LearningTOfly

I think that part of the cause of the sloppiness under canopy is that skydiving isn't as organized as other airborne activities. Once a student is competent to save himself, they're cut loose- and unless they're self motivated, they will be confident flying whatever path gets them to the ground- whether it be a straight in, square circuit, 270 hook, or a series of unorganized turns to loose altitude- followed by a student flare. The student flare may be common because there is just a lack of developed canopy pilots- and after that, the one's who do know what they're doing may not want the responsibility of passing thier knowledge onto others. Learning at smaller DZ's may allow this lack of technique to develop into a habit because there typically is much less traffic in the final stages of the approach. In the end it's up to the jumpers- publish (via a printed piece of paper stapled to the wall) an approach procedure for four different wind directions. Specify keypoints to turn base and final over. The circuit should be square- downwind, base, final. Maybe swoopers should be told to use an opposite downwind so they can keep a better eye on who's conflicting (provided there is airspace for this). - I saw such a sheet at a DZ a while back and it made an impression on me- the procedure was there in print, instead of being local knowledge someone may or may not tell you. As for the student landings... maybe that's more of a personal comfort level thing than anything else. It's what worked the first time, and has been working for the last 1200 landings, so why change? I personally am younger, thus dumber, and try new things/ techniques... sometimes not the healthiest things (leaning to swoop), but I keep aware of what and where my outs are- and what's going on. It seems some people don't give much thought to what 'plan b' is- and don't care, because they know the student landing works, and they have no interest in trying to push it. They don't want to have to come up with a 'plan b'- and so they work to create a situation where it is not needed. They are happy with their basic skill set and want to focus on ... (RW etc)

If I'm not mistaken... SWOOP is also opening their gear shop on July 2nd. At least I read that in the last CANPARA. Dunnville should have some nice festivities going on- and even if they don't, they have a King Air And PST is a very pleasant place to jump- with very cool regulars/ residents.

Post hijack alert... it's 'what to do for a 100th' not 'bug the jumper about personal decisions'- most people are adults here and can make calls for themselves. For my 100th, I would like to do something that's fun and interesting, but also simple. Something that has a social aspect to it... like a big tracking dive. If that's any help in your decison...

Sabre at about 1:1

Nothing in any way spectacular- probably nothing that includes flying, anyhow. I know a few guys who graduated last year from such a program... only one I know has a flying job, and he had 700h TT with about 500 tailwheel. My advice would be 'don't do it'. Don't blend work with play- do a normal four year degree and fly at a flight school on the side- it's alot of work but it is possible and is very rewarding. You'll progress fater also. It's easy to do the MIFR, CPL, and then whatever CFI's you want in less than four years, and take regular uni classes, too. The 'degree' half of an aviation specific degree is absolutely useless... and employers know this. Besides, if you blow a medical five years from now, you're back at square one. Thus reason for getting a degree (in an independant topic)- just incase the pilot thing dosen't quite take off. Best of luck

I think in this case, 'mistake' is the wrong word. To survive the first few freefalls takes quite a bit of luck. Experience is at an all time low, and requirement for good judgement is standard. That pretty much leaves it up to what the course curriculum and briefings cover, and luck. Much judgement is gained by exposure to the sport... not by classes or briefings. So therefore, the student has a very limited knowledge base by which decisions may be made. 'Mistake' is too critical a term. In my view, after reading the story, JayCam did everything to the best of his abilities, and is unscathed because of that- there was no 'mistake' made. (Dumping while belly up will never happen again- gained experience- may be a good thing or bad thing) Great job keeping your wits about you during the ordeal, JayCam.

Kind of at a loss for seeing sense here ...and how is this proposition supposed to help?

My experience is based off of departures utilizing full aircraft performance. At such speeds, 'small' gusts can change the flow enough to get the stall horn going momentarily on the initial climb out (particularily when getting over the obstacle). Properly done- the stall horn does quit shortly after liftoff, agreed- I was attempting to argue the point that the stall horn blaring is an unavoidable part of takeoffs in some situations- complaining about it, or refusing to fly in such a situation dosen't really make sense- the pilot doesn't want to pile in any more than the next guy. I take back my comment about vx being unattainable- that was typed before proper thought was give- 'late at night' is my feeble excuse. Blue skies

1. Preflight stress usually comes when you're doing something new (i.e. there is some uncertainty in your mind as to whether you are doing it right or not)- whether it be cross country, at night, IFR etc. Timing and making fly/ no fly calls when the weather is unclear (as mentioned) also adds. 2. Again, significant stress here usually comes when a new situation presents itself. Otherwise, stress levels are moderate because you much stay on top of all details all the time. 3. Thinking about those new situations encountered and whether you handled them correctly. How I handle it- think ahead- I know where I'm going before I get there. Stay ahead of the airplane, and know the available 'outs'. Stress levels decrease as experience increases- this experience gives the comfort of knowing that you did it right.

