Ideal aircraft for commercial training

rickgn

rickgn

Pre-Flight
Joined
Dec 2, 2023
Messages
64
Location
Georgia, USA
Display Name
Display name:
Rick G
Hi all,
I have about 1300 hours and I've been flying for 18 years. I decided to get my commercial done this year. Has anyone done a checkride in a high performance 300 HP airplane? If so, did you find it difficult, or would you say the difficulty level is probably the same if I already know the airplane?

Will it make it harder to do chandelles and lazy 8's having a lot of HP up front? Or is it just a matter of adjusting speed?

I have 77 Piper Lance 300 HP. Maneuvering speed is 115-125 knots (depending on weight). Best rate of climb is 96 kt. It climbs at 1400+ FPM. Stall speed is around 60 knots with the flaps up. So basically everything is 15-20 knots faster than a trainer and it takes a lot of altitude to get it to a stall speed. Last time I tried a power on stall I think I was 25+ degrees nose up before it finally stopped climbing, and it didn't really nose over. I had to use a lot of trim to get it to pitch that high.

Does the checkride allow for doing the maneuvers at lower initial power settings? I'm assuming it would, because I'd need to be at about 20" MP to get to maneuvering speed.

The alternative is to rent something with lower power that is simple to handle.

Thoughts? Advice? Thanks.
 
I'd be more concerned about the power off 180 and short field landings and the possible abuse it might subject your airplane to during training trying to nail the tolerances.

Have you heard of the Piper wing spar inspection AD? This AD was prompted by a report of a wing separation caused by fatigue cracking in a visually inaccessible area of the lower main wing spar cap. This AD requires calculating the factored service hours for each main wing spar to determine when an inspection is required, inspecting the lower main wing spar bolt holes for cracks, and replacing any cracked main wing spar. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

Factored service hours relates to 100 hour inspections which relates to flight schools which relates to hard landings IMO.

Do the easy stuff in your airplane; cross country training, long solo etc. Train and take the checkride in someone else's.
 
Get all your ratings in the smallest, most simple aircraft available. This minimizes items to be tested on in flight and things that can go wrong.

C172 (or fixed pitch PA28) would get my vote.

After your rating, go practice the maneuvers on the big plane.
 
I did my commercial in a 285hp C180, with tundra tires, no big deal. Use what you've got.
 
kaiser said:
Get all your ratings in the smallest, most simple aircraft available. This minimizes items to be tested on in flight and things that can go wrong.

C172 (or fixed pitch PA28) would get my vote.

After your rating, go practice the maneuvers on the big plane.
Click to expand...
Yeah but he owns it and already knows how to fly it. That’s a no brainer for me.
 
Walboy said:
I'd be more concerned about the power off 180 and short field landings and the possible abuse it might subject your airplane to during training trying to nail the tolerances.

Have you heard of the Piper wing spar inspection AD? This AD was prompted by a report of a wing separation caused by fatigue cracking in a visually inaccessible area of the lower main wing spar cap. This AD requires calculating the factored service hours for each main wing spar to determine when an inspection is required, inspecting the lower main wing spar bolt holes for cracks, and replacing any cracked main wing spar. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

Factored service hours relates to 100 hour inspections which relates to flight schools which relates to hard landings IMO.

Do the easy stuff in your airplane; cross country training, long solo etc. Train and take the checkride in someone else's.
Click to expand...

What is abusive about power off 180 or short field landing practice?

The rest of it would make me not want to fly the thing at all, checkride or otherwise.
 
People do the Commercial in 300hp airplanes every day. Run what you brung.

If you’re gaining a lot of altitude on the stalls, you’re starting them too fast.

You don’t trim to pitch; you trim to airspeed. It’ll always take a lot of nose-up trim to get to the slowest possible airspeed. It might be that your Lance is nose-heavy like everyone else’s, and you’d benefit from a sand bag in the baggage compartment.

Doing the training/maneuvers in your Lance won’t hurt the check ride, and will teach you a lot about the airplane.
 
Walboy said:
I'd be more concerned about the power off 180 and short field landings and the possible abuse it might subject your airplane to during training trying to nail the tolerances.

