X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:49:43 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [198.64.152.110] (HELO sdc.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.0) with ESMTP id 5037391 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:34:35 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=198.64.152.110; envelope-from=Ronald@sdc.com Received: from [192.168.0.14] [68.202.59.0] by sdc.com with ESMTP (SMTPD-11.5) id bfb600028a17d8b9; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:24:27 -0400 User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.0.0.100825 X-Original-Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:33:57 -0400 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Fin From: Ronald STEVENS X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List X-Original-Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [LML] Re: Fin In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Hi John This is a nice idea about the 1500ft and the rounded arc approach, however the Tower will not always agree with you, so I imagine you will have to call 'unable' a lot. (Tight Pattern, Squared Pattern are calls that I have heard many times from the tower), is it not then wiser just to go a bit faster? And just for fun.....1500ft pattern would not be possible where I live, our airport (7FL6) is right under Daytona Beach (KDAB) where our ceiling is at 1200ft. -- Ronald On 6/29/11 1:14 PM, "John Hafen" wrote: >Giff: > >Good moves all. > >Additionally, I think in the early days, guys didn't consciously realize >how much AOA increases with bank angle. Flying square corners in a >pattern, especially in the base to final turn, can stall the plane way >too close to the ground to do anything about it. > >That is why HPAT recommends flying a 1500 foot pattern, and a roundish >arc from down wind to final, rather than square corners from down wind to >base, then base to final. > >John Hafen > > >On Jun 29, 2011, at 8:26 AM, Giffen Marr wrote: > >Before I started to build my IV-P, I reviewed the accident history of the >IV.What I found was a significant number of stall spin accidents in the >IV. Why a higher rate then other aircraft? From my analysis, I felt there >were two reasons, one,the aircraft tended to have an aft CG, and two, the >tail became blanketed in the spin, causing difficulty in recovery. My >un-flown solution was to move as much weight forward as I could, add >stall strips, add the ventral fin and add about 48 square inches of area >to the rudder trailing edge. You must also remember that when you retract >the gear, the cg moves aft about 2 inches. With an aft CG, the aircraft >will tend to go flat in the spin, which makes recovery difficult. > >Giff Marr >N229GM >1st engine run before AirVenture. >-- >For archives and unsub >http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html > > >-- >For archives and unsub >http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html