|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

08-21-2011, 09:57 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,275
|
|
Is a mid field crossing 500' above the traffic pattern...then at some point on the downwind side of the field tear drop entry into a 45 degree entry acceptable?
|

08-22-2011, 02:48 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,685
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RV7Guy
Folks, this is a matter of perception. Is such an act necessary under normal arrival procedures? I will submit that it is not. It really doesn't matter if it is legal or not.
Point being that the Cessna 182's or Cherokee's don't do such passes.
|
Actually they do, it is just the viewer's "perception" that they do not because their speed is somewhat limited. There is no question when you as a pilot witness one of these events and you hear that Lycoming wound up tight and the airplane is passing down the runway with no change in altitude, direction or velocity. It is locked in and you know a swooping climb out is coming at the far end of the runway even if it is only going 130 kts.
Bob Axsom
Last edited by Bob Axsom : 08-22-2011 at 02:51 AM.
|

08-22-2011, 07:48 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 406
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironflight
Does anyone remember the days when you could come to VAF and read respectfully submitted opinions, clearly stated facts, and honest, open discussions - without all the emotions, all the **** (which means that you can't think of a decent word), and all of the clearly "oh yeah, who's going to make me!!" bullying behavior?
I liked that - it was what set this place apart. We have now had a solid week of threads which has done nothing but divide us. We have posters with only a few posts (and no name in their profile, or signature in their posts) making broad acrimonious statements. Every thread other than one asking a specific building question devolves into an argument about behavior.
And no folks, the Moderators can't fix it without being called out as draconian.
If you want VAF to become a swamp, then keep it up. One thing I am absolutely certain of - you are not going to change a person's mind by arguing with them on the internet. You just poison the atmosphere for everyone.
(If you HAVE to post yet another vote for or against the Overhead break, why not do it over on that thread. This thread is about low passes!)
|
I remember, Paul. I also think that the negative threads of the past week or two have overshadowed the positive ones - the ones that SHOULD be receiving the most attention (first flight announcements, for example.) I suppose you're right that the moderators can't fix everything, and as the forum base continues to grow, we will likely see an increasing amount of the undesirable types of posts that you mentioned. As for threads specific to pilot behavior, I think it's important to note that EVERY topic (low passes, overhead breaks, formation in the pattern, low-level acro, radio etiquette, etc...) has already been beaten to death several times over (probably within the past year alone), and I, for one, see no point in even allowing them pop up again and again. It seems a bit ironic that when someone does ask a specific RV-related build question there is often an immediate reply of "use the search function." Yet when a topic like this comes up that involves emotion/opinion, it is allowed to fester to the point that it predictably degrades to the extent where it becomes an ugly exchange of personal attacks and must be locked....after five or six pages of a slow decline. My two cents? Nip them in the bud early and (maybe) post a link to a previous thread of the same topic.....or just send them to the "red" board at AOPA where such dialogue seems to be the norm.
Also, I'm certainly not trying to criticize the job the mods do or the rules that have been laid out. Just a "thinking out loud" suggestion from someone that also enjoys the civility of this place.
__________________
Ryan
Tampa, FL
RV-4 (sold)
RV-8 (sold)
Xtreme Decathlon (borrowing)
|

08-22-2011, 09:41 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bonney Lake, WA
Posts: 295
|
|
I would have serious reservations about a forum moderator or leader deleting a thread simply because it may not look favorable upon the group. The topics brought up are very serious, self-critiquing in nature, and are intended to help the group prevent, or at least consider, flying behavior that may or may not be looked upon highly by our fellow aviators.
__________________
Ryan Winslow
|

08-22-2011, 10:56 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Bryan/College Station, TX
Posts: 25
|
|
As commentary about both the low pass and the tone of the posts;
The low passes that I see generally are done with some degree of reservation. I am aware of what these planes are capable of, and in that regard they are generally very conservative. They could do much more aggressive maneuvers. I personally like a fly by. It let's me hear, see, and in a way feel the plane as it passes. What I don't like, since Reklaw was mentioned, is 12, count em, passes at full throttle by a Cessna. I like cessnas, but geez, 12 passes? As a side note, I very much enjoy Reklaw, but sadly, I think it has a limited life span.
About the tone of the forums, I like the discussions. I like the differences, but mostly I like seeing that the posters almost always end up quite civil, even disagreeing. Contrast that with the AOPA forums and you get why this is nice. I don't fly an RV, but a plastic airplane. Out of the flying public, I'd rather be here than in a sea of animosity called AOPA forums. Van's seems to self moderate most of the time. I like the people.
KB
|

