Lessons learned from a Europa prang
Moderator
Thread Starter
Lessons learned from a Europa prang
I found this AAIB report extremely interesting reading.
The first and most obvious learning point is that the 90 day rule has some value.
Less obvious, my experience is that the LAA is very poor at ensuring proper authoring and validation of their POHs (or even in some cases, whether the aeroplane should have one at-all). In this case, it appears that an inexperienced pilot was playing around with techniques, where at-least a really well written manual would have given him something clear to work with.
An interesting point is AAIB's "An instructor may have been able to intervene appropriately to prevent the accident." We're all familiar with intervention methods, but was the lack of readily available instructors who know the Europa a reason why he was flying with a PPL who knew the type, but not supervisory flying?
One thing I'd be interested to have seen, but AAIB didn't look at is the airstrip. I wonder how any rational performance analysis would have shown the ability of that aeroplane, on that day, at that weight, to land on that strip? And again, how reliable would the LAA POH data have been? - the manufacturer don't seem to declare any take-off or landing distances. And realistically, how good can an instructor, or ordinary pilot, be be if he's not given the "S" from the SHELL model to work with in the first place.
G
The first and most obvious learning point is that the 90 day rule has some value.
Less obvious, my experience is that the LAA is very poor at ensuring proper authoring and validation of their POHs (or even in some cases, whether the aeroplane should have one at-all). In this case, it appears that an inexperienced pilot was playing around with techniques, where at-least a really well written manual would have given him something clear to work with.
An interesting point is AAIB's "An instructor may have been able to intervene appropriately to prevent the accident." We're all familiar with intervention methods, but was the lack of readily available instructors who know the Europa a reason why he was flying with a PPL who knew the type, but not supervisory flying?
One thing I'd be interested to have seen, but AAIB didn't look at is the airstrip. I wonder how any rational performance analysis would have shown the ability of that aeroplane, on that day, at that weight, to land on that strip? And again, how reliable would the LAA POH data have been? - the manufacturer don't seem to declare any take-off or landing distances. And realistically, how good can an instructor, or ordinary pilot, be be if he's not given the "S" from the SHELL model to work with in the first place.
G
Moderator
Thread Starter
Possibly an instructor knows better how and when to intervene without making things worse? Rather than that an experienced non-instructor pilot wouldn't try to intervene. The obvious case here being insisting much earlier on a go-around.
G
G
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is definately a change in mind set on the instructors course.
You just keep on getting told that the students are out to kill you.
Also as well there are no discussions about coockpit gradient ie the person flying will 9 times out of ten do as they are told without talking back. And the 1 in 10 that don't, just get it taken off them. Also as well instructors will tend to have more experence for seeing a bad situation developing and will take control of it before it developes to a dangerous one.
You just keep on getting told that the students are out to kill you.
Also as well there are no discussions about coockpit gradient ie the person flying will 9 times out of ten do as they are told without talking back. And the 1 in 10 that don't, just get it taken off them. Also as well instructors will tend to have more experence for seeing a bad situation developing and will take control of it before it developes to a dangerous one.
