Cessna 150 checkist

[dodos9]

Hi everyone. I need to buy a Cessna 150/152 checklist. The issue is that I don't know which one to get, as there's Pooleys, AFE and Transair. Any recommendations or just go for any of these three?
Thanks
Dom

[sapperkenno]

Use the one out of the POH, or whatever you're flight school/instructor suggests.
It's a very simple aircraft (no fuel pumps, different fuel tanks to select between etc) to operate... but you'd be surprised with these multiple page flip book affairs you see around the UK.
We use a two-sided laminated A5 sheet, and it covers everything (external, normal/emergency) you need.

[JG321]

The one my school provided is one of those ring bound ones. Only ever use a few pages though!

As you say, relatively simple aircraft.

[Genghis the Engineer]

If you are learning to fly, check with your instructor - the odds are that they have a preferred version in the school.

if you're a relatively recently qualified pilot, go for whatever is most similar to what you have used before - that will do a good job of keeping you in existing good habits.

G

[manuaros]

If you are renting the plane from a school, stick to the one in the school.
If it is just a C150 from a private person, ask for the one in the POH as someone has already suggested.

Anyways, if you want to buy your own checklist, you might want to check out ebay or marvgolden.com - they've got a few there.
I have bought some of them myself and they are pretty good.

[Exascot]

1. Put in key
2. Turn it
3. Hit the throttle
4. Configure for take off on the roll.
5. Clean up after take off
6. Configure for landing
7. Clean up after landing
8. Park and switch off.

:ok:

[funfly]

Exascot
I sincerely hope that no trainee will use this sort of thing as a check list.

[worrab]

...

2a) **@! engine won't start. :hmm:

[wood73]

I have the AFE checklist, but as others have said I only use the first few pages.
There is other useful information in it such as crosswind chart and emergency procedures.
This is what I got from the school so for a student like myself it does everything quite comprehensively and in a logical order.

[RTN11]

The trouble with the long winded checklists is that instructors use it as a learning aid rather than a list of things to check they've been done.

Things like hatches and harness secure, should be a check, not a prompt to put on a seat belt.

Things like starting the engine should be able to be done from memory, particularly the first three after start items, RPM 1200, starter warning light out, oil pressure rising to green arc or shut the engine down, and yet countless students let the engine sit at 1600 RPM, take ages faffing turning a page on the list and ignoring these important checks.

If given a list that simply said "power checks - compete" as a pre take off check, I honestly wonder if a lot of PPL holders would be able to complete the checks without a list telling them what to do next.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Simple aeroplanes don't need check lists any more than cars and motorbikes do. Most of those multi-page things for the likes of C150s and PA28s are folk who like to play at airline pilots (1970s airline pilots at that!).

[Pilot DAR]

I support what RTN11 has posted. The flight manual contains a checklist, that is your "official" reference for flying the aircraft. Perhaps the aircraft operator has a few additional checks to be made, which are relevant to the local operation, or additional equipment in the aircraft. That might be a local operating procedure.

Also be aware that the aircraft could have applicable Flight Manual Supplements, for additional equipment, and those FMS' could also contain checklists which you must follow. An example of this would be a Cessna modified to have amphibious floats, will have additional checklist items which are not in the basic FM, and are vital for flight safety.

However, resist long multi page home made "checklists" which differ, or attempt to expand on what the manufacturer has written about operating the plane. Ultimately, when you are flying the aircraft, you are solely responsible to assure that it is operated in accordance with the manufacturer's recommended practices. If you are using a "checklist" other than that provided by the aircraft manufacturer, how can you be sure you are doing that?

As said, a checklist is a mind bumper to help you confirm that you have done, what should have been done. The "Emergency Procedures" and "Normal Procedures" sections of the flight manual tell you how the plane is to be operated. Those sections will contain checklists, as a part of the procedures, and those are the authoritative checklists.

When the manufacturer of the aircraft prepares a checklist in the flight manual, it gets approved by the authority (FAA, for example). Its not a template for someone else to build upon for a thicker checklist - it is the checklist for the aircraft in that configuration. Unless another company (perhaps who holds an STC for that aircraft) gets an FMS checklist approved for that aircraft, the flight manual holds your only approved checklist.

[Baikonour]

This:

The trouble with the long winded checklists is that instructors use it as a learning aid rather than a list of things to check they've been done.

Is a very good point. :D

Following a checklist mindlessly is like following a GPS. If you don't realise what you are doing you will not be able to do it without the paper at any time. If you blindly follow a GPS, you will neither know where you've been, what you flew next to, nor recognise it next time you fly there or thereabouts...

It's a checklist, not an actionlist.

BTW - this is a drift from the OP, but it strikes me as a useful drift and worth pointing out :)

B.

[Pilot DAR]

The need for and value of a checklist can be very type, configuration, and operationally dependent. There is no one size fits all. If the person who owns the plane tells you to use a checklist, you should use the checklist, though it should be an approved one.

In my two planes (one of which is a 150), I do not use checklists, I use a flow check, paired with a self reminder of what I'm about to do. I think of it as "Configuration Assurance": Have I configured the plane for the next thing that I know I'm going to do with it, or should be ready for?

You won't find a Cessna flight manual checklist for a 185 reminding you to assure the wheels are retracted for landing, but there are times when doing this is vitally important. Other times, you would want to check that they are extended for landing. So the use of a checklist for the "simple" C 185 becomes operationally vital.

Another aspect of checklist use is crew co ordination. This is a complete non issue in a C 150, but the discipline can be a good beginning point. An airline will use approved checklists to create a regime which assure that crews are always working together toward the same end.

I have chosen to not fly for airlines, but I appreciate those who do, as sometimes, I need to get somewhere faster than 100MPH, and farther than 500 miles! It's nice to be able to catch a flight on something faster, being flown by someone who wants to do that for a living!

[Baikonour]

Here's another (slightly longer, reasoned) view on it Pelican's perch: Throw away that checklist! (http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182037-1.html?redirected=1)

[Genghis the Engineer]

Student pilots: do what your instructor tells you, or you'll fail your skill test !

People who are neither professional pilots or instructors: possibly remember that some other people are?


I find (as an instructor) that PPLs, particularly those who have relatively few - say under 400 hours, who have come to regard checklists (either written or memorised) as optional, usually make many mistakes and are sloppy about most other aspects of their flyng as well.

Memorising checklists for simpler aeroplanes is fine (or open cockpit aeroplanes where anything on paper not tied down is just going to vanish over the side), and using a mnemonic and/or the cockpit as an aide-memoire to make sure you don't miss anything on a memorised checklist, is also fine.

Ignoring the requirement for a checklist (whether that's written, a flow-drill, or a mnemonic) is just asking for trouble.

Also think about how you will use it. Single pilot, there are only really two options - "read-do", or "do-confirm".


I'd treat (and I have a lot of hours, including quite a lot on type) a C150 thus:-

Startup - written, read-do
System checks - flow, read-do
Take-off - written, read-do
In flight - routine all from memorised mnemonics, as read-do
- emergencies using flow-drills if I have time, do-confirm if I don't
After landing / shutdown: do-confirm.

(The third option with checklists: challenge and response is only really available in multi-crew aeroplanes, and that DOES NOT include a student and their instructor).

G

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Here's another (slightly longer, reasoned) view on it Pelican's perch: Throw away that checklist!

The Pelican has it! Wise words.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Pelican is using a do-confirm method from a mnemonic. He just doesn't like calling that a checklist, but it is.

G

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Pelican is using a do-confirm method from a mnemonic. He just doesn't like calling that a checklist, but it is.

He advocates using the aeroplane as an aid memoire. That's not a checklist.

A C150 checklist is a multi-page document a stude, after starting up at after fueling, shuffles through religiously mentally ticking-off boxes without thinking about what needs to be done while the engine roars away at post-start high RMP and the aeroplane blocks the access to the fuel pumps for the waiting queue.

[Maoraigh1]

I do checks from memory in the Jodel DR1050, which I've been flying since 1990, but I can see the usefulness of checklists for rented aircraft. I just looked at my old C152 list, and compared it with my even older 1965 C150 list, which is much more user friendly in finding emergency procedures, as these pages are pink, and overlapping, so page subject can be seen without leafing through.
However the most sensible checklists I've used for simple Cessnas have been single laminated sheets in the US. EG for radio failure, a list of suggestions - headsetjacks, try other side and other ptt, etc. And the US lists are in the aircraft, while the UK pilot has to buy the school/organisation list.
PS I can see the checklist as a habit-training item for those going on to more complex aircraft. (Such as modern home-built glass-cockpit microlights :E)

[Genghis the Engineer]

SSD, you are describing a badly designed and poorly used checklist. There is such a thing as a good short to the point checklist, used intelligently.

I'm the first to express my strong views about these daft massively overlong checklists used in some schools, but because bad practices exist, does not mean that good practices don't exist.



And from his age and question, I still think that the best advice we can give the OP, is to do what his instructor tells him, given that presumably he has strong ambitions to pass his skill test, before he starts copying the bad habits of cynical and over-opinionated PPLs !

G

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

cynical and over-opinionated PPLs

Oh. Right. But is that your over-opinionated opinion showing through? ;)

I didn't have the distraction of internet forums back in the '70s, and went with the 'school flow' (including ludicrous C150 checklists) and got a near-minimum hours PPL.

But we were taught to THINK, and to TAKE COMMAND, and the first thing out the window post exam stage was that bluddy checklist! (second thing was the whizz wheel).

Today's studes will form their own opinions.... Given the data to evaluate.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I did my first PPL on microlights - mnemonics and no whizz wheel. Nowadays I use both, checklist and whizz-wheel WHEN they're useful. But rejecting both outright because you don't like how some people use them could be regarded in some lights as shortsighted ?

G

[Armchairflyer]

With Maoraigh1 on this one. In the aircraft I fly most regularly, I know the "flows" by heart now, but if I take one of the others I am (not that) current in, the checklist is very welcome and used.

SSD, if indeed checklists for garden variety SEP aircraft are so unnecessary, why is their use advocated and instructed (unlike for cars and motorcycles)? Sheer tradition? Someone making a profit of it? An evil checklist conspiracy? Agreed that it is not an action list to be blindly followed and that there is no need to make a ceremony of each item, but I don't agree with the assertion that they are simply unnecessary even in a simple SEP aircraft. (IMHO this position could even be linked to four of the five pilot's hazardous attitudes if one were so inclined, which would indeed hint at a certain lack of professionalism :p.)

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Armchair - they exist perhaps because they probably make initial PPL training simpler, or even possible; 'just do it by rote for now', as the raw stude has no background to 'think about it' rather than to 'follow the checklist'.

It's a bit like teaching 'stall speeds'. How else do you keep a stude safe on the approach other than by the mantra of 'stall speed'?

But there is of course no such thing as 'stall speed', only 'stall angle'.

