bob Gardner

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:Bj5gj.287919$Fc.120969@attbi_s21...
> This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this month
> entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many interesting
> points about things that can affect good piloting.
>
> Precision is part of being a good pilot, and it seems that good ones are
> always striving for perfection, even though they know it's unattainable.
> As pilots we are always one mistake away from bent metal (or worse) so
> this is a good thing.
>
> In my own flying, I strive to avoid the pitfall of becoming sloppy -- but
> I have to confess that it's easy to fall into bad habits. When you've
> droned VFR between Iowa and Wisconsin 500 times, it's easy to become
> sloppy about altitude -- I mean, who cares if you're off by 100 feet?
> And heading? Well, shoot, we're just following the magenta line on the
> display, right? Sloppy.
>
> Another example: Practice can make perfect, but repetition can also make
> you forget things, over time. Mary and I were recently discussing the
> fact that neither one of us could remember the precise V speeds for
> Atlas -- a plane we've flown every few days for six years. They've all
> become automatic and ingrained in our muscle memory -- but we'd have to
> look at the panel placards to tell the exact speeds. Sloppy.
>
> Interestingly, the definition of sloppy piloting has changed somewhat over
> the years I've been flying. It used to be that you could spot a sloppy
> pilot by the way they read a sectional chart; nowadays, many pilots don't
> ever look at a sectional, and a sloppy pilot is defined by how much they
> fumble with the knobs of their Garmin 1000...
>
> As I'm typing this, I'm trying to remember the last time I opened my
> sectional chart. With a Lowrance 2000c on the pilot's yoke, and a Garmin
> 496 in the panel, there is literally no reason for us to EVER open a
> sectional anymore. Both of those instruments have far more information
> than a chart could ever display -- yet I feel sloppy for not having opened
> my paper map in the last dozen or so flights.
>
> With two pilots on board, we have a good system to offset any inclination
> to get too sloppy -- it's called "spouse pressure". For example, if I fly
> a non-rectangular pattern, I'm sure to hear about it -- and vice versa.
> But even after 30 years we can't read each other's minds, and --
> especially after a long lay-off from flying -- it's easy to develop sloppy
> thought processes. Piloting requires linear thinking, and much of it is
> habit developed over time, so it's the first thing to go when you haven't
> flown much.
>
> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency toward
> sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you might employ?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave[_3_]]

My flying partnet/co-owner and I cross check each other rigorously
when flying together..(usually business trips).

Does keep us sharper...

And we try to use ALL the stuff in the panel.

.....including the ADF !

Dave





On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:10:41 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this month
>entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many interesting points
>about things that can affect good piloting.
>
>Precision is part of being a good pilot, and it seems that good ones are
>always striving for perfection, even though they know it's unattainable. As
>pilots we are always one mistake away from bent metal (or worse) so this is
>a good thing.
>
>In my own flying, I strive to avoid the pitfall of becoming sloppy -- but I
>have to confess that it's easy to fall into bad habits. When you've droned
>VFR between Iowa and Wisconsin 500 times, it's easy to become sloppy about
>altitude -- I mean, who cares if you're off by 100 feet? And heading?
>Well, shoot, we're just following the magenta line on the display, right?
>Sloppy.
>
>Another example: Practice can make perfect, but repetition can also make you
>forget things, over time. Mary and I were recently discussing the fact that
>neither one of us could remember the precise V speeds for Atlas -- a plane
>we've flown every few days for six years. They've all become automatic and
>ingrained in our muscle memory -- but we'd have to look at the panel
>placards to tell the exact speeds. Sloppy.
>
>Interestingly, the definition of sloppy piloting has changed somewhat over
>the years I've been flying. It used to be that you could spot a sloppy
>pilot by the way they read a sectional chart; nowadays, many pilots don't
>ever look at a sectional, and a sloppy pilot is defined by how much they
>fumble with the knobs of their Garmin 1000...
>
>As I'm typing this, I'm trying to remember the last time I opened my
>sectional chart. With a Lowrance 2000c on the pilot's yoke, and a Garmin
>496 in the panel, there is literally no reason for us to EVER open a
>sectional anymore. Both of those instruments have far more information than
>a chart could ever display -- yet I feel sloppy for not having opened my
>paper map in the last dozen or so flights.
>
>With two pilots on board, we have a good system to offset any inclination to
>get too sloppy -- it's called "spouse pressure". For example, if I fly a
>non-rectangular pattern, I'm sure to hear about it -- and vice versa. But
>even after 30 years we can't read each other's minds, and -- especially
>after a long lay-off from flying -- it's easy to develop sloppy thought
>processes. Piloting requires linear thinking, and much of it is habit
>developed over time, so it's the first thing to go when you haven't flown
>much.
>
>I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency toward
>sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you might employ?

[NW_Pilot]

I agree bob when it's -23 or colder out and your empty "full fuel" One pilot
310HP at SL. wow air is so dense!


"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
. ..
>I would recommend that you calculate Vx and Vy for various density
>altitudes and weights rather that memorize a number that is valid only at
>sea level on a standard day at gross weight.
>
> Bob Gardner
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:Bj5gj.287919$Fc.120969@attbi_s21...
>> This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this
>> month entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many
>> interesting points about things that can affect good piloting.
>>
>> Precision is part of being a good pilot, and it seems that good ones are
>> always striving for perfection, even though they know it's unattainable.
>> As pilots we are always one mistake away from bent metal (or worse) so
>> this is a good thing.
>>
>> In my own flying, I strive to avoid the pitfall of becoming sloppy -- but
>> I have to confess that it's easy to fall into bad habits. When you've
>> droned VFR between Iowa and Wisconsin 500 times, it's easy to become
>> sloppy about altitude -- I mean, who cares if you're off by 100 feet? And
>> heading? Well, shoot, we're just following the magenta line on the
>> display, right? Sloppy.
>>
>> Another example: Practice can make perfect, but repetition can also make
>> you forget things, over time. Mary and I were recently discussing the
>> fact that neither one of us could remember the precise V speeds for
>> Atlas -- a plane we've flown every few days for six years. They've all
>> become automatic and ingrained in our muscle memory -- but we'd have to
>> look at the panel placards to tell the exact speeds. Sloppy.
>>
>> Interestingly, the definition of sloppy piloting has changed somewhat
>> over the years I've been flying. It used to be that you could spot a
>> sloppy pilot by the way they read a sectional chart; nowadays, many
>> pilots don't ever look at a sectional, and a sloppy pilot is defined by
>> how much they fumble with the knobs of their Garmin 1000...
>>
>> As I'm typing this, I'm trying to remember the last time I opened my
>> sectional chart. With a Lowrance 2000c on the pilot's yoke, and a Garmin
>> 496 in the panel, there is literally no reason for us to EVER open a
>> sectional anymore. Both of those instruments have far more information
>> than a chart could ever display -- yet I feel sloppy for not having
>> opened my paper map in the last dozen or so flights.
>>
>> With two pilots on board, we have a good system to offset any inclination
>> to get too sloppy -- it's called "spouse pressure". For example, if I
>> fly a non-rectangular pattern, I'm sure to hear about it -- and vice
>> versa. But even after 30 years we can't read each other's minds, and --
>> especially after a long lay-off from flying -- it's easy to develop
>> sloppy thought processes. Piloting requires linear thinking, and much of
>> it is habit developed over time, so it's the first thing to go when you
>> haven't flown much.
>>
>> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency toward
>> sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you might employ?
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>> Pathfinder N56993
>> www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this
> month entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many
> interesting points about things that can affect good piloting.
>
> Precision is part of being a good pilot, and it seems that good ones are
> always striving for perfection, even though they know it's
> unattainable. As pilots we are always one mistake away from bent metal
> (or worse) so this is a good thing.
>
> In my own flying, I strive to avoid the pitfall of becoming sloppy --
> but I have to confess that it's easy to fall into bad habits. When
> you've droned VFR between Iowa and Wisconsin 500 times, it's easy to
> become sloppy about altitude -- I mean, who cares if you're off by 100
> feet? And heading? Well, shoot, we're just following the magenta line
> on the display, right? Sloppy.
>
> Another example: Practice can make perfect, but repetition can also make
> you forget things, over time. Mary and I were recently discussing the
> fact that neither one of us could remember the precise V speeds for
> Atlas -- a plane we've flown every few days for six years. They've all
> become automatic and ingrained in our muscle memory -- but we'd have to
> look at the panel placards to tell the exact speeds. Sloppy.
>
> Interestingly, the definition of sloppy piloting has changed somewhat
> over the years I've been flying. It used to be that you could spot a
> sloppy pilot by the way they read a sectional chart; nowadays, many
> pilots don't ever look at a sectional, and a sloppy pilot is defined by
> how much they fumble with the knobs of their Garmin 1000...
>
> As I'm typing this, I'm trying to remember the last time I opened my
> sectional chart. With a Lowrance 2000c on the pilot's yoke, and a
> Garmin 496 in the panel, there is literally no reason for us to EVER
> open a sectional anymore. Both of those instruments have far more
> information than a chart could ever display -- yet I feel sloppy for not
> having opened my paper map in the last dozen or so flights.
>
> With two pilots on board, we have a good system to offset any
> inclination to get too sloppy -- it's called "spouse pressure". For
> example, if I fly a non-rectangular pattern, I'm sure to hear about it
> -- and vice versa. But even after 30 years we can't read each other's
> minds, and -- especially after a long lay-off from flying -- it's easy
> to develop sloppy thought processes. Piloting requires linear thinking,
> and much of it is habit developed over time, so it's the first thing to
> go when you haven't flown much.
>
> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency
> toward sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you might
> employ?
I had two things I used to do. One on cross country and the other
involving a slow roll; both involving the altimeter.
On cross countries, I would attempt to hold the altimeter needle rock
solid with thye hundreds needle on whatever number I was using for level
flight without letting the needle come off the number on either side.

For the slow roll, it's execution is done in the shape of the capital
letter D; a normal D to the right and reversed to the left.
I'd assign myself a roll altitude slightly above where I was and use
that as my "pinned" altitude for the roll. I would do a pull to the roll
set and initiate the roll with the hundreds needle pinned on that
number. I would attempt to keep the needle pinned through the roll to
the second knife edge, then return the airplane back down to level
flight at exactly the initiating altitude.

Generally speaking, if you can do these two things well, you have a
fairly good hand and feel for the airplane.


--
Dudley Henriques

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> Sounds like a lot of work, but being a relatively low-time pilot, making
> the cards is a way for me to familiarize myself with the details of each
> flight (I have a home office with all the equipment needed to make the
> cards, so that makes it easier, too), and then all the info is readily
> available for re-familiarizing each time. And my higher-time partner has
> said it's helpful, too, so it works well for us.

I used to do something very similar to this, back in our pre-GPS,
pre-two-pilot days. I found my "cheat sheets" to be extremely helpful,
especially when flying into unknown or big-city airports.

These sheets really help because they eliminate more than a few things to
remember. As a new(er) pilot, I remember feeling like I was close to
mental overload when flying into complex airspace, and anything you can do
to minimize that load is definitely helpful.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> For the slow roll, it's execution is done in the shape of the capital
> letter D; a normal D to the right and reversed to the left.
> I'd assign myself a roll altitude slightly above where I was and use that
> as my "pinned" altitude for the roll. I would do a pull to the roll set
> and initiate the roll with the hundreds needle pinned on that number. I
> would attempt to keep the needle pinned through the roll to the second
> knife edge, then return the airplane back down to level flight at exactly
> the initiating altitude.

