Lazy Eights

desertdog71

desertdog71

Girthy Member
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
 
desertdog71 said:
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
Click to expand...

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.
 
N422NM said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

I enjoyed the crisp eights more though.
 
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...
 
N422NM said:
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...
Click to expand...


I was thinking a couple wing overs would satisfy the DE. :) :nana2: :nana2: :nana2:
 
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.
 
meritflyer said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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. ​

 
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.
 
meritflyer said:
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.
Click to expand...

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 said:
Why you gotta be like that AND YELL?

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

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.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top