Breakout 91.213 discussion from Icing thread...
- Thread starter SteveC
- Start date
Re: Icing
Mike, I never said I didn't like the military way, I was just ignoring you.
In fact the Citation and Lears that I fly have similar checklist items, but I didn't want to get off track from the other discussion which was centered on the single-engine GA type operations. The C550 and LJ45 checklists have items that are marked to indicate first flight of the day items, and we also have a separate checklist for Quick Turns. I don't recall off the top of my head if there is a written definition on what time limit constitutes a "Quick Turn" as opposed to "Same Day" though. Anyway I'm on board with that whole concept, I'm just philosophically opposed to stroking your ego by agreeing with you too often.
I would say, "no," simply because I don't think a significant number of accidents would be prevented by such a system in the civilian/GA world. More procedures and regulations are the last thing I'm interested in
But it is interesting how the military spells everything out like that.
you're both dangerous.
Just thought I'd let you both know that.
Since you both don't like the military way of preflights and thruflights.
Carry on.
Mike, I never said I didn't like the military way, I was just ignoring you.
In fact the Citation and Lears that I fly have similar checklist items, but I didn't want to get off track from the other discussion which was centered on the single-engine GA type operations. The C550 and LJ45 checklists have items that are marked to indicate first flight of the day items, and we also have a separate checklist for Quick Turns. I don't recall off the top of my head if there is a written definition on what time limit constitutes a "Quick Turn" as opposed to "Same Day" though. Anyway I'm on board with that whole concept, I'm just philosophically opposed to stroking your ego by agreeing with you too often.
Duck_Twacy
Well-Known Member
Re: Icing
My point wasn't about the order of regulations - sorry if that wasn't obvious - but rather what was in the ones in question.
My specific point was this:
"If it says I don't need a landing light to do pattern work in the daytime I'm not checking it."
Happy to clarify further if you still don't understand my logic.
My point wasn't about the order of regulations - sorry if that wasn't obvious - but rather what was in the ones in question.
My specific point was this:
"If it says I don't need a landing light to do pattern work in the daytime I'm not checking it."
Happy to clarify further if you still don't understand my logic.
ppragman
No pasa nada.
Re: Icing
There are a couple of outfits up here that have that, fairly rare though. Personally I think its a great idea, the problem is that most GA stuff isn't complex enough to merit it (IMO) and anything big enough to merit it is usually flown by two pilots on the Civvie side of things.
There are a couple of outfits up here that have that, fairly rare though. Personally I think its a great idea, the problem is that most GA stuff isn't complex enough to merit it (IMO) and anything big enough to merit it is usually flown by two pilots on the Civvie side of things.
HARRY POTTER
New Member
jrh
Well-Known Member
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
Re: Icing
It takes 5 minutes to change a nav light... and if you catch it during the day while maintenance is around you might be saving someone's night flight.... because they'll find it burned out when nobody is around to fix it...
Just sayin
It takes 5 minutes to change a nav light... and if you catch it during the day while maintenance is around you might be saving someone's night flight.... because they'll find it burned out when nobody is around to fix it...
Just sayin
HARRY POTTER
New Member
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
Re: Icing
Well if you're in the pattern I would think that the current ATIS is sufficient... if you're at an airport with no weather... what's a weather briefing going to tell you?
Well if you're in the pattern I would think that the current ATIS is sufficient... if you're at an airport with no weather... what's a weather briefing going to tell you?
jrh
Well-Known Member
Re: Icing
Whoa, hang on, I never said anything about not doing a weather briefing!
I said a *full* weather briefing. Maybe I could have been more clear about that. When I take a trip somewhere, I get a full briefing. And by "full" briefing, what I mean is, I'm looking at METARs, TAFs, area forecasts, radar pictures, satellite pictures, winds aloft forecasts, etc. The full deal.
When I go out to zip around the pattern a few times, I look at METARs and TAFs, and that's about it. Do you think looking at satellite pictures and winds aloft forecasts are really critical for staying in the local area? If so...why?
Have you read the rest of this thread yet?
Your question is basically what SteveC and I went back and forth about for three pages or so.
The answer lies in what one considers to be a "partial" preflight. I consider my method to be a complete preflight for the flight at hand. I don't check equipment that I reasonably expect to have a near zero chance of needing.
You can read the rest of this thread to see our thoughts in depth.
Whoa, hang on, I never said anything about not doing a weather briefing!
I said a *full* weather briefing. Maybe I could have been more clear about that. When I take a trip somewhere, I get a full briefing. And by "full" briefing, what I mean is, I'm looking at METARs, TAFs, area forecasts, radar pictures, satellite pictures, winds aloft forecasts, etc. The full deal.
