|
CBJSprague24 posted:I've wondered what the hell you would do to pass the time on a trans-pacific flight in a turboprop.
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 04:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 01:48 |
|
|
e.pilot posted:I think I mentioned it a few pages back when you brought up this student, but when I have students that have that problem I’ve been known to put power in and hold a flare down the runway a foot or two off the ground to burn in that flare slight picture for them. I did this, it didn't work as well as I'd hoped. The demo didn't do much, getting him to try and do it was the same shitshow as the flare was in general. Part of the problem is that he's taken to the fact that we're switching planes (between different 172s) and the sight picture is ever so slightly different as an excuse. Which, yeah, I understand a little bit, but at the same time, the problem is he wasn't relating what the aircraft is doing to the control inputs he should be applying. If you bring the nose up too soon, even if you hit the perfect sight picture for a second, you're going to balloon. Today, at altitude, we practiced smoothing the control inputs close to flare, and we got to do it a few times in 10 minutes instead of flying to halfway to bumfuck nowhere every circuit. I think that's the most important thing to correct. If you can make small adjustments skillfully, you can make the plane do what you want it to do. It's just draining because I know I've taught these skills before and I can't figure out why this is loving up so bad with one specific student, and it's not like he's unusually weak at the upper air stuff. It's like a puzzle and I need to figure out what the missing piece is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 05:01
|
|
|
Nooooo don’t have them do it. Demo it for them, tell them to pay attention to the sight picture.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:Nooooo don’t have them do it. Demo it for them, tell them to pay attention to the sight picture. Hmm, okay. I'll do it again next time if this last lesson didn't take. EDIT: My goal with getting them to do it was to use a lower power setting than I had and get them to focus on holding the plane off the runway and then touch down in the perfect flare, but, yeah, it didn't work. PT6A fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Jan 21, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 05:25
|
|
|
Yeah that’s way too advanced a thing to have a student do that can’t even flare right. It’s just a demo so they can see what it should look like in the flare, but for longer than the half a second in an actual flare.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 05:46
|
|
|
Sometimes the attitude/sight picture is the wrong thing to focus on. In the flare, the airplane will decelerate at whatever rate it does, and at every time-step along the process in other to fly a level flight path, the AOA (commanded by you) has to correspond to the airspeed (given to you by the airplane). So if the student gets hyper-tasked with establishing the touchdown attitude, and tries for it too early, he'll balloon. His real task should be to fly a constant aLtitude, (actually a slight decent of course) and nip in the bud any descending or ballooning motions. The attitude is more in the background of his mind, just making sure the airplane gets to the proper one before letting it touch down. While slower is better, it's not a huge deal and a tricycle plane has a range of acceptable touchdown attitudes. The primary task should be altitude/flight path control, and the low pass is a great exercise that gives him the chance to practice it for say 20-30 seconds instead of a few seconds in the flare, and also practice it without the stress of worrying about an actual touchdown.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 06:09
|
|
|
This is still my favorite landing video https://youtu.be/Rv5HEJCyTuk
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2019 06:17
|
|
|
So it turns out the phrasing "look at the end of the runway" was the incorrect phrasing, and what I should've been saying the whole time was "do not under any circumstances look inside the aircraft during the flare." I finally noticed this when my student mentioned he was watching the airspeed in the flare. His landings have improved considerably now!
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 00:37
|
|
|
Ooph. In landing news, I rolled a 700 on after not having flown one since September. Even remembered the brakes are touchy and didn’t slam anyone into the tray tables. V proud of myself. Related: The 700 shits on a 200 so hard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 00:51
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:Ooph. I feel kind of bad about taking this long to notice it, since my eyes are outside during the flare too, but now I know sometimes you do need to use the "don't do X" phrasing instead of the "do Y" phrasing that they push on us during instructor training.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 01:10
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:Ooph. Slats are a crutch. Hard Wing master race. The -200 is the pinnacle of aircraft engineering. Fight me. Serious note though, Canadian regional industry is going through a bit of a shuffle. The mothership just put forward a proposal to move the 14 CRJ1/2s from my poo poo tier regional to the much more established regional, as well as extend contracts and buy new airplanes and poo poo. The better regional has offered us all jobs with seniority protection which is incredible, but I definitely won't have the seniority for the left seat or possibly even the jet out of YYZ base. All of this is predicated on said better regional airline's pilots agreeing to a 17-year extension to their contract. Apparently poo poo's not going well, and rumours are abound about what the mothership's Plan B is. So basically, my life is  right now. Ah the airline industry...