But it's unrealistic to expect a stude to grasp the principle of stall angles at the beginning of a PPL course (heck, I know some very experienced pilots who haven't grasped it!), so teaching 'stall speeds' is the pragmatic method.

So it is with check lists.

But they should be simple, not multi-page affairs. And most important of all, they should be disposable, ditched out the window just like 'stall speeds', once the pilot has sufficient ability to think about what they are doing rather than doing it by rote.

[Armchairflyer]

Fully agree with the K.I.S.S. assertion, only (very) partly with the categorical "should be ditched out the window post-exam". They may not be necessary without exception, but even for experienced and thinking pilots they are a safety net and a helpful tool to prevent things from being overlooked and/or actions being omitted, especially in times of stress and/or distraction.

(As for "stall speeds", basically full ACK, but they are IMHO still a sufficiently accurate and helpful concept in most flight regimes.)

[Big Pistons Forever]

This is the checklist I made up for my last PPL student flying a C 150


Pre-Start

Pasenger Brief: Complete
Avionics & Electrical: Eq. Off
Circuit Breakers: In

Start

Fuel Selector: On
Mixture: Rich
Carb Heat: Cold
Throttle: Open 1/2"
Prime: As Required
Master: On
Beacon & Nav Lights: On
Prop Clear:

After Start

Throttle: 1000RPM
Ammeter: Zero
Oil Pressure: Rising
Brakes: Check

Pre-Taxi

flaps: Up
Transponder: Code & Standby
Altimeter & DI: Set


Run Up

Oil Temp. & Press: Green
Mixture: Rich
Throttle: 1700RPM
Suction Gauge: 4.5 - 5.4
Oil Temp. & Press: Green
Mags Check: 150RPM Max
Carb Heat: Hot
Mixture: Check
Throttle: Idle Check
Thottle: 1000RPM

Pre-Takeoff

Belts & Doors: Secure
Fuel Valve: On and Quantity
Trim: Set for T/O
Mixture: Rich
Flaps: As Required
Primer: Locked
Mags: Both
Carb Heat: Cold
Heading Indicator: Set
Controls: Free and Correct
Radio: Set
T/O Brief: Complete
Transponder: On
Landing Light: On


Cruise Check

Mixture: Leaned
Heading Indicator: Set
Landing Light: As Required
Flight Plan: Open

Descent & Approach

ATIS: Check
Fuel Quantity: Check
Mixture: Rich
Altimeter: Set
Oil Temp. & Press: Green
Approach: Briefed


Pre Landing

Mixture: Rich
Carb Heat: as req
Brakes: Check

After Landing

Flaps: Up
Carb Heat: Cold
Transponder: Off
Landing Light: Off

Shut down

Radios: Off
Mags: Cycle
Mixture: ICO
Master: Off
Electrical Switchs: Off
Flight Plan: Closed
Control Lock: Install

The checks follow a logical order so that they can be done as a flow. Checks where the airplane is stopped on the ground or in cruise flight are "Do" lists. That is the the student reads the item, does it and then moves on to the next. Checks where the airplane is moving are done as a flow and then when practicable the checklist is read to "check" that no items have been missed.

[piperboy84]

I have owned my current plane for 4 years, it's parked up next to the house, and flown every day the weathers allows. I am very familiar with all it's equipment and systems from both flying it and self-maintaining, included assisted annuals. I transposed the POH checklist into an excel spreadsheet broken out into flight phases and laminated in a 2"x 5" sheet that hangs from the yoke clamp directly in front of me, I go thru each and every item on the checklist every time I fly.

The reason is I'm a forgetful bugger who suffers from many "CRAFT" moments, and I almost killed myself many years ago by skipping a checklist item taking off from airport on the list below called Catalina

http://www.mediarockerz.com/2014/04/09/top-10-dangerous-airports-photos/

[27/09]

SSD: Simple aeroplanes don't need check lists any more than cars and motorbikes do. Most of those multi-page things for the likes of C150s and PA28s are folk who like to play at airline pilots (1970s airline pilots at that!).

Plus 1. The first checklist I used was during my IR.

Sure there was a list of DVA's that I had to learn but there was no written checklist in any of the aircraft I flew VFR before started my IR. Those aircraft included heavy singles, retractable and CSU aircraft.

[manuaros]

I guess there is no right or wrong answer here.
Basically I would say: everyone should do whatever you feel more confident with - either follow the checklist or not.

Me, personally, I do from memory:
- Start
- Taxi
- After take off
- App + landing

I always always stick to the checklist for the before take-off since I had an incident years ago because I skipped it.
Nothing happened, aside from the initial: "what the hell is going on".
I was cruising in a C172 and did some testing of the AP. Once the first leg was over and I was ready to go back home I forgot to check the trim in its T/O position. It was in a all forward nose down position. I was assuming a normal rotation and climb but obviously it was not.
Thankfully right 2 seconds after pulling the yoke I realised it was way too hard and noticed the trim. Nothing happened.
After that I never do from memory the before take off one. Which includes the trim re-check (as well as the before start).

I always follow the securing the airplane too, just to make sure I do not leave the MAS/ALT and standby BAT ON :-)

If I am flying a new aircraft, there's no way I always always follow the checklist.

Regarding instruction, I am all forward to have instructors to get you used to use follow checklist.
I think following a reasonable flow makes you safer up in the air, or at least the instructor can be sure that you are not going to avoid any important check, specially when the student is soloing.

TL;DR: If you have already passed your checkride: do whatever you feel safer with.

[dodos9]

Plenty of replies here! Whilst not even trying discuss whether or not checklists should be used (I'm a PPL holder with not more than 55 hours - not very experienced at all!) I am still going to use it. The vast majority of these replies don't exactly answer my question, but nevertheless I read each and every single one of them and thanks to anyone who replied in the thread! See, all I am is a PPL holder who has done his PPL on a PA-28 and who now, whilst on holiday abroad, wants to go ahead and rent a C150 - a plane which I have never flown before. Hence, I would feel very unsafe not having a checklist and therefore it's not a choice of whether to have one or not, but rather a choice of which one to use. One good reply was from Wood73, who said he has an AFE one and also mentioned what's in it - thank you! Another useful replies where from people recommending the ones from the POH, as these are the only ones approved- thanks again!
I rang the flight school and whilst they said they can easily provide me with a checklist, I might go for the AFE one for the time being in order to study it before I go there.
Once again, thanks to everyone who replied!
Regards
Dom

[funfly]

Why do people with good memories not accept that some of us have poor memories. We are not stupid (as my teachers used to think) but we do need written reminders - for us checklists are a must.

[SpannerInTheWerks]

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I think with low-hour PPLs in particular any recommendation that the checklist be:
ditched out the window just like 'stall speeds', once the pilot has sufficient ability to think about what they are doing rather than doing it by rote
is less than helpful.

Many PPLs fly on an irregular basis. It is not so much to do with 'sufficient ability' but 'sufficient experience'.

The old maxim of checklists on the ground and mnemonics in the air still holds good.

Try passing a flight test, whether private or commercial, without the use of a checklist and I'll guarantee you'd fail.

Surely that is the touchstone, not a view that because of brains and experience you are above it all.

Remember you're never too old or too experienced to have an accident.

Not using checklists can only serve to reduce safety rather than enhance it.

[tecman]

I would suggest to the OP that he find a minimal checklist (maybe from the POH), carry a written version, but do himself a favour and commit it to memory. It'll serve you well over many years of flying. Not to say you'll use the same checklist for every aircraft but the C150 checklist my instructor had me learn at the end of lesson 1 is still the basis of my checks 30 years later.

Also, although you're talking PPL, nothing shows a more professional approach when doing a check ride etc than having your checks under control. And that means not fumbling around with written checklists in the circuit, when your eyes should be outside. There are times when you're required to refer to written lists in more advanced flying, but the essential C150/172/etc checks are easily committed to memory.

The list BPF gave is pretty good, although there's quite a meal made of run up and pre- takeoff. I consolidate these into something like:

Hatches and harnesses - secure
Trim - set for take-off
Instruments - L to R and set (suction gauge on L is first port of call)
Mags - 1700, L, R, both (check rpm drop, and equality of drop on L, R)
Carb heat - check working, set cold, good engine idle
Flaps and controls - full free, correct sense
Radios, transponder - as needed
Brakes off
All clear

Obviously some important regional quirks. In many parts of Australia you don't want to be taxying or doing run-ups on dusty strips with the carb heat selected. But, equally, I can imagine that you need to be vigilant about carb ice in Canada or the UK. My only other suggestion is that the pre-start checks should always begin with "acceptable position". You'd be amazed at the number of people who apparently think it's OK to sandblast other aircraft, or blast dirt into open hangars.

Most of all, enjoy the flying :)

[150bugsmasher]

Dodos9 - I'd recommend the Surecheck brand of checklists. Always found them much more succinct than the AFE ones which can go on and on a bit, and they're better made/laminated, and a bit smaller (every millimetre counts in the c150!) the only downside is they're not massively available in europeland, but are well worth a US ebay order.

[worldpilot]

Avoid being complacent - Use checklists

A pilot parked an aircraft (a Cessna 172) at my home airport without enforcing a simple policy which is appropriately securing the aircraft wheels with required chocks and came back to find out that the aircraft became totaled and the only way to get back home was by a rental car (more than 5 hours of driving). The aircraft rolled back and hit a wall resulting in the destruction of the aircraft empennage structure.

Another pilot (a Cirrus pilot) learned a hard lesson when he forgot to remove the towbar before engine start and the resulting prop-strike was disastrous. Thousands of Euros lost due to complacency.

Both scenarios were clearly avoidable by following the checklist.

I use both written and mental checklists all the time and it is a safety resource that I can't abdicate from using.

It is my understanding that using a checklist minimizes flight envelope risks and has little to do with simplicity of an aircraft configuration or complexity. The checklist is there to align the execution of operational procedures at appropriate times.

I don't see any reason why checklists should be "ditched" out.:ugh:

Eliminate complacency from the cockpit!

WP

[RTN11]

Not sure a checklist would stop either of those, they are basic habit based behaviour, one should always chock an aircraft and never leave a tow bar attached when finished towing.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Worldpilot illustrates nicely why the 'checklist mindset' is an atedote to flight safety other than in complex multi-crew challenge-response scenarios.

Neither of those incidents say to me "he should have used a check list"; they say "he should have engaged his brain". Spanner - take note... and BTW, this:
Not using checklists can only serve to reduce safety rather than enhance it.
is total earwash.

Aeroplanes have thousands of ways to kill you. If you can devise a checklist that covers you against every one of those ways, good luck in implementing it. Me? I have a simpler, and far safer maxim: when dealing with aeroplanes, THINK! Think very carefully about what you are about to do, about what you are doing, and about what you just did. Observe carefully, and think again. Then think some more.

It's called airmanship and you won't find it on any checklist.

If you can't do that, go take up golf instead; this flying business ain't for you. The aeroplane will kill you with something your precious checklist didn't cover.

