Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #35906
From: Paul Nafziger <naf@britevalley.com>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML] Re: engine failure on TO
Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 14:41:08 -0400
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
I suppose we don't want to start an argument about the "wing-over method". <g>  It actually does work.
 
Naf


From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of MikeEasley@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 8:50 AM
To: Lancair Mailing List
Subject: [LML] Re: engine failure on TO

 
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
 
 
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster