Lazy Eights

[desertdog71]

I was trying a couple different ways of doing these.

One with use of variable power settings and another using constant power settings. Any opinions on the best method? I thought it was easier to do them constant power, but I felt like the manuever was much more crisp varying the power.

Any thought?

Thanks

[N422NM]

Originally Posted by desertdog71

I was trying a couple different ways of doing these.

One with use of variable power settings and another using constant power settings. Any opinions on the best method? I thought it was easier to do them constant power, but I felt like the manuever was much more crisp varying the power.

Any thought?

Thanks

Constant power.

I don't have the FAA flight manv. manual in front of me, but that's the way they define manuever being done. Crisp is ok, but in the whole point is for it to be lazy.

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by N422NM

Constant power.

I don't have the FAA flight manv. manual in front of me, but that's the way they define manuever being done. Crisp is ok, but in the whole point is for it to be lazy.

Same thing my CFI said. I just like bringing these subjects up for discussion.

I enjoyed the crisp eights more though.

[N422NM]

Me CFI-SE checkride - It came up to lazy 8's and I did the FAA standard 15 degree bank, then 30 degree bank, etc... and did fine, but the DPE (Mr. 30,000 landings) said "can you do these steeper ?" So I said sure, then I did them with 30 degrees, followed by 60 degrees bank at the 90 degree point of the manvr.

He asked me then, well, what's important about this...so I told him "well, as long as we make our PTS standards, the point is that our bank angle at the 90 degree point is double our initial bank angle" and he seemed happy with that...

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by N422NM

Me CFI-SE checkride - It came up to lazy 8's and I did the FAA standard 15 degree bank, then 30 degree bank, etc... and did fine, but the DPE (Mr. 30,000 landings) said "can you do these steeper ?" So I said sure, then I did them with 30 degrees, followed by 60 degrees bank at the 90 degree point of the manvr.

He asked me then, well, what's important about this...so I told him "well, as long as we make our PTS standards, the point is that our bank angle at the 90 degree point is double our initial bank angle" and he seemed happy with that...

I was thinking a couple wing overs would satisfy the DE.

[meritflyer]

Goin' with constant power on this one. Its how the Airplane Flying Handbook describes them. You're cheating in you jockey the throttle to control your airspeed as its supposed to be managed by pitch, rudder, and aileron inputs.

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

Goin' with constant power on this one. Its how the Airplane Flying Handbook describes them. You're cheating in you jockey the throttle to control your airspeed as its supposed to be managed by pitch, rudder, and aileron inputs.

I don't know that its cheating. The PTS makes no mention of throttle requirements. I also thought it was much easier to do them with constant power.

[meritflyer]

Sure it is. The purpose of the maneuver is to demonstrate aircraft mastery in several different airspeeds and attitudes while maintaining (or adjusting) coordination, airspeed, and heading. It clearly says constant power not "continuously adjusts power to maintain airspeed". If at your 135 degree point your airspeed is out of controll, the maneuver was not executed the way it should've been.

On stalls even at the ATP level, it says "minimal loss of altitude". So, does that mean its okay to drop 1000' on a power off? See my point?

If the throttle was meant to be adjusted throughout the maneuver it would say something like "applicant adjusts power smoothly and correctly for blah blah blah"

If you're having to play with the power settings, the maneuver isnt being performed correctly.

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

It clearly says constant power

You are gonna have to document that one.

[desertdog71]

1. Exhibits knowledge of the elements related to lazy eights.
2. Selects an altitude that will allow the task to be performed no
lower than 1,500 feet AGL (460 meters).
3. Establishes the recommended entry configuration, power, and
airspeed.
4. Maintains coordinated flight throughout the maneuver.
5. Achieves the following throughout the maneuver—
a. approximately 30

° bank at the steepest point.
b. constant change of pitch and roll rate.
c. altitude tolerance at 180° points, ±100 feet (30 meters) from
entry altitude.
d. airspeed tolerance at the 180° point plus ±10° knots from
entry airspeed.
e. heading tolerance at the 180° point ±10°.
6. Continues the maneuver through the number of symmetrical
loops specified and resumes straight and level flight.

Says establishes recommended entry configuration but does not say maintains power setting anywhere.

I am full aware of the "purpose" of the manuever. This discussion is just another example of how the PTS standards have holes in them.

[meritflyer]

Ummkay..

The Airplane Flying Handbook says "normal cruise power"

The Advanced Pilots Flight Manual says "leaving your throttle at cruise setting"

Nowhere does it say "jockey the snot out of the throttle to maintain airspeed because you're chasing your altitude and as a result your airspeed went through the roof"

Thoughts?

I would agree that the PTS has holes in it but IMO, its pretty sloppy aircraft control to have to use the throttle as an airspeed lever.

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

Ummkay..

The Airplane Flying Handbook says "normal cruise power"

The Advanced Pilots Flight Manual says "leaving your throttle at cruise setting"

Nowhere does it say "jockey the snot out of the throttle to maintain airspeed because you're chasing your altitude and as a result your airspeed went through the roof"

Thoughts?

I would agree that the PTS has holes in it but IMO, its pretty sloppy aircraft control to have to use the throttle as an airspeed lever.

OK I will say it again, maybe you will catch it this time. ITS EASIER TO DO IT WITHOUT VARYING POWER!!!!!!!!

The Airplane Flying Handbook say "Enter at cruise setting" not MAINTAIN cruise setting.

All these FAA publications have holes in them.

Here is another example. Can you do steep spirals with the flaps extended?

Before you answer, show me where it says NO YOU CAN'T

[meritflyer]

Why you gotta be like that AND YELL?

Go eat a Double Western and get back to me when you're not hungry!

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

Why you gotta be like that AND YELL?

Go eat a Double Western and get back to me when you're not hungry!

I just ate.

Oh and its easier to do a steep spiral flaps at 10 BTW.

Yeah I know the DE will want it without, but again the point is these friggin regulations and PTS standards are so full of holes its ridiculous.

[meritflyer]

What did you have to eat?

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

What did you have to eat?

A couple children.

[meritflyer]

Uhhh...

[desertdog71]

Chicken Quesadilla

[meritflyer]

I am goin' to Outback Steakhouse tonite. Mmmmm! Anyways, I cant really think of a reason why you "couldnt" use 10 degrees of flaps. I just teach it differently.

I thought for sure you woulda had some BBQ.

[Swen]

I think he had some yesterday.

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by Swen

I think he had some yesterday.

I had BBQ on Monday in Wichita

[Swen]

Ah! I had a BLT, wait, two BLTs tonight. Good stuff.

I think having a completely off-topic conversation deep in the bowels of the forum just screams REBEL! Woo! Muahhahahah...

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by Swen

Ah! I had a BLT, wait, two BLTs tonight. Good stuff.

I think having a completely off-topic conversation deep in the bowels of the forum just screams REBEL! Woo! Muahhahahah...

Or cheesehead, I have no idea which.

[Swen]

Doh! Runs and sulks......with beer.

[desertdog71]

Originally Posted by Swen

Doh! Runs and sulks......with beer.

Old Milwaukee, Deer Hunting and the Packers WOO HOO. I lived there for a few years actually. My business partner also lives there.