Oh, I just remembered. The Tiger Club used to (maybe still does) have an excellent cover-all checklist on the panel of all its aeroplanes. It said "All aeroplanes bite fools".

[SpannerInTheWerks]

SSD

Just out of interest, do you use a checklist when flying with an instructor/examiner as a part of your SEP renewal requirements?

[fireflybob]

A checklist is a tool to assist the pilot to manage the aircraft safely.

As SSD states a well rounded pilot also has to be thinking about what he/she is doing.

The checklist is not there to tell you how to do it but is there to ask the pilot "Have you done this?".

Some commercially produced checklists are full of errors which contravene the POH.

Am not against sensible use of checklists but as an instructor there are times in a students training where I take the checklist away from them as all too often they are being used as a prop for incomplete knowledge as to how to operate the aircraft.

Any pilot worth his salt should be able to safely operate a simple aircraft without a checklist.

[worldpilot]

Aeroplanes have thousands of ways to kill you. If you can devise a checklist that covers you against every one of those ways, good luck in implementing it.Complacency is a dangerous thing. Being an impostor is also a dangerous thing.:=

Adopt a "security state of mind" and reduce the likelihood of being a victim of an aviation incident.:ok:

A checklist minimizes such a likelihood by providing a structured approach to performing aviation procedures in a consistent way. It assists in minimizing the risks of that "thinking process" when engaging in aviation context.

WP

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Just out of interest, do you use a checklist when flying with an instructor/examiner as a part of your SEP renewal requirements?

Absolutely not! We've always been too busy trying to get that s-l-o-w roll really nice!

I did once leave my renewal too late to get a suitably qualified (tailwheel, aeros) instructor to sit in the back. So I did an hour with one of the other (flat earth) guys in a prosaic club PA38. No aeros of course, so I decided it'd be some instrument practice. He put some maps over my side of the windscreen and I put on the hood, and we did a bit of climbing, descending, vectoring onto headings while so doing - the usual 'under the hood' stuff.

I noticed that despite having cruise power set and the attitude where it should be, we were slowly descending. Himself was at a loss to explain this. So I came out from under the hood to to 'have a look'.

We were downwind of some seriously big mountains. "Lee side sink", I said. "Oh right", he said".

But at least he hadn't demanded to see my checklist (I do have a PA38 checklist in my flightbag, which was in the boot of my car at the time).

I wonder if any PA38 checklist has the line:

"If flying downwind of high hills, the aeroplane may experience a reduced rate of climb, or a descent when configured for level flight, and in extreme cases a rate of decent with full power that will have you into the ground in short order".

[SpannerInTheWerks]

The best checklist I ever came across was in the film 'Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines'.

The German officer read from his checklist:

Nr 1 - Sit down!

:)

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

A checklist minimizes such a likelihood by providing a structured approach to performing aviation procedures in a consistent way.


Consistently unthinking 'by rote' way? You're not getting it, are you?

The best checklist I ever came across was in the film 'Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines'.

The German officer read from his checklist:

Nr 1 - Sit down!

Lovely! And actually, it perfectly illustrates the point I'm trying to make here.

[glendalegoon]

checklists are very important to safe flying.

the ONLY time I didn't use a checklist, it was during a flight in a piper cub.

I had only ONE mag on for takeoff and virtually the whole flight.

CHECKLISTS, use em.

There isn't a good reason NOT to use them.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Glendale, if you need a checklist to ensure you switch on the second mag after starting a Cub, may I respectfully suggest Golf instead?

Or use a checklist that starts "Item 1: Sit down". ;)

Seriously, a very able but aging pilot I know of hung up his headset when he realised he'd flown a full hour in the Tiger Moth on only one mag. He reasoned, wisely in my view, that if his brain had addled enough for him to do that after many decades of not doing that, it was time to stop before something worse happened.

A good reason not to use checklists in simple single crew ops (other than ab initio when they can substitute for a level of knowledge not yet gained) is that they can mask 'not thinking'. And 'not thinking' while operating an aeroplane can be seriously life-threatening.

[Jan Olieslagers]

Nobody ever suggested that checklists can replace, or even reduce the need for, good airmanship, or the use of common sense and intelligence. Those who have all these properties in absolute total perfection can indeed do without.

The lesser gifted can use a checklist as one of the many possibilities to catch up with any little bit of imperfection popping up.

For myself, flying a very simple craft, I never saw the need for a checklist - till the day I took off with a fuel valve unopened. The engine ran fine during taxi, and while I waited for three planes before me to take off - plenty of time to go through the checklist! The engine hiccupped when I had about -100 metres of runway left - luckily I understood quick, and the engine never stopped, it came back to normal as soon as the valve was opened.

So Mr Skygod, good luck to you, we will eternally worship you and sing your praises. Remembering them from the appropriate checklist from time to time.

If ever you fall from the skies, please posthumously excuse me for coming to your funeral waving a big "WE TOLD YOU" banner.

[glendalegoon]

shaggy sheep


I imagine if you only fly one or two types of planes, you will be comfortable without a checklist.

but if you fly dozens, checklists come in handy.

and by the time you get to the airlines, you can use the checklist process as part of the team building of CRM.

The only thing good about golf is that the golf courses can make landing spots if you need. Just yell FORE good and loud.

[Mach Jump]

I need to buy a Cessna 150/152 checklist. The issue is that I don't know which one to get, as there's Pooleys, AFE and Transair. Any recommendations or just go for any of these three?
Thanks
Dom

Hi Dom. Just in case you are still interested in an answer to your question, now that the pxxxxxg contest has died down a bit, :rolleyes: there is not much to choose between the three you have suggested. Of the three, I would buy the AFE one.

As to how you should use your checklist, which bits you memorise, whether you use it as a read-action or action-check, don't bother using it at all, etc etc, etc, ....that's between you and your instructor for now, and entirely up to you after you pass your test.


MJ:ok:

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

MJ, if you really think a discussion on whether check lists are appropriate in little aeroplanes is a pi55ing contest, you missed the point.

Drift from the OP's original point, maybe. But pi55ing contest it isn't.

[Pilot DAR]

OP Dom, What year 150 would you like the checklist for? I have most of the Cessna flight manuals, and perhaps I could help you get what you need.

Choosing to use a checklist is not wrong, choosing not to use one might not be wrong either, but you're taking responsibility for your actions, or lack thereof. I did my CPL flight test on the C 150 I had owned for 25 years, a few years back. I'd never really used a checklist, but the instructor reminded me that I'd better use one for the flight test. As I had 2700 hours in that plane, and fly it most days, I struggled to see the need for a checklist, other than that was the operational requirement for that flight. So I copied the APPROVED one from the flight manual - it is the ONLY legal one a pilot could use for that aircraft.

Sometimes I'll fly three or four rather different types in a day - then I'll use checklists on the unfamiliar ones. I one day flew My C 150 to work, then a Caravan, then a DA-42, then a Tiger Moth. The Moth did not seem to have a checklist with it, so I preplanned my own.

In my opinion, if you choose to use the Flight Manual checklist, that is your privilege, and responsible. It must not be a replacement for good airmanship, or familiarity with the aircraft. Other pilots should respect that. If you choose to read from a multi page novel to get a 150 up and back, and use it as the instructions as to how to operate the plane, I'm uneasy with that - your good training should already be telling you how to fly the plane, and what good airmanship is.

Look at the items on a C 150 checklist - what, if omitted, would enable you to get airborne, and be less safe up there? There's really not too much you can miss in such a simple plane. But once you have retractable gear, fuel pumps, cowl flaps, auto feather, and varied operations, a checklist gets to be a good idea. A pilot who tells me they can safely fly anything without reference to the aircraft checklist worries me.....

[maxred]

A pilot who tells me they can safely fly anything without reference to the aircraft checklist worries me.....

Truly worries me also.

To the OP, welcome to the world of Pprune. Please use a checklist for your flying. Flying is a building block approach, A, B, C, D etc. the checklist is an aid to ensure that you are proceeding with your learning curve, and are safe in doing so. It is very easy to miss something, if doing from memory.

Yes, we all know the ones that kick the tires, light the fires, and spiral themselves into the blue yonder. Good for you. One day it might just go pear shaped, like having the fuel caps left on the Tarmac, or the pullrod left on the front wheel, or heaven forbid, a circuit breaker gone on your comm unit etc etc.

My view, checklists enhance and confirm good airmanship. Good luck with the Cessna 150....

[Camargue]

Interesting views. I learnt on an air squadron. ALL checks and procedures were memorised and I've been using that method since, even on my ppl tests.

In fact if you apply logic all the checks are basically the same in any simple SEP. once a pilot has answered the question 'whats the fuelling arrangement, do I have flaps, if so electric or not, do I have fixed or constant speed prop, do I have retractable gear, do I have an O or IO upfront the checks can be amended accordingly adding or removing what needs to be checked. Flying on one Mag is the same as leaving flaps down or flying full rich ad 6000 ft or forgetting to switch on the radio.

Cut a long story short, I ve used the checks I learnt on a bulldog 25 years ago in extended or abbreviated format from memory for every plane I've flown since and no one has ever complained. Each to his own of course.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

An unprofessional "kick the tyres light the fires" attitude has NOTHING to do with not using check lists in simple aeroplanes. But I suspect you know that. :rolleyes:

[maxred]

Camargue. I have a good number of hours on Chipmunks. I learnt to fly in one, then owned one, and displayed it. Issue, I jump from that to a Cessna 310, out of that into a YAK 50, out of that into a Baron, out of that into a YAK 52, and on.

Now, with the Chipmunk, I had no need to look at a list, I knew it inside out, but getting into multiple types, then I see a real benefit.

It may just be me, but the utilization of a checklist, ensures that one does not, or would minimize, the chance of missing something.

If you are in that mind set from day one, ie using a list, it stays with you. Also there is nothing wrong with, guided by the POH, having your own list made up. I have it in the Bonanza, made by the guy who operated it before me.

[Pilot DAR]

The need for a written checklist in a C 150 is modest, so discussion about complex aircraft and checklists amounts to thread drift. But, at a more basic level, and in the theme of those who memorize their checklists, I think in terms of "Configuration Assurance". It is not so much aircraft type dependent, as operation dependent.

At every change in a phase of flight, ask yourself: "Is the aircraft configured for what I'm going to do with it next?" Then, if need be, use a checklist.

I can jump into a Cessna 182, and pretty well have have things memorized. I can jump into a 182 RG, and add "gear" to my thinking. However, if I take the amphibian version of a 182, and land it on the water with the wheels down, it's going to end badly, and be my fault. So it's not a non thinking "wheels down for landing", it's "what am I doing with this plane next? Is the plane correctly configured for it?".

I would not criticize a pilot for using a paper checklist. But a dedication to assuring configuration for what you're about to do is basic airmanship - a checklist can be weak for making that up. It probably works for the plane, but towbars, chocks and fuel caps are rarely mentioned on the approved checklist for an aircraft - they are airmanship. "I'm about to move it, and fly it, is it configured and secure?"....

