Lesson...um, six?

[Scott]

Wow, those breaks in flying can sure sneak up on you.

I'd been scheduling 5pm flights to fit in after work. I flew on June 22nd,
and then we had a string of afternoon thunderstorms. Then we had a little
heat wave, making the field's density altitude too high to safely fly my old
172N. For July I scheduled 9am flights, early enough to catch the cooler
morning temps, but late enough for me to actually be awake. And then the
airplane comes due for its 100-hour, making the first week of July a
washout. But after three weeks of this-and-that, I had a really nice flight
lesson yesterday.

We did another approach stall, which I seriously screwed up. I wish we'd
tried a few more, I have lots of room for improvement. I think it's a
prerequisite to demonstrating a successful departure stall recovery, which
is probably going to be part of my checkride.

Then, on to emergencies. My CFI demonstrated a simulated engine-out from
2,500 AGL, then I got to do one from 2,000 AGL. I went through the
checklist as best I could, picked a crosswind road to land on, screwed up
the glide, and ended the flight with a downwind landing in a field where the
ensuing fire destroyed the airplane and killed all aboard.

Hmm. Let's try that again.

We circle back up to get in pretty much the same position as before. Again,
the engine mysteriously fails, only this time...oh, hey, there's an airfield
right there, straight ahead. I didn't even see it the first time. In fact
there are at least three airstrips in this practice area, you can't hardly
swing a dead cow without hitting one. This time I manage to glide the
airplane into a fair imitation of a normal upwind final and a survivable
landing. Makes me wonder if my CFI has permission from the (private)
airstrip owners to actually land....

My weak spots here: When the engine "failed" I had a hard time achieving
best-glide speed (not aggressive enough) and had a hard time keeping it,
seems that there isn't enough nose-up trim to get there with no flaps. I
also flubbed the emergency checklist flow, but as before, I think this was
first-time jitters and will improve with experience.

Finally, I got to fly heads-up on the commute to and from the practice area,
maybe 10-15 minutes each way. That by itself is a treat; puttering along
and enjoying the view is one of the things that attracted me to flying. By
now I can hold my altitude and heading pretty well (at least in cruise),
navigate about the restricted areas and Bravo ceilings, scan for traffic,
make and hear radio calls, and not feel completely overwhelmed. Real
progress!

Finally, I flew a pretty good pattern approach, if a little high, and ended
the lesson with a survivable landing. But this time I could see some of
what was going wrong even as it happened, and I'll be that much better
prepared next time.

[Watson]

A couple of pointers, if I may:

Approach to landing -

-stalls start with landing checklist. Always done in a desent (hence
approach to landing) could be in a turn or straight ahead, recover at stall
(nose drops seriously, not just bobs): roll wings level mostly with rudder,
step on the high wing, put your thumb out on throttle hand and use the heel
of your throttle hand to push throttle and thumb to push carb heat
simultaneously as you are dropping the nose. Classy move.

Engine out ABCD

Airspeed. Older C172s will be at best glide with full aft (nose up) trim at
the stop and engine at idle. May have to start pitching the nose over if
already nose high. Wait for the airplane to slow down (with some pitching
up) before you go to full nose up trim. Some instructors maintain they were
designed that way. Cessna trim wheels are vertical, Pipers and Maules are
horizontal (on the floor), older Pipers are a window crank in the ceiling
(great fun.)

Best place to land: only four lane roads, no two lane, small remote
airstrips in the West usually take special techniques not conducive to
enging outs. Pick a field, land with the furrows, like you said, fly full
pattern maybe 3 - 500' higher than normal pattern altitude around an
airport.

Checklist for restart. Inverted "L" no need to memorize anything, it is
all right in front of you. Fuel on both on the floor, move up to the panel
to mixture, go left across panel throttle, carb heat, fuel pump (if you have
one) mags, primer (in and locked) if in and locked try pumping it and being
a human powered fuel pump. [Limping to airport with crash truck is
preferrable to eating barbed wire.] Going across the panel as such is used
by the airlines and military and called flow control. You flow across the
panel and maniuplate any and all controls that could give you fuel, air, or
spark.

