Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - 180 turn back to the runway video

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

180 turn back to the runway video
Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

Jason Omelchuck

Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 120
Location: Portland Oregon

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:26 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

Hello All,



One of the things I have always wanted to test was the height required to get back to a runway after take off.  On Sunday, I got a chance to do some testing and I got a video of it.  The runway I am flying from is about 2500 feet long.  I found that it required about 500' for me to make the 180 and get back to the end of the runway.  I tried it at 400' but the ending was not pretty (nothing bent).  The interesting thing is that at 600' I could not make the runway because I had traveled further away from the runway than the extra 100' in altitude allowed me to make up.  My engine has a clutch, so the prop windmills at engine idle just like it would windmill if the engine failed.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn6T8ynRDLk



FWIW

Jason

MKIII Yamaha powered

Portland, OR

Arksey(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:54 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

interesting info jason.....my advice for what it is worth that with a  engine failure on take it is best to go forward rather than trying to turn back  around to the runway. keep us informed on any future tests....jswan

  

 do not  archive

jim swan firestar ll 503 michigan

  [quote][b]

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 9:07 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

I found that it required about 500' for me to make the 180 and get back to 

the end of the runway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn6T8ynRDLk



FWIW

Jason

MKIII Yamaha powered

Portland, OR





Jason O/Gang:



Thanks for sharing your experiences.



What is the name of your airstrip?



Where is it located?



Does it have an identifier?



GPS coordinates?



Would I need prior permission to land there?



If I make it to the West Coast of Oregon, I will probably come through the 

Portland area next month after I depart The Rock House the end of May.



john hauck

MKIII - 3,006.2 hours

912ULS - 437.7 hours

Titus, AL

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

Jason Omelchuck

Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 120
Location: Portland Oregon

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:01 am Post subject: Re: 180 turn back to the runway video

I agree Jim,



That is why I am interested in this learning about this envelope of my airplanes performance.  I now know that on a 2500 foot runway, I should not attempt to return (factoring in the reaction time if the engine actually did quit unexpectedly).  If I am flying out of a 3500 foot runway, I have a window between 600' and probably 800' that returning is an excellent option.  My next testing is how high can I get and still land straight ahead on the same runway and getting a technique down.  I believe that if I have this knowledge that before I take off from any runway, I can make my emergency procedures before take off. For instance, I can make up the emergency procedures for a 3000 foot runway that says below 200' land straight ahead, between 600' and 700' return to the runway.  Between 200' and 600' neither of those are an option and find the best landing spot.  I then call out these altitudes (to myself) and if the engine does quit, I know what to do without wasting precious seconds thinking about it or making a bad decision and trying to turn back or land straight ahead when it is not physically possible.



Regards

Jason

[quote="Arksey(at)aol.com"]interesting info jason.....my advice for what it is worth that with a  engine failure on take it is best to go forward rather than trying to turn back  around to the runway. keep us informed on any future tests....jswan

  

 do not  archive

jim swan firestar ll 503 michigan

   	  Quote: 	
		  [b]

mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.co
Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:02 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

Jason,

  

   Very interesting exercise.  For you and your plane, under these identical conditions,

 you feel that 500' agl is a safe u-turn height to make it back to the field.  That is good.

  

   However, I want to point out that these are narrow parameters to duplicate.  For instance;  if you add a little headwind (which would then become a tailwind on a 180 deg turn), or if you add a passenger, or the density altitude is different, the outcome may be quite different.

  

   I'm not trying to rain on your parade, Jason, I just want to make sure we all remember this particular scenario has limited value.

   Being proficient at 180 degree turns (after take-off) is great!!!!   But to be truly proficient, you'd need to practice in ALL wind conditions, several weight conditions, and various density altitude conditions, and combinations of all of these.  

  

   Practicing proficient flying techniques is ALWAYS good advice.  Especially those techniques that deal with emergency proceedures!!   But, unless a pilot were incredibly confident he could make the field on a u-turn landing after an engine failure, the best advice is to always land straight ahead.

  

   BTW, keep in mind that practicing low level u-turns amount to acrobatic flying.  More than a few pilots have died finding out that what they thought would work....didn't!!!

  

   Okay everybody, now you can beat me up.

