Overweight? Out of CG? Stalled? Too slow?

Dave Doe wrote:

In article ,
says...

Dave Doe wrote:


In article .com,
says...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWC2X...rplane%20pilot

Overweight? Out of CG? Stalled? Too slow? What do you all think?


Looked overweight to me - rotated a bit early too (inducing unecessary
drag) - and *chit* - he never uncrossed the thing once airborne! (more
uneeded drag). Couldn't tell what he was doing w' the flaps - but he
shoulda been 1 notch (maybe none?) - and left it that way (or gone to 1
notch) until climb was achieved.

I didn't look closely to see if it was a 172 or 182, but I think someone
else said it was a 182. If that were the case, then flaps 20 is fine
for a short-field take-off.


Sure - and indeed, upon looking at it a couple more times, I'd say
that's his setting. Possibly still not the wisest if he wanted a short
field t/o (which in *my* training on a 172, is no flaps).

I don't have my 182 anymore so don't have a manual handy, but I'm about
95% certain that flaps 20 was specified for a short-field TO in my 67
model. I haven't flown a 172 in years and don't remember the
configuration for it. The 182 has enough power that using the flaps
makes a huge difference in both take-off roll and initial angle of climb.

Matt

"Jose" wrote

I suppose I'm making too much noise, but if nobody makes noise, the
assault will continue. I'll be happy to tell you why flash is so bad if
you like, but as you note, it's probably OT here.

If you google, you can find "flash substitutes" that have none of flash's
tendencies to take over your machine.
--
Jim in NC