![]() |
Quote:
Where would one get charts with statue miles? AAA:eek: |
You have no idea how hard it is for an English guy to admit that anything invented in France is better..:)
I do love this forum! |
So Larry, just how many buckets of popcorn have you enjoyed since stirring this pot up, eh! ;)
And "nobody cares about how fast a ship goes"?...I dunno, how fast the carrier was going made a fair bit of difference in the "quality" of the air behind it (more natural wind = less burble), so we cared how fast it was going! (We also cared how fast it was going when it was headed into port! :cool:) Hey Mike, all those Class B, C, D, Mode C, etc rings and things on charts (and yes, in GPSs too)...what kinda miles are those in...hmmmm ;) So there are a lotta knots out there...the only ones I don't like are the ones that get in my headset cord...pesky dern things! :rolleyes: MPH sounds good to U.S. race fans (500 MPH Unlimiteds and 400 MPH Sports does sound pretty cool, ya gotta admit)...and it sounds good to U.S. airline passengers (they'll get there faster...and happier...at 500-600 MPH...yessir!). If you're quick, or do it 6-10 times a day (outbound and inbound...AMHIK), you can convert KTS to MPH on the fly, just like C to F temps, which we also have to do, since C is on the paperwork, but is still a mystery to most folks here (and as Bob Ax said...we were going to be converted by 1975! If you really want to brag, state top speed in MPH, and stall speed in KTS, then you win on both ends! Don't screw it up though! ;) And have you guys forgotten? Girls like knotty boys...so what are ya thinkin'!?! :D Cheers, Bob |
He lives!!!
|
Quote:
Jim Sharkey |
Quote:
It's January, cold, windy, a little "cabin fever" setting in. This is what happens when there is no build in the shop. " No one cares how fast a ship goes!" Did I really say that? :o. I was in the Navy, yes we cared. :D We have been debating this for some time in another group and it spilled over into this one as an after thought. Just having some fun. |
Quote:
Your fun was taken seriously by the majority of VAFers. How come nobody uses metrics? I heard one favoring Mach but the unit was not in the poll. :D |
Hey, we decided this issue years ago, right here on VAF. Everyone was happy with the Mock System.
100 mph = Mock 1....cocktail party bragging rights for RV-12 owners. 200 mph = Mock 2....routine for the rest of us, although -9 owners really should fix their static system leak. 300 mph = Mock 3....used by a small group of Rocketeers, or the airport liar. |
A question...
All the reasons for using knots are valid. However, I use MPH because that is what every plane I have piloted since I started flying in 1968 has the ASI in MPH. I was instructed in MPH. I don't fly IFR, and the guys I fly with use MPH.
Does anyone know why, if knots is the standard for aviation (charts, ATC, ect.), it seems virtually all civilian aircraft made in the last 50 years have ASI's in MPH? It seems like the manufacturers should have used knots, but they didn't. Or would that be an option when the plane was manufactured and the buyers selected MPH? |
Klik
Quote:
Pete |
To me a pace (having used it a fair bit in the field to estimate distance) is R-L-R, thus 1000 5-foot paces is pretty close to a mile.
Quote:
|
Quote:
don't forget the GAPHO system! 04 gph = GAPHO 1...cocktail party bragging rights for RV-12 owners 14 gph = GAPHO 2...routine for the rest of you lbs/hr = GAPHO 3...used by a small group of Rocketeers. (just having fun of course...not necessary to brag about gph at stall speeds) Pete |
Knots...
You got a problem with that? See Above avatar from an 'ol carrier sailor in Naval Aviation...nuff sed...:cool:
|
Quote:
Real sailors deploy on destroyers BTW. We measured distance in strokes per hour. :D ;) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
150agl(offset 350')= 500'. That's legal, isn't it? |
Quote:
Knots are the standard. (FAA, ICAO, etc) However, I think there are some countries that use metric routinely. |
Quote:
150agl(offset 350')= 500'. That's legal, isn't it? Looked it up, to be sure (c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. |
Quote:
![]() |
Check your math Larry.....
So you are flying 350 ft laterally away from the fishermen and you are 150 ft above the ice. Thats a right triangle. The ''hypontenuse of that triangle is 381 ft. (Square root of (350 squared plus 150 squared). I'm no aviation expert, but I think 500 feet requirement is a straight line measurement.