  

 Mike Welch

 MkIII

  

  

  

      

  

  

  

  

  

  

 	  Quote: 	
		   Subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

 From: jason(at)trek-tech.com

 Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 09:26:33 -0700

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com

 

 --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jason Omelchuck" <jason(at)trek-tech.com>

 

 Hello All,

 

 One of the things I have always wanted to test was the height required to get back to a runway after take off. On Sunday, I got a chance to do some testing and I got a video of it. The runway I am flying from is about 2500 feet long. I found that it required about 500' for me to make the 180 and get back to the end of the runway. I tried it at 400' but the ending was not pretty (nothing bent). The interesting thing is that at 600' I could not make the runway because I had traveled further away from the runway than the extra 100' in altitude allowed me to make up. My engine has a clutch, so the prop windmills at engine idle just like it would windmill if the engine failed.

 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn6T8ynRDLk

 

 FWIW

 Jason

 MKIII Yamaha powered

 Portland, OR

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=295752#295752

 

 

 

 

&g========================> 
	


[quote] 

 

 		 	   		  Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Learn more.   	  Quote: 	
		  [b]

Jason Omelchuck

Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 120
Location: Portland Oregon

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:49 am Post subject: Re: 180 turn back to the runway video

Hello Mike,



I am not going to beat you up and I agree that someone should not try to apply my experience to their plane, they should get out there and practice themselves.  Go to altitude and practice power off 180's.  See how much altitude you loose, find the best glide of your aircraft.  Then , if you  have a safe place to practice them at lower altitudes and feel you are proficient enough, go ahead and try them out.



I agree that the plane will perform differently (and everybody's planes are different) under different wind conditions and weights, but I do believe this gives ME a valuable base line from where to take all of the variables into consideration before I start my take off roll.



This is just like the "practicing dead stick landings" conversations.  Some people say more planes are bent practicing than in actual situations.  In my plane, I can have the engine at idle and it performs exactly like when the engine is no longer running.



You stated "unless a pilot were incredibly confident he could make the field on a u-turn landing after an engine failure, the best advice is to always land straight ahead"  I agree, but how is one suppose to know if he can make the field on a U turn?  Thats just like saying, unless a pilot were incredibly confident he could shoot an ILS landing the best advice is to always fly clear of clouds.  If this were true, no one would every learn how to fly on instruments.  That is why you practice under a hood with a safety person in the cockpit.  I believe that is what I was doing, practicing this maneuver with my safety person (fully functional engine) in the cockpit.



As I stated before, for me, it is good to know ahead of time what my emergency procedure is.  If I do my call outs in my head, I will not fool myself into something that is not possible and try to turn back below 600' no matter how uninviting the terrain ahead may be, I know and have experienced that I will not make it back to the runway.



I am not a high time pilot so no one should take this as the voice of experience.  Always fly your airplane in a manner in which you feel safe.

Jason

[quote="mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.co"]Jason,

 ï¿½

 ï¿½ Very interesting exercise.ï¿½ For you and your plane, under these identical conditions,

 you feel that 500' aglï¿½is a safe u-turn height to make it back to the field.ï¿½ That is good.

 ï¿½

 ï¿½ However, I want to point out that these are narrow parameters to duplicate.ï¿½ For instance;ï¿½ if you add a little headwind (which would then become a tailwind on a 180 deg turn), or if you add a passenger, or the density altitude is different, the outcome may be quite different.

 ï¿½

 ï¿½ I'm not trying to rain on your parade, Jason, I just want to make sure we all remember this particular scenario has limited value.

 ï¿½ Being proficient at 180 degree turns (after take-off) is great!!!!ï¿½ï¿½ But to be truly proficient, you'd need to practice in ALL wind conditions, several weight conditions, and various density altitude conditions, and combinations of all of these.ï¿½ 

 ï¿½

 ï¿½ Practicing proficient flying techniques is ALWAYS good advice.ï¿½ Especially those techniques that deal with emergency proceedures!!ï¿½ï¿½ But, unless a pilot were incredibly confident he could make the field on a u-turn landing after an engine failure, the best advice is to always land straight ahead.

 ï¿½

 ï¿½ BTW, keep in mind that practicing low level u-turns amount to acrobatic flying.ï¿½ More than a few pilots have died finding out that what they thought would work....didn't!!!

 ï¿½

 ï¿½ Okay everybody, now you can beat me up.