Think about your configuration assurance, and use the checklist if you need it.

[maxred]

Yes Pilot DAR, but it is a mindset. The building mentality. If you learn from memory, great. But it is about all aspects of airmanship. A lot goes on pre flight. Not all can be done by sole ref to memory.

On longer navigation trips it becomes, I think, more important. The checklist, is part of that flight. If you think about all you complete. I am not talking here about jumping into the Cub, from the grass strip, to go for a 30 minute flight.

The thread moved to training and checklists and operations, then to the old debate about should you, shoud'nt you. It is all very well for experienced, multi houred pilots, to pour slight scorn on the use of a checklist, but that is the point that some of us are trying to state, is not that helpful.

[fireflybob]

But even then you wouldn't be using paper checklists in the air single crew, or would you?

[Camargue]

Maxred I take your point, never flown a 310 so no idea but starting an m14 p? Hell one could fire up an aeio 580, fly several unlimited sequnces and land before the 14 even had the oil in the right place to attempt a start.

My point really is that with a logical and sensible approach you can make and use your own check list for the vast majority of simple sep's. yaks and sukhois excluded!

The danger with memorised checks of course is that you won't remember you forgot a check. !!

But this is something that can be decided with experience and the op can make his own mind up in due course. For now, he should do as instructed!

[Mach Jump]

MJ, if you really think a discussion on whether check lists are appropriate in little aeroplanes is a pi55ing contest, you missed the point.


I think that when someone (especially someone new) asks a perfectly reasonable and simple question, he/she at least deserves an answer, before people start hijacking the thread to exercise their own conflicting hobby horses.


MJ:ok:

[worldpilot]

......but towbars, chocks and fuel caps are rarely mentioned on the approved checklist for an aircraftNot quite though.:=

The Cirrus pilot's checklists clearly stipulates removal of tiedown rope, tow bar removal and stow, etc.

3. Empennage
a. Tiedown rope_____Remove

7. Right Wing Forward and Main Gear
g. Chocks and Tiedown Ropes______Remove

9. Nose gear, Propeller, and Spinner
a. Tow Bar______________________Remove

Yes, it is elementary, but serves the purpose which is enhance situational awareness.

Had it been the cirrus pilot followed the checklist, the prop-strike could have been avoided.:ugh:

WP

[Pilot DAR]

Fair enough, I have never flown a Cirrus. It's the new way I suppose...

I write a number of Flight Manual Supplements, which are approved as a part of an STC on an aircraft. When I write these, I review them, and ask myself "what can I cut out of this, to make it brief, effective, and safe?". Airmanship has to play a part in getting and keeping a plane in the sky safely. The longer a checklist is, the more likely it'll be skipped or ignored. I focus on those things which will result in an unsafe situation if forgotten, and are unique to that aircraft, or class of aircraft.

I sure would rather add one item, of "controls free and correct" than four or so items of "remove control lock......". Chocks and tiedowns - nope! let the pilot feel the embarrassment of trying to taxi a restrained aircraft - they'll never forget that again!

If a new C 150 pilot would like to use a checklist to build airmanship, I'm good with that. It's a tool, not a crutch....

[27/09]

Avoid being complacent - Use checklists

A pilot parked an aircraft (a Cessna 172) at my home airport without enforcing a simple policy which is appropriately securing the aircraft wheels with required chocks and came back to find out that the aircraft became totaled and the only way to get back home was by a rental car (more than 5 hours of driving). The aircraft rolled back and hit a wall resulting in the destruction of the aircraft empennage structure.

Another pilot (a Cirrus pilot) learned a hard lesson when he forgot to remove the towbar before engine start and the resulting prop-strike was disastrous. Thousands of Euros lost due to complacency.

Both scenarios were clearly avoidable by following the checklist.

I'm astounded at some of the logic being used here. If either pilot needed a checklist to avoid these incidents then I'm afraid he/she shouldn't have a licence.

Both incidents would have been avoided by a normal post flight or pre flight walk around. There should be no need to have a piece of paper in your hand telling you what to look for in cases like these.

[Tankengine]

Over a thousand hours in C150, never used or taught with written checklist, all memory items. That said, no problem with checklists - they are required with more complex aircraft.

The main thing to remember though is even in Airline flying : they are a CHECK list, not a DO list!:ok:

So, you configure the aircraft from memory, then use checklist to CHECK that you have done everything.;)

[Big Pistons Forever]

The list BPF gave is pretty good, although there's quite a meal made of run up and pre- takeoff. I consolidate these into something like:

Hatches and harnesses - secure
Trim - set for take-off
Instruments - L to R and set (suction gauge on L is first port of call)
Mags - 1700, L, R, both (check rpm drop, and equality of drop on L, R)
Carb heat - check working, set cold, good engine idle
Flaps and controls - full free, correct sense
Radios, transponder - as needed
Brakes off
All clear



I would suggest our checklist are pretty close. The only difference is I listed the individual items in the Left to Right check. Since this checklist was built for PPL students this helps them learn all of the steps and since it lows it goes pretty fast.

Most airplanes have at least one item peculiar to them which is why I don't like generic checklists. For example your check list does not address the primer. If it is not locked in fuel will flow continually through it to the engine causing an excessively rich mixture, rough running and a significant loss of power. Not such a big deal on the C 172 but much more noticeable on the C 150 so it is an item that IMO should be explicitly addressed in the checklist.

Finally with respect to the runup, I am dismayed by how many pilots do the run up actions by rote with out any understanding of what they are checking and what to look for.

For example in the runup you check the mags and the left mag has a 40 RPM drop but the right mag has no drop at all. I have met many pilots who when presented with this situation think that they have an especially good right mag and they are good to go :ugh:

[Big Pistons Forever]

Avoid being complacent - Use checklists

A pilot parked an aircraft (a Cessna 172) at my home airport without enforcing a simple policy which is appropriately securing the aircraft wheels with required chocks and came back to find out that the aircraft became totaled and the only way to get back home was by a rental car (more than 5 hours of driving). The aircraft rolled back and hit a wall resulting in the destruction of the aircraft empennage structure.

Another pilot (a Cirrus pilot) learned a hard lesson when he forgot to remove the towbar before engine start and the resulting prop-strike was disastrous. Thousands of Euros lost due to complacency.

Both scenarios were clearly avoidable by following the checklist.


WP


What I see here is a confusion between use of SOP's and use of checklists. I teach that just before the student turns the key he/she calls out "clear, towbar out". What will occasionally happen is he will make the call and then say "wait I am not absolutely sure the tow bar is out". " Go look" is what I will tell them.

I have had a student come back to me several years later and say the habit of that stopped him from starting the engine with the tow bar still on. How that came to pass was the classic change of plan with the towbar removed and then just before getting in, a hanger door opened behind the airplane necessitating moving it followed by being distracted by questions from the passenger.

My point is that building those good habitual SOP's provides the required safety net without writing down everything. The same goes for chocking the airplane. From day one my student learns that you never walk away from the airplane without at lest one chock on the pilot side wheel.

[tecman]

BPF, I take the point about the piece of paper you give to the guy on lesson 1, vs the more streamlined version you might encourage as they progress (once they actually know what they need to do with the DG etc).

My primer check is at the end of the after-start list although, to be totally honest, when I learned to fly a C150 in the warmish parts of Australia, the primer was hardly ever unlocked - some quick pumps of the throttle are enough to get the average 0-200 away. I later learned that this was viewed as a mortal sin (with some justification) but generations of muster pilots managed well enough.

I agree re the tow-bar and similar items: these are things you really have to build into to what you call SOPs but which I might call situational awareness at all times. For what it's worth, I never leave the tow bar attached to an aircraft if I'm not actually holding it: if I have to walk away, I put the tow bar in front of one of the main wheels where, if I do run over it (heaven forbid), it'll cause a small bump. It was something suggested to me early on and I never thought too much about it until, a few months ago, I saw an instructor about to start an Arrow with the tow-bar attached. We managed to attract his attention but it was a near thing.

And there's the famous US incident of the PA24 and the tow-bar, of course.

[Big Pistons Forever]

- some quick pumps of the throttle are enough to get the average 0-200 away. I later learned that this was viewed as a mortal sin (with some justification) but generations of muster pilots managed well enough.

.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with pumping the throttle as long as the starter is turning the propeller. Indeed the Continental engine in the C 150 should start almost immediately if warm or properly primed. If the prop has made a half dozen rotations and has not started a few quick pumps will usually be all that is need to get an immediate start.

In any case the C 150 POH does specifically allow it.

[fujii]

The OP's question was where to buy a checklist. Four pages and 67 posts later and the question hasn't been answered.

[abgd]

No, the original question was which checklist to go for.

"Hi everyone. I need to buy a Cessna 150/152 checklist. The issue is that I don't know which one to get, as there's Pooleys, AFE and Transair."

[fujii]

Well yes although the poster did say he needed to buy one. All the same he/she still doesn't have an answer.

[tecman]

He can use the perfectly good one written out in full by BPF and save himself the money.

[maxred]

The OP's question was where to buy a checklist. Four pages and 67 posts later and the question hasn't been answered.

Well at one point, I did welcome him to the world of Pprune....:O

[Mach Jump]

The OP's question was where to buy a checklist. Four pages and 67 posts later and the question hasn't been answered.

There was one answer to the question, but I seriously doubt that the OP bothered to follow this thread beyond the fist few repiles. :sad:


MJ:ok:

[Genghis the Engineer]

Anybody with an interest or opinions about the use of checklists would get a lot out of reading a book called "The checklist manifesto" by Atul Gawande. He's the fellow who took aviation (and other) checklist practices and introduced them into surgery. A local version of the WHO Safe Surgery Checklist is now mandatory, I believe, in all NHS operating theatres and other versions used throughout the world. There are research papers to show that they've saved a lot of lives.



A further thought or three:-

Checklists can be used in three ways:-

(1) Read-do
(2) Do, confirm
(3) Challenge and response

So let's put the nonsense about never using checklists as a list of actions to carry out aside. Read-do, is a perfectly legitimate way to use a checklist, just not the only way, and may not sometimes be the best way.



However, one major advantage of a checklist, however used, is that it frees up a chunk of mental capacity to then spend on thinking about the stuff that really needs the skills and reasoning capacity of the expert (pilot, surgeon, stockbroker...). That comes across very clearly and well in Gawande's book, which is one of the most impressive books I've ever read about how to achieve professionalism.


Original poster - if you've not lost all will to live, I have access to somebody's personal system (sort of a checklist, sort of not) that I know works well in the C150, and I use in my instructing. If you want to PM me an email address and which model C150 you are planning to fly, I'll ask them if they'd email you a copy.


G

[Pilot DAR]

The OP's question was where to buy a checklist. Four pages and 67 posts later and the question hasn't been answered.