When I go out to zip around the pattern a few times, I look at METARs and TAFs, and that's about it. Do you think looking at satellite pictures and winds aloft forecasts are really critical for staying in the local area? If so...why?
Have you read the rest of this thread yet?
Your question is basically what SteveC and I went back and forth about for three pages or so.
The answer lies in what one considers to be a "partial" preflight. I consider my method to be a complete preflight for the flight at hand. I don't check equipment that I reasonably expect to have a near zero chance of needing.
You can read the rest of this thread to see our thoughts in depth.
USMCmech
Well-Known Member
I'm with jrh on this one.
If a piece of equipment is not likely to be required on a given flight, then there really isn't a need to check it. Same goes for weather briefings, full gas tanks, paper W&B, ect.
I think is absolutely nesacery to teach students to think for themselves and evaluate the risks of each flight. Rather than just doing something "because my CFI said to". Treating student pilots like children is very common, but does not prepare them for the real world after they earn their liscense.
If a piece of equipment is not likely to be required on a given flight, then there really isn't a need to check it. Same goes for weather briefings, full gas tanks, paper W&B, ect.
I think is absolutely nesacery to teach students to think for themselves and evaluate the risks of each flight. Rather than just doing something "because my CFI said to". Treating student pilots like children is very common, but does not prepare them for the real world after they earn their liscense.
Re: Icing
Wow, great discussion. First let me say that I am on the Jrh side here, sorry Steve no soup for you. I would like to pick apart a couple things though:
To answer this let me copy and paste from the regulation, pay attention to the bolded words:
If I am in a non-turbine small aircraft, the equipment isn't part of VFR type certification or aircraft's equipment list or 91.205 or part of an airworthiness directive, placarded or removed, and I have determined it to not cause a hazard to the flight then I am fine. So the remedy to avoid this seems to be just mark everything you don't need in these lists as INOP. Seems kind of silly but you are completely within the regulations if you do that.
My reply to the FAA would be similar to this. Point out how this regulation reads and ask him/her, seriously and not with sarcasm, if they really want me to mark everything not on the lists as INOP. Explain that I checked each item on the lists as well as any other items I felt were pertinent to safety for this flight.
That said, my agreement with Jrh isn't on the basis of this regulation. It is simply to teach what is necessary to be safe and live to fly another day. We have to draw a line in what we teach somewhere. I want my students to know 91.205 like the back of their hand and check for that. I also want to see weight and balance, takeoff/landing distances, and an applicable weather brief for the operation being conducted.
Using their brain space to memorize a 101 item preflight check leads me to believe that something far more dangerous will be forgotten in their training. What is it mike calls this, target fixation? Focus on one problem too much and you lose the big picture perspective. I believe it applies well to this scenario.
A little nit pick here that I have mentioned various times in the past. Primacy says that what we are taught first we remember. It doesn't mention anything about items that are omitted from training cannot be learned later. After all, this is the premise that building block learning is designed around.
Mike: I think that military checklist idea would be great for us. I am all for structure. I would want a good, FAA approved, and well laid out professional checklist available for each aircraft. If they could do that, I would be happy. The checklists we have are just absurd: often over worded, poorly laid out, and just cumbersome to use in the cockpit.
A 3-fold approved checklist that fits on my kneeboard with all of the flight checks on on side, flip over for emergencies, and open up for ground checks (the way DWC made them) is MUCH easier and safer IMO. I will try to get some pictures for an example later.
Wow, great discussion. First let me say that I am on the Jrh side here, sorry Steve no soup for you. I would like to pick apart a couple things though:
To answer this let me copy and paste from the regulation, pay attention to the bolded words:
MR. FAA said:
If I am in a non-turbine small aircraft, the equipment isn't part of VFR type certification or aircraft's equipment list or 91.205 or part of an airworthiness directive, placarded or removed, and I have determined it to not cause a hazard to the flight then I am fine. So the remedy to avoid this seems to be just mark everything you don't need in these lists as INOP. Seems kind of silly but you are completely within the regulations if you do that.
My reply to the FAA would be similar to this. Point out how this regulation reads and ask him/her, seriously and not with sarcasm, if they really want me to mark everything not on the lists as INOP. Explain that I checked each item on the lists as well as any other items I felt were pertinent to safety for this flight.
That said, my agreement with Jrh isn't on the basis of this regulation. It is simply to teach what is necessary to be safe and live to fly another day. We have to draw a line in what we teach somewhere. I want my students to know 91.205 like the back of their hand and check for that. I also want to see weight and balance, takeoff/landing distances, and an applicable weather brief for the operation being conducted.