08-22-2011, 11:42 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: na
Posts: 1,457
|
|
nobody is forced to read a particular thread. If a thread doesn't sound interesting or is perceived by title to be overly debatable simply do not read it. Easy.
|

08-22-2011, 11:57 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,685
|
|
Flyfalcons's Comment
I read the comment about moderators deleting threads because they do not look favorably upon the group and it caused me to think about the forum. Several years ago this forum was deleted and it seemed to me that the attraction and value of the site went away. I think uncontrolled negative slanted threads toward individuals as categories, groups or single persons also reduce the appeal of the site. This forum does not have the responsibility to address all things aviation and perhaps the ground rules need to be revisited to weed out the bad influence. This isn't exactly a democracy and it doesn't have to serve the good with the bad with equal access - it can be brought back the sweetness and light, helpful and positive exchanges of information concerning RVs by the owner. Let Van, the NTSB, FAA, AOPA, EAA do their nasty work as they need to do it and if we want to influence them we can go to their forums for input. I am for locking all of these negative threads and terminate their cancerous growth or deleting them and deleting any future negative threads in the bud.
Bob Axsom
|

08-22-2011, 01:47 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 1,095
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Lee
Is a mid field crossing 500' above the traffic pattern...then at some point on the downwind side of the field tear drop entry into a 45 degree entry acceptable?
|
Hey Ron, no one answered this, and I'm curious what will be said, too. At my home field there is a helicopter training school who uses the south side of the runway at 500' below our TPA for their operations. I recently had a BFR done, and the instructor validated what I was doing when entering from the South. I enter at 500' above our TPA, and decend into the downwind (actually I probably start decending when I'm over the field). No tear-drop entry, just a turn to the downwind depending on the flow of traffic.
Funny story about the tear-drop entry, though...11 years ago when I was a student pilot, my instructor had me cross midfield, and enter the downwind after a tear-drop decending turn. Some local pilot got pretty vocal over the radio stating that we were doing a non-standard entry and could potentially confuse other traffic. If it hadn't been for that day, I'd still never know what kind of entry that was!
__________________
Sonny W
Boise, Idaho
RV-7A Flying!
Last edited by lostpilot28 : 08-22-2011 at 01:49 PM.
|

08-22-2011, 02:15 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: KRTS
Posts: 1,798
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffDriver
Yes, except that sometimes they have waivers to exceed speed limits. For instance the T-38 is waivered to 300kias below 10kft. In general, military aircraft are subject to all the same rules that civilian aircraft are when operating anywhere in the NAS.
|
Not entirely accurate. Certain manuvers such as the break and G-warm are not considered aerobatic, however that doesn't mean you can't still get violated for ripping of a sht-hot break at 500 knots.
For instance we're waivered to 350 knots for visibility/manuverability below 10K feet. At a busy towered airport, if they can accomodate the over head I'll do it at something less than 350 knots, although usually I'll take the straight in to fit in with traffic and not highlight myself or create more work for the controllers (like taking a 4 ship into a busy class B airfield for the over head causing two 121 carriers to go around.). Usually the break altitude is above 1500' and just doesn't look cool anyway. However I've been into certain civilian fields that are familiar with Navy operations and without asking for it been cleared for the "carrier break" (800' break to 600' pattern), knowing full well it's for the controllers entertainment. In that case you can keep the speed down until within two miles or so, then let 'er rip. Doesn't mean you can't still get violated either way though.
There is a clause in OPNAV 3710 that basically says any operation that makes people on the ground that feel endangered by operations, is a violation of OPNAV. More subjective than some of the FAR's, so you can be completely within the letter of the law, but one person getting nervous about what you're doing is enough for you to be in the wrong. Perception is reality.
Personally I like seeing a good fly-by. We used to go stand at the end of the runway every evening when a local DC-3 cargo operator would depart, those made for some memorable events! Even an SH-60 (Ken!) can look cool with a well done fly-by, but it's hard to argue that there is ever a time and place for it. The FAR's are open to interpretation on the matter, and unfortunately the subjectivity is not in your favor.
__________________
Next?, TBD
IAR-823, SOLD
RV-8, SOLD
RV-7, SOLD
Last edited by Sig600 : 08-22-2011 at 02:27 PM.
|

08-22-2011, 03:54 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: valencia, ca
Posts: 207
|
|
"Pull closed" Where did that terminology/maneuver come from??
I have been flying a fair number of years and have never heard the term "pull closed" in any civilian aviation manual, magazine, AIM, etc. Have I been missing out on some important terminology utilized when landing at an airport??
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:44 AM.
|