Previous employer Pria abuse
- Thread starter M5000
- Start date
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Also a fair point.How long can you glide?
Out of control engine fires are pretty rare. Once the motor is shutdown and fuel is shut off at the firewall they usually don’t keep burning.
The study was about fires in the cabin/cargo hold no? Where there is an abundance of flammable material and a good supply of air. Most transport category airplanes don’t crash after and engine fire and I’ve not heard of a PC-12 or caravan crash that was the result of an uncontained engine fire.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ILS37R
Well-Known Member
Heck even Flight Safety for the Caravan generally teaches, okay, here's the in-flight fire checklist. But also, in real life, you really want to think about it before you shut the engine down. There's only one engine and a lot of ways to get a false positive. And even with a true indication, there's still only the one engine.
Actually I taught it and executed it per company sop. The very new assistant chief wanted it done HIS WAY, I always taught and was taught by the company on my initial checkride years ago to do it like that. The ASSisant chief did it his way. Yes there is check list to follow - thrust, prop fuel checklist in that order establish 95 knots land immediately then you do all the other stuff contact atc squawk 7700 but one thing I always emphasized is with an engine fire you want to get on the ground asap the caravan has a fire loop but no way of extinguishing an engine fire. Yes, you can cut fuel but I always teach what if something goes wrong, or the fire has spread outside the engine? Paint burns too, correct? In all my years of teaching never have I heard someone say fly a pattern to the airport to land with an engine fire.
I didn’t mean to come off as arrogant or haughty to people here, but I do take it personal when my competency as a pilot is questioned by anyone especially a d’bag of an assistant chief who as it now turns out falsified my Checkride record with him and the regional I applied to. The fool also said I failed my oral. Unfortunately for him the oral was conducted via CBT and I showed proof to the regional doing the hiring that he altered the score.
One thing about me, I always got and kept records of my checkrides with Martinaire. Thankfully I was able to submit those records to the regional doing the hiring so they can see exactly what he did.
Turns out this is, once the new airline found out, is a non event to them. I am just happy they gave me a chance to tell my side of the story and provide facts to them. I know some companies chose not to do that and will just take thier word. Martinaire clearly got busted on this one. This and guy also accused my personal friend of incompetence and called both the Dalllas and Minneapolis FSDO on him once they terminated him for thier own crappy maintenance when the autopilot on his plane decide to bank him right into the path of an incoming AA 787 at DFW. The result of that was he passed his examination ride and the Minneapolis FSDO said we’re going to keep the results of this we think your lawyer might need it.
I also want to clarify that we as pilots are always learning new things and we should be humble enough to accept that. It’s when we stop learning, refused to be questioned that as we can see in aviation history, that bad thing happen. However when I see someone who uses the checkride event as a weapon or uses it to fire people that really gets to me.
I also would like to thank everyone for their advice on here, I do appreciate it. May you all have blue skies and a strong tailwind! Good health to you all.
Last edited:
Not having been there in the situation with the OP and his company, I would have to hear for myself what the ACP means by the term “traffic pattern”. I mean, in a single engine airplane or helicopter, even if you spiral down to a landing somewhere relatively close below you during an engine failure/fire, you’re going to have to set up some form of at least an abbreviated type of traffic pattern at the bottom end, in order to maneuver and get lined up at the appropriate place(s) so as not to over/undershoot the landing area.
Not knowing the situation, I don’t know whether the term “traffic pattern” is being used in the sense I’m using it here, or whether its being used to mean a proper-style rectangular traffic pattern with an upwind, and downwind, a base and a final……all flown at a singular altitude until descending on base leg.
