Aviation sayings.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 1:47 pm

There are a few aviation sayings that really are stupid in my opinion.

Here are two.

(1) The other engine will only take you to the scene of the crash.

So why do you have to train for and pass single engine proceedures if you are going to crash anyhow?

(2) There are two kinds of pilots, those who have landed gear up and those who are going to.

All that saying means to me is the pilots repeating it should stick to fixed gear airplanes, or better yet quit flying due to being just to plain stupid to be allowed in an airplane.

Hedley · Post by **Hedley** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:14 pm

landed gear up

I think it's a training issue. I'm probably out in left field, but I teach the GBUMPFH downwind check - even on a fixed gear aircraft. I want to hear the student call out:

Gas - tank - quantity
Brakes - check
Undercarriage - down (and welded!)
Mixture - rich
Pitch - full fine
Flaps
Harness

It's all about the habits that you form. If you learn to fly, not worring about the gear, well, that's probably the way you're going to fly later on, too.

If I could, I'd put a fake gear handle in the cockpit, too - wired up in a most interesting fashion, so that if he taxiied in with the gear up, he buys beer for the entire airport, because it would set a siren off when the gear selector was up, the master was on, and the aircraft was stopped

This is why I strongly prefer to teach at least to solo on a tailwheel aircraft. Those first few hours will form rudder skills that will last a lifetime. It's a pain in the ass, taking someone with 100 or so hours of only nosewheel time, and teaching them how to use the rudders - they have 100 hours of bad habits to unlearn.

Food for thought: at the last airshow you went to in Canada, the demo pilot flying the F-18 didn't have enough hours in his logbook to get hired flying popnchips in a Navajo.

Pop Quiz for the class 4's - what Learning Factor am I referring to?

N2 · Post by N2 » Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:21 pm

My favorite aviation saying is "Better train now there's a big pilot shortage looming!" Oh if bullshit were golden the flight schools would be rich!

popo · Post by **popo** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:30 pm

fuel in the tank is money is the bank.

The only time you have too much fuel is when you are on fire.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:35 pm

" Gas - tank - quantity
Brakes - check
Undercarriage - down (and welded!)
Mixture - rich
Pitch - full fine
Flaps
Harness "

There is one of the most frustrating habits I have to unteach pilots learning to fly big radial engines.

Getting check lists concreted into the memory bank can quite often be counter productive later on in ones flying career.

By the way I teach them to leave the props in cruise pitch for most all approaches and landings ( unless there is a reason to need higher RPM ) Full fine is selected as the throttles are closed for the landing.

I have yet to see any real need to have take off RPM and the engines screaming in my ears to go down hill, I use gravity instead of power to descend.

cplpilot · Post by **cplpilot** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:42 pm

Better break the ground and head into the wind than break the wind and head into the ground!

Hedley · Post by **Hedley** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:51 pm

Mixture - rich
Pitch - full fine

Like the old incorrect "undersquare" rule of thumb (ie never use more inches of MP than RPM), it isn't always optimal, but it's hard to get into trouble, for a newbie pilot who is baffled by all the knobs and levers.

Like training wheels, it's a place to start. But you probably wouldn't want to end your career with training wheels still bolted on

I agree that full rich mixture and fine pitch can be unnecessary and in some cases quite damaging to the engine.

On our 421, Continental engineers say that the main source of GTSIO-520 cylinder head cracking ISN'T shock cooling, but instead is caused by the cold fuel being squirted into the cylinder when pilots jam the mixtures forward during descent at low power settings - ask GE about this.

The way I land the 421 is with the props still at 1800 rpm and the mixtures half-way out. In the unlikely event that I need to go around, it's mixture/pitch/throttles, in that order. I am sure that I would flunk a Transport PPC with that technique, however

Rockie · Post by **Rockie** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:22 pm

Hedley wrote:Food for thought: at the last airshow you went to in Canada, the demo pilot flying the F-18 didn't have enough hours in his logbook to get hired flying popnchips in a Navajo.

Maybe not, but I bet he could learn how to fly popnchips in a Navajo quicker than a popnchip hauling Navajo pilot could learn how to do demos in an F-18.

pushyboss · Post by **pushyboss** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 4:04 pm

At the risk of hi-jacking this thread I could not dis-agree more about the F-18 guy versus the popnchip hauler. There is significantly more to pilot skills than the ability to throw an over powered fighter through the sky. Speed is relative. The military pilots (fighter jocks in particular) are led around by an array of manpower and technology. Other than basic handling decisions his/her flight is governed and controlled by multitudes of people and paper. The Navajo guy/gal gets up in the morning and figures it out on their own. Usually flying a leaky, cold, underpowered Navajo to East Rubberboot Sask. with little or no backup.

The ability to MANAGE a days worth of flying in crappy conditions with marginal equipment is a much harder skill to learn than the ability to throw an airplane around the sky. Military pilots are very good at what they do, but their skill sets are no more impressive than the Navajo pilot bombing around the north.

Skosh · Post by **Skosh** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 4:30 pm

Yup you got that right..

I just get to work in the morning, jump in my airplane, flick the switch and she does all of the work magically. I don't even have to watch the fuel or know where I'm going. I just kind of hang on while the over powered GE404s do all the work.

Glad I have all those people and pieces of paper governing what I do so I don't have to make any decisions.

Oh, and don't get me started on flying in bad weather. Only clear and a million will get my pink body off of the ground.

Everyone should fly in the military, where the robots do the managing.

Rowdy · Post by **Rowdy** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 6:44 pm

Cat Driver wrote:
There is one of the most frustrating habits I have to unteach pilots learning to fly big radial engines.

By the way I teach them to leave the props in cruise pitch for most all approaches and landings ( unless there is a reason to need higher RPM ) Full fine is selected as the throttles are closed for the landing.

I got my hand smacked for doing just that when I was stuffed into the beav! No need for you to move the prop lever to fine untill the power is back at idle and you're nearing the (in my case) water! Makes for a lot smoother descents and also makes for less concerned pax. with gradual increases and decreases in engine noise! As well as whats already been mentioned.

As for the gear ups.. I greatly dislike "it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when" Thats a big pile of shyte.. You should know your gear is down if you're goin for a runway.. and should know and confirm (repeatedly) that it's UP if you're on amphibs for the water! I don't see how the simplicity of this basic task of checking gear gets forgotten! There are lights, indicators and for most.. MIRRORS for you to check! It's also in ALL of the checklists!

Scuba_Steve · Post by **Scuba_Steve** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 7:05 pm

Pre approach ban - ' vis is below mins? Just Give'r!'

Post approach Ban - ' lets go VFR and just give'r!'

Rowdy · Post by **Rowdy** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 7:11 pm

Scuba_Steve wrote:Pre approach ban - ' vis is below mins? Just Give'r!'

Post approach Ban - ' lets go VFR and just give'r!'

Classic!

TC! wake up and smell reality!

Mitch Cronin · Post by **Mitch Cronin** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 7:45 pm

There's a grumbly old grunt around here someplace who has a pretty good saying... "Where am I landing, Where is my gear"

kinda reminds me of an older one "where am I sleeping, where is my gear?"

Rockie · Post by **Rockie** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:10 pm

pushyboss wrote:At the risk of hi-jacking this thread I could not dis-agree more about the F-18 guy versus the popnchip hauler. There is significantly more to pilot skills than the ability to throw an over powered fighter through the sky. Speed is relative. The military pilots (fighter jocks in particular) are led around by an array of manpower and technology. Other than basic handling decisions his/her flight is governed and controlled by multitudes of people and paper. The Navajo guy/gal gets up in the morning and figures it out on their own. Usually flying a leaky, cold, underpowered Navajo to East Rubberboot Sask. with little or no backup.

The ability to MANAGE a days worth of flying in crappy conditions with marginal equipment is a much harder skill to learn than the ability to throw an airplane around the sky. Military pilots are very good at what they do, but their skill sets are no more impressive than the Navajo pilot bombing around the north.

With all due respect, you simply do not know what skill sets a fighter pilot must have. Someone who has never done it does not understand the kind of "management" handled by a fighter pilot on any given flight. Flying a single fighter is actually, from a handling aspect, the easiest thing to do because they are designed to be easy to fly. But fighters are not a people mover, they are an airborne weapons platform. They must be "managed" in a way that cannot be understood by people who have never done it.

Leading a formation of fighters is many times more difficult than just flying your own airplane even on a normal flight from A to B. It requires you to fly two, four or more aircraft at the same time with all the same worrysome considerations as one aircraft multiplied. In a tactical situation it becomes incredibly more dynamic and dangerous. Contrary to what you think, technology is just another input that has to be managed. There are no multitudes of manpower and paper that leads a fighter pilot and people who cannot think quickly, both as part of a team and independantly, do not last long.

Flying a 200 and 1/2 approach either as a single or in formation is simply how fighter pilots get home from work, it isn't the actual work. It's the most relaxing part of their day.

I'm not in any way belittling the guy flying a leaky piece of crap up north, or suggesting that they are not skilled at what they do. But I don't think you should pass judgement on fighter pilots when you have no idea what it is they do.

Red Line · Post by **Red Line** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:08 pm

Hedley wrote:I'm probably out in left field, but I teach the GBUMPFH downwind check - even on a fixed gear aircraft. I want to hear the student call out:

Gas - tank - quantity
Brakes - check
Undercarriage - down (and welded!)
Mixture - rich
Pitch - full fine
Flaps
Harness

I agree with your teaching, Hedley, but if I may play devil's advocate for one minute.....if the student is conditioned to to say "undercarriage down" on a fixed gear airplane without actually seeing or touching anything while rhyming off the checks, isn't there a possibility of doing the same when flying the retractable? You know, sure they said "gear down", just like they did the hundreds of other times, but did they actually look at something? See how this can be almost counter-productive?

