alioth wrote:
I don’t think I’ve ever been anywhere where it has not been standard practise to put the gear down on downwind when flying a normal circuit.
That’s what I was taught, too, and not in a “zero to hero” outfit…
Downwind checks at our school in a Cessna 150, BUMPFITCH, U being for Undercarriage. When I asked the instructor why undercarriage on a fixed wheel, he replied “one day you will need to lower the gear and it’s one thing less to learn”. P was also there for Pitch, on a fixed prop, same reason!
maxallup wrote:
Downwind checks at our school in a Cessna 150, BUMPFITCH, U being for Undercarriage. When I asked the instructor why undercarriage on a fixed wheel, he replied “one day you will need to lower the gear and it’s one thing less to learn”. P was also there for Pitch, on a fixed prop, same reason!
New plane, new checks! Or you’ll have to kick te habbit of skipping essential items automatically.
maxallup wrote:
Downwind checks at our school in a Cessna 150, BUMPFITCH, U being for Undercarriage. When I asked the instructor why undercarriage on a fixed wheel, he replied “one day you will need to lower the gear and it’s one thing less to learn”. P was also there for Pitch, on a fixed prop, same reason!
I don’t think that is a good idea. More likely you will have learned to skip over the P and U at the point you start flying VP/RG aircraft.
That’s why I wished fixed gears planes had at least a little button that would light up / off gear lights. This way, you could still do the procedure, and do an actual check, even when flying fixed gear.
Currently I still do a “red blue green”, on a DA40NG (single lever, fixed gear), and try to be dilligent about it, but even looking at the panel and saying “gear is fixed” is not great, as it increases the chance I actually do and think the exact same thing next time I get on a retractable.
I think that’s the limitation of the mnemonics. They are not great if very often you’ll skip some of the items because they don’t apply to the plane.
>That’s why I wished fixed gears planes had at least a little button that would light up / off gear lights.
Maybe there is a market for a little box to be velcrowed into training aircraft that has three green lights and an up/down switch for training. Very occaionally when flicked down, some of the three green lights don’t come on.
I’m sure it could be made very cheaply, and would be a good training aid. But I suspect most schools wouldn’t be interested and see it as just a distraction.
Ultranomad wrote:
I suspect it’s not so much about amateurs vs. professionals as about military vs. civilian.
It’s neither. It is plain attitude towards aviation. We have had plenty 200hrs ATPL-heroes who thought they knew it all and flew worse than most spare-time-captains who kept their professional attitude towards aviation.
Having said that, pulling out paper in a traffic circuit is contradicting safety, because it is the most demanding part of the flight flying low and slow and that needs attention, as does other traffic. I have and teach a flow pattern and the biggest items are displayed on a checklist placard in the cockpit. but regardless of mnemonics, paper or flow, you have to have a consistent system and work it in a calm and unagitated way.
maxallup wrote:
Downwind checks at our school in a Cessna 150, BUMPFITCH, U being for Undercarriage. When I asked the instructor why undercarriage on a fixed wheel, he replied “one day you will need to lower the gear and it’s one thing less to learn”. P was also there for Pitch, on a fixed prop, same reason!
There is a drawback to this. A friend of mine did this, too, in a C172. He always checked for the gear but had no action coupled with the check. He then, after several hundred hours doing so in his 172, flew a 172RG of a friend of his. And sure enough he checked the gear but didn’t lower it. Was all on tape (or goPro) and it showed he called out the check but did not act towards it.
Different aircraft need different checks that fit to the very aircraft you fly.
dublinpilot wrote:
But I suspect most schools wouldn’t be interested and see it as just a distraction.
I suspect it’s a distraction at the start of a PPL, and could lead to some unnecessary frustration / flustering from the students. It is really only useful for people who fly both retractable and fixed.
The bit I don’t get is why, with the plane scraping along the tarmac, somebody thought it would be a good idea to take off again.
Peter wrote:
The bit I don’t get is why, with the plane scraping along the tarmac, somebody thought it would be a good idea to take off again.
I think there are several explanations for that. First, everybody is taught that it is never too late for a go-around. So something is wrong – go around and try it again. With insufficient time to analyse the problem (short runway maybe) this might explain why they did it. Next there is a strong tendency of many people (including pilots!) to cover-up their blunder. So go-around, lower the gear, land again and quietly push the plane into some dark corner of the hangar before anyone notices may have been the plan here. Or even the idea of going around and do another circuit with enough time to lower the gear in order to prevent further damage to the aircraft.
This is not the first such accident. I recall an accident report I read maybe 10 years ago. It was a C421 during a checkride (in the UK IIRC) with student and instructor in the front and the examiner, who was too big to fit in the cockpit, watching from the rear. They too tried to go-around after hitting their props against the concrete but due to the damaged engines and propellers hit some trees they could not outclimb. The impact was survivable and both pilots from the front seats escaped, but the examiner burnt to death in the cabin because he was too heavy for them to pull him out.