 ï¿½

 Mike Welch

 MkIII

 ï¿½

 ï¿½

 ï¿½

 ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ 

 ï¿½

 ï¿½

 ï¿½

 ï¿½

 ï¿½

 ï¿½

 	  Quote: 	
		   Subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

 From: jason(at)trek-tech.com

 Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 09:26:33 -0700

 To: kolb-list(at)matronics.com

 

 --> Kolb-List message posted by: "Jason Omelchuck" <jason>

 

 Hello All,

 

 One of the things I have always wanted to test was the height required to get back to a runway after take off. On Sunday, I got a chance to do some testing and I got a video of it. The runway I am flying from is about 2500 feet long. I found that it required about 500' for me to make the 180 and get back to the end of the runway. I tried it at 400' but the ending was not pretty (nothing bent). The interesting thing is that at 600' I could not make the runway because I had traveled further away from the runway than the extra 100' in altitude allowed me to make up. My engine has a clutch, so the prop windmills at engine idle just like it would windmill if the engine failed.

 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn6T8ynRDLk

 

 FWIW

 Jason

 MKIII Yamaha powered

 Portland, OR

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=295752#295752

 

 

 

 

&g========================> 

	


 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 		 	   		  Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Learn more.   	  Quote: 	
		  [b]

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:04 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

Just a note.  Had the 447 ice up on take off from Painton Airport, and the 

engine started to droop very badly.  Dropped the nose on the FireFly and 

kicked it around and back to the runway down wind.  I had not prepared my 

self for which way to turn, and automatically turned left in the normal 

pattern direction.  But there was a strong cross wind from the right and it 

blew me off into a much larger turn than I would have hoped for.



I made it just fine, but it taught me a lesson, to always think before take 

off about which way to turn if the engine quits on the initial climb out.



Jason, I think it is great that you are preparing your self for the 

possibility of engine failure after take off.  Another exercise that may be 

helpful is to practice spilling altitude to land at a spot directly below or 

to make high approaches and still touch down at the usual spot.  Having 

practiced this with the FireFly it really helped me when the MZ34 quit on 

its first flight.  I was able to zip back to the airport, turn over the end 

of the runway at 1,000 agl, and forward slip it down the runway so that 

after touch down, I did not have to push the FireFly far to get it off the 

other end of the runway.  When I initially practiced this, I over shot my 

aiming point.  I found I could be much more aggressive with the forward 

slip, and forward stick and I could hit my aiming point.  It looks and feels 

a little weird but the FireFly is so draggy the airspeed does not climb too 

high, and one can spoil a lot of altitude in a hurry.  One nice thing about 

this manuver is that when you pop it out of the slip you have plenty of 

excess air speed or energy that can be used to make a nice landing.



FWIW



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

russkinne(at)mac.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:30 pm Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

OK, now you can beat me up too.

Esp since I'm a non-Kolb pilot.

But all this recent talk about minimum altitude to make a 180 back to  

the runway after an engine failure on takeoff  -- the early posts, at  

least, and the video,  indicate that the trials were done right off  

the runway, at an altitude of 500' AGL or so.

IMHO, THIS IS ASSININE!

For the luvva Pete, and your loved ones, do these trials AT ALTITUDE!

The graveyard's full of people who didn't.

So beat me up if you want to. I only hope this will save a life &  

avoid a crash or two.

Russ K

On Apr 26, 2010, at 1:48 PM, Mike Welch wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Jason,



   Very interesting exercise.  For you and your plane, under these  

 identical conditions,

 you feel that 500' agl is a safe u-turn height to make it back to  

 the field.  That is good.



   However, I want to point out that these are narrow parameters to  

 duplicate.  For instance;  if you add a little headwind (which  

 would then become a tailwind on a 180 deg turn), or if you add a  

 passenger, or the density altitude is different, the outcome may be  

 quite different.



   I'm not trying to rain on your parade, Jason, I just want to make  

 sure we all remember this particular scenario has limited value.

   Being proficient at 180 degree turns (after take-off) is  

 great!!!!   But to be truly proficient, you'd need to practice in  

 ALL wind conditions, several weight conditions, and various density  

 altitude conditions, and combinations of all of these.



   Practicing proficient flying techniques is ALWAYS good advice.   

 Especially those techniques that deal with emergency  

 proceedures!!   But, unless a pilot were incredibly confident he  

 could make the field on a u-turn landing after an engine failure,  

 the best advice is to always land straight ahead.



