Curtis L. Olson writes: > Is it fair to land with the parking brake on?
If you didn't mind replacing the tires after every landing, and paying for any runway lights you took out while skidding around, why not? Perhaps we need to start modelling exploding tires. > That got me down to 258'. I tried dead stick, came in a bit short, > but managed 182'. Then I tried full throttle and a 90 degree glide > slope, but I wasn't sure if you are supposed to measure from the > furthest piece, or the center of gravity. Try bringing it across the (imaginary) fence at about 50-55 kt and 10 ft AGL with full flaps and idle power, then keep descending and slowing by raising (yes, raising) the nose. As soon as you're over the threshold pull the nose right right up to the stall to plant the mains firmly on the runway, then brake aggressively while holding full back pressure on the elevators to keep the weight on the mains. Ideally, you want to hear the stall horn just as the wheels touch the runway, and you'll have under 40kt to kill off in the ground roll. I can manage about a 350 ft ground roll this way, stopping just at the top of the runway numbers (not quite as impressive as Curt's parking-brake-on landing, I'm afraid). This is an excellent exercise for experimenting with the slow-flight and stall envelopes. You can actually feel for the stall by raising the nose slightly then letting go -- if you raise the nose and the plane climbs, you're still above the stall; if you raise the nose and the plane descends, you're on the far side of the stall curve, and raising the nose will help you descend faster (hopefully, you're only a couple of feet up at this point). All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
