An interesting NOTAM?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can proudly say that I smashed the limit a couple of years ago in a single engine piston. 9,500ft on descent over Tulla into Moorabbin, SR22, 200 indicated, add for TAS and a massive tail wind giving 270 knots. Can't complain.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VH-XXX;
You can't claim a tailwind!
May 1974. FL 240 ISA, night flight Dubbo to Sydney 3 POB V35TC VH-DLO, 200 Kts straight and level before descent, normal predicted TAS.
GPS wasn't invented then. I descended at book figures, but ATC wanted a high speed ability below 10,000 due traffic separation which was accomplished OK.
A good tin aeroplane is probably as good as your modern "plastic fantastics"
You can't claim a tailwind!
May 1974. FL 240 ISA, night flight Dubbo to Sydney 3 POB V35TC VH-DLO, 200 Kts straight and level before descent, normal predicted TAS.
GPS wasn't invented then. I descended at book figures, but ATC wanted a high speed ability below 10,000 due traffic separation which was accomplished OK.
A good tin aeroplane is probably as good as your modern "plastic fantastics"
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
And what is the VNE for an SR22 Mr XXX ? With an estimated TAS of 225 there!
I would not like you doing that in any Cirrus that I owned......not that I would!
J
I would not like you doing that in any Cirrus that I owned......not that I would!
J
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just looked at the notes I still have. ISA VNE 195 Kts CAS. Full throttle, 2500 RPM 75% 214 BHP FL 240 is 230 MPH./ 199.64 Kts. Descent as previously stated, at book figures. Strong as a "bone". Max speed below 10,000 in those days was, from memory, 200 Kts.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I assume that the 199knots is TAS not IAS?
The V Tail must have a tolerence beyond 195 for TAS then if they publish that as being acceptable behaviour. Where is the Dr when you need him!
The V Tail must have a tolerence beyond 195 for TAS then if they publish that as being acceptable behaviour. Where is the Dr when you need him!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what is the VNE for an SR22 Mr XXX
Don't try that at home in the RV10 or you'll get that dreaded wing flutter I have been reading about.
Vne in the Bonanza is 196 kts. I believe that they are test flown to 10% above that before delivery.
So what is the "margin for error" ? Dunno, but the ruddervator beef-up AD is some comfort.
I rarely descend above top of the green - but that's just me.
Jaba doesn't seem to have the same reservations on descent in the Retard Vehicle - when trying to stay ahead of the FTDK!
Dr
So what is the "margin for error" ? Dunno, but the ruddervator beef-up AD is some comfort.
I rarely descend above top of the green - but that's just me.
Jaba doesn't seem to have the same reservations on descent in the Retard Vehicle - when trying to stay ahead of the FTDK!
Dr
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes, but we know 'the dart' will downhill much better than that
As long as it is not Class E
C and D in Oz enable fast descents [for sequencing] because VFR hear IFR, and IFR hear VFR, you are known about by ATC, who is not going to let you hit one another
In E, well, even 250kts reducing is gunna be a Mark 1 EB challenge.
At least in the 30nm CTAF/CAGRO IFR can hear VFR broadcasts
As long as it is not Class E
C and D in Oz enable fast descents [for sequencing] because VFR hear IFR, and IFR hear VFR, you are known about by ATC, who is not going to let you hit one another
In E, well, even 250kts reducing is gunna be a Mark 1 EB challenge.
At least in the 30nm CTAF/CAGRO IFR can hear VFR broadcasts
Chimbu Chuck,
How does this work??
Light aircraft don't (usually) have an ADC, or any other digitized IAS data, the Garmin 330 Mode S transponder plus GDL 90 GPS source has no IAS input of any kind, I was not aware that IAS was a required input into an ADS-B/C message??
Tootle pip??
PS: Re. Class E airspace, can ATC really give an exemption to a statutory speed limit. Last time I read the rules, ATC could only waive a speed limit in A and C??
But maybe I have missed an amendment??
Unfortunately, 250 kt. is often a very inefficient speed for many large aircraft, particularly on climb at heavy weights. Anybody for Flaps 1 to 10,000 on a 744 at max weight. Not any time this pilot is flying one, see the airplane flight manual.
How does this work??
