Handswinging?

[Centaurus]

Basic Airmanship'?
EVEN - 'Airmanship'..?? NOW that's a whole new ball-game for some of the 'younger gen.' so it would seem(?) .

Is there some sort of CASA paperwork that certifies a pilot is competent to hand-start an aeroplane type. Like this in my first RAAF log book date 16/4/1952. Certified

1. I have read and understood Air Board and RAAF Station Uranquinty Flight Orders relating to flying and operational limitations of the DH-82 aircraft and the Gypsy Major engine.
2. I am conversant with:-
(a) Action in the event of fire.
(b) Procedure of abandoning the aircraft.
(c) Fuel, oil and ignition systems.
(d) Starting and stopping of the engine (including airscrew swinging)

Date 16/4/52........Signed.... Trainee Pilot Centaurus.
............................................................ ...........................

Strangely enough there was no such certificate certifying that we were conversant with airscrew swinging of the Wirraway or Mustang. Maybe because they were never meant to be hand-swung. Well neither are Cessna's, Barons or a myriad other present day aeroplanes. Lawyers would have a field day if someone gets an arm chopped off simply because someone could not be bothered to fix a flat battery or crook starter motor.

PS. During the war in an emergency the props of the DC3 Dakota could be hand swung either by a human chain of four or five people linking hands and some sucker to pull the prop. Or putting a rope around the prop dome and having a jeep pull the rope to get the prop turning.

No charge for the history lesson, chaps

[spinex]

Wahll I'll be buggered, so it is. Will have to be sure and tell the old geezer that taught me that he had it all ar$3 about, all these years.

[blackhand]

Sliced Seminole
Nobody died, but still damnable

BH

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Hi Mr C,

The 'visual pic' of someone even thinking about the Merlin......I'm not even sure I could turn one 'over'... once......

As you did say, 'strange' there were no certificates for same.....

[Slippery_Pete]

leaving a relatively simple issue to be resolved by twisting (if memory serves) only 3 wires from the back of the key barrel together to allow 2 hot mags...

If the type of people who handswing props also think that twisting a few mag wires together is an adequate and safe solution, that tells me a lot.

My recollection is that magnetos are made dead by connecting the P lead to ground.

However, twisting some wires together by hand which could vibrate loose at any time and stop the engine... If I had been your boss, I would have told you never to try and do me any favours again, EVER. I can just imagine a light plane at low altitude, gliding with a failed engine while the pilot fiddles around under the dash with some magneto wiring. Nice

I will never hand swing a prop, period. And will never encourage a junior pilot to do so either. There may be some people with excellent training, vast experience who never make mistakes... but the reality is, that by engaging in prop swinging, you are placing yourself in a group of people where death can and does occur on a regular basis.

I survived many thousands of hours in the 90's at remote locations with unreliable GA aircraft and never swung a prop or twisted metaphorical wires together. Yes, it resulted in a few ****ty bosses at times with aircraft grounded in the bush, but they got over it. In fact, I remember hearing an owner/CP say to a junior pilot on the phone "the only thing that will cost me more $ than flying out a rescue plane with an engineer, is you trying to be a hero and chopping your arm off or my aircraft running away and pranging into a ditch".

He was a smart man.

[Wally Mk2]

'RS' I think yr drawing a very looong bow there with ref to mech devices to start engines is the same as hand swinging. Yr connection to both being technically one of the same are miles apart as a starter motor used for starting an engine is far safer than the 'armstrong' method hence we have them in the first place today! The core subject here is safety or just how safe is it with hand swinging & in my opinion ( & that's all it is) hand propping is damn dangerous & should be avoided at all costs in today's modern A/C.

'MIHC' you too are drawing a loong bow with ref to yr prop face. Whilst you are technically correct as far as the operation of a prop goes it's generally accepted that the front of the prop is the part that you face whilst holding it during the dangerous act of hand swinging same.

Still at the end of the day it's about choice. Being able to hand start an engine doesn't mean yr any better than a pilot who can't or doesn't want to, the latter may simply want to improve his chances of flying the next day.