Declare emergency, mayday, 121.5, 7700 etc.

Secure aircraft for off airport landing, fuel, switches off, pop the door.

Always touch down off airport full flaps, try to get as slow as possible,
hit the softest thing, with anything on the airplane where the people are
not.

Taught both maneuvers just this morning. You are doing fine. Keep at it.
Nobody knows how to fly out of the cradle. Every pilot out there has gone
through this, every one.

The airplane you are flying, is that the one that landied on the interstate
during a night x/c from Toole? Just wondering.

Regards,

Watson

Post by Scott
Wow, those breaks in flying can sure sneak up on you.
I'd been scheduling 5pm flights to fit in after work. I flew on June 22nd,
and then we had a string of afternoon thunderstorms. Then we had a little
heat wave, making the field's density altitude too high to safely fly my old
172N. For July I scheduled 9am flights, early enough to catch the cooler
morning temps, but late enough for me to actually be awake. And then the
airplane comes due for its 100-hour, making the first week of July a
washout. But after three weeks of this-and-that, I had a really nice flight
lesson yesterday.
We did another approach stall, which I seriously screwed up. I wish we'd
tried a few more, I have lots of room for improvement. I think it's a
prerequisite to demonstrating a successful departure stall recovery, which
is probably going to be part of my checkride.
Then, on to emergencies. My CFI demonstrated a simulated engine-out from
2,500 AGL, then I got to do one from 2,000 AGL. I went through the
checklist as best I could, picked a crosswind road to land on, screwed up
the glide, and ended the flight with a downwind landing in a field where the
ensuing fire destroyed the airplane and killed all aboard.
Hmm. Let's try that again.
We circle back up to get in pretty much the same position as before.
Again,
the engine mysteriously fails, only this time...oh, hey, there's an airfield
right there, straight ahead. I didn't even see it the first time. In fact
there are at least three airstrips in this practice area, you can't hardly
swing a dead cow without hitting one. This time I manage to glide the
airplane into a fair imitation of a normal upwind final and a survivable
landing. Makes me wonder if my CFI has permission from the (private)
airstrip owners to actually land....
My weak spots here: When the engine "failed" I had a hard time achieving
best-glide speed (not aggressive enough) and had a hard time keeping it,
seems that there isn't enough nose-up trim to get there with no flaps. I
also flubbed the emergency checklist flow, but as before, I think this was
first-time jitters and will improve with experience.
Finally, I got to fly heads-up on the commute to and from the practice area,
maybe 10-15 minutes each way. That by itself is a treat; puttering along
and enjoying the view is one of the things that attracted me to flying.
By
now I can hold my altitude and heading pretty well (at least in cruise),
navigate about the restricted areas and Bravo ceilings, scan for traffic,
make and hear radio calls, and not feel completely overwhelmed. Real
progress!
Finally, I flew a pretty good pattern approach, if a little high, and ended
the lesson with a survivable landing. But this time I could see some of
what was going wrong even as it happened, and I'll be that much better
prepared next time.
--
Due to Usenet spam, emailed replies must pass an intelligence test: if
you want me to read your reply, be sure to include this line of text in
your email, but remove this line before sending, otherwise my filters
will delete your email with all due prejudice. Thanks!

[Scott]

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 23:49:58 -0600, in rec.aviation.student, "Watson"
Any time, and welcome to!

Post by Watson
-stalls start with landing checklist. Always done in a desent (hence
approach to landing) could be in a turn or straight ahead, recover at stall
(nose drops seriously, not just bobs): roll wings level mostly with rudder,
step on the high wing, put your thumb out on throttle hand and use the heel
of your throttle hand to push throttle and thumb to push carb heat
simultaneously as you are dropping the nose. Classy move.