Have you heard of the Piper wing spar inspection AD? This AD was prompted by a report of a wing separation caused by fatigue cracking in a visually inaccessible area of the lower main wing spar cap. This AD requires calculating the factored service hours for each main wing spar to determine when an inspection is required, inspecting the lower main wing spar bolt holes for cracks, and replacing any cracked main wing spar. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

Factored service hours relates to 100 hour inspections which relates to flight schools which relates to hard landings IMO.

Do the easy stuff in your airplane; cross country training, long solo etc. Train and take the checkride in someone else's.
Click to expand...
The Arrow that lost the wing in flight had been ridden hard and put away wet for thousands and thousands of hours of almost exclusively pattern work, by very low-time pilots. I believe there was also some evidence that it had been subjected to some aerobatics, most likely improperly performed and over-G’d. The other Arrows that had cracks had endured the same life of being ridden hard and put away wet by hamfisted kids.

An owner flying an extra 10 hours and a few landings isn’t in the same ballpark, not even close.
 
Doing it in your own plane will make it easier to get ready for the check ride because you already know the plane, and it will make you a better pilot of that plane by getting you comfortable with some of its flight characteristics that you probably haven't explored or spent much time with.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
It might be that your Lance is nose-heavy like everyone else’s, and you’d benefit from a sand bag in the baggage compartment.
Click to expand...
This makes sense. A little weight in the back can help with leverage, reducing the elevator needed. I'll find a way to put weight in the back, making it easier to pivot for chandelles and lazy8's. Otherwise it would have a tenancy to keep on climbing, or needing excessive pitch to get near stall speeds. The hershey bar Lance does a weird not climbing but not stalling thing between 75 and 90 knots if the pitch attitude is moderately up.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
If you’re gaining a lot of altitude on the stalls, you’re starting them too fast.
Click to expand...
This makes sense. I suppose I should slow to 96 kt first. Then go power on while pitching up. That would be more representative of a power-on stall at takeoff. I think previously I had been doing them starting at 115 knots which is top of white arc.

A lot of good info here. I suppose I never fully learned the limits of the airplane after buying it. This is not an airplane to go play with on a Sunday just for fun. Usually we are going somewhere 100's of miles away. I'll have to make a point of practicing the basics again.
 
RyanShort1 said:
I liked the Lance I flew. If you're careful it shouldn't be too big of a deal.

Regarding stalls, the ACS says no less than 65% power - so yes, you don't have to be at full power for the power on stall.

You really should look at the ACS for yourself:

Click to expand...

This is helpful. I was worried it would need to be full throttle, based on some training videos I was watching. I can practice maneuvers at 24 MP / 2400 RPM. At typical training altitudes that's probably 2/3 throttle.
 
Walboy said:
I'd be more concerned about the power off 180 and short field landings and the possible abuse it might subject your airplane to during training trying to nail the tolerances.

Have you heard of the Piper wing spar inspection AD? This AD was prompted by a report of a wing separation caused by fatigue cracking in a visually inaccessible area of the lower main wing spar cap. This AD requires calculating the factored service hours for each main wing spar to determine when an inspection is required, inspecting the lower main wing spar bolt holes for cracks, and replacing any cracked main wing spar. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

Factored service hours relates to 100 hour inspections which relates to flight schools which relates to hard landings IMO.

Do the easy stuff in your airplane; cross country training, long solo etc. Train and take the checkride in someone else's.
Click to expand...
This is a commercial checkride, not PPL.

I do short field landings often. The trick is in flaring at the perfect time, then it doesn't have to be a hard landing just because it's short. But you have to define what short field is. For this airplane it means 2000' when she's heavy. The nose gear is more of a concern than the spar. I've blown a front tire from braking too hard. The nose doesn't like having a lot of weight on it.

I'm more concerned about the emergency power off landing.

I suppose being that I'm not in a huge rush, I can keep easing it down closer to the runway before actually touching down. If I'm coming down too hard I can always put in some power and abort the landing.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
...and you’d benefit from a sand bag in the baggage compartment.
Click to expand...
I just had another thought on this: I could fill up the tanks. 94 gallons of fuel adds a lot of weight. I think I normally do biannuals (stalls and stuff) at half tank. That's another 275 lbs.

I don't necessarily want to make it aft W&B. That would make it harder to do some of the maneuvers. I think it would cause a need for more rudder if the weight is in the baggage area.

