Hi Dan,
I'm not sure if what you said is entirely what you meant.
I am presuming you felt more comfortable aiming a bit long on approach
with extra height or speed (both are energy) for "insurance" that the
intended touchdown point be "made". You associate the availability of
flaps or separate rudder control with the ability to dump such extra
energy as proves unneeded.
Flaps do allow a pilot to slow the plane and increase the rate of
descent. In the Ercoupe, slowing the plane below 55-60 MPH TAS while
moving the yoke back slowly also increases the rate of descent.
Changing the flap setting gives a pilot muddling through an
unstabilized approach relatively instant "feedback" as "extra" energy
is being scrubbed. Changing an Ercoupe's airspeed, by raising or
lowering the nose in a glide or by adding or subtracting power has the
same effect; but the transition is not as direct or instantaneous.
Accordingly, the pilot must anticipate and initiate appropriate control
inputs somewhat.
Carrier pilots transitioning from prop fighters to jets learned to do
this because jet engines took longer to "spool up" and produce power.
In each instance the pilot must manage energy such that enough is
always available when and as necessary.
Erco considered the addition of flaps and ultimately decided the
complexity and cost were unjustified. In the Ercoupe an essentially
level and stable approach descent in a glide at minimum speed with the
yoke fully back may yield a rate of descent of 700-800 FPM.
This is absolutely safe so long as the pilot understands that forward
speed of 60-70 MPH must be reestablished before touchdown. Several
hundred feet up one must lower the nose, add power, or do both in
combination. Choosing a "normal" touchdown point several hundred feet
beyond the runway threshold makes good landings in any airplane much
easier to accomplish.
With rudder pedals, one can slip and skid a coupe; and tight S-turns on
final will increase the rate of descent. I tend to believe that an
approach that requires such extreme measures may simply not be worth
"saving". There are many instances when a go-around is the "right"
decision.
Congratulations on practicing how to accomplish a landing in case of
power loss! In an emergency at an unfamiliar landing spot, flying
figure eights left and right of extended heading (crossing back and
forth about where one would turn final) makes the decision when to
initiate the final turn to touchdown rather intuitive.
Regards,
William R. Bayne
.____|-(o)-|____.
(Copyright 2009)
--
On May 8, 2009, at 20:24, Caliendo Dan wrote:
While I love my coupe and am having a lot of fun flying it, I do miss
the
ability to add flaps and perform slips and skids. In the event of an
engine
failure it was always reassuring to be able to aim a little short
knowing I
could dump the speed when landing spot was assured. So, as suggested
earlier, I am practicing my engine out landings. (In my coupe the spot
under
the tip of the wing is where I will end up if I fly a pattern from a
given point in
the sky.)
Dan Caliendo
Ercoupe Mach 0.14
3658H
