Tomo with no brakes? No, Pud with no brakes

[pudestcon]

On reading Tomo’s account (in the ‘Gazelle Belly Flop’ thread) of flying the Jab back home without brakes I thought I would post my experience over the last couple of Sundays regarding no brakes on the Thruster T500 I have been flying out of Northam in the Avon Valley, WA.

 

 

On the 1st Sunday the owner told me that the brakes were disconnected (don’t come standard on a Thruster anyway) so I would need to watch it when doing the ignition checks and at the hold point prior to entering the runway for the take off run. I found even on warm up that the aircraft was just on the point of wanting to move off and taxiing was slightly faster than I was used to, so much so that just before getting to the hold point I had to shut down and roll to a stop at the hold point. I did all my pre-take off checks with the engine shut down, then on restarting and rolling onto the runway for take off (after doing a radio call) I did the ignition checks whilst rolling. The flight was very pleasant and satisfying with the morning being absolutely perfect for a local flight. On the rollout after landing I found that the Thruster did not want to slow down to what I considered was a comfortable pace before exiting the runway so I switched of one ignition circuit which gave me very little in the way of slowing down. I did however assess that I was slow enough to exit the runway and duly taxied back to the hangar, albeit at a faster pace then normal. It requires some extra forward planning when taxiing at a faster pace then normal but was easily enough handled.

 

 

The next Sunday I found the brakes had not yet been reconnected, and the landing gear tyres were a little soft so I added some air, which had the effect of decreasing tyre/tarmac resistance so much easier to start moving without brakes. An added complication was that Northam was hosting a “Dawn Raid” where visiting aircraft arrive for a BBQ breakfast and a competition – trouble was they decided to use the non preferred 32 runway (no wind so 14 should have been used). Now picture this – More aircraft then normal on the field both in the circuit, taxiing and parked up, people walking around airside, balloon operations and sight seers: and me having to taxi past this lot to the non-preferred runway in an aircraft without brakes. I thought long and hard about using what to me was the correct runway but opted (wisely I think) to use the in use runway 32. At start up on the apron the T500 started to roll almost straight away so I taxied to a larger vacant apron area and positioned the aircraft facing up a slight rise where I could do the warm up. During this period I took the opportunity to reassess the situation and made the decision to return to the hangar and not fly with the congested (relatively speaking) ground conditions present at the time. I know the decision was a correct one to make but had runway 14 been in use then I would have flown and done it in a safe way.

 

 

This Sunday morning I am going to Northam to fly the T500, still without brakes, and will assess the situation at the time before flying, to make sure it is completely safe for me to operate the aircraft including ground handling. Nothing unusual about that really – it’s what we all do every time we fly; assess the situation as presented.

 

 

Sorry for the long post, but please give me your thoughts. I think my neck is out far enough:peepwall:

 

 

Pud

 

 

[sseeker]

I've flown a T300 with no brakes with my instructor and I wasn't really all that concerned. It was fairly different going from an aircraft with brakes to something without. He told me an easy way to slow down on the taxiway or runway is to weave from side to side (also giving you excellent visibility in a high attitude tail dragger) I can see problems arrising when you need to abort a takeoff or conduct a forced landing (although I'm sure you'd stop pretty fast.)

 

Good luck with the T500 on Sunday, looks like beautiful flying weather for both of us. I'm up at Bindoon from 1030 till 1600 for some time in the Jab, if you were on 126.7 I'd listen out for you, but I guess not i_dunno

 

-Andrew

 

 

[Tomo]

Good story Pud.

 

Many thrusters I know of haven't/ or don't have working brakes. Many smaller ultralight aircraft I've flown don't have any/or not very good brakes either, and in a tail drager you don't want good ones anyway, but suffice to say, they did have a little bit of friction. Sometimes not quite enough to hold you to do runups though, so you either do it on the roll (always best on gravel anyway) or find a bit of grass, or a rut to put your wheel on.

 

Another way to do your runups is to put a rock/wood under the wheel... warm up, runups... rev up and taxi over the rock or wood. Job done.

 

Leaving the tyres slightly spongy would probably help taxiing issues, but you just have to consider the performance loss on take off.

 

It's up to you whether you consider it safe, like you did last time, so have fun. I always like to encourage people to drive like you don't have brakes - though you do - it's amazing what you can do if you try.

 

I drove a ute from Brisbane without using the brakes the whole way (only used the hand brake) 300 or more klms. Before you all strangle me, it did have brakes, but every time you used them the front wheel would lock up, and stay locked up, so you had to pull the wheel off, and release the caliper. (not lock up solid, just the caliper pressure stayed applied, so it heated up - was still drivable) (fixed it the next day, just at that time of night I didn't feel like it). But it just requires planning ahead, and trying to sight read what other drivers are going to do! In my case I could use them if I had to. So was quite safe.

 

Anyway getting off the point ain't I.... Swerving works, looks amusing to sight seers I'm told.... but You do what you have too.

 

As a matter of interest, I wonder if Instructors should do a "brakeless" lesson, just to show the student what to do. I've had people tell me after my expedition the other day - That they wouldn't have thought about all this stuff. Now that may make pilots fly away like I did without brakes, but at least a lesson on ''brake failure" after landing, would probably be handy for some. Just a thought.

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

No brakes, don't you just put it in reverse?

 

 

[Tomo]

No brakes, don't you just put it in reverse?

When mine let go the other day... I thought, "oh wouldn't that be so handy!!" I pulled back on the throttle to see If I could get reverse, but it didn't work!

 

The first time I used reverse in the Cresco, I thought, gee this is good.... :thumb_up:

 

 

[pudestcon]

I've flown a T300 with no brakes with my instructor and I wasn't really all that concerned. It was fairly different going from an aircraft with brakes to something without. He told me an easy way to slow down on the taxiway or runway is to weave from side to side (also giving you excellent visibility in a high attitude tail dragger) I can see problems arrising when you need to abort a takeoff or conduct a forced landing (although I'm sure you'd stop pretty fast.)Good luck with the T500 on Sunday, looks like beautiful flying weather for both of us. I'm up at Bindoon from 1030 till 1600 for some time in the Jab, if you were on 126.7 I'd listen out for you, but I guess not i_dunno

 

-Andrew

G'day sseeker,

 

Yes, Sunday is looking to be an absolute corker for flying. I'm flying from 0800 or so as I need to be back in Perth by 1200. I'll be on 124.2 but might monitor 126.7 for a bit.

 

I haven't used the 'weave' technique (for slowing down purposes) yet but will do so on Sunday just to give it a go and see what happens.

 

Happy flying

 

Pud

 

 

[Spin]

Wot not even size 10 Nike brakes? Once saw a fella in a single seat trike stop in a cloud of dust, having just about worn through the soles of his shoes on the over run.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

...As a matter of interest, I wonder if Instructors should do a "brakeless" lesson, just to show the student what to do. I've had people tell me after my expedition the other day - That they wouldn't have thought about all this stuff. Now that may make pilots fly away like I did without brakes, but at least a lesson on ''brake failure" after landing, would probably be handy for some. Just a thought.

Good idea Tomo.

 

I think I'll give it a try, just to see how far I roll without using brake. Not that the one I have (drum brake on front wheel only) is anything to write home about, but it does help. I use it very lightly on gravel anyway, for obvious reasons.

 

Having flown both types, the XT-912 with main wheel disk brakes is significantly more effective than the front wheel drum.

 

 

[Spin]

I drove a ute from Brisbane without using the brakes the whole way (only had the hand brake) 300 or more klms. Before you all strangle me, it did have brakes, but every time you used them the front wheel would lock up, and stay locked up, so you had to pull the wheel off, and release the caliper. (fixed it the next day, just at that time of night I didn't feel like it). But it just requires planning ahead, and trying to sight read what other drivers are going to do! In my case I could use them if I had to. So was quite safe.

Geez Tomo you're a glutton for punishment lately, I'm afraid that sounds like a daft thing to do. All very well moving from one property to the next out bush, but around the big smoke that's a recipe for getting cleaned up. A good part of city or highway driving is anticipation and the reverse side of the coin is that you are best off not doing anything unexpected either, lest the tradies ute rise up and smite you about the bumper bar!

 

By way of example, I ground to a halt in traffic the other day and very nearly got taken out because said tradie saw all 3 lanes brake then resume rolling (except for me). What he couldn't see was that a ladder had fallen off the ute in front of me and the Holden wasn't likely to clear it. So despite all 3 brake lights blazing, he kept coming at me until the last second before sliding to a halt in a cloud of his tyre smoke, causing much angst further back in the queue. Your locking brake caliper could result in the same scenario, never mind where you need to brake hard and then jump on the gas to avoid something.thumb_down I reckon the 6 P's pretty much covers it.