I could put all the seats in it. Maybe I can borrow a center console from another PA-32 and fill it with sandbags. That would be weight on CG and centerline.
 
rickgn said:
This makes sense. I suppose I should slow to 96 kt first. Then go power on while pitching up. That would be more representative of a power-on stall at takeoff. I think previously I had been doing them starting at 115 knots which is top of white arc.

A lot of good info here. I suppose I never fully learned the limits of the airplane after buying it. This is not an airplane to go play with on a Sunday just for fun. Usually we are going somewhere 100's of miles away. I'll have to make a point of practicing the basics again.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think you should get a instructor who knows the airplane as well.
 
rickgn said:
I'll find a way to put weight in the back, making it easier to pivot for chandelles and lazy8's. Otherwise it would have a tenancy to keep on climbing, or needing excessive pitch to get near stall speeds. The hershey bar Lance does a weird not climbing but not stalling thing between 75 and 90 knots if the pitch attitude is moderately up.
Click to expand...
you definitely need to get some instruction in your Lance.
 
rickgn said:
This makes sense. I suppose I should slow to 96 kt first. Then go power on while pitching up. That would be more representative of a power-on stall at takeoff. I think previously I had been doing them starting at 115 knots which is top of white arc.
Click to expand...
That explains the extreme attitude and gain in altitude. But you said your clean stall speed is about 60? If that’s the case, I’d slow to 65-ish in level slow flight before starting a power-on stall. You have to lose all of the energy you’re carrying, plus what you add with the throttle, before it’ll stall. Best to start with as little energy as possible. As a ridiculous example, if you started at 170 knots, you might wind up vertical or beyond — headed for the Great Beyond! — or even loop all the way around without stalling.

I was taught, before the ACS, to do slow flight with the horn blowing and to start the power-on stall from there. It still pitches up, but there’s a lot less energy to bleed off. You might want to go practice slow flight over and over and over again until it bores you — gear up and down, flaps up and down, holding airspeed within 5 knots and altitude within 50 feet.
 
kaiser said:
Get all your ratings in the smallest, most simple aircraft available. This minimizes items to be tested on in flight and things that can go wrong.

C172 (or fixed pitch PA28) would get my vote.

After your rating, go practice the maneuvers on the big plane.
Click to expand...
Agree with this.

After my Commercial training and checkride in a PA-28, I flew with the same instructor for the HP endorsement. It was fun doing all the commercial maneuvers and landings in a Saratoga.
 
farangutan said:
Agree with this.

After my Commercial training and checkride in a PA-28, I flew with the same instructor for the HP endorsement. It was fun doing all the commercial maneuvers and landings in a Saratoga.
Click to expand...
It sucks to rent a plane while mine is sitting in the hanger. Then again, my fuel burn at 75% power is 16-18 GPH. So the rental might work out to be not much more expensive.

I see a lot of the students flying a Grumman Traveler at my airport. That airplane might be a candidate. I have some time in a Tiger. The Traveler is probably easier to handle.
 
MauleSkinner said:
you definitely need to get some instruction in your Lance.
Click to expand...
I'll be humble enough to agree that I can always use some pointers. The trick is to find someone who really knows the Lance. I have ~350 hours in mine. I feel I know it well. However, I rarely take it up for maneuver practice. Passengers generally don't like being 30 degrees nose up nearly stalling, nor do they enjoy a 50 degree spiraling bank. Even my roller coaster loving teenage son gets freaked out when I do maneuvers. And at approx. $250+ per hour all-in operating cost I don't do maneuvers for just a joyride by myself.
So sure, I admit I can use some practice. :cool:
 
rickgn said:
I'll be humble enough to agree that I can always use some pointers. The trick is to find someone who really knows the Lance. I have ~350 hours in mine. I feel I know it well. However, I rarely take it up for maneuver practice. Passengers generally don't like being 30 degrees nose up nearly stalling, nor do they enjoy a 50 degree spiraling bank. Even my roller coaster loving teenage son gets freaked out when I do maneuvers. And at approx. $250+ per hour all-in operating cost I don't do maneuvers for just a joyride by myself.
So sure, I admit I can use some practice. :cool:
Click to expand...
My comment was more about the aerodynamic misunderstandings than the lack of practice.
 
rickgn said:
I'll be humble enough to agree that I can always use some pointers. The trick is to find someone who really knows the Lance. I have ~350 hours in mine. I feel I know it well. However, I rarely take it up for maneuver practice. Passengers generally don't like being 30 degrees nose up nearly stalling, nor do they enjoy a 50 degree spiraling bank. Even my roller coaster loving teenage son gets freaked out when I do maneuvers. And at approx. $250+ per hour all-in operating cost I don't do maneuvers for just a joyride by myself.
So sure, I admit I can use some practice. :cool:
Click to expand...