I think you would have to be 476 feet laterally to the side of people at 150 ft to equal 500 straight line. My guess is you are wagging the lateral distance and if you checked it closely you would see that you were indeed farther away than you estimate:). But thats just my humble opinion.... |
Pythagorean Theorem
Quote:
|
Quote:
24.5 mpg..I can lve with that..:) Frankh.RV-7a |
I Use Both!!
....I Use Both! And must admit, I am most comfortable with MPH. I wish this were the standard for aircraft as that measure is what we are accustomed to using in this country. We will most likely soon be using whatever the Chinese mandate?:rolleyes: Since knots are considered the standard for aviation throughout the world, I find it odd that Vans, (being the only aircraft of any real importance) elected to publish all performance specifications and sales information in MPH exclusively. Few people that have RVs have their panel, GPS, airspeed indicator etc in MPH. Many RVers are low or no time pilots and are most accustomed to using MPH. Perhaps that is the rationale for Vans decision. Or could it be when glancing at the airspeed indicator (as knots look lower than MPH) you are less likely to scare the sh-t out of yourself when you hit a bump :eek: with our extremely low maneuvering speeds, or are approaching VNE with little room for error at cruise, and would like to begin a decent? Seems like it would make sense to have airspeed indicator match the specifications on the plane. Am I rambling again? Allan
|
Centuries ago (before airplanes) the men who guided ships on the water were called pilots. In fact Merriam Webster lists this as the first definition of pilot.
So if we are to avoid nautical terms what must we call ourselves if not pilots?:D:D:D Quote:
|
Quote:
;););) |
Quote:
I must have flunked Trigonometry.....42 years ago...:( |
Now I get it...
Real pilots fly taildraggers.
Real aviators fly MPH |
Quote:
|
Switched my EFIS over to Knots today. One more nice thing about electronics. Not a big deal in the 9. I just went from 70MPH to 60 knots on final and from 60 MPH over the numbers to 50 knots.
|
Quote:
Ships going into port still require pilots. They come out on small boats and board the ship, and take control of the docking of the ship with tugs and side thrusters....... and you guest it....... they use MPH inside the harbor. ( I have no idea if that last part is true, I am getting bored again. :D) |
Quote:
;) |
knots
simple: Knots
|
I am ambidextrous and can use all three systems in various situations. For flight planning, I use 150 knots along with knotical miles which makes it easy to roughly guess trip/leg durations. On the rare occasion I have to file a flight plan...knots.
Airspeed indicator...MPH. |
Easy: knots are for airplanes and boats, mph are for cars...
Just ask any aircraft company (Boeing, Airbus, General Dynamics, Lockheed, etc...) Since all charts are in NM, it makes sense to use knots both for planning and flying. |
Quote:
and...Nope...not MPH (they'd be tossed out of the bridge, and overboard...in which case it wouldn't be such a good gig!) :eek: Where's the popper?! ;) Cheers, Bob |
We should use Strawberries
We should use strawberries. After all it is just a number. Just make sure you use one number, stick with it, and have an easy way to convert to other measurements.
I use the numbers in the POH for the plane I am flying and ensure the ASI is referenced as to what it indicates. I do not mind doing the calculations between knots, statute miles or kph as I have flown all three many times. I do prefer knots though as 1 nautical mile is one minute of arc on a great circle track. I will use knots in my RV-4 as that is the standard here in Europe. The use of knots has come out of maritime history and being British I am kinda proud of our history of circumnavigation, measurements of time and other discoveries. |
Older General Aviation/Military/Non Aviation Civilians
Older General Aviation/Military/Non Aviation Civilians
Started flying: General Aviation aircraft were with ASI's in MPH. Military: Knots Non Aviation Civilians: MPH Best way that I have found is to fly using knots, now a days. Exception: If aircraft is using an ASI carded with MPH. Many still are MPH. Know the simple conversion: 1.15/0.87 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Another reason that I like nm (and, just to be clear about it, by extension, nm/hr or "knots") is that it is very close to exactly 2 km (similarly, 2 km/hr), which is the Canadian standard for speeds on the road. So when I talk to my non-aviation friends it makes the conversion to road speeds extremely easy to approximate in my head. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:46 AM. |