Desi fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Jan 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
I dunno, everyone always talks about the weirdness and whatnot of landing the 200, but for me it came much easier. It was my first variant and I took to it like a duck to water. After switching to "the heavy," it took me a bunch of months to get consistent. edit: but only recently it dawned on me that our 900's GPWS doesn't say the heights below 50, whereas the 200s say "thirty, twent, ten..." so that may have something to do with it too. vessbot fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Jan 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:16
|
|
|
Desi posted:Slats are a crutch. Hard Wing master race. The -200 is the pinnacle of aircraft engineering. Fight me. No need to fight you if you’re in a 200, I’ll climb 1500fpm+ to cruise and fly away at 0.83. And the packs system will actually keep me comfortable while doing it. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:16
|
|
|
Desi posted:The -200 is the Pinnacle of aircraft engineering. Fight me. Naw man, let's be bros. Want a coke?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:35
|
|
|
vessbot posted:I dunno, everyone always talks about the weirdness and whatnot of landing the 200, but for me it came much easier. It was my first variant and I took to it like a duck to water. After switching to "the heavy," it took me a bunch of months to get consistent. I flew the MU2 before I started on the deuce and had to relearn to flare. The MU2 would come in reasonably nose up while the 200 behaves a lot more like a 172 with the nose-down-dont-pile-drive-it-into-the-ground attitude. Interesting about the callouts. I once had to land a 200 without them, as one rad alt was deferred and the other one crapped out in flight. You forget how much you rely on that thing til its gone. I find I'm doing finesse changes almost with ever 10' callout. Fun side note, with no radalt signal, your GLDs dont go up. So float-float-float, then poo poo pull the speedbrakes on rollout. Good times. e.pilot posted:No need to fight you if you’re in a 200, I’ll climb 1500fpm+ to cruise and fly away at 0.83. Next you're going to try and tell me that you can keep the wings warm at idle thrust, like some miracle plane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:48
|
|
|
Desi posted:Next you're going to try and tell me that you can keep the wings warm at idle thrust, like some miracle plane. It's a cheat though, the idle raises itself when you turn A/I on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:52
|
|
|
No GPWS callouts on landing is weird
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 02:54
|
|
|
PT6A posted:So it turns out the phrasing "look at the end of the runway" was the incorrect phrasing, and what I should've been saying the whole time was "do not under any circumstances look inside the aircraft during the flare." I finally noticed this when my student mentioned he was watching the airspeed in the flare. His landings have improved considerably now!
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 04:47
|
|
|
The CR2 you just fly it into the ground until you hear *thunk*. CR7/9 you have to flare like a Cessna, it’s harder to land but rewards you with nice greasers. B-767 is surprisingly responsive and squirrelly. vessbot posted:Naw man, let's be bros. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 04:53
|
|
|
You know its going to be a bad day when the taf for your home airport has 4 different kinds of freezing precip in it and your first flight has a transponder code ending in 666.vessbot posted:Want a coke? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 05:57
|
|
|
Desi posted:The -200 is the pinnacle of aircraft engineering. Please tell me this was intentional.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 06:06
|
|
|
vessbot posted:I dunno, everyone always talks about the weirdness and whatnot of landing the 200, but for me it came much easier. It was my first variant and I took to it like a duck to water. After switching to "the heavy," it took me a bunch of months to get consistent. Nah the 200 lands better than the 9 because of the gear. The 900 seemed liked you always had to fly it the ground to get a good landing. The 200 you could flare like a Cessna. I couldn’t imagine not having the callouts below 50 ft doing a Cat II landing. The lights are so drat bright it’s really hard to judge how high above the ground you are without the callouts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 07:24
|
|
|
On the Q400, we do Cat III approaches with no callouts (aside from "MINIMUMS"), but the HUD has flare guidance that produces surprisingly good landings. For anything but Cat III, the Q can be a complete bitch to land, since the nose can't go above 6 degrees in the flare (or there's a risk of a tail strike), the gear is is stiff, and if there's icing or windshear, the added approach speed means that the airplane loves to just float in ground effect and refuses to touch down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 08:59
|
|
|
Someone hosed up the prop on my favourite 172 by taxiing it into one of the orange cones on our ramp. Instead of proceeding to get out and inspect for damage, and maybe clean up the thousands of tiny orange plastic shards this generated, he proceeded to go flying with the aforementioned damaged propeller. This person is an instructor candidate. I'm vaguely worried.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 16:54
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Someone hosed up the prop on my favourite 172 by taxiing it into one of the orange cones on our ramp. Instead of proceeding to get out and inspect for damage, and maybe clean up the thousands of tiny orange plastic shards this generated, he proceeded to go flying with the aforementioned damaged propeller. Its a loving prop and they FLEW with a strike against a blade? Are they loving daft?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 17:17
|
|
|
