Exactly...
And I don't shift into low gear until I am stopped and want to get going again.
This nonsense of increasing RPM when more power is not needed started some decades ago at the FTU level probably because the added noise gave some instructor a woody.
It is now almost a have to do action because the training industry has allowed it to continue.
Here is my bottom line on this subject.
I have been flying and teaching people to fly multi engine airplanes since 1957 I think it was.
Unlike some of the instructors and TC inspectors I have yet to damage or lose control of an airplane yet and my flying has been in some of the most demanding areas of aviation there is.
Each of you that have a license are free to operate your own airplane any way you want.
If you fly my airplane you will operate it the way I require, if you are my student and you do not want to operate the airplane the way I teach that will be the end of the lessons.
Go find another instructor.
Hey, that is not all that difficult to understand is it?
Multi engine training.
-
CpnCrunch
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 10:46 pm
Chuck Ellsworth wrote: No he was not.
And once more I do not operate or teach others to operate aircraft in non conformance of POH.
I am really getting fed up with people who keep trying to make it look like I operate outside of the rules and regulations so why don't you find someone else to irritate?
I never said you were operating outside the rules. You can do things differently from the POH without breaking the rules, depending on how exactly it is phrased.
I assume it was a PA-23, as you mention owning a Geronimo. The POH says (for approach/landing checks):
"RPM should be left at high cruising RPM, or approximately 2400. This propellor setting gives ample power for an emergency go-around and will prevent overspeeding of the engines if the throttle is advanced sharply."
So, it seems reasonable for the instructor to increase RPM during the downwind / pre-landing checks as that is what the POH recommends. It's also reasonable for you to require an instructor to ignore that recommendation when flying your plane (as it isn't a prohibition). It's also reasonable for the instructor to refuse to fly that way and for you to later fire him.
It doesn't really seem reasonable, however, for you to go calling this instructor "incompetent" on every aviation forum in Canada simply for following the POH, IMHO.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
Once again Cpn Crunch I am tired of your constant googling of my background and your nit picking of my posts.
So find someone else to irritate.
So find someone else to irritate.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
I copied the following from Pprune as example of the quality of my flight training when I worked in the industry.
I must be getting old because I get so irritated by posters like CpnCrunch who keep on nit picking my posts.
For a long time BPF constantly did exactly what Crunch is doing so I quit posting on the other forum, and I am getting tired of the same crap here.
BPF was fired because I did not feel he was competent to the level I wanted a flight instructor to be.
He of course is welcome to argue his position, but I am tired of someone else defending something they have no personal knowledge of.
By the way my rates were very high for my instruction and I had more work than I could handle and that to me is what mattered.
*************************************************************************************************************
[quote][url=http://www.pprune.org/members/213968-pby]PBY[/url]
Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Around the corner Posts: 114
Chuck was the only guy I met in my flying carrier who could properly teach landings. Before you stone me on this forum, realize, that I am not saying that he is the only guy who can teach landings properly. I only said he is the only guy I met in my 10000 hrs of flying who could do it. Thanks to him I can relieve the suffering of many post-traumatic-airline-training-department-disorders.
Airline instructor, unless he she has a previous instructing background, is just trained to recognise somebody's mistakes, but is not equipped with the tools
How to fix them. Airline instructor was not even trained to give instrument rating or a licence. Just renew it.airline instructor can only give a type rating to pilots, who are supposed to know how to fly. And now we get the co pilots with 150 hrs total (60 hrs actual flight time). Coming in. They don't even have a license to take their mother up in a Cessna on a nice Sunday afternoon. And these guys are the future instructor pool. So that is the reason we have all these "arrivals". Of course everybody makes mistakes sometime and that is normal. But to many airline guys the last 50 feet of flight is a mystery even more compounded by the educationally non-equipped training departments. So they know only firm landing as opposed to long greaser. Not too many seem to know you can still land nicely right at the touch down zone.
Who is gonna cast the first stone? [/quote]
I must be getting old because I get so irritated by posters like CpnCrunch who keep on nit picking my posts.
For a long time BPF constantly did exactly what Crunch is doing so I quit posting on the other forum, and I am getting tired of the same crap here.
BPF was fired because I did not feel he was competent to the level I wanted a flight instructor to be.
He of course is welcome to argue his position, but I am tired of someone else defending something they have no personal knowledge of.
By the way my rates were very high for my instruction and I had more work than I could handle and that to me is what mattered.
*************************************************************************************************************
[quote][url=http://www.pprune.org/members/213968-pby]PBY[/url]
Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Around the corner Posts: 114
Chuck was the only guy I met in my flying carrier who could properly teach landings. Before you stone me on this forum, realize, that I am not saying that he is the only guy who can teach landings properly. I only said he is the only guy I met in my 10000 hrs of flying who could do it. Thanks to him I can relieve the suffering of many post-traumatic-airline-training-department-disorders.
