"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in newsdkQj.67984$y05.29472
@newsfe22.lga:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
Dylan Smith wrote in
:

On 2008-04-25, WingFlaps wrote:
On Apr 25, 9:31 pm, Dylan Smith wrote:
IIRC, Vy is for a C172 is in the region of 65 knots - or best
glide,
and

I can see you missed the point entirely. By the way, Vy is never at
best glide (it is above that ~69knots in a 172) -perhaps you would

I never said it was best glide. I said Vy for a C172 is *in the
region
of 65 knots* (I don't actually remember what it is off the top of my
head, it's been 5 years since I flew a C172, but I do remember Vy
being close to 65 knots). I do, however, remember that for an 'N'
model C172, 65 knots was best glide and Vy was close to that number.
(In fact a brief internet search shows it to be 70 knots, so if the
pilot recognises an engine failure promptly, should not have to dive
to regain airspeed as your scenario stated. In reality, your
'concrete
numbers' are just as much handwaving: how many pilots seriously
climb
out to 600 feet at Vx? How many pilots would seriously spend 10
seconds doing nothing but talking on the radio when the engine has
quit cold - instead of looking for a suitable landing site and
navigating towards said site?)

Good luck on your first engine failure during climb out, if you
turn
back I hope you make it. but you'll have a better chance going
straight ahead...

Actually, I did go straight ahead but with 4000 feet of runway
remaining and a slow aircraft (C140), it wasn't exactly the hardest
aviation decision I've had to make.

If it happens again, I'll do what I think is prudent at the time.
That
might be straight ahead, it might be turn to some amount, and it
might
even be return to the airfield. I can't say at this point, and I
won't
be able to say unless it actually happens - just like one of our
glider pilots did when the rope really did break at 200 feet: owing
to
the strong tailwind that he would have had on a downwind landing, he
elected to land in a field instead, even though the turn itself was
eminently possible and he could have made it to the runway.

My friend who did have his engine lunch itself had the choice of a
built up area, a busy beach full of people, or the airfield. He was
at
about 600 feet in a C150. If I had been in the same situation as
him,
I'd have done the same - try to get back on airfield property
because
it was the only thing flat not covered in people that was within
range. I can not fault his decision. (He did better than airfield
property, he did get it onto the runway).

What I'm trying to say in a long winded way is that there are no
prescriptive solutions. "Always land straight ahead" isn't always
the
right decision, nor is the decision to turn back even if you really
can make the runway safely (in the glider example, the prospect of
groundlooping into a barbed wire fence when the glider got below
wind
speed on the ground was a deciding factor to land in a field rather
than on the runway). It depends on conditions at the time, how much
altitude and airspeed you have, and what the terrain is like.


Actually, if you're light or have a tailwind, best glide will come at
a
lower airspeed. in a manuever this tight you need every trick in the
book at your disposal.

Bertie

Only if you fly as lame a you do.


Snort!

Yeh, my self image as a pilot hinges on the opinion of someone who
counldn't teach a bird to fly.


Bertie