'slippery' I'm with you

Wmk2

[Capt Fathom]

Once hand swung a C206. It took a back-breaking 30mins! But it was worth the effort. The swim home was 60nm!

[Fondair]

Still at the end of the day it's about choice. Being able to hand start an engine doesn't mean yr any better than a pilot who can't or doesn't want to, the former may simply want to improve his chances of upgrading to the company twin the next day.

Fixed that one for you Wally. Lets get the job done!

[CHAIRMAN]

Gipsy engines and others built in the days when hand propping was the accepted method, allow you to position the prop on the crankshaft such that the compression occurs about at the horizontal position, and because most are taildraggers, the compression occurs above waist height.

On the other hand, most 2 blade Lyco engines (not sure about Contis) have a defined crank/prop position to reduce vibration/harmonics, and which, if hand swinging, places the compression point about knee height or below, a position which makes SAFE hand propping almost impossible.

ALL hand swinging should be treated with the utmost caution and full concentration (there are NO second chances if you get it wrong).

I regularly hand prop the Gipsy, but would have to be really stuck to contemplate the exercise on a Cherokee - as stated in other posts, the risks are simply not worth it, don't even think about it in a modern aircraft unless you have been trained specifically by someone very experienced on swinging the particular type.

Like the idea of the jeep on the DC3 - very inventive and above all,safety conscious

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Hi Mr RS,

I note your remark re the 'high wing' twin...and that would confirm my point re the physiology of swinging a 'high' vs a 'low' mounted prop.

May the force be with you....


Frank,
'Horses for courses',....Not being a critic, just explaining why I do it the 'other way'...
I still swing the Chippy from the rear, if only because -- I can easily see, and talk to the little man in the cockpit - you know, switches off /on etc...and,
- IF the little man in the cockpit has NOT pulled on sufficient brake, then the 'thing' will simply walk AWAY from me until the leading edge of the wing touches my backside. Then I am the brake.
- Plus, I get to hold onto the engine cowl whilst I pull the prop down with my left hand, so I will not overbalance / don't have to 'step back' etc etc.
Works for me.

Whatever works for you is good too.


And Hi Pete,
I'm with you.

I would have sacked the bloke on arrival I reckon.
Imagine, you are coming up the valley into Queenstown, over water, and the wires you so carefully 'soldered together / twisted crossed', (Of course there was no soldering iron...) decided to part from each other, with the pilot sitting at the wheel....
I cannot even imagine him being able to slide the seat back sufficiently, fly the aeroplane, locate and twist the 'right' wires back again - UNDER the panel - by 'touch'..(?) and restore 'order' to the engine....

I reckon his SLF would have got very wet!! And they definitely would have missed their flight!!
However, obviously, they all 'made it' this time around......
But.......
And, this was a COMMERCIAL OP??

Cheers

[Centaurus]

Former military pilots who learned to fly on Tiger Moths were taught to hand swing the prop from the front of the aircraft never the rear where the leading edge of the wing could knock you into the prop if the aircraft happened to jump the chocks, or the chocks slide on wet grass.

Extract from the Royal Air Force Flying Training Manual Air Publication 129 Revised November 1937. Reprinted June 1938. Part1 - Landplanes

Chapter 2 Hand swinging. Para 41 (i) "A qualified officer or airman is to occupy the pilot's seat, another officer or airman trained in hand swinging, is to stand in front of the aircraft.

It was clear all those years ago that the RAF knew what was dangerous when it came to hand swinging and this is what was published at Para 24 Chapter 2 of AP 129 in 1937. Maybe readers might laugh at these words now but this is what was the Truth.

General The following regulations have been laid down so that aero engines may be started with minimum danger to all concerned. The neglect of these regulations has caused many very serious accidents.

The methods of starting. It is usually impossible to start a modern high powered engine by hand swinging. The following mechanical means are employed:-

1..Compressed gas starters.
2. Compressed air starters.
3. Hand cranking gear.
4. Inertia starters.
5. Electric starters.
6. Hucks starters.

