Bob - S50

Supporter
  • Content Count

    1,784
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Bob - S50 last won the day on February 25 2018

Bob - S50 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,007 Excellent

1 Follower

About Bob - S50

  • Rank
    Won't Leave!

Contact Methods

  • MSN
    bobpatch5@msn.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    S50 - Auburn, WA
  • Reg #
    N201CB
  • Model
    1978 M20J

Recent Profile Visitors

2,605 profile views
  1. DXB. For what it's worth, I agree with you. I think the controller could have done a better job to minimize confusion. I think if he had said "cleared direct KEHSO, maintain 3000" but did not give you approach clearance that would have helped. Once you got in close enough to descend to 2000 he could have then given you 2000' and approach clearance. But you are correct, when given an approach clearance, maintain the last assigned altitude until established on a published segment of the approach. In your case KEHSO. The good news is that it is 6.1 NM from KEHSO to PACKS. That would be plenty of time to descend from 3000' to 1400'. Unless you have speed brakes you would probably need to lower the gear at KEHSO, but the descent would still be very doable. And as you said, if we want lower we can always ask for lower. I frequently do.
  2. I don't know if it would make much difference, but the '78 might make a little more power for takeoff than the '96 because of a different magneto setup. The '78 has the 'D' magneto timed to 25 BTDC. I'm guessing the '96 has two magnetos timed to 20 BTDC.
  3. I take everything in the POH with a grain of salt. In our '78 J, there is no way I can get the nose off the ground at 63 KIAS. I usually lift off at closer to 75 KIAS. That also means a longer ground roll. I've never really looked, but it feels like it takes me about 1200' or so to get airborne at SL. Who cares what the book says. Take your plane to nice long runway that has runway remaining markers and bring another pilot along with you. Load it up as close to gross as possible then make some takeoffs using your normal procedures. Have the other pilot note how much ground roll you had. Make 4 or 5 of those takeoffs and use the longest one for your future computations. Just for fun, compare your results with the POH.
  4. Just a matter of opinion. Several here use altitude to lose to determine how many MINUTES it will take to descend. I find it easier to determine how many MILES it will take to get down. The math may seem harder but not really. Planning a 500 fpm descent, if you plan a GROUNDSPEED of 120 knots, that's 4 NM/1000'. 150 knots gives you 5 NM/1000' and 180 knots gives you 6 NM/1000'. My GPS can tell me how many miles I have left to go so I know when to start down. If you are using minutes, I don't have a minutes left to go indicator in my plane so I have to convert minutes to miles anyway. So for example, from 8000' to SL would be 16 minutes times my 2.5 NM/minute (150 knot groundspeed) gives my 40 NM. For me it's just easier to avoid the double calculation and just take 8 (thousand to lose) x 5 (miles/thousand) to get 40 directly.
  5. I have a J, but what works for me will probably work for you. Find a few techniques and try them to see what works for you. My technique... I use 5 NM/1000' and 500 fpm. I usually assume I want to be a field elevation as I reach the airport. That will put me at pattern altitude about 5 miles from the airport which gives me plenty of time to slow for pattern entry or even a straight in. At top of descent I pull the power to 20", keep my cruise RPM (2600 for me), and start the 500 fpm descent. That works out to 200'/NM. As the altitude decreases I just keep pulling the power back to 20". I've found that gives me about 150 KTAS. I've also found that if I pull the power to just above the horn (13 - 15") I can maintain about 120 KIAS on the same 200'/NM which is below gear limiting speed for my J. Approaching the pattern I level at pattern altitude and pull the power to 13-15" which slows me nicely to about 100 KIAS. Experiment and have fun.
  6. Without looking, and assuming I could very easily be wrong, I would assume you would need to meet IFR requirements from the point at which you switched. Sort of like being re-dispatched while airborne on the way to Asia.
  7. I've had to divert several times. Depending on several issues, Northwest/Delta used to give us anywhere from 20 to 120 minutes of extra fuel over and above what was required. However, there were times when ATC would use up that fuel (ground delays, route changes, vectors, altitude restrictions..) followed by holding for various reasons (weather, traffic, runway changes, runway closures...) as we got close to the destination. When I got down to zero extra fuel, unless ATC would let me continue to the destination with a realistic expectation of landing without further delays, I would divert. Once I started a divert I would not turn back. If I did so, and ATC lied to me (they would never do that would they?) I would be between a rock and a hard place. Going to either airport would require using some of my reserve fuel. I considered that fuel to be used in an emergency, not due to poor decision making. I was not willing to risk running out of gas with 100+ people behind me. I even had one time when my dispatcher let me know that I was not authorized to divert. I let him know I'd call him after I landed at Rochester.
  8. I know there is a paint shop at Independence (7S5) that is close to you but I have no idea how their prices or quality compare to others. It's in the hangar just north of the diner.
