Jump to content
2018 Page Fly-in Cancelled! Read more... ×


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/19/2017 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    I might regret posting this but when I read people say that a CT lands flat I think that is because the speed is too high. Slow it down a bit increase the angle of attack the nose wheel is now higher. I can see why some are scared of full flap landings because it is a little more demanding but that is a matter of practice. The stall is so docile and also low speed that it is not to be feared. Get out there and enjoy such a wonderful capable bird.
  2. 2 points
    When operating at low throttle the mixture is lean anyway then add very cold air and the mixture is very lean. Carbs will altitude compensate but not density compensate like injection will. The answer is to just increase throttle till it smooths out or if you don't feel like that just go higher for thinner air which will also fix it. The altitude compensation of Bing carbs is not that good anyway so climb to find the best spot.
  3. 2 points
    Amelia Earhart Peak 11,974'
  4. 2 points
    I don’t think anybody takes exception to landing technique discussion. But we don’t need a new thread on it twice a week. Just start a landing technique thread and keep all of the discussions there. At least that way if somebody wants to find info on landings, they can dig through one deep thread instead of twenty single page threads.
  5. 2 points
    This whack a mole of new threads all on the same topic is getting a little weird. It seems like the discussion gets to a certain point where people differ, then a new thread pops up and the cycle of abuse starts over...
  6. 2 points
    The CT is a numbers plane, its slick with the nose down, dirty with the nose high and power off, so the best approach is flying the numbers for the configuration. We start our students at 15deg and 0 flap until they are able to maintain a steady glideslope and approach speed and figure out where the ground is to time the round out and flare appropriately. Common errors in the CT landing is ballooning by an over pitch at the transition from the round out to flare, failure to recognize elevation above the runway, or failure in maintaining an appropriate altitude while reducing speed to touchdown speed near stall. Using 15 or 0 flaps allows some addition time in the flare while the speed is depleting for touchdown, and yes if you are patient and continue increasing pitch as speed decreases then you should touchdown near stall speed. If you are not patient enough in increasing pitch while reducing speed you will touch flat and may bounce and get a second landing practice. If you cross the runway threshold above target approach speed then you will have to work longer in the flare to reduce the speed to near stall touchdown and float further down the runway (long runway or long landing desired, no problem just takes longer). Cross the threshold to slow and the transition from round out, to flare, to touchdown will be very timely, firm if not timed correctly, or over pitched because of rapid sink, followed by a balloon then quickly run out of airspeed. The CT with 30 or more flap is certainly manageable with the appropriate airspeed and is not terribly difficult once you have mastered the sight picture for round out and flare. However, the CT is very easy to balloon during the initial round out with 30 or more flap when it hits ground effect. You have to make a smooth level off, almost pause for a couple seconds until a little sink is observed, then continue with pitch increasing into flare. With 15 or 0 flap this transition is a bit easier plus if a balloon occurs it is easier as an instructor to salvage it into a go around or landing. With 30 or more flap the instructor has to really be close to the throttle as it can quickly bleed speed during the balloon.
  7. 2 points
    The Best Ever Holidays to all.... and a great 2018, 19, & 20!!!
  8. 2 points
  9. 2 points
    Gorilla tape should provide a temporary repair.
