Mayday @ YPJT
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Under the Equator
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Several Flight Schools around the country now use Cirrus for ab-initio - both SR20s and SR22s.
From what I hear, quite a number of Pilots now have solo'd in a Cirrus.
As per 1013.2; the hardest part to flying a Cirrus is the higher rental price paid to fly the latest and greatest.
From what I hear, quite a number of Pilots now have solo'd in a Cirrus.
As per 1013.2; the hardest part to flying a Cirrus is the higher rental price paid to fly the latest and greatest.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote from QNH 1013.2;
"nope. They are a single engine tricicle undercarriage with a throttle and a mixture control. You *could* fly very normally with the glass turned off and you'd have a stock standard aircraft".
My understanding of things is that a Mayday... is for "grave and imminent danger" and a Pan is for an "emergency"....which this clearly appears to be likened to.
BTW QNH 1013.2, why should I butt out of this because I haven't flown a Cirrus and, given my highlighted quote of yours, a stock standard aircraft (Cessna perhaps), should have no trouble doing a dead stick from 1500 ft overhead even if it were a student pilot).
You write like someone I know who said he wouldn't be seen dead posting here.
Also detonation is a product of fuel, so if you cut off the fuel or limit it via mixture, so you have another option in case of an undershoot, there should be no damage to the engine if you "blip" the ignition. The Sopwith Camel did it all the time. (Ah, modern technology, sorry).
"nope. They are a single engine tricicle undercarriage with a throttle and a mixture control. You *could* fly very normally with the glass turned off and you'd have a stock standard aircraft".
My understanding of things is that a Mayday... is for "grave and imminent danger" and a Pan is for an "emergency"....which this clearly appears to be likened to.
BTW QNH 1013.2, why should I butt out of this because I haven't flown a Cirrus and, given my highlighted quote of yours, a stock standard aircraft (Cessna perhaps), should have no trouble doing a dead stick from 1500 ft overhead even if it were a student pilot).
You write like someone I know who said he wouldn't be seen dead posting here.
Also detonation is a product of fuel, so if you cut off the fuel or limit it via mixture, so you have another option in case of an undershoot, there should be no damage to the engine if you "blip" the ignition. The Sopwith Camel did it all the time. (Ah, modern technology, sorry).
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bobbie says "You write like someone I know who said he wouldn't be seen dead posting here."
- Nope, QNH is alive and well here at his desk; hence this post.
My comment regarding those "butting out" as you put it, is for those who haven't flown a Cirrus, but yet still seem to know all about them, their parachute system and flight characteristics., etc. I note that the actual offending post has since been removed.
As to what constitutes a mayday... grave and imminent danger... well do we know where the throttle was when it froze, on or off..? I for one would be transmitting a mayday if I had no throttle wide out in the circuit after following a crappy old 172 bug smasher that's 2 mile out becuase of is 300 fpm climb rate. A Cirrus isn't the best glider with a bit of weight on-board, especially the 22 and there's certainly no feathering of the Cirrus prop with only a throttle and a mixture control.
QNH (Alive and well)
- Nope, QNH is alive and well here at his desk; hence this post.
My comment regarding those "butting out" as you put it, is for those who haven't flown a Cirrus, but yet still seem to know all about them, their parachute system and flight characteristics., etc. I note that the actual offending post has since been removed.
As to what constitutes a mayday... grave and imminent danger... well do we know where the throttle was when it froze, on or off..? I for one would be transmitting a mayday if I had no throttle wide out in the circuit after following a crappy old 172 bug smasher that's 2 mile out becuase of is 300 fpm climb rate. A Cirrus isn't the best glider with a bit of weight on-board, especially the 22 and there's certainly no feathering of the Cirrus prop with only a throttle and a mixture control.
QNH (Alive and well)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tropopause
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
seems shortly we'll be arguing that new technology is wasted and lets get back to old simplicity.
The cirrus aircraft is still simple design, but you must still know the ins and outs of the system, if you've done the standardized Cirrus Instructor course you'll know what im talking about!