Hmmm... Maybe I'll forego using this particular technique, Dudley...

:-)

I had an interesting experience on a flight today that illustrates how
easily "sloppy" can creep in. The temperature today soared to 52 degrees
(and, man, I am here to tell you that 52 never felt so good), so -- after
the morning's pea soup fog burned off -- we headed to the airport.

It was my turn to fly out, so I went through my usual routine -- unplug the
plane, pull it out, thorough preflight inspection. Once in the plane, I
followed my usual "geographic checklist" -- upper left to lower right. I
listened to AWOS, set the DG, set the altimeter to field elevation, did my
run-up, and off we went.

I was planning to do one touch & go and then depart the pattern to the
south. There were two guys in the pattern, so I timed my departure to fit
into the flow. Upon reaching my turn from crosswind to downwind, I looked
at my altimeter and was surprised to see I had overshot my altitude by a
full thousand feet! With the cool weather, and light on fuel, Atlas climbs
like a homesick angel -- but something just didn't seem right...

I looked around and realized that my sight picture matched what 1000 AGL
*always* looks like. And it seemed unlikely that I had overshot my altitude
by *that* much -- so I tuned in AWOS again to check barometric pressure.

Sure 'nuff, I had set the altimeter precisely 1000 feet wrong. I reset
accordingly, and continued the flight, chastened by discovering yet another
way to fly sloppy. (Mary just laughed. I had caught her doing the exact
same thing some years ago -- so now we're "even"...)

We flew to a nearby town, swapped seats, and Mary flew us back -- where we
met our son pre-flighting the rental C-150. Mary *finally* got her
"chauffeured ride" with Joe at the controls today!

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

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Jan 6, 9:10*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> As I'm typing this, I'm trying to remember the last time I opened my
> sectional chart. *With a Lowrance 2000c on the pilot's yoke, and a Garmin
> 496 in the panel, there is literally no reason for us to EVER open a
> sectional anymore.

Two GPSes should keep you away from the charts, but I read somewhere
that the US military has the ability to turn off or set the sats to
send out false signals. In that rare scenario, you'd be dead
reckoning it though. Anyways, getting lost is not the end of the
world.

Wil

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

William Hung > wrote in news:1ced3e8f-c4ba-4f03-a438-
:

> On Jan 6, 9:10*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> As I'm typing this, I'm trying to remember the last time I opened my
>> sectional chart. *With a Lowrance 2000c on the pilot's yoke, and a Garmi
> n
>> 496 in the panel, there is literally no reason for us to EVER open a
>> sectional anymore.
>
> Two GPSes should keep you away from the charts, but I read somewhere
> that the US military has the ability to turn off or set the sats to
> send out false signals.


Yes, they can. I have experienced it flying through the Adriatic, for one.


Bertie

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> Two GPSes should keep you away from the charts, but I read somewhere
> that the US military has the ability to turn off or set the sats to
> send out false signals. In that rare scenario, you'd be dead
> reckoning it though. Anyways, getting lost is not the end of the
> world.

I wouldn't be lost without the GPS, since we still keep the current
sectional on-board. We may not refer to it much anymore, but it's still
there if needed.

And, last time I checked, my VORs still worked...

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

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Jan 6, 9:19*pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > Two GPSes should keep you away from the charts, but I read somewhere
> > that the US military has the ability to turn off or set the sats to
> > send out false signals. *In that rare scenario, you'd be dead
> > reckoning it though. *Anyways, getting lost is not the end of the
> > world.
>
> I wouldn't be lost without the GPS, since we still keep the current
> sectional on-board. *We may not refer to it much anymore, but it's still
> there if needed.
>
> And, last time I checked, my VORs still worked...
>
> ;-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Sounds like you've got it covered then.

Cheers,
Wil

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in news:g%fgj.24519$Ux2.24339
@attbi_s22:

>> Two GPSes should keep you away from the charts, but I read somewhere
>> that the US military has the ability to turn off or set the sats to
>> send out false signals. In that rare scenario, you'd be dead
>> reckoning it though. Anyways, getting lost is not the end of the
>> world.
>
> I wouldn't be lost without the GPS, since we still keep the current
> sectional on-board. We may not refer to it much anymore, but it's still
> there if needed.
>
> And, last time I checked, my VORs still worked...


Aren;'t you marvelous?

Bertie

[[email protected]]

> For the slow roll, it's execution is done in the shape of the capital
> letter D; a normal D to the right and reversed to the left.
> I'd assign myself a roll altitude slightly above where I was and use
> that as my "pinned" altitude for the roll. I would do a pull to the roll
> set and initiate the roll with the hundreds needle pinned on that
> number. I would attempt to keep the needle pinned through the roll to
> the second knife edge, then return the airplane back down to level
> flight at exactly the initiating altitude.

That's rockin. What kind of plane?

Why not a barrel roll or two as well? Heh. Keep it interesting. I'm
very excited to get started on that stuff. Waiting to hear back from
my old flight instructor.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

wrote:
>> For the slow roll, it's execution is done in the shape of the capital
>> letter D; a normal D to the right and reversed to the left.
>> I'd assign myself a roll altitude slightly above where I was and use
>> that as my "pinned" altitude for the roll. I would do a pull to the roll
>> set and initiate the roll with the hundreds needle pinned on that
>> number. I would attempt to keep the needle pinned through the roll to
>> the second knife edge, then return the airplane back down to level
>> flight at exactly the initiating altitude.
>
> That's rockin. What kind of plane?
>
> Why not a barrel roll or two as well? Heh. Keep it interesting. I'm
> very excited to get started on that stuff. Waiting to hear back from
> my old flight instructor.

Most accurate in the Pitts, and dead on close in the P51. A little
harder to do in the Decathlon but doable.

Barrel rolls are fun but for display flying you need pinpoint accuracy
in the slow roll department where a dish out can really ruin your day.
Barrel rolls are pretty and easy to do but not the best maneuver when
considering precision on the roll axis.

Glad you're considering aerobatics. Take a good course with a good acro
instructor and if you never fly acro again, your general flying will be
greatly improved.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> For the slow roll, it's execution is done in the shape of the capital
>> letter D; a normal D to the right and reversed to the left.
>> I'd assign myself a roll altitude slightly above where I was and use
>> that as my "pinned" altitude for the roll. I would do a pull to the
>> roll set and initiate the roll with the hundreds needle pinned on that
>> number. I would attempt to keep the needle pinned through the roll to
>> the second knife edge, then return the airplane back down to level
>> flight at exactly the initiating altitude.
>
> Hmmm... Maybe I'll forego using this particular technique, Dudley...
>
> :-)
>
> I had an interesting experience on a flight today that illustrates how
> easily "sloppy" can creep in. The temperature today soared to 52
> degrees (and, man, I am here to tell you that 52 never felt so good), so
> -- after the morning's pea soup fog burned off -- we headed to the airport.
>
> It was my turn to fly out, so I went through my usual routine -- unplug
> the plane, pull it out, thorough preflight inspection. Once in the
> plane, I followed my usual "geographic checklist" -- upper left to lower
> right. I listened to AWOS, set the DG, set the altimeter to field
> elevation, did my run-up, and off we went.
>
> I was planning to do one touch & go and then depart the pattern to the
> south. There were two guys in the pattern, so I timed my departure to
> fit into the flow. Upon reaching my turn from crosswind to downwind, I
> looked at my altimeter and was surprised to see I had overshot my
> altitude by a full thousand feet! With the cool weather, and light on
> fuel, Atlas climbs like a homesick angel -- but something just didn't
> seem right...
>
> I looked around and realized that my sight picture matched what 1000 AGL
> *always* looks like. And it seemed unlikely that I had overshot my
> altitude by *that* much -- so I tuned in AWOS again to check barometric
> pressure.
>
> Sure 'nuff, I had set the altimeter precisely 1000 feet wrong. I reset
> accordingly, and continued the flight, chastened by discovering yet
> another way to fly sloppy. (Mary just laughed. I had caught her doing
> the exact same thing some years ago -- so now we're "even"...)
>
> We flew to a nearby town, swapped seats, and Mary flew us back -- where
> we met our son pre-flighting the rental C-150. Mary *finally* got her
> "chauffeured ride" with Joe at the controls today!
>
> :-)

You know, no matter how much we practice, and no matter how careful we
are as pilots, most of us will make this type of error. I've done it. I
think all of us have done it. What I used to do when it happened to me
was to take serious note of it and in that way try and keep that same
error from happening again.
It's a sobering feeling, especially when you've been flying a long time,
to have one of these "oh crap" moments.
I'm in fact involved right now with an international group of
demonstration and air show pilots working on exactly this type of thing.
We're doing serious research into what causes highly experienced pilots
to have "brain farts" for lack of a better term :-)
There will be a symposium in London at the End of the month where these
and other issues will be discussed openly in the hope of making our
community safer.
Anyway, I just wanted you to know you're not alone with this kind of
thing :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[kontiki]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> These sheets really help because they eliminate more than a few things
> to remember. As a new(er) pilot, I remember feeling like I was close
> to mental overload when flying into complex airspace, and anything you
> can do to minimize that load is definitely helpful.

One of the handiest "cheat sheets" you can find are the terminal
procedures, or approach plates. Even if I'm not flying IFR I
always bring a set with me. All the information you need to
know about an airport is on one piece of paper.

[Mxsmanic]

William Hung writes:

> Two GPSes should keep you away from the charts, but I read somewhere
> that the US military has the ability to turn off or set the sats to
> send out false signals.

That capability is no longer used. The military now uses local jamming
techniques to deny GPS when required.

Unfortunately, they often test it in the U.S., and when they do, GPS within a
wide area may be unusable or unavailable.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> William Hung writes:
>
>> Two GPSes should keep you away from the charts, but I read somewhere
>> that the US military has the ability to turn off or set the sats to
>> send out false signals.
>
> That capability is no longer used. The military now uses local
> jamming techniques to deny GPS when required.


No, they don't.

>
> Unfortunately, they often test it in the U.S., and when they do, GPS
> within a wide area may be unusable or unavailable.
>


So what;'s it to you? You have the local dumpsters marked on your Garmin?

Bertie

[gliderguynj]

I'll admit to sloppy flying this weekend, and I hope I learned my
lesson. I recently joined a club that flies a C150. I transitioned
into it from a Cherokee. One of the biggest differences I noticed
other than where the wings are is the climb out. It's not exactly
robust. I've also been grilled to be very careful to make sure I use
the Carb Heat in my landing pattern. Well, I was doing pattern work
and wasn't using a checklist between landing and take offs. On the
last T/O I neglected to put the carb heat off, which was a carry over
from neglecting to fully clean up my ship after exiting the runway.

After lift off, which took a bit more runway than usual, the plane
just felt anemic. I realized something was wrong and looked at my
RPM's which were 200 less than what I needed. I checked the throttle,
that was correct, mixture ok flaps ok then I saw my carb heat was on.
DOH!!!!!!

If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
Kimchee. Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened.
I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
combined could have put me in real harms way. It's very easy to kill
yourself if you aren't on top of your game. Sloppy is a great way to
describe it.