In same example above, I have different techniques personally whether it’s a single-engine airplane or whether it’s a single engine-helicopter. In an airplane, which mostly glides well, I’ll shut an engine down that is on fire….shut the fuel off etc, as it may take time…depending on altitude…to reach a suitable area, and I’d prefer not to having things burning for long. Helicopters have the very cool ability to allow a pilot to take an airborne emergency, and turn it into a ground emergency pretty quickly. But in a single-engine helo, autorotation engine-off isn’t a good glide. Some single-engine helos autorotate/glide better than others due to being high versus low inertia rotor systems. For example, in the single-engine UH-1 Huey, with loss of the engine and resultant autorotation, the wide chord rotor blades and semi-rigid rotor system is high inertia and very efficient in storage of potential energy (so long as the pilot uses proper rotor speed management, and even if not, its forgiving), that the areas I can make an autorotative glide to, are anywhere from right underneath me, all the way to far out ahead in the front windscreen. Even then, I can get down to the deck and hover for a bit with no power in order to select an actual touchdown area that I want, because the Huey preserves it’s rotor speed so well.
Conversely, in a bird like a Hughes/MD 500/520 or such, with a very low inertia rotor system with narrow blade area, it doesn’t preserve rotor speed well when the powerplant stops or is shut down, and it doesn’t quickly regain rotor speed that is lost. In those helos, when the engine fails, the area you can autorotate/glide to is somewhere right underneath you, to somewhere in the chin-bubble area…..ie- not a great glide ability. And when you get down to a flare to touchdown point, you are touching down wherever is underneath you…..good or bad, since the rotor speed will disappear quick, hopefully you picked a suitable place. Where I’m going with this, is that in a single-engine helo, I personally don’t want to shut an engine down that is on fire and still producing power, because I can enter an “autorotative descent”, basically a rapid descent with power. And because nearly anywhere is suitable as a landing spot, I can be on the ground very shortly, and at least use the power still being produced to make a fast descent but managed touchdown, instead of having one emergency (fire) and turning it into two emergencies (fire + no-power autorotation). Only big thing to have to keep SA on during a rapid autorotative descent with power, is to avoid overspeed of the rotor system by managing it correctly.
So yeah, different techniques for different situations. In all the above scenarios, some form of maneuvering to set up for final approach……a type of pattern, no matter how abbreviated……will have to be done. Whether or not this is the definition being used by the ACP and there’s some form of miscommunication going on, I do not know.
Not knowing the situation, I don’t know whether the term “traffic pattern” is being used in the sense I’m using it here, or whether its being used to mean a proper-style rectangular traffic pattern with an upwind, and downwind, a base and a final……all flown at a singular altitude until descending on base leg.
In same example above, I have different techniques personally whether it’s a single-engine airplane or whether it’s a single engine-helicopter. In an airplane, which mostly glides well, I’ll shut an engine down that is on fire….shut the fuel off etc, as it may take time…depending on altitude…to reach a suitable area, and I’d prefer not to having things burning for long. Helicopters have the very cool ability to allow a pilot to take an airborne emergency, and turn it into a ground emergency pretty quickly. But in a single-engine helo, autorotation engine-off isn’t a good glide. Some single-engine helos autorotate/glide better than others due to being high versus low inertia rotor systems. For example, in the single-engine UH-1 Huey, with loss of the engine and resultant autorotation, the wide chord rotor blades and semi-rigid rotor system is high inertia and very efficient in storage of potential energy (so long as the pilot uses proper rotor speed management, and even if not, its forgiving), that the areas I can make an autorotative glide to, are anywhere from right underneath me, all the way to far out ahead in the front windscreen. Even then, I can get down to the deck and hover for a bit with no power in order to select an actual touchdown area that I want, because the Huey preserves it’s rotor speed so well.
Conversely, in a bird like a Hughes/MD 500/520 or such, with a very low inertia rotor system with narrow blade area, it doesn’t preserve rotor speed well when the powerplant stops or is shut down, and it doesn’t quickly regain rotor speed that is lost. In those helos, when the engine fails, the area you can autorotate/glide to is somewhere right underneath you, to somewhere in the chin-bubble area…..ie- not a great glide ability. And when you get down to a flare to touchdown point, you are touching down wherever is underneath you…..good or bad, since the rotor speed will disappear quick, hopefully you picked a suitable place. Where I’m going with this, is that in a single-engine helo, I personally don’t want to shut an engine down that is on fire and still producing power, because I can enter an “autorotative descent”, basically a rapid descent with power. And because nearly anywhere is suitable as a landing spot, I can be on the ground very shortly, and at least use the power still being produced to make a fast descent but managed touchdown, instead of having one emergency (fire) and turning it into two emergencies (fire + no-power autorotation). Only big thing to have to keep SA on during a rapid autorotative descent with power, is to avoid overspeed of the rotor system by managing it correctly.
