Landing without flaps

On Mar 5, 4:06 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

You noticed that too huh??? :-)))) Well, I guess the extra weight helps
to get that ole airplane down again on the remaining runway when you
pull that ole mixture back on a student right after rotation :-))))


I still can't believe that some-one claiming to be a pilot made the
'pull mixture on takeoff' statement and is still here

On Mar 4, 7:35 pm, george wrote:
On Mar 5, 4:06 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

You noticed that too huh??? :-)))) Well, I guess the extra weight helps
to get that ole airplane down again on the remaining runway when you
pull that ole mixture back on a student right after rotation :-))))

I still can't believe that some-one claiming to be a pilot made the
'pull mixture on takeoff' statement and is still here

What's a typo, or it there a reason?

BTW, here's a video of that x-wind landing...
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/309221
(It ****es me off it's an amateur video, for the price
of a bit of tape, one would think all landings should
be properly video taped, cheap ****in' ****s).

Anyway, the rudder steering seems odd to me,
based on squinty frame advance...grrrr.
Ken

george wrote:
On Mar 5, 4:06 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

You noticed that too huh??? :-)))) Well, I guess the extra weight helps
to get that ole airplane down again on the remaining runway when you
pull that ole mixture back on a student right after rotation :-))))


I still can't believe that some-one claiming to be a pilot made the
'pull mixture on takeoff' statement and is still here

He keeps asking me to specifically state why I have issues with him.
This single item has been the mainstay of my problem with him. No
instructor worth the rating would yank a mixture on a student on takeoff.
This "procedure" is so antithesis to competent flight instruction that
it defies description.
If this guy does things like this to his students, I am one instructor
who doesn't agree with the way he "teaches".


--
Dudley Henriques

In rec.aviation.student Ken S. Tucker wrote:
BTW, here's a video of that x-wind landing...
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/309221
(It ****es me off it's an amateur video, for the price
of a bit of tape, one would think all landings should
be properly video taped, cheap ****in' ****s).

If it's so cheap, and you think it's so important, why don't you
contribute the cash to set it up?

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:35 pm, george wrote:
On Mar 5, 4:06 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

You noticed that too huh??? :-)))) Well, I guess the extra weight helps
to get that ole airplane down again on the remaining runway when you
pull that ole mixture back on a student right after rotation :-))))
I still can't believe that some-one claiming to be a pilot made the
'pull mixture on takeoff' statement and is still here

What's a typo, or it there a reason?

BTW, here's a video of that x-wind landing...
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/309221
(It ****es me off it's an amateur video, for the price
of a bit of tape, one would think all landings should
be properly video taped, cheap ****in' ****s).

Anyway, the rudder steering seems odd to me,
based on squinty frame advance...grrrr.
Ken


Weren't you the guy that was also suggesting that the runway be subject
to a walk down before every take-off? So I guess the next step will be
required CVR in C-150s.

On Mar 5, 5:07 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
george wrote:
On Mar 5, 4:06 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

You noticed that too huh??? :-)))) Well, I guess the extra weight helps
to get that ole airplane down again on the remaining runway when you
pull that ole mixture back on a student right after rotation :-))))

I still can't believe that some-one claiming to be a pilot made the
'pull mixture on takeoff' statement and is still here

He keeps asking me to specifically state why I have issues with him.
This single item has been the mainstay of my problem with him. No
instructor worth the rating would yank a mixture on a student on takeoff.
This "procedure" is so antithesis to competent flight instruction that
it defies description.
If this guy does things like this to his students, I am one instructor
who doesn't agree with the way he "teaches".

My point also.
Engine failure on takeoff is, in my experience, simulated by the
instructor/testing officer pulling power.
The student then carries out the engine failure on takeoff drills
whereupon the instructor/testing officer restores power
IMO he is not an instructor.

On Mar 5, 6:17 am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:35 pm, george wrote:
On Mar 5, 4:06 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

You noticed that too huh??? :-)))) Well, I guess the extra weight helps
to get that ole airplane down again on the remaining runway when you
pull that ole mixture back on a student right after rotation :-))))
I still can't believe that some-one claiming to be a pilot made the
'pull mixture on takeoff' statement and is still here

What's a typo, or it there a reason?