A description of these mechanical methods is given in paras48 to 54 and the standard drill for all methods of starting is laid down in paras. 44 to 47. Hand starting is not to be attempted when one of the above mentioned methods is available

Seems the Royal Air Force of 1937 paid much greater respect to the dangers of hand starting than the current generation of general aviation pilots in Australia?

[RadioSaigon]

OK, fair enough. Hotwiring Mags was not the best call I could have made -but let's not lose sight of the fact this was 30+ years ago. Things were different then. It was the end of an era when things really were done differently. Some of the stories I could relate from that time would truly get the collective PPRuNe 'gurus' panties in a bunch At no time did I say I thought it was a good idea -or if faced with a similar situation today that I would consider a similar course of action. I related that story to illustrate a point, not to advocate a similar course of action today. Dare I say it, the realities of being a young, fresh CPL in their 1st job at that time with hundreds of others barking at your heels for that job led many a young pilot to do things that wiser heads may not have... not all of us survived, not all that died passed due directly aviation related activities -none that I'm aware of as a consequence of Armstrong starting. Perhaps, if some of those climbing on their high-horses here are as old and experienced as their profiles and comments suggest, you may have done something back in your past career you would not consider now? Please, try to retain some balance in your comments.

My point of course is/was that handswinging should not be written off as simply too dangerous to contemplate, as some here certainly appear to be. If you are properly trained, think the process through thoroughly, plan and prepare appropriately and execute as planned, handswinging an engine may just save the day. The process must be treated with the respect it deserves. In my opinion it is just another skill that pilots need to be aware of, properly trained in and fully cognizant of the risks inherent.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Hi Mr C,

I appreciate your post - however, 'horses for courses'.....

Most G/A pilots would by necessity, have to operate on their own from time to time.

As a PPL, I too was shown the RACNSW 'way' of swinging Chippies from the front, but, it did require two people.

When I was instructing on Tigers and Chippies, later, I was shown the benefits of swinging from the rear, by a VERY experienced Tiger owner / pilot who had his own croppie business, was very well respected in the industry by all - including the Regional DCA examiners of the time.
I say all of this to give the guy credibility.

I must say, I much prefer the extra safety of doing it this way - especially when solo.

I still operate my Tiger that way.

Current methodology at RACWA is 'from the rear'.

'Horses For Courses'......

Cheers

[kaz3g]

1. There isn't enough space between the arc of the prop and the leading edge of the wing on a PA28 to safely swing from behind in my view.

2. Remember that at the bottom of the arc on a TW aircraft the prop is closer to your legs/private bits than it is to your head at the top if you swing from the front and vice versa... hence swing from the rear.

3. My Auster, like many others, is fitted with a Lycoming and an electrical starter.

4. Enjoy the wise words of Dick Gower, Chipmunk owner and CFI with more than 12,000 hours of instruction here http://www.ycem.com.au/images/CFS/armstrongstarter.pdf

kaz

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

'MIHC' you too are drawing a loong bow with ref to yr prop face. Whilst you are technically correct as far as the operation of a prop goes it's generally accepted that the front of the prop is the part that you face whilst holding it during the dangerous act of hand swinging same.

No apologies here. It's either right or it's not and a 100% incorrect "generally accepted" term needs to be taught correctly from the start, not perpetuated because people need to think about it. I can see what spinny meant, but this would be just another example of perpetuation if not corrected.

Hopefully, thing like this encourage people to get back to a bit of theory from time to time.

Left drift and right drift can easily be interpreted either way too.
Are we heading left to allow for left x/w or heading right to prevent being pushed left?

[osmosis]

The very fact different aero engines can be hand-started by different methods, by different people with success indicates it can be safe, yes? It has been done and will continue to be done, a matter of necessity.