So yeah, different techniques for different situations. In all the above scenarios, some form of maneuvering to set up for final approach……a type of pattern, no matter how abbreviated……will have to be done. Whether or not this is the definition being used by the ACP and there’s some form of miscommunication going on, I do not know.
The old school FEVER check comes to mind when determining whether a fire light is real or not; as reacting to just a light only, could lead to shutting down an engine where it may be a false indication. Any or all of these can confirm the validity of a fire light:
Fluctuating fuel flow,
Excessive TGT/ITT/TIT
Visual indications of a fire
Erratic engine operation
Rough engine operation
Same with the idea of restarting an engine that has been shut down inflight, the three F’s. Do not restart an engine that was shut down for:
Fire: known/confirmed fire
FOD: or other damage to the engine itself
Frozen: unable to windmill, or locked up in some form
In this case Mike, it was a straight in to the runway. No setup to a pattern was necessary.
I assume, with altitude allowing for a straight-in, and no excessive altitude needing to be lost to make the straight in happen? In that case, yeah, no semblance of a pattern needed. And even so, if the runway can be legitimately made straight-in with the altitude at hand, there probably wouldn’t be the ability to fly a pattern of any kind engine-out anyway, and still make the runway.
Autothrust Blue
"Well, on the Brasilia..."
Hopefully, you’ll learn that the big piece of advice your attorney is invariably going to give you - “shut your frakking mouth” — is good advice, sooner than later.
Boots2Wings
Just happy to be here.
I know right? I quite literally spit my coffee out on the ramp, laughing when I saw PilotFighters reaction.
KLB
Well-Known Member
Yeah. When in doubt, go by the procedure. And if you have a problem with the procedure? Take that up with the CP/DO/Training Department/Standards Department. Jostling with the check airman during the checkride will only lead to bad things happening.
What are you talking about? It’s always a great idea to argue with the check airman on the checkride, especially during a maneuver. By telling them they are completely wrong and showing them up, theres a very good chance they will come to the realization that you are right and they are completely and utterly wrong, will see their own error and change their mind and their ways, and will pass you.
KLB
Well-Known Member
What are you talking about? It’s always a great idea to argue with the check airman on the checkride, especially during a maneuver. By telling them they are completely wrong and showing them up, theres a very good chance they will come to the realization that you are right and they are completely and utterly wrong, will see their own error and change their mind and their ways, and will pass you.
I can see this users "See what happen was" story being very interesting during an interview.
moxiepilot
Well-Known Member
Final advice then...
If you're not the CP, then the ACP is your superior. If he wants it done his way, then here's a little helpful phrase to get you through the day: "get along to move along." Just smile, nod, think internal thoughts and get through the ride.
If they say you failed your oral, you failed your oral like it or not. They are a DE/DPE and you are not.
Aviation is too small a community to publicly call out an ACP as an ASS, fool or douchebag. You better believe that he knows other folks in the industry and will be called by your future employers to determine if you are hire-able.
With your other posts of lawsuit, etc. and your name-calling I'd just recommend stopping. No more posts to this thread, no more ranting about former employers no matter how upset you are. You are not helping yourself one bit.
WacoFan
Bigly
So weird...are you trying to tell me that my behavior on this website...in front of people that may be in the recruiting/hiring process for places people want to work...could have an impact on employment opportunities? What F^$#ery is that! In the years since I've joined, literally NOBODY has said anything like that! This sounds like fake news to me.
It would be totally intolerable if my tangles with @Seggy kept me out of his carrier, or @Derg years-long frustration with my behavior on his website be the reason I am not a widget person. And don't even get my started on that dweeb @DPApilot - I even bought him food once and he won't help me do anything. The only person I've earned hatred from is @jtrain609 but I'm okay with that.
In reality this, like the intubation of the unvaccinated suffering from COVID, is an example of something that is as predictable as could be - new member burning bridges. The consistency of people doing that on JC is comforting.
