View Single Post
  #34  
Old May 15th 07, 04:25 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Orval Fairbairn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 824
Default Is it just me that thinks this was stupid

In article , DR
wrote:

Dudley Henriques wrote:
"Blanche" wrote in message
...
On 5/14/2007 2:03:24 AM, "Bravo Two Zero" wrote:

A small plane crashed into Lake Pleasant, just outside of Phoenix, at
approx 8pm Friday, while the pilot was reportedly talking on his
cellphone
and flying 10 feet above the water.
Can you have "ground effect" over water?


There's a great story about the crew of a Pan Am Stratocruiser I think it
was, who were low on fuel and a long way out over the ocean. They let down
to within a wingspan's distance over the water, leaned it back a ton,
played
with the RPM, and made it home.
Can't remember the source of the story, but I do remember reading it a long
time ago.
Dudley Henriques


Maybe a true story but I think the the odds are they would have been
much better off at high altitude. As I understand it, induced drag is
only reduced by 10% at 50% of wing span above surface. At 20% of wing
span altitude the drag is still ~70% (Surface skimming birds actually go
lower, nearly touching the water with their wing tips). Of course if the
Stratocourser dropped to say 10' it could have worked better... -kersplash!

Cheers MarkC


I recall the story -- happened about 50 years ago. The Stratocruiser
lost 2 engines, IIRC, and descended (power glided) to about 1/2 wingspan
of the water and was able to fly to land in surface effect. They
obviously did not descend immediately, rather they did a max L/D powered
descent until they stopped losing altitude. It was written up in an old
"Reader's Digest," among others.