If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 17, 8:48*pm, wrote:
Approach lights are part of runway environment... Then you are clearly wrong. The fact that you see the approach lights certainly does not indiciate that you have any visibility. As I mentioned before you can see the approach lights through the fog but not be able to see the ground around the lights. So your statement that seeing the environment demonstrates the visibility, if you include the apporach lights, cannot be correct. -robert, CFII |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 18, 5:26*am, " wrote:
On Jan 17, 9:15 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote: I only teach in Monneys but I'm not sure why you would need to be faster without flaps. Even if I used flaps I wouldn't change the speed on the approach. Are you flying ILSs in a 172 at 50 knots such that you need flaps? Nope --100-90 KIAS in an A36, 90 KIAS in a 172. Approach flaps set in the A36 and 10 degrees in 172. I never noticed that as a problem in the A36. It was very stable at 100 knots without flaps. I never felt any tendancy for it to be unstable. But either way you have full flaps once you go visual so the landings distance is the same in each technique. While that may be the case in a particular Mooney or Cherokee or Skyhawk, this method will not work in a faster (more slippery) airplane. What plane are you flying that is more slippery than a Mooney and that does not slow when you deploy the flaps? Your A36 is a truck compared to the slippery Mooney. I used to cook into San Jose Int'l in the A36 at 150 knots and drop the gear/flaps on short final. I could feel the G's of the decelleration, so you can't tell me that your A36 won't slow with flaps. -Robert |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
Marco Leon wrote: "Newps" wrote in message . .. That was wrong on the controllers part. Wouldn't it be covered under here? Maybe he forgot to specifically say "runway xx unsafe?" No, this section has nothing to do with the topic at hand. |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 18, 2:05 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
What plane are you flying that is more slippery than a Mooney and that does not slow when you deploy the flaps? Your A36 is a truck compared to the slippery Mooney. I used to cook into San Jose Int'l in the A36 at 150 knots and drop the gear/flaps on short final. I could feel the G's of the decelleration, so you can't tell me that your A36 won't slow with flaps. -Robert The A56 drag coefficient is a bit more than a Lear and an F-104, so it's pretty slippery. In the Army we differentiated between doctrine and technique. Doctrine everybody was to do, period. Technique was the method you employed to achieve doctrine. In this case "doctrine" is to arrive at the runway with as little energy as possible, given the requirements of safety in the conditions at hand. If you can reconfigure the airplane on short final and reduce the speed as appropriate to achieve this, then that's your technique. But I think teaching this particular method as the only way for every airplane is a mistake, as it will eventually lead to overly fast landings when the student climbs aboard his/her faster airplane. It just seems to me that a consistent, less drastic change in configuration is the better technique. Dan |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 18, 6:32*pm, " wrote:
The A56 drag coefficient is a bit more than a Lear and an F-104, so it's pretty slippery. True, but its still a truck compared to a Mooney. But I think teaching this particular method as the only way for every airplane is a mistake, as it will eventually lead to overly fast landings when the student climbs aboard his/her faster airplane. I think anyone who teaches either technique and claims its good for all aircraft is probably full of crap. I wouldn't teach flying approaches w/o flaps in a 767. When I'm giving training in the Mooney or occasionally in the A36 people are looking for type specific training. Showing them how its done in other aircraft (like a 767) is not what they are looking for. In both those aircraft I find the no flap approach best. Add to that that I live in a fog valley and finding nothing but 0/0 at mins is not uncommon so shooting approaches to mins in actual is not theory around here and neither are missed in actual. -Robert |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 18, 9:37 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
On Jan 18, 6:32 pm, " wrote: The A56 drag coefficient is a bit more than a Lear and an F-104, so it's pretty slippery. True, but its still a truck compared to a Mooney. But I think teaching this particular method as the only way for every airplane is a mistake, as it will eventually lead to overly fast landings when the student climbs aboard his/her faster airplane. I think anyone who teaches either technique and claims its good for all aircraft is probably full of crap. I wouldn't teach flying approaches w/o flaps in a 767. When I'm giving training in the Mooney or occasionally in the A36 people are looking for type specific training. Showing them how its done in other aircraft (like a 767) is not what they are looking for. In both those aircraft I find the no flap approach best. Add to that that I live in a fog valley and finding nothing but 0/0 at mins is not uncommon so shooting approaches to mins in actual is not theory around here and neither are missed in actual. -Robert Well then there ya go... Dan |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
wrote in message
... Some of them are never wrong... Jeeze - I'd never have to take my wife to the comedy club if I could just get her to read this group.... -- Jim Carter Rogers, Arkansas |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:01:44 -0800 (PST), "Robert M. Gary"
wrote: On Jan 17, 8:48*pm, wrote: Approach lights are part of runway environment... Then you are clearly wrong. The fact that you see the approach lights certainly does not indiciate that you have any visibility. As I mentioned before you can see the approach lights through the fog but not be able to see the ground around the lights. So your statement that seeing the environment demonstrates the visibility, if you include the apporach lights, cannot be correct. -robert, CFII I am not saying that at all. Descent below the MDA, or continuation of the approach beyond DA, requires 3 conditions: 1) Runway environment in sight 2) Normal rates of descent, etc... 3)Flight visibility as specified... All 3 conditions must be met. Approach lights satisfy condition 1. |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 18, 9:37 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
On Jan 18, 6:32 pm, " wrote: The A56 drag coefficient is a bit more than a Lear and an F-104, so it's pretty slippery. True, but its still a truck compared to a Mooney. But I think teaching this particular method as the only way for every airplane is a mistake, as it will eventually lead to overly fast landings when the student climbs aboard his/her faster airplane. I think anyone who teaches either technique and claims its good for all aircraft is probably full of crap. I wouldn't teach flying approaches w/o flaps in a 767. When I'm giving training in the Mooney or occasionally in the A36 people are looking for type specific training. Showing them how its done in other aircraft (like a 767) is not what they are looking for. In both those aircraft I find the no flap approach best. Add to that that I live in a fog valley and finding nothing but 0/0 at mins is not uncommon so shooting approaches to mins in actual is not theory around here and neither are missed in actual. -Robert So, you are able to: Apply full flaps Reduce speed from 90-100 K to 70 K Continue descending to the touchdown point Stabilize the approach at somewhere near 1.3-1.4 Vso All beginning at 200' AGL? Dan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land" | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 168 | February 5th 08 05:32 PM |
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks" | Mike[_7_] | Naval Aviation | 50 | November 30th 07 05:25 AM |
Old polish aircraft TS-8 "Bies" ("Bogy") - for sale | >pk | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | October 16th 06 07:48 AM |
"Airplane Drivers" and "Self Centered Idiots" | Skylune | Piloting | 28 | October 16th 06 05:40 AM |