Earthstar Forums

Yes, stepping on the gas. In front-engined planes a sheet metal "firewall" separates the cabin from the engine compartment to offer some protection to pilot and passengers in case of an engine fire. So firewalling the throttle is pushing it as far as it will go forward.

Mark's planes are not susceptible to porpoising, but the Cessna Cardinal is, and so are some other planes. A porpoise is dangerous because it can easily turn into a crash landing. It works like this: If the plane comes in too fast and isn't smoothly flared to a gentle landing and bounces back in the air when it touches down. If not immediately corrected by adding a little power and then landing properly further down the runway, the plane will hit the runway harder the second time it comes down and then bounce higher back into the air. Then it will probably experience an aerodynamic stall (the wing stops flying) and it falls back to the runway farther and at a steeper angle which probably collapses the nose gear and the plane finishes up in a crash landing.

The Cardinal has a cantilever high wing, with no strut, like Mark's planes. That makes it more slippery through the air than a Cessna 172 and more likely to land too fast if the pilot doesn't pay close attention to approach airspeed and descent angle. Mark's landing gear has less springboard effect than the taller gear on Cessnas and the balance characteristics are much different because of the pusher engine. Mark's planes are easier to fly (and more fun) than Cessnas.

 
Dick O'Reilly


________________________________
From: Rahul Choudhary <rahul.chou@gmail.com>
To: "Earthstar_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com" <Earthstar_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 7:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Earthstar_Aircraft] Re: Odyssey: Go Around Procedure / Climb Gradient



 
(yet to be pilot) what is firewalling a throttle? like stepping on the gas?

porpoising sounds interesting. doves here do it all the time prior to light windy landings/perchings. bit like a vertical sine wave right, even dolphins do it. why is it not good for planing? sometimes I think when Mark does his full flap steep landing, what he really does in the last few feet prior to landing, looks like a half-porpoise to me, as in the nose goes up a bit but the plane does'nt really go up that much, just levals out usually for a tiptoe landing (unless a gust sprang up right then at the slow speeds..)

On 21-Apr-2014, at 12:36 pm, Richard OReilly <dickoreilly@yahoo.com> wrote:


 
>Another way to look at it is that go-arounds are rarely necessary and when they are you know it well before you touch down. You know when you are at least 100 yards out if you are going to touch down where you need to touch down. If not, go around. That means that it is not a last second procedure. You'll still be 30-40 feet high when you know you need to go around so the climb gradient isn't really an issue. You already have flying airspeed. You just need to give it full throttle, raise the nose gently to stop the descent and begin a gentle climb as you increase airspeed. You can do it safely with two notches of flaps and worry about raising the flaps after you have established a proper climb and cleared the power lines.
>
>A word about flaps - two notches is all you need for landing. Yes you can land slower and steeper with three or
four notches, but that is an advanced manuever and unnecessary in your early learning period. I understand the flaps are easier to use in the Odyssey than the JT2. They share the same wing but have different fuselages. In the JT2 using one or two notches is easy, but adding a third or fourth requires speeds below 60 mph and a strong arm. I seldom used more than two notches operating off a sandy-dirt runway 2000 ft long. I never used more than half the runway and mostly needed no more than 500-600 ft. I also often landed and took off from a friend's narrow 1000 ft runway and always had plenty of runway even though I usually landed long because the runway was at the base of a hill and I seldom flew the approach as low as I should have.
>
>If you don't decide to go around until you are within a couple feet of the ground it is too late. You should finish the landing and steer the plane and slow it as much as possible before you collide with anything
solid. You may damage the plane but you won't be hurt. The same can't be said for attempting a go around too late.
>
>I did a go around only once in my JT2. The cross wind was strong and very gusty and I was going too fast and too erratic. I once had to abort a takeoff. I had added some weight in the nose in the mistaken notion that it would make the plane fly better. When I reached my normal lift off point and the JT2 showed no inclination to fly, I pulled the engine to idle and hit the brakes. Worked fine.
>
>Many years ago in a rented Cessna Cardinal I got into a porpoising situation on landing. That model was notorious for that possibility. After the second bounce I firewalled the throttle, went around and made a very nice normal landing. Of course I made sure I got my approach speed properly slowed on that second approach.
>
>The point of all this is that I think you are obsessing over a theoretical problem that isn't really there. The
characteristics of your airport demand that you make special rules to accommodate those characteristics. Your special rule is that you decide 100 yards out from the approach end of the runway whether you will be able to land within the first 100 yards of runway. If in doubt, go around. You'll probably do a lot of go arounds as you learn how to safely use that airport. Those go arounds will be easy and safe.
> 
>
>Dick O'Reilly
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: "ananda@guam.net" <ananda@guam.net>
>To: Earthstar_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 7:54 PM
>Subject: [Earthstar_Aircraft] Re: Odyssey: Go Around Procedure / Climb Gradient
>
>
>
> 
>Thanks Dick O'Reilly and Riley ...
>Lacking an alternative field is part of the problem.  That leaves simulation only at altitude.   Certainly this should be done and multiple times.   Your description of the timing is spot-on.   Moving on groundtrack at 88 feet per second eats up runway very fast.   Hence, my point that this procedure needs to deliver sufficient climb in about 10 seconds.    Yes, it is possible to go under the lines, but that is, I believe, what most would consider a hot-dog solution.  I admit that I also have certainly had this thought.
> 
>I am sure Mark B, master of the Odyssey, is following this thread.   I talked to Mark about the field slope but did not mention the power line issue.   Mark gave me a climb range with 0 flaps of 500 to 700fpm.   Assuming, at midfield, the
transition to full power and no flaps was complete, this gives 85 to 115 feet of climb in 10 seconds or 1,000 feet of ground track.   Timely decision making, as Dick mentions, is absolutely critical.
>
>This is why it would be good to have some real world Odyssey flyers with a level field to do some Go Arounds and let me know what climb is achieved with two on board.    With what I know now, the climb does not look sufficient.  Let's see what Skot W and John Karevoll might offer, or others.   Greg Carter may also come online soon.   Thanks
>RMM
>
>
>---In Earthstar_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, <dickoreilly@...> wrote :
>
>
>With two aboard you should be able to simulate the power line obstacle at a safe location where there aren't any obstructions. Instructor can concentrate on the altitude while you fly a simulated landing approach. Instructor can tell you to go around at any time and you do the real go around from the simulated approach while instructor determines if you hit the simulated power lines. You can practice this many times until doing a go around becomes second nature to you and instructor believes that you can safely operate on the real runway.
>
>The trick in the real world is to do a go around at the first hint of trouble with the approach. If the approach isn't perfect go around immediately. Pilots who do this live long and happy lives at the expense of flying a few extra miles and using a little more gas than those who don't. Practice
this and you get to the point that nearly every approach is perfect. Never ever listen to your inner voice if it tries to tell you that you can save a bad approach or a bad landing. Go around. Pretty soon that bad inner voice will get the message and shut up.
>
>
>
>Dick O'Reilly
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: "ananda@..." <ananda@...>
>To: Earthstar_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 4:14 PM
>Subject: [Earthstar_Aircraft] Re: Odyssey: Go Around Procedure / Climb Gradient
>
>
>
> 
>Additional Clarification..
>The power lines are at the highest end of the runway and are an issue when landing, not on takeoff.
>This is why I am addressing Go-Around Procedures, not normal landings or takeoffs.    
>
>Takeoff gives 2,000 feet of downhill grade into prevailing winds with maybe a 20' tree line to climb over.    Landing has the uphill grade.   First 1,000 feet only 17 feet of uphill slope, then the second 1,000 feet with 50 feet of uphill slope.   THEN...at the runway end on landing....the power lines sit 40' in the air at about 2,100 feet.   Hence, 90 feet of climb from mid-field for a rejected
landing / go around procedure.  
>
>For safety purposes, I need to consider 1,000 pounds gross weight.    My CFI prefers using MTOW but that is unlikely in real
flying (my MTOW is 1,250).   The second phase flight test showed 980 lbs gross weight, Vy of 70mph.  I assume Vx of 60mph.   HKS 700E / 26' Heavy Duty Wing.
>
>So, regarding Go-Around Procedures, not normal landings or takeoffs.  
>Your further advice and thoughts, gentlemen? 
>Thanks and Happy Easter   
>RMM
>
>
>
>

