Twin pilots, opinion on this approach

[Don Jones]

I hadn't previously thought much about staying ahead either. It's really opened my eyes (and made my Mooney flying a lot better). I like the mental exercise of having to start a descent 135 miles out, going down 6000 fpm with spoilers out and engines at idle and still being too high cause ATC couldn't let us start down sooner, planning to be at 250 kts when we hit 10,000' and being at 200 kts when I'll need flaps. I get a little better each flight, ask a lot of questions about using the tools the airplane has available, and continuously going over the various handbooks we have to know the operating limitations. Oh, and to get down in a Learjet slipping is NOT an option .

Sounds like you are having way too much fun Lance.

I had to laugh reading your Mooney comment, I logged almost 4 hours in one day in the Baron a while back, the next day I had 3 students in the 172. Just about went to sleep in the downwind, didn't think we would ever get to turn base, lol. Everything was in slooooooooow moooootion

 

[MauleSkinner]

With the manifold pressure reduced to below governing range, pushing the props full forward will get you a ton of flat-plate drag....you can come back in with the props as you approach your target altitude. Just another tool if gear speed is a problem.

Bob Gardner

OK...I'm gonna admit it...I'm confused.

With the MP reduced to below governing range, aren't the props already on the low-pitch stop, and therefore pushing the prop controls full forward would result in no change in blade angle?

Or are we somehow using the same terms differently?

Fly safe!

David

 

[TMetzinger]

Except when the hobbs meter is wired to the gear up light, and you get paid by the hobbs hour. Then you put the gear down at the normal FAF and not a second before!
Plan ahead and bring in full prop drag and partial flaps.

THAT's why I always hear some cargo guys asking for the full approach instead of vectors... more paid time!

 

[MauleSkinner]

THAT's why I always hear some cargo guys asking for the full approach instead of vectors... more paid time!

I always asked for the full approach because I coud make it faster than with vectors...but then, I was never a freight pilot

Fly safe!

David

 

[Larryo]

Don,

Just a few wags for the Baron. All at 120 GS: (2 miles per minute)
(you will have to bring your IAS speed back somewhat in a no wind situation to get the ground speed you want, OR simply reduce power for a greater descent which works too)

For a MAX descent, you can comfortably go down 500 ft per mile (6 degrees) fairly easy, gear down, full flaps, ~15". (1200 fpm)

For a normal GS descent (3 degrees), very comfortable with gear down, flaps up, ~15", about 600 fpm down. And this is the configuration I'd fly this approach from Coses, but would come bring the power back 2 extra inches to stay ahead of thing and as a check I'd want to be at 7700 at Mendz.

-----

Now with a speed of 180GS (3 miles a minute)
You can make this approach clean, but will require a large decrease in power to below 12" and you'll need better than 1000 fpm down to allow time to slow for gear speed. This is pretty aggressive, and allows little room for error. I don't recommend it.

------

As for approach flaps. I don't like them and normally don't use them, and they would not be necessary for this approach in an early B55 like you're flying or any other Baron for that matter. Also, you don't have an approach flap setting, do you?, so you have to know what approach flaps are. This can be done with a mark on the flap.

However, use of flaps is technique. They "could" be used for a cruise descent to help get down, but not my normal SOP. And they can be used for approach, perhaps to to a cat A approach.


BE55/58