Doug

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
> Kimchee. Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened.
> I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
> combined could have put me in real harms way. It's very easy to kill
> yourself if you aren't on top of your game. Sloppy is a great way to
> describe it.

Switching planes is a great way to make sloppiness apparent.

I had recently transitioned to a Cessna 172, and I was on final approach for
Rwy 9 at Sylvania Field (C89) in Wisconsin. This airport had a 2300 foot
by 30 foot wide runway, with Interstate 94 just a few dozen feet off the
departure end of the runway.

Precision was rewarded.

I was approaching somewhat high and fast when another plane -- apparently
NORDO -- pulled onto the runway. I immediately firewalled the throttle --
and slapped the flap selector to the "up" position. Big mistake.

I was used to Cherokee flaps -- one click of the Johnson Bar up or down --
and was surprised to find my now-becoming-flapless plane sinking toward the
runway -- and I-94. I quickly put in a click of flaps, which arrested the
descent, just in time to clear the trucks on the freeway.

It was a great lesson to learn, if you lived through it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:jpDgj.290305$Fc.40223@attbi_s21:

>> If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
>> Kimchee. Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened.
>> I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
>> combined could have put me in real harms way. It's very easy to kill
>> yourself if you aren't on top of your game. Sloppy is a great way to
>> describe it.
>
> Switching planes is a great way to make sloppiness apparent.
>
> I had recently transitioned to a Cessna 172, and I was on final
> approach for Rwy 9 at Sylvania Field (C89) in Wisconsin. This
> airport had a 2300 foot by 30 foot wide runway, with Interstate 94
> just a few dozen feet off the departure end of the runway.
>
> Precision was rewarded.
>
> I was approaching somewhat high and fast when another plane --
> apparently NORDO -- pulled onto the runway. I immediately firewalled
> the throttle -- and slapped the flap selector to the "up" position.
> Big mistake.
>
> I was used to Cherokee flaps -- one click of the Johnson Bar up or
> down -- and was surprised to find my now-becoming-flapless plane
> sinking toward the runway -- and I-94. I quickly put in a click of
> flaps, which arrested the descent, just in time to clear the trucks on
> the freeway.
>
> It was a great lesson to learn, if you lived through it.



You're a real hero


Bertie

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote

> Switching planes is a great way to make sloppiness apparent.
>
> I had recently transitioned to a Cessna 172,

What???

Why were you making a change from a manly low wing airplane, to a sissy high
wing airplane, with such a un-manly little engine?

Isn't Atlas going to be jealous?

You had better make sure the door to Atlas is kept closed, so he can't see
you flying this new mount, and take a shower and wash up real good after you
fly the 172, before you get near Atlas again. If he smells the 172 on you,
there is going to be hell to pay!

;-))
--
Jim in NC

[dVaridel]

"Jay Honeck" wrote
> I immediately firewalled the throttle -- and slapped the flap selector to
> the "up" position. Big mistake.
>
> I was used to Cherokee flaps -- one click of the Johnson Bar up or down --
> and was surprised to find my now-becoming-flapless plane sinking toward
> the runway -- and I-94. I quickly put in a click of flaps, which
> arrested the descent, just in time to clear the trucks on the freeway.

I went from Tomahawks to C150's when I moved town. Did almost exactly the
same thing after a couple of hours in the Cessna, total hours ~15, and 17
year old.

Since I survived I will never make the same mistake again.



David


--
If everything seems to be going well, you have obviously overlooked
something.

[Jay Maynard]

On 2008-01-08, dVaridel > wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" wrote
>> I immediately firewalled the throttle -- and slapped the flap selector to
>> the "up" position. Big mistake.
>> I was used to Cherokee flaps -- one click of the Johnson Bar up or down --
>> and was surprised to find my now-becoming-flapless plane sinking toward
>> the runway -- and I-94. I quickly put in a click of flaps, which
>> arrested the descent, just in time to clear the trucks on the freeway.
> I went from Tomahawks to C150's when I moved town. Did almost exactly the
> same thing after a couple of hours in the Cessna, total hours ~15, and 17
> year old.

I did just the opposite. I'd done my primary training in both 172s and
Warriors, so I thought I was immune to that kind of thing, but on my Archer
checkout, I started a go-around and dumped *all* of the flaps instead of
just the first notch. Life got exciting for a few moments. I learned to hold
that Johnson bar firmly when pushing the release button.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

>> Switching planes is a great way to make sloppiness apparent.
>>
>> I had recently transitioned to a Cessna 172,
>
> What???
>
> Why were you making a change from a manly low wing airplane, to a sissy
> high wing airplane, with such a un-manly little engine?

"HAD", Jim, "HAD" recently transitioned. As in past tense -- way past.
Like 1995-ish.

No "C" products for me nowadays -- although I did have fun flying with Joe
in that little 150!

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

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:kQQgj.26997$Ux2.10948@attbi_s22:

>>> Switching planes is a great way to make sloppiness apparent.
>>>
>>> I had recently transitioned to a Cessna 172,
>>
>> What???
>>
>> Why were you making a change from a manly low wing airplane, to a
>> sissy high wing airplane, with such a un-manly little engine?
>
> "HAD", Jim, "HAD" recently transitioned. As in past tense -- way
> past. Like 1995-ish.
>
> No "C" products for me nowadays -- although I did have fun flying with
> Joe in that little 150!

Unreal.


Bertie

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> Switching planes is a great way to make sloppiness apparent.
>>>
>>> I had recently transitioned to a Cessna 172,
>>
>> What???
>>
>> Why were you making a change from a manly low wing airplane, to a
>> sissy high wing airplane, with such a un-manly little engine?
>
> "HAD", Jim, "HAD" recently transitioned. As in past tense -- way past.
> Like 1995-ish.
>
> No "C" products for me nowadays -- although I did have fun flying with
> Joe in that little 150!
>
> :-)

What do you have against Cirrus or Columbia? :-)

[Jay Honeck[_3_]]

Matt Whiting > wrote in news:c0Tgj.1404$2n4.31544
@news1.epix.net:

> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>>> Switching planes is a great way to make sloppiness apparent.
>>>>
>>>> I had recently transitioned to a Cessna 172,
>>>
>>> What???
>>>
>>> Why were you making a change from a manly low wing airplane, to a
>>> sissy high wing airplane, with such a un-manly little engine?
>>
>> "HAD", Jim, "HAD" recently transitioned. As in past tense -- way past.
>> Like 1995-ish.
>>
>> No "C" products for me nowadays -- although I did have fun flying with
>> Joe in that little 150!
>>
>> :-)
>
> What do you have against Cirrus or Columbia? :-)
>

They begin with C obviously.

It's the way his mind works.


Btrebel

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> They begin with C obviously.
>
> It's the way his mind works.

Hey -- Bertie has learned how to spoof an email address! Woo hoo!

Can forming complete sentences and spelling correctly be next?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:PhTgj.27158$Ux2.11768@attbi_s22:

> Xref: news rec.aviation.piloting:581394
> Path:
> wns13feed!worldnet.att.net!attbi_s22.POSTED!53ab27 50!not-for-mail
> From: "Jay Honeck" > Newsgroups:
> rec.aviation.piloting References: <Bj5gj.287919$Fc.120969@attbi_s21>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> <jpDgj.290305$Fc.40223@attbi_s21> >
> <kQQgj.26997$Ux2.10948@attbi_s22>
> >
> > In-Reply-To:
> > Subject: Re: Sloppy
> Piloting Lines: 13
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> format=flowed;
> charset="Windows-1252";
> reply-type=original
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16545
> Message-ID: <PhTgj.27158$Ux2.11768@attbi_s22>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.202.118.194
> X-Complaints-To:
> X-Trace: attbi_s22 1199833327 12.202.118.194 (Tue, 08 Jan 2008
> 23:02:07 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:02:07 GMT
> Organization: AT&T ASP.att.net
> Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:02:07 GMT
>
>> They begin with C obviously.
>>
>> It's the way his mind works.
>
> Hey -- Bertie has learned how to spoof an email address! Woo hoo!


But Jay has not yet learned how to read.

Where has an e-mail been spoofed, fjukktard?


>
> Can forming complete sentences and spelling correctly be next?

Not as long as it keeps fjukkwits like you on the line.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Oh yeah, BTW, if yu had really had me killfiled properly, you wouldn;t have
seen that post.


Hmmm.


Guess that makes you a liar...



Bertie

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote

> "HAD", Jim, "HAD" recently transitioned. As in past tense -- way past.
> Like 1995-ish.
>
> No "C" products for me nowadays -- although I did have fun flying with Joe
> in that little 150!

Whew, that was a close one! <g>

I should have know you would not do that, nowdays!`
--
Jim in NC

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> They begin with C obviously.
>> It's the way his mind works.
>
> Hey -- Bertie has learned how to spoof an email address! Woo hoo!
>
> Can forming complete sentences and spelling correctly be next?

He'll (she'll??) have to spit out the pacifier first. :-)

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Matt Whiting > wrote in news:GJVgj.1407$2n4.31496
@news1.epix.net:

> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> They begin with C obviously.
>>> It's the way his mind works.
>>
>> Hey -- Bertie has learned how to spoof an email address! Woo hoo!
>>
>> Can forming complete sentences and spelling correctly be next?
>
> He'll (she'll??) have to spit out the pacifier first. :-)
>

Aww, Gender dysphiria lames.

Kewt!

Bertie

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Jan 7, 6:27*pm, gliderguynj > wrote:
> I'll admit to sloppy flying this weekend, and I hope I learned my
> lesson. *I recently joined a club that flies a C150. *I transitioned
> into it from a Cherokee. *One of the biggest differences I noticed
> other than where the wings are is the climb out. *It's not exactly
> robust. *I've also been grilled to be very careful to make sure I use
> the Carb Heat in my landing pattern. *Well, I was doing pattern work
> and wasn't using a checklist between landing and take offs. *On the
> last T/O I neglected to put the carb heat off, which was a carry over
> from neglecting to fully clean up my ship after exiting the runway.
>
> After lift off, which took a bit more runway than usual, the plane
> just felt anemic. *I realized something was wrong and looked at my
> RPM's which were 200 less than what I needed. *I checked the throttle,
> that was correct, mixture ok flaps ok then I saw my carb heat was on.
> DOH!!!!!!
>
> If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
> Kimchee. *Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened.
> I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
> combined could have put me in real harms way. *It's very easy to kill
> yourself if you aren't on top of your game. *Sloppy is a great way to
> describe it.
>
> Doug

You say Kimchee like it was a bad thing. Yummmm Kimchee. <smile>

Wil

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

William Hung wrote:
> On Jan 7, 6:27 pm, gliderguynj > wrote:
>> I'll admit to sloppy flying this weekend, and I hope I learned my
>> lesson. I recently joined a club that flies a C150. I transitioned
>> into it from a Cherokee. One of the biggest differences I noticed
>> other than where the wings are is the climb out. It's not exactly
>> robust. I've also been grilled to be very careful to make sure I use
>> the Carb Heat in my landing pattern. Well, I was doing pattern work
>> and wasn't using a checklist between landing and take offs. On the
>> last T/O I neglected to put the carb heat off, which was a carry over
>> from neglecting to fully clean up my ship after exiting the runway.
>>
>> After lift off, which took a bit more runway than usual, the plane
>> just felt anemic. I realized something was wrong and looked at my
>> RPM's which were 200 less than what I needed. I checked the throttle,
>> that was correct, mixture ok flaps ok then I saw my carb heat was on.
>> DOH!!!!!!
>>
>> If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
>> Kimchee. Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened.
>> I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
>> combined could have put me in real harms way. It's very easy to kill
>> yourself if you aren't on top of your game. Sloppy is a great way to
>> describe it.
>>
>> Doug
>
> You say Kimchee like it was a bad thing. Yummmm Kimchee. <smile>
>
> Wil

