NPPL question - taxiing emergencies?

[_Flying_Tiger_]

I'm about half way through my UK NPPL (SLMG), and noticed an item on the syllabus:

5e. Taxiing emergencies

I've no idea what this is intended to cover, and my instructor isn't too sure either, so we both said we would find out.

Can anyone shed any light on it?

Thanks.

[airborne_artist]

Google is your friend (http://87.198.219.221/Ex%205E%20-%20Taxiing%20Emergencies.mp3) :ok:

[BackPacker]

The brake failure above is a good one, but also rather obvious: Steer away from any obstacles, shut down the engine, try to avoid a collision.

Another emergency I could think of would be some kind of engine fire.

And then you've got the C172 flip-on-the-back-in-high-winds type of emergency. But once that happens, you're a passenger along for the ride anyway. The only thing you can do is shut off the fuel and get the hell out.

But honestly, from what I've seen so far is that distraction (e.g. trying to do the power checks/controls free/other checks while taxiing) and trying to maneuver in a confined space while not looking at your wingtips well enough, are the major causes of damage during taxi.

We almost had to write off a PA28 because somebody taxied the wingtip into another aircraft. Eventually the whole spar box had to be replaced.

[Whopity]

I've no idea what this is intended to cover, and my instructor isn't too sure either,Perhaps he shouldn't be an Instructor!
Cabin Fire; Evacuation drill; Steering and Brake Failure are pretty obvious starters.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Obvious thing to do is have the instructor ask the examiner what they'll be examining!

Real taxiing emergencies I've come across - nosewheel steering failure, brake failure, tyre burst, radio failure, somebody else crashing in field of view, engine fire, one aeroplane taxiing into another, aeroplane having a throttle runaway into the side of a hangar.

I've only had the first four myself, as well as carb ice whilst taxiing with a couple of smaller Continental engines.

G

[Whopity]

Obvious thing to do is have the instructor ask the examiner what they'll be examining!The Examiner can examine anything in the Syllabus. We must not get into training to meet the requirements of some God like figure with their own agenda.

[JUST-local]

Not really one of the taxing emergencies, but the best place to show the effects of carb ice. The 0-200 and 0-235 are great for it on the right day.

Flying tiger.
If you/your instructor are struggling with this have a think about what you would consider an emergency.

[Genghis the Engineer]

The Examiner can examine anything in the Syllabus. We must not get into training to meet the requirements of some God like figure with their own agenda.

He can, but most examiners have their own flavours and preferences.

My CPL examiner sent me on the same route, with the same diversion, as he had sent my CPL instructor several years previously. I'd been briefed to expect that, and I got it!

I'm training a fellow for his NPPL at the moment, and took the time to ask the examiner which of the many perfectly legitimate ways to handle certain aspects of nav and emergencies he prefers. So, I'm training my student accordingly - I'll make sure he's a safe pilot who knows the syllabus, but I also want him to pass first time with the examiner he'll get.

Question spotting is, sadly, an inevitability of any formal examined system. Which makes for an interesting point - the exam itself becomes incredibly critical because it will ultimately define the training regime far more than any published syllabus will.

When I was a University Lecturer I used to regularly get complaints from the students for delivering questions that didn't match their expectations, or the patterns they'd derived from looking through old exam papers. That is how people think, and it's fair to argue that they should just learn the syllabus, but at the same time - that's exactly what I used to do as an undergraduate as well.

G

[Jan Olieslagers]

The one ground emergency I lived wasn't even taxiing - we were ready for take-off and just waiting for a PA28 to land, then line up after him (at a non-controlled field); luckily our plane was in such a position we had full sight of the short finals area. For a reason best known to himself, the PA28 pilot decided to land 200 feet or so to the left of the runway, alarmingly close to where we stood. My instructor had quicker wits than myself and applied full power to get out of the way! Lesson learned: keep at least half an eye on the short finals area ALL THE WHILE.
(although of course the real champions will find even more elusive ways to catch us at unawares.)

[RTN11]

The fact is that you don't spend a whole lesson doing 5 and 5e, they are incorporated at the beginning and end of each lesson and you build up the experience over time until you can taxi safely without the instructor hovering over the brakes.

5E would include a saftey brief, which I hope you're instructor gave you at the beginning of the course, and once you are more proficient it would incorporate a discussion about engine fire on the ground, brake failure, steering failure and the correct actions to take, possibly with some touch drills in the aircraft to follow up.

If your instructor doesn't know this is on the syllabus, I would seriously consider another instructor as this is a key safetly point.

[abgd]

When I was a University Lecturer I used to regularly get complaints from the students for delivering questions that didn't match their expectations, or the patterns they'd derived from looking through old exam papers. That is how people think, and it's fair to argue that they should just learn the syllabus, but at the same time - that's exactly what I used to do as an undergraduate as well.When I was an undergraduate, my university refused to publish past papers, ostensibly to avoid this 'problem'. There were a few issues with this approach -

Firstly the syllabus was too vague - 'describe the basic components of the auditory system and their function' means something quite different to a medical student or a neurosciences student, and what does 'basic' mean anyway? My undergraduate and PhD syllabuses were basically identical, but 'basic' meant rather different things in each case. In general, what you need to know is far better defined by the exam questions than the syllabus.

