Same for the Air Transat Airbus 330 that glided to a landing a couple of years ago. |
Originally Posted by forumname
(Post 565735)
Yep, they do have the values published, just not labeled "best glide speed". It's found in the take off data speeds.
I don't know anything about 2 engine fighter jet performance so excuse the ignorance. But if you were to lose an engine right after liftoff, is there a speed at which you climb for best angle to ensure obstacle clearance, etc? If so, do you climb to that altitude, then level out to accelerate and then climb at a best rate? Or do you just just keep climbing at specific speed all the way up? A-6 carrier crash - Google Video# This video clip shows an A-6 taking off from the carrier and he has an engine failure if I remember correctly. More than likely he is trying to hold **on-speed** and climb away but something else happens, he knows he is going down and tries to jettison the centerline tank as a last ditch effort to save it I imagine. I don't have any knowledge of this particular accident (some on here might) but most engine failure of the catapult emergency proceduress fall along the same lines. USMCFLYR |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 565717)
AV8OR -
I've heard many people mention CA Sullenberger's glider experience but I wonder how much it really might have helped.... Glider pilots are used to "milking” the airplane down onto sometimes pretty rough grass strips, etc. where touching down gently is very important. Also, we are always focused on keeping the wings straight during the touchdown as the go-around option obviously just isn’t out there... ;) So basically I think the fact the river was to his left and he was already in a shallow left turn gave him a pretty good view of his touch down zone options. That's what I'd be looking out for and I'm sure his glider pilot instinct kicked in too. By the way, I am not implying that a non-glider pilot wouldn't be able to repeat what he did, quite the opposite. I simply think that as a glider pilot he truly knew how critical it’d be to keep those wings very straight over the water because in his past I’m sure he’d witnessed a ground-loop or two when the wing would dip just a tad too low over the grass strip... That's all. Either way, like I said, very nice touchdown or splashdown indeed.., :D |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 565717)
It has been a long time since I flew GA and my current aircraft doesn't have a best glide airspeed :o but at least smaller GA aircraft havea best glide airspeed and even have a published glide ratio correct? Do CRJ/ERJ, Q400, and larger airliners have such figures available?
USMCFLYR |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 565748)
I'll only speak to the Hornet - but if I lose an engine on takeoff - I climb away **on-speed* which for us means 8.1 alpha (AOA)(L/D max). It is displayed in our HUD as an E bracket. It results in the perfect speed for whatever configuration/weight you happen to be at during the event. If I was really heavy (loaded down with bombs or tanks, etc.....) then I would emergency jettison those items. Once that extra weight is gone you usually don't have a problem with climbing out.
|
Originally Posted by forumname
(Post 565873)
Thanks for the info. So even though there's no published glide speeds, that number is readily available to you. Like another poster said, I guess the 170 has the same capability. As long as the piece of equipment that provides that info is STILL working properly. I'm assuming the F-18 is similar to the civilian aircraft in that there is enough redundancy built in that if you lost that, your day is a lot worse than worry about knowing what L/D max is.
USMCFLYR |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 565884)
Well...there are procedures for that scenario too. :) We know what on-speed should be for a normal aircraft based on weight too and if I care too I can look it up in the Pocket CheckList (PCL) that we carry.
USMCFLYR |
Sully on landing plane: 'It was a very intense moment' - MSN Video
Not sure of this was posted already, 20min interview on NBC with the whole crew. |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 565717)
AV8OR -
I've heard many people mention CA Sullenberger's glider experience but I wonder how much it really might have helped. . . . . - I could see a glider pilot trying to apply his glider sight picture to an aircraft not capable of such performance and making a serious error in judgment. USMCFLYR The "pattern sight picture" does not change just because the airframe is heavier. Things just happen faster. Consider the following: Two aircraft are exactly alike (aerodynamically), are flying side by side at the same altitude, both loose total power at the same time and start flying L/D Max. One aircraft is significantly heavier then the other. Which one will glide the longest distance ? You would be amazed how many pilots get it wrong. |
Originally Posted by Ftrooppilot
(Post 567301)
Most glider pilots have flown trainers that have the L/D ratio of a streamlined brick then eventually fly 34/1 (and above) glass slippers that keep you airborne hours. Each of these has a "different sight picture" (especially in the pattern)and you adjust accordingly.
The "pattern sight picture" does not change just because the airframe is heavier. Things just happen faster. Consider the following: Two aircraft are exactly alike (aerodynamically), are flying side by side at the same altitude, both loose total power at the same time and start flying L/D Max. One aircraft is significantly heavier then the other. Which one will glide the longest distance ? You would be amazed how many pilots get it wrong. T-38 L/D if I remember was 230+fuel First T-38 Flameout no fuel glide at 230 into a 230 kt wind. Dist traveled=0 Second T-38 Flameout with 1,000# into a 230 kt wind. Dist traveled>0 :D |
Originally Posted by ⌐ AV8OR WANNABE
(Post 565620)
Agree 100%.
Also, not sure if it played any role in his (Sully's) sub-conscious reasoning but nevertheless as a glider pilot (which I believe applies to Sully too) being able to look out at your approximate landing zone from your side window helps tremendously when judging the landing itself. Since they were in a left turn and Sully was in the left seat that might have helped him in his decision too. Overall, he scored a perfect glider landing! :D |
Originally Posted by brownie
(Post 567317)
Who is they? Was there a first officer on that plane:D
|
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 565748)
I'll only speak to the Hornet - but if I lose an engine on takeoff - I climb away **on-speed* which for us means 8.1 alpha (AOA)(L/D max). It is displayed in our HUD as an E bracket. It results in the perfect speed for whatever configuration/weight you happen to be at during the event. If I was really heavy (loaded down with bombs or tanks, etc.....) then I would emergency jettison those items. Once that extra weight is gone you usually don't have a problem with climbing out.
A-6 carrier crash - Google Video# This video clip shows an A-6 taking off from the carrier and he has an engine failure if I remember correctly. More than likely he is trying to hold **on-speed** and climb away but something else happens, he knows he is going down and tries to jettison the centerline tank as a last ditch effort to save it I imagine. I don't have any knowledge of this particular accident (some on here might) but most engine failure of the catapult emergency proceduress fall along the same lines. USMCFLYR JJ |
Originally Posted by Jetjok
(Post 567384)
Of course let's not forget that Sully and Jeff Skiles didn't have the luxury of knowing in the back of their minds that if they really screwed up the approach, they'd still be able to use their ejection seats. Having an ace in the hole always made my life a little easier when I flew fighters.
JJ USMCFLYR |
Originally Posted by seaav8tor
(Post 567306)
Depends on the wind. :D
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:22 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands