Instrument approach question
- Thread starter Screaming_Emu
- Start date
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
[ QUOTE ]
Considering the fuel gauges tend to read correct only when they're empty, it might be tough to detect an uneven fuel burn in the Nole.
Although, if you had a nice, metered system in there, that would definately be a valid reason.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was a fueler once. Started from left to right....Ran out of gas after i had done the right side, and only got started on the left. Truck out, and the farm broke. There's a scratcher....Is there a max imbalance limitation?
Considering the fuel gauges tend to read correct only when they're empty, it might be tough to detect an uneven fuel burn in the Nole.
Although, if you had a nice, metered system in there, that would definately be a valid reason.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was a fueler once. Started from left to right....Ran out of gas after i had done the right side, and only got started on the left. Truck out, and the farm broke. There's a scratcher....Is there a max imbalance limitation?
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Nope, no situation. Just "Crossfeed the left engine from the right tank......okay, now crossfeed the right engine from the left tank......Good. You can go back to both now." If he gave a scenario, it would be easier to swallow. What gets me is the guy seriously thinks the POH was written incorrectly. Wish I could just change the POH to suit my needs. Personally, I think Vmc should be about 40 kts.
Not aware of a max imbalance limit, but I'll check the POH later tonight.
Not aware of a max imbalance limit, but I'll check the POH later tonight.
I know it's not the same as a Seminole, but our C310 has 2 mains, 2 aux's, and 1 wing locker tank. The only way to use the wing locker fuel is to transfer pump it to the left main tank and if you don't crossfeed the right engine you end up with uneven fuel (and reduced range). Not sure why that DE wants to see it done in the 'Nole, but there are cases were we do it for real on other aircraft.
mastermags
Well-Known Member *giggity*
Sounds sort of like my DE on my multi checkride. He didn't want to see any aileron use in my Vmc demo, even though the POH says to bank into the operating engine. Even when I was in a 20 degree bank away from the operating engine at 20 knots above Vmc, the DE slapped my hand when I tried to use the ailerons to roll the plane level and told me to only use the rudder. When I did it my way, banking into the operating engine at no more than 5 degrees, the stall horn went off and I recovered (before the roll ever happened). He told me that's not how he wanted to see me do it; he only wanted to see my use rudder....
So he thinks his way goes before the POH and the PTS... I just said "ok", and took my pass.
BTW, what part of the PTS could the examiner fail you for not crossfeeding both engines?
So he thinks his way goes before the POH and the PTS... I just said "ok", and took my pass.
BTW, what part of the PTS could the examiner fail you for not crossfeeding both engines?
mastermags
Well-Known Member *giggity*
Hey Kyle, you recognize my avatar?
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Sounds sort of like my DE on my multi checkride. He didn't want to see any aileron use in my Vmc demo, even though the POH says to bank into the operating engine. Even when I was in a 20 degree bank away from the operating engine at 20 knots above Vmc, the DE slapped my hand when I tried to use the ailerons to roll the plane level and told me to only use the rudder. When I did it my way, banking into the operating engine at no more than 5 degrees, the stall horn went off and I recovered (before the roll ever happened). He told me that's not how he wanted to see me do it; he only wanted to see my use rudder....
[/ QUOTE ]
He did that because he realized that the loss of control is below stall speed with the aileron help, so all you'd be doing then is a simple stall recovery at the horn, which isn't what you're there for.
By eliminating the aileron, you'd get to see the loss of control first, and recover from that. Just in case, you know, you ever fly a plane with Vmc above stall
Sounds sort of like my DE on my multi checkride. He didn't want to see any aileron use in my Vmc demo, even though the POH says to bank into the operating engine. Even when I was in a 20 degree bank away from the operating engine at 20 knots above Vmc, the DE slapped my hand when I tried to use the ailerons to roll the plane level and told me to only use the rudder. When I did it my way, banking into the operating engine at no more than 5 degrees, the stall horn went off and I recovered (before the roll ever happened). He told me that's not how he wanted to see me do it; he only wanted to see my use rudder....
