Use The Park Brake

[pelmet]

The accident below can happen quite easily. I have noticed in the C182 that I have to remove my feet from the brakes to change the fuel selector(as per the checklist after starting up). It is tempting to just quickly do it but better to just use the park brake.

"C-GNUE Brampton Flying Club's Cessna 172R, with one crew member on board, had just started
up for a local flight from Brampton-Caledon Airport (CNC3), ON. The pilot in command was
adjusting his seat and his feet involuntarily came off the brake pedals and the aircraft started to
move. When the pilot looked up the aircraft was in close proximity to another aircraft parked on the
ramp, and he couldn't avoid the collision. The other aircraft, C-GBFR, a Cessna 172R, owned by
Brampton Flying Club, was not in operation at the time; it sustained substantial damage to the
horizontal stabilizer and elevator. C-GNUE had minor damage."

[photofly]

When the pilot looked up

I take a different message. Parking brakes can fail or slip. The message I take is don't look down in the first place. Eyes outside, all the time the engine is turning, if you're in charge of an airplane.

[rookiepilot]

I take a different message. Parking brakes can fail or slip. The message I take is don't look down in the first place. Eyes outside, all the time the engine is turning, if you're in charge of an airplane.

Exactly.
Pretty darn fundamental from lesson one in PPL training.
Trust Cessna parking brakes? No.....

[rigpiggy]

The park brakes have history of failing when you need it, and not releasing when you don't. Yyz had a person just about drive into terminal, because head was down doing after starts. The rampy woke them up by slapping fuselage side. Had a guy in a metro use my steel toe as a chock, "heater was pooched and his feet were frozen couldn't lfeel the brakes...

[pelmet]

Good points about trying not to use the park brake and keeping a lookout. That is why I don't use it for the run-up or really at any time on the general aviation aircraft I fly, with rare exception.

Unfortunately, I cannot keep a looking outside when I reach way down for the fuel selector on the C182. Therefore, I have decided during such a scenario, I absolutely will always use the park brake as it has proven to be reliable in my experience at low engine power settings. Then again, I could always leave the fuel selector in the Both position for ground ops while the engine is running instead of following the flight school checklist procedure. I don't believe the Cessna checklist has the starting on one tank, taxiing on the other tank and then back to both for the run-up.

Another example where one might have to stop their looking outside is after dropping something on the floor on a similar type and one has no choice but to look away. No doubt, most if not every one of us has had a situation where they have no choice but to look away and take their feet off the brakes, probably to reach for something. If you have reason to believe that your parking brake system is reliable, I suggest using it. If it is not reliable, come up with a different plan.

I take a different message. Parking brakes can fail or slip. The message I take is don't look down in the first place. Eyes outside, all the time the engine is turning, if you're in charge of an airplane.

Exactly.
Pretty darn fundamental from lesson one in PPL training.
Trust Cessna parking brakes? No.....

Good point about not trusting brakes. But to take to an extreme level of being unwilling to use them at low power when one can't keep ones feet on the brakes and has to look away would be foolish. I have found C172 parking brakes and C182 brakes on the later models(the handle you pull out and turn 90°) to be very reliable at low power for such as a situation where you might want to adjust a seat or reach down to change a fuel selector at 1000 rpm or less.

Has anybody here found these brakes to not be reliable and something that they would therefore not use in a situation where they had to do something like reach around and grab something.

[digits_]

I can't help but wonder if the whole unreliable parking brake thing isn't a self fulfilling prophecy.

They aren't designed to park the plane indefinitely, not even on big airliners. They park the plane for a few moments, and after that they lose effectiveness. People interpret that as "they don't work", which then causes them to not maintain them properly, reducing their effectiveness further, only strengthening the belief they don't work anyway.

[pelmet]

I can't help but wonder if the whole unreliable parking brake thing isn't a self fulfilling prophecy.

They aren't designed to park the plane indefinitely, not even on big airliners. They park the plane for a few moments, and after that they lose effectiveness. People interpret that as "they don't work", which then causes them to not maintain them properly, reducing their effectiveness further, only strengthening the belief they don't work anyway.

Thanks,

I think it really varies from aircraft type to aircraft type and possibly even versions on a specific type. I was taught that the parking brake on the Cessna 150 had issues with getting stuck in the On position and therefore have never used it. I have found the parking brakes on the Cessna 172 and 182 aircraft that I have operated(pull and turn handle) to be quite reliable at low power settings but personally don't use them for run-ups in case they happen to slip. An instructor on a Bonanza warned me about the possibility of the parking brake remaining stuck in the On position and showed me what to do under the cowl to release it got stuck. If I remember correctly, I used the park brake on the various Diamond aircraft I flew during the run-ups as per instruction and had no problems. Same thing on some of the Cherokee instruction flights I had.