 

 

[Tomo]

Geez Tomo you're a glutton for punishment lately, I'm afraid that sounds like a daft thing to do. All very well moving from one property to the next out bush, but around the big smoke that's a recipe for getting cleaned up. A good part of city or highway driving is anticipation and the reverse side of the coin is that you are best off not doing anything unexpected either, lest the tradies ute rise up and smite you about the bumper bar!By way of example, I ground to a halt in traffic the other day and very nearly got taken out because said tradie saw all 3 lanes brake then resume rolling (except for me). What he couldn't see was that a ladder had fallen off the ute in front of me and the Holden wasn't likely to clear it. So despite all 3 brake lights blazing, he kept coming at me until the last second before sliding to a halt in a cloud of his tyre smoke, causing much angst further back in the queue. Your locking brake caliper could result in the same scenario, never mind where you need to brake hard and then jump on the gas to avoid something.thumb_down I reckon the 6 P's pretty much covers it.

Ah Spin.... the joys on only knowing a little bit of the story.....

 

You could still drive it with the locked caliper... for a bit, just got rather hot, and started smoking... ;) I actually didn't plan the trip that way... I picked up the ute and was on the freeway, when the smoke started to form... so that was the first signs of trouble Funny thing was it didn't have much of a pull on the steering wheel.

 

Btw, all this was at 9pm one night... and I wasn't driving around the city - obviously that would be stupid!

 

And if someone run up the back of me... well, that is their small problem. It's called being aware of your surroundings, and don't take it for granted!! I saw a classic example of that once, when this guy powered off at the lights... only the car in front didn't have as such a heavy foot...

 

Sorry.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Wot not even size 10 Nike brakes? Once saw a fella in a single seat trike stop in a cloud of dust, having just about worn through the soles of his shoes on the over run.

That would have been great to watch.

 

 

[Spin]

Ah Spin.... the joys on only knowing a little bit of the story.....

 

Sorry.

And who was telling the half story?

 

No mate, you can justify it all you like, but there is a common theme of pushing the limits and cutting down your options for when the rest of your luck deserts you - that's when it ends in tears and sadly not always those of the person causing the mayhem. Been there, got the scars to prove it.

 

 

[Barefootpilot]

Hey Pud,

 

Now i waged in on Tomo's thread but I believe this is a little different. If the aircraft is desinged with no brakes and is configured correctly then operating without them is not to much of a problem. I've flown plenty of Thrusters without brakes (its actually an illegal mod on most Thrusters to have brakes!) but they must be set up correctly. The idle needs to be low enough to allow the aircraft to roll to a stop - this often means that the engine will be running rough with a 503/582 but if you don't you won't stop! The wheels also need to be a little soft and even with the bearings slightly stiff to help slow down. It also helps if you can operate of a grass strip or the grass beside the strip. It requires more planning ahead but most of the time can safely be done.

 

Sounds like you made the right choice on the morning it was busy its really embaressing running into another aircraft with you feet out the door trying to slow down!

 

Adam.

 

 

[Guest rocketdriver]

Hi Pud

 

when I was regularly flying a t300, I made up a pair of wooden chocks and drilled a hole cross wise through the base of them both. Through the holes went a rope with a large knot on the end and long enough that I could pull the chocks out after run up ..... Its also good not to have to go near (or have a helper go near) a spinning prop when removing chocks, so I used them on the Tiger Moth too .....

 

RD

 

 

[Tomo]

And who was telling the half story?No mate, you can justify it all you like, but there is a common theme of pushing the limits and cutting down your options for when the rest of your luck deserts you

It was an illustration of the fact that FAR TOO many people rely on brakes to much (ie, pushing the limits). I only told a little of the story to imply it can be done if you care to try it. (the vehicle I had to do it in, wasn't modified at all, it still HAD full operative brakes - just I didn't use them - because of a safety reason - which was I didn't want to blow a tyre because of it over heating) Automatic vehicles these days tend to create a sense of reliance in them, because your rather stuck without them in an auto.

 

You can argue the fact that it shouldn't happen, this and that etc... but the fact of the matter is - I'd rather be able to handle the situation when it does, than to have an accident because I never knew what to do. Not an excuse to go around doing clearly dangerous things, do it somewhere you can do it safely.