   BTW, keep in mind that practicing low level u-turns amount to  

 acrobatic flying.  More than a few pilots have died finding out  

 that what they thought would work....didn't!!!



   Okay everybody, now you can beat me up.



 Mike Welch

 MkIII

cristalclear13

Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Posts: 363
Location: Southeast Georgia

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:34 pm Post subject: Re: 180 turn back to the runway video

 	  Jason Omelchuck wrote: 	
		  Hello All,



One of the things I have always wanted to test was the height required to get back to a runway after take off.  On Sunday, I got a chance to do some testing and I got a video of it.  The runway I am flying from is about 2500 feet long.  I found that it required about 500' for me to make the 180 and get back to the end of the runway.  I tried it at 400' but the ending was not pretty (nothing bent).  The interesting thing is that at 600' I could not make the runway because I had traveled further away from the runway than the extra 100' in altitude allowed me to make up.  My engine has a clutch, so the prop windmills at engine idle just like it would windmill if the engine failed.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn6T8ynRDLk



FWIW

Jason

MKIII Yamaha powered

Portland, OR 	




Wish I had that many open fields to choose from for emergency landing spots.

Please be careful.  Do you know your stall speed on a steep turn?

_________________
Cristal Waters
Kolb Mark II Twinstar Rotax 503 DCSI Sept 2007 - sold Sept 2012
Private Pilot Aug 2008
ELSA Repairman for N193Y April 2008
Rotax 2 stroke maintenance April 2009

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:43 pm Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

Esp since I'm a non-Kolb pilot.

But all this recent talk about minimum altitude to make a 180 back to

the runway after an engine failure on takeoff  -- the early posts, at

least, and the video,  indicate that the trials were done right off

the runway, at an altitude of 500' AGL or so.

IMHO, THIS IS ASSININE!

For the luvva Pete, and your loved ones, do these trials AT ALTITUDE!

The graveyard's full of people who didn't.

So beat me up if you want to. I only hope this will save a life &

avoid a crash or two.

Russ K

***************************



Russ/Gang:



Would be a good idea to get some flight experience in a Kolb.



What Jason was doing was normal Kolb flying in my book.



I believe he has learned a great deal more about his airplane.



john hauck

mkIII

Titus, Alabama

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

lcottrell

Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 1494
Location: Jordan Valley, Or

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:43 pm Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

Not sure why you want to get beat up, but if it make you  feel better have your wife do it for us. In actuality the way that he did it was  the safest way to have done it at all. If you recall, he has a clutch, so  whether the engine is running or not, and his was, his prop is going to spin and  slow him down a lot. All he had to do was to apply throttle and he is running  again, so the danger that he put himself into was no worse than any power off  landing, whether it be straight in or not.

  

 Now I don't have a clutch, but you can be sure that if you  are not going to make the runway, you are going to know it a long time before it  gets critical. If you have to pull start the engine, then you are engaging in  risky behavior, with a starter it is doable without too much risk. 

  

 Now the following may be only applicable to myself, if you  do not react this way, then by all means feel free to disregard the following. I  have had at least two situations that could be qualified as an emergency. The  first one was an engine malfunction wherein a spark plug cap disengaged from the  spark plug. I had noise, but no real power. I reverted to the type of landing  that I would normally make. Muscle memory if you will. I picked a spot to land  that was the best choice open to me, throttled back and set it down. There was a  large rock that I could not see, ended up on my back with gas dripping by my  ear.  Besides the damage to the landing gear, and a crushed nose cone,  I had a prop strike when I flipped, and a bit more damage than necessary.   What would have been better would have been to shut off the engine, master  switch, and made my approach as slow as I could, even to pancake it in if  necessary. I had never faced the possibility of an off field landing, so I  reverted to what I did each time I landed. No emergency practice or even thought  of what I would do in an emergency, nothing.

  

 Now after that and early last year there was the original  discussion about how much altitude one needed to make a unpowered turn. I went  out, ( I did use more altitude however) and found that I could make a full turn  within 200 feet. One of my misadventures with a HAC-man wherein I neglected to  turn it off as I was coming in for a landing. ( I ascribe no blame to the  HAC-man system. It operated as it was designed to do. The fault was entirely  mine.)  I was on final approach to my cross wind runway, which is a bit  uphill. I was probably under 300 feet, the engine quit. Straight ahead there was  nothing but sage about two feet high. Behind me was a clear patch of dirt that  was as smooth as one could ask for. It was also on down sloping ground. I knew I  had altitude enough to turn, the question was whether I had enough altitude to  make the clearing. Well I did, skimming the last piece of sage between me and  the clearing. I shut off the HAC-man, started the engine and went home to an ass  chewing by the little lady. 