  9. We've gone through 2 of those. They make it pretty easy to get up on the wing but don't work so well getting down off the wing due to a couple issues. First, they are not very tall so it requires the passenger to step over the flap and down about a foot and land on the relatively small area. Second, they are not very strong. I think they are only rated to 200 lbs, but even with someone lighter than that, if they hit the mark and land in the middle of the step it cracks. The best way to handle a significant load is to have them step on the edge over a support, not in the middle. That makes it even more difficult and potentially more dangerous. I ended up buying a folding 2 step metal ladder. It isn't idle because it's quite a bit more bulky, but it's pretty light (5 or 6 pounds), has two steps so it's easy to get on AND off the wing, and strong. If I've got a bunch of luggage I put it on top of the luggage because I'm going to want it first anyway.
  10. That's why I said Western Washington/Oregon. There is a bit of a rain shadow caused by the Olympics but it moves around with the wind direction.
  11. Unless of course you live in western Washington or Oregon. We do have fewer thunderstorms but get our fair share of stratus.
  12. That may be, and we do have weather out west too, but the fact remains that an IFR rating is not required for Angel Flight West. While the Angle Flight organizations are all similar, they are all just a little bit different. The only way to know is to check with the one that services your area. Part of the difference may be that AFW does not carry insurance on us. One of the requirements is to meet certain minimum insurance coverage.
  13. No IFR requirement for Angel Flight West. I carry a small two step ladder in the baggage compartment that makes it much easier for my wife (and others) to get up on the wing. Getting in and out of the back seat is not that difficult, especially if you are there to help them.
  14. Ours does both. For reservations of 7 days or less, the reservation is yours unless somebody objects. For reservations over 7 days it takes specific approval of the partners. If the airplane has not flown for 2 weeks, and weather is suitable, somebody has to fly the airplane. The requirement falls to the partner who has gone the longest time without flying. If they can't/won't, they can get one of the other partners to do it for $50 (billed to one and credited to the other on the monthly bill). So far we have never needed to enforce this rule in 6 years. We have a formalized plan since scheduling is included in the agreement. We do not use any kind of rotating priority system. Instead we follow a decision making matrix: Can the two conflicting partners reach an agreement? If not, the partner with the fewest currently reserved days will prevail. If there is a tie, it will be by vote of the (4) partners. If that is a tie it will be decided by coin flip. So far we have never needed this either. On the other hand, there are a lot more people who have $15,000 to $40,000 available for a partnership than there are people who have $60,000 to $160,000 available to buy an entire airplane. So while your geographic market may be smaller, the total number of people with available funds may be pretty close. So far we have had 2 partners sell their share. Both got the deed done within a month or two. Just include it in the agreement. Lost medical? No longer pay dues and stop flying. Sell the share. Just want out? Keep paying and flying. Sell the share. Dies? The estate will pay no dues. The remainder of the partnership will ask the estate if they want to keep owning the share and fly the plane (probably pretty rare case). If they don't want it we will try to sell the share for the estate and give them the proceeds. If after a reasonable time we can't sell the share we can either buy the share ourselves or sell the plane and divide the proceeds according to the plan. Not covered in the plan? Come up with a plan and vote on it.
  15. A couple more comments. Another technique I've read about that should make the impossible turn more possible has to do with the departure. If we depart straight ahead, lose an engine, and decide to return; the initial 180 will put us in a position offset to the side of the runway so we will have to turn more than 180 degrees (210?) and then line up with the runway, so maybe 240(?) total? Instead of departing straight out, I've heard it suggested that we turn 30 or 45 degrees on departure. Then when the engine quits it does two things for us: 1) since part of our flightpath was offsetting to the side of the runway, it may be a simple 210 degree (for a 30 degree offset) or 225 degree (for a 45 degree offset) turn around to line up with the runway and 2) because of trigonometry, we will not be as far past the end of the runway. We will be the same total distance, but not as far along the extended centerline. Keep in mind, that turns are discouraged below 400' AGL (can't remember where that's written). Part of the reason that 45 degrees works so well is again because of trigonometry. At 45 degrees of bank, both sin(45) and cos(45) = .707 so we are getting equal forces working to hold us up and turn us. That totals 1.414. With less bank (30 degrees for example) we are increasing the vertical lift component (.866) at the expense reduced turn performance (.5). That totals just 1.366. Same thing if we increase to 60 degrees of bank, but the numbers are reversed. Total of 1.366. If you increase to 90 degrees or reduce to 0 degrees you get a total of 1.0. 45 degrees just gives you the most bang for the buck.