 

Like a simulated engine failure in an aircraft. You should hear some people go off about doing that! I just hope I'm never their passenger when the day comes and they have never done it. Remember it is always simulated in a safe environment, and if it ever looks unsafe - it's aborted.

 

If you look at other side of the coin, I'm not trying to promote bad stuff at all - but actually prepare people for various problems.

 

People thinking they are saving fuel by coasting down the range and end up in an emergency stopping bay dumb founded as to what happened etc... people that go way to fast on gravel roads and end up in the trees... people that don't realize what a heavy trailer does to your performance "Oh it pulls it fine" and takes out the next T intersection dead end sign...

 

Some don't ever realize the dangers involved, I lot of the time you can sense if it isn't going well, and should steady up one way or the other.

 

If you ever do a defensive driving course - or a safety driving course you find out these various things - bit like doing EMT training I reckon.

 

I don't like the idea of giving people a fish, I like it when you give a person a fishing line, and teach him how to use it.

 

 

[blueshed]

Reverse is the go! amazing what it can save you from! and don't cars have reverse! OMG amazing the inventiveness of the country! Nessesity (spelling) was it the mother of invention, or the invention the mother of it?

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Reminds me of a story. A few years back when Lee Ungerman was instructing up this way in a T500 out of Starke Field (then Ace Base) we got to fly into RAAF Townsville for an open day static display. Several aircraft went in including a few Drifters as I remember. Lee didn't have a whole heap of hours at the time, and he and I flew the T500 over, with him as PIC.

 

I had on a new pair of Blundstone ringer boots, and the T500 had no brakes. As we taxyied in past F 111s and Orions on what seemed like endless concrete, the single Blundstone was out the door often to moderate taxi speed.

 

We departed around three that afternoon, and once again as we taxied past a large audience, and several RAAF fighter jet crews, the Blundstone brakes got a fair workout.

 

Just as we lined up for takeoff, the tower controller passed on to us that the fighter jet pilots were particulary impressed with out aircrafts' braking system !!.............Maj...

 

 

[facthunter]

In the grass.

 

Yeah the frictionless tarmac gets you. In the grass they don't need brakes. Just to show that we do not need to go BACK (To the weeds) we demonstrate how adaptable we are. In your capable hands. Basics are flexible.. Nev

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Hey Tomo, how old are you mate??... Just curious.

 

 

[Mazda]

Sorry guys, I'm not with you on this one at all. Yes, things fail. If your brakes fail on landing you do need to deal with it. But to taxi and take off again knowing you have failed brakes is at the least poor airmanship and at the worst it is just negligence.

 

Using the engine failure analogy, yes, engines fail, but if you had a partial engine failure you wouldn't go flying again without having the engine looked at, would you?

 

 

[facthunter]

Agree.

 

Right as usual M. It is a question of attitude or culture. You either accept a disciplined way of doing it , or you don't. The culture of safety does have a LOGIC to it . Nev

 

 

[pudestcon]

Sorry guys, I'm not with you on this one at all. Yes, things fail. If your brakes fail on landing you do need to deal with it. But to taxi and take off again knowing you have failed brakes is at the least poor airmanship and at the worst it is just negligence.Using the engine failure analogy, yes, engines fail, but if you had a partial engine failure you wouldn't go flying again without having the engine looked at, would you?

You talking to me Mazda?;)

 

If so, can you give me your opinion regarding my T500 Thruster being restored at the moment? Should I or should I not fit brakes? I can fly it legally without brakes, but what happens if I fit brakes and the brakes become inoperable - can I still fly it and would you consider me negligent if I did fly it without operating brakes?

 

Maybe I should take Maj's (and others) suggestions and chuck in a spare set of Blundstones or lightweight chocks (with rope attached) when I need stopping power.

 

Cheers,

 

Pud

 

 

[pudestcon]

The culture of safety does have a LOGIC to it . Nev

Oh so right Nev:thumb_up:

 

I believe the safety logic goes something like this....

 

Spot the hazard

 

Assess the risk

 

Make the change if needed.

 

Pud

 

 

[Tomo]

Hey Tomo, how old are you mate??... Just curious.

