Lancair crash at SnF

On 2008-04-25, WingFlaps wrote:
On Apr 26, 12:18*am, Stefan wrote:
But I hope that you rather risk a stall/spin than to hit a crowd of
pedestrians with that meat chopper turning.

I thought the engine had stopped?

The prop will often keep turning after the engine has stopped - unless
you can feather it. (I have flown singles with feathering propellors,
but they are the exception).

There are also degrees of engine failure other than quitting dead -
sometimes, an engine may continue to make a minimal amount of power
after the failure event occurred.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

Ummmm............

I think in this example the "meat chopper" is out of service.

Valid point tho...

Dave

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:18:19 +0200, Stefan
wrote:

B A R R Y schrieb:

I'd rather hit a bus shelter or light poles @ 40-50 MPH than go in
inverted after a stall/spin @ 200-300 AGL.

But I hope that you rather risk a stall/spin than to hit a crowd of
pedestrians with that meat chopper turning.

WingFlaps schrieb:

In everyday's language, the word velocity stands for the _magnitude_ of
the vector.

Nope. Not even at high school. The magnitude is "speed".

Maybe where you live. Not where I live.

Excellent post..

I was taught to normally turn cross wind at 500 ft AGL.. if taking
off on a short single runway.

Long runway - keep it in front of you as long as it is usable..

Dave



On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 01:17:48 -0700 (PDT), Brian
wrote:


One way to practice this would be to establish a "runway altitude" at,
say, 1000ft AGL, get the airplane into takeoff configuration on heading
at that altitude over a road or something, simulate a failure at a
specified altitude--say, 1,500 feet--and see what altitude you're at
when you get back to your reciprocal heading. If it's above your
starting altitude, you made it.


Actually this is very similar to how I do have pilots simulate this.
However it is often not quite realistic for a couple of reasons.

1. The illusion of speed. When done for real the airplane will seem to
be fly much faster than when done close to the ground, especially if
there is much wind. I am thoroughly convinced the most stall spin
accidents happen for two reasons. A. is the illusion of speed when the
pilot thinks the are going faster than the are. B. Is the pilot isn't
thinking they are in a situation where a stall is possible, and thus
does not recognize it as a stall when it occurs. (Very similar to A)

2. Decent rate. It may be possible to get back to the runway and line
up on the runway but not arrest the descent rate. This is especially
important in aircraft with higher wing loadings. Make sure that when
you about 100 feet above your runway altitude that you are still at
you minimum (normal) power off approach speed. True this may be a
better option than putting it into the trees but hitting the runway at
a high decent rate because you are too slow to round out and flare
will probably only be a Fair landing. (Good = Airplane will need some
repair, Fair = occupants may need some repair as well)

3. Proficiency. Look back through the group at the arguments for and
against power on landings VS full power off. Also look at the
arguments for Full Flaps vs Flaps as Needed.vs. No Flaps. If you are
one of the pilots where less than 50% of your landings (in the
airplane you are flying(Gliders fit here)) are power off then Land
Straight ahead should be your only option. Same thing applies if you
land with full flaps more that 50% of the time. Again the same should
apply if you are not thoroughly familiar with the airplane you are
flying. Are you beginning to see why as a rule landing straight ahead
is almost always the best option? My mantra to pilots is "an
emergency is not the place to be practicing little used skills, try to
make an emergency landing as normal as possible"

4. Options. One of the biggest problems with trying to go back to the
runway is the commitment to it. Once you commit to it there are
usually little else available for options that will have a good
outcome. If open fields surround the airport you may have the option
of landing somewhere else. But in order to make it back to the runway
you will have little time to evaluate any other options, and by the
time you figure out it isn’t going to work you will likely be out of
airspeed, altitude and ideas.

5. The Pattern. My practice of the maneuver has shown that usually it
can be done from 500 feet in most training aircraft if the pilot is
proficient in the maneuver and the aircraft. This is why I generally
teach to start the crosswind turn at 500 feet. Once you are at 500
feet and have your turn established your chances of making back to the
runway usually change from slim to good and it is much more likely
that you will be able to make the runway as an option. At this point
you are not longer climbing straight ahead and are entering the
crosswind. Usually from this point on the runway should be an option
if you have a power failure in the pattern. Again proficiency and
practice are the key as you will be landing power off, downwind and
using flaps as required.