Thanks, that's why i used to think about a low cost short range accurate laser altimeter earlier... to convert the art of tiptoe landings to a science; that even newbies could land like Mark :) Heck, would be pretty easy for one of the electronics geniuses on forum to automate it to a recreational simple ILS, pilot's side only. guess half of the bumpy accidents happen there..

Rahul

But then we might lose our sharpness and finesse for perfect hand landings. And back to the go-around, I would do those soon in transition training as you just don’t know when you would need that skill from your bag of trickss. Usually with forethought and planning, and go-around isn’t necessary, but . . . . . . . . . . . . things can go not as planned, an animal, person or vehicle can suddenly appear, or even the nice little strip you had worked hard at getting the right approach set up just doesn’t look right. That’s the time to say I’m going around and set up again.

Hi from Mark
You don't have trouble staying in your lane on the highway.
You won't have trouble making greaser landings because the same thing works on landings, look down to the end of the runway and you will know when to flair. What gets in the way is your manufactured fear and that is what causes a lack of confidence on your self. Fact is you do know how to do it but you doubt your own skill set. This is a very common cause of accidents, people who fix problems say to them selves "I know how to do this!" And they do it. I Am not talking to any one person hear. When you drive you look far down the road. Look at the big picture and your on board guidance computer will let you know when you need to act and what you need to do
As long as you don't build a wall of fear to block your vision of the right thing to do.
Happy Flying
Mark

Sent from my iPhone

Maybe I don't understand something, but I agree with Dick. If your
instructor is confident that he can both takeoff and land your plane. Then
I'd say that the best way to accomplish this is to have the instructor
solo, and start making low passes that simulate a missed approach. At
first, with plenty of safety margin. Then repeat, each time closer to a
more realistic missed approach. Then when he's comfortable, do it at dual
weight the same way.

This method would give me more confidence than any set of calculations.

Hi Dave..
You certainly understand correctly. Just spoke again to Mark B. We seem to have a good consensus here. Guam is hot and humid so there is a performance hit. But early mornings and late afternoons provide calm air virtually every day. I have to travel in May, so really hope to get some flying done before then.

For the record....I had asked for input from pilots in order to assure relevance. I would request again that the topic be respected and not diverted to off-track issues. That is called Hi-Jacking and is not at all considerate. If a member has other topics or questions, then a new topic or private emails serve better. This is a generous community and should be met with the appropriate internet courtesy.

I am going to post a separate note on etiquette, to hopefully reinforce some concepts of how to better interact with courtesy and respect for others on an Internet forum.

RMM


---In Earthstar_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, <dave.bonkowski@...> wrote :

Maybe I don't understand something, but I agree with Dick. If your instructor is confident that he can both takeoff and land your plane. Then I'd say that the best way to accomplish this is to have the instructor solo, and start making low passes that simulate a missed approach. At first, with plenty of safety margin. Then repeat, each time closer to a more realistic missed approach. Then when he's comfortable, do it at dual weight the same way.

This method would give me more confidence than any set of calculations.