Buried in every back yard in Korea no less. Not bad really...especially
if it's REALLY fermented :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Jan 8, 9:40*pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> William Hung wrote:
> > On Jan 7, 6:27 pm, gliderguynj > wrote:
> >> I'll admit to sloppy flying this weekend, and I hope I learned my
> >> lesson. *I recently joined a club that flies a C150. *I transitioned
> >> into it from a Cherokee. *One of the biggest differences I noticed
> >> other than where the wings are is the climb out. *It's not exactly
> >> robust. *I've also been grilled to be very careful to make sure I use
> >> the Carb Heat in my landing pattern. *Well, I was doing pattern work
> >> and wasn't using a checklist between landing and take offs. *On the
> >> last T/O I neglected to put the carb heat off, which was a carry over
> >> from neglecting to fully clean up my ship after exiting the runway.
>
> >> After lift off, which took a bit more runway than usual, the plane
> >> just felt anemic. *I realized something was wrong and looked at my
> >> RPM's which were 200 less than what I needed. *I checked the throttle,
> >> that was correct, mixture ok flaps ok then I saw my carb heat was on.
> >> DOH!!!!!!
>
> >> If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
> >> Kimchee. *Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened.
> >> I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
> >> combined could have put me in real harms way. *It's very easy to kill
> >> yourself if you aren't on top of your game. *Sloppy is a great way to
> >> describe it.
>
> >> Doug
>
> > You say Kimchee like it was a bad thing. *Yummmm Kimchee. <smile>
>
> > Wil
>
> Buried in every back yard in Korea no less. Not bad really...especially
> if it's REALLY fermented :-))
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You are Hardcore Dudley, lol. Those are too sour for me, I like mine
still a bit crunchy like Dill pickles.

Wil

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

William Hung wrote:
> On Jan 8, 9:40 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> William Hung wrote:
>>> On Jan 7, 6:27 pm, gliderguynj > wrote:
>>>> I'll admit to sloppy flying this weekend, and I hope I learned my
>>>> lesson. I recently joined a club that flies a C150. I transitioned
>>>> into it from a Cherokee. One of the biggest differences I noticed
>>>> other than where the wings are is the climb out. It's not exactly
>>>> robust. I've also been grilled to be very careful to make sure I use
>>>> the Carb Heat in my landing pattern. Well, I was doing pattern work
>>>> and wasn't using a checklist between landing and take offs. On the
>>>> last T/O I neglected to put the carb heat off, which was a carry over
>>>> from neglecting to fully clean up my ship after exiting the runway.
>>>> After lift off, which took a bit more runway than usual, the plane
>>>> just felt anemic. I realized something was wrong and looked at my
>>>> RPM's which were 200 less than what I needed. I checked the throttle,
>>>> that was correct, mixture ok flaps ok then I saw my carb heat was on.
>>>> DOH!!!!!!
>>>> If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
>>>> Kimchee. Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened.
>>>> I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
>>>> combined could have put me in real harms way. It's very easy to kill
>>>> yourself if you aren't on top of your game. Sloppy is a great way to
>>>> describe it.
>>>> Doug
>>> You say Kimchee like it was a bad thing. Yummmm Kimchee. <smile>
>>> Wil
>> Buried in every back yard in Korea no less. Not bad really...especially
>> if it's REALLY fermented :-))
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> You are Hardcore Dudley, lol. Those are too sour for me, I like mine
> still a bit crunchy like Dill pickles.
>
> Wil
More like desperation on my part. We were friends with a Korean family
over there who LOVED the stuff. I think they had a ton of it fermenting
in the back yard. They wouldn't leave me alone until I tried it. Then
they hounded me until I ate some more. :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Jan 8, 9:48*pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> William Hung wrote:
> > On Jan 8, 9:40 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> >> William Hung wrote:
> >>> On Jan 7, 6:27 pm, gliderguynj > wrote:
> >>>> I'll admit to sloppy flying this weekend, and I hope I learned my
> >>>> lesson. *I recently joined a club that flies a C150. *I transitioned
> >>>> into it from a Cherokee. *One of the biggest differences I noticed
> >>>> other than where the wings are is the climb out. *It's not exactly
> >>>> robust. *I've also been grilled to be very careful to make sure I use
> >>>> the Carb Heat in my landing pattern. *Well, I was doing pattern work
> >>>> and wasn't using a checklist between landing and take offs. *On the
> >>>> last T/O I neglected to put the carb heat off, which was a carry over
> >>>> from neglecting to fully clean up my ship after exiting the runway.
> >>>> After lift off, which took a bit more runway than usual, the plane
> >>>> just felt anemic. *I realized something was wrong and looked at my
> >>>> RPM's which were 200 less than what I needed. *I checked the throttle,
> >>>> that was correct, mixture ok flaps ok then I saw my carb heat was on.
> >>>> DOH!!!!!!
> >>>> If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
> >>>> Kimchee. *Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened..
> >>>> I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
> >>>> combined could have put me in real harms way. *It's very easy to kill
> >>>> yourself if you aren't on top of your game. *Sloppy is a great way to
> >>>> describe it.
> >>>> Doug
> >>> You say Kimchee like it was a bad thing. *Yummmm Kimchee. <smile>
> >>> Wil
> >> Buried in every back yard in Korea no less. Not bad really...especially
> >> if it's REALLY fermented :-))
>
> >> --
> >> Dudley Henriques- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > You are Hardcore Dudley, *lol. *Those are too sour for me, I like mine
> > still a bit crunchy like Dill pickles.
>
> > Wil
>
> More like desperation on my part. We were friends with a Korean family
> over there who LOVED the stuff. I think they had a ton of it fermenting
> in the back yard. They wouldn't leave me alone until I tried it. Then
> they hounded me until I ate some more. :-))
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'm not Korean, but occasionally I like it. The fresher krispy ones.
I even eat their fermented oysters, talk about acquired taste! lol.
Not bad after several hundred tries, I even grew to like it. Well,
the Korean girl I was dating at the time made it all worth it. <g>

Wil

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

William Hung wrote:
> On Jan 8, 9:48 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> William Hung wrote:
>>> On Jan 8, 9:40 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>>>> William Hung wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 7, 6:27 pm, gliderguynj > wrote:
>>>>>> I'll admit to sloppy flying this weekend, and I hope I learned my
>>>>>> lesson. I recently joined a club that flies a C150. I transitioned
>>>>>> into it from a Cherokee. One of the biggest differences I noticed
>>>>>> other than where the wings are is the climb out. It's not exactly
>>>>>> robust. I've also been grilled to be very careful to make sure I use
>>>>>> the Carb Heat in my landing pattern. Well, I was doing pattern work
>>>>>> and wasn't using a checklist between landing and take offs. On the
>>>>>> last T/O I neglected to put the carb heat off, which was a carry over
>>>>>> from neglecting to fully clean up my ship after exiting the runway.
>>>>>> After lift off, which took a bit more runway than usual, the plane
>>>>>> just felt anemic. I realized something was wrong and looked at my
>>>>>> RPM's which were 200 less than what I needed. I checked the throttle,
>>>>>> that was correct, mixture ok flaps ok then I saw my carb heat was on.
>>>>>> DOH!!!!!!
>>>>>> If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
>>>>>> Kimchee. Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened.
>>>>>> I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
>>>>>> combined could have put me in real harms way. It's very easy to kill
>>>>>> yourself if you aren't on top of your game. Sloppy is a great way to
>>>>>> describe it.
>>>>>> Doug
>>>>> You say Kimchee like it was a bad thing. Yummmm Kimchee. <smile>
>>>>> Wil
>>>> Buried in every back yard in Korea no less. Not bad really...especially
>>>> if it's REALLY fermented :-))
>>>> --
>>>> Dudley Henriques- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> You are Hardcore Dudley, lol. Those are too sour for me, I like mine
>>> still a bit crunchy like Dill pickles.
>>> Wil
>> More like desperation on my part. We were friends with a Korean family
>> over there who LOVED the stuff. I think they had a ton of it fermenting
>> in the back yard. They wouldn't leave me alone until I tried it. Then
>> they hounded me until I ate some more. :-))
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I'm not Korean, but occasionally I like it. The fresher krispy ones.
> I even eat their fermented oysters, talk about acquired taste! lol.
> Not bad after several hundred tries, I even grew to like it. Well,
> the Korean girl I was dating at the time made it all worth it. <g>
>
> Wil

Sounds like you managed the best of both worlds there. :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[gliderguynj]

On Jan 8, 9:35*pm, William Hung > wrote:
> You say Kimchee like it was a bad thing. *Yummmm Kimchee. <smile>
> Wil-


Just using it as a saying. I happen to LOVE Kimchee. I buy it by the
quart in the local Asian market. When I go to Korean restaurants, I'm
usually given free dishes of different types of Kimchee to try because
I show such enthusiasm for it. The only problem I have with Kimchee
is that my wife gets very annoyed when I eat it at home because of the
Aroma....

Doug

[Kevin Clarke]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this
> month entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many
> interesting points about things that can affect good piloting.
>
> ...
>
> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency
> toward sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you
> might employ?

Don't know if this was mentioned yet, but AOPA Flight Training current
issue (Feb 08) has a good article titled "Are you on your game?" It
lists 10 things that we get sloppy on. To recap

1. Sterile Cockpit: gone
2. Fly Headings: Whatever
3. Level Flight: More or less
4. See and Avoid: Avoid Seeing
5: Nice Field down there: finding an emergency LZ
6. Stealth Traffic Pattern
7. Flat Landings
8. Go Around
9. Slow flight: Or an inability to perform slow
10: Stalls

[Roger (K8RI)]

What is a sloppy pilot? I'll probably step on most toes with this and
I realize a lot is open to interpretation so I'll try and explain as I
go along, but...

Most seem to be sticking just with execution, or organization, but "to
me a sloppy pilot is: A Disorganized Pilot, A Distracted Pilot, A
complacent Pilot, A pilot who does not make use of all equipment and
information available to them, A pilot who does not know his/her
airplane, A pilot who always plays it safe. a pilot who does not
practice, a pilot who does not keep up with recurrency training, and
I'll probably think of more.

A couple of points though, sloppy in a high time pilot may just be
polish for a low time pilot or even student.

One point with which I take strong issue is Practice does not make us
forget. Familiarity may, but not practice. Practice ingrains actions
and reactions and if done often enough and well enough it becomes
subconscious. This it not the same as muscle memory, but rater quite
different. Yes, we may do something so often we just accept it and let
our subconscious take over from our conscious. Consciously we may not
be able to recall some numbers, but our subconscious can. The danger
with repeated practice is developing bad habits and getting those
ingrained. Hence the occasional ride with either an instructor or
another pilot competent and proficient in that plane.

An example of the subconscious taking over: I lost an engine at
roughly 50 feet and 100 MPH on initial climb out from a 3800 foot
runway. there was none of this stopping to realize the engine had
quite and I needed to lower the nose. I immediately knew the engine
quit and while I was selecting an appropriate landing spot my hands
and feet were flying the airplane, shutting off the fuel, brining in
full flaps, and shutting down *stuff* This was low altitude with no
time to stop and reason out what to do and where to land. I recognized
I couldn't make the highway, the trees off the end of the runway
looked very uninviting and the airport fence didn't look all that bad.
By the time my vision had covered that I was already set up to set
back down straight ahead with maximum drag. I had 1200 feet of runway
left and barely enough energy to make the turn off in front of the
terminal.

The disorganized pilot...With out organization it's difficult to bring
up the proper charts, or is unfamiliar with the route, or the
destination airport and even airports along the way. When IFR they
have to take extra time to work out entering in the updated route, or
can't find the new intersections on the chart. Usually I'd put not
holding heading or altitude here, but it could go in a number of these
categories.

The distracted pilot is one whose mind is on something other than
flying. The pilot who spends time doing unnecessary things, spends too
much time setting up the VORs, RNAV, or GPS. Or they spend time trying
out all the capabilities on the GPS whether they need them or not. Too
much time with head in the cockpit instead of tending to business.
I flew with a pilot who was learning all the neat things his GPS would
do. I don't think he looked outside more than 10 to 20% or the time.
By the time we got back I had a sore neck from looking for traffic.
Same thing happened way back with a LORAN system.

The complacent pilot just flys along with little concern about
anything. They think they know all the procedures, and pushing
"nearest" is all they need to know.

The one who doesn't make use of all available information. This could
also include the pilot who depends on one navigation system. IOW, IT
doesn't matter if you have dual GPS in the panel and a hand held for
backup. It's still one system. It's the most reliable system we have
save one, and due to that reliability we tend to focus on its use, but
GPS, regardless of how many units you have in the plane is still one
system and it has gone down from a few minutes to a few hours. on
several occasions. We are starting up a new sunspot cycle as of last
week so in a few years solar activity could very well cause
interruptions. The most reliable system is still a ruler, watch, and
chart. OTOH I did have all but the corner of my new chart disappear
out under the door in the old Cherokee 180. Good thing I had and NDB
and VOR to back it up. <:-)) Even IFR with RNAV and a hand held GPS I
always carried current charts (Low Altitude IFR AND VFR Sectionals).
Never depend on only one form of navigation. After all your chart
could get sucked out the door.

The pilot who doesn't know his or her airplane. Never having done
stalls, not knowing best glide, fuel burn, Vx, Vy, Max range settings,
unusual attitude recovery. Even for the pilot who only flys on nice
days there is the occasional wake turbulence. Besides, nature is good
at providing surprises as is ATC at times. What if that pilot has to
make a maximum effort to avoid a mid air such as a steep turn or climb
while hanging on the edge of a stall. It happens and planes can get
very close to even the pilot who spends a lot of time looking for
them.

The pilot who always plays it safe is sort of a continuation of the
one above as that pilot, never really learns his, or the planes
limitations. Or what to do in that rare chance that the weather
suddenly turns to something quite different than forecast.

Of course the pilot who doesn't practice pretty much fits into the
complacent and not knowing, or staying sharp in the plane they are
flying. Just watch the traffic at Oshkosh for a while.

Recurrency training or lack there of fits in with the above three
definitions. Recurrency training in a specific plane can often teach
the pilot a lot of useful information as well as making the insurance
company happy who them may give a discount.

"To me" a sloppy maneuver doesn't necessarily mean a sloppy pilot.
Unless of course if he does that sort of thing for a living.

Roger (K8RI)

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in
:

>
>
> An example of the subconscious taking over: I lost an engine at
> roughly 50 feet and 100 MPH on initial climb out from a 3800 foot
> runway. there was none of this stopping to realize the engine had
> quite and I needed to lower the nose. I immediately knew the engine
> quit and while I was selecting an appropriate landing spot my hands
> and feet were flying the airplane, shutting off the fuel, brining in
> full flaps, and shutting down *stuff* This was low altitude with no
> time to stop and reason out what to do and where to land. I recognized
> I couldn't make the highway, the trees off the end of the runway
> looked very uninviting and the airport fence didn't look all that bad.
> By the time my vision had covered that I was already set up to set
> back down straight ahead with maximum drag. I had 1200 feet of runway
> left and barely enough energy to make the turn off in front of the
> terminal.

100mph at 50 feet? that sonds pretty fast at that altitude for a Debonair.
Why?


Bertie
>

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:24:29 -0500, Kevin Clarke >
wrote:

>Jay Honeck wrote:
>> This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this
>> month entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many
>> interesting points about things that can affect good piloting.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency
>> toward sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you
>> might employ?
>
>Don't know if this was mentioned yet, but AOPA Flight Training current
>issue (Feb 08) has a good article titled "Are you on your game?" It
>lists 10 things that we get sloppy on. To recap
>
>1. Sterile Cockpit: gone
>2. Fly Headings: Whatever
>3. Level Flight: More or less
>4. See and Avoid: Avoid Seeing
>5: Nice Field down there: finding an emergency LZ
>6. Stealth Traffic Pattern
>7. Flat Landings
>8. Go Around
>9. Slow flight: Or an inability to perform slow
>10: Stalls

wow such a detailed list.
you could do all that in the late evening at 65 knots and never even
raise a sweat. such a champion!

how about a sloppy pilot is the guy who cant fly his aircraft in a 20
knot crosswind.

fly a decent aircraft like a tailwind and you'll never get sloppy.
Stealth Pilot.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Stealth Pilot > wrote in
:

> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:24:29 -0500, Kevin Clarke >
> wrote:
>
>>Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this
>>> month entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many
>>> interesting points about things that can affect good piloting.
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency
>>> toward sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you
>>> might employ?
>>
>>Don't know if this was mentioned yet, but AOPA Flight Training current
>>issue (Feb 08) has a good article titled "Are you on your game?" It
>>lists 10 things that we get sloppy on. To recap
>>
>>1. Sterile Cockpit: gone
>>2. Fly Headings: Whatever
>>3. Level Flight: More or less
>>4. See and Avoid: Avoid Seeing
>>5: Nice Field down there: finding an emergency LZ
>>6. Stealth Traffic Pattern
>>7. Flat Landings
>>8. Go Around
>>9. Slow flight: Or an inability to perform slow
>>10: Stalls
>
> wow such a detailed list.
> you could do all that in the late evening at 65 knots and never even
> raise a sweat. such a champion!
>
> how about a sloppy pilot is the guy who cant fly his aircraft in a 20
> knot crosswind.
>
> fly a decent aircraft like a tailwind and you'll never get sloppy.

I wouldn't imagine so!

Tell me a bit about the tailwind.. I've always had a bit of a yen for
one...



Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Stealth Pilot wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:24:29 -0500, Kevin Clarke >
> wrote:
>
>> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this
>>> month entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many
>>> interesting points about things that can affect good piloting.
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency
>>> toward sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you
>>> might employ?
>> Don't know if this was mentioned yet, but AOPA Flight Training current
>> issue (Feb 08) has a good article titled "Are you on your game?" It
>> lists 10 things that we get sloppy on. To recap
>>
>> 1. Sterile Cockpit: gone
>> 2. Fly Headings: Whatever
>> 3. Level Flight: More or less
>> 4. See and Avoid: Avoid Seeing
>> 5: Nice Field down there: finding an emergency LZ
>> 6. Stealth Traffic Pattern
>> 7. Flat Landings
>> 8. Go Around
>> 9. Slow flight: Or an inability to perform slow
>> 10: Stalls
>
> wow such a detailed list.
> you could do all that in the late evening at 65 knots and never even
> raise a sweat. such a champion!
>
> how about a sloppy pilot is the guy who cant fly his aircraft in a 20
> knot crosswind.
>
> fly a decent aircraft like a tailwind and you'll never get sloppy.
> Stealth Pilot.

Don't know about the list but the premise is sound. Pilots do get sloppy
for lack of a better word and it's a serious safety issue.
I'm involved right now with an international cartel of professional
airshow demonstration pilots including the jet teams and we're studying
this exact issue. It will be discussed in detail at a symposium in
London later this month.
The answers are many and complex, and are slightly different as they
relate specifically to us in the display flying community. The AOPA is
just touching the tip of the iceberg with their approach, but it is a
serious issue and deserving of serious attention by the entire aviation
community.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_21_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
> Stealth Pilot wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:24:29 -0500, Kevin Clarke >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>>> This group's own Rick Durden published an article in AOPA Pilot this
>>>> month entitled "Are you a good pilot?" In it, Rick raised many
>>>> interesting points about things that can affect good piloting.
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> I'm interested in hearing what you do to combat the human tendency
>>>> toward sloppiness? Any tricks that you might use, or methods you
>>>> might employ?
>>> Don't know if this was mentioned yet, but AOPA Flight Training current
>>> issue (Feb 08) has a good article titled "Are you on your game?" It
>>> lists 10 things that we get sloppy on. To recap
>>>
>>> 1. Sterile Cockpit: gone
>>> 2. Fly Headings: Whatever
>>> 3. Level Flight: More or less
>>> 4. See and Avoid: Avoid Seeing
>>> 5: Nice Field down there: finding an emergency LZ
>>> 6. Stealth Traffic Pattern
>>> 7. Flat Landings
>>> 8. Go Around
>>> 9. Slow flight: Or an inability to perform slow
>>> 10: Stalls
>>
>> wow such a detailed list.
>> you could do all that in the late evening at 65 knots and never even
>> raise a sweat. such a champion!
>>
>> how about a sloppy pilot is the guy who cant fly his aircraft in a 20
>> knot crosswind.
>>
>> fly a decent aircraft like a tailwind and you'll never get sloppy.
>> Stealth Pilot.
>
> Don't know about the list but the premise is sound. Pilots do get sloppy
> for lack of a better word and it's a serious safety issue.
> I'm involved right now with an international cartel of professional
> airshow demonstration pilots including the jet teams and we're studying
> this exact issue. It will be discussed in detail at a symposium in London
> later this month.
> The answers are many and complex, and are slightly different as they
> relate specifically to us in the display flying community. The AOPA is
> just touching the tip of the iceberg with their approach, but it is a
> serious issue and deserving of serious attention by the entire aviation
> community.
>

They are all sloppy and all fjukkwits should be grounded

Bertie

[Rich Ahrens[_2_]]

William Hung wrote:
> On Jan 8, 9:48 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> William Hung wrote:
>>> On Jan 8, 9:40 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>>>> William Hung wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 7, 6:27 pm, gliderguynj > wrote:
>>>>>> I'll admit to sloppy flying this weekend, and I hope I learned my
>>>>>> lesson. I recently joined a club that flies a C150. I transitioned
>>>>>> into it from a Cherokee. One of the biggest differences I noticed
>>>>>> other than where the wings are is the climb out. It's not exactly
>>>>>> robust. I've also been grilled to be very careful to make sure I use
>>>>>> the Carb Heat in my landing pattern. Well, I was doing pattern work
>>>>>> and wasn't using a checklist between landing and take offs. On the
>>>>>> last T/O I neglected to put the carb heat off, which was a carry over
>>>>>> from neglecting to fully clean up my ship after exiting the runway.
>>>>>> After lift off, which took a bit more runway than usual, the plane
>>>>>> just felt anemic. I realized something was wrong and looked at my
>>>>>> RPM's which were 200 less than what I needed. I checked the throttle,
>>>>>> that was correct, mixture ok flaps ok then I saw my carb heat was on.
>>>>>> DOH!!!!!!
>>>>>> If there had been any significant sink I would have been in deep
>>>>>> Kimchee. Had I been using my checklist this wouldn't have happened.
>>>>>> I was a sloppy pilot and a classic example of a few dumb errors that
>>>>>> combined could have put me in real harms way. It's very easy to kill
>>>>>> yourself if you aren't on top of your game. Sloppy is a great way to
>>>>>> describe it.
>>>>>> Doug
>>>>> You say Kimchee like it was a bad thing. Yummmm Kimchee. <smile>
>>>>> Wil
>>>> Buried in every back yard in Korea no less. Not bad really...especially
>>>> if it's REALLY fermented :-))
>>>> --
>>>> Dudley Henriques- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> You are Hardcore Dudley, lol. Those are too sour for me, I like mine
>>> still a bit crunchy like Dill pickles.
>>> Wil
>> More like desperation on my part. We were friends with a Korean family
>> over there who LOVED the stuff. I think they had a ton of it fermenting
>> in the back yard. They wouldn't leave me alone until I tried it. Then
>> they hounded me until I ate some more. :-))
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I'm not Korean, but occasionally I like it. The fresher krispy ones.
> I even eat their fermented oysters, talk about acquired taste! lol.
> Not bad after several hundred tries, I even grew to like it. Well,
> the Korean girl I was dating at the time made it all worth it. <g>

Her oyster was fermented? Ewwww...

