Jump to content

John Vance

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About John Vance

  • Rank
    Senior Crew Member
  • Birthday 12/27/1954

Profile Information

  • Location
    Elkhart, IN (KEKM); Wallace, NC (KACZ)
  • Interests
    Flying the CT, Sailboat Racing
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,534 profile views
  1. Hi Dick - I’ll probably return in early June, and am looking forward to some mid-west aviating. My airplane was five years old with only 105 hours on the Hobbs when I bought it. So it spent several years sitting in a hangar in Texas, and I believe that’s probably why I’m having this problem when others are using ethanol fuel with no issues. However, I posted that info because like me, many probably assume that if the fuel is properly filtered & sumped, no debris or water can show up in your carb. Not so, at least in my case. Funny thing is, I drain the sump before every flight, and never see water, but I do see it in the bowls from time to time. I had always assumed the bowls were aluminum, until I read the Kathryn’s Report on the accident. Surprise, I guess they’re cast zinc. Now that I’m aware of the issue, it’s not a problem but I’ll probably replace the bowls at the next annual. Thanks for the info on MMO.
  2. Yes, I saw that as well. You could do that with Auto non-ethanol, too. If only...
  3. Between Swift 94 in Michigan & Indiana and non-ethanol auto gas, I’ve managed to avoid ethanol for a year and a half now, and it seems to help, at least in my case. You don’t find many vintage car owners with nice things to say about what it does to carburetors.
  4. Prior to making a couple of changes in operating & maintaining my CTLS, I experienced a couple of partial power loss incidents. I’ve since found that corrosion products originating in the carb bowls can plug your jets. Below is a link to the Kathryn’s Report covering the investigation into the 2016 fatal accident that occurred at Fond du Lac. Read especially the section on the carburetor inspection. This is an extreme case, but it’s an eyeopener. I’ve found the same phenomenon in both carb bowls of my airplane, but to a much lesser extent. These days, I inspect & clean the bowls every 3 months and have begun limiting ethanol, and the engine never misses a beat. At some point, I may replace the bowls since the “black areas” seem to breed this stuff, but the cleaning regimen isn’t a big deal. http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2016/07/flight-design-ctls-accident-occurred.html
  5. Call Desser. The last time I ordered these they were listed as GL-4087, otherwise known as TU 13/500-6 (400-6) AC TR-87 HEAVY DUTY.
  6. I’m in if I’m back from NC by then. I’m looking forward to flying the midwest again, if not early June, then later.
  7. Roger all of that. I used to enjoy spinning the 150 as well. They wrap up pretty tight after the first few revs but recovery is not a problem. Not planning to go there in a CT.
  8. That’s a great question. I’ve always kept the airspeed a little higher for slips, just because it’s a cross-control situation (but better than a skid) and then there’s the transition to the flare, at a really low altitude. It might be worth trying at altitude to see what happens. On the other hand, on short final, the descent profile in the low 40+ kt range with 35 flaps is already a little spooky to me.
  9. GrassStrip - thanks for your observations. Your story sounds very similar to my experience. The value I see In the low-speed approach is the relatively steep glide path, simultaneously with a controlled low airspeed and little float on the round-out. The descent rate (fpm) might not look impressive but since groundspeed is low, the descent angle can be similar to a slip. For me, over the fence at 35 flaps & 45 kt is good, but sometimes hold 40 earlier on final to steepen the glide if needed. All this assumes benign wind conditions. I think this is a valuable thing to have in your bag of tricks, if for no other reason than familiarity with that end of the envelope. My go-to technique has always been a slip, but I usually arrive at flare hight with a bit of extra speed.
  10. GrassStrip - I’m with you on the prop hanging thing, and am just cautiously exploring that last phase of the approach. You definitely will not see my video anytime soon. Another interesting thing about flying the CT in that low speed range, though, is that you can feel it when you’re there. During the last biennial, we used that to practice landings with the airspeed indicators covered up - finding that airspeed zone by feel, and maybe adding a bit of down pitch for margin. It’s surprisingly easy.
  11. If you fly a CT, you’ve noticed that sometimes the “bottom drops out” 5 feet above the runway, if you let the speed drop too low and don’t add power. CTs seem to have a fairly sharp drop in the lift/drag ratio somewhere in the mid-40 kt range with full flaps. About a year ago, I read about using this phenomenon for landing approaches in “Stick and Rudder”, and started playing around at altitude with lower approach speeds in the CTLS. This is standard bush pilot technique - nothing new about it, but I’d just never tried it and wasn’t about to try it for real on my own. Last summer during my biennial review, my instructor taught me how to use it for landings, and it now gets regular use. My airplane stalls at 29 kts indicated with full flaps, power off, wings level, at gross wt (I realize that this number results partly from pitot position error). At about 43 kts indicated in my airplane, the approach angle steepens noticeably. You can either nose down to increase stall margin when near the ground, or with enough practice (and benign weather conditions), use power and careful control of airspeed all the way down, no float. I’m using this as an alternative to slipping sometimes, because my passengers don’t like the bank/yaw angles. I’m curious as to whether anyone else is learning/using using this technique in the CT.
  12. There is a bracket near the charging wire that one of the lower cowl fasteners connects to. That works well for me.
  13. FYI - here’s the Notam. The affected area is huge, and the flight path could have passed within 40 nm of Ft Bragg. GPS testing is scheduled as follows and may result in unreliable or unavailable GPS signal. A. Location: Centered at 350649N0792216W or the RDU VOR 221 degree radial at 54NM. B. Datesandtimes(DatesandtimesarebasedonGMT(Z).): 23 – 27 MAR 20 DLY 1200Z – 2300Z C. Duration: Each event may last the entire requested period. D. NOTAM INFO: NAV GPS (FTBRNC GPS 20-27) (INCLUDING WAAS, GBAS, AND ADS-B) MAY NOT BE AVBL WI A 109NM RADIUS CENTERED AT 350649N0792216W (RDU221054) FL400-UNL, 110NM RADIUS AT FL250, 110NM RADIUS AT 10000FT, 85NM RADIUS AT 4000FT AGL, 26NM RADIUS AT 50FT AGL.
  14. Also, I just realized that if Ben2k picked up a CTLS at KILM yesterday, he would have almost surely flown through the affected area.
  15. GPS altitude depends on that signal. Same as horizontal position.
  • Create New...