BTW, here's a video of that x-wind landing...
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/309221
(It ****es me off it's an amateur video, for the price
of a bit of tape, one would think all landings should
be properly video taped, cheap ****in' ****s).

Anyway, the rudder steering seems odd to me,
based on squinty frame advance...grrrr.
Ken

Weren't you the guy that was also suggesting that the runway be subject
to a walk down before every take-off?

For major airports, radar is being developed,
but I think dogs could do it faster and better.

So I guess the next step will be
required CVR in C-150s.

A 7-11 can afford video survalience but a major a
airport can't, sounds like as if a govmonk is making
a decision....runaway ....
Ken

On Mar 5, 11:34 am, george wrote:
On Mar 5, 5:07 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:



george wrote:
On Mar 5, 4:06 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

You noticed that too huh??? :-)))) Well, I guess the extra weight helps
to get that ole airplane down again on the remaining runway when you
pull that ole mixture back on a student right after rotation :-))))

I still can't believe that some-one claiming to be a pilot made the
'pull mixture on takeoff' statement and is still here

He keeps asking me to specifically state why I have issues with him.
This single item has been the mainstay of my problem with him. No
instructor worth the rating would yank a mixture on a student on takeoff.
This "procedure" is so antithesis to competent flight instruction that
it defies description.
If this guy does things like this to his students, I am one instructor
who doesn't agree with the way he "teaches".

My point also.
Engine failure on takeoff is, in my experience, simulated by the
instructor/testing officer pulling power.
The student then carries out the engine failure on takeoff drills
whereupon the instructor/testing officer restores power
IMO he is not an instructor.

Yeah, but there is that cardinal rule, that one or the
other controls the ship and of course the CFI has
priority, but that does not allow the CFI to interfere
by sneaky with the aircraft, at least not in my ship.
Ken

On Mar 6, 8:49*am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
On Mar 5, 6:17 am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:





Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:35 pm, george wrote:
On Mar 5, 4:06 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

You noticed that too huh??? :-)))) Well, I guess the extra weight helps
to get that ole airplane down again on the remaining runway when you
pull that ole mixture back on a student right after rotation :-))))
I still can't believe that some-one claiming to be a pilot made the
'pull mixture on takeoff' statement and is still here

What's a typo, or it there a reason?

BTW, here's a video of that x-wind landing...
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/309221
(It ****es me off it's an amateur video, for the price
of a bit of tape, one would think all landings should
be properly video taped, cheap ****in' ****s).

Anyway, the rudder steering seems odd to me,
based on squinty frame advance...grrrr.
Ken

Weren't you the guy that was also suggesting that the runway be subject
to a walk down before every take-off?

For major airports, radar is being developed,
but I think dogs could do it faster and better.


Hey that was my idea! Do you like it really? I worry though, will dog
**** on the airport runway be a problem when projected by jet blast?
What do you think?

Cheers

Cheers

On Mar 6, 8:49*am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
On Mar 5, 6:17 am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:





Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:35 pm, george wrote:
On Mar 5, 4:06 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

You noticed that too huh??? :-)))) Well, I guess the extra weight helps
to get that ole airplane down again on the remaining runway when you
pull that ole mixture back on a student right after rotation :-))))
I still can't believe that some-one claiming to be a pilot made the
'pull mixture on takeoff' statement and is still here

What's a typo, or it there a reason?

BTW, here's a video of that x-wind landing...
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/309221
(It ****es me off it's an amateur video, for the price
of a bit of tape, one would think all landings should
be properly video taped, cheap ****in' ****s).

Anyway, the rudder steering seems odd to me,
based on squinty frame advance...grrrr.
Ken

Weren't you the guy that was also suggesting that the runway be subject
to a walk down before every take-off?

For major airports, radar is being developed,
but I think dogs could do it faster and better.

So I guess the next step will be
required CVR in C-150s.

A 7-11 can afford video survalience but a major a
airport can't, sounds like as if a govmonk is making
a decision....runaway ....

How about planes wear a net diaper to catch all the bits that fall
off?

Cheers