I once flew with a student who prop-struck a 172 on landing on a solo XC (to the point where the first couple inches of each blade were bent back), and then flew it about an hour back like that, put it back in the hangar, and just assumed we wouldn't notice. Students can do some really dumb stuff sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:I once flew with a student who prop-struck a 172 on landing on a solo XC (to the point where the first couple inches of each blade were bent back), and then flew it about an hour back like that, put it back in the hangar, and just assumed we wouldn't notice. Non students do, too. I’ve seen some certified pilots (dentist types) do some stupid dangerous poo poo after a lifetime of being spoiled.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:and if there's icing or windshear, the added approach speed means that the airplane loves to just float in ground effect and refuses to touch down. When the 175 encounters icing it causes stick shaker speed to increase by 10 knots. Unfortunately this message latches and doesn't clear until touchdown so even if you're landing in phoenix during the middle of the summer where it's 100 degrees you still have to fly icing speeds. We also add the whole gust factor instead of half so it's no uncommon to have to fly vRef +20 when any other plane would fly vRef +5. You basically don't flare and have to drag the mains to trigger the ground spoilers otherwise the airplane will float for 5,000' in ground effect. Even then it's still super squirrely in any sort of crosswind.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 17:41
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Please tell me this was intentional. Yes it was. That crash defines the -200. From a lack of performance whilst being empty, the two douches flying it, everything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
EvilMerlin posted:Its a loving prop and they FLEW with a strike against a blade? I would suspect so, yes. Other greatest hits from this guy include showing up for a night flight without a headlamp, and asking how to deal with a 172 that had no separate avionics bus. I feel he may not be the sort of person we would like to have instructing new pilots because drat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
Desi posted:Yes it was. That crash defines the -200. From a lack of performance whilst being empty, the two douches flying it, everything. I just have to chime in, though...... It was a Pepsi, not a Coke.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 18:20
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:When the 175 encounters icing it causes stick shaker speed to increase by 10 knots. Unfortunately this message latches and doesn't clear until touchdown so even if you're landing in phoenix during the middle of the summer where it's 100 degrees you still have to fly icing speeds. We also add the whole gust factor instead of half so it's no uncommon to have to fly vRef +20 when any other plane would fly vRef +5. This seems like a good design that will never cause issues with runway overrun and eventually be changed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:22
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:When the 175 encounters icing it causes stick shaker speed to increase by 10 knots. Unfortunately this message latches and doesn't clear until touchdown so even if you're landing in phoenix during the middle of the summer where it's 100 degrees you still have to fly icing speeds. We also add the whole gust factor instead of half so it's no uncommon to have to fly vRef +20 when any other plane would fly vRef +5. Was this a peculiar response to colgan or just Brazilian weirdness?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Was this a peculiar response to colgan or just Brazilian weirdness? Colgan wasn't really caused by anything icing related. In the aftermath, there was some discussion of icing on the approach (the crew mentioned seeing ice build up on the windshield, and there were reports of moderate icing), but the only icing-related NTSB determination was that Colgan had inadequate procedures in place for airspeed selection and management during icing, but the root cause was "Captain overpowered the stick shaker and pusher, and the FO retracted flaps in the stall".
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 23:57
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:This seems like a good design that will never cause issues with runway overrun and eventually be changed. Just flip the breaker to clear it. (Don’t actually do this.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:03
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Was this a peculiar response to colgan or just Brazilian weirdness? Barzilian weirdness. The 175 is like a korean "luxury" car from the early 2000s. It has all the features of the more popular brands but they're poorly implemented and it's obvious everything was designed to be cheap which leads to a lot of quirks. Similar to the korean auto industry they eventually figured out what they were doing and apparently the e2 fixes a lot of the problems.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:17
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:Colgan wasn't really caused by anything icing related. Right, but it wasn’t caused by anything sleep apnea related either and yet the FAA still did something unnecessary and bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:30
|
|
|
It was a few pages back, but thank you aviation goons for explaining why my airplane probably wasn't going to crash 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:58
|
|
|
Had my first Solo XC yesterday!  And another Solo XC today!Flew right over the Sutter Buttes. Beautiful clear skies. Had a great time! It’s amazing how much easier it is to follow and fill out a navlog when you don’t have an instructor trying to distract you on purpose. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 01:48 |
|
|
cigaw posted:Had my first Solo XC yesterday! You flying out of MYV? I ride my bike past there all the time. Congrats on the solo, don’t crash into my house.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 04:02
|
|