Running dry?

On 2005-08-23, john smith wrote:
Dylan Smith wrote:
Many high wing planes have a method of checking the fuel without a
ladder (many provide a small step). The other great thing they provide
is the ability to check the fuel sumps without crawling on wet, dirty
ground and the ability to tie down without having to crawl on the ground
too :-)

Spoken like a true trike-driver! :-))

If you're having to crawl on the ground to tie the tail down, you're
doing it wrong :-)

[for reference, the plane I currently fly the most has a free castoring
tailwheel, so take that you steerable tailwheel weenies!]

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Dylan Smith wrote:
Many high wing planes have a method of checking the fuel without a
ladder (many provide a small step). The other great thing they provide
is the ability to check the fuel sumps without crawling on wet, dirty
ground and the ability to tie down without having to crawl on the ground
too :-)

On 2005-08-23, john smith wrote:
Spoken like a true trike-driver! :-))

Dylan Smith wrote:
If you're having to crawl on the ground to tie the tail down, you're
doing it wrong :-)
[for reference, the plane I currently fly the most has a free castoring
tailwheel, so take that you steerable tailwheel weenies!]

This thread is denigrating nicely!
BTW, there are now available locking devices for free castoring
tailwheels, you know?

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Matt Barrow wrote:

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Matt Barrow wrote:



Starting out with partial fuel means you are starting with the C/G
already partially aft.
I always calculated both the takeoff and landing C/G when I flew the
Bo
I had access to.


All you need do is NOT overload the rear seats/baggage area.

On a 1300 foot strip I will be all alone and will have removed the rear
seats.



I assume he's getting a V-tail; CG is much better with a straight tail

(yet

still a bit narrow).

It is better with the A36, not with the 33's.


It is, but the 33 is still 2 1/2" wider than the 35, yet still more

The 33's envelope goes two inches farther aft but starts two inches
farther aft too because the tail weighs more.

Gotcha...I was thinking of something else and did a reference fart.

Since running a tank dry in the air is optional,


Flying itself is optional...

Take-offs are optional. Landings are mandatory.

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I had a tank run dry unexpectedly on me; I've never seen myself hit the
mixture, carb heat, fuel selector, fuel pump, and have my hand on the mags
so fast! It was =way= different from the simulations my CFI pulled.

Same here. I didn't think it was possible to change tanks as fast as I
did -- but a little adrenaline goes a long way!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I had a tank run dry unexpectedly on me; I've never seen myself hit the
mixture, carb heat, fuel selector, fuel pump, and have my hand on the mags
so fast! It was =way= different from the simulations my CFI pulled.

Jay Honeck wrote:
Same here. I didn't think it was possible to change tanks as fast as I
did -- but a little adrenaline goes a long way!

I tend to remember what I read in The Blue Sheet a few years ago.
An airliner was flying along when suddenly an alarm sounded and a light
began to flash. The first officer looks over at the pilot, ready to
respond to his commands. As the seconds tick by, the FO observes the
pilot sitting there, winding his watch. Finally, the FO cannot stand the
wait any longer and queries the captain, "Shouldn't we do something? Why
are you just sitting there winding your watch?"
To which the captain replies, "I never killed anyone winding my watch."

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Icebound,

Since running a tank dry in the air is optional,


Flying itself is optional...


*Life* is optional.

Once having embarked upon it, however, we would like to get through it as
safely as possible. :-)

One of my instructors told me about a time when he and another
instuctor were flying a 206 and inadvernatly ran a tank dry.
They about knocked each other silly as their heads collided as the both
reached for the Fuel Selector.

He says the were so focused on changing fuel that if they had hit
little harder they probably would have knocked themselves out and still
got the fuel selector changed. In which case no one would have ever
figured out why the crashed.


Brian

In article QbHOe.2349$IG2.1697@trndny01,
George Patterson wrote:

john smith wrote:

Have you ever looked inside an old, straight-backed Cessna 182 jumpship?
I would wager that they have 1600 pound useful load EASY!

Max gross - 2,950. Empty weight - 1,595.

Gross weight on the 182 is 2550 pounds, the 182A and 182B gross at 2650.
Gross didn't get up to 2950 pounds until they put the girlie swept tail
on them.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

With NO changes in engine horsepower, NO changes in wing design, NO changes
in nothing else except a net NEGATIVE CHANGE in rudder area ...

How (in an engineering sense) did they do that?

Jim





"Dale" wrote in message
...

Gross weight on the 182 is 2550 pounds, the 182A and 182B gross at 2650.
Gross didn't get up to 2950 pounds until they put the girlie swept tail
on them.

--
Dale L. Falk