Letters

Since I have been doing turnbacks for 30 years, Richard McSpadden’s article (“Safety Spotlight: The Runway Behind You,” June 2021 AOPA Pilot) really got my attention. The results with the Beechcraft Bonanza were interesting. I don’t think it would be because of a shorter glide ratio. Best I can tell, it will glide farther than a Skyhawk—1.7 nautical miles per 1,000 feet versus the Skyhawk’s 1.5. I think the results could have been affected significantly by the climb speed versus the glide speed. In the Skyhawk, V_Y is higher than V_G giving a lift reserve. In the Bonanza, V_Y is less than V_G making that a big disadvantage. But on the other hand, the climb performance is so much stronger in the Bonanza, it seems that would more than compensate for the low V_Y speed. I was very surprised it wouldn’t return to an 8,800-foot runway. I’m currently based at an airport with a 3,665-foot runway—we climb to 500 feet in a Skyhawk and have no trouble in making it back. Of course, as you know there are many factors.

Warren Webb Jr. / AOPA 1099812
Cromwell, Connecticut

Thanks to feedback like this, the AOPA Air Safety Institute revisited its conclusions regarding the effects of glide ratio on the ability of an aircraft to return to the runway. The video Reality Check: The Runway Behind You (airsafetyinstitute.org/realitycheck/runway_behind_you) concludes that the turnback is not a good option for aircraft with faster climb and glide speeds, which travel farther from the runway. —Ed.

I enjoyed Richard McSpadden’s article “The Runway Behind You.” In the article, he mentions that “the advantages of an engine in idle are believed to be minimal.” I don’t necessarily disagree; among other things, it depends on your threshold for “minimal.” But it bugged me that no one seemed to have any actual measurements of that, and I’d like to know what it is for my airplane. So, on a day perfect for the task (and above an airport), I did a large number of long glides to measure the glide ratio at different speeds and with the engine either at idle or with the mixture cutoff.

The results were very consistent. The speed for best glide (for that gross weight and center of gravity) didn’t change, but the glide ratio was reduced by 11 percent going from idle to cutoff. That took the ratio from 10.9:1 down to 9.7:1. That’s a loss of 1,200 feet distance in a glide from 1,000 feet altitude, so it seems worth it to take it into account.

Interestingly, both of those glide ratios are well above the 8.9:1 that Cessna provides in the POH. The airplane is stock, except that it has a three-blade prop.

Thanks for the interesting articles, and for all you do to promote aviation safety.

Scott Hunziker / AOPA 1103741
Des Moines, Washington

Thanks to Richard McSpadden for his great work with ASI and articles in AOPA Pilot. I write to ask about his deduction regarding root cause for crummy turnback performance by the Bonanza. He explains it by stating Bonanzas have a shorter glide ratio than the other airplanes tested. An A36 has a better glide ratio than a Super Cub, 172, or Cherokee so I wonder what could be a better explanation. For one thing, I know failing to pull the prop control back has a huge adverse impact in glide performance. Could that have been a factor in the tests?

John Sandvig / AOPA 729399
Seattle, Washington

Distractions

Thanks for the great article on distractions (“Waypoints: Distractions: Dispatch them,” May 2021 AOPA Pilot). I’ve had the same conversations with my kids and their friends and couldn’t help but smile when Thomas B. Haines mentioned the noise from the back of the airplane on his way home from the beach. 

Just last month my daughter asked me to take her and three friends from Kansas City to Peoria and back to see some other friends. Naturally, I couldn’t decline and was honored to have them ask. The noise from four teenage girls often penetrated the isolate mode. The trip home was a bit more subdued as you can see. 

I love being reminded what an incredible blessing it is to share GA with others. 

Chris Kirk / AOPA 1222667
Edgerton, Missouri

Savvy Maintenance

I just wanted to thank Mike Busch for all of the Savvy Maintenance articles in AOPA Pilot. My dad was a private pilot (no longer current or flying much), but he has an AOPA membership. I always cut out and save the Savvy Maintenance articles. As an A&P/IA myself, they help me to understand components, techniques, and the regulations better in my mind. I’m going to start being an independent A&P mechanic soon, and thanks to Mike Busch I have more confidence in my abilities to get the job done, while also making aircraft owners happy.

Cody Strack / AOPA 6546667
San Antonio, Texas

Light the fire

Thank you for an excellent article on ballooning (“Light the Fire,” June 2021 AOPA Pilot), but I do have a couple of clarifications and errors of omission.

A balloon is difficult to learn to fly because weight, temperature, humidity, and wind speed are always different from one flight to another. Each minor change in any one of those factors makes for a major change in how the balloon handles. In essence you are a test pilot on each flight.

The general view of crew was not challenged in the article. Crew do help you lug and inflate the balloon, chase you, and help you pack. If a balloon pilot is properly trained, however, the crew is much more than that. They are your safety system. They provide a second look at everything you do in preflight. In the landing approach, they should get permission from the landowner and inspect the landing site for obstacles that the pilot might not see from the air.

My final comment is on the controllability of a balloon. As a fixed-wing pilot as well as a balloon pilot, I understand the misconception. You can’t often pick the landing spot when you launch but you do have “steering” when you fly. There are few days when the wind doesn’t shift 15 to 30 degrees from 50 feet to 1,000 feet. I do not know Patrick Smith or how he flies but I was trained to climb slowly to 2,000 feet and feel for the wind changes and take mental notes. By rising or descending, you can “steer” a balloon easily and you are always in control of vertical speed. You can pick a landing spot easily and within inches.

On one occasion I briefed my passengers on a landing in the back yard on the north side of a subdivision. They said, “Too bad, we live in the far south house.” I went up to 500 feet and dropped into their back yard. A balloon can be steered.

All those comments aside, a great article.

Jim Kunze / AOPA 1314460
Plymouth, Indiana

Only new twice

It was with great interest that I read Kollin Stagnito’s recent article about the restoration of a Cessna 150 (“Only New Twice,” June 2021 AOPA Pilot). I have an incredibly similar story on a 1959 150 Fastback that I have owned since 1974. I repainted it once in my youth, and at that time I was not too concerned with anything other than a flashy currently trending paint scheme. Fast forward to a couple of years ago, I decided to go retro. I contacted Cessna, and they had the blueprints for the paint on my serial number, and the rest is history.

Michael Anderson / AOPA 1400423
Missoula, Montana

We welcome your comments! Send letters to Editor, AOPA Pilot, 421 Aviation Way, Frederick, Maryland 21701 or [email protected]. Letters may be edited for length and style.