6. Semantics. We tend to say land straight ahead, But I don’t know of
any flight instructor that does not teach that a 45 degree change in
heading left or right is not appropriate and often desirable when
dealing with a power failure immediately after takeoff to take
advantage of more desirable terrain.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

On Apr 26, 12:57*am, Stefan wrote:
WingFlaps schrieb:

In everyday's language, the word velocity stands for the _magnitude_ of
the vector.

Nope. Not even at high school. The magnitude is "speed".

Maybe where you live. Not where I live.

BS. This is stated in any basic physics text book -even Wiki knows it:

"In physics...The scalar absolute value (magnitude) of velocity is
speed."

Cheers

But I hope that you rather risk a stall/spin than to hit a crowd of
pedestrians with that meat chopper turning.

WingFlaps wrote:
I thought the engine had stopped?

No, don't think the engine quit. They said it was smoking on takeoff,
and witnesses who saw it come down described how the engine sounded, so
it apparently was still running.

On Apr 25, 11:42*am, "SR20GOER" wrote:
"WingFlaps" wrote in message


Why two turns? *At 500' why not one turn and land with wind up derriere?
And, at 500 ft I wouldn't be too worried about the radio.
Brian- Hide quoted text -



Well first ya got to turn back and then you have to turn to line up
with the runway...

Cheers

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in news:dakQj.67980$y05.66333
@newsfe22.lga:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
Larry Dighera wrote in
:

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 01:27:52 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip

wrote in :

The best way to do it is with a steep bank. Very steep.


The bank angle may be quantified:



Good grief Larry, you really are an idiot.
Of course it can be quatified, but the numbers only tell a minute
part
of the story. I can categorically state that I can do a 180 with 70
deg
bank at VSO 1.2 deadstick and come out the other end in one piece.
Can
you? Try it using those figures and send my the answer via my Ouiji
board.


Bertie

There ya go, take a lesson from Dudley. If you can't dazzle'm with
brilliance, baffle'm with bull****.


You can, apparently, be dazzled with just about anything.


Bertie

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in news:tbkQj.67981$y05.60745
@newsfe22.lga:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
WingFlaps wrote in
news:c92067a2-bb08-4ce3-afab-
:

On Apr 25, 8:50 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote
innews:3ui2149cg0sac5dsdsi4f05v8t42
:

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 01:27:52 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip


wrote in :

The best way to do it is with a steep bank. Very steep.

The bank angle may be quantified:

Good grief Larry, you really are an idiot.
Of course it can be quatified, but the numbers only tell a minute
part of the story. I can categorically state that I can do a 180
with
70 deg bank at VSO 1.2 deadstick and come out the other end in one
piece. Can you? Try it using those figures and send my the answer
via
my Ouiji board.


Well I cannot understand you you can load the plane up like that and
not raise stall speed beyond 1.2Vs so you must be using a wing drop
to
acclerate the turn? Do you could just stall out of the turn -but
how
much height do you loose in the stall and it's recovery?

No, you have to lower the nose continuously to offload as you go
around
the bend. You will end up fairy nose low at the end of the turn
alright
but you can recover that as you level the wings. The turn is pretty
rapid at that speed so you won't be in it too long. It's as about "on
the edge" as you can get. It's the only way it can be done unles you
have an airplane with an outrageous climb. If you're proficient in
spins
try it at a bit of altitude and a reduced bank angle. You can
increase
the bank in subsequent attempts as you become more comfortable. just
don't get the idea that this will make you good enough to try it in
anger on it's own!


Bertie

Did you and MX work that out on the sim last night???


oh ouch. Lumping me with Anthony. What's next, hitler?

Bertie

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in news:YbkQj.67982$y05.56887
@newsfe22.lga:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
B A R R Y wrote in news:Z%iQj.22374$%41.15539
@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com:

Shirl wrote:
WingFlaps wrote:
I've also heard a lot of BS in this thread about not having good
palces to put the plane. There is nearly always somewhere flat to
put
the plane within 90 degrees of the runway centerline -even a road.
Malls have big parking lots!

I don't know about where you live, but malls here have lots of
light
poles, concrete islands, park-and-rest benches and ... and ...
vehicles
everywhere. And having gone through it once, I'm no longer fooled
by
what *looks* "flat" at 500, or even 50 feet.

I'd rather hit a bus shelter or light poles @ 40-50 MPH than go in
inverted after a stall/spin @ 200-300 AGL.


Exactly.

Bertie

One doesn't equal the other moron.





Obviously, fjukktard.


Figured out that maze on the back of your froot loops box yet?


Bertie