Secondly, many people learn best by doing. Any maths student will have spent ages working out proofs and answers to challenging problems. They don't just learn the rules of calculus by heart. Psychologically speaking, there's a fundamental difference between learning texts 'Carb ice can cause your engine to run roughly...[explanation of meteorology and carb construction...]. An overly rich or lean mixture can cause your engine to run roughly' and learning by answering questions like 'You're flying straight and level at 5000 feet when your engine starts to run rough - list your initial actions.'

Thirdly... it's difficult to be aware of what you don't know and to identify misconceptions if you don't test your understanding and breadth of knowledge somehow. This is why feedback is so important. As an aside, my university didn't believe in feedback - they gave some justification for this, but really it saved huge amounts of money because it meant they could use the same question bank year after year.

In my view, this approach was an unmitigated disaster. Students would not be told what they'd done wrong - something that's psychologically devastating if you fail an exam unexpectedly and potentially very dangerous in the medical faculty. And paradoxically, it seemed to favour the 'learn-by-rote' rather than the 'learn by understanding' people - exactly the problem the approach was intended to avoid. The 'learn by rote' crowd just made flashcards of every factoid in their textbooks - not a bad approach to preparing for multiple choice questions if you have that sort of mind. In contrast, the 'learn by understanding' people were never given the tools (worked questions) that they needed in order to learn effectively.

[Genghis the Engineer]

A PhD syllabus! There's a fascinating concept.

G

[xrayalpha]

Ask your instructor.

If he/she doesn't know, expect a reply along the lines of: "I will find out."

If you don't get the info - especially info you have asked for and are paying for - you should have a word with the CFI. They cannot listen in to every student/instructor interaction, so your feedback is vital.

If the CFI doesn't answer, check out another flying school.

Yes, I am a NPPL M instructor, CFI (two FIs and an AFI working with me) and a Flight Examiner.

In flight and on the ground emergencies are, in my experience, something not well covered in training. Yet, in my experience, far more likely - when they happen - to have far more serious consequencies than drifting a few degrees off heading or 150ft (instead of 100ft) off an altitude.

What are the key points of an engine fire on the ground? Number 1: get out of the aircraft!

Yes, it is good to make sure the engine is downwind - so in a weightshift, or some amphibians, nose INTO wind! - so as flames are taken away from cockpit. But it could be argued, there is a firewall there, so just stop and get out. But in a Cherokee, where all four occupants have to get out the passenger side (and the pax may be on their first ever flight!), there might be other priorities.

Then, since you are getting out the aircraft, a good idea to stop the head chopper turning too.

I suppose the third thing is the insurance certificate! Then you don't need to worry about fuel off (because fuel taps can be a pain to reach - thinking of flexwings in particular where getting to the tap could halt the rear seat occupant from vacating, see point one.)

So all I look for is mags off (ie prop stopped) and get out.

(The rest: ie fuel off, master off - even engine downwind - is all icing on the cake. You should have briefed any pax about how to open the door, safe exit path etc in the pre-flight brief)

In the air, it is fuel off, mags on and stay in!

Get your instructor to sit in the aircraft with you on bad weather days - the weight will help stop it being blown away! - and go through the drills. As you become more experienced and confident, you'll be amazed at what you can do in a very short period of time - ie a couple of seconds. You'll be able to go for the fully iced cake!

The whole point of all this is that when it happens - and it will - you don't have to spend time thinking. And that stretches time, so everything happens in slow motion and you have more time to react and achieve a safe result.

Happy flying!

[abgd]

A PhD syllabus! There's a fascinating concept.There's a taught component these days to most PhD programmes, but I did mine via a slightly unorthodox route where the first year was largely lectures, and included exams. I then had the option to bail out at various points, and could have ended up with another undergraduate degree, a masters or a PhD depending.

[_Flying_Tiger_]

Thanks for all the input, especially xrayalpha, lots of useful info there.

I would just like to say in the defence of my (excellent) instructor that the club has only just started teaching to the NPPL syllabus - I am only the second student - and hence a bit of a guinea pig. I am not being charged anything for the instruction, just covering the costs of the airtime and exams.

[FlyingKiwi_73]

And then you've got the C172 flip-on-the-back-in-high-winds type of emergency. But once that happens, you're a passenger along for the ride anyway. The only thing you can do is shut off the fuel and get the hell out.




One little trick i have heard of at NZWN a very windy airport is to get the Fire Truck to come long the windward side and act as a wind break for taxiing, i have heard it has been doen several times, however becuase its an international airport it must make ATC very unhappy.

Brake Failure, taxiing too fast, and people on the apron (how quick can you shut down the engine) spring to mind for taxiing emergencies... oh and how to read a taxi plate... "vacate and hold Charlie...what?? whose Charlie?"

[patowalker]

"vacate and hold Charlie...what?? whose Charlie?"

What's a Charlie? Do we all have one? :)

[Whopity]

but most examiners have their own flavours and preferences.Indeed some do, and often they are based upon perceived weaknesses in training which they have specific safety concerns about.