Commercial checkride requires recovery at the first indication of a stall, whether that's a horn, light, or buffet, so no need for 30 degrees nose up. And the more you fly it the cheaper it is per hour, so comparing $250 for your own plane vs. $150/hr (or whatever the price is) for a rental isn't really accurate. And you have cited fuel burn at 75% power multiple times. You don't need to fly it as fast as it will go, especially not to practice maneuvers ;)
 
rickgn said:
This makes sense. I suppose I should slow to 96 kt first. Then go power on while pitching up. That would be more representative of a power-on stall at takeoff. I think previously I had been doing them starting at 115 knots which is top of white arc.

A lot of good info here. I suppose I never fully learned the limits of the airplane after buying it. This is not an airplane to go play with on a Sunday just for fun. Usually we are going somewhere 100's of miles away. I'll have to make a point of practicing the basics again.
Click to expand...
I teach power on stalls starting at lift off speed.
 
I don’t see the sense in renting a plane. You will be a much better and safer pilot of the plane you own by becoming proficient in it performing the commercial maneuvers. I did my commercial rating in my C182 five years ago and it remains the plane I fly the best and am most comfortable in.
 
Pinecone said:
I teach power on stalls starting at lift off speed.
Click to expand...
I do realize a lot of my questions here are related to HP aircraft. I had training, but most local instructors don't have Lance experience. The advice I get is usually from PA-32 260 (six-260) experience - which is not necessarily valid in the Lance. With my speed mods, the power-to-speed ratios are different than normal. I had to come up with my own "fly by the numbers" cheat sheet.

In my Lance at 80 kt with no flaps I'm about 10 degrees nose up. So lift-off speed will be too slow for maneuvers. However, I see your point. I'll try practicing power-on stalls at ~90 kt. That's typically the speed range where it is most likely. After taking off with one notch of flaps I'd be at 85 kt for initial climb. If I don't nose down and pick up speed before raising flaps, at high/hot altitude the Lance ends up in a power-on stall.

Below 105 I start to need a bit of flaps to stabilize and keep the nose level. Nose up = right rudder straight and level, which makes the checkride more difficult because of the requirement to stay coordinated at all times. For example, in the pattern at 110 kt I usually put in a notch of flaps.

Oddly, my airplane wants a bit of left rudder at max cruise. I start to need left rudder at about ~140 IAS. You can see this in the photo below. It's trimmed slightly left rudder in this pic.

So it seems 115 - 125 should be the ideal range. The POH says 120 for maneuver speed when light or 132 at max gross.

At 5000' I cannot use full power because I would be uncomfortably into the yellow arc. I would also need to use full left rudder trim, and left rudder pedal on descent to stay coordinated.

To stay within the 65% power requirement for maneuvers I can go as low as 22.5" MP and 2300 RPM at 5000'. I'll have to practice flying at that speed. I believe that should put me at about 120-125 IAS.

This still causes concern for descending maneuvers. I would need to get down to 19" MP to avoid going into the yellow arc. Or, my descent can't be very shallow. I don't see how to do the lazy 8's at constant power. I guess I'll have to figure something out that lets me stay in checkride tolerance but doesn't get me going too fast.


1704561543064.png
 
rickgn said:
Oddly, my airplane wants a bit of left rudder at max cruise. I start to need left rudder at about ~140 IAS. You can see this in the photo below. It's trimmed slightly left rudder in this pic.
Click to expand...
That is not odd, it is normal.

Aircraft are normally rigged with some right rudder, so at cruise you need some left. My Mooney is the same
 
I think the beauty of doing the commercial is being a better pilot, particularly in the plane that you are flying. I do commercial maneuvers in my 600HP, M600, and when appropriate just pull the power back. As far as abuse, there is no reason to abuse the plane in commercial maneuvers. If you are, you just need a little more time in the saddle to figure out energy management.
 
@rickgn , you are way overthinking this. Yes, you can do Commercial maneuvers in your plane. No, you do not need to do anything special with the weight or CG or loading or anything. Yes, you have to know the proper power settings and entry speeds for the maneuvers - but that's part of the training and is no different than in any other airplane.

