Prop to High RPM on downwind

In article ,
john smith wrote:
Unless you have been assigned a lower altitude by ATC, try setting up
your pattern so you arrive 1500 feet above field elevation when abeam
the approach end of the runway.

1500AGL?? I've done 180 degree desending turns to land and the optimum
altitude seems to be about 800AGL. If you start 1/2 mile away from the
runway (laterally, abeam the threshold) you're going to follow an arc
that's about 3/4 of a mile long. At around 70mph that will take only
about 40 seconds, and from 1500' that would require a 2000FPM average
descent.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

40 degrees flaps and power to idle?

Ben Jackson wrote:
In article ,
john smith wrote:

Unless you have been assigned a lower altitude by ATC, try setting up
your pattern so you arrive 1500 feet above field elevation when abeam
the approach end of the runway.


1500AGL?? I've done 180 degree desending turns to land and the optimum
altitude seems to be about 800AGL. If you start 1/2 mile away from the
runway (laterally, abeam the threshold) you're going to follow an arc
that's about 3/4 of a mile long. At around 70mph that will take only
about 40 seconds, and from 1500' that would require a 2000FPM average
descent.

I have flown two airplanes (Osprey II and an RV-6 with constant speed
prop) that would not make the runway from a 180 degree approach from a
downwind less than a 1/4-mile from the runway without carrying power.

Ben Jackson wrote:
In article ,
john smith wrote:

Unless you have been assigned a lower altitude by ATC, try setting up
your pattern so you arrive 1500 feet above field elevation when abeam
the approach end of the runway.


1500AGL?? I've done 180 degree desending turns to land and the optimum
altitude seems to be about 800AGL. If you start 1/2 mile away from the
runway (laterally, abeam the threshold) you're going to follow an arc
that's about 3/4 of a mile long. At around 70mph that will take only
about 40 seconds, and from 1500' that would require a 2000FPM average
descent.

Mitty wrote:
I like the several suggestions that the go-around mantra be "everything
forward" -- in fact I wish I had been drilled on that one while training
for my Private.

It's an okay mantra, but you probably want to make sure that you don't
have it so drilled in that you push the mixture full forward on a go
around at a high altitude airport.

--
David Rind

David Rind wrote:

Mitty wrote:
I like the several suggestions that the go-around mantra be "everything
forward" -- in fact I wish I had been drilled on that one while training
for my Private.

It's an okay mantra, but you probably want to make sure that you don't
have it so drilled in that you push the mixture full forward on a go
around at a high altitude airport.

That's just another good reason why a "flow-check" involves thinking.
Letting it become too automatic is a Bad Thing. Oddly enough grin.

- Andrew

"Mitty" wrote

In the Six, which has a three-blade prop, I have to carry more power of
course.
Next time I fly it, I am going to listen more carefully while flattening
the
prop on downwind and see if there is much noise effect.


You, as a pilot, are in a bad place to observe prop noise, since 98% of the
extra noise comes off the prop, at high RPM, only in the plane of the prop,
or another way of saying it, is, right off the ends of the tips.

But you already knew that, didn't you? g
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 11/19/2004

You, as a pilot, are in a bad place to observe prop noise, since 98% of the
extra noise comes off the prop, at high RPM, only in the plane of the prop,
or another way of saying it, is, right off the ends of the tips.

But you already knew that, didn't you? g

Actually, no. But whatever the level to others, it is probably proportional to
the level I get, no? So I can still make the judgement call.

"Mitty" wrote in message
.. .

You, as a pilot, are in a bad place to observe prop noise, since 98% of
the
extra noise comes off the prop, at high RPM, only in the plane of the
prop,
or another way of saying it, is, right off the ends of the tips.

But you already knew that, didn't you? g

Actually, no. But whatever the level to others, it is probably
proportional to
the level I get, no? So I can still make the judgement call.

Actually, no. You just don't get the "blat" from the tips when you are
sitting behind them.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 11/20/2004

Mitty wrote:

Actually, no. But whatever the level to others, it is probably
proportional to the level I get, no? So I can still make the judgement
call.

No.

We do such experiments at club meetings: E.g. the club pilots stay on
the ground while some pilot flyes a couple of circuits with a variety of
settings (with and without power reduction after take off, with and
without high rpm on downwind etc.). Such things are always very
educative and make a good starter for discussions.

Stefan