I agree with QNH1013.2, its definately going to be a hell of a ride with the throttle wide open, and given the system of Prop RPM control theres no guarentee that your not going to end up with a prop runaway and a completly different problem as the continental up front does the preverbial.......
QNH1013.2 I have had a single brake failure on the cirrus and wasnt the easiest situation to deal with, alot of opposite rudder, landing on runway side oppsite to dead brake and used nearly 1000m!
As for them getting on the ground safely, great outcome and well done to the pilot, especially if they are a low timer!
As far as comparing them with C172's at Ab initio level, lets not even go there!!
The cirrus aircraft is still simple design, but you must still know the ins and outs of the system, if you've done the standardized Cirrus Instructor course you'll know what im talking about!
I agree with QNH1013.2, its definately going to be a hell of a ride with the throttle wide open, and given the system of Prop RPM control theres no guarentee that your not going to end up with a prop runaway and a completly different problem as the continental up front does the preverbial.......
QNH1013.2 I have had a single brake failure on the cirrus and wasnt the easiest situation to deal with, alot of opposite rudder, landing on runway side oppsite to dead brake and used nearly 1000m!
As for them getting on the ground safely, great outcome and well done to the pilot, especially if they are a low timer!
As far as comparing them with C172's at Ab initio level, lets not even go there!!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sth. Pacific
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to be some confusion settling in here.
Single engine pistons are not able, as a rule, to feather the propellor. The pitch can be made coarse or fine but feathering is a different prospect.
Throttles are not "on or off", they are open or closed or somewhere in between.
If the throttle was stuck at or near closed ("off") then it seems unlikely he would've been still floating around when the RFF took up positions.
As for:
The thing is, if you've cut off the fuel, "blipping" the ignition isn't going to do very much. Once again, the damage is sustained not by cutting off the fuel but by attempting to reduce power by leaning it too much at wide throttle settings and low altitude.
Single engine pistons are not able, as a rule, to feather the propellor. The pitch can be made coarse or fine but feathering is a different prospect.
Throttles are not "on or off", they are open or closed or somewhere in between.
If the throttle was stuck at or near closed ("off") then it seems unlikely he would've been still floating around when the RFF took up positions.
As for:
Also detonation is a product of fuel, so if you cut off the fuel or limit it via mixture, so you have another option in case of an undershoot, there should be no damage to the engine if you "blip" the ignition
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt. Queeg
I think you may have conflated Mr Murphies comments about mixture and blipping. They are in the same sentence but separated by a comma which I read as and/or.
With respect you can't have it both ways, the use of the mixture for "power" control wasn't suggested as a means of controlling power by "leaning" which will not change the power produced more than a little bit, maybe +/- 4-5 % from memory, but of complete removal of fuel i.e. ICO = the engine will happily continue to windmill = throttle is "open" = just a very expensive air pump until you need some power to correct your descent/approach/flare = gently push the mixture control in to add fuel to the air pump which with the ignition still selected ON will eventually restore power for as long as you need it. The engine will only "fire" when the correct amount of fuel relative to the volume of air being pumped through it becomes stoichiometric from lean thru rich = the too high power thingy it was doing before. It might be a clunky way of controlling the flight path. But hey it wont do any damage to the engine and with a bit of juggling will get you back to terra firma.
There have been yards of posts here about the pros and cons of what is the best and safest way to routinely "slot" an engine producing high power (twins) AND the best and safest means of quickly bringing it back to life if necessary.
But then I am always open to being corrected.
I think you may have conflated Mr Murphies comments about mixture and blipping. They are in the same sentence but separated by a comma which I read as and/or.
