Multi
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister, North Shore
-
shamrock104
- Rank 8
- Posts: 792
- Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 9:16 pm
Multi
Any opinions on what the best aircraft is for the Multi IFR, twin Commanche or Cougar?
-
bizjet_mania
- Rank 8
- Posts: 982
- Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:37 am
-
Big Pistons Forever
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5868
- Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
- Location: West Coast
All the trainer twins are the same, that is they are generally crappy airplanes. The ONLY consideration IMO for choosing where you do your training is the quality of the instructor. You want to be tought by somebody who has actual line IFR experience and a rep for having good instructional technique.
I did initial MIFR in GA7 in Australia and did the conversion in the Twin Commanche.
Because of the IFR weight restriction on the GA7, I like the PA30 better but... GA7 was nicer to fly... (it was the newer one). so... I guess it's up to the avianics and instructor as long as I'm not flying around mountains.
Because of the IFR weight restriction on the GA7, I like the PA30 better but... GA7 was nicer to fly... (it was the newer one). so... I guess it's up to the avianics and instructor as long as I'm not flying around mountains.
-
duplicate2
- Rank 5
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 10:54 am
- Location: Limbo
I'm guessing you must be in Calgary, deciding between Morgan and SATC.
Is this for just multi, or multi IFR?
I agree, instructor should be your biggest criteria. However, I wouldn't want to be clocking too many hours in a twin taxiing around at the international and flying to and from the training area. Plus landing fees.
Never flown a Twin Commanche. Cougar is under-powered (2 172 engines strapped to the wings!) and is crap for holding altitude single engine. Less power makes it easier to control on the way down though.
Is this for just multi, or multi IFR?
I agree, instructor should be your biggest criteria. However, I wouldn't want to be clocking too many hours in a twin taxiing around at the international and flying to and from the training area. Plus landing fees.
Never flown a Twin Commanche. Cougar is under-powered (2 172 engines strapped to the wings!) and is crap for holding altitude single engine. Less power makes it easier to control on the way down though.
-
groundtoflightdeck
- Rank 6
- Posts: 416
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 9:56 pm
The twin commanche has the same engines- 2 172s. It has a laminar flow wing so is a bit trickier to land, but fast for a tiny twin so might be good to learn to fly approaches at 120kts now and get used to it. I had fun in it. Probably won't hold ice really well though, but I don't know the Grumman would be any better.
Have fun.
Have fun.
Approach at 120kts in any light twin, and you will have issues. Heck, the King Air's (C90A) Vref is about 120kts, depending on configuration.groundtoflightdeck wrote:The twin commanche has the same engines- 2 172s. It has a laminar flow wing so is a bit trickier to land, but fast for a tiny twin so might be good to learn to fly approaches at 120kts now and get used to it. I had fun in it. Probably won't hold ice really well though, but I don't know the Grumman would be any better.
Have fun.
The PA30's normal approach is 90kts, 85kts over the fence, and I would recommend NO ice. EVER.
-Guy
TC guy, you guys use 120 as a Vref for your 90? How far do you float? We use 100, and I think even that's a little on the high side?
And groundto.....I seem to remember a Twin Comanchie having more jam than 150 a side....that's standard Apache fare. Either way, you shouldn't be sticking your nose into ice in it, or a Cougar!
And groundto.....I seem to remember a Twin Comanchie having more jam than 150 a side....that's standard Apache fare. Either way, you shouldn't be sticking your nose into ice in it, or a Cougar!
LOL... actually, ya have me there... 120kts is Vref at Gross/0% Flap. It is also our approach speed. Standard (without looking at the card) is 105 at gross weight over the threshold with 100% flap. 100kts with a light load sounds about right.Doc wrote:TC guy, you guys use 120 as a Vref for your 90? How far do you float? We use 100, and I think even that's a little on the high side?
And groundto.....I seem to remember a Twin Comanchie having more jam than 150 a side....that's standard Apache fare. Either way, you shouldn't be sticking your nose into ice in it, or a Cougar!
The PA30 has 2xIO320's rated at 160hp at 2700 RPM. The Twin Commanche is a pretty slick bird-- Apache, notsomuch.
-Guy
Free advice to any new retractable-gear pilot:
With the gear up, you can descend, or slow down, but not both at the same time. At least, not without speed brakes, which you ain't gonna have.
Try to avoid shock-cooling the engines in the descent. Keep some power on (eg 15 inches MP) to keep the CHT's in the green, esp in the winter.
A really great descent strategy is to first slow down in cruise by reducing your power, get to your gear speed, drop the gear, and then descend with three greens.
Landing gear works very well as a speed brake. The additional drag will allow you to keep some power on in the descent to keep the cylinders from cracking.
Keeping the speed down in the descent will give you more time to think, and not get behind the aircraft. Most aircraft are easier to fly under the hood with the gear down, too.
