BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:37

Username Protected wrote:

They all diverted on their first miss and you didn't. Says more about you than the plane.

Mike C.

I never went missed. So clearly his response was not well thought out. There's just no reason to take the tone he takes. Is it so hard to be nice? It was the same crap in the SF50 thread. It gets no fun.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:37

Username Protected wrote:

Yup, just a few degrees.

More of a round out in the descent to a flat attitude, occurs just over the numbers.
Then in the ground effect, you see the descent rate slow.
Then nose up a few degrees (what I assume you call a flare)
Then mains touch.

What is funny, is I then went searching for the technique I see a lot of pilots execute on landing. King Schools, Ron Machiado and all the others use almost exactly the same technique as the Mooney video. I then found a couple examples of what I think of "flare", all given as examples of what NOT to do.

So with that stated, you are right. :cheers:

Tim

That's what I mean by a flare. In an Acclaim, if you'd look at your attitude indicator, it's about 5 to 6 degrees nose up and yes, it happens at the very last moment, but if not executed, the result is not pretty. It continues to fly on the nose wheel or worse.

Edit: I think I'm am trying to say, and maybe it's not like that in a Cirrus, but in the Mooney, the yoke is in your lap upon a properly executed touchdown, and there is that final pull that happens sometimes right before touch down. Let me look for a video.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:39

Username Protected wrote:

:popcorn: Mike C taking the Beechtalk creep factor to a whole new level! Seems like more and more of these trolls are popping up.....While temporarily amusing, I agree with JC that they are detrimental to the site.

I may disagree with him, but I have yet to see Mike C. start anything. Respond aggressively yes; but not out of bounds.

Tim

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:40

Username Protected wrote:

Do you not find it advantageous to land whatever airplane you happen to be be flying close to the critical angle of attack? I see lots of corporate guys who hit the ground in an attitude more suited to cruise, but I have never really understood the reasoning why. :shrug:

If you're talking about corporate jets, it simply has to do with stopping distance. If you hold off a CJ, it will float, and float, and float, and then some. Goal is to slam it into the ground, dump lift, get on the breaks.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:40

Username Protected wrote:

:popcorn: Mike C taking the Beechtalk creep factor to a whole new level! Seems like more and more of these trolls are popping up.....While temporarily amusing, I agree with JC that they are detrimental to the site.

BS, every post of his has valid points and is very well thought out. I may not agree with his views at all times, but a troll he his not. My personal feeling is that he adds tremendous value to BT.

Show me one of his posts that are not a valid response?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:46

Username Protected wrote:

I don't understand the tone and intent of your antagonistic posts.

I agree with you.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:48

Username Protected wrote:

BS, every post of his has valid points and is very well thought out. I may not agree with his views at all times, but a troll he his not. My personal feeling is that he adds tremendous value to BT.

Show me one of his posts that are not a valid response?

C'mon Michael, really?

You've shown yourself to be a person here of reasonably high IQ and EQ. You, as much as anyone here knows it's not necessarily "what" you say, as much as "how" you say it.

In other words...

Civility.

Or for you highbrow types...

Modicum of Decorum

:doh:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:49

Username Protected wrote:

I was taught to land the Cirrus in a very flat manor

Tim

Wouldn't it have been easier and safer to land ON a very flat manor instead of IN a very flat manor? Probably would have pissed off the owners less if you didn't keep flying through their crib all the time.

Sorry Tim-thought I could leave it alone but just couldn't help myself :bud:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:52

Username Protected wrote:

Do you not find it advantageous to land whatever airplane you happen to be be flying close to the critical angle of attack? I see lots of corporate guys who hit the ground in an attitude more suited to cruise, but I have never really understood the reasoning why. :shrug:

If you're talking about corporate jets, it simply has to do with stopping distance. If you hold off a CJ, it will float, and float, and float, and then some. Goal is to slam it into the ground, dump lift, get on the breaks.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:52

Username Protected wrote:

I was taught to land the Cirrus in a very flat manor

Tim

Wouldn't it have been easier and safer to land ON a very flat manor instead of IN a very flat manor? Probably would have pissed off the owners less if you didn't keep flying through their crib all the time.

Sorry Tim-thought I could leave it alone but just couldn't help myself :bud:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:53

Username Protected wrote:

I was taught to land the Cirrus in a very flat manor

Tim

Wouldn't it have been easier and safer to land ON a very flat manor instead of IN a very flat manor? Probably would have pissed off the owners less if you didn't keep flying through their crib all the time.

Sorry Tim-thought I could leave it alone but just couldn't help myself :bud:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:55

Username Protected wrote:

Don't have any real time in a Cirrus other than a few demo flights. But 80 over the numbers in any piston single seems excessive in a slick airplane. I'm always aiming for 1.2 stall speed which in a cirrus should be right around 70knots over the numbers at 50 feet. Anything special about Cirrus where that sounds like way too slow of a speed?

80knots over the numbers in an Acclaim will add 1500 feet to your landing.

I'm sure you have a lot more experience than I do. I have experimented with landing slower than 80 but my normal practice is to follow a stabilized approach and to fly the airplane the way I was trained to. I've got less than 200 landings in a Cirrus so not a lot of experience in this airframe. Of course I have a lot more in Bonanzas and tail wheel planes. But I find that over the numbers at 80, as recommended by the manufacturer of the airplane, works quite well.

Your point about a "slick airplane" is worth commenting on. I think anyone who has experience flying a Cirrus and a Bonanza will tell you that making a good landing in the Cirrus is more difficult. That wing on the Cirrus is a big part of the reason. It is more speed critical, in my experience, than the Bonanza's.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 22:59

Username Protected wrote:

:popcorn: Mike C taking the Beechtalk creep factor to a whole new level! Seems like more and more of these trolls are popping up.....While temporarily amusing, I agree with JC that they are detrimental to the site.

I may disagree with him, but I have yet to see Mike C. start anything. Respond aggressively yes; but not out of bounds.

Tim

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 23:06

There was a French war rifle for sale recently. I almost bought it. Ad read "French war rifle. Perfect condition. Never fired, but dropped once."

Sorry, could not resist - carry on

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Jan 2015, 23:09

I really need to convince the Jeff's to add an emoticon for sticking a tongue out an making raspberry sounds.

Tim

That PC12 is biiiiiiiig.