Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Jab 7252 I don't see why you would remove your option of a go around if things demanded it. It doesn't have to be a "must land this time" situation. The foam confuses me. I thought those days were over and they wouldn't do it anymore. If it WAS needed they didn't really get the benefit of it and it may have added confusion. I don't know. Nev

Given the circumstances, I'd take that chance. Remember, it's not a forced landing so taking ones time would be in order.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Posted

As Boxfat stated in post#10, the rudder could possibly be jammed as the nose wheel is linked to the rudder.

 

This may explain the eratic aileron movements in trying to line up the runway?

 

 

Posted
Let me flaunt my ignorance; the foam is a fire-retardant NOT a 'soft landing' cushion (True/false).

 

there apparently was an instructor on board and they overshot the fire retardant strip almost completely.

My 2 bob's worth -

 

  1. The foam was sprayed to extinguish sparks expected to be created when the metal of the nose wheel touched the runway surface.
     
     
  2. Fire retardant foam is very corrosive, so the instructor chose to avoid it to preserve the skin of the aircraft, thereby greatly reducing the cost of repairs.
     
     

 

 

Sometimes I think that some underemployed firies go over the top in their assessment of potential ignition when transport vehicles collide with things. It is not for nothing they are called "Evidence Eradication Teams" by traffic accident investigators.

 

OME

 

 

  • Agree 1
Posted
Alf, I like to believe that everyone does the best they know how but some of the results I keep seeing on here, really have me shaking my head.Continuous talk about learning from past mistakes, yet they keep happening!...Where`s the solution? Is there really one?

 

Frank.

Hi Franco

I work on the art of never rush a landing the plane will when it wants to at the right speed

 

If it's not looking or feeling right push the throttle forward and go around, set up again and fly the numbers quoted by the manufacturer

 

Peter Harlow put up a great post awhile back about how he hates instructors who say just add 10 to your approach speed (NOT saying this was the cause of this one)

 

The Foxbat is one aircraft that certainly doesn't need extra speed

 

The A22LS is quoted from memory at 49 kts when on final which already is giving you 7 kts additional approach speed than what you actually require and I'm guessing the A32 is no different

 

My guess on this and only a guess is late roundout or trying to force it on carrying too much speed because how else do you shove a nose wheel that far back

 

 

  • Agree 3
Posted

A while ago i rang a schoo; in QLD who had the a vixen on line and ask to get check out in it. they siad that i was better off flying the A22 for a few hours. they siad the vixen can be a handful to fly

 

 

Posted

Good on Peter Harlow from Foxbat Australia for being so quick to post a preliminary report.

 

 

  • Agree 4
Posted
A while ago i rang a schoo; in QLD who had the a vixen on line and ask to get check out in it. they siad that i was better off flying the A22 for a few hours. they siad the vixen can be a handful to fly

What an odd thing to say (not knowing the whole conversation of course). I mean it surely would depend on whether the pilot was ab initio vs highly experienced

 

 

Posted

I did not find the A32 Vixxen difficult at all. The only thing is you have to do is pay more attention to speed control but that is true of any faster aeroplane - and this one has an unusually large range from 27 kts stall to 115 kts standard cruise. With full flap on short final you should be at about 45 kts and herein lies a potential problem - that *feels* very slow, especially in a good headwind, and especially if you have just been hooning around at 115 kts ! There may be an issue here as the temptation to carry a bit more speed can mean a lot of runway goes past before the plane is ready to land - and more time for crosswind, gusts to make life "interesting" !

 

 

Posted

Actually, the Foxbat in any kind of wind is happier without flap and I suspect the same is true of the Vixxen.

 

 

  • Agree 3
Posted
What an odd thing to say (not knowing the whole conversation of course). I mean it surely would depend on whether the pilot was ab initio vs highly experienced

Yes it was. And at the time i rang there A32 was getting fixed because of a bent nose wheel.

 

 

Posted

And to add to that Aerprakt have redesigned the nosewheel and they now come with a heavier duty nosewheel same as the Foxbat.

 

As is the replacement one on the one that I am aware of that damaged the nosewheel/leg/firewall.

 

The new nosewheel/Leg assembly does to the best of my knowledge not fit the wheel spat and costs a reasonable amount of top end speed.

 

Bet they don't put that in the glossy brouchure. :)

 

 

Posted

I suppose the pilot was instructed on where to land, but I would have thought there would be less gravel rash on the grass ,( less sparks). Also as a previous post commented, it appears to have been braked ,forcing the nose down at a higher speed then it might have. They will run on their hind legs almost to a stop. But always easy to be an armchair expert.

 

 

Posted

Think it's more likely to dig in on grass. It's such a low speed plane in the landing phase, it's all a bit academic. Steel will spark, aluminium doesn't. Nev

 

 

  • Agree 1
Posted
And the nose leg is made of?

Glass..... According to some instructors.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Haha 4

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...