Just be careful that when you level off with the gear down, use at least 20+ inches of MP to keep your airspeed up - don't go below blue line.
You gotta be thinking ahead, too. Let's say you're at 7,000 and desired altitude at a fix (eg IAF for the PT) is 2,000. You gotta lose 5,000 feet which is 10 minutes at 500 fpm. So, you better start your descent before the GPS or DME says your ETE is down to 0:10 to the fix, otherwise you're going to need more than 500 fpm which upsets most people without pressurization.
Keep in mind, though, that Transport Canada says I'm the most dangerous pilot in the country, so everything I've said is probably worthless
With the gear up, you can descend, or slow down, but not both at the same time. At least, not without speed brakes, which you ain't gonna have.
Try to avoid shock-cooling the engines in the descent. Keep some power on (eg 15 inches MP) to keep the CHT's in the green, esp in the winter.
A really great descent strategy is to first slow down in cruise by reducing your power, get to your gear speed, drop the gear, and then descend with three greens.
Landing gear works very well as a speed brake. The additional drag will allow you to keep some power on in the descent to keep the cylinders from cracking.
Keeping the speed down in the descent will give you more time to think, and not get behind the aircraft. Most aircraft are easier to fly under the hood with the gear down, too.
Just be careful that when you level off with the gear down, use at least 20+ inches of MP to keep your airspeed up - don't go below blue line.
You gotta be thinking ahead, too. Let's say you're at 7,000 and desired altitude at a fix (eg IAF for the PT) is 2,000. You gotta lose 5,000 feet which is 10 minutes at 500 fpm. So, you better start your descent before the GPS or DME says your ETE is down to 0:10 to the fix, otherwise you're going to need more than 500 fpm which upsets most people without pressurization.
Keep in mind, though, that Transport Canada says I'm the most dangerous pilot in the country, so everything I've said is probably worthless
More Free advice:
Dont take Hedley's free advice. Some of it is just is not so.
1. Shock cooling is caused by a fast reduction in power as much as a low power setting. To avoid shock cooling you have to bring the power back slowly and then keep some power on, . The engine people say a much worse scenerio is enriching the mixture to much on the descent.
2. If you are planning a precision IFR approach you normally would select gear down as you are intercepting the glide path. On a non precision , typically would be on the inbound leg. These are guidlines but dropping the gear and motoring around at low power settings may be good for the charge by the hour FTU's and instructors who want to build hours, but it is not really necessary and not particularily good advice. In VFR flying the gear is usually extended in the downwind or just prior to entering the circuit, though I think there is quite a variety of different opinions on this.
Now having said this, you sometimes have to do what you have to do, but normally with good planning and no externally imposed restrictions, you do not need to use any extraordinary measures to get down and slow down.
3. Generally speaking, with piston engines, you should begin your descent and slowly start reducing power until you reach a little below the first flap setting speed(not necessarily the white arc in many aircraft), lower the flaps, stabalize and then set power(if necessary- slowly) to get below the gear speed.
Or, if your a shitty pilot you can just drop the gear, slam off the power (but not all the way...something about shock cooling), and slowly motor in....which will of course may make it difficult to have time to give free advice to others on how to use this technigue.
Hedly wrote:
Keep in mind, though, that Transport Canada says I'm the most dangerous pilot in the country, so everything I've said is probably worthless
No argument from me. Looks like TC got it right
Dont take Hedley's free advice. Some of it is just is not so.
1. Shock cooling is caused by a fast reduction in power as much as a low power setting. To avoid shock cooling you have to bring the power back slowly and then keep some power on, . The engine people say a much worse scenerio is enriching the mixture to much on the descent.
2. If you are planning a precision IFR approach you normally would select gear down as you are intercepting the glide path. On a non precision , typically would be on the inbound leg. These are guidlines but dropping the gear and motoring around at low power settings may be good for the charge by the hour FTU's and instructors who want to build hours, but it is not really necessary and not particularily good advice. In VFR flying the gear is usually extended in the downwind or just prior to entering the circuit, though I think there is quite a variety of different opinions on this.
Now having said this, you sometimes have to do what you have to do, but normally with good planning and no externally imposed restrictions, you do not need to use any extraordinary measures to get down and slow down.
3. Generally speaking, with piston engines, you should begin your descent and slowly start reducing power until you reach a little below the first flap setting speed(not necessarily the white arc in many aircraft), lower the flaps, stabalize and then set power(if necessary- slowly) to get below the gear speed.
Or, if your a shitty pilot you can just drop the gear, slam off the power (but not all the way...something about shock cooling), and slowly motor in....which will of course may make it difficult to have time to give free advice to others on how to use this technigue.