Airline instructor, unless he she has a previous instructing background, is just trained to recognise somebody's mistakes, but is not equipped with the tools
How to fix them. Airline instructor was not even trained to give instrument rating or a licence. Just renew it.airline instructor can only give a type rating to pilots, who are supposed to know how to fly. And now we get the co pilots with 150 hrs total (60 hrs actual flight time). Coming in. They don't even have a license to take their mother up in a Cessna on a nice Sunday afternoon. And these guys are the future instructor pool. So that is the reason we have all these "arrivals". Of course everybody makes mistakes sometime and that is normal. But to many airline guys the last 50 feet of flight is a mystery even more compounded by the educationally non-equipped training departments. So they know only firm landing as opposed to long greaser. Not too many seem to know you can still land nicely right at the touch down zone.
Who is gonna cast the first stone? [/quote]
-
CpnCrunch
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 10:46 pm
When you keep calling someone incompetent, you have to expect a certain amount of "nit picking". So far you don't seem to have addressed my comments. Unless I'm missing something, the action in question is perfectly reasonable, and not "incompetent". You feel you have the right to call people incompetent because they don't fly precisely the way you want them to, and if anyone questions the facts you just say they are "nit picking".
I'm pretty sure you were an excellent instructor.
I'm pretty sure you were an excellent instructor.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
HPC, the method you describe is excellent especially for light aircraft.
The prop RPM issue is a separate discussion and is more dependent on the airplane being flown.
For instance big radials such as in the DC3 /C117 /DC6 ect. are operated above the zero thrust setting at all times therefore you do not increase prop RPM at reduced power settings such as on the appproach for a landing because that reduces positive thrust.
I should maybe apologize for my annoyance with CpnCrunch but I finally am getting tired of his constant questioning most every opinion I have, so I finally got to the point where I decided to tell him find someone else to troll.
I do plan on writing some interesting ideas on how to fly airplanes based on what I learned over the many decades I was flying for a living.
The flying I enjoyed most was Aerial application, especially in helicopters.
The part of the industry I like the least is the FTU mentality.
The prop RPM issue is a separate discussion and is more dependent on the airplane being flown.
For instance big radials such as in the DC3 /C117 /DC6 ect. are operated above the zero thrust setting at all times therefore you do not increase prop RPM at reduced power settings such as on the appproach for a landing because that reduces positive thrust.
I should maybe apologize for my annoyance with CpnCrunch but I finally am getting tired of his constant questioning most every opinion I have, so I finally got to the point where I decided to tell him find someone else to troll.
I do plan on writing some interesting ideas on how to fly airplanes based on what I learned over the many decades I was flying for a living.
The flying I enjoyed most was Aerial application, especially in helicopters.
The part of the industry I like the least is the FTU mentality.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
Great post heavy744 that really added useful content to the forum.
Instead of making snide remarks why not post some useful advice on the art of flying?
Instead of making snide remarks why not post some useful advice on the art of flying?
-
HiFlyChick
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 9:54 pm
First off - I'm getting the same thing as Chuck - can't quote people.... (due to change in s/w?)
Colonel said:
"Changing the engine RPM rapidly is very bad if you have crankshaft counterweights (4 cyl Lycs do not, 6 cyl Lycs do, as an example),
as they can be damaged...."
That's interesting to know about the 4 vs the 6 cyl Lycoming, Colonel - I'm only familiar with the 6, so I was gonna put my two cents worth in about overspeeding the prop, too (but didn't realize the 4 didn't have the same problem).
"It makes you sound like a real putz, too.... Pisses the neighbours off, too."
Not to mention the paying passengers! Our pilots are taught to not only baby the aircraft, but as a second priority to make everything as pleasant as possible for the guys who are paying the bills.
Just a note to whomever asked about overspeed, not only can you do it by shoving the prop levers, you can get the same brief overspeed on T/O too if you shove the throttles (at least on some aircraft). Not to say that you need to take a long time putting props (or throttles) forward, but you just shouldn't shove the levers - push rapidly, sure, but not shove. A subtle but very real difference. Even during training and engine out practice, you don't need to shove - the time difference is maybe half a second....
I think Chuck also mentioned that it's ridiculous to put the props forward for the whole approach. I'm not sure either why you'd need the props forward for the whole approach (are there some fundamental differences in certain types of aircraft, or between light, medium and heavy twins?), but I certainly don't put the props forward until inside the FAF when I'm getting power and speed back.