Using their brain space to memorize a 101 item preflight check leads me to believe that something far more dangerous will be forgotten in their training. What is it mike calls this, target fixation? Focus on one problem too much and you lose the big picture perspective. I believe it applies well to this scenario.
jtrain said:
A little nit pick here that I have mentioned various times in the past. Primacy says that what we are taught first we remember. It doesn't mention anything about items that are omitted from training cannot be learned later. After all, this is the premise that building block learning is designed around.
Mike: I think that military checklist idea would be great for us. I am all for structure. I would want a good, FAA approved, and well laid out professional checklist available for each aircraft. If they could do that, I would be happy. The checklists we have are just absurd: often over worded, poorly laid out, and just cumbersome to use in the cockpit.
A 3-fold approved checklist that fits on my kneeboard with all of the flight checks on on side, flip over for emergencies, and open up for ground checks (the way DWC made them) is MUCH easier and safer IMO. I will try to get some pictures for an example later.
Re: Icing
I can't help that I'm right.
Actually, I'm not right......blame the military for that info
I can't help that I'm right.
Actually, I'm not right......blame the military for that info
jrh
Well-Known Member
Re: Icing
Oh. Wow. I only skimmed that thread just now, but the bits I read were...impressive...to say the least.
Oh. Wow. I only skimmed that thread just now, but the bits I read were...impressive...to say the least.
HARRY POTTER
New Member
Re: Icing
Look, I'm not going to convince you otherwise, so it's not worth wasting my time. If you want to teach your students it's OK to only follow the regulations that you feel like following, or that it's OK to just do the preflight items that you feel like doing, then go right ahead. I just hope your students get a chance to fly with a real instructor who knows a thing or two about aviation safety because you obviously don't. I wish you luck, because you'll need it when that day comes when you get ramp checked by the FAA.
Look, I'm not going to convince you otherwise, so it's not worth wasting my time. If you want to teach your students it's OK to only follow the regulations that you feel like following, or that it's OK to just do the preflight items that you feel like doing, then go right ahead. I just hope your students get a chance to fly with a real instructor who knows a thing or two about aviation safety because you obviously don't. I wish you luck, because you'll need it when that day comes when you get ramp checked by the FAA.
jrh
Well-Known Member
Re: Icing
Oh my...I don't know what else to say. You got me laughing out loud at this one. Have a nice day.
Oh my...I don't know what else to say. You got me laughing out loud at this one. Have a nice day.
Re: Icing
Okay, what you still don't understand is the type of community we have going on here. JRH has a LONG history of excellent posts, even temperaments, and clear evidence of being a dedicated and knowledgeable instructor.
Read the ENTIRE thread to get everything JRH has said in context. Then look at his post history to see what kind of person he is.
Other people in this thread have disagreed with JRH in a very respectful way - these people have read the entire thread and have provided their opinions based on the context of the discussion. You have not.
Is that what JRH was advocating?
I hope they do to - assuming I had students. Which I do not. Which you would have known if you came to JC with an open mind ready to learn instead of with guns blazing looking for a fight.
And look - I understand the internet is usually a place of mindless anonymity - but JC is different. I'll throw out the olive branch to you - none have taken it so far but maybe you'll rise above the rest. My name is Ian, I fly helicopters for the US Army in Connecticut. What is your name and what do you do?
Okay, what you still don't understand is the type of community we have going on here. JRH has a LONG history of excellent posts, even temperaments, and clear evidence of being a dedicated and knowledgeable instructor.
Read the ENTIRE thread to get everything JRH has said in context. Then look at his post history to see what kind of person he is.
Other people in this thread have disagreed with JRH in a very respectful way - these people have read the entire thread and have provided their opinions based on the context of the discussion. You have not.
Is that what JRH was advocating?
I hope they do to - assuming I had students. Which I do not. Which you would have known if you came to JC with an open mind ready to learn instead of with guns blazing looking for a fight.
And look - I understand the internet is usually a place of mindless anonymity - but JC is different. I'll throw out the olive branch to you - none have taken it so far but maybe you'll rise above the rest. My name is Ian, I fly helicopters for the US Army in Connecticut. What is your name and what do you do?
First of all, the preflight check shouldn't be memorized. There's no need for it. If they do it enough, eventually they'll get it into a flow, but even if they don't, there's no reason why it's not okay to go around the plane with a checklist and just do the whole thing as a read-and-do.
Secondly, if they do develop a flow, it's a lot easier to just check something even if you're not going to need it - the flow is pretty much something you don't have to think about, whereas pausing to ask yourself "am I going to need the pitot heat on this flight?" may end up requiring more mental capacity. If it's not working, then you can stop and decide what you want to do about it. It also puts the seed in their mind that it's okay to skip it, and if they do it enough it may end up as the routine, which is a recipe for trouble should the day come where they actually do need it and skip it anyway.
My two cents.