If the speeds brakes still stick out however it’s a little embarrasing for the crew (or oneself in some cases…)
I do not remember what company it was… but after landing and having tacked I to the gate we were in the process of disembarking when I commented to my wife that it was strange the spoilers were still not stowed and I saw the pilots preparing to leave the cockpit. My wife put on a big smile and ran up to the pilots while I was still gathering my stuff. She talked to one of them who turned on his heal and walked back into the cockpit.
I think she saved him the embarassement that day.
And as to speedbrakes….cough…..never done that…..!
Luckily it only takes a couple of seconds of starter engage for pumping enough hydraulic liquid to raise them (now how on earth did I find that out…). The flaps would need a full engine start to be raised (and because an engine start costs the same as an hour of operation – overhaul is due after 5000 hours or 5000 cycles, whatever comes first) one has to live with the embarassment in such a case.
When the flaps are down even part way on a Rallye, it makes it more likely you will step on them when embarking/disembarking. I used to retract during preflight when I flew Cessnas, now not so much. I don’t like running the battery when the engine isn’t running and other things worry me more+ I’m a lazy bum. With club/rental planes, I would check because I have found stress lines/cracks probably from deployment at speeds that are too high, but my own plane, I don’t worry so much. I do check the other control surfaces and linkages carefully though.
Devil’s advocate here….
Has anyone here found, or known a pilot who has found, a defect with a Cessna 1xx flap during a preflight inspection? Just wondering…
It’s great to confirm that flaps, as all flight controls, work prior to flight. I am entirely satisfied of this, if, while I am taxiing for takeoff, I select the flaps to my desired takeoff setting, and they extend to that position. Yes, every takeoff I fly will have the flaps selected to the greatest permitted takeoff flap position, so the opportunity to inspect is assured for Cessna 1xx and 2xx.
Checklists: The checklist in the flight manual, is the one, and only one, which is formally approved. They were developed as a part of (requirement of) the certification process. All other checklists are not approved. Could you explain to the insurance adjuster/AAIB, why you were flying the plane with reference to an unapproved checklist, when an approved one was available in the flight manual, which is required to be aboard?
Pilot_DAR wrote:
Has anyone here found, or known a pilot who has found, a defect with a Cessna 1xx flap during a preflight inspection? Just wondering…
Yes. An instructor I used to fly with a lot once found a damaged (IIRC bent) roller guide. The flaps deployed, but wouldn’t retract. About a year ago I thought the sound of the flaps as they deployed was very unusual, called the mechanic who found some damage in the mechanism (don’t recall now what exactly it was).
All other checklists are not approved.
As I already wrote, where I fly (EASA mainland…) training providers and commercial operators can get approval for their own abbreviated checklists. Don’t know if and how this applies to privately owned and operated aircraft.
what_next wrote:
training providers and commercial operators can get approval for their own abbreviated checklists.
This must be similar to an airline having its internal procedures and checklists approved. Fair enough, if a checklist bears an approval stamp and signature from the authority, that would be good enough for me. I would wonder why go to the effort, and in Canada, Transport Canada would not expend the effort to approve a checklist for a “club” or training GA aircraft, but is it is done elsewhere, that’s following the process as it should be followed.
Pilot_DAR wrote:
…an approval stamp…
The last time I saw a stamp on anything must be longer ago than the last time I saw a cheque being used as a method of payment. But I get the idea.
I would wonder why go to the effort
The checklists of e.g. a Piper Seminole are spread over two dozen pages in the flight manual which is the flimsiest possible printed product one can image with pages falling out after the third time of being used. Our flight school checklists (there are three actually: Preflight, Inflight and A&E – abnormal and emergency) on the other hand fit on an A5 sized platic card which you can clip to your kneeboard or sun shield. That alone is worth the effort of making them.
Why do so many still believe that approval = good? This is the same fallacy that compliance means quality or safety.
If you have nothing better, using the approved, compliant checklist is the best starting point.
And anyone saying – “just use the aircraft manufacturer’s checklist as in the AFM” has not seen what some of them look like in practice. A 1970’s or 1980’s twin can have them spread over the main AFM body and supplements, which may or may not apply to the aircraft in question. If after an accident, anyone asked me “why do you not use the checklist from the AFM, but your own” this is prob99 is completely irrelevant to the accident, and the answer will be “because it is better”.
Also, assembling the checklist and developing the flows when transitioning to a new aircraft is – for me – part of the learning, drives systems knowledge, and it takes several flights to get them right for a particular aircraft, which will probably have been modified a bit since the AFM was published last century.
Pilot_DAR wrote:
Checklists: The checklist in the flight manual, is the one, and only one, which is formally approved. They were developed as a part of (requirement of) the certification process. All other checklists are not approved. Could you explain to the insurance adjuster/AAIB, why you were flying the plane with reference to an unapproved checklist, when an approved one was available in the flight manual, which is required to be aboard?
We have been through this before in this thread.
To quote a reply to you from myself in that thread:
Airborne_Again wrote:
As far as approval goes, in EASA-land you don’t have to use approved checklists for non-commercial operations with non-complex aircraft. (And as you know, EASA means something entirely different with “complex” compared to the FAA.)AMC1 to NCO.GEN.105(c) does say that “The pilot-in-command should use the latest checklists provided by the manufacturer.” but you may use your own Alternate Means of Compliance without approval (NCO.GEN.101). The only hard requirement is that you should follow the operating procedures in the AFM (NCO.GEN.105(a)(3), referring to Basic Regulation, Annex IV, 1.b), but you can still do that using your own checklists