No, you are spot on, Learningtofly does not understand the purpose of the stall horn, which warns of an impending stall because the wing is nearing the critical angle of attack. If the pilot needs to clear trees or powerlines at the end of the runway, hanging on the prop with the stall horn blaring will not produce the best angle of climb, Vx. Derek Mr. Buchanan, you are right on in your post. ... The situation I am thinking of is a short, rough field with obstacles to clear. The aircraft is operating at the edge of it's performance envelope. In a given weather condition: hot temperature and high humidity- the aircraft will need to travel faster to attain the required amount of lift to get off the ground. Reason is that rho (air density) is least, and Lift=0.5*rho*v^2*A*Cl. A higher speed will require a longer time in a state of acceleration, which translated into a longer takeoff roll. Now the trees are getting close fast. What to do- well, the aircraft accelerates more efficiently in the air than on the ground, so 'stalling' it off the ground is a help- flying at 1.05 or 1.1 Vso two feet off the deck, the stall horn is blaring, but you are accelerating the best you can. Still below vx, but not for long. Problem now is that those trees are really close- there's no runway for an abort, and if you loose the engine now, you're sleeping with the squirrels. Two options, start your climb at 1.1 or 1.2 vso and climb out with the stall horn, or build speed to hop over the trees at the last moment. The fact is that vx may not be attainable in cases. On the other hand, if vx is possible to get over a given obstacle and the pilot dosen't employ such speed, a change should be made to his SOP. Also, vx is not to be maintained, the transition to vy is made asap to help in cooling and general engine health. Climbing the whole ride up with the stall horn going is just plain stupid- the rate of climb is reduced due to drag, the engine is being burnt to pieces due to lack of cooling (if you ever want to piss off a dzo, toast his engine in such a manner- 800 hr tbo, woohoo), and there's no room to deal with gusts/ thermals. Take into consideration, though, that a climb at vy (or between vx and vy) may encounter gusts that cause the stall horn to go off- deal with this- the pilot dosen't want to fall out of the sky any more than you do... okay that was a bad example. Now if I could only understand the purpose of a stall horn... Edited to correct spelinng

It's not really a case of 'likely' or not- a stall is not a surprise to a pilot (well, a pilot who pays attention at least). At any airspeed, if say the pilot pulls back on the control, the airflow over the wing will change- that is, the angle of attack (angle at which the relative wind hits the wing) will increase- from 3 degrees to 9 degrees (for example- not exact) in a 2-g pull. If the pilot keeps increasing back pressure (more g's), the AOA will continue to increase- the critical point on most airfoils is somwhere between 14 and 18 degrees AOA. When the airflow hits the wing at such an angle, it produces drag (a burble) that thrust alone cannot overcome, thus a descent results- this descent is prompted by the stall. Lower airspeeds mean that less g's (less back pressure) need to be pulled to reach the critical AOA on the wing because the wing is already flying at a high angle of attack- Lift is a function of velocity and coefficient of lift (Cl)- if velocity is low, then Cl must be high. The higher Cl's are found at high angles of attack. At approxamately 16 degrees, though, the Cl will spike and drop significantly. This drop is located at the AOA of the stall. (There are charts for airfoils comparing AOA to Cl where this info is taken from) When this drop is encountered, velocity is constant and Cl is reduced, so lift is reduced momentarily. That is, it is less than weight for a moment until the downward vector of velocity increases so now lift equals weight again at this lower Cl. Added: an engine failure does not affect AOA speifically. An engine failure is a garauntee that you will not maintain altitude, though. If the engine fails and you try to maintain altitude, then you will change the AOA until the wing stalls- after that, your descent will continue.

Airspeed actually isn't a factor in a stall. Granted, the wing must be flying (L=W) or travelling close to the required velocity for lift to equal weight. After that, it's the flow over the top of the wing that causes the stall- at high angle of attacks, the point at which the flow turns from laminar to turbulent moves forward up the chord. At a certain point, the drag produced in this turbulent separation is so great that the wing (plus powerplant) cannot maintain the aircraft in level flight anymore. This turbulent separation can be loosely compared to the burble in freefall- for comparison, bellyflight is a stalled condition. Also, a stall may be encountered on a single aircraft at a range of speeds from vso (say 55 kts) to va (say 130 kts) It all depends on how aggressively the AOA is changed and whether it exceeds 16* AOA in that change attempt.