With respect you can't have it both ways, the use of the mixture for "power" control wasn't suggested as a means of controlling power by "leaning" which will not change the power produced more than a little bit, maybe +/- 4-5 % from memory, but of complete removal of fuel i.e. ICO = the engine will happily continue to windmill = throttle is "open" = just a very expensive air pump until you need some power to correct your descent/approach/flare = gently push the mixture control in to add fuel to the air pump which with the ignition still selected ON will eventually restore power for as long as you need it. The engine will only "fire" when the correct amount of fuel relative to the volume of air being pumped through it becomes stoichiometric from lean thru rich = the too high power thingy it was doing before. It might be a clunky way of controlling the flight path. But hey it wont do any damage to the engine and with a bit of juggling will get you back to terra firma.
There have been yards of posts here about the pros and cons of what is the best and safest way to routinely "slot" an engine producing high power (twins) AND the best and safest means of quickly bringing it back to life if necessary.
But then I am always open to being corrected.
I know it is an old chestnut but...
Weight has no effect on gliding ability. It is a function of lift/drag ratio.
Flight path control using the mixture control was something I covered during my commercial training back before the CAA was created.
An interesting exercise. Does that even get briefed nowadays?
A Cirrus isn't the best glider with a bit of weight on-board, especially the 22
Flight path control using the mixture control was something I covered during my commercial training back before the CAA was created.
An interesting exercise. Does that even get briefed nowadays?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Icarus2001
My point exactly, there seems to be an awful lot of basic "what if" stuff that is not covered nowadays, that would have the efect of significantly lowering the overall "pucker factor" and preparing a more confident pilot.
But I guess that costs money, and they either don't want to pay what it costs or the flying schools only teach the bare necessities for the money.
Anyone involved with training new airline intakes or entry level turboprop will tell you there are some fairly big holes in the overall level of aviation knowledge and handling. Not necessarily the young pilots fault if they don't know what they don't know, hence airlines increasing tendency towards their own training schools.
My point exactly, there seems to be an awful lot of basic "what if" stuff that is not covered nowadays, that would have the efect of significantly lowering the overall "pucker factor" and preparing a more confident pilot.
But I guess that costs money, and they either don't want to pay what it costs or the flying schools only teach the bare necessities for the money.
Anyone involved with training new airline intakes or entry level turboprop will tell you there are some fairly big holes in the overall level of aviation knowledge and handling. Not necessarily the young pilots fault if they don't know what they don't know, hence airlines increasing tendency towards their own training schools.
Bottums Up
Does it really matter if the pilot called MAYDAY? Perhaps s/he was sh!t scared. Perhaps other things were happening at the time and they thought that the end was nigh.
Perhaps they didn't have thousands of hours of terrified experience to remain perfect at the time.
Perhaps they didn't have thousands of hours of terrified experience to remain perfect at the time.
Join Date: Jan 1998
Location: somewhere in the nth of Oz, where it isn't really cold
Posts: 884
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clarrie - that's exactly what I said - no point being in the air, WITH a drama, a not say something - anything! No extra points given for keeping secrets in these instances!
This is a very dangerous thread.
There are postings on it that convey the idea that a pilot is somehow a nancy boy for declaring a Mayday under circumstances that were not warranted, at least according to supposed "Old Hands" who post here.
There is also the implication that some techniques of dealing with a supposed emergency may result in "damage to the aircraft", and therefore should be avoided, even if they are the most appropriate measure available to the pilot concerned.
All it needs Folks, is for one student pilot to read this guff and absorb your spurious message, and then decide he/she is not going to do the "Nancy Boy" thing when an emergency eventuates, thereby killing himself.
What I am going to say now is probably going to cost me, and it is this.
If you believe you are in a life threatening situation call Mayday, you can always cancel it later with the loss of a few dignity points, so what? ATC won't mind, you are just demonstrating your prudence. Don't wait too long either. Just run through your checks to confirm that its not a false alarm according to your level of experience. Your emergency may be subjective - one that an "Old Hand" can deal with, but unless you get help, your never going to get to be an "Old Hand" are you?
The alternative scenario I have knowledge of was a marine drowning where the crew concerned waited 45 minutes before calling mayday, as they fought to get a drowning crew member back on board. When they finally did call Mayday, a rescue helicopter arrived in only 15 minutes, underlining the fact that a prompt Mayday would in all probability have resulted in a successful rescue. The Coroner was not very kind to the skipper concerned. Just hold the picture of the Coroner asking "Why didn't he/she declare an emergency?" in your mind.
