Citation Mustang Wheels-Up Closes Cambridge
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bali H'ai
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have it on good authority the go-around followed a prolonged takeoff balanced on the tailskid (over rotation bumper)which eventually wore out doing considerable damage to the tail end of the aircraft.
The appointment of the examiner/trainer in question proved the "Peanut Principle" mentioned in an earlier post.
The appointment of the examiner/trainer in question proved the "Peanut Principle" mentioned in an earlier post.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: uk
Age: 75
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aheamin
The Mustang has TAWS, which is another name for EGPWS.
Not quite, all EGPWS installations qualify to be called TAWS, but not all TAWS installations qualify to be classified as true EGPWS. It is dependant on whether the TAWS installation is TAWS A or B
The Mustang has TAWS, which is another name for EGPWS.
Not quite, all EGPWS installations qualify to be called TAWS, but not all TAWS installations qualify to be classified as true EGPWS. It is dependant on whether the TAWS installation is TAWS A or B
Join Date: May 2002
Location: dubai
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Pilot
"The FAA will accept the level D sim which IMHO is not good because no simulator represents the landing of the aircraft correctly"
Perhaps you are correct.
I would like to point out however, especially with aircraft with RA audio call outs, you should, as a Captain be able to close the throttles at say 5 feet. If you do nothing else from that point on until touch down, the landing should be reasonable, provided the basic techniques are there.
I think the FAA have it right in this case. Aircraft and personal are too valuable to be monkeying around, training. That is what the simulator is designed for and is a far better and safer training tool.
"The FAA will accept the level D sim which IMHO is not good because no simulator represents the landing of the aircraft correctly"
Perhaps you are correct.
I would like to point out however, especially with aircraft with RA audio call outs, you should, as a Captain be able to close the throttles at say 5 feet. If you do nothing else from that point on until touch down, the landing should be reasonable, provided the basic techniques are there.
I think the FAA have it right in this case. Aircraft and personal are too valuable to be monkeying around, training. That is what the simulator is designed for and is a far better and safer training tool.
Egpws / Taws
H750
I believe the difference between EGPWS and TAWS is that Honeywell took out a patent on the phrases GPWS and EGPWS so every other manufacturer has to call theirs TAWS A or B.
I htink the same goes for TCAS and ACAS. TCAS being Honeywell's patented name.
Regards
MM
I believe the difference between EGPWS and TAWS is that Honeywell took out a patent on the phrases GPWS and EGPWS so every other manufacturer has to call theirs TAWS A or B.
I htink the same goes for TCAS and ACAS. TCAS being Honeywell's patented name.
Regards
MM
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: all over the place
Age: 63
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Double U,
Perhaps but;
If a new FO perhaps on the first flight has an 'incapacitated' captain and has NEVER landed a swept wing jet there is the potential for trouble, or the same situation where someone is moving from one jet to another where one requires a positive push to lower the nose from one that required a hold off etc.
PB
Perhaps but;
If a new FO perhaps on the first flight has an 'incapacitated' captain and has NEVER landed a swept wing jet there is the potential for trouble, or the same situation where someone is moving from one jet to another where one requires a positive push to lower the nose from one that required a hold off etc.
PB
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MM
You can't patent a 'name', copyright perhaps. Anyway -
From a Honeywell Manual.
This manual applies to systems which are compliant to RTCA DO185A MOPS Change 7.0 and RTCA “DO- 185” MOPS Change 6.04a. These systems are referred to as TCAS II (Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System) in the United States and ACAS II (Airborne Collision Avoidance System) internationally. The terminology is used interchangeably and, for the purpose of discussion, TCAS II will be the terminology used in this manual.
I believe the difference between EGPWS and TAWS is that Honeywell took out a patent on the phrases GPWS and EGPWS so every other manufacturer has to call theirs TAWS A or B. I think the same goes for TCAS and ACAS. TCAS being Honeywell's patented name.
From a Honeywell Manual.
This manual applies to systems which are compliant to RTCA DO185A MOPS Change 7.0 and RTCA “DO- 185” MOPS Change 6.04a. These systems are referred to as TCAS II (Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System) in the United States and ACAS II (Airborne Collision Avoidance System) internationally. The terminology is used interchangeably and, for the purpose of discussion, TCAS II will be the terminology used in this manual.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Makes very interesting reading.
If the flap hinges were damaged, is that why the flaps were not retracted? As they were fouled, or was it because the commander failed to raise them?
Whichever it was, this was probably very lucky. At low speed, low height and then a differential flap retraction or the loss of a flap would have caused a far worse outcome.
"Landing Checklist Please"
"Enie, Meenie, Minie, Mo - Landing Gear - Down you go!"
If the flap hinges were damaged, is that why the flaps were not retracted? As they were fouled, or was it because the commander failed to raise them?
Whichever it was, this was probably very lucky. At low speed, low height and then a differential flap retraction or the loss of a flap would have caused a far worse outcome.
"Landing Checklist Please"
"Enie, Meenie, Minie, Mo - Landing Gear - Down you go!"
Last edited by Spunky Monkey; 2nd Feb 2010 at 18:42.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: crawley
Age: 74
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 Crew 2 Passengers on a Training Flight ???
I did not think youwere allowed Pax on a Training Flight (Never used to be) or maybe it all changed now @@@@
Regards
Gezza
I did not think youwere allowed Pax on a Training Flight (Never used to be) or maybe it all changed now @@@@
Regards
Gezza
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BFS
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps there were two other crew members also training sitting down the back but classed as pax as not operating?
Not pretty reading, I suspect there is more to read between the lines, it is a very simple statement of fact style report.
Not pretty reading, I suspect there is more to read between the lines, it is a very simple statement of fact style report.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it going to happen then circuit bash is the most likely place to see it especially on a dual training /check flight.
On a normal flight there is a sequence of events that are well drilled and expected
On a circuit session there are many traffic, atc and flight distractions which provide a greater opportunity for gear up landing.
Bad luck !
On a normal flight there is a sequence of events that are well drilled and expected
On a circuit session there are many traffic, atc and flight distractions which provide a greater opportunity for gear up landing.
Bad luck !
