In a message dated 6/21/2007 2:59:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
europa-list@matronics.com writes:
Greetings Team,
John, It's worth perhaps making the point that trees make a fairly
reasonable place to land in an emergency. Over 90% of those force landing in
trees survive - beats landing in a housing estate or spinning into hard
ground. Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
Words of wisdom, David, but every departure situation is different, every
airplane is different and every pilot is different. Unfortunately, there isn't
a "one size fits all" solution to the issue of engine failure on take off.
Being a tow pilot, I have had A LOT of practice, far more than the average
pilot, doing take offs and landings in a wide variety of conditions. Having
done
a couple of thousand glider tows out of TN89 in my Pawnee, I've had a lot of
time to think about where I'd go in the event of an engine failure in a lot
of different weather conditions, both with and without a glider on tow.
In the case of my strip, the trees on what is the usual departure end of the
runway (due to prevailing valley wind flow) consist of a stand of about 100
yards (meters) wide and their bases are about 50' lower than the runway due
to the lay of the land. So, the trees I deal with daily are lower than typical
trees in the area as viewed from the runway level.
On the other side of the those trees is a 500-700 acre, pool table flat
river bottom field. Although it usually has a crop in it in all but the dead of
winter, I would much prefer to have a hard landing in corn or soybeans in that
field as opposed to picking leaves out of the trees at the end of the runway
and destroying my airplane. I have found that if I accelerate to 75-80 kts
in ground effect with the flaps up I can coast over and clear the trees easily
in my Europa with the extra speed from about 150' agl and make it into the
next field. If the engine quits before I reach this speed or altitude, yes,
I'm going to opt for the trees because I have no other choice. Trying to turn
back to the runway from lower than 150' in anything other than a hang glider
is a good way to demonstrate the flight characteristics of a lawn dart.
The Pawnee or Citabria we used to tow with are both much different from the
Europa because they have so much more drag than the Europa. Both the Citabria
and the Pawnee have much higher wing loading and thus much higher sink rates
without power than the Europa, too. I wouldn't even consider a 180 in either
lower than 800' agl and then only in calm conditions. Getting into the next
field in either would require at least 400' agl, so an engine failure in
either of these would likely result in some squirrel chasing.
You're right on. At our old airport in Illinois, we required at least a
glider
solo for anyone who wanted to learn how to fly. In most cases, they finished
the glider rating before transitioning to power. If I had my way, that would
be required of all pilots.
Jim Puglise A-283
I agree completely, Jim. Glider time should be required for all pilots,
perhaps even up through solo. I've said for many years that beginning power
pilots should be required to do at least 20 hours in gliders. That way, they
learn
how to fly the airplane before they have to worry about managing systems
such as fuel, engine, electrical, etc. If nothing else, would-be power pilots
would learn how to use their feet. Many, if not most, of the power only pilots
I've flown with would wear a hole in their windshields if they had a yaw
string taped to it.
Regards,
John Lawton
Dunlap, TN (TN89)
N245E - Flying
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
|