[/ QUOTE ]
He did that because he realized that the loss of control is below stall speed with the aileron help, so all you'd be doing then is a simple stall recovery at the horn, which isn't what you're there for.
By eliminating the aileron, you'd get to see the loss of control first, and recover from that. Just in case, you know, you ever fly a plane with Vmc above stall
mastermags
Well-Known Member *giggity*
He did it because the ailerons on the DC3 are so big and create so much drag that you could get in a cross controlled stall if you use aileron. Thing is, I'm flying a Duchess. My point is, you do what the POH for that particular airplane says, and you conduct the test according to the POH. This wasnt a "helpful hint" durning the checkride... this was a "what the hell are you using aileron for, you are doing it wrong!!!" kind of thing.
GaTechKid
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
He did that because he realized that the loss of control is below stall speed with the aileron help, so all you'd be doing then is a simple stall recovery at the horn, which isn't what you're there for.
By eliminating the aileron, you'd get to see the loss of control first, and recover from that. Just in case, you know, you ever fly a plane with Vmc above stall
[/ QUOTE ]
It is valuable to show a student what a Vmc episode looks like but denying the student the ailerons isn't a very realistic and useful of way of accomplishing your goal. A better way to create a Vmc encounter in the training environment is to block the rudder.
He did that because he realized that the loss of control is below stall speed with the aileron help, so all you'd be doing then is a simple stall recovery at the horn, which isn't what you're there for.
By eliminating the aileron, you'd get to see the loss of control first, and recover from that. Just in case, you know, you ever fly a plane with Vmc above stall
[/ QUOTE ]
It is valuable to show a student what a Vmc episode looks like but denying the student the ailerons isn't a very realistic and useful of way of accomplishing your goal. A better way to create a Vmc encounter in the training environment is to block the rudder.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
[ QUOTE ]
By eliminating the aileron, you'd get to see the loss of control first, and recover from that. Just in case, you know, you ever fly a plane with Vmc above stall
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, considering that not using the aileron can increase Vmc by as much as 20 kts, most DEs just block the rudder. Plus, if ya look in the PTS, it says to recover at the stall horn or loss of control, whichever occurs first. So, recovery at the stall horn is totally legal.
By eliminating the aileron, you'd get to see the loss of control first, and recover from that. Just in case, you know, you ever fly a plane with Vmc above stall
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, considering that not using the aileron can increase Vmc by as much as 20 kts, most DEs just block the rudder. Plus, if ya look in the PTS, it says to recover at the stall horn or loss of control, whichever occurs first. So, recovery at the stall horn is totally legal.
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By eliminating the aileron, you'd get to see the loss of control first, and recover from that. Just in case, you know, you ever fly a plane with Vmc above stall
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, considering that not using the aileron can increase Vmc by as much as 20 kts, most DEs just block the rudder. Plus, if ya look in the PTS, it says to recover at the stall horn or loss of control, whichever occurs first. So, recovery at the stall horn is totally legal.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand that, and I'm saying, having done my multi training with a DE, that he explained for the exact reason in my previous post as to why some examiners do it with just rudder. They want to see that you know how to react to the loss of directional control, not a stall horn. Yes, the PTS says that you can do it with both and recover at the stall horn, but some DE's make an assumption that you won't always be flying a Seminole where Vmc is 45 (example purposes only, I forget what it really is) and Vs is 55.
[ QUOTE ]
By eliminating the aileron, you'd get to see the loss of control first, and recover from that. Just in case, you know, you ever fly a plane with Vmc above stall
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, considering that not using the aileron can increase Vmc by as much as 20 kts, most DEs just block the rudder. Plus, if ya look in the PTS, it says to recover at the stall horn or loss of control, whichever occurs first. So, recovery at the stall horn is totally legal.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand that, and I'm saying, having done my multi training with a DE, that he explained for the exact reason in my previous post as to why some examiners do it with just rudder. They want to see that you know how to react to the loss of directional control, not a stall horn. Yes, the PTS says that you can do it with both and recover at the stall horn, but some DE's make an assumption that you won't always be flying a Seminole where Vmc is 45 (example purposes only, I forget what it really is) and Vs is 55.