Doug G. Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 So much advice about something he has never done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 It has nothing to do with wake turbulence. It's about landing 1000's of airplanes as quickly and efficiently as possible. While I have never had any issues with wake turbulence landing at Oshkosh. When flying the Thorp T18 I did get rocked pretty hard a few times flying the arrival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobJones Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 I'm sure there is plenty of wake turbulence to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbigs Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 I'm sure there is plenty of wake turbulence to deal with. Yes. It's why they are staggering the landings on the runway...apparently with numbered markers? Anyway...Morden will no doubt do fine once he gets there and gets down then wonders why he was ever worried about it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Remembering that wingtip vortices expand behind the aircraft, landing offset might actually put you right into the vortices of the preceding aircraft. Wind is, of course a factor. But I'm pretty sure staggering the arrivals is for separation purposes, roughly doubling the amount of traffic a single runway can handle, and not related at all to wake turbulence concerns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Yes. It's why they are staggering the landings on the runway...apparently with numbered markers? Anyway...Morden will no doubt do fine once he gets there and gets down then wonders why he was ever worried about it... The markers a colored. Like I said never had an issue with wake turbulence on landing at Osh, but did while flying along at 90kt arrival inline behind other aircraft. After FISK they split the line sending aircraft to different runways. When they do this the separation gap should be a little bigger than 1/2 mile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbigs Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Remembering that wingtip vortices expand behind the aircraft, landing offset might actually put you right into the vortices of the preceding aircraft. ATC routinely delays takeoffs and instructs aircraft in regard to wake turbulence on landing runways. Always land beyond the prior aircraft if you are either warned about the wake turbulence or suspect it might be present given the size and proximity of the aircraft you see landing in front of you. There is no question the staggered landings being done at Oshkosh are due to trying to minimizing the danger of wake turbulence. Flying in and out of controlled airspace especially in Class B and C you will always get the warnings regarding wake turbulence. You are on your own at non towered airports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 There is no question the staggered landings being done at Oshkosh are due to trying to minimizing the danger of wake turbulence. The staggered landings is not about wake turbulence. If it was they would only be landing one airplane at a time one each runway. The staggered landings are about being able to land 3 airplanes on the same runway at the same time. If they operated in traditional fashion there would be no way they could get anywhere close to the number of aircraft into the airport that they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 I always get the same wake advisories in class D. I believe they are required if you are landing behind a heavy. The required hold is three minutes after a heavy takes off ahead of you. You don't need a heavy to get turbulence from another plane. Have you ever crossed your own turbulence doing turns about a point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 There is no question the staggered landings being done at Oshkosh are due to trying to minimizing the danger of wake turbulence. Pretty sure that's not the reason. In fact, it makes no sense, so there very much is a question. Take a moment and look at this diagram: With a wind down the runway, the area of least wake turbulence would be directly behind the preceding aircraft. Staggering would make encountering wingtip vortices more likely, not less. That's obvious, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobJones Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Well, I guess I'm going to Oshkosh. I reserved the SkyCatcher for 7/19 through 7/22. I'll be camping with the plane. Thanks Andy for starting this thread. I probably would not have thought about going otherwise. This thread got me to thinking about it and asking, "why not?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Good choice! Now just hope for decent weather! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Jefts Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Word of caution - Pitch your tent on high ground. I have seen low ground tenting there and it can be very wet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobJones Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Do you have a choice? SkySleeper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobJones Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Good choice! Now just hope for decent weather! That's a crap shoot. Didn't you end up driving last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Well, I guess I'm going to Oshkosh. I reserved the SkyCatcher for 7/19 through 7/22. I'll be camping with the plane. Thanks Andy for starting this thread. I probably would not have thought about going otherwise. This thread got me to thinking about it and asking, "why not?" It should be an adventure. Weather wise I have been lucky in that I was always able to get there and back when I wanted, but it is just a 350 mile trip one way for me. Couldn't get your Mooney friend talked into going, or is that still a possibility? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbigs Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 I always get the same wake advisories in class D. I believe they are required if you are landing behind a heavy. The required hold is three minutes after a heavy takes off ahead of you. You don't need a heavy to get turbulence from another plane. Have you ever crossed your own turbulence doing turns about a point? Agreed. And yes, when you are behind a big boy its imperative to land further down the runway if forced to land on the same runway. Oshkosh no doubt doesn't have time to sort out the aircraft by size and don't have unlimited runways to get them all down, so they are going with the staggered idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 That's a crap shoot. Didn't you end up driving last year? Actually that was 2013. All set to fly, and the weather seemed borderline doable, but chickened out at the last moment. Stayed overnight near Louisville, KY. Had we flown, we would have been hosed the next day: Anyway, drove to Racine, WI, met up with Al Downs and drove with him the rest of the way the next day. BTW, this is what Fisk (I think) looks like from the ground! [ As hectic as things may seem in the air, these guys stay pretty cool on the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 "Thanks, Fast Eddie! I think I knew that wingtip vortices propagated outwards, but your diagram drove the point home. It's clear to me now that offsetting or "staggering" on a runway would not in any way mitigate the chances of encountering them. Bear in mind I've never actually been to Oshkosh, or any large fly-In for that matter, so I was kind of just taking a stab at why they'd land staggered on a runway like that. It's clearly to expedite traffic flow, and unrelated to wake turbulence, as virtually all of the experienced pilots here pointed out. Thanks again, guys!" Just a suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted May 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2015 To mitigate wet conditions, I use a well sealed waterproof tent (stayed perfectly dry inside through two big storms last year), and a camping cot that puts me 6" or so off the ground. A cot might not fit in the Skycatcher, but you could buy one at the Walmart at OSH and give it away to somebody when you leave. BobJones, are you taking a passenger? I'll PM you my contact info and you can text me when you arrive and we can get a beer or sandwich and decide if we really are the obnoxious curmudgeons we think we are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobJones Posted May 20, 2015 Report Share Posted May 20, 2015 I didn't wait on my Mooney friend to decide. He hardly ever flies his Mooney and I decided not to wait on him to make up his mind. I'll be going by myself so should have plenty of capacity for whatever I need. I have a small tent my grandsons and I use to camp out in the back yard. Also have an air mattress and battery operated air pump. Other than that, I won't take much except sleeping bag, a few changes of clothes, flashlight, hammer and tie down kit, folding chair, sun screen and bug spray, water, and a few snacks. Oh yes, plenty of cash and credit cards. Andy, I look forward to having a beer with you. We'll be fine if we stay away from politics. We'll never agree there, but that's OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted May 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 I went out yesterday to practice for Oshkosh. Wind was 8kt, mostly down the runway with a slight left cross. I just kept power at 4300-4400rpm at 0° flaps, and ran my downwind at 90kt. I ran a little larger pattern than usual, since I fly a close pattern and expect the one at OSH to be a larger. I pulled power at the base turn. I was able to get the airplane to my touchdown point with no problems, but I was pretty high each time and needed to slip to get to the touchdown point. Next time I'll try pulling out a little more power and descending more into the base turn to see if I can scrub off more altitude without the big slip. All in all it was not hard, just took some work to bleed off the energy. For those who have been to Oshkosh before, if I have to use a big slip to get to my touchdown point, are the controllers going to let that play out or likely to call a go-around for me? I'm very comfortable with full slips, and there are a lot of airplanes there with no flaps that probably have to slip to come down, but you never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 Andy a slip shouldn't be a problem. If it were me I would practice by flying all the way to final at 90kts and 400 AGL, and then slow it down. For all but runway 18 you should have plenty of time to slow down after turning final. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 I recall a charging station at the EAA Headquarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 Pretty sure it looked like honor system. Might be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.