Again, I agree with you. Just looking at the flip-side.

Red

mellow_pilot · Post by **mellow_pilot** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:17 pm

When is the last time you heard of a military aircraft crashing because it was intentionally over max gross and took off in ice without proper equip, just so that the boss could make and extra $100?

We could sit around all day and debate who's dick is bigger, but I think it's probably best to realise that there are different facets of aviation, and perhaps it would be best to have a beer with the other guy than tell him his job is easy. I mean really, everyone always bitches about how pilots cut each others throats all the time, and then this shit about military pilots suck comes up? WTF?

Hedley, I'm a little surprised at your comment. You are one of the ones always saying how little time actually counts for, that skill isn't always equal to the totals line in a logbook. I've seen tons of posts out of you about how much better a pilot you are for being able to do inverted spins below 1000', and yet you won't throw a little respect at a guy who can demo a hornet? What gives?

grimey · Post by **grimey** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:29 pm

mellow_pilot wrote: Hedley, I'm a little surprised at your comment. You are one of the ones always saying how little time actually counts for, that skill isn't always equal to the totals line in a logbook. I've seen tons of posts out of you about how much better a pilot you are for being able to do inverted spins below 1000', and yet you won't throw a little respect at a guy who can demo a hornet? What gives?

I took his comment as meaning that TT doesn't count for shit, not that military pilots suck. If someone with <1000 hours TT can do a damn fine demo at an airshow, how much can TT really count for?

The difference with the CF-18 pilot is that most of his hours arn't simply enroute time flying from Moosejaw to Cold Lake return, and learning next to nothing in between. A chips & pop hauler is doing exactly that in alot of cases.

mellow_pilot · Post by **mellow_pilot** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:49 pm

Could be right grimey... Perhaps I have mis-read the internet and all it's subtleties (yet again). If that's the case, hedley, my apologies.

adhc2 · Post by **adhc2** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:59 pm

off the original topic but further to catdrivers thread cus its a good one moving the props prematurely to me is akin to gearing down into 1st gear
in a standard shift car at 50kms. approaching a stop sign. I,ve untaught
that bad habit while teaching many a comm,multi ifr student how to fly floats. I,ve seen far to many experienced drivers hurrying up a cold engine or abrupt application of takeoff power. For that matter just because there is a max flap or gear speed does,nt mean thats the speed they should be deployed or flown at. We ask a lot of these machines we fly and I just as soon ask no more of a machine than necessary except when absolutely no other choice is available. I find that aircraft r like women they like to be warmed up and given respect, they seem to respond a whole lot better that way. Sorry guys those rum and eggnogs make want to rattle on

Happy Christmas guys and gals

2R · Post by 2R » Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:05 am

Never teach Downwind Checks as the first time the downwind trained pilot ventures off into the straight in world or gets distracted shooting an IFR approach.The pilot will not do the essential BEFORE LANDING CHECKLIST and we all know how many Mooneys are landed gear -up every year some by the same pilots.

A checklist to be completed requires consideration by those doing the checks.When a pilot is flying a fixed gear aircraft is taught to consider that it is fixed-Down and welded -down and bolted- a thought process that promotes good flying habits occurs.The transition to more complex aircraft is safer and easier for the well trained pilot .Reducing the probabilty of a gear up landing event.If that pilot is also encouraged to check outside the plane as well as asking the person sitting next to them to look outside it promotes active CRM .

I was at the factory when they rolled the first CF-18 out .I have a gold tie pin around here somewhere .It was a Impressive then and still is."Although this generation of fighters has little chance against the next generation of anti-aircraft rockets. Fighter +- 9Gs rockets +=50Gs
Fighter Mach 2 anti -aircraft rockets Mach 9" was what one of the naysayers said about it at the time .Waste of money he said .I think that guy was proved wrong.He had something to do with the Avro Arrow project and was adamant that money spent on rockets was better spent.

Kelowna Pilot · Post by **Kelowna Pilot** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:30 am

(2) There are two kinds of pilots, those who have landed gear up and those who are going to.

So CAT, tell us about the time you landed gear up...

grimey · Post by **grimey** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:05 am

Kelowna Pilot wrote:
(2) There are two kinds of pilots, those who have landed gear up and those who are going to.
So CAT, tell us about the time you landed gear up...

I'm sure he's done it plenty of times in the PBY.

snaproll20 · Post by **snaproll20** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:08 am

Here is a silly one......"We embrace Civil Aviation’s raison d’être "

So why do they keep trying to put Aviation out of business?
This is just one of many TC mission statements that is totally out of synch with what they do.

PeteThePilot · Post by **PeteThePilot** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:15 am

Hey I've got one:

"Pilots are so stupid that they can't even stay on topic in a post"