----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
Hello, All I apologize for my apparent difficulty in communicating several facts. Perhaps first and foremost, my personal preference to own is the "D" Model. I need 1400# gross to lift me, my wife, a few hankerchiefs and full fuel and travel cross country. I don't regard the flight characteristics of the "D" "draconian" any more than the high sink rate possible in any coupe at very low speeds. I just try to stay aware and respectful as appropriate. Most pilots at my previous "home" field in California flew "VASI" on approach, which was a lower approach than Ed described. I wished to to make it clear being "low and slow" in a "D" is inherently more unforgiving than in other models for reasons Ed's post of 9/6 9:30am explained best. (Thanks, ED!) In my opinion he's one of our best in safely exploring the coupe's operational capabilities, and then communicating this information usefully to others. On the other hand Ed says he flew his approaches high at 1500 rpm and "...130% minimum flying speed". He didn't say what speed that was on his bird. 130% of "D" Model published "Stall Speed" would be 75.4 mph TIAS, and an airspeed indicator reading of 72 mph (as factory produced!). OK... At this point let's consider some of the comments Ron Burke made at [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted at 1:51 AM: > I have a few comments.... > > I would like to find the guy that started the "Make the first turn off, or > you are a bad pilot" guy and KILL HIM. > This thinking has killed many a good pilot. > It appears you're new to the list as a contributor. Welcome (I think). While I agree landing longer is the best practice, an anger management course might help you deal with opinion differences less aggressively. > > First, I have hundreds of hours in a "D", and most likely close to a > thousand landings.. > There is ONE hard fast rule in a "D" NEVER get under 80mph without power > Are you implying I do not advocate landing a "D" faster than a "C" or "CD"? If so, where? What (or who) is the source of this "ONE hard fast rule"? > > Second, I was thought to fly energy not airspeed, buy a guy named R. A. > "Bob" Hoover. > With power (energy) you can hang a "D" on the prop, no problem... I have > seen zero indicated in a 0-200 rigged properly. Without energy , NEVER get > under 80mph, turns out 80 should be your best glide anyway. > If you learned everything Bob Hoover could have taught you, I'm impressed. If not, what's your point? What is the proper "rig" for an 0-200? > > Third, I would say from his comments that Mr. Bayne, has never bleed (sic) > trained to fly an ercoupe. > I see these guys at flyin's. and they are just plain scary. You can not > fly an ercoupe like a Cessna 150. > Pilots get away with it for a while, then will mess up a perfectly good > airplane, and most times themselves too. > I'm not sure why my training or credibility is under attack. To my knowledge, we've never met or spoken. Which of my comments do you believe factually wrong, as opposed to a simple difference of opinion or personal experience? I did take my original flight instruction in an Ercoupe, now just under 400 hours with 1224 landings. What's your point? > There is a MANUAL for the "D" and it covers everything you are talking > about. Many times I have operated out a 1500 foot gravel strip without > problems. ALTHOUGH I did not try the 1500 foot without GOOD training. The Approved Airplane Flight Manual for the Model 415-D makes no mention of glide ratio, our original subject, or recommended landing speed. It does refer a pilot, on p. 6, "For operating instructions in greater detail refer to the Ercoupe Instruction Manual", underlining that comment. The Ercoupe Instruction Manual was written at a time when Fred Weick believed operation of a 415-C at 1400 lbs. in the (new) "Normal" catagory was a piloy option from 1260 lbs. in the original "Utility" catagory in which original CAA certification was obtained. It therefore presumes the availability of 13ยบ up elevator. REMEMBER THAT when it advocates twice, on pages 6 and 7, an airspeed reading between 60 and 70 mph. I believe the "MANUAL" is, today, unintentionally misleading if a low time "D" owner believes from the landing descriptions that 60 mph is an acceptable approach speed for a "D" Model. > > There is an approved maneuver used to load energy and lose altitude without > gaining airspeed. It is in the MANUAL > Well, unwanted altitude is lost trading forward airspeed for greater sink; and then traded back prior to touchdown (p. 7). Who said otherwise? > > In case of engine failure I would set up 80 mph and start looking for a > place to put her... Carry 80mph to the touch down point, if high perform the > maneuver in the manual and trade altitude for energy ... Then at the last > moment trade energy for a nose high crash... hit tail first if possible... > keep the nose up as long as possible and try to keep her off her back. > > This sounds different... it is... I also have more than 30 years in aircraft > search and rescue. > I fully agree with you if, as pilot in command, you have allowed your flight to progress to a point that a controlled crash (not an off-field landing) is the single remaining option. Having said that, why would anyone with 30 years in aircraft search and rescue do that? (grin) > > There is a saying if you have 2 of 3 things you are ok. If you get down to > just one you are in big trouble, that would be > Brains, Altitude, Energy (sometimes called power or airspeed) > Important difference here, Ron. Maybe you missed some of what Bob Hoover said. He would want it clear that you have power only when the engine produces it. Airspeed is there either way. It is altitude (sink speed) and forward progress (airspeed) that are traded to affect a shorter or longer touchdown point. We need all 3...brains coordinate the other two! (grin) > > <sarcasum> > But then I may be in the market soon for another "D"... so please keep > calling them "SCARE COUPE" > it keeps the price lower... but then maybe William R. Bayne is also looking > for a "D" > I actually am, Ron. What's your point? > > Keep flying safe and get ERCOUPE training.... it keeps insurance lower for > all of us... > <sarcasum off> > > Ron Burke > ========================================================================== ==== To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers-tech/
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
