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

King Air C90A controllability issues

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

King Air C90A controllability issues

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 2nd Feb 2024, 03:02
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 552
Received 81 Likes on 63 Posts
King Air C90A controllability issues

Here's a good one: "The pilot disengaged the autopilot and hand flew the aircraft resulting in minor controllability issues."

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...rt/ao-2024-003

Just what sort of training are people getting these days?!?
PiperCameron is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2024, 04:53
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Great South East, tired and retired
Posts: 4,382
Received 211 Likes on 96 Posts
Jeez. Looking across the cockpit at the other one must have been too hard. AI still working, Maybe turn off Tracking ? Use trims?
Ascend Charlie is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2024, 08:57
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
I get this a little bit different. Looking across the cockpit could potentially be called "minor controllability issue".
Nothing else can be said, based on the quoted text.
Michael S is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by Michael S:
Old 2nd Feb 2024, 17:13
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Age: 35
Posts: 241
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
Yes I think it depends on how you interpret the phrase 'minor controllability issues', it could simply be that the pilot's handling was less accurate than usual which I think would be understandable hand flying in IMC while looking across the cockpit for the HSI on the opposite side. I think it's a big call to question the quality of training based on that one single statement.
NZFlyingKiwi is offline  
The following 4 users liked this post by NZFlyingKiwi:
Old 2nd Feb 2024, 20:33
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,880
Received 193 Likes on 100 Posts
I was left seat early days in a Seneca 1 on an ILS into Essendon with the all the gear on my side with young instructor on the right, and I was super impressed at his ability to follow it amazingly well from that angle.

There’s a Seinfeld episode where he said from where the passenger is sitting, he’s doing 60 miles an hour and the tank is full, but from where he’s sitting, the tank is empty and he’s sitting in the driveway.
Squawk7700 is online now  
Old 2nd Feb 2024, 22:32
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,789
Received 415 Likes on 229 Posts
Originally Posted by NZFlyingKiwi
Yes I think it depends on how you interpret the phrase 'minor controllability issues', it could simply be that the pilot's handling was less accurate than usual which I think would be understandable hand flying in IMC while looking across the cockpit for the HSI on the opposite side. I think it's a big call to question the quality of training based on that one single statement.
Also quality of training would not be a factor if it's a 10,000 hour pilot that trained 30 years ago. Could also be lack of practice of raw data flying, which is creeping more and more into play given the amount of automation in all levels of Aviation. A turboprop captain told me how their co-pilot could not maintain +-400 feet in IMC when they had a primary attitude failure, he had to take over and fly when he'd rather be conducting the checklist and working out what had failed.

I was left seat early days in a Seneca 1 on an ILS into Essendon with the all the gear on my side with young instructor on the right, and I was super impressed at his ability to follow it amazingly well from that angle.
That is what the instructor is trained to do though, flying from the right hand side, pretty much all scans will be cross cockpit in trainers from the RH side.
43Inches is online now  
The following users liked this post:
Old 3rd Feb 2024, 04:49
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 51
Posts: 1,069
Received 129 Likes on 63 Posts
I’ve been heard to mumble…

Autopilot off, motion coming on!

😁
Global Aviator is online now  
Old 5th Feb 2024, 02:06
  #8 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 552
Received 81 Likes on 63 Posts
Originally Posted by 43Inches
Also quality of training would not be a factor if it's a 10,000 hour pilot that trained 30 years ago. Could also be lack of practice of raw data flying, which is creeping more and more into play given the amount of automation in all levels of Aviation. A turboprop captain told me how their co-pilot could not maintain +-400 feet in IMC when they had a primary attitude failure, he had to take over and fly when he'd rather be conducting the checklist and working out what had failed.
That didn't lead to an ATSB Incident Investigation though, did it? So what's the go here?? Is the HSI even on the MEL?

..or are Part 135 pilots so fragile these days that the second the autopilot gives up they report it to the ATSB (as if they have nothing better to do)?!? April 1 is a while away yet.
PiperCameron is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2024, 02:44
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... It's Permanent!
Posts: 4,292
Received 169 Likes on 86 Posts
Originally Posted by PiperCameron
the second the autopilot gives up they report it to the ATSB
The autopilot did not give up. It was disconnected due to not having a valid lateral mode.
As the aircraft was in operating in Class E Airspace, the pilot would have notified ATC of the Altitude and Tracking issues.
Capt Fathom is online now  
Old 5th Feb 2024, 02:50
  #10 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2022
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 552
Received 81 Likes on 63 Posts
Originally Posted by Capt Fathom
The autopilot did not give up. It was disconnected due to not having a valid lateral mode.
As the aircraft was in operating in Class E Airspace, the pilot would have notified ATC of the Altitude and Tracking issues.
And that was serious enough to warrant an Incident report?? In Class A or C maybe, but unless someone is wanting to make an issue of the piloting skill of the poor unfortunate at the controls, surely there's something else going on here..
PiperCameron is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2024, 05:09
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Age: 35
Posts: 241
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by PiperCameron
And that was serious enough to warrant an Incident report?? In Class A or C maybe, but unless someone is wanting to make an issue of the piloting skill of the poor unfortunate at the controls, surely there's something else going on here..
With respect, it seems to be you wanting to make an issue of the piloting skills in question. Perhaps it was a slow day at the pilot's company or the ATSB but surely reporting more is preferable to reporting less.
NZFlyingKiwi is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2024, 05:36
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 2,194
Received 155 Likes on 103 Posts
Originally Posted by PiperCameron
And that was serious enough to warrant an Incident report?? In Class A or C maybe, but unless someone is wanting to make an issue of the piloting skill of the poor unfortunate at the controls, surely there's something else going on here..
It may have been reported by an overly zealous Safety Manager. They do occasionally need to be seen reporting events, as a total lack of minor incidents can look a bit sus come audit time. It gives some people the warm fuzzies to have safety meetings etc, and occasional minor reports can create a smokescreen for more serious stuff, which doesn’t always get to the authorities.
(sorry for the cynicism; not making any accusations here, as I know nothing of the operator or even whether they have a safety department, but I have seen this before…)
Or, it could simply be the way the extensive list of Reportable Matters has been interpreted by a diligent pilot. For example, it could be said that when the HSI failed, because the autopilot was unusable, this amounted to a multiple systems failure. Reporting is then a case of CYA, should your friendly CASA FOI be anal.

Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 5th Feb 2024 at 07:46. Reason: no conspiracy, pure speculation
Mach E Avelli is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by Mach E Avelli:

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



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.