After some trial and error, I have concluded that my Ercoupe will
easily glide (without power) to the
point on the ground that is under my wing tip. Have no idea what the
ratio is; but that information
comes in handy for a power failure. Or, if landing straight ahead, it
will land at that spot that is not
moving up or down on the windshield or tip of the cowling. To me this
is more practical than knowing
the glide ratio (I can't think that fast when the prop stops).
Dan Caliendo
Ercoupe Mach 0.14
3658H
On Jan 21, 2009, at 12:41 PM, [email protected] wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "c d gundy" <[email protected]>
To: "Ed Burkhead" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 1:38:58 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada
Eastern
Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] coupe landing
Guys,
I intend to test for the min. airspeed as soon as my engine is back
together and get the correct number for my ASI. I have been using
80mph as a landing speed and I have room left on the yoke to pull
back and make a nice soft landing.
Yesterday, wondering what the glide ratio was, I went into google
earth, used the "ruler" which measures feet on the ground from a
line you have drawn and measured the distance I travel from abeam
the numbers in the pattern, which is where I drop to idle,
downwind, base and final. I could do this looking down on my home
airport as there are definite landmarks where the pattern is
located. I understand this is really approximate and just a ball
park fiqure, but nontheless, an interesting exercise. I calculated
8.5 to 1.
Darick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Burkhead" <[email protected]>
To: "ety" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2009 10:40:06 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada
Eastern
Subject: RE: [ercoupe-tech] coupe landing
Airslot4518 wrote:
> Down final I never fly less than 80 indicated.
And Bart wrote:
> Just establish a STABILIZED SPEED on final, usually about 65-70
> mph, then bring the power to idle and flare,
Too many Coupes have inaccurate airspeed indicators to give people
advice
based on a numerical airspeed number.
When I first bought my Coupe, I used the best published numbers for
airspeeds in the pattern. On the second flight, the gas line iced
up and I
glided to my landing in a plowed field. THEN PUBLISHED NUMBERS WERE
WRONG
FOR MY PLANE because the airspeed indicator was old and worn and gave
numbers 10-15 mph higher than my true "indicated airspeed" should
have been.
When I got to the flare and pulled back there was no "back" to pull
to - I
was already AT minimum flying speed at 70 mph indicated.
With a new, calibrated ASI, that plane had a 55 mph minimum flying
speed and
70 mph on final did give me a decent glide and lots of energy to
flare.
Even 65 mph was an OK approach speed in calm conditions.
All the numbers I gave in my landing "essay" were in relation to a
"minimum
flying speed" determined by getting THAT airplane up high, pulling
the power
to idle and finding out how slow it goes according to THAT airplane's
airspeed indicator. Then multiply that number times 1.3 or 1.4 or
1.5 to
get the cushion numbers you want. This is an approximation, but
it's way
better than just saying an airspeed number.
Both of you, Airslot and Bart are citing _right_ numbers for your
plane and
approach and see how different they are!
Airslot's commented that the Coupe has a high sink rate and,
judging from
context, I think he meant a high sink rate at 80 mph indicated on
final. At
a true 80 indicated a Coupe should have a fairly decent glide ratio
- not to
compare it to a long-wing Cessna but decent. When was your ASI last
calibrated, Airslot?
We should all calibrate our airspeed indicators from time to time.
Mine was
sure way off.
http://www.csgnetwork.com/tasgpscalc.html True airspeed calculator
I'll go with Bart's "stabilized speed." I'll agree that, for
Airslot, 80 on
final is right for his plane. But, when giving general advice,
we've got to
be careful about numbers.
Ed