I disagree. By post 12, three of us had suggested that the OP obtain the genuine Cessna checklist from the POH. That checklist, combined with good airmanship, and a knowledge of any local and/or operator requirements (SOPs), would be all that is needed to operate the aircraft safely.

[cockney steve]

For a newish PPL, renting an unknown C150, the realelephant in the room has not been addressed.

having read many accounts on PPrune, I append a tongue in cheek addendum to exascot's "checklist.


A- Are SID's complied with?
Yes...go to 1
NO- B- Wings still firmly attached?

Yes. say prayers, go to 1
no... walk away alive.

C Main landing gear still attached?
Yes...say prayers go to 1
no... call scrapman
do not attempt to go to 1

Even though the aircraft has a Certificate of Airworthiness, the many horror-stories resultant from SIDS inspections, would suggest thatthese amazingly long-lived, robust aircraft are increasingly flying on the "excess-strength" margin.

[27/09]

Cockney Steve:
Are SID's complied with? Thread drift but I'll bite.

A couple of comments.

SIDS are only mandatory in the USA for Air Transport aircraft. If things were so bad why were they not made into an AD which is mandatory for all aircraft?

If an aircraft has been maintained properly, and looked after during its life so far, then the SIDS will generally not find anything of major concern.

With the aforementioned in mind, and knowing the penchant in the UK for doing things by the book, I'm surprised by your comment "the many horror-stories resultant from SIDS inspections"

The only horror stories have been the eye watering amounts that some owners have been charged for the work.

[Heebicka]

write own checklist based on info from POH, even comprehensive checklist with touch and go infos etc would be small, there is not much you can do in 150 :)

[mad_jock]

I will put my hand up and say that I did over 1000 hours in SEP's without using a physical checklist.

Yes I did use them when told to during training.

All examinations in SEP's since then I haven't used them and its never been commented on including low digit exam call signs for FI tests.

The light aircraft stuff is quite bizarre how much stuff there is in them.

My work machine start checklist is 4 items.

TAxi 4 items

Lineup 5 items

After T/O 4 items

Decent 3 items

Appr 4 items.

Landing 6 items.

After landing is a flow.

And shut down is a flow.

Putting the aircraft to bed 6 items.

[ChickenHouse]

I am really surprised that the question for a checklist does have this kind of discussion. In my eyes the issue is quite simple.

First: if I enter a plane, be it my own or a rented one, there has to be one in it by any regulations of the world I know (ok, sometimes in Africa, it was not, but that is a totally different story). Second: the checklist has to be the one which is part of the ARC inspection, so one time a year it is checked a checklist is on board and it is the correct one (item on the list for ARC, tyoical the one after original POH on board). Third: the only allowed checklist is the official one released by the manufacturer, maybe in a later revision, but often still the one with which the plane was delivered at first hand.

First reality: many times at ARC neither POH nor checklist were checked. Second reality: quite often neither the correct POH nor the correct checklist is on board. Third reality: the original documents are not the very best ones from nowadays perspective and it may be advisable to write an own version of the POH as well as a personal checklist, which is mainly the official one with some added features for things fit in the last x0 years.

My best way is to keep the original POH and checklist documents within the planelog and use my own. By this I am current on document features and do have the originals for ARC and ramp checks handy.

[cockney steve]

@27/09
just re-read the last couple of lines of my post:)
These Aircraft have proved to be far more durable than the makers ever envisaged.
The Spitfire was a short-life aircraft....it would either be written off or suprseded within ~ 5 years...so nopoint wasting resources building for a 10-year life.

The SIDS are showing wing-strut cracks and laminated -spar corrosion, among other issues....Perhaps, by the time the Reims versions entered production, someone realised the design was unbeatable and therefore the factory corrosion-proofed for an extended life.

Back on thread...My pilot friend had access to a 152, a 172 and an Aeronca Chief we mainly flew in the Chief . A simple,logical, progression around the aircraft covered everything from tyres to fuel-level No flaps, no electrics (Icom and battery-intercom) Armstrong starting.
Maybe it helped he was from an engineering background? (me,too)
NO CHECK LIST....but, even now, I could probably do the full routine up to lining-up...and i've never had a formal lesson :}
I don't remember a list for the Cessnas, either, but, as both our lives depended on it, it got the full beady eye treatment,including full flap extension, inspection. retraction......finally a check on full andfree controls before the start and run-up (repeated after power-check immediately before takeoff.)If there was a "gotcha" I never saw it.

[ChickenHouse]

This SID discussion is going round and round ... I had a review recently on more then a dozen of them and was shocked by the results - most of the owners paid extraordinary amounts of cash for them and did receive only checked lists as a result - no pictures, no videos, no real documentation. I then started to visit the maintenance organizations and check photos and docs on what they really did. First of all, almost everybody got ripped off by the companies. Many bills were mere street robbery and many, many people did not get half of what they paid for. What was presented as finding, was often poorly documented and where it was, it was quite often obviously unnecessary work done. Yes, the Cessna corrosion inspection is a good thing to do and in some few cases there were really potential things to stop, but the most of these findings are covered by ADs already. I also had the inspection done on my plane (Reims built) and as a result I am quite happy to know the plane is fine and free of corrosion, but we also had some preventive corrosion treatment to not have a problem in 10 years - fine with me and worth the money I spent, but that was about one third of the typical inspection costs charged. So people, do the Cessna corrosion inspection, but stay close when they do it, because even your old buddy workshop will try to rip you off.

[Pilot DAR]

Third reality: the original documents are not the very best ones from nowadays perspective and it may be advisable to write an own version of the POH as well as a personal checklist, which is mainly the official one with some added features for things fit in the last x0 years.

Be careful with that....

The POH (as a "Flight Manual") is a document approved by the certifying authority for the aircraft design. Writing your own version, though perhaps entertaining, would not result in a document which had any legal basis from which to operate the aircraft. This theme extends to the checklist provided in the POH/Flight Manual - it is in the "Approved" section of the POH, and as such, would require reapproval if changed.

If the aircraft has "added features" which are properly approved (usually by STC) and installed, there would be an approved Flight Manual Supplement with these installations. That FMS might contain a supplemental checklist, which would be required to be followed.

Though I'm not aware of any regulation prohibiting writhing your own checklist (or I suppose POH), if you are not operating the aircraft with reference to the approved version, you're on thin ice for compliance (ramp check). I suppose if your home made checklist obviously exactly combines the relevant sum of approved checklists from the original aircraft and any approved mods, and the originals were still available for pilot reference, that would probably be looked upon favourably by authorities.

[ChickenHouse]

I did check with authorities before making my own checklist. They told me they are absolutely fine with personal checklists, as long as it contains only additions for cockpit procedures and you carry the original POH and checklist on board. At ramp check, they are only interested in the original ones. I even translated my original POH and made two personal copies to stick in the plane for friends unable to read english. So, personal checklists and POHs are just like any other novel book as long as you have the original documents handy.

[maxred]

Time then, for the really stupid question.

If, the 'authorities', and the manufacturer, deem it a necessity, or even mandatory, to have a 'checklist', to operate the aeroplane, then why is everyone debating not using it.

'My memory serves me well'. 'Waste of time'. 'If you are that stupid, you cant operate a simple type without a checklist, go take up golf'

Quote-unquote???

[Pilot DAR]

The authorities and manufacturer also require that sufficient fuel be carried for the intended flight, and people don't do that, so why would they carry and refer to the required checklist? The Canadian wording is the the approved checklist "be available" to the pilot (like fuel, I suppose) how the pilot uses it could be a different thing, but don't get caught in trouble not using it!

If you are using a home made or flying school made checklist, and something has been omitted, or confusion introduced by non approved additions, you, the pilot using that checklist, become responsible, not the person who wrote it!

Yes, I was required to have and use a paper copy of the checklist for my C 150 when I flew it for my CPL ride. (I had more than 2500 hours in that plane at that point). I exactly copied the one from the POH, and all was good. For those three or four flights, I used the checklist. When I flew an MD500 yesterday, the other pilot and I used the checklist (as I don't fly those very often).

[ChickenHouse]

@maxred: it is twofold, point one - every local authority under ICAO regulations requires the pilot to operate compliant with the operations defined by the planes manufacturer; point two: the manufacturer complied with manufacturing and permit to fly regulations by issuing checklists in their respective type POH and/or separate checklist documents.

If later changes apply, it is not expected by authorities to release a new POH, which would be then plane specific and no longer type specific, but to have some addendum of unspecific kind, so that all documents can be used as if they would have been the original issued POH/checklist in that case.

So, yes, it is useless to discuss POH or checklist, because they are part of the internationally agreed procedures to operate a plane correctly.
And further yes, in reality many people give a sh*t.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Chicken - I'm not going to repeat what's been said. No-one mandates I use a checklist in an L4 Cub, a Chipmunk, or even a Yak52 (quite a complex aeroplane). So what are you on about?

[glendalegoon]

I think what is mandated is that there IS a checklist on board the aircraft.

What I think would be interesting to know is when you take a check ride, and you don't use a checklist, do you pass your check ride?

BTW: I am of the opinion that many items should be done via a "DO LIST" instead of a checklist. I AM NOT A FAN OF "FLOWS" to accomplish things. I have seen both methods and the most sure way of setting all switches prior to start is the "DO LIST".

"CHECK LISTS" make more sense while actually flying, moving etc.

IT seems to me that C150 types have a checklist printed on the sun visor. Piper had checklists printed on the instrument panel near the fuel gauges. But this is from memory as I have not flown either types this century. Or in the last 32 years.

[Genghis the Engineer]

As I said, the document called a checklist can be used in one of three ways...

Do - confirm

Read - Do

Challenge - Respond.


The first two are both potentially viable in light GA, and either can be built upon a flow, a written checklist, or a memorised mnemonic.


Incidentally

Standards Document 19 (A): Notes for the Guidance of Applicants taking the PPL Skill Test (Aeroplanes) | Publications | About the CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?appid=11&mode=detail&id=1206)

Page 11..

Throughout the flight the applicant will be expected to use the authorised aeroplane checklist. The applicant is to assume that the test is the first flight of the day. Airborne checks may be completed from memory, or from alternative notes, but must be in accordance with the checklist and wi th each check item spoken aloud.

Page 12...
The applicant will be expected to proceed with the checks at a practical pace and with reference to the checklist. Expanded checklists are not permitted. Where visual checks are made these should be described to the Examiner only if requested


And for CPL Standards Document 03: Notes for the Guidance of Examiners and Applicants taking the CPL Skill Test (Aeroplanes) | Publications | About the CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=1198)

Page 11..
hroughout the flight the applicant will be expected to use the approved aeroplane checklist. The applicant is to assume that the test is the first flight of the day. Airborne checks may be completed from memory, or from alternative notes, but must be in accordance with the checklist.