Light aircraft don't (usually) have an ADC, or any other digitized IAS data, the Garmin 330 Mode S transponder plus GDL 90 GPS source has no IAS input of any kind, I was not aware that IAS was a required input into an ADS-B/C message??
Tootle pip??
PS: Re. Class E airspace, can ATC really give an exemption to a statutory speed limit. Last time I read the rules, ATC could only waive a speed limit in A and C??
But maybe I have missed an amendment??
Unfortunately, 250 kt. is often a very inefficient speed for many large aircraft, particularly on climb at heavy weights. Anybody for Flaps 1 to 10,000 on a 744 at max weight. Not any time this pilot is flying one, see the airplane flight manual.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Class E airspace, can ATC really give an exemption to a statutory speed limit
In terminal area [where climb and descent is part of the conflict exposure] E, nobody knows with any certainty, the track or altitude intentions of a large proportion of the conflict scenarios i.e. the VFR component. In D or higher categories they do.
ARFOR,
That's the point, speed limits in A/C (have a think about the new D, maybe another legislative change coming up) can clearly be waived, but it is a statutory limit in E and G.
Therefor, only the pilot in command can, on legitimate safety grounds, can determine that 250 kt below 10,000 can be exceeded.
Unfortunately, our regulations are far from clear, as to the authority of the PIC is concerned, compared to FAR 91.3.
See also Part 91.117(d), whereas in AU, the power of the PIC to do as in (d) must be inferred.
Receiving a bluie (administrative fine) in the mail effectively (if not strictly legally) leaves you "guilty" unless you can prove your innocence, including by virtue of exercising the authority of the PIC.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Extract from FARs.
§ 91.117 Aircraft speed.
(a) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots (288 m.p.h.).
(b) Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft at or below 2,500 feet above the surface within 4 nautical miles of the primary airport of a Class C or Class D airspace area at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph.). This paragraph (b) does not apply to any operations within a Class B airspace area. Such operations shall comply with paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) No person may operate an aircraft in the airspace underlying a Class B airspace area designated for an airport or in a VFR corridor designated through such a Class B airspace area, at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph).
(d) If the minimum safe airspeed for any particular operation is greater than the maximum speed prescribed in this section, the aircraft may be operated at that minimum speed.
That's the point, speed limits in A/C (have a think about the new D, maybe another legislative change coming up) can clearly be waived, but it is a statutory limit in E and G.
Therefor, only the pilot in command can, on legitimate safety grounds, can determine that 250 kt below 10,000 can be exceeded.
Unfortunately, our regulations are far from clear, as to the authority of the PIC is concerned, compared to FAR 91.3.
See also Part 91.117(d), whereas in AU, the power of the PIC to do as in (d) must be inferred.
Receiving a bluie (administrative fine) in the mail effectively (if not strictly legally) leaves you "guilty" unless you can prove your innocence, including by virtue of exercising the authority of the PIC.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Extract from FARs.
§ 91.117 Aircraft speed.
(a) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots (288 m.p.h.).
(b) Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft at or below 2,500 feet above the surface within 4 nautical miles of the primary airport of a Class C or Class D airspace area at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph.). This paragraph (b) does not apply to any operations within a Class B airspace area. Such operations shall comply with paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) No person may operate an aircraft in the airspace underlying a Class B airspace area designated for an airport or in a VFR corridor designated through such a Class B airspace area, at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph).
(d) If the minimum safe airspeed for any particular operation is greater than the maximum speed prescribed in this section, the aircraft may be operated at that minimum speed.
Grandpa Aerotart
Chimbu Chuck,
How does this work??
Light aircraft don't (usually) have an ADC, or any other digitized IAS data, the Garmin 330 Mode S transponder plus GDL 90 GPS source has no IAS input of any kind, I was not aware that IAS was a required input into an ADS-B/C message??
How does this work??
Light aircraft don't (usually) have an ADC, or any other digitized IAS data, the Garmin 330 Mode S transponder plus GDL 90 GPS source has no IAS input of any kind, I was not aware that IAS was a required input into an ADS-B/C message??
our regulations are far from clear, as to the authority of the PIC is concerned, compared to FAR 91.3.
All that USA "authority" is just extra rules that the yanks have decided to impose. I wonder if they have lodged differences with ICAO?