Langewiesche on Pilot proficiency • 1970 article

[Garfly]

 

https://airfactsjournal.com/2021/05/wolfgang-langewiesche-on-pilot-proficiency/

 

 

[walrus]

Good idea, but we would mess the execution up.

[facthunter]

You will find the type of person who  will put more effort into rorting the system than is needed to comply with it.. One of the most careful pilots I ever knew flew into  a cliff face in cloud.  He was Aviating but not Navigating... There is a practical limit to how far you go to assess people where it becomes more effort than a guaranteed result (impossible) could justify.. Some famous pilots had deep weaknesses. Kingsford Smith  was reputedly scared of night flying . The plane he flew that damaged the prop. on the starboard  engine was in a poor state of repair due lack of funds. You can pick issues with people you crew with when the pressure's on.. Some might as well be down the back with the other passengers. 

[Old Koreelah]

There are a few lessons for RAA pilots there, but we don’t need a formal “badge” system to tell us if we improving. Every flight could be set up as a challenge to test our planning.

We could use our OzRunway tracks to check how accurately we fly circuits, etc. 

In the near future I plan to practice EFATO turn backs while at altitude directly over our airport, so that the OzRunways track are laid over the actual strips. Confined with careful recording of the gauges, this could show if my turns could have made it to the cross runway, etc.

[Old Koreelah]

On 10/05/2021 at 4:29 PM, Old Koreelah said:

We could use our OzRunway tracks to check how accurately we fly circuits, etc. 

In the near future I plan to practice EFATO turn backs while at altitude directly over our airport, so that the OzRunways track are laid over the actual strips. Confined with careful recording of the gauges, this could show if my turns could have made it to the cross runway, etc.

This morning I finally got to do this over 1000’ above our circuit.

Was surprised to lose no more than 200’ during the two simulations and easily lined up the cross strip. OzRunway tracks seem to show I could have comfortably made it.

Not advocating anyone ignore good advice, but the paddocks directly ahead are pretty rough and usually full of big black cattle.

[turboplanner]

2 minutes ago, Old Koreelah said:

This morning I finally got to do this over 1000’ above our circuit.

Was surprised to lose no more than 200’ during the two simulations and easily lined up the cross strip. OzRunway tracks seem to show I could have comfortably made it.

Not advocating anyone ignore good advice, but the paddocks directly ahead are pretty rough and usually full of big black cattle.

I'm not advocating doing this physically in case something goes wrong, but now allow six seconds for "shock value" the this can't be happening/flicking a few switches etc. You know your distance per second at circuit speed and you can scale the strip quite accurately using Google earth. It would be interesting to see how much further on that curve starts. Also, with what's visible in the photo, would you really want to squeeze into the last part of the cross runway and risk hitting the fence vs straight ahead where you might experince some bumps, albeit having to steer through the cattle. Also there's the pre-knowledge where you set the engine-fail before the cross strip. What is your mind-set, having done all those simulations if on the very next non-sim flight the engine fails just as you get to the cross-strip. I've tried many different ways to really test myself for (a) an instant sub 50/100 reaction to do what I've drilled to do vs (b) the six second "why is this happening to me" delay, by telling the Instructor to pick a random time, randomly deciding the engine just cut, even getting someone to set a stop-watch alarm, but in all those cases, I knew I'd get a failure at some point so didn't make any mistakes.

[facthunter]

6 seconds is a lot of time. You can reduce that by prebriefing yourself before commencing the take off roll.. Nev

[Old Koreelah]

41 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

... now allow six seconds for "shock value" the this can't be happening/flicking a few switches etc.

Valid comments, Turbs. A couple of seconds of “startle” time is built into this simulation, but every takeoff should include the Murphy factor. (Who was it that said we should not be surprised when the engine stops, but surprised when it doesn’t.)

Those two turns were pretty leisurely; I could do better.
As shown on the tracks, I like to drift to the left, just in case. A failure below 300’ means I should make it back onto the runway line and get down on the long gravel strip ahead. After that point I can turn onto the cross strip, but that “window” is pretty small. 
Beyond that window means coming down in a cultivation to the left of the strip.

41 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

by telling the Instructor to pick a random time, randomly deciding the engine just cut, even getting someone to set a stop-watch alarm...

Good points; I was lucky to have an instructor who surprised me with about 20 simulated power failures.
That was years ago and the lesson is wearing off.

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

6 seconds is a lot of time. You can reduce that by prebriefing yourself before commencing the take off roll.. Nev

I understand that, you can pretty much reduce it to a fraction of one second if you pre-programme yourself to do it every time, and OK is more or less doing this by programming-in different actions for each different phase of his own strip. 

I was interested though is seeing what the situation would be for the average person who had been trained in EFATO, but wasn't expecting one.

I've told the story before about being in a race and seeing my right rear wheel creeping forward into vision. I backed off for a corner and it disappeared, accelerated again and it appeared, looked at it and lifted my foot making it disappear, tramped my foot bring it forward again, and only then realised the traction rod had snapped off at the front, and pitch me up into the air for a very serious crash at any second, then had the "Oh Shit" moment , back off and gingerly steered into the infield. Elapsed time was easily five or six seconds. We had safety chains so this shouldn't have happened, but this time everything had let go.

Edited May 28, 2021 by turboplanner

[facthunter]

That's not a slow decision . It's an analysis/assessment. Your decision was to move off the track.. I think 2 seconds is considered realistic with engine fail normally.  The turnback is not just a height thing. It must consider other factors like height for distance relationship. A strong headwind will make this look good but the downwind makes the landing more difficult. Better to think this through before you roll.. A row of trees at the far end makes your T/O very risky.  Whatever you do may involve some aircraft damage. The highest energy is flying down wind for a "still in control" situation. The worst is downwind with loss of control.  Higher RoD and groundspeed likely. 

  Conceptually the turnback is a situation where it must be done successfully or you are worse off than straight ahead with dodging major objects allowed if it only needs a small change of heading. Because of the limited stall speed the "ahead" is survivable but the alternative may not be.. The term "Impossible" turn may be a challenge for some.    Prudent to avoid that temptation especially if your plane is a "fast" one. Nev

[Old Koreelah]

A very useful discussion, fellas.

 

One skillset needed in EFATOs is slow speed flight; keeping control at V1.4, which in my case is 58kt. 

 

My next lesson is to practise keeping control and doing safe turns (at altitude) with the nose high and engine turning below 2000rpm.

[Thruster88]

Dan Gryder has put together a very good package that will make anyone a better pilot. DMMS to goto airspeed for any stressful situation. Live it.

 

 https://www.aviation101.com/aqpgrassroots