Hedly wrote:
Keep in mind, though, that Transport Canada says I'm the most dangerous pilot in the country, so everything I've said is probably worthless
No argument from me. Looks like TC got it right
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
-
goldeneagle
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1187
- Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:28 pm
Ok, I read your advice, wont argue any of it, can probly debate a point or two, but, it's not worth making a fuss, we'll end up at the same conclusion, just getting there for different reasons. I also looked at your website, and I watched the videos. Now I got a question (or 2 or 3).Hedley wrote:Free advice to any new retractable-gear pilot:
...
Keep in mind, though, that Transport Canada says I'm the most dangerous pilot in the country, so everything I've said is probably worthless
a) With the pitts, is it normal to proceed to the fix, then just descend vertically ? Seems like the most fun way to do it ?
b) Does the pitts descend better with the wheels down, or up?
c) top link shows 4 pitts
http://www.pittspecials.com/images/4pitts_gnd.jpg
Bottom pic on the website only shows 3 pitts.
http://www.pittspecials.com/images/mer_smoke.jpg
Is the big fireball in the background #4 landing ?
Actually, Ray Williams, of Tennessee, has a retractable-gear Pitts. I will ask him next time I am talking to him.Does the pitts descend better with the wheels down, or up?
Yeah, that was a Transport Canada Civil Aviation Inspector trying to land our first #4. We won't let THAT happen againIs the big fireball in the background #4 landing?
Back on topic ... Mr Cruel demonstrates very nicely why I would not let some people push my lawnmower, let alone fly our Cessna 421:
When you're the one who pays for any cracked jugs, you tend to take a bit more care than someone who doesn't.
Can you say, "Thanks ATC, for another Slam Dunk"? I knew you could
A very common IFR scenario is, inbound for the approach, being kept up too high by ATC, often because they have an IFR departure in your direction, or perhaps because there's high terrain. When the traffic has passed (or you're past the hills) and ATC clears you for the descent, if you stuff the nose down with the gear up like Mr Cruel suggests, you're going to build an eye-popping amount of speed. It may be impossible to get the speed down anywhere near to gear extension speed if you continue to descend during the approach (eg vectored straight in).
The slickness of retractable-gear aircraft is something a newbie retractable-gear pilot needs to get used to, and needs to be thinking about, when ATC inevitably slam-dunks you.
Piston engines - especially the higher-powered ones in our C421 - do not respond well to the inevitable rapid chopping of power by pilots like Mr Cruel.
Also, remember that when you're cruising along in the smooth air on top of the typical Cu layer, if you're slick and pick up speed in the descent, you may very likely be over Va when you encounter the bumps in the convective air below. This is not only uncomfortable for pax, but can be very hard on the airframe. Pilots like Mr Cruel may think that as long as you are in the green arc on the ASI, you can pound through any bumps as hard as you want, but that's simply not true.
Which brings me back to my original point. A newbie retract pilot, who has been poorly trained by someone like the dogmatic Mr Cruel, that "the gear must come down at this point on the approach" would be well off to learn that the gear can be used as a speed brake in a descent to keep the speed down, and the CHT in the green.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Flying is not a one size fits all kind of enderavour and with experience one learns to customize your actions to fit the airplane you are flying and the profile you need at the moment.
For instance on the PBY I teach the pilots to extend the gear at the top of the descent regardless if they start at one thousand ( the minimum altitude that it is safe to extend the gear on a Cat) or ten thousand feet.
By the way Hedley in large radial engines shock cooling results in a risk of severe cylinder damage due to cylinder choking caused by the cylinder shrinking faster than the piston due to shock cooling.
Remember gang, it is sometimes better to be polite to your colleauges rather than try and tear them a new as.hole with dumb comments.
Ain't that right TC Guy?
Now Hedley my problem with TC is not that they think I'm a dangerous pilot, they " KNOW " I'm dangerous because I am going to fix a couple of those as.holes real good as far as their career with the regulator goes.
Cat
For instance on the PBY I teach the pilots to extend the gear at the top of the descent regardless if they start at one thousand ( the minimum altitude that it is safe to extend the gear on a Cat) or ten thousand feet.
By the way Hedley in large radial engines shock cooling results in a risk of severe cylinder damage due to cylinder choking caused by the cylinder shrinking faster than the piston due to shock cooling.
Remember gang, it is sometimes better to be polite to your colleauges rather than try and tear them a new as.hole with dumb comments.
Ain't that right TC Guy?
Now Hedley my problem with TC is not that they think I'm a dangerous pilot, they " KNOW " I'm dangerous because I am going to fix a couple of those as.holes real good as far as their career with the regulator goes.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
Big Pistons Forever
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5868
- Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
- Location: West Coast
Hedly,TC Guy et al.
