Flaps on take-off and landing

"mike regish" wrote in message
...
I've read that the U2 (or is it U-2) has a 4 knot speed range at altitude.
Too fast, you get mach buffet-too slow, you stall.

It's U-2... U2 is a leftist Irish rock group that thinks that just because
they're made a few songs that people like, their opinion on world matter
actually means something... Kind of like actors in that respect, I guess...

The original U-2 had a rather small range while at altitude between stall
speed and mach buffet... Especially in the U-2A through U-2C... The latest
of the series are the U-2R and U-2S models and from what I've heard, some of
the bad characteriestics from the eariler models were improved upon...I
believe that there is now an 8 kt speed range... Originally it varied from 3
to 5 kts...

And interesting tidbit of information is that the U-2G model was made for
carrier operations and actually took off and landed from the USS Ranger back
in the early to mid 1960s...

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in message
...
Generally you have a choice of jobs, how close to an airport your live
and job location. IF a person is willing to change jobs, professions,
or locations they may be able to end up close to work and fairly close
to an airport.

Of course, it's possible that when you factor in being able to afford a
plane, changing professions so that you can live closer to the airport might
not really be an option...

I'm only a bit over 4 1/2 miles from the airport where I have the Deb
based. Unfortunately you can't get there from here. There is a river
between me and town. There are only two bridges although they are
planning to put one in just about a mile from me. When they do that my
trip to the airport would drop from 10 1/2 to about 5 miles. Currently
both bridges are well out of the way to get where I want. If they had
the new bridge in I could ride my bicycle back and fourth.

When I had my plane over at SGR, it was 4 nm from my house to the airport,
or around 8 miles driving distance... There is a railroad track there that
seemed to *always* have a long train on it whenever I wanted to go there...
Lots of road construction to boot, so the commute there sucked... I moved it
over to AXH with is 8 nm away (13 miles driving distance) and the traffic is
not as heavy, so it takes less time to get there... To top it off, I was
able to eventually find a hangar at AXH, whereas at SGR I was stuck parking
on the grass (even the hard surface tiedown spots were full up)...

A friend has his own sod strip about 2 miles from me which would be
great in the summer. The Deb does real well on sod and is a good
short field plane although the sod strip is 3800 feet long.

I was considering taking a look at a piece of property that I heard about to
the north of Houston up around Lake Livingston and the guy wanted $53,900
for 13 acres (approx 1682 x 340 ft)... Considering the fact that the land
tends to be heavily forested with pine trees up around there and as such, I
would probably have to be taking off and landing over them, I don't think it
would work with my plane... I've been into a 1900 ft strip before and it was
tight enough that I really don't want to have to routinely go into a 1600 ft
one, especially adding in trees and probably power lines... Oh well... Keep
looking, I guess...

Mxsmanic wrote:
Thomas Borchert writes:

Listen, if you don't want to fly, so be it. But don't try to
rationalize it.

If you want to fly, so be it. But don't try to say that it's not
extremely expensive.


Can you read? rec.aviation.piloting. That group is for people who find
pleasure or interest in piloting. You're obviously not piloting, and
you're obviously not interested in it as you're trying to convince
everybody that what they're doing is too expensive for them. If someone
wants to fly and is not a complete looser he or she will find a way to
do that.

So, why don't you just find another group?


Leonard

Mxsmanic,

All costs combined: license, insurance, fuel, maintenance, the
amortized cost of the car, etc.


Show me. Make a list. You'll get nowhere near that figure. And that's
why you're evading again.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Mxsmanic,

But don't try to say that it's not
extremely expensive.


It isn't. The facts have been explained to you. You have provided no
evidence at all to the contrary. You can (and obviously do) ignore the
facts, but you look very stupid doing that. Then again, you don't seem
to care much about that, because that's about all you do on this group.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Marty Shapiro writes:

The IRS allows 47.5 cents/mile as the cost to operate a car if its
use is tax deductible.

You use IRS figures for the car, but not for the plane. How much does
the IRS allow for operating a plane instead of a car?


I've never found a direct answer for the IRS allowance for private air
travel. Whenever I rent an aircraft for an Angel Flight, I get to deduct
the entire cost of the rental.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Marty Shapiro writes:

No more so than the hood of a car extends beyond the front window.
You can't see the ground immediately in front of you, but you can see
the ground in front of you.

How much of the runway can you see from the cockpit?

All but about 3 feet in front of the nose. That's better than 99.99%
of the runway.


The instrument panel is only imposing when you are not a pilot.

Pilots must be extremely tall, then.

No, you simply raise or lower the seat as appropriate.

After a while, it is no more imposing than the "instrument
panel" in your car. Even when you are on an IFR flight, if the
weather conditions are VMC, you've got to look out of the window.
You also have to be able to see in front of you to taxi to the
runway.

At the viewing angles I see for small craft (particular those that
don't sit level on the ground), it should be practically impossible to
see much of the runway.

True for tail draggers, but in a tricycle gear aircraft you have an
excellent view of the runway.



--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

Which is about the range of the plane anyway.

mike

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
mike regish writes:

I go before I take off. No brainer.

That still limits most people to 3-5 hours of flight.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Nothing unhealthy about it at all. And I, aswell as my kids, love the
sensation. That's actually what a lot of amusement park rides are all about.
Plus, you can fly anywhere you want and never feel more than a small
fraction over 1 G.

mike

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
news
mike regish writes:

Minus all those neat sustained G forces.

That's the part I don't like. It's uncomfortable and unhealthy.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

That's what chainsaws are for...

mike

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
news:fhrPg.9861

Considering the fact that the land
tends to be heavily forested with pine trees up around there and as such,
I
would probably have to be taking off and landing over them, I don't think
it
would work with my plane... I've been into a 1900 ft strip before and it
was
tight enough that I really don't want to have to routinely go into a 1600
ft
one, especially adding in trees and probably power lines... Oh well...
Keep
looking, I guess...