Various large aircraft parking brakes seemed quite good and I even did high power run-ups on several types with no issue. To give a slightly interesting example of poor crew judgement way back when. One of the captains I flew with on the Twin Otter did a high power run with the brakes on at an off-strip location pointing toward a steep drop-off(can't remember the reason for the run-up). Fortunately the brakes held very well.

Anyways, getting back to the original incident. If one needs to adjust a seat in a C172 and needs to take your feet off the brakes.....try using the parking brake....and doing your best to monitor outside for any aircraft movement.

[rookiepilot]

But to take to an extreme level of being unwilling to use them at low power when one can't keep ones feet on the brakes and has to look away would be foolish. I have found C172 parking brakes and C182 brakes on the later models(the handle you pull out and turn 90°) to be very reliable at low power for such as a situation where you might want to adjust a seat or reach down to change a fuel selector at 1000 rpm or less.

Thank you for your opinion on what is extreme, what is foolish -- or not. Everyone has a disciplined routine that works for them, or should.

I adjust my seat and organize my stuff before I start an engine.

If for any reason I have to have my head even momentarily down -- copying a clearance-- I am sure not pointed at another aircraft, and I'm well away from other people. Otherwise my head is outside, in case someone decides to walk into my prop or something.

I'd rather not have a dragging parking brake during a short field takeoff, and Cessna's certainly can stick, too, especially under certain conditions.

My AME doesn't like using them. No instructor I've had in the past liked using them -- on Cessna singles anyway.

Perhaps they are all foolish, but I rate their in person advice rather above the internet on what is wise or not.

Everyone, though, as they say, can "do what works for them".

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

I've been taught to just not rely on the parking brakes, at all.

As I understand it, parking brakes in most small GA aircraft are in fact hydraulic, and rely on a check valve in the line that prevents brake pressure from being released. However, that check valve can leak, or stick. I'm not sure if that is specific to the airframe I am training in, or more generally applicable to all small GA craft. The only time I generally use them is at idle power or slightly above - perhaps to scratch an itch on the bottom of my foot, after realizing that the right seat's headset wires are tangled around my harness, or after pulling a muscle in my foot that makes using the brakes painful momentarily, to think of a few possibilities.

Is it that students are generally taught not to use them because the assumption is they will assume that they behave similar to an automotive parking brake on a separate, mechanical system, with the same reliability? It would seem to me the safer option would be to use both, if the aircraft isn't supposed to be moving yet. Don't trust that parking brake, but it's one more hole in that swiss cheese you need to poke through before something ugly happens.

To take it to an extreme, you could theoretically be stung by a wasp while doing a runup, or any number of ridiculously unlikely but not impossible scenarios. Why not use the toe brakes and the parking brake?

[pelmet]

If for any reason I have to have my head even momentarily down -- copying a clearance-- I am sure not pointed at another aircraft, and I'm well away from other people. Otherwise my head is outside, in case someone decides to walk into my prop or something.

I'd rather not have a dragging parking brake during a short field takeoff, and Cessna's certainly can stick, too, especially under certain conditions.

My AME doesn't like using them. No instructor I've had in the past liked using them -- on Cessna singles anyway.

Everyone, though, as they say, can "do what works for them".

Good point about trying not to be pointing at other aircraft when looking down Rookie. Of course, it can be difficult at times to not be pointed at some place where we would rather not be pointed at when a clearance needs to be copied.

Good thinking as well about being concerned about a dragging brake on takeoff. I have never encountered such a situation in my experience on a Cessna with the pull and turn park brake handles. I would be curious if anyone else has had such an encounter. Anyways, I like the C172 and C182 later model park brakes although I only use them with the engine running when I can't keep my feet on the brakes for some reason(such as switching some fuel selectors, picking up something that dropped on the floor, reaching for something, etc).

The bottom line is....if the guy at Brampton had simply used the park brake this thread wouldn't exist. Consider using the parking brake in a situation such as that pilot encountered. Always have a heightened alert for a dragging brake if the parking brake was used.

As a note: There have been several of other aircraft where I used the parking brake a lot, most recently while flying a Sling 2 LSA. Most of the ones I flew had a handbrake beside the throttle(although a couple did have toe brakes). Continuously holding a handbrake instead of using the park brake would have been foolish once again. The parking brake was used for all after start procedures and the run-up/Before takeoff checks.

[7ECA]

One would think adjusting the seat would be done prior to firing up, but apparently that's not what everyone does; as shown by this "incident".

The only aeroplane I ever used the parking brake on was the Seneca while doing run-ups during my multi-engine rating. Even then, it was just a backup to the toe brakes - in the sense that we never took our feet off the peddles even with the parking brake set.

About the "funniest" thing I ever saw, was a person who decided to set the parking brake in a Cherokee while holding short at Blunder Bay... and then promptly couldn't get it to release when cleared for takeoff. Well, with a small fleet of aeroplanes holding behind the Cherokee, there was most certainly some sweating going on.

