R
Roger, Roger
Guest
Yeah doing a gear swing using the proper procedure is scary enough in those airplanes, not to mention doing some ghetto-rigged procedure like that. *shudder*
Poor RG...
- Thread starter Nick6485
- Start date
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
I didn't say I condoned it, but I was pointing out that you can inadvertently retract the nose gear and have the mains remain in place.
Douglas
Old School KSUX
Fixed it.
--------
Every flight school should have a no T&G policy in complex aircraft.
In GA aircraft, the further the gear handle is from the pilot, the better.
----
I'm glad the pilot was okay. I also vote the C-182RG as a best in show for like aircraft.
R
Roger, Roger
Guest
They're a pain in the butt to work on (at least compared to, say, a Lance or Arrow).
Douglas
Old School KSUX
Now that is a gear system I can get behind.
Gear shouldn't look like they need to be broken before being retracted. :laff:
gomntwins
Well-Known Member
As has been said, it sounds like you have to pull the handle out then push it up. But, how much do you think about that motion when you do want to retract the gear? I've been flying nothing but complex airplanes for a lot of years and the motion required to move a gear handle is second nature. I can't remember the last time I had to tell myself to pull the lever out, hell I don't know if I've ever had to think much about it. Personally, I've never geared up an airplane, but I don't think it's the physical differences in handles that has ever stopped me, instead it's me moving the right handle/lever at the proper times.
It's too bad. Stuff like this is often preventable. But, nobody hurt, so bent metal isn't the end of the world either.
Why have the risk factor? All it takes is one accident like this and:
1) Plane is off the books for mx,
2) Someone has to pony up for the deductible, and
3) Maintenance fees + Increased insurance premiums = Higher rental cost.
Why even risk that?
Agreed. If you're going to teach rejected landings, nothing should be touched until you're flying again anyway, so actually stopping after a landing (which can be the difficult part for some students) shouldn't be a problem.
Add another +1 here.
Sounds about right. This is not going to be a cheap "oops".
-mini
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
Why? Just because you don't feel comfortable with them, doesn't mean you can push your opinion on every pilot out there. It not your certificate on the line, only the other guy's.
I disagree. Having a "no touch and go" policy on RG aircraft due to risk management, is like trying to cure the headache by cutting off the head.
I think it's better to train people to do the procedure right and methodical to where they don't grab the wrong handle on a T&G, rather than just prohibit it and not have pilots have to actually deal with being a pilot and having the SA to do things right.
wjmiller3
Well-Known Member
Your missing the point... If I owed the aircraft, and I could prevent this from happening by implementing a no touch and go policy, then guess what the policy is going to be?
Where I trained we could not do T/G's in complex for this reason. Also with the exception of short field landings I do not let the student touch ANYTHING in the aircraft until we are off the runway and to a full stop. People start messing with flaps, tuning radio freqs, leaning mixture, ect, they get a hand slap. The focus should be elswhere...
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
That's fine, but to come out and say that EVERYONE shouldn't be allowed to do T&G's in a complex is ridiculous. If the owner of the plane is comfortable with it, and the flight school is comfortable with it, and you've got a reason to do it, go for it.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
Ever looked at the price of a C152 lower rudder attach bracket? About 5 large.
A seatbelt/no smoking sign cover for our Lear 55 cost $1,600. A piece of plastic about 6 inches long and 2 inches high, and a little bit of paint....$1,600.
Douglas
Old School KSUX
It may be cutting the head off, but we don't need the head. I don't know how to teach rational thinking, but I can tell them to stop the plane plane first.
IMO, it is a better option.
I don't know why students move so fast.
Exactly.
You don't know how to teach guys to be pilots? Thats, in essence, what you're saying. (not bagging on you, just debating).
Hell, you want to really manage risk? Keep the plane tied down in its parking spot.
Risky flying is a guy going into known icing. Or truly dumb stuff that is beyond the capabilities of the aircraft and/or prohibited. A touch and go should be a normal event, and the SA to do it right, is what should be getting taught. In my opinion.
I see the logic behind your way of thinking, but by attempting to shield people from "potenitally dangerous" maneuvers, they're not learning how to think and do it right. Instead of a no touch and go policy, how about enough dual in the aircraft before getting released solo, to where the pilot can execute profesionally and methodically....just as in any other maneuver? Or are touch and go's in the RG prohibited by dual crews too?
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
To quote Enterprise..."Not exactly".
It's just as easy to forget to put the gear down as it is to grab the wrong lever on the "go". It's also super easy to land on the nose wheel in an RG Cessna.
If you're concerned about a T&G gone wrong, then you're probably worried about the other 1,001 ways a student can crack an airplane, so you probably shouldn't be renting out your airplane.
Nick6485
Well-Known Member
Ridiculous
Also found out this plane is most likely going to be a total loss. Add in the prop, engine, cowling, gear doors, other misc parts, labor...and the bill is up there.
What's your reason to do the touch and go? What are you accomplishing that you can't accomplish with a full stop landing (other than increasing the workload when it's unnecessary)?
-mini
Douglas
Old School KSUX
Ha, I even came up here during the 3rd quarter to change my reply because on second thought I think I took it down specifics on a broad topic.
Not fast enough.
-------
True, it is all about risk management. Prohibiting T&G is a quick way to mitigate risk the flight schools (and students) have in complex training.
It's nothing personal to our students ability and we think waiting until the airplane is off the runway is great decision making in reducing gear ups.
I agree that it would be best if we could teach the pilot to stop retracting gear up. I still don't know how to do it though with out putting them in a position where when I'm not there to stop them, the squat switch is.
When they get all grown up and fly their own planes then they can do whatever flow they like...unfortantely just like a lot of what flight school really is ;"you find out how to do that later".
----
The whole group of people, from chief down to the wet endorsement can't do T&G.
----
You know come to think of it even six months ago when I had a ride with a Fed, I put the Carb heat in on a C-182rg while still on the runway, and from the whole ride, that is what he talked to the chief about.
I don't know what the Feds will say further on in my career, but for right now it really is looked down on.
Flight schools have a long way to go in the training that is provided.
I come from the "hertz" school.
I would have to look it up but that is not what a study found. I think it was the Navy that did a study and the end result was that the best position of the gear handle was in the most inconvenient and out of sight position from the pilot.
Why?
Because putting the gear down is easy to remember with many warnings, brining them up is often a matter of moving too fast without thinking and by the time you flip it up, it is too late.
I doubt i will ever find that study again.
It's probably the fourth quarter by now.... gotta run
tgrayson
New Member
Highly experienced and skilled people make stupid mistakes all the time, so clearly you can't train this sort of thing out of a human being. The wisest pilots don't put themselves in situations where these mistakes are catastrophic.