That helps to connect the dots. We've been doing power-off stalls as their
own thing, just recently adding a floor altitude, and not doing any of the
landing checklist. Thinking of them as simulated landings will help. Part
of my most recent failure was going too quickly from cruise to slow flight,
and then failing to re-establish stable flight before attempting the stall.

Post by Watson
Airspeed. Older C172s will be at best glide with full aft (nose up) trim at
the stop and engine at idle.

That rings a bell. I noted that with full nose-up trim, I *almost* had the
book glide speed of 65kts, but still had to add more up elevator to keep it.
But on reflection, the book speed is for a max gross loading, and we were at
least a few hundred pounds light...with less weight it seems reasonable that
the max L/D glidepath would be shallower, hence a higher best-glide speed,
right?

Post by Watson
one) mags, primer (in and locked) if in and locked try pumping it and being
a human powered fuel pump. [Limping to airport with crash truck is
preferrable to eating barbed wire.]

Using the primer pump to feed the engine? That's a new one on me, and not a
bad one I think, depending on how the fuel system is laid out. Food for
thought.

[Clark]

usenet-***@asgard.slcc.edu (Scott) wrote in news:***@localhost:

[snippage]

Post by Scott
That rings a bell. I noted that with full nose-up trim, I *almost* had
the book glide speed of 65kts, but still had to add more up elevator to
keep it. But on reflection, the book speed is for a max gross loading,
and we were at least a few hundred pounds light...with less weight it
seems reasonable that the max L/D glidepath would be shallower, hence a
higher best-glide speed, right?

Negative. Lower weight requires lower speed for best-glide. It sounds weird
but that's the way it works.

[Mike Ash]

Post by Clark
[snippage]

Post by Scott
That rings a bell. I noted that with full nose-up trim, I *almost* had
the book glide speed of 65kts, but still had to add more up elevator to
keep it. But on reflection, the book speed is for a max gross loading,
and we were at least a few hundred pounds light...with less weight it
seems reasonable that the max L/D glidepath would be shallower, hence a
higher best-glide speed, right?

Negative. Lower weight requires lower speed for best-glide. It sounds weird
but that's the way it works.

In short, best gilde speed is just another performance airspeed like
your stall speed, and will be proportional to the square root of your
weight (or load factor).

If it helps, think of it as going down a hill. Angle of attack
determines the steepness of the hill (although the steepness is *not*
equal to the angle of attack), and then greater weight makes you roll
down it faster. (This is a real hill with friction losses, not one of
those idealized physics-class hills where a bowling ball and feather
achieve the same speed.)

[Scott]

On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 09:32:11 -0400, in rec.aviation.student, Mike Ash

Post by Mike Ash
In short, best gilde speed is just another performance airspeed like
your stall speed, and will be proportional to the square root of your
weight (or load factor).

Right...load factor again. I need someone to pound that into my head.

[Mike Ash]

Post by Scott
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 09:32:11 -0400, in rec.aviation.student, Mike Ash

Post by Mike Ash
In short, best gilde speed is just another performance airspeed like
your stall speed, and will be proportional to the square root of your
weight (or load factor).

Right...load factor again. I need someone to pound that into my head.

Hold still, I'll go get my hammer.

[Clark]

Post by Mike Ash

Post by Scott
On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 09:32:11 -0400, in rec.aviation.student, Mike Ash

Post by Mike Ash
In short, best gilde speed is just another performance airspeed like
your stall speed, and will be proportional to the square root of your
weight (or load factor).

Right...load factor again. I need someone to pound that into my head.

Hold still, I'll go get my hammer.

That's what my dentist said once...

