Jump to content

Jim Meade

Members
  • Content Count

    1,853
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

About Jim Meade

  • Rank
    Top Gun Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Iowa
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'd think the way to reduce vibration is to construct a mount that always "floats". That is, isn't held rigid anywhere. Shouldn't be too hard to modify. Drill out the front holes and use bushings so the bolt head doesn't touch the tray plus Roger's idea of a zip tie or safety wire to hold up the other end. Of course, it wouldn't be strictly stock. Caveat, I have not done this myself, just thinking out loud.
  2. That's interesting, Corey, because it's not my experience. When you apply the knowledge, how do you document the procedure? Does Rotax make a formal announcement through the instructor in class and you are covered to implement the changes or are you more or less "on your own" until it gets into the manual?
  3. Can anyone refer me to the web site where those with current Rotax training are listed? I think I used to know but when I tried to find it last night I couldn't.
  4. Do you stay current with Rotax courses, Roger? I remember you have often talked of how much you learned in the classes that was not in the manuals. I would expect that if you are going to pass on the latest from Rotax you'd have to be taking the Rotax courses yourself? (Personally, I've taken all the Rotax courses through Heavy Maintenance from Bryan Carpenter, Brett Lawton and Ronnie Smith and never found one thing in the class that wasn't in the manuals, but that's just my experience.)
  5. Does one have to be current with Rotax maintenance courses to perform or sign-off any maintenance work on any Rotax engine, or is your course fine?
  6. Roger, will Rotax recognize your classes as meeting their requirements?
  7. I haven't installed mine yet but the document they sent recommended 27 deg.
  8. I like what the FAA says. Airplane Flying Handbook, page 9-8. They acknowledge that flare is a synonymous term for round out - I use flare. In a CTSW, I start the flare only a few feet above the ground, not 10-20 feet, and let it drift down slowly to a foot or less above the ground. Then back pressure is exerted slowly and only enough to level off. After that, back pressure is added only as the airplane sinks beneath one. Many people have a tendency to add too much back pressure too quickly and balloon. It is easy to over do it. It's better to think of arresting the descent rather than raising the nose, although of course the nose is somewhat elevated at touchdown. My disagreement with Roger is his persistence in advocating a fast, even power-on landing. Round Out (Flare) The round out is a slow, smooth transition from a normal approach attitude to a landing attitude, gradually rounding out the flightpath to one that is parallel to and a few inches above the runway. When the airplane approaches 10 to 20 feet above the ground in a normal descent, the round out or flare is started. Back-elevator pressure is gradually applied to slowly increase the pitch attitude and AOA. [Figure 9-10] The AOA is increased at a rate that allows the airplane to continue settling slowly as forward speed decreases. This is a continuous process until the airplane touches down on the ground. Figure 9-10. Changing angle of attack during round out. When the AOA is increased, the lift is momentarily increased and this decreases the rate of descent. Since power normally is reduced to idle during the round out, the airspeed also gradually decreases. This causes lift to decrease again and necessitates raising the nose and further increasing the AOA. During the round out, the airspeed is decreased to touchdown speed while the lift is controlled so the airplane settles gently onto the landing surface. The round out is executed at a rate such that the proper landing attitude and the proper touchdown airspeed are attained simultaneously just as the wheels contact the landing surface. The rate at which the round out is executed depends on the airplane’s height above the ground, the rate of descent, and the pitch attitude. A round out started excessively high needs to be executed more slowly than one started from a lower height. The round out rate should also be proportional to the rate of closure with the ground. When the airplane appears to be descending very slowly, the increase in pitch attitude should be made at a correspondingly slow rate. The pitch attitude of the airplane in a full-flap approach is considerably lower than in a no-flap approach. To attain the proper landing attitude before touching down, the nose needs to travel through a greater pitch change when flaps are fully extended. Since the round out is usually started at approximately the same height above the ground regardless of the degree of flaps used, the pitch attitude should be increased at a faster rate when full flaps are used. However, the round out should still be executed at a rate that takes the airplane’s downward motion into account.
  9. I've been using one satisfactorily for a number of years on my ELSA CTSW
  10. Yes, I had a problem with the Silent Hektik. Wouldn't hold desired voltage.
  11. I haven't installed the E-Props on my CTSW yet, but I have installed in on my Rans S-7S which I've just started flying. I got along OK with the E-Props pitch gauge. The instructions tell you how to calibrate the gauge, where to place it on the blade, and which order to tighten the bolts in and it seems to work. Interestingly, when you get really close to the right angle with the blades loose enough to twist them by hand, you snug the bolts down a bit and then you use a rubber mallet or the equivalent to tap the blade near the hub to nudge the pitch angle to where you want it. Then you finish tightening in the recommended order and double check the angle didn't move. Sounds crazy but works. In other words, I simply followed the instructions just as given. FWIW, I have only 4.3 hours on my Rans so far, but the recommended pitch from E-Props seems to be spot on. My initial WOT RPM is 5680, which will do until I get the airplane wrung out a little more and can take another look at the prop pitch.
  12. I went from Ducati to Silent Hektik and have now settled on the BANDC AVC1 which so far has worked very well. https://bandc.com/product/avc1-advanced-voltage-controller-14v-homebuilt/#installation-kit
  13. Landing my CTSW on my grass strip, usually the uphill runway, I nearly always use 40° flaps and virtually never less than 30°. I very seldom use any power after I'm abeam the numbers except to adjust the glide path - virtually never on touchdown. I aim for spot landings and will slip as necessary till the last minute to hit the spot if need be. I have a very narrow landing window on my grass strips. I was taught to land light jets, twin engine turboprops and twin piston aircraft with no power. We'd carry 60% power on the jets till over the threshhold and then reduce to idle as we transitioned to a flare. And gliders, but I guess they don't count. On hard runways I usually use 30° flaps on the CT unless there is a very strong, gusty crosswind, when I'll reluctantly use 15°.With bigger aircraft I used full flaps. My objective is to touch down softly as slowly as I can. Again, the FAA Aircraft Flying Handbook is pretty good at landings, including in light airplanes. Yes, you can fly many airplanes on, but it is seldom necessary.
  14. Familiarization with enroute operations would doubtless be quite valuable. What other skills would one want to develop and how are they best trained? Based on discussions on this forum, one might think take-off and landing characteristics are a key difference between conventional GA aircraft and the CTSW. In fact, I helped a pilot do transition training by letting him be PIC enroute, but still handed him off to a good instructor who did a lot of pattern work with him before he was fully comfortable with the CTSW. Bottom line - the enroute training is fine but in my opinion does not necessarily complete the job. The OPs idea of 5-10 hours mostly in the pattern with a CFI seems to be well placed. AC 90-109A has some suggestions.
×
×
  • Create New...