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:09:49 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in
:
>
>>
>>
>> An example of the subconscious taking over: I lost an engine at
>> roughly 50 feet and 100 MPH on initial climb out from a 3800 foot
>> runway. there was none of this stopping to realize the engine had
>> quite and I needed to lower the nose. I immediately knew the engine
>> quit and while I was selecting an appropriate landing spot my hands
>> and feet were flying the airplane, shutting off the fuel, brining in
>> full flaps, and shutting down *stuff* This was low altitude with no
>> time to stop and reason out what to do and where to land. I recognized
>> I couldn't make the highway, the trees off the end of the runway
>> looked very uninviting and the airport fence didn't look all that bad.
>> By the time my vision had covered that I was already set up to set
>> back down straight ahead with maximum drag. I had 1200 feet of runway
>> left and barely enough energy to make the turn off in front of the
>> terminal.
>
>100mph at 50 feet? that sonds pretty fast at that altitude for a Debonair.
>Why?

Vy is listed at 104 MPH , or 90 knots. I hadn't quite reached it yet.

Roger (K8RI)
>
>
> Bertie
>>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in
:

> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:09:49 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in
:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> An example of the subconscious taking over: I lost an engine at
>>> roughly 50 feet and 100 MPH on initial climb out from a 3800 foot
>>> runway. there was none of this stopping to realize the engine had
>>> quite and I needed to lower the nose. I immediately knew the engine
>>> quit and while I was selecting an appropriate landing spot my hands
>>> and feet were flying the airplane, shutting off the fuel, brining in
>>> full flaps, and shutting down *stuff* This was low altitude with no
>>> time to stop and reason out what to do and where to land. I
>>> recognized I couldn't make the highway, the trees off the end of the
>>> runway looked very uninviting and the airport fence didn't look all
>>> that bad. By the time my vision had covered that I was already set
>>> up to set back down straight ahead with maximum drag. I had 1200
>>> feet of runway left and barely enough energy to make the turn off in
>>> front of the terminal.
>>
>>100mph at 50 feet? that sonds pretty fast at that altitude for a
>>Debonair. Why?
>
> Vy is listed at 104 MPH , or 90 knots. I hadn't quite reached it yet.

Wow! I never would have guessed!

I would have thought more like 75 knots. Learn something new.

Bertie

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 01:14:15 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in
:
>
>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:09:49 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in
:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> An example of the subconscious taking over: I lost an engine at
>>>> roughly 50 feet and 100 MPH on initial climb out from a 3800 foot
>>>> runway. there was none of this stopping to realize the engine had
>>>> quite and I needed to lower the nose. I immediately knew the engine
>>>> quit and while I was selecting an appropriate landing spot my hands
>>>> and feet were flying the airplane, shutting off the fuel, brining in
>>>> full flaps, and shutting down *stuff* This was low altitude with no
>>>> time to stop and reason out what to do and where to land. I
>>>> recognized I couldn't make the highway, the trees off the end of the
>>>> runway looked very uninviting and the airport fence didn't look all
>>>> that bad. By the time my vision had covered that I was already set
>>>> up to set back down straight ahead with maximum drag. I had 1200
>>>> feet of runway left and barely enough energy to make the turn off in
>>>> front of the terminal.
>>>
>>>100mph at 50 feet? that sonds pretty fast at that altitude for a
>>>Debonair. Why?
>>
>> Vy is listed at 104 MPH , or 90 knots. I hadn't quite reached it yet.
>
>Wow! I never would have guessed!
>
>I would have thought more like 75 knots. Learn something new.

Best glide (at gross) is 120<:-)) = ~ 600 fpm which makes for a pretty
good glide ratio.

OTOH with a normal VFR landing, final is 80 MPH/70 knots minus 1 MPH
for each 100# under gross. With just me and half fuel at about 75-76
MPH (and a fair amount of power, the old girl can make some really
short landings. With only my 40 minutes and 3 landings since last
March I'm not quite that proficient... yet. <:-)) of course the
weather has been crap ever since that flight except yesterday and I
had too much to do. Maybe I can get out again this Saturday or Sunday
between snow showers. (winter storm coming in tonight.)

BTW that difference between best glide and a normal landing really
screws with some pilots minds. Little high on final. Lower the nose
and you find the extra speed will move your landing spot farther
down the runway. OTOH get 'er down to the proper speed and with those
big flaps she'll come down right steep with a surprising rate of
descent too. <:-))

Power off landings use a lot more runway than normal landings
Roger (K8RI)
>
>Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in
:

>>Wow! I never would have guessed!
>>
>>I would have thought more like 75 knots. Learn something new.
>
> Best glide (at gross) is 120<:-)) = ~ 600 fpm which makes for a pretty
> good glide ratio.
>

Pretty good? That's an L/D of 20/1.. Couldn't be. I'd be seriously
impressed with 14/1

> OTOH with a normal VFR landing, final is 80 MPH/70 knots minus 1 MPH
> for each 100# under gross. With just me and half fuel at about 75-76
> MPH (and a fair amount of power, the old girl can make some really
> short landings. With only my 40 minutes and 3 landings since last
> March I'm not quite that proficient... yet. <:-)) of course the
> weather has been crap ever since that flight except yesterday and I
> had too much to do. Maybe I can get out again this Saturday or Sunday
> between snow showers. (winter storm coming in tonight.)

The the old V tail I once flew was extremely good at short field stuff.
I remember being amazed.
>
> BTW that difference between best glide and a normal landing really
> screws with some pilots minds. Little high on final. Lower the nose
> and you find the extra speed will move your landing spot farther
> down the runway. OTOH get 'er down to the proper speed and with those
> big flaps she'll come down right steep with a surprising rate of
> descent too. <:-))

Yeah, thsat makes sense.
>
> Power off landings use a lot more runway than normal landings
> Roger (K8RI)
>>

Well, you could fiddle around with that with some odd technique, but
it's true of most airplanes that you can touch down a bit more slowly
with the power on.

Bertie

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:33:13 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in
:
>
>>>Wow! I never would have guessed!
>>>
>>>I would have thought more like 75 knots. Learn something new.
>>
>> Best glide (at gross) is 120<:-)) = ~ 600 fpm which makes for a pretty
>> good glide ratio.
>>
>
>Pretty good? That's an L/D of 20/1.. Couldn't be. I'd be seriously
>impressed with 14/1

5280 feet / 300 feet per statute mile = 17.6:1
We're relying on a foggy memory here, but next time out I'll try to
remember to refresh it. <:-))

It's considerably more than that of a 172. On my last biennial flight
review the CFI pulled the power right as I was taking the hood off
after a bunch of instrument work. We were at 4000. He said, "find a
spot", I suggested the airport which was about 6 miles to the East. I
received the usual, "think you can do it", and I replied "with room to
spare". Actually it was a LOT of room to spare, as I had enough extra
altitude to fly the pattern (with a close base) while slipping all the
time. Pattern altitude is about 1700 with field elevation being 630.
So we had 4000 - 1700 = 2300 feet to lose in 6 miles and ended up
reaching the airport at roughly 500 above the pattern or 2700. That
figures out to about 4000 - 2200 = 1800/6 = 300 FPM. (These are rough
figures) other than the starting altitude, and knowing I was well
above the pattern altitude when I got there) I don't usually have to
slip all the way down wind to base, to the runway. <:-))

>
>> OTOH with a normal VFR landing, final is 80 MPH/70 knots minus 1 MPH
>> for each 100# under gross. With just me and half fuel at about 75-76
>> MPH (and a fair amount of power, the old girl can make some really
>> short landings. With only my 40 minutes and 3 landings since last
>> March I'm not quite that proficient... yet. <:-)) of course the
>> weather has been crap ever since that flight except yesterday and I
>> had too much to do. Maybe I can get out again this Saturday or Sunday
>> between snow showers. (winter storm coming in tonight.)
>
>The the old V tail I once flew was extremely good at short field stuff.
>I remember being amazed.

Book figures are better than many 172s. <:-)) It's a slippery plane
but the wing loading on mine is the same as many Cherokees (~17#sq ft)
The older V-Tails like the one you flew are lighter yet.
The wing loading on the G-III I'm building is 29# plus change.

>>
>> BTW that difference between best glide and a normal landing really
>> screws with some pilots minds. Little high on final. Lower the nose
>> and you find the extra speed will move your landing spot farther
>> down the runway. OTOH get 'er down to the proper speed and with those
>> big flaps she'll come down right steep with a surprising rate of
>> descent too. <:-))
>
>Yeah, thsat makes sense.

Add some slip and you can scare some Cherokee and Cessna pilots. For
that matter you can scare a lot of Bo pilots too. <:-)) Most of 'em
land way too fast and aren't used to seeing the VSI wayyyy over
"there". That's what Maynord was laughing about when I made the one
pattern a U-turn from down wind to the numbers. He knows more about
flying Bo's than I'll probably ever learn.

>>
>> Power off landings use a lot more runway than normal landings
>> Roger (K8RI)
>>>
>
>Well, you could fiddle around with that with some odd technique, but
>it's true of most airplanes that you can touch down a bit more slowly
>with the power on.

Power off landing is 90 while the normal is the 80 minus listed above.
The manual states you need the extra speed to have enough energy to
flare.

Roger (K8RI)
>
>Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in
:
>
> 5280 feet / 300 feet per statute mile = 17.6:1
> We're relying on a foggy memory here, but next time out I'll try to
> remember to refresh it. <:-))


Oh, OK, I was thinking NM becaus I'm used to just taking the descentx
the TAS. even 17/1 sounds , um optimistic. Some of the gliders I used to
fly wouldn't do that ( the 1-19, for instance)

>
> It's considerably more than that of a 172.

Oh yeah!