  

 Now I will not deny that there was a large measure of  luck, but I knew how much it would take to turn, I knew what my best glide was,  and I pulled it off with no repair, other than my britches. Had I gone straight  ahead, I would have been replacing the nose cone, and probably  recovering.

  

 My point is if you do not know how the plane will react,  you will have no other choice than muscle memory. Yes straight ahead is probably  safest if you don't know, but its most likely gonna hurt. Any exercise that you  are going to attempt should be carried out with as much safety cushion as you  can get, but knowing what to expect from your plane and preparing yourself for  it is priceless.

  

 Now I thought that this should be classified as gentle,  but I think he did as he should have done. An emergency is no place for  guesswork.

 Larry

  

  

  

 Note: If you forward this email, please delete the forwarding history,  which includes my email address.

 [quote]   ---

_________________
do not archive

Arksey(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:38 pm Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

good thinking Jason.....let us know your final results i am sure we will  find them interesting and helpful.....jswan    fly  safe   .....

  

 do not  archive

jim swan firestar ll 503 michigan

  [quote][b]

Jason Omelchuck

Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 120
Location: Portland Oregon

Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:00 pm Post subject: Re: 180 turn back to the runway video

Hello Crystal,



In a descending (power off) turn at constant airspeed your airplane will stall at the same speed it does straight ahead with power off.  The risk is keeping the turn coordinated so that remains true for both wings.  The tendency is to try to put in too much rudder to tighten the turn and you then run the risk of the inside wing stalling. when I first started practicing at altitude, I noticed I could feel the wing start to bobble at stall and that it would increase the bank and start the beginning of a spiral.  It was a little unnerving at first, but I noticed I could keep it from developing by a little opposite rudder and of course getting the nose down ever so slightly to keep the airspeed up.  I did practice (at altitude) going from a full throttle climb to a descending 180 turn while trying to keep a constant airspeed.  One of the things I think I have learned while doing this close to the ground is that the fear of hitting the ground is a very ingrained in my brain.  It is an un-natural act to put the nose down to save yourself from hitting the ground.  I believe this has caused many an airplane accident because it is just does not make sense, your instinct really wants to pull back on the stick to extend the glide just that little bit more.  This sensation does not get triggered when flying at altitude.  I believe this is the reason that many a Kolb landing gear has been bent by people who are used to flying GA aircraft.  To the pilot of a faster airplane, the angle of approach that must be kept close to the ground before round out is alarming until you do it many times.



My $.02 worth

Jason

 	  cristalclear13 wrote: 	
		   	  Jason Omelchuck wrote: 	
		  Hello All,



One of the things I have always wanted to test was the height required to get back to a runway after take off.  On Sunday, I got a chance to do some testing and I got a video of it.  The runway I am flying from is about 2500 feet long.  I found that it required about 500' for me to make the 180 and get back to the end of the runway.  I tried it at 400' but the ending was not pretty (nothing bent).  The interesting thing is that at 600' I could not make the runway because I had traveled further away from the runway than the extra 100' in altitude allowed me to make up.  My engine has a clutch, so the prop windmills at engine idle just like it would windmill if the engine failed.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn6T8ynRDLk



FWIW

Jason

MKIII Yamaha powered

Portland, OR 	




Wish I had that many open fields to choose from for emergency landing spots.

Please be careful.  Do you know your stall speed on a steep turn?

pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:05 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

In a descending (power off) turn at constant airspeed your airplane will 

stall at the same speed it does straight ahead with power off.  >>



Sorry but that is not true.



Two things happen when you turn.



1. Your apparent weight will increase because of the `G` force engendered by 

turning.



2. Your generated lift will diminish because lift is always generated at 

right angles to the wing and if you turn  part of the lift will be used to 

turn you.. The steeper your turn the worse both of these effects become.

You MUST increase your speed to compensate.