Furthermore, If I was ever in a "Mayday" situation (God help me), the state of the aircraft and its engine after you have safely extracted yourself and your passengers from it must be of absolutely no concern whatsoever, and you have to remind yourself of this at all times. You can worry about the aircraft once you are safely standing on solid ground.
It's better to be alive and perhaps slightly embarrassed then dead. The stuff about "Old and Bold" is not myth.
There are postings on it that convey the idea that a pilot is somehow a nancy boy for declaring a Mayday under circumstances that were not warranted, at least according to supposed "Old Hands" who post here.
There is also the implication that some techniques of dealing with a supposed emergency may result in "damage to the aircraft", and therefore should be avoided, even if they are the most appropriate measure available to the pilot concerned.
All it needs Folks, is for one student pilot to read this guff and absorb your spurious message, and then decide he/she is not going to do the "Nancy Boy" thing when an emergency eventuates, thereby killing himself.
What I am going to say now is probably going to cost me, and it is this.
If you believe you are in a life threatening situation call Mayday, you can always cancel it later with the loss of a few dignity points, so what? ATC won't mind, you are just demonstrating your prudence. Don't wait too long either. Just run through your checks to confirm that its not a false alarm according to your level of experience. Your emergency may be subjective - one that an "Old Hand" can deal with, but unless you get help, your never going to get to be an "Old Hand" are you?
The alternative scenario I have knowledge of was a marine drowning where the crew concerned waited 45 minutes before calling mayday, as they fought to get a drowning crew member back on board. When they finally did call Mayday, a rescue helicopter arrived in only 15 minutes, underlining the fact that a prompt Mayday would in all probability have resulted in a successful rescue. The Coroner was not very kind to the skipper concerned. Just hold the picture of the Coroner asking "Why didn't he/she declare an emergency?" in your mind.
Furthermore, If I was ever in a "Mayday" situation (God help me), the state of the aircraft and its engine after you have safely extracted yourself and your passengers from it must be of absolutely no concern whatsoever, and you have to remind yourself of this at all times. You can worry about the aircraft once you are safely standing on solid ground.
It's better to be alive and perhaps slightly embarrassed then dead. The stuff about "Old and Bold" is not myth.
Last edited by Sunfish; 10th Jul 2006 at 23:37.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with the Fishmiester.
You can always cancel your mayday and you won't get in trouble.
I don't even think you can get in trouble for calling mayday; better to be safe than sorry.
If you're in busy GAAP or CTA with a lot of radio traffic it's definitely the right thing to do to let your message of distress be heard. Best that everyone knows as they will normally keep quiet. I've heard it before; if a mayday doesn't get declared every man and his dog gets on the radio offering their assistance.
When I'm in trouble, I want everyone to know!
You can always cancel your mayday and you won't get in trouble.
I don't even think you can get in trouble for calling mayday; better to be safe than sorry.
If you're in busy GAAP or CTA with a lot of radio traffic it's definitely the right thing to do to let your message of distress be heard. Best that everyone knows as they will normally keep quiet. I've heard it before; if a mayday doesn't get declared every man and his dog gets on the radio offering their assistance.
When I'm in trouble, I want everyone to know!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Under the Equator
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Cirrus isn't the best glider with a bit of weight on-board, especially the 22
From SR20 POH: Best Glide Ratio = 10.9:1
From SR22 POH: Best Glide Ratio = 9.6:1
Compared to a lot of other aircraft, I would suggest the Cirrus SR20 & SR22 glide ratio is pretty good.
Capt Fathom, it would depend. Myguess is it depends on the immediacy of the threat. Stuck landing gear wouldn't be a Mayday in my untutored opinion. Engine failure in a single would be.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps I think he meant that the 22 wasn't a good glider in terms of manoeuvring. They are very heavy, especially with a heavy nose at slow speed. The controls are quite heavy, especially in a low speed go-around or similar. After all there's 300+ HP up there, especially in the SR22-GTS model; it has something crazy like 350hp... hmmmm nice. Those yanks love a big engine in their cars and planes. Fossil fuel; it's the only way to go!
