aviatoreb

Thanks - what you describe is what I expect. At this point I have no worries in the least for runway length at SAF but I am just continuing the discussion for learning sake to enumerate the changes in performance.

Thanks! Yeah I scoped out the activity on flight aware and yes indeed lots of jets. So folks - I am utterly confident the runways there are plenty plenty big since I have a good feeling I can land anywhere a 737 can land. But nonetheless - I would like to understand how this works. Just for learning sake. That Koch table - is that for engine performance or is that for performance of the air foils. -When landing say at 9000ft density altitude, I know our TAS is high as compared to sea level - as we still stall based on IAS or better yet, AO, but the moment the tires are on the ground, there is more speed for the brakes to dissipate. So is the Koch table the one that tells me the equivalent lengths? or is that for engine performance - of what - of NA? -Even a Turbo has diminished runway performance at altitude - yes power may be 100% same, but again, it takes more TAS to get off the ground since we leave the ground at a certain IAS, or better said AO. So again - is that AO? I just want to know for sure how this all works....just because I like to know stuff. E

It seems as if the Koch table should do everything I want - I was unaware of it when I first started this thread - but Im not yet confident Im using it correctly. If say I put 6349ft (KSAF altitude) as pressure altitude (assuming standard?) and I put 83F current temp (which is showing density altitude of 9088 from other means) and I get 6000 ft is like 2110ft equivalent at sea level - OUCH - Am I doing that correctly? that's worse than I guessed and I am glad I am asking this question.

Thanks - that is VERY useful intel. How hot? So that's what - local heat bubbling/rising off a hot tarmac? Is that effect still there if there is wind or does it then mostly convert to standard turbulence in windy conditions considerations?

That's the source of my worry - I am darn sure I can take off from whatever I can land on. I am not actually worried I won't be able to land on a 6000 ft runway even at 9000ft of altitude - but I am surprised to realized this is an important piece of aviation operations info I do not know how to compute - when I am thinking ground roll on landing - what should I consider a 6000ft runway at 9200ft pressure altitude to be like vs what unknown to me length at sea level pressure altitude - half? Should I expect touch down speed is so high (True air speed) if I am spot on flying by IAS and angle of attack that I will have so much kinetic energy so as to roll much longer and it will be like...what - a 3000ft runway? Anyway I figure this is something I REALLY should know how to do - also not to mention - what if ... knock on wood ... there is need for an emergency landing somewhere else? I (we) should really know how to do this computation. Mostly - computations aside - rule of thumb - the rocket has an easy time flying out of whatever it can land into. Especially with just me on board - even with full fuel.

Exactly - I was thinking landing too.

Hello folks! So I am planning to fly to Santa Fe NM in a few weeks. Scoping out density altitudes which are as expected, hot and high. They have 3 nice big runways there so no problem right? Seems like I should be able to be more precise than that. Surely someone made a table or a chart that shows how many feet a runway needs to grow at various density altitudes. Like grow factor y as the dependent variable a function of density altitude x. E.g. right now at KSAF I see the density altitude is 9217'. SO there are two 6300 ft runways and one 8366' runway. Yes yes I know those are plenty big - but I am asking an empirical question perhaps more useful for other places. So say I want to land at the 6300ft runway in 9217' density altitude conditions - is that equivalent to landing in a ???? runway? 4500' at sea level density altitude? Anyway how do I do this calculation?

From a man in New Jersey - Like you Blend (but its French Quebecoise in Montreal .... )

YUP! I think you will be passing right close to me! KPTD - feel free to stop by. I am always slightly worried I will forget something or not know something that is peculiar to Canada operations, so I always file IFR. Ill tell you one very important thing regarding Canada operations - when flying into an untoward airport the way they do patterns is distinctly different from USA patterns so please study up on standard Canada pattern entries so you can blend with the flow - AND - its not all that common for an individual airport to have a distinct pattern practice published that is different even from that. E

Where can we get one!!!

Piston or turbine? They are awfully awesome.

That's my standard operating procedure when near the most complicated air spaces - or any possibility of such - eg near Washington DC, and even this week in Toronto (since I am never 100% confident I might miss something distinctly Canadian!). When under positive control then in some ways its easier because you go where atc tells you where to go.

...that's how we got our third - Adam!

He's hiding his ears.

Well - here's how Bravo got his name - he's a 7 month old White Samoyed - and we picked him up from the groomer in late Jan. The groomer had named him Boris and we were thinking if we would change his name - his name is still Boris on the official AKC paperwork. Since my plane is N314EB - Ech Bravo - I was talking to ATC and my wife said - let's keep Boris and call him Bravo for short. He's got a lot of fuzz - so I have tried two different plastic headsets - which immediately slide off. I bet this Rex thing will work - if Bravo will wear it. Ill post a pic when I get a chance of my big boy puppy.

That’s exactly what happens with bravo - so I immediately was fascinated with what you have. Thanks.

What’s he wearing on his head for noise? I’ve been looking for something for my dog bravo.

I’m due to go to Santa Fe in a few weeks - slightly on topic. Anything exciting our out of the ususl about Santa Fe airport operations? I like that it had 3 long runways !

I would not want to step foot in Russia right now. I would be worried about becoming a political prisoner.

I used to own a DA40. Even up here at the Northern Border, it was a bit much. It would make moderate days into hot days. I really was happy to have a roof to the airplane when I got this Mooney. Even though it is lovely to have the bubble canopy - once the novelty wears off - it is just a lot of sun. and heat. On the flip side - its nice solar heat in the winter.

Several weeks ago I did an approach into Valley City, ND on an intense smoke day and it was truly IMC. Its weird how smoke reports in the aviation reports as low visibility but relatively high ceilings. SO there you are at say 2000 ft easily seeing the ground straight down but very little forward visibility if vis is reporting say 2 or 3 mi. That is more of a smoke scenario and necessary to stay on instruments.

Another thought - When I was at Oshkosh a number of years ago - Beringer was promising an STC for Mooney - the more modern looking red anodized stuff - but now browsing Beringer's website I see no such STC. I think there was a discussion on this forum on it at some point.

Thanks - I should have said that upfront - I was thinking that - yes indeed I have a rocket. By today's standards I bet the FAA would have required more braking power. Anyway rules or not - brakes are nice.

So what I am hearing - mimicking the encore setup is the only likely way to go since trying to get long body parts requires to many mods to make it likely?

Are the brakes different from the Bravo and the encore?