  10. 2 points
    I never really liked the Willette opinion letter. It focuses on part 43. That portion of the regs. imposes NOTHING on owners or operators. The topic of mandatory engine overhaul, or any other mandatory maintenance, are requirements of WHEN to perform maintenance, and they are found in other rules like part 91, 39, 135, etc........................Part 43 speaks to WHO can perform, and HOW maintenance must be performed. So for SLSA, 91.327 is the operational rule that puts maintenance burdens on operators. It doesn't speak to any kind of "maintenance program". It does speak to an "inspection program" for the aircraft.......................................... a "Condition Inspection". A condition inspection is just that..........................an inspection. That is the extent of legally required maintenance on SLSA aircraft. The other key language in 91.327 is the requirement for operators to have any maintenance performed on their SLSA be performed (by appropriately qualified personnel) in accordance with PROCEDURES. In the case of SLSA, these PROCEDURES must be those specified by the aircraft manufacturer. An overhaul requirement, or a hose change requirement, or a training requirement, are not PROCEDURES, and are therefore not part of required maintenance on SLSA regardless of what the maintenance manual or POH say. I agree with previous posts, that an SLSA aircraft manufacturer can make other types of maintenance legally mandatory with regard to WHEN, and HOW by way of the Safety Directive system. The FAA can also do so using the Airworthiness Directive system. I too think that the inspector in IOWA is 100% wrong in taking the position that the engine must be overhauled for the aircraft to be legal. He is well within his authority to say that he is not going to certify the aircraft as in a condition for safe operation, but his basis for saying it is fundamentally incorrect in this case. Same could be said for hose change, or lock nut change. Absent a Safety Directive or AD, those types of maintenance requirements come down to the judgment of the inspector after diligent application of the required inspection PROCEDURES. Just because something is replaced, or overhauled does not by itself correct an unsafe condition. I can replace a properly functioning used lock nut with a brand new defective one, and I have actually induced a potentially unsafe condition. Wouldn't it just make more sense to use proper maintenance PROCEDURES when installing/inspecting any fastener, and then safety can be assured. Basically what that means is......................if the nut is found to be bad as installed, REPLACE it. Used is not necessarily bad, new is not necessarily good...................Judgment prevails and the regulations support this. How many hose changes have resulted in off airport landings due to debris? How many off airport landings have been found to be a direct result of NOT replacing all hoses at and arbitrary 5 yr. mark? Anticept, The Piper hose AD is an apples to oranges comparison as I see it. The unsafe condition there is cause primarily by a routing proximity to the aircraft exhaust and not a blanket life limit for a hose. It is very specific, and as we have discussed previously, the AD only applies to aircraft with a specific type of hose design installed in the first place. Nevertheless, the safety issue was addressed in the correct way. If hose changes or engine overhauls, or locknut replacements are so critical to safety in the SLSA world, a Safety Directive must be issued.
  11. 2 points
    The wind has no effect on the turn, whether upwind or downwind in direction.
  12. 2 points
    Repairing two wingtips shattered during landing short of runway.
  13. 2 points
    It takes about 12 man hours to do a proper condition inspection on a CTSW, that includes complying with all the safety directives. If you change sparkplugs, and change oil and filter you will have another $100 in parts. That is if there is nothing wrong.
  14. 2 points
    $900 isn't steep for an annual many main centers charge $2200 up to $5K. $900 is reasonable cheap.
  15. 2 points
    Congrats on keeping the CTSW, I think it’s a good choice. $900 seems steep for an annual, that is getting toward Lockwood price without the Lockwood experience level! What worked out for me when I was S-LSA, was to find a good local independent A&P, and I did all the work myself. I paid him $400 to supervise and look over all my work and sign off the logbook entry.
  16. 2 points
    Just remember anyone, including a trunk monkey, can do work on an experimental aircraft. But, unless you built it EAB (experimental, amateur built) you will need the 16 hour course and the appropriate FAA certificate to sign off inspections on an E-LSA but only if it's yours. If EAB you don't need the 16 hour course but you still need a FAA certificate to sign off inspections and that only works for the original builder. If you didn't build the EAB the "anyone can work on it" still applies but an A&P would be required to sign off inspections. For S-LSA you need the 3 week course then you can work on and sign off inspections on any S-LSA. Being an A&P works too. And, what Andy says about just because you can, doesn't mean you should, is right on. About 7 years ago a cylinder head cost about $2K, probably a lot more now. So, screw up a valve job and you could have a major expense.
  17. 2 points
    It smells exactly the same as burning money. When my exhaust broke just aft of the cylinder, I didn’t notice until I pulled the cowl, likely a couple of flight hours later. Others said later they thought my airplane sounded a bit different from the other CTs, but not crazy. I didn’t notice any change, maybe because of my noose canceling headset. I did hear a change in some of the GoPro video I reviewed after the repair.