On my last biennial flight
> review the CFI pulled the power right as I was taking the hood off
> after a bunch of instrument work. We were at 4000. He said, "find a
> spot", I suggested the airport which was about 6 miles to the East. I
> received the usual, "think you can do it", and I replied "with room to
> spare". Actually it was a LOT of room to spare, as I had enough extra
> altitude to fly the pattern (with a close base) while slipping all the
> time. Pattern altitude is about 1700 with field elevation being 630.
> So we had 4000 - 1700 = 2300 feet to lose in 6 miles and ended up
> reaching the airport at roughly 500 above the pattern or 2700. That
> figures out to about 4000 - 2200 = 1800/6 = 300 FPM. (These are rough
> figures) other than the starting altitude, and knowing I was well
> above the pattern altitude when I got there) I don't usually have to
> slip all the way down wind to base, to the runway. <:-))
>

OK. I'll take your word for it, but if I was flying one, I don't think
I'd bet the farm on it on the day.

>
> Book figures are better than many 172s. <:-)) It's a slippery plane
> but the wing loading on mine is the same as many Cherokees (~17#sq ft)
> The older V-Tails like the one you flew are lighter yet.
> The wing loading on the G-III I'm building is 29# plus change.

Well, the loading won't change the L/D anyway, but I didn't do any
soaring in the one I flew!
I'd have to check but I think it wa a D. About 1953? had the triangular
third window. Can't remember which engine, but an electric prop.

>
>>>
>>> BTW that difference between best glide and a normal landing really
>>> screws with some pilots minds. Little high on final. Lower the nose
>>> and you find the extra speed will move your landing spot farther
>>> down the runway. OTOH get 'er down to the proper speed and with
those
>>> big flaps she'll come down right steep with a surprising rate of
>>> descent too. <:-))
>>
>>Yeah, thsat makes sense.
>
> Add some slip and you can scare some Cherokee and Cessna pilots. For
> that matter you can scare a lot of Bo pilots too. <:-)) Most of 'em
> land way too fast and aren't used to seeing the VSI wayyyy over
> "there".


Yeah, I know what you're talking about there. A lot of guys, when thye
move into higher performance airplanes, start flying crazy big patterns
and landing at outrageous speeds.
"no more than you absolutely need"

>
> Power off landing is 90 while the normal is the 80 minus listed above.
> The manual states you need the extra speed to have enough energy to
> flare.
>

OK. Again, I'll have to defer! Loooong time since I flew a single
retract. We have to land with power on, but we could land at idle if we
wanted to!


Bertie

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:02:52 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:


>>>
>>>1. Sterile Cockpit: gone
>>>2. Fly Headings: Whatever
>>>3. Level Flight: More or less
>>>4. See and Avoid: Avoid Seeing
>>>5: Nice Field down there: finding an emergency LZ
>>>6. Stealth Traffic Pattern
>>>7. Flat Landings
>>>8. Go Around
>>>9. Slow flight: Or an inability to perform slow
>>>10: Stalls
>>
>> wow such a detailed list.
>> you could do all that in the late evening at 65 knots and never even
>> raise a sweat. such a champion!
>>
>> how about a sloppy pilot is the guy who cant fly his aircraft in a 20
>> knot crosswind.
>>
>> fly a decent aircraft like a tailwind and you'll never get sloppy.
>
>I wouldn't imagine so!
>
>Tell me a bit about the tailwind.. I've always had a bit of a yen for
>one...
>
>
>
>Bertie

deliberately uncomfortable to sit in for long periods ...so that you
dont go to sleep.

pretty well neutrally stable.

very sensitive controls that require you to fly with the arm resting
on the leg to steady the hand.

totally honest aerodynamics. all controls are well harmonised and
equally sensitive.

mine now cruises at 120 knots at 2500rpm and a little over 20 litres
per hour fuel burn.

takeoff safety speed 57 knots
best angle of climb 60 knots
best rate of climb 70 knots
turbulence penetration 100knots
vne 160 knots
max flap 85 knots
stall no flap 52 knots
stall 30 degrees of flap 47 knots
approach speed 70 knots

3 points with 20 degrees of flap.

fuselage has a noticeable buffet 5 knots before stall.

if you take a cessna 150 as a difficulty benchmark.
an Auster J1B is a quantum leap harder to fly.
a Tailwind is a quantum leap harder again to fly.
took me 100 hours to be really comfortable flying it. it is now just
an extension of my hand. I can and have and do fy in 20 knot
crosswinds.

mine is a W8 with the improved wing, 120 litre tank and slightly
stretched seat position.

if you fly at 80 knots and hold the stick rock steady, then haul on
full flaps, you will seem to be pointing vertically downward.

on a summer's day I can leave Perth in western australia at crack of
dawn and be in Ceduna in south australia by nightfall.
I've owned mine 9 years and 360 hours flying. the aircraft was first
flown in 1985 and the previous owner did 320 hours in it.

btw all that and more is etched in my head. I dont use checklists.
I use left to right and right to left scans.

I have no intentions of ever selling my aircraft.
I might be a quiet unassuming guy but I have stainless steel balls.
I'm a tailwind pilot :-)
Stealth Pilot

[[email protected]]

> The the old V tail I once flew was extremely good at short field stuff.
> I remember being amazed.

A friend lets me fly his 1947 straight 35 Bonanza. While the panel
needs a serious upgrade and the interior screams 1965, the thing
climbs at 1500-2000 FPM single pilot and lands in less distance than a
172.

Not bad for 185 HP, 7 GPH airplane that can cruise at 140 TAS!

I did some night stop and go practice this week after she sat for a
month (December has been terrible for VFR) and was really impressed.
All my time lately has been in the A36 (which can be flown slow and
land short as well -- just not as short as the 35), so the sights and
sounds were quite different -- but all good.

Winds were straight down the runway at 5.

With two of us on board we were 200' AGL halfway down the 4000' foot
runway. Landings were accomplished and all rolling was complete before
the 1500' mark.

I probably could have shortened it up even more by using 73 MPH as
final approach speed instead of 80. On this flight I used 80 from
abeam the numbers to base to final, then gradually bled off the
airspeed over the threshold. By the time we reached the touchdown
point airspeed was 65-70 MPH.

Dan
http://trainingforcfi.blogspot.com/

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Stealth Pilot > wrote in
:
>
> deliberately uncomfortable to sit in for long periods ...so that you
> dont go to sleep.

He he. Been there done that!

>
> pretty well neutrally stable.
>
> very sensitive controls that require you to fly with the arm resting
> on the leg to steady the hand.
>
> totally honest aerodynamics. all controls are well harmonised and
> equally sensitive.
>
> mine now cruises at 120 knots at 2500rpm and a little over 20 litres
> per hour fuel burn.


O 200?
>
> takeoff safety speed 57 knots
> best angle of climb 60 knots
> best rate of climb 70 knots
> turbulence penetration 100knots
> vne 160 knots
> max flap 85 knots
> stall no flap 52 knots
> stall 30 degrees of flap 47 knots
> approach speed 70 knots
>
> 3 points with 20 degrees of flap.

VNE is 160? How are the guys that are claiming over 200mph top speed
managing it? I know they are running O320s and probably hopped up at
that, but are they doing this at altitude, or are theydoing airframe
mods to raise VNE or are they hallucinating?

>
> fuselage has a noticeable buffet 5 knots before stall.
>
> if you take a cessna 150 as a difficulty benchmark.
> an Auster J1B is a quantum leap harder to fly.
> a Tailwind is a quantum leap harder again to fly.
> took me 100 hours to be really comfortable flying it. it is now just
> an extension of my hand. I can and have and do fy in 20 knot
> crosswinds.
>

Sounds like fun!

> mine is a W8 with the improved wing, 120 litre tank and slightly
> stretched seat position.


The tank all behind the panel?
>
> if you fly at 80 knots and hold the stick rock steady, then haul on
> full flaps, you will seem to be pointing vertically downward.
>
> on a summer's day I can leave Perth in western australia at crack of
> dawn and be in Ceduna in south australia by nightfall.
> I've owned mine 9 years and 360 hours flying. the aircraft was first
> flown in 1985 and the previous owner did 320 hours in it.
>
> btw all that and more is etched in my head. I dont use checklists.
> I use left to right and right to left scans.

Well, we do that in airliners for the most part. We have only an
abbrevisated checklist owadays, but OTOH we have a few warning systems
if we elave anything switched off.
>
> I have no intentions of ever selling my aircraft.
> I might be a quiet unassuming guy but I have stainless steel balls.
> I'm a tailwind pilot :-)


Hehe I've seen some beauts!

How's the short field performance? Would you get out of a 4oo meter
grass strip 2up?
I've eyeballed the Buttercup as well, but I think I'd better finish the
hatz first!

Bertie

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:59:43 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>Stealth Pilot > wrote in
:
>>
>> deliberately uncomfortable to sit in for long periods ...so that you
>> dont go to sleep.
>
>He he. Been there done that!
>
>>
>> pretty well neutrally stable.
>>
>> very sensitive controls that require you to fly with the arm resting
>> on the leg to steady the hand.
>>
>> totally honest aerodynamics. all controls are well harmonised and
>> equally sensitive.
>>
>> mine now cruises at 120 knots at 2500rpm and a little over 20 litres
>> per hour fuel burn.
>
>
>O 200?
>>
yeah O-200. a lovely engine. the only drawback is the marvel schebler
support going toes up.

>> takeoff safety speed 57 knots
>> best angle of climb 60 knots
>> best rate of climb 70 knots
>> turbulence penetration 100knots
>> vne 160 knots
>> max flap 85 knots
>> stall no flap 52 knots
>> stall 30 degrees of flap 47 knots
>> approach speed 70 knots
>>
>> 3 points with 20 degrees of flap.
>
>VNE is 160? How are the guys that are claiming over 200mph top speed
>managing it? I know they are running O320s and probably hopped up at
>that, but are they doing this at altitude, or are theydoing airframe
>mods to raise VNE or are they hallucinating?
>
After 10 years of being around this aircraft I still have no idea how
the Vne was set. It is possible that there have never been structural
calcs other than what Fairchild did after WW2 but I've never ever seen
mention of their existence if they exist at all.
it is entirely possible that Vne is set at 90% of what someone has
driven their aircraft to with the high figure taken as Vd.
the high fliers could also have poorly calibrated airspeed
indications.

>>
>> fuselage has a noticeable buffet 5 knots before stall.
>>
>> if you take a cessna 150 as a difficulty benchmark.
>> an Auster J1B is a quantum leap harder to fly.
>> a Tailwind is a quantum leap harder again to fly.
>> took me 100 hours to be really comfortable flying it. it is now just
>> an extension of my hand. I can and have and do fy in 20 knot
>> crosswinds.
>>
>
>Sounds like fun!
>
>> mine is a W8 with the improved wing, 120 litre tank and slightly
>> stretched seat position.
>
>
>The tank all behind the panel?

yep. 120 litres of high octane avgas right above your knees.
if I ever do become a sloppy pilot I know how I'll die. rolled up in a
ball and burning fiercely.

>>
>> if you fly at 80 knots and hold the stick rock steady, then haul on
>> full flaps, you will seem to be pointing vertically downward.
>>
>> on a summer's day I can leave Perth in western australia at crack of
>> dawn and be in Ceduna in south australia by nightfall.
>> I've owned mine 9 years and 360 hours flying. the aircraft was first
>> flown in 1985 and the previous owner did 320 hours in it.
>>
>> btw all that and more is etched in my head. I dont use checklists.
>> I use left to right and right to left scans.
>
>Well, we do that in airliners for the most part. We have only an
>abbrevisated checklist owadays, but OTOH we have a few warning systems
>if we elave anything switched off.
>>

the only checklist I use is 'roger' after startup.
revs
oil
gyro
electrics
radio.