[photofly]

I think the parking brake is a complete red herring in this event. Use it, don't use it, who cares. Either way you must not take at least peripheral attention away from outside the airplane, whether you're adjusting your seat, copying a clearance, programming the gps or looking something up in the CFS.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

I think the parking brake is a complete red herring in this event. Use it, don't use it, who cares. Either way you must not take at least peripheral attention away from outside the airplane, whether you're adjusting your seat, copying a clearance, programming the gps or looking something up in the CFS.

And I respectfully disagree. Although I agree that you must not remove peripheral attention from outside the aircraft, I am pragmatic enough to recognize that mistakes happen. To me this is similar to a seat belt argument. Granted, quite often the use or not of seat belts in an accident is a red herring; the driver made a mistake that he/she should not have, and caused an accident. The cause remains the same. But to argue that the use of the parking brake is irrelevant to this discussion is to argue that the use of seat belts is not relevant to automotive safety.

As has been said above, had that pilot used the parking brake, this thread would not exist. I think that makes it very relevant to the discussion. Pilot inattention and use of the parking brake are separate, but connected issues here. The latter is a safety mechanism in case the former fails (and sooner or later, no matter how good you are, it will - most of us are just lucky when it happens).

[photofly]

Why is the parking brake the one issue you pick to interrupt this chain of errors? Why not ask why he didn’t adjust the seat before starting the engine, or idle the engine, or position the aircraft so that when it rolled forward it would have moved into an empty area, or simply flown on Tuesday instead of Wednesday?

Yes, the parking brake might have helped here, but not using the parking brake was not THE error any more than the other things I suggested you could have picked. The lesson is not about the brake. The lesson is about paying attention when you’re in command of an airplane.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Why is the parking brake the one issue you pick to interrupt this chain of errors?

Because the thread is titled "Use The Park Brake".

Why not ask why he didn’t adjust the seat before starting the engine, or idle the engine, or position the aircraft so that when it rolled forward it would have moved into an empty area?

All of these are also very valid lessons.

Yes, the parking brake might have helped here, but not using the parking brake was not THE error any more than the other things I suggested you could have picked. The lesson is not about the brake. The lesson is about paying attention when you’re in command of an airplane.

I would argue there are many things to be taken from this incident, not solely inattention.

[photofly]

The thread title should be changed to “Shoulda flown on Tuesday instead” then.

[rookiepilot]

Why is the parking brake the one issue you pick to interrupt this chain of errors?

Because the thread is titled "Use The Park Brake".

Then it's the thread title is what's wrong here.
Adding another procedure, checklist, whatever, isn't a solution for situational awareness.

A checklist will work fine until you are flying hard IFR single pilot. Then glancing at a checklist isn't going to save your butt. You'll need Situational awareness.

So might as well learn it...on the ground.

[tsgarp]

The take away is to avoid fixating. Scan inside and out while actioning a check. Do one item on the check, look outside, do the next item, look outside etc...

[Cliff Jumper]

I'm all for 'safety improvements' but I'm with photo on this one. I don't think the 'remember the parking brake' advice is the solution here.

Lets keep in mind a few things.

1. A Cessna 172R at idle doesn't exactly accelerate like a ferrari.
2. He must have moved at least 30-40 feet to hit another parked aircraft, otherwise there wouldn't have been room to turn out.
3. The top speed of a C172R at idle isn't very high.
4. The pilot had to be completely heads-down for this whole time. so much so to notice nothing in his/her periphery.
5. In my experience, it doesn't take full heads-down attention to adjust a cessna seat.

I know that it was a mistake, and this persons actions seemed reasonable to them at the time, but I'm not sure that the solution to this level of inattention is advice to ''use the parking brake more'.

We wouldn't say this to someone if this was a car. I don't recall ever while I was learning to drive (in an automatic), my dad saying "hey, if you have to take your foot off the brake, and look down for a long time, don't forget the parking brake (or put it in park)". I just assume that my dad thought that this was a lesson that wasn't really necessary to teach. He had a terrific amount of faith in me, assuming that I understood that if I took my foot off the brake that the car would move.

If he had told me, I certainly would have looked at him with a raised eyebrow, and given him a sarcastic response.

[pelmet]

How about using the parking brake. People get focused on the seat adjustment in the accident after starting the engine(which in reality, probably happens around the world thousands of time each year).

But I used other examples including fuel tank selection on certain aircraft, picking something up off the floor, and grabbing something in the back. These are all known to be situations where one will have no choice but to not pay attention outside. The idea that any one of us will not encounter a situation where we will have to stop paying attention outside at some point in the future is highly unlikely. When it happens, try setting the parking brake if it works well at low power and is unlikely to cause subsequent problems. Sometimes people plan to do something for a few seconds and then become more distracted than they expected(Maybe trying to get something off the floor and it is just out of reach).

People have been killed when a plane taxies into another one. My method has worked very well for me. The other method didn't work out so well for the guy in Brampton. Anyone reading this thread can decide for themselves what they think is best.