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish me old
Lets get back to tors eh.
You don't need to be an "old hand" to work that one out.
You just need to slow down or stop even and thimk.
Icarus 2001 must have had the same instructors as I, everyone of them taught me, the first action when a problem arises is to do nothing maintain control of the aircraft, until you have analysed and thought the problem through and worked out what needs to be done and in what order. You don't need to be an "old hand" to do that.
If you think you dont have the time to do that, then you are indeed in grave and imminent danger, probably from yourself.
And I don't believe the "marine" story is relevant without full knowledge of the context. At what points in the rescue, did it go, from a man over board through for the time being no immediate danger, to his being in grave and imminent danger. That's a command judgement The Coroner may or may not have been fully justified in asking that question, they are known on occasion to possess perfect 20/20 hindsight.
Whilst I agree with the Voice on most things I think the Voice would also be the first to agree that a stuck throttle in normal flight does not constitute "grave and imminent danger" it only heralds a potential safety problem if it cant be unstuck or a landing attempt needs to be made so configured.
Did anyone request an engineer or the Chief Pilot on the line for a bit of a chat.
I'm not belying the potential seriousness of the event other than trying to point out that with thorough training and yes a fair bit of hangar or bar flying there is always more than one way to skin a cat.
Ever tried landing a turboprop that wont slow down below 150KIAS at flight idle, no biggie but no Mayday or Pan either. Nothing in the book, but my old mate Franks words from a long ago hangar session saved the day.
ATCers are very good at sussing the issues and acting accordingly, problem for them is that when a pilot calls a Mayday they must act on the assumption that the aircraft is in "grave and imminent danger" and act accordingly, big red trucks and ambos, the lot, and neither do they have an easy option to unilaterally "implement" or "suggest" a downgrade of the call to Pan.
The responsibility therefore, and it always does, rest with the pilot to make the appropriate call.
IMHO Pan Pan would have been waaay more appropriate and if it gets more serious it can always be upgraded, in any event you can expect serious attention and whatever assistance is possible from ATC should you need it.
A Pan call should also have the same effect insofar as radio traffic is concerned as a May Day, i.e. everybody shut up for the moment until ATC sort it out, maybe even go to another frequency, and/or the Panner has the floor, so to speak. The world, in a busy CTA, cant just stop, hence the reponsibility of the pilot to consider the consequences.
I think most "old hands" would also agree that rushing a problem when a deep breath should be taken will be more likely to bring a negative conclusion or as they say "adverse" consequences".
Dangerous thread, nah, far from it.
It's how we all learn from each other in this business. The call may well have been fully justified, but at least the newbies out there now know that there are 2 simple "remedies" available for this situation, that they can discuss with their peers and instructors for the good goss.
The notion that you will trash the engine by the manipulation of the mixture control anywhere between closed and full rich under those circumstances is nonsense.
I would be disapppointed were the pilot to draw that conclusion, I am sure that if he was worthy of his command he will have debriefed himself or sought one out, gone through the event step by step, and if we are lucky, will relate his experience to us. That is how it has been since Wilbur was a boy.
It is correct there is no penalty for declaring a Mayday and that is as it should be, but there is a command responsiblilty attached whether you are flying a Cirrus or a Tiger. It is fair that we should be able to discuss the notion.
Lets get back to tors eh.
A call of pan-pan means that there is an emergency on board a boat, ship, aircraft or other vehicle but that, for the time being at least, there is no immediate danger to anyone's life or to the vessel itself. This is distinct from a Mayday call, which means that there is imminent danger to life or to the continued viability of the vessel itself. Thus 'pan-pan' will inform potential rescuers (including emergency services and other craft in the area) that a safety problem exists whereas 'mayday' will call upon them to drop all other activities and immediately instigate a rescue attempt.