Sobe's 'Arush' is pretty good. No Fear isn't bad either, but why so much liquid (see can size for details)? I don't really like Red Bull- the taste is mediocre and it gives me more of an unpleasant buzz than an energy boost. I'd like to try Go Fast, but I haven't found it in any stores here in Canuck-land

Just because the engine quits does not mean, by any stretch of the imagination, that a plane must stall. Angle of attack is the only thing that will produce a stall. Exceed (about) 16* AOA, and the wing will stall. In a stall, again, nothing says the tail drops. Provided the aircraft is properly loaded, it is designed so that the nose will drop (that way the pilot may recover in a non-exciting manner). I think that the bigger concern would be clearing the trees at the end of the runway after convincing your pilot to fly without the stall horn going off. Connecting with powerlines or trees will be slightly more annoying than listening to a buzzer for a few seconds. Why is there a stall horn? Good question... the planes I fly have no stall horn. A good pilot can feel how the craft is flying and can judge his speed off of that feel- cross checking the ASI is sensible also- keep it in the green arc, don't do anything to change the AOA quickly, and a stall will not result. Stalls are not surprizes- they happen under certain known conditions. If a CG issue causes the stall, then the pilot holds the responsibility for flying an aircraft with the CG out of tested datum locations. If I'm not mistaken, in this case, the 206 would be properly classified as experimental and your pilot will have just been promoted to 'test pilot'. Insurance would also no longer be vaild as the aircraft is operating outside the limits specified in the POH. These are things I have asked myself about, yes- and I know the answers... Blue Skies

Uh guys, would you like to go up in that 206 on a hot (humid) summer day with five in the back at anything close to a reasonable rate? Let the pilot do his job- he knows what he's doing- the stall horn is going off, most likely at low altitude just after takeoff, because el capitan is trying not to cream the plane and it's contents into the fence/ trees/ etc at the end of the runway. If you're so worried he can't do his job properly, or that the day is too hot or humid to fly safely, talk to your DZO.

This is something to note, and is very true (on a general basis- er, statement one specifically). Keep the scudrunning safe.

Keep in mind that a pilot is usually the first to his/ her crash site, and naturally does their best to keep alive- if they stay alive, the pax usually do too. That being said, a good pilot is one who THINKS. Employers don't pay pilots to fly- they pay pilots for good judgement.

First mistake... you spend too much time in the house. Go outside and play. Agreed Go play. "Modeling" has one 'd'... even if you're talking about FEM/ flow analysis etc.

A not so fun story... Was on a flight to B.C.- 767 I recall it was- we push back and begin to taxi. After about three minutes, the left engine shuts down. Plane stops and pilot restarts the engine. Thirty seconds... left engine shuts down again. Pilot taxis to the de ice area (this is spring- de ice area is not in use) stops and retarts the engine. Thirty seconds... it quits again. This happened three more times. About then, at the time I was about to flag down a crew member and advise them to ask the captain to recall how many strikes are allowed in baseball, and how much more serious the game he plays is- el capitan comes on the radio and we taxi back to the gate to 'close a valve'. I guess that was the issue because half an hour later we were taxiing back out and departed just fine. Man would I have been irate if he tried to go the first time- the most comforting part of riding backseat is knowing that the captain is the first to arrive at his crash site, and thus usually makes the right call. On a side note... I was travelling with a rig at the time- I've never thus far had issues with security- they usually ask while pointing at the Cypres "Does this have the compressed air in it?" And I say "No... this system doesn't have any compressed air in it" and they say "Okay then"

I got to 'work' today at 10am... walked around a bit... talked to some pilots... did my walk around, logged an hour and a bit of air time (today was slow) mowed a runway (fixed the mower shortly thereafter- fatigue failure)...then mosied on home at 7ish- ergh- strech- what a tough day. Happy daydraming all

CFSEX is a 172 based in St. Hubert, QC

um... the citabria is not certified for solo from the back seat- only the front seat- this is placarded conspicuously but congrats on the jump!! i fly a 180 hp citab, and it's a blast- the jump must have been awesome

This might be one of our fatal flaws... it's accepted that the population of the world is growing at an exponential rate. When you draw a graph representing an exponential function, it has asymptotes either at zero or infinity. The part where it goes to infinity is the problem here . Not that the world can support that- of course war and whatnot will break out long before that as people fight for what little food, land and resources are available, which will bring the population down a bit. But, back to the point... birth conotrol support- it seems China has gotten on the ball with it, despite criticism- although there are still customs (here in America also) of having six or more kids. My understanding is back a few hundered years ago, six kids ensured that the family will continue if a few give up the ghost early (whether it be to war, sickness, etc)- but now, with medical treatments (at least in Western countries) two kids should be plenty (two- just incase one takes up skydiving or something of that sort). Why families still have four or five kids beats me... ( I am allowed to hijack my own thread, right?)

Gah, packers these days...

Agreed as well- we've got it incredibly good- I feel guilty thinking about it sometimes- what we have and they don't- and likely won't. Or about how lazy we've become (in general). Or, thinking about the fact that we have the liesure time here to write on such a forum and discuss these issues- while the chaos continues, and we can only imagine, and sympathize- and in the end, are more or less powerless.