Wow just wow I’m speechless.
No way no how does anybody touch my power lever down low. That includes instructors. Done as a surprise? And right after takeoff and over water? This is egregious and headed toward homicidal. Seems the underwriters watch your videos and have priced your insurance accordingly.
Btw-I thought we agreed that the aoa sales efforts would go in the marketplace forum.
We sure do have some strong opinions on this thread for some reason. This is the second time one poster has forcefully accused another of actually trying to get someone killed. Not merely a difference of opinion, and not merely questioning the risk - actually killing someone.
I think we should lighten up.
As far as this particular accusation goes, remember there’s a difference between pulling the throttle back and pulling the mixture back. Throttling back is a normal part of emergency training.
OMG, so fricking tedious. A typical Knollenberg “contribution.”
What is it about this thread?? It’s getting to feel like a slasher movie.
Yeah, the ad hominems are not particularly helpful, IMO.
[Long tangent removed to be raised in a member-only thread.]
If I understand your comment correctly, you are proclaiming it is “tedious” to question or discuss how COPA should present educational material with safety implications. Is that right?
Very interesting. If I have misinterpreted, please enlighten me in a snark-free manner. Because to me it seems far more relevant and less tedious than … well, you know.
In this thread? Where?
If you are referring to my post, I would counter that offense that was inferred out of thin air (from a non-existent accusation) does not constitute “forceful accusation.” From where I sit, a member upbraided our former President without thinking his comments through. When his error was brought to the fore through a legitimate question, he faked an astonished insult and then shrunk away.
If you disagree, let me know. I always want to learn.
Peter,
Would you mind if we began a new thread to discuss your training idea. First, I don’t know that you want it on the Guest forum. Second, well, there’s been some drift…
Shock value aside Peter, once you firmly grasp that blue donut is 30% above your stall speed regardless of bank angle and load factor.
If you read the ACS it states that all approaches should be flown at 1.3 Vso.
Therefore what is the difference between a normal straight in approach at 1.3 Vso approach at 500’ versus one that includes a banking turn? Both are 1.3 Vso.
Furthermore it is the only angle of attack that provides the maximum amount of time airborne. By definition.
Angle of Attack is your lift. GA pilots are so in love with airspeed because that’s the only hammer they have to hit the nail.
In the video below the Chief Instructor at American Airlines dissects the Delta airlines crash. Bottom line- if they had an AoA they would realize that the aircraft had enough lift to pull out of the microburst. Instead the pilot was focused on speed.
Opening your mind to a more fundamental form of flying and you will gain a deeper understanding of the physics and aerodynamics. Perhaps take some glider lessons ?
For the record my throttle was just above idle to simulate a windmilling prop. Flaps were at half. Which is the highest L/D configuration for our aircraft. That is the only way it can be done.
Not at all. I will trim my post accordingly.
I usually come through “What’s New” and don’t really track what forum a given thread is on.
I do, but over a beer someday James. Your skillful wordsmithing is too nuanced I fear to effectively dissect in written exchanges here.
Fine…
However, if you disagree, let me assure you that the disagreement is spawned not by my skillful wordsmithing but rather my LACK of wordsmithing skills. As I said a couple of times above, I believed (and still believe) my words were clear and non-accusatory. But apparently, for a number of people they were not.
I will borrow some words I have heard from women back in my younger days…
“It’s not you. It’s me.” [:)]
Gee, if I were a guest reading this GUEST forum, I would save my $65.00 and go watch a soap opera. Take it somewhere “gentleman” please…
You are not driving membership with this squabble
What squabble? I know of no squabble. I am not in a squabble.
Apparently some here think I used some inflammatory words. You maybe? I have no idea what the bad words might be. I have repeatedly asked what they might be and received no answer. I have explained why the words are not (IMO) accusatory, and received no response.
Is this a squabble?
Sometimes COPA is interesting like this. I guess we are driven to be annoyed by something or someone whether there is a reason or not. I get grumpy sometimes myself, but I am not grumpy about anything in this thread.
To add even more irony, every time the “public” Guest Forum comes up in discussion, almost everyone says it should be eliminated. Now, there is criticism that it is not suffiently welcoming. We are wonderful group but in a kooky way sometimes.
“In real life I would never do this at 500’. It would have to be minimum 1000’ AGL.”
Really well done video and seems like a fun place to fly.
Yes I’m happy to move this discussion away from the guest side. Somebody please post the title of the new thread.
Cirrus Flying forum - “From Bubble-Wrap to Mastery”
L/Dmax is achieved with flaps UP, not half flaps.
There’s an L/D Max angle of attack for every configuration, but “best glide” is indeed achieved with flaps up due to the reduced drag of that clean configuration.
But this is not a “best guide” maneuver, it’s a “get turned around before altitude runs out” maneuver. The radius of turn is significantly less and the rate of turn are significantly faster at slower speeds, which half-flaps permits. So there’s a tradeoff for someone trying to get turned around after an EFATO.
How do you find the best configuration to make the turn before altitude runs out and without getting too far away from the runway in the turn (which is what this is all about)? Put your test pilot hat on and go do a fly off. I’d be surprised if Balter has this all wrong.
I think you would have to get pretty slow to gain an appreciable benefit to having the flaps hanging and flying slower (e.g. less energy). But that’s just a guess.
Since I don’t know what Laurence’s speed was in the turn, I’ll offer up some data for consideration. (Laurence, can you guesstimate what is the airspeed with 50% flap and blue donut when you do this? Also do you have another camera angle that shows the AoA and PFD?)
IIRC, the SR22’s max range glide speed is 92 KIAS.
92 knots & 30 degrees of bank: level turn radius = 1304’. Turn rate = 6.8 deg/sec. 180 deg turn takes 26"
92 knots & 45 degrees of bank: level turn radius = 753’. Turn rate = 11.8 deg/sec. 180 deg turn takes 15".
Compare this to:
80 knots & 30 degrees of bank: level turn radius = 986’. Turn rate = 7.9 deg/sec. 180 deg turn takes 23".
80 knots & 45 degrees of bank: level turn radius = 570’. Turn rate = 13.6 deg/sec. 180 deg turn takes 13".
So 12 knots slower does not yield what I would think are significant performance improvements.
(caveat: yes, you’ll be descending… not level… so the turn radii will be less than listed above)
I admit it is not near enough data to reach any conclusions… but I’m skeptical that leaving the flaps at 50% is what I’d want if I wasn’t sure that I had the energy to make it back to the runway with no thrust. But hey… I’m not the one who has actually tried it in the Cirrus. Laurence, do you have any data to compare doing it clean vs with 50% flaps?