But one point not really appreciated so far is swinging a 2 blade prop on the C185/188 and others of similar configuration. No prizes for realising the prop hub is high, the tail is low, and the down-swinging blade moves forward in its rotational plane. But you can't reach it of course, it's too high. You have to push the lower blade up, moving toward the prop as you do so.

It's a pity more lames didn't have more input into this thread.

[Frank Arouet]

I have, by necessity swung a PA-32 in the bush, but it's a big ask and at my age now is nothing I would contemplate.

A lot of 60-70's era, IO 500 type engined aeroplanes had external power jacks and most aeroplanes had cables. Said something of the battery technology of the day I guess. Modern battery's are better of course, but we still get caught sometimes.

Excepting Flight of The Phoenix stuff, I personally limit hand swinging to the smaller engines. As for fiddling with electrics or anything under the cowl, (except for homebuilts etc), I would expect the presence of a LAME in spite of pressure from "management".

[baron_beeza]

It's a pity more lames didn't have more input into this thread.

I am sure many LAME's here will be following this.
I have worked for the Tiger Club in the UK and that was my job there.. I can't think of one aircraft at the time that had an electric starter fitted.

I also did my share of glider towing in a Cub sans battery etc also.

I last swung a prop about 10 days ago, - a Tomahawk.
Easy to do but you have to be aware of the starter Bendix engagement and plan around that. You also need to be aware of the magneto set-up so you start on the impulsed mag only. Generally the left mag as in this case. Some aircraft will have both mags fitted with the couplings and the loop at the back of the switch opened accordingly. My own Tomahawk has that arrangement.

My experience of pilots trying to swing in this day and age has been that they have little idea. Fair enough, they have not been taught.... the best thing in that case is to not even think about attempting it.
Just look at the runaway aircraft scenario alone, - it is many more than you would expect.

I think another point being overlooked is the starting procedure of a typical 1970's GA machine.
I see guys cranking and cranking not even realising that only half the plugs are firing. If you flood the lower plugs then those cylinders are out of the equation. These guys expect an engine to basically run on two cylinders.
Often you can get a result by releasing the switch from the 'Start' position as soon as it fires. This will allow ALL spark plugs to fire and may be enough to catch the engine. Especially if it rotating reasonably fast on the starter anyway.
Some aircraft have had their HT leads arranged so that the 'Left' mag actually supplies the top plugs on both banks... it would pay to talk to the LAME if you think that may be the case with your machine.
I have also seen the mag 'P' leads reversed so that the wrong mag is trying to do the starting, - ie the Impulse is actually disabled during the start.


I think we all appreciate the risks involved in hand swinging or in getting out the jumpers. They are very real risks. We need to think and act accordingly.
Many do not..

[Frank Arouet]

Getting CASA to include anything on any training syllabus that doesn't give them Carte Blanche to make your life miserable is a waste of time, so the technique should be at least demonstrated by somebody competent during training.

[27/09]

Imagine, you are coming up the valley into Queenstown, over water, and the wires you so carefully 'soldered together / twisted crossed', (Of course there was no soldering iron...) decided to part from each other, with the pilot sitting at the wheel....
I cannot even imagine him being able to slide the seat back sufficiently, fly the aeroplane, locate and twist the 'right' wires back again - UNDER the panel - by 'touch'..(?) and restore 'order' to the engine....

I'm amazed no one else has picked up on the "twisted together" comment.

Actually just undoing the wires, "P leads", from the switch is all that's needed to make the mags live. The mag switch connects the "P leads" of the mags to earth when the mags are "OFF". The earthing or grounding of the "P lead" stops the mag producing a spark.

So there's no need to worry about the leads becoming untwisted though you would want to ensure the leads didn't come in contact with the airframe and thus earthing the "P lead". This would be very easy to ensure. Though for the engine to stop both "P leads" would need to be touching the airframe.

I would consider undoing the "P leads" as a very practical way of solving the dilemma described by RS. I cannot see why his boss should have thought about sacking him. The main issue to consider is that the mags would be "live" all the times and extreme care is required WRT to touching or going near the prop when the aircraft is parked.