On an IFR approach, so long as I have the props forward before decision height, then I'm ready for the overshoot. On a visual, I don't wait until the flare, but do wait until the power is way back - I can tell I've got it right by the fact that there's virtually no change in the sound. And another argument against shoving... if my timing is off and I've started putting the props forward too soon (i.e. with too much power), I can hear it and pause, because I'm doing it smoothly, not shoving. So I stop, leave them where they are and then continue after the power is back where it should be.
I get people's concern with being ready for the overshoot, which can get busy at DH especially with the ground so close, but an overshoot from 1000+ ft AGL has lots of time to get yourself established (at least in the little planes I fly - probably the guys that fly the heavy metal would disagree, but then again, they aren't worried about props anyway)
Colonel said:
"Changing the engine RPM rapidly is very bad if you have crankshaft counterweights (4 cyl Lycs do not, 6 cyl Lycs do, as an example),
as they can be damaged...."
That's interesting to know about the 4 vs the 6 cyl Lycoming, Colonel - I'm only familiar with the 6, so I was gonna put my two cents worth in about overspeeding the prop, too (but didn't realize the 4 didn't have the same problem).
"It makes you sound like a real putz, too.... Pisses the neighbours off, too."
Not to mention the paying passengers! Our pilots are taught to not only baby the aircraft, but as a second priority to make everything as pleasant as possible for the guys who are paying the bills.
Just a note to whomever asked about overspeed, not only can you do it by shoving the prop levers, you can get the same brief overspeed on T/O too if you shove the throttles (at least on some aircraft). Not to say that you need to take a long time putting props (or throttles) forward, but you just shouldn't shove the levers - push rapidly, sure, but not shove. A subtle but very real difference. Even during training and engine out practice, you don't need to shove - the time difference is maybe half a second....
I think Chuck also mentioned that it's ridiculous to put the props forward for the whole approach. I'm not sure either why you'd need the props forward for the whole approach (are there some fundamental differences in certain types of aircraft, or between light, medium and heavy twins?), but I certainly don't put the props forward until inside the FAF when I'm getting power and speed back.
On an IFR approach, so long as I have the props forward before decision height, then I'm ready for the overshoot. On a visual, I don't wait until the flare, but do wait until the power is way back - I can tell I've got it right by the fact that there's virtually no change in the sound. And another argument against shoving... if my timing is off and I've started putting the props forward too soon (i.e. with too much power), I can hear it and pause, because I'm doing it smoothly, not shoving. So I stop, leave them where they are and then continue after the power is back where it should be.
I get people's concern with being ready for the overshoot, which can get busy at DH especially with the ground so close, but an overshoot from 1000+ ft AGL has lots of time to get yourself established (at least in the little planes I fly - probably the guys that fly the heavy metal would disagree, but then again, they aren't worried about props anyway)
-
Chuck Ellsworth
My faith in pilots has been given a boost tonight because finally we have someone who gets it, thanks HiFly.
This subject is all about being an aviator instead of a mindless robot and operating your machine as smoothly and carefully as possible..
Selecting props to climb or full RPM can be done at any time you are at a power setting where the prop RPM does not surge up, such as close final.
I chose to leave then in cruise until I close the throttle/'s for the touch down on every piston engine airplane I flew unless I had a need to increase RPM for a missed approach which in almost every case will not come as a sudden surprise.
The difference in time to select higher RPM as needed compared to hearing the prop noise the higher RPM produces is probably a second or two and if that short time means the difference between losing control of the thing you should look for another way to earn a living.
Now back to HiFlyGirl....
I clearly remember the first time I got to fly the Navajo it was in 1970, a was flying a DC3 for an oil company and they wanted me checked out on their Navajo. I had been flying the DC3 for over five thousand hours at that time and the difference in prop noise was quite noticeable and took a bit of getting used to.
Jesus 1970, I am getting old.
This subject is all about being an aviator instead of a mindless robot and operating your machine as smoothly and carefully as possible..
Selecting props to climb or full RPM can be done at any time you are at a power setting where the prop RPM does not surge up, such as close final.
I chose to leave then in cruise until I close the throttle/'s for the touch down on every piston engine airplane I flew unless I had a need to increase RPM for a missed approach which in almost every case will not come as a sudden surprise.
The difference in time to select higher RPM as needed compared to hearing the prop noise the higher RPM produces is probably a second or two and if that short time means the difference between losing control of the thing you should look for another way to earn a living.
Now back to HiFlyGirl....
I clearly remember the first time I got to fly the Navajo it was in 1970, a was flying a DC3 for an oil company and they wanted me checked out on their Navajo. I had been flying the DC3 for over five thousand hours at that time and the difference in prop noise was quite noticeable and took a bit of getting used to.
Jesus 1970, I am getting old.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post