Quick inject... I fly an O-200 ragwing "E" model based at 5834 MSL. I stall power off at 55 mph IAS at gross and at 44 mph IAS power on. For normal approaches I set up at 80 mph IAS downwind abeam the numbers, slow to 75 mph while in my base turn and long final, and stabilize at 70 mph IAS final. I hold this to the fence, then progressively pull power and touch down at about 55-60 mph. For short fields in high density altitudes I carry considerably more power and a higher nose up attitude with an IAS of 65 mph on short final. Any slower and I have found that the safety margins are reduced below my comfort level. Of course, with an engine out and going in to any kind of off-airport field I would slow it down even more; I have practiced holding it on short final power off at 60 IAS with a last second flare (there is NO float and you are down NOW with this method)...but I don't do this as a normal routine...there is NO margin but it gets you stopped in a hurry. I have test flown my "E" at various weights and have the power settings for each configuration so that even if the pitot catches a bug and I lose the airspeed indicator I am still confident of my speeds based on power. This is part of the high elevation field technique I use also in my Skylane (with different speeds of course). The point is that you need to go to altitude, establish a hard deck, and go through the configurations and establish...for your plane...what settings give you what speeds. There is no other substitute. Do not depend on the book settings. John Olav Johnsen Albuquerque, New Mexico
-----Original Message----- From: Doug Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Coupers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, September 20, 1999 7:09 AM Subject: Fw: Lightweights? >At 11:55 on 9/19/99 > >You wrote; > >>You guys might want to watch it doing this, I think the >>1.3 X Vso rule of thimb means 1.3 times the calibrated speed, doesn't it? >>If you do 1.3 times the indicated speed, you'd come up with a number >>that might be too low. >> >>I'll check to make sure, but I think it's 1.3 times calibrated. > >Steve, you could be right, in fact probably are. 60's a pretty low number >for proper glide slope in a coupe, she's gonna come down hill pretty darn >quick, that's why I suggested he try it at 70. That was decent when I had >the coupe, but I still had to add a touch of power at flair. Those speeds >certainly got rid of the "float" though. Even at 70, those that use that >number are going to have to shorten their "final". > >
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
