Jump to content

Ed Cesnalis

Members
  • Content count

    4,421
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Everything posted by Ed Cesnalis

  1. Glide Ratio

    When the emergency arrives and you have to deal with a different glide ratio than you got when you practiced there is a built in fix. The fix is the sight picture. Personally I am not going to head to a field that is visually rising in my view as I approach.
  2. 100LL questions

    I'll have to filter less
  3. Slipping from abeam using a 180 is a great way to get down fast and tight.
  4. In 2018 I continue to fly mostly in the high Sierra. I've been waiting to have my new flap circuit board installed since last year and currently operate without flaps. I have been a long time advocate of using flaps and minimum speed landings. My opinion on that isn't changing but I do understand why so many prefer minimum flap landings, its just too easy (as long as you don't get gusted on rollout). Its on my -6 take-offs that I sense the vulnerability every time. The period where my mains are on the ground and I have flying speed screams vulnerability to me. The photo below was shot at 13,000'+. I now like to descend into position and through canyons at low power settings and I'm taken by how rough running my Rotax is when I get well below the 5,000RPM range. I wonder if a carb balance might help? I mind it less in the pattern than I do in the big canyons.
  5. No flaps, and low power settings in the mountains

    2 primary reasons, shear, excess energy for emergency canyon exit.
  6. CT photos 2018

    Woodstock visits Winnemucca (the fun capital of Nevada)
  7. No flaps, and low power settings in the mountains

    BTW it was a disconnected carb equalization tube to the airbox causing the roughness at low power settings.
  8. No flaps, and low power settings in the mountains

    It was the other Andy that revealed that Vx was determined by comparing drag and available power profiles for each flap setting.
  9. No flaps, and low power settings in the mountains

    50' trees at the end of the runway are the type of obstacles that you need Vx for. High mountains, even close by are better to fly clean. If the angle is too steep then you orbit or s turn or work lift. It's silly to point at the highest point in your direction, then use a steep angle and labor over. Far better to put your nose down and find a path at a much higher speed, it just won't be a strait line. As you test different headings and positions in the canyons and positions relative to the ridges you will know where there is lift to work and drift is to be concerned about. The big risk isn't that you can't out climb the terrain because even at the very last 2nd you can always turn away (you can't let yourself be trapped). The big risk comes from constantly turning or doing long sustained turns, where you are blinded by the banked wing and there is terrain to fly into or even more insidious, drift into while you are blind. I visualize the turn and its exit and make sure it takes up no more than 50% of the time I have to remain clear of terrain in that turn. Synthetic Vision can be confirming here but that's complicated and more useful in very big canyons. I crossed 8 mountain ranges this morning and never got within 1,500 of the high points, small amounts of deviation gets you around things and thats better than even Vy climbing.
  10. No flaps, and low power settings in the mountains

    From the east its even uphill approaching but departing to the west is more like rapidly rising terrain. Flying the runway heading goes to 13,000' in about 12 miles.
  11. No flaps, and low power settings in the mountains

    Vx isn't an issue for me in the big Sierra Canyons. There is so much wind shear that I loath to get that slow or anywhere close to it. I fly 200lbs under gross when working up high and have good rate of climb up to and above 15,000 and I keep my indicated air speed at 95kts if I can. Below 85 I get anxious.
  12. No flaps, and low power settings in the mountains

    Thanks for the tip Roger, guess I like the top speed more than I hate the landings/take offs.
  13. No flaps, and low power settings in the mountains

    they are stuck at -12. I do land pretty fast compared to 30
  14. P51 engine out video

  15. Reading Winds

    Wind transport of snow from the Fish Creek drainage to the Convict Creek drainage. This snow melt was going to SF but now is headed to LA
  16. Rumbling idle this morning?

    In that RPM range mine is not very smooth.
  17. Rumbling idle this morning?

    When my fuel system was polluted with rubber shavings it ran extremely badly at idle.
  18. Rumbling idle this morning?

    its a cause for concern. a common source would be rubber from fuel lines damaged when installed at the 5 year change. What was the nature of the debris?
  19. Dynon Autopilot "hunting" in azmuth

    I remember the phrase 'present the fuselage to the relative wind' to describe slipping. Our CTs have a big hole, making slipping less draggy I think.
  20. Dynon Autopilot "hunting" in azmuth

    Our blunt nosed, shaped CTs seem to pay little penalty.
  21. Max rpm or?

    our props are ground adjustable and my side of this long standing argument has always been that RPM alone doesn't determine power/wear. In this thread and prior the other side argues that RPM alone determines wear no matter what the pitch. ------------------------- granted in recent posts 'similar loads' has crept in but that makes me right not them
  22. Max rpm or?

    Your have to negate my argument with similar loads for Roger to be correct. The long standing argument here never included similar load. Roger like Andy now always argued more RPM means more wear period. I always argued that the power setting was the right metric not RPM. More power = more wear. (anomalies excluded) RPM is multiplied by MAP before it has much meaning.
  23. Max rpm or?

    Rotax assumptions change nothing. Rub 1,000 times lightly or 750 times with a lot of pressure 750 has more wear.
  24. Max rpm or?

    try this, compare an 80% power setting that uses 5,200 to a 70% power setting that uses 5,500. now you would be saying that 70% power produces same wear as 80%, that's just not right.
×