Aircraft type
 

i've just got back from the US after completing my JAA PPL in a Cessna 152. I'm planning to fly a Grumman AA5 now i'm back which is privately owned by a friend of mine.
Who needs to check me out on this. Is it the aircraft owner or does it have to be a CAA instructor. Basically am i OK to fly this aircraft ??

The law will let you go right ahead and fly the aircraft but i strongly recomend that you do a few hours with an instructor who has some time on the type.

The flight manual is not the best so read it very carefuly as the performance data is hard to extract (another reason for an instructors help)

I would advise not to be "checked out" by the owner as he will probably be not as informed as an instructor who flys the type and if you do something wrong the instructor will be much more likly to recover the situation without a drama.

There's a second issue here - flying in the UK is very different to the USA (we have weather for start!).

Whatever the law says, you'd be well advised to spend a couple of hours in the AA5 with a QFI, doing trips in UK airspace, then you've filled both safety boxes.

G

Avrodamo,

If your ears are burning it’s because other people are discussing your situation on the instructors’ forum under the topic of Differences Training!

Horsepower



[This message has been edited by Horsepower (edited 01 November 2000).]

Hey Genghis!
<<<...flying in the UK is very different to the USA (we have weather for start!)...>>>
I've heard this argument before, and always found it kind of funny!
I think the weather in the UK is a lot less varied than the US! How may thunderstorms, tornadoes, ice storms, etc. is the average UK flier exposed to...? (in addition to extreme temperatures, high and low!)
Not looking for an argument, just comments...!


[This message has been edited by NIMBUS (edited 05 November 2000).]

Nimbus raises an interesting point.

The US is a BIG place with regional variations in the weather norms. I've flown in California where the weather tends to be friendly and predictable (although you wouldn't wish to get caught near the mountains when the Santa Ana wind blows off the high desert. "I learned about windshear from that."

I've also experienced very unpredictable advection fog and low cloud formation in Cape Cod, where it can all go pear shaped in a matter of minutes.

If we talk about flying in the US, we should perhaps equate the US to the whole of Europe and then try to compare like for like. e.g. learning in California would probably relate to Southern Spain to some extent, New England more like Britain.

Its a good idea for anyone who learns in the US to check out throughly in the UK, as the R/T techniques are quite different, as are some of the customs and practices at uncontrolled fields, e.g. 45 degree downwind standard join, as opposed to an overhead.

Also, carb heat is used less often (in my experience in the USA), whereas I think that most UK pilots would be keener to employ it.

In the US, there can be more teaching of leaning the mixture, often due to operations at higher altitude fields... e.g. at Big Bear City in Southern California, you have to lean on the runway to get full power as you are at 6700' before you start rolling! The difference in take off/go around performance is unbelieveable until you have experienced it.

Final, wing down landing is taught for cross wind approaches as the norm, whereas it is the crab in the UK. I "surprised" one US flight instructor who had never checked out a UK pilot before and we had a good laugh about it over a beer afterwards.

With regard to the intitial point about differences training, it would strike me as a very good idea for a C150 newby to check out with an epxerienced AA5 instructor.

A few months after I passed my PPL, the flying club converted me on to a Cherokee 6 at 70 hours and I was surprised how different it was to a PA28 and more importantly, how easy it was to become comfortable quickly with a few "grey hairs" giving valuable advice from the right hand seat.

I'm happy to justify my comments - and yes I have flown in British snowstorms and Florida thunderstorms so this isn't just banter.

The USA's weather systems are far larger and more predictable, the sudden changes in cloud, fog, precipitation, etc that often catch people out in the UK don't happen in the same way.

The UK often uses overhead joins at smaller airfields, which are almost unheard of in the USA.

Normal circuit radio calls are different in the UK - it is highly unlikely you'd be asked to call base or crosswind unless joining there, and the american "upwind" is called "deadside".

There is no automated weather briefing system at most UK airfields.

Rules on use of transponders are different in the UK.

Terrain clearance rules are different in the UK.

The rules on class D airspace are different in the UK.

The US doesn't operate the British FIS or RIS services, and has no such thing as LARS.

British weather forecasts are presented differently.

The US doesn't have Military Air Traffic Zones (MATZ).

The UK doesn't have automated runway lighting.

If you squawk 1200 in the USA that's "VFR own navigation", in the UK it's "autonomous fighter operations". The difference could be important.

Well, that's the differences that I can think of in 2 minutes, anybody care to add anything?

G

The UK doesn't have automated runway lighting.

Doesn't Shoreham have this now? Hopefully we'll see it more and more.

Cheers!
foggy

Millibars (Oops, Hectopascals) versus Inches of Mercury.

Genghis

I support your overall conclusion completely, but don't rely on "predictable" weather patterns in New England, as it is very variable there! However, I expect that most UK PPL students probably learn in FL or CA where it's as you say.

By the way, the US may not have LARS, but class C clearance (formerley flight following) is pretty good in my experience.

Cheers

I bow to your greater wisdom on New England weather, although I've been there I was being strictly terrestrial and wasn't paying much attention. Having said that, as you say most people who do a US PPL do so in Florida or California.