I think this topic is a reflection of how disconnected the TC IFR standards and the real world of IFR flying have become. When I got my IFR rating in 1987 on the West Coast, most of BC had no radar coverage, there were no SIDS or STARS outside of YVR, holds were common place, procedural separation the norm, and you lived (or died) by how good you were on the ADF. At that time the MOT IFR flight test was a reasonably accurate reflection of the real world of IFR flying.
Fast forward 19 years and the IFR flight test standards are still the same but the real world of IFR procedures has changed dramatically. Since the IFR schools want their students to pass the ride they teach them what TC wants not what they actually should know to fly the modern IFR system. I think that is at the root of the engine handling issues you guys have talked about. I bet we would we would not be having this discussion if during training every ILS started with a minimum of 140 knots at LOC interception, just like what ATC wants to see at busy airports.
I think this topic is a reflection of how disconnected the TC IFR standards and the real world of IFR flying have become. When I got my IFR rating in 1987 on the West Coast, most of BC had no radar coverage, there were no SIDS or STARS outside of YVR, holds were common place, procedural separation the norm, and you lived (or died) by how good you were on the ADF. At that time the MOT IFR flight test was a reasonably accurate reflection of the real world of IFR flying.
Fast forward 19 years and the IFR flight test standards are still the same but the real world of IFR procedures has changed dramatically. Since the IFR schools want their students to pass the ride they teach them what TC wants not what they actually should know to fly the modern IFR system. I think that is at the root of the engine handling issues you guys have talked about. I bet we would we would not be having this discussion if during training every ILS started with a minimum of 140 knots at LOC interception, just like what ATC wants to see at busy airports.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
How true BPF.
and when I started my instrument training in 1957 the ADF was high tech. because our approaches were generally done using the radio range.
TC is a bureaucracy that has become more and more unacountable and more reluctant to change.
If they truly had the best intrest of the aviation community in their minds they would clean house and hire people that understand modern aviation and completely restructure their training poilicies, but their only true concern is protecting the status quo and keeping their perks..
..accountability and or common sense is way, way beyond their scope of understanding.
And sadly it will only get worse as time passes, not better.
Cat
and when I started my instrument training in 1957 the ADF was high tech. because our approaches were generally done using the radio range.
TC is a bureaucracy that has become more and more unacountable and more reluctant to change.
If they truly had the best intrest of the aviation community in their minds they would clean house and hire people that understand modern aviation and completely restructure their training poilicies, but their only true concern is protecting the status quo and keeping their perks..
..accountability and or common sense is way, way beyond their scope of understanding.
And sadly it will only get worse as time passes, not better.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
The instrument rating (any group) is best viewed as a "licence to learn".
The ride consists of a departure, ground speed check, a hold, and two approaches. And that's it - you're now an IFR pilot.
A newly minted IFR pilot quite possibly has never seen the inside of a cloud (!!)
Once an IFR pilot has the basic skillset as defined by the flight test, there are indeed a whole lot of other things he needs to learn if he's going to stay alive. My top 3 subjects:
1) dewpoint spread
2) icing (winter)
3) Cb's (summer)
If there's moisture in the atmosphere in the summer, you'd better know how to deal with Cb's if you're going to fly in cloud.
If there's moisture in the atmosphere in the winter, you'd better know how to deal with icing if you're going to fly in cloud.
And if you're going to stay alive, you'd better pay attention to the dewpoint spread. What's the temperature doing? What are the sources of moisture? Is your destination going to go below minimums? What about your alternate?
It would appear that pilots are expected to pick up this knowledge on their own, after they get their instrument rating.
There are all sorts of other skills - (night) circling approaches, entering and exiting controlled airspace - that are generally not covered either, and can sure come in pretty handy.
This knowledge and skills are obviously learned best as a co-pilot, from a seasoned captain, but not every pilot has that opportunity.
The ride consists of a departure, ground speed check, a hold, and two approaches. And that's it - you're now an IFR pilot.
A newly minted IFR pilot quite possibly has never seen the inside of a cloud (!!)
Once an IFR pilot has the basic skillset as defined by the flight test, there are indeed a whole lot of other things he needs to learn if he's going to stay alive. My top 3 subjects:
1) dewpoint spread
2) icing (winter)
3) Cb's (summer)
If there's moisture in the atmosphere in the summer, you'd better know how to deal with Cb's if you're going to fly in cloud.
If there's moisture in the atmosphere in the winter, you'd better know how to deal with icing if you're going to fly in cloud.
And if you're going to stay alive, you'd better pay attention to the dewpoint spread. What's the temperature doing? What are the sources of moisture? Is your destination going to go below minimums? What about your alternate?
It would appear that pilots are expected to pick up this knowledge on their own, after they get their instrument rating.
There are all sorts of other skills - (night) circling approaches, entering and exiting controlled airspace - that are generally not covered either, and can sure come in pretty handy.
This knowledge and skills are obviously learned best as a co-pilot, from a seasoned captain, but not every pilot has that opportunity.
