---------------------------------------------------------- Commander-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sat 12/31/05: 11 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 03:52 AM - Re: Slips (W J R HAMILTON) 2. 06:32 AM - SLIP/NO SLIP (Dan Farmer) 3. 09:44 AM - Re: SLIP/NO SLIP (YOURTCFG@aol.com) 4. 12:10 PM - Re: Commander decent (CloudCraft@AOL.COM) 5. 02:42 PM - Commercial Use? (Seth) 6. 03:58 PM - Re: FLAPS (BillLeff1@aol.com) 7. 04:03 PM - HAPPY NEW YEAR (Barry Collman) 8. 04:07 PM - Re: FLAPS (Barry Collman) 9. 04:22 PM - Re: Commercial Use? (CloudCraft@aol.com) 10. 05:38 PM - Re: Slips (br549phil@mindspring.com) 11. 07:10 PM - Re: Slips (css nico) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 03:52:36 AM PST US From: W J R HAMILTON Subject: RE: Commander-List: Slips --> Commander-List message posted by: W J R HAMILTON Folks, I doubt there is any problem structurally or aerodynamically slipping a Commander, after all models such as the 500A were originally in the Utility cat. - limited aerobatics. All the later Boeings I have flown had no prohibition on sideslips, in fact it came in very useful from time to time. Indeed, the 757/767/ 400(in part) all slip across the wind during an auto-coupled approach. Cheers, Bill Hamilton At 15:11 31/12/2005, you wrote: >--> Commander-List message posted by: "Bill Bow" > >". Sudden high rudder inputs apparently caused structural failure in a large >jet reported not too long ago. Do I recall that correctly? Apparently I >would have been unduly cautious. What a machine!" > >Nico, the rudders only break off on "Hugo" Jets(AirBus). I know pilots who >slipped Stretch DC-8s. The tail didn't break off and the fuselage did not >break or bend (not permanently). > >bilbo > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of css nico >To: commander-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: Commander-List: Slips > >--> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico" > >I cannot remember ever having had a need to slip my straight 500 (which I >flew for about 1,000 hours - measly compared to what some of you guys have >spent in the front office), but then again, one could hang full flaps and >gear out, nose her over and fall out of the sky like a brick. The few hours >I spent flying a 680 - now let me get this right - (P), I had ample time to >keep positive thrust in regular descents, so no need there. > >It never dawned on me that a slip should or should not be attempted, which >is why I value this group because there is always something new to learn >somewhere. From a gut-feel stance, I would have been hesitant to attempt a >slip for fear of the large wing putting the tail in turbulence or exposing >the large tail to undue side-ways forces. Sudden high rudder inputs >apparently caused structural failure in a large jet reported not too long >ago. Do I recall that correctly? Apparently I would have been unduly >cautious. What a machine! > >Nico > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Jim Addington" >To: >Subject: Commander-List: Slips > > > > --> Commander-List message posted by: "Jim Addington" > > > > > > > My two cents on slips. > > Be sure to keep the nose below the horizon when doing slips, if you get >the > > nose up with the airspeed indicators being unreliable as they are and it > > does stall the shiny side will not be up for long. The Commander having a > > high wing should not give the problems that could come up with the low >wing > > aircraft, such as the fuselage blocking the upper wing. Yes, I have >slipped > > low wing planes too, probable as much as any one, but, there can be >trouble. > > > > Jim A > > N444BD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVILEGE NOTICE W.J.R.Hamilton,Glenalmond Group Companies,Fighter Flights Internet Services and Warbirds.Net. & . This message is intended for and should only be used by the addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged information.If you are not the intended recipient any use distribution,disclosure or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.Confidentiality and legal privilege attached to this communication are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery to you.If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately to Australia 61 (0)408 876 526 Dolores capitis non fero. Eos do. ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:32:34 AM PST US From: Dan Farmer Subject: Commander-List: SLIP/NO SLIP --> Commander-List message posted by: Dan Farmer You guys are making this approach far too difficult!! Just turn your transponder off for a couple of minutes as you approach the field at any altitude you like:-))) I would be willing to bet the field was there first. For those of you with no sense of humor IT'S A JOKE. ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 09:44:19 AM PST US From: YOURTCFG@aol.com Subject: Re: Commander-List: SLIP/NO SLIP --> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com In a message dated 12/31/2005 6:33:34 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, daniellfarmer@yahoo.com writes: I would be willing to bet the field was there first What about the trees at the end of my runway. Will turning off the TXP take them away?? That would really be handy at night!! Happy New Year Dan!! jb ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 12:10:39 PM PST US From: CloudCraft@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander decent --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com In a message dated 30-Dec-05 13:48:12 Pacific Standard Time, moe@rosspistons.com writes: Running north and south almost directly over DEMON along the 110 Freeway is a Los Angeles helicopter routing, thus, when flying into HHR VFR there is the altitude restriction of 1,500 (approx 1,440 above the runway). When the LOC RWY 25 approach is used, the choppers are held until the aircraft shooting the approach is clear. On clear days it is much easier to go into HHR VFR than to go in IFR. To get a "pop up" approach you need to go down to SLI (Seal Beach VOR). Also, in many instances the LA APPROACH controllers frequency is so busy that it can take several minutes just to get him to answer you back. >> >> Gadzooks! Life isn't simple anywhere! I figured it had to be something along the lines of what you described above, otherwise you'd have found a better way, Moe. Wing Commander Gordon Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere. ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 02:42:03 PM PST US From: Seth Subject: Commander-List: Commercial Use? --> Commander-List message posted by: Seth Hi. I am new to this group but have been researching Commanders for quite a while. I am attempting a 135 start up and the 500 series provides the best balance of required field performance and passenger comfort. The problem is that prices are quite high, for obvious reasons. Occasionally, some geared models pop onto the market at attractive prices - now, I realize that the increase in OH expense will more than eat up that price difference. But the reduction in up-front costs might make it worthwhile. And so the question is: is it possible to safely demonstrate competency, say, in recurrent training or on a checkride for the Fed in a geared aircraft without trashing the gear box? And if so, how? Thanks in advance, and fire away. ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 03:58:24 PM PST US From: BillLeff1@aol.com Subject: Re: Commander-List: FLAPS --> Commander-List message posted by: BillLeff1@aol.com It could be pressurized if all the drawings and equipment were installed. Actually yours would be a 720. Bill Leff ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 04:03:11 PM PST US From: "Barry Collman" Subject: Commander-List: HAPPY NEW YEAR --> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" Hi All, Well, the magic moment has arrived and over here, we're now in 2006! So far, the year has gone very well. No nagging from "her indoors" and it's not snowing. HAPPY NEW YEAR everyone! Barry C (UK) ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 04:07:18 PM PST US From: "Barry Collman" Subject: Re: Commander-List: FLAPS --> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" If the pressurized 680F was a 680F(P), why wasn't the 720 a 680E(P) and the 680FLP a 680FL(P)? And, of course, the spelling should be pressurised ;-) Good fun, history, isn't it! Barry C. (UK) (Two posts already this year) ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Commander-List: FLAPS | --> Commander-List message posted by: BillLeff1@aol.com | | It could be pressurized if all the drawings and equipment were installed. | Actually yours would be a 720. | | Bill Leff | | | | | | | | | | | | | ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 04:22:53 PM PST US From: CloudCraft@aol.com Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commercial Use? --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com In a message dated 31-Dec-05 14:42:45 Pacific Standard Time, capt_seth@yahoo.com writes: And so the question is: is it possible to safely demonstrate competency, say, in recurrent training or on a checkride for the Fed in a geared aircraft without trashing the gear box? And if so, how? >> >> Seth, The economic debate of geared engine vs. direct drive in a commercial operation is something I'll leave between you and your profit/loss statement. As far as 135 check rides go in a geared engine driven aircraft, I've taken many (AC-680E, AC-680FL, BE-80, CE-411) and can tell you with 99% certainty that the FAA examiner is scared to death of engine cuts and even more scared of geared engines, in general. The POI will probably tell you to simulate feather thrust -- which you'll set up very slowly -- and fly what ever task you're supposed to demonstrate. It's totally unrealistic, as far as a training and check-ride scenario, but it's the best both of you can do. If/when you acquire a geared-Lycoming powered Commander, the collective wisdom on this email net can give you lots of suggestions on power settings to simulate feather thrust, depending on what model you end up with. Wing Commander Gordon Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere. ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 05:38:35 PM PST US From: br549phil@mindspring.com Subject: RE: Commander-List: Slips --> Commander-List message posted by: br549phil@mindspring.com The most recent rudder failure I'm aware of was an AA A300 which experienced rapid and repeated (pilot induced)full rudder reversals after encountering the wake vortex of a B747 departing JFK. (Cleared for takeoff one minute and thirty seconds after the 747 rather than the normal two minute separation) It was a composite rudder which had been found to have a defect during manufacture and had been repaired on the line by Airbus.(a fact which they tried to conceal). -----Original Message----- >From: "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" >Sent: Dec 30, 2005 11:43 PM >To: commander-list@matronics.com >Subject: RE: Commander-List: Slips > >--> Commander-List message posted by: "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" > >Of course the Commanders' tails are not made of plasti...err "composites" > >___________________________ >Deneal Schilmeister >St. Louis - Cincinnati >1997 SL500 >http://homepage.mac.com/deneals/SL500.htm >http://homepage.mac.com/deneals/Sites/My_Commanders.htm > >-----Original Message----- >From: On Behalf Of Bill Bow >To: commander-list@matronics.com >Subject: RE: Commander-List: Slips > >--> Commander-List message posted by: "Bill Bow" > >". Sudden high rudder inputs apparently caused structural failure in a large >jet reported not too long ago. Do I recall that correctly? Apparently I >would have been unduly cautious. What a machine!" > >Nico, the rudders only break off on "Hugo" Jets(AirBus). I know pilots who >slipped Stretch DC-8s. The tail didn't break off and the fuselage did not >break or bend (not permanently). > >bilbo > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 07:10:52 PM PST US From: "css nico" Subject: Re: Commander-List: Slips --> Commander-List message posted by: "css nico" That explains it. It worried me that, even with sudden full rudder deflections, that the tail would come off. If they messed with the damn thing, it stands to reason that it would fail at some point. Many years ago as a small tyke, I once went up to the fence at an air force base, not more than perhaps 100 or so yards from the threshold of the runway on which C130's landed. After passing only a couple of hundred feet overhead, the air would make noises like the cracking of a whip, just much louder. It was the eeriest thing that I have ever experienced, messing with one's senses, not able to see anything but hearing these "snaps" - very loud - almost like gunfire as the disturbed air regroups. I have always been very aware of wake vortices because of that, watching crosswinds before takeoff to head upwind from possible vortices. Then I watch airliners take off one after the other straight ahead and I wonder. Especially at airports like John Wayne in Orange County, CA, where jets climb out very steeply before leveling off. Noise restrictions, perhaps? Surely steep take-offs like that would create larger than normal vortices? Even if there is a two-minute separation, if there isn't a cross-wind, the turbulent air would hang around, but every jet climbs into the same box time after time. Just some observations. Nico ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: RE: Commander-List: Slips > --> Commander-List message posted by: br549phil@mindspring.com > > The most recent rudder failure I'm aware of was an AA A300 which experienced rapid and repeated (pilot induced)full rudder reversals after encountering the wake vortex of a B747 departing JFK. (Cleared for takeoff one minute and thirty seconds after the 747 rather than the normal two minute separation) It was a composite rudder which had been found to have a defect during manufacture and had been repaired on the line by Airbus.(a fact which they tried to conceal). > > > -----Original Message----- > >From: "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" > >Sent: Dec 30, 2005 11:43 PM > >To: commander-list@matronics.com > >Subject: RE: Commander-List: Slips > > > >--> Commander-List message posted by: "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" > > > >Of course the Commanders' tails are not made of plasti...err "composites" > > > >___________________________ > >Deneal Schilmeister > >St. Louis - Cincinnati > >1997 SL500 > >http://homepage.mac.com/deneals/SL500.htm > >http://homepage.mac.com/deneals/Sites/My_Commanders.htm > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: On Behalf Of Bill Bow > >To: commander-list@matronics.com > >Subject: RE: Commander-List: Slips > > > >--> Commander-List message posted by: "Bill Bow" > > > >". Sudden high rudder inputs apparently caused structural failure in a large > >jet reported not too long ago. Do I recall that correctly? Apparently I > >would have been unduly cautious. What a machine!" > > > >Nico, the rudders only break off on "Hugo" Jets(AirBus). I know pilots who > >slipped Stretch DC-8s. The tail didn't break off and the fuselage did not > >break or bend (not permanently). > > > >bilbo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >