teaching emergency landings...How low do you go...

Emergency landings eh
It's obvious that the glider pilots are away flying.

In rec.aviation.student george wrote:
Emergency landings eh
It's obvious that the glider pilots are away flying.

Alas I'm not, but I've been keeping quiet. I know that there's a
significant difference between landing a 20:1, 30:1, or 40:1 glider with
no engine and landing a 7:1 winged brick whose engine has suddenly decided
to stop after a long period of appearing to work fine. Landing a glider
doesn't worry me at all but I would not be happy taking the controls of a
Cessna after the fan stopped cooling the pilot. For one thing, no
spoilers for glideslope control!

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:55:12 -0600, ManhattanMan wrote:

Man - memories, circa 1968........

Yeah... back when you were forty...

G


--
Dallas

In article ,
Michael Ash wrote:

In rec.aviation.student george wrote:
Emergency landings eh
It's obvious that the glider pilots are away flying.

Alas I'm not, but I've been keeping quiet. I know that there's a
significant difference between landing a 20:1, 30:1, or 40:1 glider with
no engine and landing a 7:1 winged brick whose engine has suddenly decided
to stop after a long period of appearing to work fine. Landing a glider
doesn't worry me at all but I would not be happy taking the controls of a
Cessna after the fan stopped cooling the pilot. For one thing, no
spoilers for glideslope control!

That's what slips are for :-)

rg

On Feb 27, 5:57 pm, Michael Ash wrote:
In rec.aviation.student george wrote:

Emergency landings eh
It's obvious that the glider pilots are away flying.

Alas I'm not, but I've been keeping quiet. I know that there's a
significant difference between landing a 20:1, 30:1, or 40:1 glider with
no engine and landing a 7:1 winged brick whose engine has suddenly decided
to stop after a long period of appearing to work fine. Landing a glider
doesn't worry me at all but I would not be happy taking the controls of a
Cessna after the fan stopped cooling the pilot. For one thing, no
spoilers for glideslope control!


Well you might look at the Shuttle returning from space as a rather
large glider

In rec.aviation.student Ron Garret wrote:
In article ,
Michael Ash wrote:

In rec.aviation.student george wrote:
Emergency landings eh
It's obvious that the glider pilots are away flying.

Alas I'm not, but I've been keeping quiet. I know that there's a
significant difference between landing a 20:1, 30:1, or 40:1 glider with
no engine and landing a 7:1 winged brick whose engine has suddenly decided
to stop after a long period of appearing to work fine. Landing a glider
doesn't worry me at all but I would not be happy taking the controls of a
Cessna after the fan stopped cooling the pilot. For one thing, no
spoilers for glideslope control!

That's what slips are for :-)

True enough, but using only slips is a royal pain, particularly in
higher-performing gliders. A mid-range glider with a 35:1 glideslope may
have a 5:1 glideslope with full spoilers, but a slip won't do nearly that
much good. It reduces the size of your glideslope "basket" and requires a
lot more precision. Combine that with not doing surprise power-off
landings all the time and the whole business seems chancier than I'd like.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

In rec.aviation.student george wrote:
On Feb 27, 5:57 pm, Michael Ash wrote:
In rec.aviation.student george wrote:

Emergency landings eh
It's obvious that the glider pilots are away flying.

Alas I'm not, but I've been keeping quiet. I know that there's a
significant difference between landing a 20:1, 30:1, or 40:1 glider with
no engine and landing a 7:1 winged brick whose engine has suddenly decided
to stop after a long period of appearing to work fine. Landing a glider
doesn't worry me at all but I would not be happy taking the controls of a
Cessna after the fan stopped cooling the pilot. For one thing, no
spoilers for glideslope control!

Well you might look at the Shuttle returning from space as a rather
large glider

Certainly, and I wouldn't want to land that one either! Ridiculously low
glide ratio, low forgiveness for poor positioning, and far too much
reliance on computer control make me leery.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

Dudley Henriques wrote:

Considering this, there should NEVER be a need to pull the mixture on a
student. Doing this can easily turn a practice session into an actual
forced landing.

I agree about stopping the prop. I have done it before, but only to
satisfy my curiosity about performance differences between stopped and
windmilling. I did it over a deserted airport with a long runway (actually 3
long runways).

I am curious about pulling the mixture, though. The only difference
between pulling the throttle and pulling the mixture is that one cuts off air
to the engine and the other cuts off fuel. Since pulling the mixture cuts
off the fuel, it keeps the engine and plugs from loading up as much. In
practice (at least in Cherokees and 172s), I've found that the prop is not
going to stop when the mixture is pulled, unless the plane gets within a few
knots of stall speed.

I'm not a CFI, but I do practice engine out landings on a regular basis
(religiously, since my real engine out). I prefer pulling the mixture to
idle cutoff as a means of simulating the power loss, just because it keeps
the plugs cleaner. Power recovery is as simple as pushing the mixture back
in and verifying that the throttle is full forward. Is there something I'm
not thinking of?

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200802/1

JGalban via AviationKB.com wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Considering this, there should NEVER be a need to pull the mixture on a
student. Doing this can easily turn a practice session into an actual
forced landing.

I agree about stopping the prop. I have done it before, but only to
satisfy my curiosity about performance differences between stopped and
windmilling. I did it over a deserted airport with a long runway (actually 3
long runways).

I am curious about pulling the mixture, though. The only difference
between pulling the throttle and pulling the mixture is that one cuts off air
to the engine and the other cuts off fuel. Since pulling the mixture cuts
off the fuel, it keeps the engine and plugs from loading up as much. In
practice (at least in Cherokees and 172s), I've found that the prop is not
going to stop when the mixture is pulled, unless the plane gets within a few
knots of stall speed.

I'm not a CFI, but I do practice engine out landings on a regular basis
(religiously, since my real engine out). I prefer pulling the mixture to
idle cutoff as a means of simulating the power loss, just because it keeps
the plugs cleaner. Power recovery is as simple as pushing the mixture back
in and verifying that the throttle is full forward. Is there something I'm
not thinking of?

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)


Pulling to ICO is simply not necessary to teach forced landings. Doing
it is just asking for possible trouble. Bottom line is that the pros
just don't outweigh the potential cons.
It's just not a practice I have ever recommended.
DH

--
Dudley Henriques