X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 01:54:45 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-m26.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.7] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.7f) with ESMTP id 951976 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:34:15 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.7; envelope-from=RicArgente@cs.com Received: from RicArgente@cs.com by imo-m26.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r6.3.) id q.282.4710dd1 (4254) for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:33:24 -0500 (EST) From: RicArgente@cs.com X-Original-Message-ID: <282.4710dd1.3107b0d3@cs.com> X-Original-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:33:23 EST Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Runway checks, passes, flybys X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_282.4710dd1.3107b0d3_boundary" X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 8000 X-Spam-Flag: NO --part1_282.4710dd1.3107b0d3_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 01/24/2006 10:17:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, lorn@dynacomm.ws writes: > What good since rules or even FAA rules, for that matter, am I, or > anyone doing the standard overhead approach, violating? > > After reading my writing above, I have convinced myself to do > overhead approaches whenever possible. I am starting today. Hi Lorn & others, I do overhead approaches as well, especially when we are arriving in form ation. It's the easiest way to break up the formation. And I've been told that it looks real cool!! ;-) The only problem with overhead approaches, especially in non-controlled airports, is that most of the spam cams trolling around the pattern don't know what the heck an overhead approach is! If you said something like, "Lancair on a 2 mile initial for the overhead...", very few folks in the pattern, IMHO, would know what you mean or know what your position is. So, to make my position MORE clear, I usually say or add, "Lancair, overhead approach, entering the UPWIND for Rwy 28". This way, 'they'll'' know that I am flying the OPPOSITE of downwind even if they have no idea what an overhead approach is... As for high-speed low flybys down the RUNWAY ...IMHO, don't feel this is a terribly unsafe maneuver as long as you know what the heck you are doing. Hey, I do it all the time (as some of you already know). It's one of the really neat things that my Lancair can do real well. Please note that I didn't just fly one day and execute a fast low approach out of the blue.--- I had several highly experienced Lancair pilots show me how to execute the maneuver properly & safely. Some may regard it as reckless but I differ in that opnion. Going low and fast around my neighborhood or following a river or highway, low and fast, would be an entirely different story. So what's the purpose of this maneuver? I guess it's simply to show-off my plane...nothing wrong with that. Been doing it for years and have never had anybody complain or been accused of being reckless. Yes, there is probably a higher risk compared to simply landing the damn thing, but it's one that I have chosen to accept. I've been closely monitoring Lancair accident files over the years. I can recall only one accident where the individual was actually doing a high-speed, low pass down the rwy and ended up stalling the airplane (I beleive it was the 'Dream Catcher' 320). The guy, if I remember correctly, just purchased the plane and probably have never execute this maneuver before. Does anybody here know of more such accidents?? Please advice. BTW, doing this maneuver with the gear down is probably not the way to go...which is why I believe the pilot of a recent Lancair crash had an entirely different intention in mind on his gear-down low-approach flight. Ok, start shooting....aim, fire!!! -Grease --part1_282.4710dd1.3107b0d3_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 01/24/2006 10:17= :45 AM Eastern Standard Time, lorn@dynacomm.ws writes:
What good since rules or even F= AA rules, for that matter, am I, or 
anyone doing the standard overhead approach, violating?

After reading my writing above, I have convinced myself to do 
overhead approaches whenever possible. I am starting today.


Hi Lorn & others,

I do overhead approaches as well, especially when we are arriving in formati= on.  It's the easiest way to break up the formation.  And I've bee= n told that it looks real cool!!  ;-) 

The only problem with overhead approaches, especially in non-controlled airp= orts, is that most of the spam cams trolling around the pattern don't know w= hat the heck an overhead approach is!  If you said something like, "Lan= cair on a 2 mile initial for the overhead...", very few folks in the pattern= , IMHO,  would know what you mean or know what your position is. =20=

So, to make my position MORE clear, I usually say or add, "Lancair, overhead= approach, entering the UPWIND for Rwy 28". This way, 'they'll'' know that I= am flying the OPPOSITE of downwind even if they have no idea what an overhe= ad approach is...

As for high-speed low flybys down the RUNWAY ...IMHO,  don't feel this=20= is a terribly unsafe maneuver as long as you know what the heck you are doin= g.  Hey, I do it all the time (as some of you already know).  It's= one of the really neat things that my Lancair can do real well.  Pleas= e note that I didn't just fly one day and execute a fast low approach out of= the blue.--- I had several highly experienced Lancair pilots show me how to= execute the maneuver properly & safely. 

Some may regard it as reckless but I differ in that opnion.  Going low=20= and fast around my neighborhood or following a river or highway, low and fas= t, would be an entirely different story. 

So what's the purpose of this maneuver?  I guess it's simply to show-of= f my plane...nothing wrong with that.  Been doing it for years and have= never had anybody complain or been accused of being reckless.  Yes, th= ere is probably a higher risk compared to simply landing the damn thing, but= it's one that I have chosen to accept.  

I've been closely monitoring Lancair accident files over the years.  I=20= can recall only one accident where the individual was actually doing a high-= speed, low pass down the rwy and ended up stalling the airplane (I beleive i= t was the 'Dream Catcher'  320).  The guy, if I remember correctly= , just purchased the plane and probably have never execute this maneuver bef= ore.  Does anybody here know of more such accidents?? Please advice.
BTW, doing this maneuver with the gear down is probably not the way to go...= which is why I believe the pilot of a recent Lancair crash had an entirely d= ifferent intention in mind on his gear-down low-approach flight. 

Ok, start shooting....aim, fire!!!

-Grease


 





--part1_282.4710dd1.3107b0d3_boundary--