I have trained people for their Commercial in PA-32s, Bonanzas, Cirruses, normally aspirated and turbocharged, and every other variation of the ASEL world in addition to the normal trainers. There's no particular trick to it, each plane is a little different and so you learn that plane.
 
I found some wonderful information after researching a bit. Turns around a pilon can be calculated by (IAS x IAS) / 113. So 110 kt = 1070 ft AGL, as a starting point. If I'm going faster than I just need to be higher. For example, 130 kt = 1500 AGL.

I took a long flight yesterday, trying to get used to flying at 115 kt IAS with no flaps. I had to use some right rudder trim and it was starting to be slightly nose high. So, I believe 120-125 is the magic number for my airplane.

120 kt is below 65% power at 2500'. It's probably about 50% power. My minimum clean speed at 65% power seems to be ~135 IAS. Per the POH this is the top of the maneuvering speed, indicating that the POH says to do maneuvers at or below 65% power.
1705260463732.png

I assume less than 65% power is okay for lazy-8's? If not, I'll need to be at 1600' AGL, which makes it a lot more challenging. Either that or I'll need to drop the gear and a notch of flaps.

Someone mentioned earlier in this thread, the standard is 65% for chandelles. So I would have an entry speed into a chandelle at 130-135 IAS, unless I can initiate the maneuver at a higher altitude such as 5000'-6000'.

I have not tried initiating a power-on stall from 65%, then going to full power -- unless I start it from 7000'. That actually worked pretty well, except I stalled only after passing 8000'. I'm thinking the examiner won't have the patience for that. At lower altitudes I'm probably going to be +15 degrees before it stalls, and it's going to gain a lot of altitude.

For the emergency landing I would use best glide speed which is 110 kt. I can touch down on the mains as high as 80 kt without bouncing. With gear down and no flaps that's still above stall speed, although very nose high.

For the spiral descent this will be interesting. I recently did some adjusting of my autopilot so that 4 degrees down angle doesn't exceed 150 IAS while at 17" MP, which is about -700'/min. Power off this is probably getting close to be as much as -2000 fpm while wings level. Once I nearly had an accelerated stall at 115 kt with the gear down, so that's the lowest safe speed I think. Gear down range is 125 kt. So once again, it seems 125 kt is the magic number.

Does anyone know what typical descent rate is in the spiral turn?

Someone mentioned "you are over thinking it". Very true. I'm an engineer. That's what I do. :) But until I can work out the mechanics and the math in my head, I struggle with it in the air -- at least until I've done it so many times that I don't have to think about it anymore.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Please, please, please fly with an instructor on this stuff before you do any more.
Click to expand...
I hear ya. But any instructors I found who have time available have only worked with AA5's, C172s and PA28s. So... who's going to train them on what numbers to use?

I'm still looking for an instructor who has more HP time (and has time available)
 
He will learn along with you, I did mine in a Bonanza long ago and don't remember the numbers. But, the lazy eights were easy, just a little aileron and rudder. Even did some just just with rudder and my hand behind the yoke not inputting any aileron. The should not be a stall and end of a chandelle. Should be close, but no stall. While you have theory, he has experience.
 
rickgn said:
I hear ya. But any instructors I found who have time available have only worked with AA5's, C172s and PA28s. So... who's going to train them on what numbers to use?

I'm still looking for an instructor who has more HP time (and has time available)
Click to expand...
Sit down together and work it out. You appear to be confusing yourself more and more.
 
rickgn said:
I assume less than 65% power is okay for lazy-8's? If not, I'll need to be at 1600' AGL, which makes it a lot more challenging. Either that or I'll need to drop the gear and a notch of flaps.

Someone mentioned earlier in this thread, the standard is 65% for chandelles. So I would have an entry speed into a chandelle at 130-135 IAS, unless I can initiate the maneuver at a higher altitude such as 5000'-6000'.

I have not tried initiating a power-on stall from 65%, then going to full power -- unless I start it from 7000'. That actually worked pretty well, except I stalled only after passing 8000'. I'm thinking the examiner won't have the patience for that. At lower altitudes I'm probably going to be +15 degrees before it stalls, and it's going to gain a lot of altitude.

For the emergency landing I would use best glide speed which is 110 kt. I can touch down on the mains as high as 80 kt without bouncing. With gear down and no flaps that's still above stall speed, although very nose high.

For the spiral descent this will be interesting. I recently did some adjusting of my autopilot so that 4 degrees down angle doesn't exceed 150 IAS while at 17" MP, which is about -700'/min. Power off this is probably getting close to be as much as -2000 fpm while wings level. Once I nearly had an accelerated stall at 115 kt with the gear down, so that's the lowest safe speed I think. Gear down range is 125 kt. So once again, it seems 125 kt is the magic number.

Does anyone know what typical descent rate is in the spiral turn?

Someone mentioned "you are over thinking it". Very true. I'm an engineer. That's what I do. :) But until I can work out the mechanics and the math in my head, I struggle with it in the air -- at least until I've done it so many times that I don't have to think about it anymore.
Click to expand...
This is a nightmare. You need to purge all this information from your brain because it's all wrong.
 
rickgn said:
I found some wonderful information after researching a bit. Turns around a pilon can be calculated by (IAS x IAS) / 113. So 110 kt = 1070 ft AGL, as a starting point. If I'm going faster than I just need to be higher. For example, 130 kt = 1500 AGL.

I took a long flight yesterday, trying to get used to flying at 115 kt IAS with no flaps. I had to use some right rudder trim and it was starting to be slightly nose high. So, I believe 120-125 is the magic number for my airplane.

120 kt is below 65% power at 2500'. It's probably about 50% power. My minimum clean speed at 65% power seems to be ~135 IAS. Per the POH this is the top of the maneuvering speed, indicating that the POH says to do maneuvers at or below 65% power.
View attachment 124359

I assume less than 65% power is okay for lazy-8's? If not, I'll need to be at 1600' AGL, which makes it a lot more challenging. Either that or I'll need to drop the gear and a notch of flaps.
Click to expand...
Eights on pylons, turns around a point, and Lazy 8s are three separate maneuvers. It looks like you’re blending parameters for them.
rickgn said:
Someone mentioned earlier in this thread, the standard is 65% for chandelles. So I would have an entry speed into a chandelle at 130-135 IAS, unless I can initiate the maneuver at a higher altitude such as 5000'-6000'.
Click to expand...
A chandelle is a maximum performance climb. Unless you’re starting at 7500’, 65% is not maximum performance.
rickgn said:
I have not tried initiating a power-on stall from 65%, then going to full power -- unless I start it from 7000'. That actually worked pretty well, except I stalled only after passing 8000'. I'm thinking the examiner won't have the patience for that. At lower altitudes I'm probably going to be +15 degrees before it stalls, and it's going to gain a lot of altitude.
Click to expand...
15 degrees nose up is nothing alarming. You start at a speed not much above liftoff and increase power as you begin the climb. When you do these with a CFI, it would be a great idea to actualy do some at full throttle to see what real nose up looks like.
rickgn said:
For the emergency landing I would use best glide speed which is 110 kt. I can touch down on the mains as high as 80 kt without bouncing. With gear down and no flaps that's still above stall speed, although very nose high.
Click to expand...
110 is way too fast once you’re on short final and landing is assured. Cross the threshold at the same speed you normally do. Try to touch down at 80 and you’re going to run out of gas taxiing back, you’ll be so far down the runway before you finally stop.
rickgn said:
For the spiral descent this will be interesting. I recently did some adjusting of my autopilot so that 4 degrees down angle doesn't exceed 150 IAS while at 17" MP, which is about -700'/min. Power off this is probably getting close to be as much as -2000 fpm while wings level. Once I nearly had an accelerated stall at 115 kt with the gear down, so that's the lowest safe speed I think. Gear down range is 125 kt. So once again, it seems 125 kt is the magic number.

Does anyone know what typical descent rate is in the spiral turn?

Someone mentioned "you are over thinking it". Very true. I'm an engineer. That's what I do. :) But until I can work out the mechanics and the math in my head, I struggle with it in the air -- at least until I've done it so many times that I don't have to think about it anymore.
Click to expand...
You really need to start training with a CFI before doing any more of this. At this point, your understanding of the maneuvers is inaccurate. While that can be corrected, it’s likely that you will have challenges resetting and learning it per standards (Law of Primacy). Continuing to self-study without an accurate basic understanding of the techniques and performance standards will cost you time, effort, frustration, and money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top