Cheers



Pat

pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:06 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

Jason Omelchuck wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Hello All,



 One of the things I have always wanted to test was the height required to 

 get back to a runway after take off.>>


	


Neatly done and a good video.. The cut back of the engine and the lowering 

of the nose were simultaneous.  In a real emergency you will lose a couple 

of seconds at least wondering `What the *******has happened`.  Also there 

was no or very little wind. A few knots on your nose turning rapidly to a 

few knots up your tailfeathers will reduce your flying speed and INCREASE 

you ground speed and the length of your landing run considerably.



You took off  from pretty well down the runway and consequently had a good 

length of runway behind you to land on. My Xtra would have been at 500 feet 

while you were still on the ground and in the event of a 180 degree turn 

back there would have been considerably less useable runway.



I dont know how much difference there is in the glide produced by a stopped 

prop as opposed to a windmilling one., perhaps someone has the figures.



Thanks for doing the experiment. I shall make sure I do not turn back at 

500ft or less.



Cheers



Pat

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:20 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

Two things happen when you turn.



1. Your apparent weight will increase because of the `G` force engendered by

turning.



2. Your generated lift will diminish because lift is always generated at

right angles to the wing and if you turn  part of the lift will be used to

turn you.. The steeper your turn the worse both of these effects become.

You MUST increase your speed to compensate.



Cheers



Pat





Patrick L/Gang:



I think we did this argument some time ago.  And....I think Tom Kuffle 

presented a good explanation of this, but I am probably wrong.



Don't we have to take into consideration this is a descending turn?



john hauck

mkIII

Titus, Alabama

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

Jason Omelchuck

Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 120
Location: Portland Oregon

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:30 am Post subject: Re: 180 turn back to the runway video

Hello Pat,



I believe this is true.  A descending (power off) turn at constant airspeed is a 1G maneuver.  If you bank steeper you descend faster and you are still at 1G.



Jason



 	  pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com wrote: 	
		  In a descending (power off) turn at constant airspeed your airplane will 

stall at the same speed it does straight ahead with power off.  >>



Sorry but that is not true.



Two things happen when you turn.



1. Your apparent weight will increase because of the `G` force engendered by 

turning.



2. Your generated lift will diminish because lift is always generated at 

right angles to the wing and if you turn  part of the lift will be used to 

turn you.. The steeper your turn the worse both of these effects become.

You MUST increase your speed to compensate.



Cheers



Pat

jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:38 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

Jason,



Took some data from your video.  I recorded the time of lift off, point of 

throttle pull back, approximated after completion of 180 turn, and touch 

down.



You were getting to 500 feet in about 30 seconds for a climb rate of 1,000 

ft/min.  Your 180 degree turn took about 17.5 seconds for a good turn rate 

of 620 deg/min.  Glide time was about 32.5 seconds for an average decent 

rate of 923 ft/min.  The latter is very good considering the wind milling 

propeller.  In your case there has to be an optimum ias that gives you the 

best glide for a wind milling propeller.  You may want to consider VG's to 

increase lift to help off set the wind milling propeller drag.  Also, I have 

found they will greatly reduce twitchyness felt during steep turns with the 

FireFly.



Keep up the good work.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

by0ung(at)brigham.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:46 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

I think we did this argument some time ago.  And....I think Tom Kuffle 

presented a good explanation of this, but I am probably wrong.



Don't we have to take into consideration this is a descending turn?



john hauck

 	  Quote: 	
		  >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


	


John and the gang



Back in my training for private ticket,,   when doing a power off left turn

from base to final,   especially if there was a bit of a left cross wind on

final , I would bank the plane a bit more than usual to stop the drifting

from the cross wind in order to line up with the runway.   That precipitated

a long lesson on accelerated stalls, with special emphasis on base to final

turns.    Long story short I think Pat was right.



Boyd

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:48 am Post subject: 180 turn back to the runway video

You may want to consider VG's to

increase lift to help off set the wind milling propeller drag.  Also, I have

found they will greatly reduce twitchyness felt during steep turns with the

FireFly.



Keep up the good work.



Jack B. Hart FF004

Winchester, IN

 *****************



Jack H/Gang:



Do VGs increase lift?  The reason I ask is I do not know.



I thought VGs decreased stall speed.



Also, could you explain "twitchyness" during steep turns with the Firefly?



Thanks,



john hauck - Twitchy after operating the "bush hog on a pole" (weed eater) 

all morning.

mkIII

Titus, Alabama

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 1 of 3

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum