 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kellym
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1705
Location: Sun Lakes AZ
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:37 pm Post subject: IFR Requirements (required vs. good to have) |
 |
|
You maybe an airline guy, but you don't read the stats too closely. Multi-engine GA flights have just as many fatals as singles, and more from mechanicals. Simple arithmetic...more than two times as many devices to fail, more complacency on maintenance because there are two, and more difficult to fly on one than the single on none. Been much studied over the years, and there simply is no statistical evidence that a twin is safer.
KM
gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com (gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com) wrote: | Quote: | Bruce I am an airline guy and two things. Don't get a little GA plane's
mixed up with a large turbojet air transport category aircraft.
All the standby instruments in the world will not help when the
the single engine stops or the crankshaft cracks and the prop falls off.
Single engine, single pilot IFR is a little risky anyway.
George ATP/CFII
>From: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org (Bruce(at)glasair.org)>
>
>OK, I've been in enough pissing contests on this subject that I don't
>wantanother
|
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ogoodwin(at)comcast.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:13 am Post subject: IFR Requirements (required vs. good to have) |
|
|
Kelly, I too am an airline guy. Also an ag pilot guy, also an old single pilot 135 guy, etc. Statistics are statistics. Nothing more. Two (or more) engines are sometimes more safe than one. I can't think of any circumstance that a WELL TRAINED, PROFICIENT pilot in a WELL MAINTAINED twin would be less safe than in a single. Lots of the light twin accidents were from lack of training or lack of maintenance. That has nothing to do with an intrinsic lack of safety of light or heavy twins. There will always be a time of flight that it's better to pull the good engine back and land straight ahead, or head for the nearest open spot. This is where proficiency comes in. You can take the statistics wherever you want to go, but if I'm on top or in the clouds in a well maintained twin and lose one engine, I'll have a much better chance of getting down intact than any single losing one engine on earth, no matter how well equipped.
do not archive
[quote] ---
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 10:38 am Post subject: IFR Requirements (required vs. good to have) |
|
|
I had the same problem when training. I was so focused on keeping above
stall speed that I flew all approaches at 80 kts.
I can assure you that it's FAR better to just become good at airspeed
control, and know your proper approach speed. Landings become much
better, and MUCH safer, when done within 5 mph of the proper speed.
I nearly ballooned and porpoised into tragedy while flying a hot
approach once, years ago.
As far as GPS not reading airspeed....why and how could it ever....
unless you have it hooked to a pitot system. The only airspeed
indicators you should consider are pitot connected ones, and if you're
that paranoid still, then buy an AOA indicator.
Again though, keeping an extra 20mph on final might just some day
get you seriously hurt, so I'd avoid that and find a better way.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Brinker wrote:
[quote] I repeated 10 times and I will not forget that LOL. Accually I
knew that but was'nt thinking at the time. My CFI drilled the importance
of airspeed into my head so hard that I got into the habit of
approaching final in my Cherokee 140 at 100mph. No problem bleeding off
airspeed on short final. And the extra 20mph is just a little insurance
against a stall.
Randy
opinions ARE like noses everybody has one I just hope I have'nt stuck
mine out so far as to get it knocked off.
---
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brinker(at)cox-internet.c
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:36 pm Post subject: IFR Requirements (required vs. good to have) |
|
|
Tim I think you misunderstood me. I have no problem with
holding 75-80mph on short final. The extra airspeed sure is nice when making
those turns from downwind to base to fInal though. Even on my check ride I
was told by the inspector that I did'nt have to fly them as fast. I told him
I was comfortable with it and he still passed me. Go figure. And no I'm not
paranoid reallllly I'm not not nottt. Anyway I guess we've strayed from
the context of aeroelectric.
Randy
---
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jpleasants(at)bellsouth.n
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 7:24 am Post subject: IFR Requirements (required vs. good to have) |
|
|
Amen, brother!
I might add: pay attention to your (airplane's) attitude in the pattern,
and in the flare. You will quickly learn that you don't even need to look
at an airspeed indicator.
do not archive
---
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mlas(at)cox.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:46 pm Post subject: IFR Requirements (required vs. good to have) |
|
|
John,
It sounds like you have given this issue some thought. What is your
alternative plan when facing a stand of trees or a field of rock? I too
have thought about the same issue and have not been able to come up with
a better idea. One thing to remember is my primary point was that you
still has to be a landing and then you stop the plane. My thoughts are
to think of a formula 1 car which is strong like the Glassair. From my
direct examination of composite aircraft crashes at the site, the impact
into the ground is what seems to kill most of the pilots and not the
stop after the landing. Most of the crashes in composite airplanes are
burners, lots of little pieces, or almost no breakup damage. The
burners are strait forward and mixed, but the airplanes that breakup are
all high velocity impacts.
Mike
--
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