18 and 8 months :big_grin:

 

But to taxi and take off again knowing you have failed brakes is at the least poor airmanship and at the worst it is just negligence.Using the engine failure analogy, yes, engines fail, but if you had a partial engine failure you wouldn't go flying again without having the engine looked at, would you?

Mazda: We are/were talking about Pud here, so please forgive Pud - I've caused a thread drift for you again ....

 

Yes and No Mazda - I totally agree though. But part of Airmanship is about assessing the risks, and making a wise decision - is it not? Yes.

 

In my case, I did my own assessment and risk analyses. 'Then' called on other experienced persons, pilots. Two of them know me and my flying ability, if they thought it not safe for me to do, they would have flown up the parts so I could repair it (highly experienced pilots and mechanic). The aerodrome I had to go to had two huge runways, grass exit points if need be etc... appropriate. It wasn't an ideal situation to be in, but I wasn't relying on my own basic analyses, I had others - they knew I was capable of operating it like it was. The airfield that I departed from was perfect for it - grass everywhere, helpful ground crew that made sure it all went smoothly. And kept people away.

 

Ok, so if the same scenario happened to me in say - a busy environment, I had to go to somewhere I didn't know, I didn't have the help needed, I only had myself to confide in, I was on tarmac for start up, there were people everywhere, I didn't have experience in aircraft without brakes etc... The assessment process would have picked this up, and an appropriate decision made from it - which in this case, would be deemed not safe, and or appropriate.

 

Please, please don't think I'm trying to talk myself out of it - I'm telling you what I did, what I assessed, and why I made the decision to do what I did. Where do you draw the line, yes - a thorough analyses and risk assessment would pick that up. I do risk assessments everyday, it's part of working on huge machinery, and equipment that can kill you with-in seconds. I have made bad assessments before, but the person never to make a mistake never did anything. You learn from it - just like I have this incident, even though it was deemed ok from a dozen sources, half of them knowing how I perform, and what I planned on doing.

 

The message I'm trying to get across (and for the general public) is. Do your own risk assessment and analyze what you plan on doing. (This is all part of our training as pilots). "Then" ask someone else with lots of experience to do it also for you. That way you aren't looking through 'she'll be right' glasses. But you have to remember that at the end of the day you're are the one responsible for your own safety.

 

I'm not totally oblivious to all this, I have friends that fly in PNG, every single flight is a complete risk analyses. One friend no longer up there flew for 25 odd yrs back in the day when It was all real 'stick and rudder' stuff, no glass cockpits, no GPS. I have his experience to draw from when I need to as well. He must have done something right to be here now.

 

Once again I'm not trying to put across that "I'll be right". I'm just trying to say I really do try and be the safe pilot I was trained to be. And I listen to you all with respect. That is why I love this place, that is why I'm fairly avid/enthusiastic in the aviation circles. I have some down right awesome friends. That is why I ask a lot of questions, and try to help others also. What I learn/learnt I try to pass on. Do with it as you wish. That is why I really try and support this site, and tell "real" stories, even at the risk of being ridiculed senseless. It helps those that are shy, or embarrassed about asking various things.

 

One of reasons I highly support the fact that no question is a stupid question, no matter how often it is asked. I've seen it - I've had students when I was at college actually come an ask me something in private about a subject or whatever because he was scared to be ridiculed in a class room. I try and put this across, because it is a tragic thing these days.

 

I know I'm only young, but I've been brought up by awesome parents, I've had some experiences some people dream about, I try and get people to realize their dream. Think outside the box, give it a go. I'm fairly often told I have a talent for everything. No not really, I just give it a go. I'm a practical person, so maybe It just looks that way. I've been extremely privileged in a lot of things. I don't deny that one bit, and it was all because of others helping out, giving information, telling stories. I love talking to people because they tell you interesting things.

 

I've still go a lot to learn yet, and that is why I like to listen, hear about others experiences. And talk to anyone.

 

Sorry I've gone on a bit, but I've just got to clear this silly little thing up. I understand what you all are saying, I totally agree. That is why I try and ask around before doing things, and gain as much information about it before going there. And learn from it.

 

Sincerely

 

Tom

 

 

[Tomo]

Oh so right Nev:thumb_up:I believe the safety logic goes something like this....

 

Spot the hazard

 

Assess the risk

 

Make the change if needed.

 

Pud

Spot on Pud - unfortunately some don't see the hazards (hazards are exceptionally dependent on ALL things also)