Or on page 20 of http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_lts_Stds%20Doc%2014V6_Sept%202012.pdf
Simulated emergencies (any emergency , abnormal procedure or system failure that is appropriate to the aeroplane on which the test is conducted) Correctly diagnose the problem Consider options and decide upon a sound course of action With reference to checklist, execute appropriate abnormal or emergency procedures Review, plan and execute further actions as appropriate to ensure safe recovery of aeroplane, passengers and crew


That seems to cover the checkride issue pretty well, at-least for us Brits. How about the yanks?

http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/test_standards/media/FAA-S-8081-14B.pdf

Page 36...
Task Management Reference : FAA-H-8083-15.
Objective: To determine that the applicant can prioritize the various tasks associated with the planning and execution of the flight. The applicant should:

1. Explain how to prioritize tasks in such a way to minimize distractions from flying the aircraft.
2. Complete all tasks in a timely manner considering the phase of flight without causing a distraction from flying.
3.Execute all checklists and procedures in a manner that does not increase workload at critical times

And page 38
Applicant’s Use of Checklists

Throughout the practical test, the applicant is evaluated on the use of an approved manufacturer’s checklist or equivalent. If no
manufacturer’s checklist is published, the appropriate FAA handbook or equivalent checklist may be used. Proper use is dependent on the specific Task being evaluated. The situation may be such that the use of the checklist, while accomplishing elements of an objective, would be either unsafe or impractical, especially in a single - pilot operation. In this case, a review of the checklist after the
elements have been accomplished would be appropriate. Division of attention and proper visual scanning should be considered when
using a checklist


So nobody is arguing for blind and unthinking use of checklists, but the world's two most competent aviation authorities seem pretty clear that you should be using one.

Unless there is something wrong with the standards of airmanship being required in the PPL and CPL checkrides / skill tests that I've missed?

G

[Pilot DAR]

world's two most competent aviation authorities

Or, "two of the worlds most competent aviation authorities..." ;)

....... aviation authorities seem pretty clear that you should be using one.

... And, as specifically mentioned, an approved one, at that.

This, and:

Expanded checklists are not permitted.

...really should be enough to remind pilots to do away with the multi page essays from non approved sources, and stick to what the manufacturer provides for the aircraft.

Thanks for the research G!

[Genghis the Engineer]

A much less clear question is what do we mean by "approved", and who is allowed to approve it?

G

[SpannerInTheWerks]

SSD:

In July of this year the Safety & Airspace Regulation Group, Flight Standards Department of the UK CAA published the latest revision of their 'Flight Examiners' Handbook (Aeroplanes and Helicopters)'.

Amongst other things the Handbook provides Guidance Notes for examiners conducting flight tests. The Guidance Notes for the LAPL/PPL(A) Skill Test Briefing are to be found at Appendix 2A. As a part of the Main Brief to be carried out by the Examiner under 'Operation' the Handbook states the Examiner should brief (my emphasis):

'Operation. You should conduct this flight in a safe and practical manner and in accordance with ATO Procedures and National Rules. Use your checklist while you are on the ground. In the air you may carry out checks from memory but following the checklist sequence. I want you to say aloud your check-list items as you do them.'

Insofar as the flight test is concerned the applicant, under paragraph 3.2.4, must demonstrate ability to: ... Maintain control of the aircraft at all times such that the successful outcome of a procedure or manoeuvre is never seriously in doubt. The applicant's airmanship and TEM must be assessed with each exercise and this must include lookout, checks and drills ...

Chicken - I'm not going to repeat what's been said. No-one mandates I use a checklist in an L4 Cub, a Chipmunk, or even a Yak52 (quite a complex aeroplane). So what are you on about?

No-one mandates I use a checklist - the UK CAA do!!!

That's what he's on about!!!

[Pilot DAR]

A much less clear question is what do we mean by "approved", and who is allowed to approve it?

The authority (CAA, FAA, Transport Canada, etc.) - whoever approved the aircraft.

Sec. 23.1581

General.

(a) Furnishing information. An Airplane Flight Manual must be furnished with each airplane, and it must contain the following:
.......
(b) Approved information.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, each part of the Airplane Flight Manual containing information prescribed in Secs. 23.1583 through 23.1589 must be approved, segregated, identified and clearly distinguished from each unapproved part of that Airplane Flight Manual.
........

This includes "Emergency Procedures" and "Normal Procedures" sections, from which manufacturer's checklists are derived.

If you are ramp checked (or worse, on the witness stand) and asked to produce the checklist you referred to for the flight, it would be helpful to you if the one you produced was obviously approved by the authority. The one you'll find in the Flight Manual is.

That said, I agree that there are a few aircraft flying out there which predate this requirement (pre 1949). I suppose with those, you just do your best if the POH provides no checklist.

[SpannerInTheWerks]

That said, I agree that there are a few aircraft flying out there which predate this requirement (pre 1949). I suppose with those, you just do your best if the POH provides no checklist.

Yes, some simple types (maybe homebuilds such as Nipper, Jodels etc) may be single seat and have no approved checklists. In those cases maybe there is no mandatory requirement for (or availability of) an approved checklist.

But types such as the Chipmunk and YAK - no excuse there I think!

Just because you may have flown a particular type over many years and have gained a substantial amount of experience doesn't exempt you from the basic principles of good airmanship (TEM) - no matter how much faith you have in your own intelligence.

Remember the greatest cause of accidents is still 'pilot error'.

The use of checklists can only serve to lessen the likelihood of errors arising due to inadvertence on the part of the pilot.

[Pilot DAR]

The use of checklists can only serve to lessen the likelihood of errors arising due to inadvertence on the part of the pilot. Yes, sort of....

I did use the term "referred to" to distinguish from "held in hand most of the time, and read from". I am in favor of the approved checklist being the reference for the flight, as opposed to a home made document of uncertain origin.

I have certainly seen situations where the over use or dependance on the paper checklist created a cockpit distraction, or interrupted the flow at the time. That could be worse than forgetting an item at that phase of flight. You can check gear down in thirty seconds, but not if you have a mid air first! Everything in moderation...

I'm not saying that the approved checklist has to be in the pilot's hand on a regular basis during the flight. It must be available, and the pilot must refer to it. Reference could be because it has been completely memorized, and I'm not against that, if it works for that pilot, in that aircraft type.

If, the pilot wishes to refer to the checklist directly that's fine too, other than "memory items" (emergency stuff) should be memorized. When I fly my 150, I know that the POH is in the seat pocket, and available. When I fly a Caravan, I'll be holding the paper, 'cause I don't fly them frequently, and costly mistakes can be made, particularly during the start.

This probably is one of those "do as I say, not as I do" situations. If a pilot needs to ask, they need to refer to the paper version of the approved checklist. Other pilots can probably fly entirely safely with recollection of the approved checklist, which must be available, should it be needed. But those pilots do no good by suggesting that other pilots do not need to refer to the paper checklist. Its a personal decision for a private flight, and a company policy for a commercial flight.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Quote:
Chicken - I'm not going to repeat what's been said. No-one mandates I use a checklist in an L4 Cub, a Chipmunk, or even a Yak52 (quite a complex aeroplane). So what are you on about?
Quote:
No-one mandates I use a checklist
- the UK CAA do!!!

That's what he's on about!!!

That's only for check flights, a tiny percentage of my flights, and post dates my operational flying flying anyway (and is indicative of the sort of 'official thinking' [that every PPL is a part-finished airline pilot - what tosh!] that led me to stop flying a while ago, after several very enjoyable decades).

My point stands! That the official mind now mandates checklists in check flights on simple aeroplanes says a lot about the trend of the official mind.

And where do today's 'non airline fodder' find a dHC1 checklist anyway? There are RAF pilot's notes of dubious worth, and ditto few 'home brewed' flying school Chippy checklists. Nothing from deHavilland Canada that I'm aware of. Never seen a manufacturer's POH, either.

[Pilot DAR]

Nothing from deHavilland Canada that I'm aware of. Never seen a manufacturer's POH, either.

From TCDS A-19, Issue 11 for the DHC-1, pages 3 and 4:

"Required Equipment Approved DHC-1 Chipmunk Airplane Flight Manual (DHC-1-2B-S3) PSM1-1S3-1" For example.

That model of the Chipmunk is required to carry the approved Flight Manual.

There are RAF pilot's notes of dubious worth

I would imagine that the RAF qualifies as an entity who are able to create and approve a Flight Manual, or other procedure, for aircraft that they operate, but that's just my opinion....

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

That model of the Chipmunk is required to carry the approved Flight Manual.

Ah! That explains the dymo-taped notice on the instrument panel "Spin recovery may require full forward stick. See also flight manual". But would you have time to un-stow it (from where?) find the relevant page, and follow what it says, before the ground intervened. :eek:

There's barely stowage space for a bit of paper with one's radio frequencies scribbled on it in a Chippy, never mind somewhere to keep a flight manual! Even my chart had to be stuffed down the side of the seat cushion when not in use (stowed behind my back for aeros!).

[Big Pistons Forever]

Ah! That explains the dymo-taped notice on the instrument panel "Spin recovery may require full forward stick. See also flight manual". But would you have time to un-stow it (from where?) find the relevant page, and follow what it says, before the ground intervened. :eek:

.

I would suggest the idea is that you study the manual before you fly the aircraft to familiarize yourself with its operating characteristics and any type specific peculiarities.

I find it puzzling why the UK GA scene has such an antipathy to using and following the manufacturers recommendations in the POH on the best way to operate the aircraft. Instead a lot of "one size fits all" practices such as turning off the carb heat on short final, something specifically prohibited for all Cessna SEP's; are rampant

[Pilot DAR]

never mind somewhere to keep a flight manual!

Yeah that can be a problem! I was flying an MD500E helicopter the other day. The Flight Manual was certainly aboard, in the compartment under your heels. Accessible if you lift your feet up! I never said that aircraft are well thought out as to where manuals are stored in the cockpit.

When I approve a placard for the instrument panel which includes "refer to Flight Manual [Supplement]", it is my hope that the pilot has made themselves familiar with the referenced details before they are airborne - that's part of the type familiarization whether you are checked out by someone, or check yourself out - in either case, you should be making yourself familiar. The placard just reminds you of that.

In my worst example of not reading a Flight Manual before flight, I was ferrying a new Cessna 303, and entering icing conditions, with all the deicing systems operating, to have a really bad - near fatal event related to icing. I later read in the Flight Manual that flight into known icing approval had been removed from the aircraft (it was to begin with) by an AD ,a d placard - the placard had not been installed. Thus my self checkout in the plane by cockpit and placard review had failed.

Read the FM before you fly the plane!

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I would suggest the idea is that you study the manual before you fly the aircraft

No **** sherlock! ;)

Did you really think I meant a Chippy pilot, spinning earthwards, frantically leafs through the flight manual for advice? :eek:

[SpannerInTheWerks]

SSD:

Sometimes you just have to accept you're wrong.

:)

[Big Pistons Forever]

SSD

Would that be the manual you did not even know existed until DAR provided the reference.......

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

....The one that, never in a million Sundays, would fit into a Chipmunk?

Spanner, I agree. But not in this instance. For why, see my earlier posts.

[Pilot DAR]

Yeah, I once thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken....

[SpannerInTheWerks]

Me too!!! :):):)

[maxred]

Operation and maintenance manual - DHC-1 Chipmunk (http://www.avialogs.com/en/aircraft/canada/dehavillandcanada/dhc-1chipmunk/operation-and-maintenance-manual-dhc-1-chipmunk.html#download)

For anyone interested in flying the DHC1 Chipmunk. And no, it does not fit in the aeroplane, however, tablet mounts are available via a ram mount.

Sorted.........

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Ah, that doc. Yes, I've had a copy of that for years as photocopied loose leaf sheets without that nice green cover. Never knew it was the official flight de Havilland Canada manual.

I remember using it to try to determine the limits on flying with the canopy partly open, but the only reference in there is that for aeros it should be fully shut. I found from experience that anything more than open to the 'second notch setting' did affect the aeroplane's handling in yaw (it became less stable). But there's nothing in the manual about that, only advice that the canopy has several 'open' settings. On hot days I generally flew it open just to first notch (except for aeros of course) which had no noticeable effect on handling. Second notch was good for aerial photography while steering with one's feet (which the Chippy does quite well!).

As an aside, I was taking off one day on a first post-maintenance flight when the canopy (which I'd checked by trying pull it open before we took off as I always did, and it didn't budge) became unlatched as we hit a particularly big Barton bump on take off, and slid right back. Too late to abort t/o, but luckily my mate in the back seat was on the ball and he caught it before it hit the stops, and we managed between us to get it closed and latched on the climb-out for a quick circuit before giving it back to the engineers for a bit of latch adjustment!

There's lots of stuff in there about maintenance procedures, and every Chippy pilot should study the flap system to see why VFE speeds should NEVER be exceeded! Those cables are thin, and failure will lead to asymmetric deployment.

But carry it in the aeroplane? Why?

And you'll note from the 'checklist' sections that the items covered are few and easily checked. Things like spin recovery are as taught in (in my day) in the PPL (no mention in the book of that placarded need for full forward stick, which in some circumstances is required). So why would you need a checklist when a comprehensive pre-flight inspection, including the engine and underneath, and a pre-flight left-to-right cockpit check covers everything? Just because some official, looking at flying training from the point of view of every PPL being airline fodder, thinks check-list-itis is ALWAYS good?

Why make things more complicated, introduce the possibility of 'doing checks by rote rather than thinking', by mandating a checklist on a biennial on such a simple machine flown by an enthusiastic and capable pilot (as all Chippy pilots are!) with no intentions of becoming a bus driver?

Would you use one in the even simpler J3 Cub?

Would you use one on a Dagling (about as simple as an aeroplane can get)?

Would you use one in a car? On a bicycle?

[Genghis the Engineer]

I used a mnemonic checklist in the flexwing I flew yesterday - that makes a J3 seem positively complicated

But I have to agree about manuals - regardless of some national regulations, I see no real value in having the POH on board any single pilot aeroplane.

G

[SpannerInTheWerks]

How've we got from:

I need to buy a Cessna 150/152 checklist.

to

I see no real value in having the POH on board any single pilot aeroplane.


That's Thread drift!!!

:confused:

[M-ONGO]

Spanner,

At least he is not reporting anyone to the authorities.

Now that's thread drift.

[Big Pistons Forever]

But I have to agree about manuals - regardless of some national regulations, I see no real value in having the POH on board any single pilot aeroplane.

G

I personally try not to make absolute pronouncements about anything in flying. I have been flying out of the same airport for 30 years. I don't carry any maps with me when I am flying locally as I am very familiar with the area. However I don't extrapolate the fact that I don't need a map for some flights to I don't need a map for any flight.

POH's are obviously quite variable and yes some are not very useful. However most of the people reading this thread are probably flying a Cessna or Piper made after 1975. These will have GAMA format and contain quite a bit of information some of which may become unexpectedly useful.

A personal example example of why having the manual on board is a good idea. I was off with a friend in a C 172S for a 150 $ hamburger one Sunday. After our personal low cholesterol warning light was extinguished we go to start up for the flight back and the battery is weak enough that it won't quite start. A local fellow sees what is happening and brings over a power cart. Now some systems require the battery master to be off with external power connected and for others it has to be on. Failure to get this right can damage the electrical system. So which one for this airplane ? Well a quick check of the manual and the answer is master off.

So what would you have done since you make a point of not carrying an aircraft manual ?

[ChickenHouse]

I see no real value in having the POH on board any single pilot aeroplane.

Just a remark from some strange country across the pond; for some local authorities such a statement could finally lead to pull the Certificate of Trustworthiness and invalidate the pilot license - no joke, just talk to someone i.e. under the repression regime of something called ZÜP ...

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

So what would you have done since you make a point of not carrying an aircraft manual ?

It's not that one 'makes a point of not carrying', it's that it won't fit into the bluddy aeroplane! Perhaps you are only used to aerial motor cars like C172s? Some of the more fun machines don't over indulge in the stowage department.

To answer your question, I'd have hand-swung it. That you didn't (it's no big deal on a 172) tells me you might be an aeroplane driver rather than an aviator.

[Genghis the Engineer]

What would I have done?

I'd have phoned somebody who had a manual. Or gone to see if there was one about the airfield I could borrow. Or for that matter looked it up in the POH I had on board, since I might well keep a copy as a matter of convenience.

Or dare I say it, used the "external power start" bit from the official checklist, which I'm pretty sure is there.

Stuck on the ground without the POH to look something up might be inconvenient, but it's unlikely to jeaopardise flight safety, as in that situation or most similar ones, you have the option not to fly.


But in flight? A pilot should be flying, or landing his or her aeroplane if they have a problem, and anything they really need should be either in their heads, or the checklist. I can think of very few, if any, occasions where you should be looking anything up in the POH in-flight, in a single pilot aircraft. And therefore, I do not see carrying a POH in flight as having any flight safety benefit - and if it doesn't, why mandate it?

G

[Piper.Classique]

G the eng...

Plus 1

Hasn't this thread gone on far too long?

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

G the E & P.C. Why wouldn't you just hand swing it? Job done in about 30 seconds and you're on your way.

[Piper.Classique]

I hand swing aeroplanes where I can reach without standing on tippy toes. That rules out a chippy, and plenty of others, for me. And anyway I need someone I can trust on the inside, especially with the super cub, which has shower of sparks mags. So one has to disengage the starter ( there is a switch) and turn the key to buzz the mags. Then the inside person has to get out engine running, from the front seat, and I have to get in. So actually I would rather be inside, with someone else doing the pulling on the prop. You going to come and do it for me? and what has this got to do with a C150 checklist anyway?

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The last Super Cub I flew had a standard Lycoming with ordinary mags. The only 'shower of sparks' (for start only of course) aeroplane I've flown was the Yak52. Some people hand-swing those, I'm told. I'm not one of them! It's bad enough 'walking' the prop through before start (it's too big to pull through, so so you push it a blade at a lime with your shoulder).

C172s are not the nicest aeroplanes to hand swing, but it's quite OK and at least with the prop turning the 'wrong' way you can do it from behind the prop (I find that easier) if you are right handed. Just like hand-propping a J3, but with the higher compression and shorter stroke of 'modern' flat fours it doesn't 'plop' over like a 65hp Conti.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I think that the point was a more general one than specifically about what to do with a flat battery in a C172.

I'm pretty certain that the conversation has gone rather beyond the C150 checklist, but that doesn't stop it being an interesting conversation.

G

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

G t E, you still haven't said why you wouldn't just hand swing it.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I didn't answer the question, because it didn't seem relevant, as the real point was about the usefulness, or not, of carrying a POH on board an aeroplane.


I hand swung an aeroplane with a flat battery on Friday. It wasn't a C172, I did have somebody I trusted and had briefed strapped into it.

I try to avoid C172s for several reasons, the main one being that I'm a shortarse and can't see over the instrument panel on most variants. I might avoid hand-swinging one mostly to give me an excuse to fly something nicer, or because I don't have gloves to hand, or because I haven't established that there isn't something more serious wrong with it than a flat battery. Mostly to have an excuse not to fly one.

G

[Thud105]

"...especially with the super cub, which has shower of sparks mags"

Garbage. I've flown lots of PA-18s. None (as in zip,zero, nada, not one etc etc) was fitted with a 'shower of sparks' mag.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Thud; +1

It looks to be bollox.

Has any Lyc been so fitted? I never heard of it.

[maxred]

Dear Christ, what has all of this got to do with the price of a lb of cheese.

SSD, a Cessna 172, hand swung from the rear, is, well nigh on impossible.

There was a fatality, a number of years back, with an acquaintance of ours, who decided to hand swing a 52. Not pretty.

I could never understand it. Like you, it was a big enough challenge to just turn the prop. We had a 50, although I have a number of hours on the 52. Both the types were not in the, lets hand swing it, variety.

Someone a bit back discussed thread drift, I am sure the OP, now has a number of hours under his belt, with the C152 checklist he got from here..

That said........

[Big Pistons Forever]

SSD, a Cessna 172, hand swung from the rear, is, well nigh on impossible.



Well by now the OP is probably long gone but as others have noted the thread is still interesting. Anyway I have hand propped C 172's many times, including one on floats.

Like SSD I prop them from the back. You can use your left hand to hold on to the cowl mounted refueling handle and the right arm to swing. The trick is to load the cylinders with the primer and then they will often go on the first flick. You don't have to be superman either as I once taught a 95 lb women how to do it.

With the small Chinese radials you don't even need to hand prop them as you pull through while priming to get a good mixture in the cylinders and then position the prop at the right spot a cylinder will fire as soon as you activate the shower of sparks. Doesn't work on the MP14, unfortunately, unless it has the Chinese mags.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

SSD, a Cessna 172, hand swung from the rear, is, well nigh on impossible.

Crikey, I wish I'd known that before I did it; countless times.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I do not see carrying a POH in flight as having any flight safety benefit - and if it doesn't, why mandate it?

G

How about when you get to your shortish strip and want to return but it is now pretty hot or you have an extra passenger and want to check the takeoff performance numbers.......

I do agree that looking something up in the POH while in flight, in the context of a single pilot flight in a GA aircraft, is unlikely but most aircraft have convenient stowage in the glove box or side panel/seat back pockets so why not have it available ?

The broader point is something I still feel worth mentioning. The POH seems to get scant attention in flight training yet the ones that come with aircraft built since the 1970's contain a wealth of useful data and need to be read and understood. That is hard to do when they are in the broom closet still is the original, now very yellow plastic wrapping........

POH are also serial number specific and the supplements are just as important as the main chapters. If the aircraft has any STC's than those will come with a flight manual supplement that should be in the back of the POH

Unfortunately older or more unusual aircraft usually have poor or non existent POH's. My Nanchang came with a very poorly translated 8 1/2 by 11 inch bulky hard bound "Flying Directions". It has high entertainment value (eg taxing is to be no faster than the PLAF double quick march pace :hmm:) but not a lot useful information. However I found a wealth of useful information through the warbird clubs, online, and from some pretty well translated maintenance manuals. Not having a spiffy nice POH is not an excuse to just ignore POH type information, rather it puts the onus on you to figure out what you need to know and go find it.

[Genghis the Engineer]

That is hard to do when they are in the broom closet still is the original, now very yellow plastic wrapping........

Or when it's in the aeroplane, so you can't have access to it for study before flying because somebody is flying said aeroplane (the standard US model).

The better UK flying schools get it right in my opinion - a shelf in the ops room with all of the official POHs on the shelf and accessible to everybody to study there, with photocopies of the most critical pages kept on the aeroplane in case somebody needs them when away from home base.

The syndicates I've been involved with in recent years have made sure that everybody has their own personal copy, but the original is kept locked somewhere safe as a "master" - many ways to do it.



But as for mandating it in the aeroplane in case it might be useful when away from home base - where do you stop? Tool set? Lifejackets? Spare spark plugs? All things I'll sometimes carry depending upon the trip - but I don't think any of them should be mandated.

Although, just maybe, the checklist should be on board?


G

[maxred]

Hand swinging props.

I'm actually relaxed swinging a proper rotation prop, and in something like a Cub from behind the prop, i.e. right-handed. I also have to have a good deal of confidence in the individual in the cockpit, and they have to understand that until I've walked away, I call the shots.

I am not comfortable swinging props on my own.

I will always use chocks, after a Chippy almost got me, and a couple of people who were standing close.:O

Most things will require chocks, although the Chipmunk brakes are quite good

The Cessna and Pipers with a pre-engaged starter, I will not touch, so that rules out the C172, for me. I also think it is nigh on impossible, safely.

The Yaks, a lot of folks still do, and on the 52, I think it stands too high, but admit if fully primed, it will fire reasonably easily.

Now where was that POH....

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The Cessna and Pipers with a pre-engaged starter, I will not touch, so that rules out the C172, for me. I also think it is nigh on impossible, safely.

Why?

The starter will only 'pre-engage' with the starter ring if someone operates the starter motor (on a 172, turns the key beyond the 'both' position). Just the same as with a non-pre-engaged starter motor, in fact.

Propping from behind is actually safer, since if the aeroplane moves, it moves away from you. That's the method I use on spam cans and Cubs. On the Chippy, a firm push on the wing's leading edge will confirm the brakes are properly 'on' and the aeroplane will not move.

Of course if you don't have faith in the person in the cockpit when swinging, walk away and leave it.

[Piper.Classique]

Thud and others. My Super Cub, which I have owned since 1989, and which I maintain, has shower of sparks mags. I haven't met another which has, but that does not change the fact that I HAVE SHOWER OF SPARKS MAGS. Don't be so quick to be rude please.

[Thud105]

Interesting. I've only ever seen 'shower of sparks'-type mags fitted to radials.
May I enquire as to the type of engine and type of mags fitted to your Super Cub?

[Piper.Classique]

Certainly. 0-320-A2C and they are well, Shower of Sparks! Or so they say on the data plates. I'm away from home so can't look up the details for you. With a starting buzzer aft of the firewall, and an isolator switch for the starter motor so that it is possible to hand swing if needed.
Interestingly enough, when the buzzer went TU, the engine would still start if cranked fast enough, but it needed everything exactly right, including probably the phase of the moon.
The aircraft is something of a bitser, converted from a 135 cub, and the wings are off two different aircraft. It was originally a cropsprayer, and we bought it from a Belgian gliding club.

[9 lives]

If you've tried to battery start a Lycoming, and run the battery down with no success, a hand swing of the prop will no longer work to start it, you're going to have to use ground power - so, having the POH, to assure the proper connection and operation is a good idea!

where do you stop? Tool set? Lifejackets? Spare spark plugs?

But on the other hand, where do you start? Checklists are required by regulation, a POH by regulation, or often the type certificate data sheet. It is not optional for the pilot to carry something required (which could include lifejackets - I wear mine). If the regulations were to be relaxed, so that the booklet which seems to have been lost, and does not fit well in the cockpit is not required in a small plane, at what point does it begin to be required?

We'd agree that a large plane should have one, so the crew can refer to manage the systems well, where would the don't need it/do need it line be?

I remember ferrying a Lake Amphibian for a friend. I had enough time flying Lakes, but this particular one was new to me. It was to be a longer flight, so I filled up the main tank, and the two wing tanks. There I am, a few hours into a very nice flight, and decide that it would be wise to use some of the wing fuel, so my main tank was still useful for approach and landing later. I could not figure out what I had to do to access the fuel I knew that I had put in those tanks - I could not find any valve or pump to operate, I read ever placard I could find - nothing. So, I found the POH, and read it, everything relevant to the fuel system - nothing. But I wasn't expecting to find a reference anyway, I knew that these tanks were an STC.

So, I used the "phone a friend" option. I did not want to phone the owner, as I would look pretty silly, so I phoned another friend. I had to wait until I had crossed a large lake to get cell coverage again, and now I was in the US, so I was paying roaming charges. After all of that, it turns out that the wing tanks just drain into the main tank, when it gets down a bit, no pilot action required - and nothing written anywhere to explain it!

Having the POH and checklist may only be a part of what you need, there might be important supplements too...

[Big Pistons Forever]

If you've tried to battery start a Lycoming, and run the battery down with no success, a hand swing of the prop will no longer work to start it, you're going to have to use ground power .
.

This would only be true if you had the Shower of Sparks Mag which are pretty rare, or the STC`d LASAR mag conversions. Virtually all of the small Lycomings are fitted with an impulse mag. These do not require any external power source.

That being said it is not a good idea to use external power if the battery is totally dead. After the engine starts the charging system will provide a very high charging current. This hard on the charging system, can damage radio`s but most importantly is absolutely death in the aircrafts` battery, which incidental will cost a minimum of 250 dollars to replace. With a dead battery the best solution is charge with a good battery charger before trying a start.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

True if the battery is totally dead as there will be no exitation current for the alternator to commence charging. But the common scenario is battery too low to turn prop over compression, but not dead.

Then a hand swing will get you on your way.

And of course 'normal' mags don't need external power - that's why we still use them in 2014!

[Piper.Classique]

Yes, well you didn't believe me about my mags, so I expect you will call me a liar if I tell you that my Cub has a generator. But it does. And will hand swing as long as there is some juice left in the battery. Just a bit. Then it charges.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

PC, apologies if your engine really does have SoS mags. Very unusual!

Generators? - oh yes, common on older engines!

[9 lives]

and run the battery down with no success, a hand swing of the prop will no longer work to start it, you're going to have to use ground power

I did not explain myself well. Many starters on Lycomings, once engaged, will not disengage the pinion from the ring gear, until started with the starter motor. With the pinion engaged, and coasting as you pull through, you likely cannot pull it through fast enough to get it started.

Thus, if you suspect that the starter will not start the engine, and you might have to hand prop it, don't attempt a starter start at all, to prevent getting the starter locked engaged.

[cockney steve]

After the engine starts the charging system will provide a very high charging current. This hard on the charging system, can damage radio`s but most importantly is absolutely death in the aircrafts` battery,

Bit of a sweeping generalisation, that!.
The charging apparatus, wether Dynamo or Alternator (and some are designed with residual magnetism , so are self-exciting even with a totally flat battery) In either case, are speed-dependent for output.

Assuming you have hand-propped (and, yes, you can do it without an impulse mag) your initial charge rate will be the maximum the apparatus can deliver at those revs....so, keeping the revs down will reduce the charge-rate....meanwhile, the voltage on the battery-plates will rise rapidly as they take a surface- charge.....this opposes the charging voltage, (which is governed to prevent overcharging and "boiling" away the distilled water content of the sulphuric acid electrolyte)

Unfortunately, this charging circuit is normally a compromise and it will NOT deep-charge a "flat" battery....to preserve battery -life, do not deep-cycle apply a regular float-charge and, yes, avoid high-current charging ,other than the surface-charge which is removed during a "normal" easy start.

Radios should not be affected if you minimise voltage-spikes usually caused by disconnecting a slave"jump" battery prematurely....about 2 minutes of fast-idle should see a drop in charge-rate as both batteries are linked and their surface-charges equalise.

Above, of course, applies to Lead-Acid types, sealed,Gel or "wet".

[9 lives]

Cockney Steve,

Interesting and valuable information - the kind of detail about aircraft systems that a pilot might learn by reading....... The flight manual for the aircraft!

How else would they know for certain what type of battery was installed, or alternator vs generator? Or, as BPF correctly mentioned, the proper selection of the battery master for the use of ground power!

Sure, there are some with oodles of experience with aircraft, who pretty well have some flight manuals memorized, and the aircraft systems equally so, but others are new, and need the resource. The regulations cannot tell who is who, so everyone is required to carry the flight manual - just in case!

If a placard is missing, and the pilot should know what it said, before it was scraped off by the passing bag, he could read the limitations section of the flight manual, and there it will be! I once nearly killed myself for not knowing the information on a placard, which had not been installed on a Cessna 303 I was flying - but it was in the flight manual - literally in fact, in a zip bag, stapled to the revised limitations page! The revised checklist also stated the newly prohibited operation - I wish I had read it before I tried it!

I watched a Mooney pilot/owner loose the skin from his knuckles, when attempting an emergency gear extension - you gotta pull that gear motor breaker before you turn the hand crank, or a few turns in, the motor will suddenly drive it, and as it comes around - Ouch!

I like flight manuals and checklists - and the skin on my knuckles!

[27/09]

If you prop swing an aircraft with a dead battery there's no guarantee the battery will charge with either an alternator or a generator.

In this situation very often the battery solenoid will not operate and the battery will not be connected to the aircraft electrical system. The generator or alternator will most likely run all the electrical systems but there will be no charge going to the battery.

The same can apply even when starting with a battery cart if the battery is dead flat.

[Piper.Classique]

PC, apologies if your engine really does have SoS mags. Very unusual!

Generators? - oh yes, common on older engines!


Yes, it does. Yes, it is unusual. Please do feel free to come and look. There are others on this forum who have flown the aircraft in question, as obviously I, as the owner, know nothing about the aircraft. Don't bother looking in the flight manual though, my approved flight manual is a scruffy bundle of A4 sheets giving information on a different engine and prop, with no other information that cannot be found elsewhere.
But the CAA, who cannot be wrong, have approved mine, so who am I to disagree?

Step Turn, I agree that a proper flight manual is a useful thing to have. I don't think many go in to the kind of detailed information that Cockney Steve has shared with us.