Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Light plane flips at Moorabbin airport, trapping pilot

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Light plane flips at Moorabbin airport, trapping pilot

Old 6th May 2021, 06:53
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
why didn't CASA airworthiness notice this when the Bristell was approved for student training?
That doesn't happen. However, CASA knew that the type was used for incipient spin training per their Part 61 requirements yet was not approved for intentional spins and did nought about it.

Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
If, as claimed in the report, some instructors said the Bristell would drop a wing in the stall, then could this be an airworthiness issue? After all, there are certification rules that govern wing drop tolerances.
Not really, the requirement is for the test pilot to be able to prevent the wing drop exceeding specified amounts - that is test pilot, not just an instructor let alone a student pilot.
David J Pilkington is offline  
Old 6th May 2021, 07:46
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,162
POH is as follows;
Balked Landing (Go around) 1. Throttle - full power (max.5800 rpm) 2. Wing flaps - extend as needed 3. Trim - adjust as needed 4. Wing flaps - retract at height of 150 ft after reaching 120 km/h (65 KIAS) 5. Trim - adjust 6. Repeat circuit pattern and landing
Seems a perculiarly written go-around procedure. Is that a manufacturer's POH or a flying school document? Extending flap in a go-around is most odd. Similarly all this advice about trimming doesn't sound like a manufacturer's language as trimming should be normal airmanship? Also use of 150 ft seems a bit dodgy when most height restrictions are in whole numbers e.g. 200 feet. As for "Repeat circuit pattern and landing" what a strange addition to a go-around procedure that is?

Not really, the requirement is for the test pilot to be able to prevent the wing drop exceeding specified amounts - that is test pilot, not just an instructor let alone a student pilot.
What is the specified limit of amount of wing drop (if any) at the point of stall for LSA certification requirements? Non LSA types? it shouldn't be a case of how cunning a test pilot is to prevent a wing drop. Either an aeroplane drops a wing at point of stall or it doesn't.

Is this at idle power? if not, how much power has to be used to meet certification requirements? Seems to me a grey area when it comes to LSA certification as against non LSA types.

David J Pilkington is online now Report Post
Centaurus is offline  
Old 6th May 2021, 08:51
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
Either an aeroplane drops a wing at point of stall or it doesn't.
Quite a few configurations and flight states to consider, for example

Of course there was that error in the crew moment arms back then so the actual CG was further aft than determined by the POH.

Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
Is this at idle power? if not, how much power has to be used to meet certification requirements? Seems to me a grey area when it comes to LSA certification as against non LSA types.
Not a grey area at all as it seems to me that the requirements are quite clear.

Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
David J Pilkington is online now Report Post
Feel free.
David J Pilkington is offline  
Old 6th May 2021, 11:31
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 19
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
Seems a perculiarly written go-around procedure. Is that a manufacturer's POH or a flying school document? Extending flap in a go-around is most odd. Similarly all this advice about trimming doesn't sound like a manufacturer's language as trimming should be normal airmanship? Also use of 150 ft seems a bit dodgy when most height restrictions are in whole numbers e.g. 200 feet. As for "Repeat circuit pattern and landing" what a strange addition to a go-around
Copy pasted direct from the POH.
Framcicles is offline  
Old 6th May 2021, 11:36
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 19
Originally Posted by Squawk7700 View Post
Iím impressed that you were one of the lucky ones that actually got a CPL from there!
Got a good theory instructor (Kris K) who not only was a wealth of knowledge, but straightened me out to get my priorities right. Also finished at a time when the big glut of students passed, we all got along and were determined to finish. Also finished bang on my allotted hours, so wasnít forced to pay overs like a lot of students.
Framcicles is offline  
Old 7th May 2021, 00:44
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,162
Not a grey area at all as it seems to me that the requirements are quite clear.
Thanks David. That certainly clears things up for me.
Centaurus is offline  
Old 7th May 2021, 00:51
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
Thanks David. That certainly clears things up for me.
FAA AC 23-8C, the FAR 23 Flight Test Guide is also a good read.
David J Pilkington is offline  
Old 8th May 2021, 04:54
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Latrobe Valley
Posts: 1
Be interesting to see if these findings play a role in the class action.

What's the latest rumour in regards to the Class Action against BHI/Soar? everything's gone really quiet on that front, did the mediation in March go ahead?
Ardo196 is offline  
Old 29th May 2021, 18:35
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Currently: A landlocked country with high terrain, otherwise Melbourne, Australia + Washington D.C.
Posts: 394
Foxbat bashing has been soarly missed.
Okihara is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2021, 02:59
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Tooradin
Posts: 6
Centaurus, I like everything you say. In my experience a go around from the flare or a bounce usually needs considerable forward stick force as power is applied and airspeed is regained. Quickly followed by adjustment of trim and flap. I doubt this is ever taught.
SBrommers is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2021, 00:45
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 615
POH is as follows;
Balked Landing (Go around) 1. Throttle - full power (max.5800 rpm) 2. Wing flaps - extend as needed 3. Trim - adjust as needed 4. Wing flaps - retract at height of 150 ft after reaching 120 km/h (65 KIAS) 5. Trim - adjust 6. Repeat circuit pattern and landing
This does make some sense to me as being a little more prescriptive for novice pilots. Everywhere I've worked at has had bounce and balloon recovery as part of its syllabus pre-solo. One operator had a strict go-around on bounce/balloon policy, due to the threat of tail strike or prop strike from students trying a second attempt on landing. The same operator also had the students recite a go-around procedure of "Going around, full power, right rudder" as the aircraft had a nasty yaw at low speed,full power application (high power, short tail). Reminding pilots to trim, is a constant thing instructors do, this still happens well into some pilots careers. Pretty sure some airline sim instructors have had to remind some quite high time pilots to trim during approaches and go-rounds, I've heard it in many a debrief.

I once witnessed a student conduct 4 go-rounds during a first solo and then land perfectly, he just didn't feel happy with the first few attempts. I had a student on second solo once have crosswind increase slightly above his comfort level, so he went around, and requested the crossing runway to land. It might be assumed a pilot has airmanship, but if an aircraft has a sneaky bite to it, why not include it in the procedure. The wing flaps extend part is the more peculiar statement, but I don't know this type.

The additive "Repeat circuit pattern and landing" says to me, don't attempt to save the landing, just do another circuit. I was never a fan of teaching students to catch balloons/bounces and try to land extending landing distance and increasing the chances of mishaps. Go-round should be part of a solo check as much as each landing is.
43Inches is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2021, 01:01
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia the Awesome
Posts: 302
Originally Posted by 43Inches View Post
Pretty sure some airline sim instructors have had to remind some quite high time pilots to trim during approaches and go-rounds, I've heard it in many a debrief.[/color]
Going from A320 to B787, had to learn how to use Pitch trim all over again😂😂
Roj approved is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.