I don't dispute that the USA has good Radar services, the point was that they are different.

TW - good point, but also add good old QFE.

G

Genghis - some to add...

LAHSO, progressive taxi, Flight watch (Or is it flight service?) , 1-800 WXBRIEF

If I had my cynical hat on I'd also say that although they don't have LARS, in many areas neither do we anymore.
Ian

Avrodamo,

Basically, yes. True, things are a little different in the UK but all of the differences mentioned above can be self-taught on the ground by Trevor Thom etc. There's absolutely no need to spend hours in the aircraft to familiarise yourself with the "technicalities."

I agree you'll need some time "on type" but only enough to make you safe/comfortable. Just watch that nosegear, it bends very easily.

With regards to the weather differences I'm afraid I'm with NIMBUS on this one. I fly to the US almost every week and other than Southern California it's far more severe and unpredictable than we ever see in Europe.

Best Regards,

Shanny

------------------
hhhiiisssssccrrrraaaacckkkllesssshhhhhh

It's all very well an experienced aviator or aviatrix teaching themselves all this stuff from a book - but we're talking about a just-qualified PPL here who is probably still struggling with most of the basic concepts, I still think a couple hours with a QFI is a bloody sensible idea regardless of the law.

My last field landing was in the UK in 1500m visibility in a 300ft cloudbase. Everywhere on route was forecast 2500ft base, 10km viz - there may be places in the USA with weather that does that in 5 minutes without fair warning, but they're not the places that they put the flying schools.

G

Avrodamo

I’m with Genghis

If you care about safety get a check out with a good instructor until you have enough general experience of aviation and types to be your own instructor – and for most of us that is a very long way down the road.

Of course, if you want to take avoidable risks (inside the legal framework) that is entirely up to you.

A little tale to show I mean what I say:

At one stage I had a super day job with an aeroplane that would accelerate at 1.3 g on take off (Mr Newton says 1.3 g from a standing start gives 2.4 secs to the legal limit on the motorway). But I just drove ordinary cars until three years ago. Then I got a little toy that was small, light and had 220 HP so would reach 60 in 6 secs and had no trouble doing 100 in third with a six speed box and was electronically limited at 155. The last time a professional looked at my driving was 43 years earlier when I passed my test. So I booked in to a (very expensive) driving course to learn how to drive defensively on the roads and how to handle the poke on a race circuit. After three days I had learned a lot about the car and myself. They so impressed me with their C.O.D. (Concentrate, Observe and keep your Distance) that now I find I don’t even like to have the radio on when I drive as it is simply a distraction to concentrating.

I reckon the more you know the more you should realise you have to learn . That goes for any trade - but especially flying. IMHO It is never naff to do more training.

JF

On which subject, don't you just hate converting onto a single seater with no 2-seat equivalent.

I've done this on 5 types so far, every one of which has scared me (but thankfully none of which I bent).

Ignore me by all means, but listen to JF. He's flown, and brought back, aeroplanes the rest of us couldn't even contemplate - and has reached "retirement" despite it all (okay, nobody ever really retires in aviation, they just become consultants).

G

[This message has been edited by Genghis the Engineer (edited 11 November 2000).]

<<<My last field landing was in the UK in 1500m visibility in a 300ft cloudbase.>>>

If this is true - then I don't think that you are the one to be giving advice to anybody.

------------------
Hunting is bad!!
Support the right to arm Bears!!

I can certainly give advice on how to land in small fields. I will also gladly advise anybody who cares to listen that forecast weather in this country can turn extremely rapidly unto un-forecast weather very fast indeed, which was my point in the first place if you missed it.

G

I don't want to get into a slanging match here...but if you are prepared to fly A KITE in 1500 metres and 300 feet (in a small field) then my own personal opinion is that you are an idiot of the first degree.

Either that, or your post was untrue.

Bear Cub - you shouldn't make comments like this unless you know the situation Genghis found himself and why. The fact that he made a succesful field landing and did not end up a pile of scrap at least shows he made the right decision in the end - I don't know why he did not put down earlier, but I at least give him the benifit of the doubt that circumstances did not favour this option!!!

[This message has been edited by foxmoth (edited 12 November 2000).]

[This message has been edited by foxmoth (edited 12 November 2000).]

I really think we're drifting off topic here, but since Tiger Cub cares to make an issue of it, I'll give the full details, and you can judge as you see fit.

I'd planned a midday flight about 70nm to lunch. Forecast was early mist, clearing about 1030-1100 becoming 10km visibility and 8/8 at 2,500ft - nil Wx forecast. That forecast was on the TAFS for 4 airfields within 10 miles either side of track, wind was about 10 knots.

I got the aeroplane out at 1000, by 1100 the cloudbase was about 1500ft, and visibility cleared to around 6km. I got airborne, sat in the overhead for 2 minutes surveying the Wx and decided that it was pretty much as forecast bar a slightly lower cloudbase.

10nm on track, the cloudbase started dropping, it became apparent that this was not a localised problem, so I turned back to my departure point - cloudbase was a dodgy but legal 600-700ft at this point. Unfortunately the cloud had dropped onto the ground behind me.

Re-planning, I ded-reconned to a motorway (successfully) and turned towards my No.1 diversion, which was about 7nm from me. Halfway there, the cloud decided to start dropping and drizzle started. I decided that I wasn't going to make my diversion, and set myself up downwind for a ridge parallel with the motorway. Cloudbase was about 400ft, Viz was down to about 3km.

At the end of downwind, the cloud dropped onto the ridge, and the drizzle worsened, giving me a 1500m viz. So, I picked the only flat field still available to me, did a 250ft circuit and landed in it.

After I'd calmed down, I borrowed my passenger's mobile and phoned the police, and my destination. Then hitched a lift home to get a trailer.

Damage - £5 to replace a bolt I dropped in the mud whilst derigging, and a box of Chocolates to the farmers wife who gave me a lift home. Landing roll, 70m - I regularly practice both forced landings and short spot-landings, I now know why!

G

Nice one Genghis,

You kept your wits about you and lived to tell the tale and have an arguement with Bear Cub :)

I too, do PFL drills regularly, if only to break the monotony of a long X country.

B

G T E thanks for a great example of why we teach forced landings with power.

A first class bit of airmanship me thinks.

Bear Cub - an apology due from you I think....
BOF

Nice one G T E

A lot of pilots think they are good because they fly around in CAVOK and have never been in a situation where a divert or land out was necessary. UK weather is like that.
It is when this situation happens that we learn how good an aviator we are, in other words prior planning prevents p... poor performance. The work rate goes up in this situation. A well performed diversion or landout is v satisfying and more experience under your belt. WELL DONE.

[This message has been edited by skywatcher (edited 16 November 2000).]

RightStuffer....I have been watching and waiting for someone to say that - I knew it would come.

Problem is that I have met Genghis and have listened to his painful "I know everything there is to know about aviation" chat for far too long.

Second problem is that I simply do not believe his story - but was prepared to stay quiet.......until you brought it up.

So, knowing that the Met office store their TAF's and Actuals for many moons before binning them I would suggest that I will scan the receipt for a donation of £500 (and that will hurt) to the charity of Genghis's choice (assuming it is not pro animal abuse) if he will prove the story.

By proof I would want to see the lat/long of his departure, the destination and the point that he made his landing. I would also want to see a copy of his letter to the CAA explaining why he found himself in such conditions (following a good weather forecast) - note...he does admit continued flight into worsening (and illegal) conditions whilst carrying passengers...why not put down earlier before being pushed to under 300 feet in a flight vis of 1500 meters (Cat 1 ILS stuff).

I would also want to see copies - posted here - of the TAF's that he got for the time of the flight and the Actuals that support his claim to the weather.

Until then, I will reserve my judgement that the story - written after my original comments - is a load of b******s.

Prove me wrong, by all means - and you'll get my apology.....or, let it go - and we'll agree to disagree.

<<edit was to add phrase ".....or, let it go - and we'll agree to disagree."


[This message has been edited by Bear Cub (edited 18 November 2000).]

Bear Cub - whoever you are, I have presented the facts as I recall them. If you choose to disbelieve me that's your privilege, but why should I lie in an anonymous forum? I spent a long time afterwards going through all that happened and couldn't find much I could have done differently bar possibly trusting the Met Office, which is a habit that has got me into trouble once or twice (on the other hand more often it's had me cancelling flying to end up doing DIY on a perfectly flyable weekend).

I recalled the incident only to illustrate the changeability and predictability of British Weather - something I think I adequately proved.

G

Oh to hell with it, if you want to donate £500 to charity.

Brakes off 1130Z, 14 Nov 1999 - so probably took-off about 10 minutes after that.

Take-off 5108.33N/W00125.28W 292ft amsl

Landed in a field just East of the M3, about 3 miles south of Popham at 1155. Called Hampshire Police about 15 minutes later to notify them, Sandown (my destination) (who reported CAVOK and couldn't understand my problem) about the same time.

TAFs I got were Odiham, Southampton, Bournemouth, all gave early mist clearing to 9999 8/8-2500ft, nil Wx.

If you wish to find the full TAFS (I got them about 0900) please feel free. No I didn't report myself to the CAA. My favourite charity is the RAF Benevolent Fund, which is only cruel to Sting, who doesn't count.

Have fun doing your homework.

G

[This message has been edited by Genghis the Engineer (edited 18 November 2000).]

Bear Cub,

Call me old-fashioned, but if you call somebody a liar it’s up to YOU to prove that this is case. Even though it’s an anonymous forum, you shouldn’t just sling around c@*p like that and then challenge your target to prove you wrong.

Better pilots than you and I have been caught out by unforecast weather; many have lost their lives as a result. I think it would be more constructive to learn from their experiences than to simply write their actions off as stupidity.

HP

Bear Cub,

Your attack on Genghis is based on the fact that he was prepared to fly in weather conditions that are perhaps beyond your personal experience. He wasn't; he landed out rather than continue. What would be your alternative plan of action?

Some of us have made a long-term living from legally flying at low level in conditions similar to or worse than those described.


So what is the problem?

Bear cub....you talk the talk , but will you walk the walk ? to quote james brown.