>> I have no intentions of ever selling my aircraft.
>> I might be a quiet unassuming guy but I have stainless steel balls.
>> I'm a tailwind pilot :-)
>
>
>Hehe I've seen some beauts!
>
>How's the short field performance? Would you get out of a 4oo meter
>grass strip 2up?

mmmmmmm. yes.
I operate from a grass runway that is 600 metres long.
I'm at 150 ft over the end of it. rarely ever not airborne before the
middle.

>I've eyeballed the Buttercup as well, but I think I'd better finish the
>hatz first!
>

finish what you've started.
the tailwind design is 55 years old now. I heard it described as a
surfboard sitting on a 'frige (refrigerator) and ugly.
for aerodynamics it still beats the most of the more modern designs in
outright efficiency, something that perpetually amazes me..


>Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Stealth Pilot > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:59:43 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>Stealth Pilot > wrote in
:
>>>
>>> deliberately uncomfortable to sit in for long periods ...so that you
>>> dont go to sleep.
>>
>>He he. Been there done that!
>>
>>>
>>> pretty well neutrally stable.
>>>
>>> very sensitive controls that require you to fly with the arm resting
>>> on the leg to steady the hand.
>>>
>>> totally honest aerodynamics. all controls are well harmonised and
>>> equally sensitive.
>>>
>>> mine now cruises at 120 knots at 2500rpm and a little over 20 litres
>>> per hour fuel burn.
>>
>>
>>O 200?
>>>
> yeah O-200. a lovely engine. the only drawback is the marvel schebler
> support going toes up.
>

?/ WTF is there to go wrong with one of those?

> After 10 years of being around this aircraft I still have no idea how
> the Vne was set. It is possible that there have never been structural
> calcs other than what Fairchild did after WW2 but I've never ever seen
> mention of their existence if they exist at all.
> it is entirely possible that Vne is set at 90% of what someone has
> driven their aircraft to with the high figure taken as Vd.
> the high fliers could also have poorly calibrated airspeed
> indications.
>

No, one was done by CAFE years ago and they maxed it at somethng well in
excess of that alright. Might be an Aussie restriction.
I don't think Fairchild looked at the Buttercup in too much detail. It
would have been the Big X, which is still a better performer in every
way than any simlarly powered production airplane today. It would have
dominated the market had it gone into production after WW2. Imagine what
it would have done with the fancy tips.

>>> fuselage has a noticeable buffet 5 knots before stall.
>>>
>>> if you take a cessna 150 as a difficulty benchmark.
>>> an Auster J1B is a quantum leap harder to fly.
>>> a Tailwind is a quantum leap harder again to fly.
>>> took me 100 hours to be really comfortable flying it. it is now just
>>> an extension of my hand. I can and have and do fy in 20 knot
>>> crosswinds.
>>>
>>
>>Sounds like fun!
>>
>>> mine is a W8 with the improved wing, 120 litre tank and slightly
>>> stretched seat position.
>>
>>
>>The tank all behind the panel?
>
> yep. 120 litres of high octane avgas right above your knees.
> if I ever do become a sloppy pilot I know how I'll die. rolled up in a
> ball and burning fiercely.
>
>>>
>>> if you fly at 80 knots and hold the stick rock steady, then haul on
>>> full flaps, you will seem to be pointing vertically downward.
>>>
>>> on a summer's day I can leave Perth in western australia at crack of
>>> dawn and be in Ceduna in south australia by nightfall.
>>> I've owned mine 9 years and 360 hours flying. the aircraft was first
>>> flown in 1985 and the previous owner did 320 hours in it.
>>>
>>> btw all that and more is etched in my head. I dont use checklists.
>>> I use left to right and right to left scans.
>>
>>Well, we do that in airliners for the most part. We have only an
>>abbrevisated checklist owadays, but OTOH we have a few warning systems
>>if we elave anything switched off.
>>>
>
> the only checklist I use is 'roger' after startup.
> revs
> oil
> gyro
> electrics
> radio.
>
>>> I have no intentions of ever selling my aircraft.
>>> I might be a quiet unassuming guy but I have stainless steel balls.
>>> I'm a tailwind pilot :-)
>>
>>
>>Hehe I've seen some beauts!
>>
>>How's the short field performance? Would you get out of a 4oo meter
>>grass strip 2up?
>
> mmmmmmm. yes.
> I operate from a grass runway that is 600 metres long.
> I'm at 150 ft over the end of it. rarely ever not airborne before the
> middle.

Wow, that's excellent.
>
>>I've eyeballed the Buttercup as well, but I think I'd better finish
the
>>hatz first!
>>
>
> finish what you've started.
> the tailwind design is 55 years old now. I heard it described as a
> surfboard sitting on a 'frige (refrigerator) and ugly.
> for aerodynamics it still beats the most of the more modern designs in
> outright efficiency, something that perpetually amazes me..

Well, it was race bred! While it's not what you'd call Svelte, I always
thought it looked purposeful. Some of them have been painted up to look
very cool indeed. in fact it's hard to think of an airplane whose looks
are so reliant on decent paint.
Steve definitely knoew what he was doing.

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:34:58 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:


>>>O 200?
>>>>
>> yeah O-200. a lovely engine. the only drawback is the marvel schebler
>> support going toes up.
>>
>
>?/ WTF is there to go wrong with one of those?
>
my carby simply wore out on critical areas through 20 years of
absolutely trouble free operation. it even still retained the original
plastic float which never gave trouble.
functionally the marvel schebler ma3 carby is superb.

>Well, it was race bred! While it's not what you'd call Svelte, I always
>thought it looked purposeful. Some of them have been painted up to look
>very cool indeed. in fact it's hard to think of an airplane whose looks
>are so reliant on decent paint.
>Steve definitely knoew what he was doing.

the only mistake in the design that I would point out to an intending
new builder ( people do still build them ) is that the tailwheel is
overgeared and in its overgeared state it is a nightmare to control on
the ground.
I moved the link arm in to half the original distance at the rudder
bellcrank arm and turned mine into an absolute pussycat.

if you want a real thriller ride have the neutral position of the
tailwheel set differently to the rudder. landings become unbelievably
squirreley :-)

how far are you along on the hatz?

Stealth Pilot

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Stealth Pilot > wrote in
:

> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:34:58 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>
> my carby simply wore out on critical areas through 20 years of
> absolutely trouble free operation. it even still retained the original
> plastic float which never gave trouble.
> functionally the marvel schebler ma3 carby is superb.

Ah, OK. I was wondering! Good lesson though...
>
>>Well, it was race bred! While it's not what you'd call Svelte, I
always
>>thought it looked purposeful. Some of them have been painted up to
look
>>very cool indeed. in fact it's hard to think of an airplane whose
looks
>>are so reliant on decent paint.
>>Steve definitely knoew what he was doing.
>
> the only mistake in the design that I would point out to an intending
> new builder ( people do still build them ) is that the tailwheel is
> overgeared and in its overgeared state it is a nightmare to control on
> the ground.
> I moved the link arm in to half the original distance at the rudder
> bellcrank arm and turned mine into an absolute pussycat.
>
> if you want a real thriller ride have the neutral position of the
> tailwheel set differently to the rudder. landings become unbelievably
> squirreley :-)
>

O~K, best avoided then!

> how far are you along on the hatz?
>

Probably about 1/4 done. Need to finish weld the fuse and start
assembling the wings. Al the major parts for the wings are made now.

Bertie

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:32:02 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>Stealth Pilot > wrote in
:
>
>> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:34:58 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>> my carby simply wore out on critical areas through 20 years of
>> absolutely trouble free operation. it even still retained the original
>> plastic float which never gave trouble.
>> functionally the marvel schebler ma3 carby is superb.
>
>Ah, OK. I was wondering! Good lesson though...
>>
>>>Well, it was race bred! While it's not what you'd call Svelte, I
>always
>>>thought it looked purposeful. Some of them have been painted up to
>look
>>>very cool indeed. in fact it's hard to think of an airplane whose
>looks
>>>are so reliant on decent paint.
>>>Steve definitely knoew what he was doing.
>>
>> the only mistake in the design that I would point out to an intending
>> new builder ( people do still build them ) is that the tailwheel is
>> overgeared and in its overgeared state it is a nightmare to control on
>> the ground.
>> I moved the link arm in to half the original distance at the rudder
>> bellcrank arm and turned mine into an absolute pussycat.
>>
>> if you want a real thriller ride have the neutral position of the
>> tailwheel set differently to the rudder. landings become unbelievably
>> squirreley :-)
>>
>
>O~K, best avoided then!
>
>> how far are you along on the hatz?
>>
>
>Probably about 1/4 done. Need to finish weld the fuse and start
>assembling the wings. Al the major parts for the wings are made now.
>
>Bertie

thats not a bad start.

what gets me is that the mx twonks never realise that you build an
aeroplane out of little bits that individually dont cost that much.

my Druine Turbulent has rudder and fin done. elevator and horizontal
stabiliser done and the fuselage all but complete but for some
finishing and bottom sheeting. wings are to go.
timber is Queensland Hoop Pine which is superb stuff to work with when
you find good bits. the ply is some birch out of finland but mainly
marine grade hoop pine ply. total cost to date for half an aeroplane
is between $200 and $300.
I reckon that I could build an aerobatic Corby Starlet fuselage for
under $500, twice the cost of the plans.

why dont the twonks ever get out and have a go?
it isnt hard. just some techniques to learn. it is good fun.
keep on ripping into them for me. you're giving me building time :-)

keep on building the hatz. it will be a good aircraft when finished.
if I bring a beer can I fly it :-)

Stealth Pilot

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Stealth Pilot > wrote in
:


>>
>>Probably about 1/4 done. Need to finish weld the fuse and start
>>assembling the wings. Al the major parts for the wings are made now.
>>
>>Bertie
>
> thats not a bad start.
>

Well, for the time that's taken it is!

> what gets me is that the mx twonks never realise that you build an
> aeroplane out of little bits that individually dont cost that much.

MMm, Bipes are expensive to build..
>
> my Druine Turbulent has rudder and fin done. elevator and horizontal
> stabiliser done and the fuselage all but complete but for some
> finishing and bottom sheeting. wings are to go.
> timber is Queensland Hoop Pine which is superb stuff to work with when
> you find good bits. the ply is some birch out of finland but mainly
> marine grade hoop pine ply. total cost to date for half an aeroplane
> is between $200 and $300.
> I reckon that I could build an aerobatic Corby Starlet fuselage for
> under $500, twice the cost of the plans.



Yeah, probably. That;'s a nice little airplane!
>
> why dont the twonks ever get out and have a go?
> it isnt hard. just some techniques to learn. it is good fun.
> keep on ripping into them for me. you're giving me building time :-)
>
> keep on building the hatz. it will be a good aircraft when finished.
> if I bring a beer can I fly it :-)
>

Of couse! You'll find it a breeze to fly even compared to the Auster.
I've flown a couple of them. Even easier than a Citabria to fly. About
85 mph is your lot, though!


Bertie