You just need to slow down or stop even and thimk.
Icarus 2001 must have had the same instructors as I, everyone of them taught me, the first action when a problem arises is to do nothing maintain control of the aircraft, until you have analysed and thought the problem through and worked out what needs to be done and in what order. You don't need to be an "old hand" to do that.
If you think you dont have the time to do that, then you are indeed in grave and imminent danger, probably from yourself.
And I don't believe the "marine" story is relevant without full knowledge of the context. At what points in the rescue, did it go, from a man over board through for the time being no immediate danger, to his being in grave and imminent danger. That's a command judgement The Coroner may or may not have been fully justified in asking that question, they are known on occasion to possess perfect 20/20 hindsight.
Whilst I agree with the Voice on most things I think the Voice would also be the first to agree that a stuck throttle in normal flight does not constitute "grave and imminent danger" it only heralds a potential safety problem if it cant be unstuck or a landing attempt needs to be made so configured.
Did anyone request an engineer or the Chief Pilot on the line for a bit of a chat.
I'm not belying the potential seriousness of the event other than trying to point out that with thorough training and yes a fair bit of hangar or bar flying there is always more than one way to skin a cat.
Ever tried landing a turboprop that wont slow down below 150KIAS at flight idle, no biggie but no Mayday or Pan either. Nothing in the book, but my old mate Franks words from a long ago hangar session saved the day.
ATCers are very good at sussing the issues and acting accordingly, problem for them is that when a pilot calls a Mayday they must act on the assumption that the aircraft is in "grave and imminent danger" and act accordingly, big red trucks and ambos, the lot, and neither do they have an easy option to unilaterally "implement" or "suggest" a downgrade of the call to Pan.
The responsibility therefore, and it always does, rest with the pilot to make the appropriate call.
IMHO Pan Pan would have been waaay more appropriate and if it gets more serious it can always be upgraded, in any event you can expect serious attention and whatever assistance is possible from ATC should you need it.
A Pan call should also have the same effect insofar as radio traffic is concerned as a May Day, i.e. everybody shut up for the moment until ATC sort it out, maybe even go to another frequency, and/or the Panner has the floor, so to speak. The world, in a busy CTA, cant just stop, hence the reponsibility of the pilot to consider the consequences.
I think most "old hands" would also agree that rushing a problem when a deep breath should be taken will be more likely to bring a negative conclusion or as they say "adverse" consequences".
Dangerous thread, nah, far from it.
It's how we all learn from each other in this business. The call may well have been fully justified, but at least the newbies out there now know that there are 2 simple "remedies" available for this situation, that they can discuss with their peers and instructors for the good goss.
The notion that you will trash the engine by the manipulation of the mixture control anywhere between closed and full rich under those circumstances is nonsense.
convey the idea that a pilot is somehow a nancy boy
It is correct there is no penalty for declaring a Mayday and that is as it should be, but there is a command responsiblilty attached whether you are flying a Cirrus or a Tiger. It is fair that we should be able to discuss the notion.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sth. Pacific
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is also the implication that some techniques of dealing with a supposed emergency may result in "damage to the aircraft", and therefore should be avoided
But a pilot with a higher level of skill, experience and knowledge might be able to ensure survival and look after the aircraft a little, as well.
Example: Gear-up landing where the pilot manages to cut the engines and line the props up to avoid ground contact prior to touchdown. It has been done but most people will be content just to make sure they live through it and that is fine.
The technique of leaning the mixture to control power, as pointed out, makes a small difference to total power output. Cutting the misture outright would have a far greater benefit (in my opinion) if the technique is carried out with correct timing.
Do you get it now? Be careful what you suggest Sunfish, and how you word it or the thread may, indeed, become "dangerous".
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this is all well and good, but maybe there is another issue worth considering. I've heard that the pilot suspected a stuck throttle because the rpm didn't change when he pulled the throttle back. This is due to the throttle and pitch being combined in the 1 lever. If this was the case, what's to be said about the training in the first place? Just a thought.