  18. 2 points
    We have the same problem in Aus. with not enough Rotax trained people. The average aircraft mechanic seems to have the attitude "I've been working on Lycs. and Conts. for thirty years so why should I go to school to work on these little pieces of crap". I think the saying goes they don't know what they don't know.
  19. 2 points
    The latest is that our two are on the docks in Singapore. They were offloaded from the TAURUS on the 4th Oct. and scheduled to load on another ship end of month. That would have them arrive in Aus. fifteen days later. We wait patiently but at least they are out of Germany.
  20. 2 points
    A Merry Christmas and blessings in the new year.
  21. 1 point
    There is now a growing population of Rotax engines on LSA aircraft that are approaching or going past 2,000 hours TIS. Knowledge and topics that allow owners to watch for and respond to signs of trouble before it occurs is needed by those that are, or will be, using "on condition" maintenance of the Rotax. In a recent thread on this forum, Corey and Roger commented on Rotax valves and valve seats. This is something I wasn't aware of and hadn't heard about. There is little to no discussion of "on condition" maintenance by "official" Rotax channels but there is an excellent core of experienced and technical people on this forum who are able to provide advice and details for this. For those of us who will be using "on condition" for our engine maintenance, how about a separate category for our forum that keeps us informed and addresses this?
  22. 1 point
    My recollection of the tail strike is what Andy describes. Typical with a GA pilot flying the CT, my friend rounded out too high and wasn't expecting the rapid speed bleed-off. I don't recall the flap setting and guess it was 15 but may have been 30. He wasn't carrying enough speed and encountered the sink. His reaction was to do what he would normally do with the Cessnas and Pipers he typically flies which was to just pull back and let the plane sink and touch down hard. This works with the bullet proof Cessna's but not with a CT. This all occurred so fast, and I was also pretty much a newbee too, that I didn't take over and add throttle. Just some cosmetic damage but a lesson learned for both of us. Ed, no worries that I might feel your comments are telling me how to land. The thing is, and it relates to your excellent analogy to the good golf swing, is that I do a pretty good landing now with the occasional "hook" or "slice" and am getting comfortable in my old age. But, I have been so far out of the box with the training my friend Phil has given me that anything is fair game for me to try and I look forward to this. As I said earlier, I'm pretty much where you are with the final stage and have a pretty good feeling for how my CT will respond so I need to get out of my comfort zone and give that "full stick" thing a try.
  23. 1 point
    The friends I have let land the CTSW with no previous CT experience say it can't be done also.
  24. 1 point
    Please come play in my sandbox. I am in the process of helping my son, who is a Cessna pilot For many years, flying every week inter island. in a near new 172, transition to the Ctls N413F. Yesterday we were out flying in 26 gusting 32 so you’ll begin flying the aircraft as soon as you open the hangar door.. Yesterday’s flight was landings in -6 to + 35 flaps you might as well Try it all so you know what to expect. We’ve had a strip of tape on the windscreen for the last month during this training and that helps a lot for the site picture. We were landing on 4L and the winds were 345. Needless to say we were the only one out training in those conditions at three in the afternoon . The goal is to do touch and go without ever letting the nosewheel touch the runway . We were successful in all but one landing of keeping the nose wheel off the pavement . I’m not suggesting anybody do this or that it is even the right thing to do however I treat the centerline of the runway merely as a suggestion . Rather than flying the centerline we focus on the Windsock and do our final approach diagonally across the runway focusing on that windsock . Close to the ground just before touchdown it’s indicating about 40 and although you’re not really looking inside the cockpit groundspeed is under 20. You don’t care about the wind speed you only care is the gust differential speed. You can find yourself making several power adjustments to keep the wings level and the nose very up attitude. As odd as it sounds this can be very smooth landing’s . These flight design aircraft are incredible machines and I would like to go someday and watch a real pilot put it through the paces There is no perfect way to fly these aircraft however really “ please come play in my sandbox anytime .” farmer
  25. 1 point
    Happy Holidays and New year to All!