[Mike Ash]

Post by Scott
Wow, those breaks in flying can sure sneak up on you.
I'd been scheduling 5pm flights to fit in after work. I flew on June 22nd,
and then we had a string of afternoon thunderstorms. Then we had a little
heat wave, making the field's density altitude too high to safely fly my old
172N. For July I scheduled 9am flights, early enough to catch the cooler
morning temps, but late enough for me to actually be awake. And then the
airplane comes due for its 100-hour, making the first week of July a
washout. But after three weeks of this-and-that, I had a really nice flight
lesson yesterday.

Good to see you're learning about all aspects of flying, not just
aviating. :)

Yes, these breaks can happen out of the blue and be really bothersome.
Weather, travel, surprise events, and soon you haven't been in the air
for a month.

Post by Scott
We did another approach stall, which I seriously screwed up. I wish we'd
tried a few more, I have lots of room for improvement. I think it's a
prerequisite to demonstrating a successful departure stall recovery, which
is probably going to be part of my checkride.

Don't be afraid to ask for more if you think you really need it. It can
be hard to even think of that while you're still in the air, of course,
because you're busy, but *if* it should cross your mind, don't be afraid
to speak up. Learning is a collaboration between you and your
instructor, and it's much easier for him to figure out that you need
more stall practice if you tell him than by watching you mess them up.

Post by Scott
Then, on to emergencies. My CFI demonstrated a simulated engine-out from
2,500 AGL, then I got to do one from 2,000 AGL. I went through the
checklist as best I could, picked a crosswind road to land on, screwed up
the glide, and ended the flight with a downwind landing in a field where the
ensuing fire destroyed the airplane and killed all aboard.
Hmm. Let's try that again.
We circle back up to get in pretty much the same position as before. Again,
the engine mysteriously fails, only this time...oh, hey, there's an airfield
right there, straight ahead. I didn't even see it the first time. In fact
there are at least three airstrips in this practice area, you can't hardly
swing a dead cow without hitting one. This time I manage to glide the
airplane into a fair imitation of a normal upwind final and a survivable
landing. Makes me wonder if my CFI has permission from the (private)
airstrip owners to actually land....

Airports can be shockingly hard to find even when you know roughly where
they are. When you don't even know they're there, you can be right on
top of them and never see them, at least if they're small.

I once landed out in a nice dirt field. Afterwards, a friend asked me,
why didn't I land at this private airport less than a mile away? I had
to tell him that I simply didn't see it.

A slight digression about roads.... I was out at a restaurant with some
people from my glider club this past weekend, after a day of flying, and
the conversation turned to landing out. One of our instructors started
to talk about the various places you might land, and he went on at some
length about how bad roads are for landing. Between traffic, signs,
power lines, fences, etc. there's just too much potential for things to
go wrong. Power pilots, he said, love to go for roads because of the
familiarity of the runway, but it's a bad choice, and a good field is
much better.

Now I don't know how much of that carries over to a dead-stick landing
in a power plane. I know that you'll have much less time to look for and
examine a field before having to actually land in it, and much fewer
options to get to. You're also landing much faster and are much heavier.
Still, I thought it was an interesting discussion.

As always, thanks for posting, and keep it up!

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"Mike Ash" <***@mikeash.com> wrote in message news:mike-***@nothing.attdns.com...
<...>

Post by Mike Ash
A slight digression about roads.... I was out at a restaurant with some
people from my glider club this past weekend, after a day of flying, and
the conversation turned to landing out. One of our instructors started
to talk about the various places you might land, and he went on at some
length about how bad roads are for landing. Between traffic, signs,
power lines, fences, etc. there's just too much potential for things to
go wrong. Power pilots, he said, love to go for roads because of the
familiarity of the runway, but it's a bad choice, and a good field is
much better.
Now I don't know how much of that carries over to a dead-stick landing
in a power plane. I know that you'll have much less time to look for and
examine a field before having to actually land in it, and much fewer
options to get to. You're also landing much faster and are much heavier.
Still, I thought it was an interesting discussion.

Based on my expierience with towing airplanes down two lane country roads -
I would say land in the field.