X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 11:49:45 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d22.mx.aol.com ([205.188.144.208] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) with ESMTP id 1112866 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 14 May 2006 10:02:32 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.144.208; envelope-from=MikeEasley@aol.com Received: from MikeEasley@aol.com by imo-d22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.5.) id q.441.66d855 (62952) for ; Sun, 14 May 2006 10:01:42 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeEasley@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <441.66d855.31989246@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 10:01:42 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] engine failure on TO X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1147615302" X-Mailer: 9.0 Security Edition for Windows sub 5300 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1147615302 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _ellipse@sbcglobal.net_ (mailto:ellipse@sbcglobal.net) I have an ABC Wide World of Flying tape (at least 10 years old) that has a segment on making the turn back to the airport done by Barry Shiff. I think he recommended a 45 degree bank as the optimum for the 180+ turn. Even though steeper was better when it comes to altitude loss, it was too difficult to execute. Another thing to keep in mind is stall speed doesn't increase in a bank IF you let the plane descend and maintain one G. It's not the "tilting" of the wings, it's the G's that increase the stall speed. I know that I have been a little nonchalant about the takeoff. And after reading about the latest accident, I added a "straight ahead vs. turn back" altitude to my pre-takeoff checklist. I just check the altimeter, add 1,000 feet and make a mental note before taking the runway. I hope to never use that altitude to make a life and death decision. More importantly, I hope that a few months from now, when the latest accident is out of mind, that I don't go back to taking a "normal takeoff" for granted. I really feel I had set myself up to be a "statistic" not a "survivor" Mike Easley N815MK Super ES -------------------------------1147615302 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

ellipse@sbcglobal.net

I have an ABC Wide World of Flying tape (at least 10 years old) that ha= s a=20 segment on making the turn back to the airport done by Barry Shiff. &nb= sp;=20 I think he recommended a 45 degree bank as the optimum for the 180+ turn.&nb= sp;=20 Even though steeper was better when it comes to altitude loss, it was too=20 difficult to execute.

Another thing to keep in mind is stall speed doesn't increase in a bank= IF=20 you let the plane descend and maintain one G. It's not the "tilting" o= f=20 the wings, it's the G's that increase the stall speed.

I know that I have been a little nonchalant about the=20 takeoff. And after reading about the latest accident, I added a "strai= ght=20 ahead vs. turn back" altitude to my pre-takeoff checklist. I just chec= k=20 the altimeter, add 1,000 feet and make a mental note before taking the=20 runway. I hope to never use that altitude to make a life and death=20 decision. More importantly, I hope that a few months from now, when th= e=20 latest accident is out of mind, that I don't go back to taking a "normal=20 takeoff" for granted.

I really feel I had set myself up to be a "statistic" not a=20 "survivor"

Mike Easley

N815MK Super ES

-------------------------------1147615302--