The Examiner's role is to conduct a balanced assessment of the students ability to operate the aeroplane in a safe and consistent manner; it is the instructors job to ensure that he has trained the student to do that, and not cherry pick around his perception of the Examiner's likes and dislikes.

Because of the jumping through well prepared hoops that prevails in our modern education system, there is a growing perception amongst many of the younger students that all you have to do is tick the boxes to get a licence. The concept of covering a broad syllabus and demonstrating skill, good judgement and relevant knowledge across this wide spectrum is totally alien to many. They are used to the quick fix.

[bingofuel]

Because of the jumping through well prepared hoops that prevails in our modern education system, there is a growing perception amongst many of the younger students that all you have to do is tick the boxes to get a licence. The concept of covering a broad syllabus and demonstrating skill, good judgement and relevant knowledge across this wide spectrum is totally alien to many

Oh so true. Life these days revolves around minimum effort for maximum profit or gain. What amazes me in flying training is the thought that if people REALLY want to learn to fly why do they not live, eat and breath it anymore? Or is it the reality that with enough money you can buy a RHS in a shiny Boeing without working for it.

[mary meagher]

Taxying emergencies? try doing some training on a taildragger. You can create your own interesting emergency by using the brakes......

Story goes that at Booker Gliding Club an attractive and experienced woman pilot (not me) had just been cleard by the resident Deity (CFI) to solo in the l80 hp Supercub. No sooner had the CFI stepped down and moved away a bit, than she tipped the Cub on its nose. Easy done, take my word for it.....

[strake]

I have observed a taxiing emergency happening to someone else who was unaware they had one.
I was on short finals at a fairly quiet little airfield with an exceptionally narrow runway which meant the one aircraft taxiing towards the hold for my runway was quite clearly in view. Despite concentrating on my landing, something odd about the aircraft in my peripheral vision caught my attention.
Happily bouncing about behind it was a large bucket-shaped piece of concrete, still attached to the rear tie-down.
Maybe not strictly a taxiing emergency but certainly about to become one...

[Cows getting bigger]

Individual brake failures are a favourite of mine, especially when taxying too fast with a tailwind :E Student/examinee is desperately trying to steer the aircraft, stamping on the pedals and getting nowhere. All the time we are racing towards a fence/hedge with the strimmer still turning at 1000rpm.

Ask me why I often do that one. :O :ouch:

... and that leads me nice on to pilots riding the brakes.......


.........which also leads me on to pilots 'riding the flaps'. "Oh, I need more drag to increase my ROD so I'll use more flap". No thought of reducing power first.

[BackPacker]

How do you simulate a brake failure?

[patowalker]

By not activating them?

[BackPacker]

What I mean is, based on his post it looks like CGB somehow deactivates the brakes suddenly, so that the student is confronted with non-functioning brakes. I wonder how that's done.

Or do you simply tell the student, "Listen, you now have a brake failure. Deal with it."

[Gertrude the Wombat]

"Listen, you now have a brake failure. Deal with it."
I was taught (lesson 1 I believe) to deal with this by never taxying towards anything at such a speed that the aircraft wouldn't stop before hitting it if I shut down the engine.

[BackPacker]

Thinking about this a bit further (while doing some necessary but boring DIY to the house)...

Aircraft like a PA28 and C172 have a parking brake lever where the hydraulic pressure is supplied by pulling on the lever. But the DR400, for instance, has a system where you press the toe brakes, and then "lock in" the pressure with a knob. In the latter system, is this a straight valve, or is it a one-way system? In other words, if you pull the knob without applying pressure, do you effectively "lock in" zero pressure, with no ability to brake anymore?

(Sure, I could try this myself easily, but not until Tuesday...)

[patowalker]

In other words, if you pull the knob without applying pressure, do you effectively "lock in" zero pressure, with no ability to brake anymore?

Yes, because the parking brake valves simply stop the flow of fluid between toe-operated levers and the brakes.

[NazgulAir]

I had a great ILAFFT moment when I started to taxi an Emeraude at Biggin and found (rather belatedly I admit) that that the rudder springs were not connected to the tailwheel. I was supposed to turn the plane into the narrow gap in the fence but the heel brakes weren't very effective and I faced a crash into the fence... the only time I ever groundlooped, and it was intentional. I shut down and went in search of the owner, who said that one of his friends may have borrowed the springs to put on another plane.
Needless to say I paid a lot more attention to preflighting the tailwheel assembly after that!

Notwithstanding this extra caution, I failed to see that there was something wrong with the tailwheel of a Super Cub I flew at Mona years later. There was a fair amount of wind and it was extremely difficult to taxi; the Cub constantly wanted to break to the right for some reason. When I returned after the flight I remarked on it and got back a lot of laughter. Apparently this was a known issue (to them, not to me; it wasn't in the snag list or the logbook): some months ago the plane had been operated with the tailwheel erroneously mounted causing the rubber to wear down unevenly, causing it to be lopsided after it got remounted in the correct position, and this gave the plane a strong tendency to veer to the right.