Going easy on the plane

[PilotDAR]

I had occasion recently to act in the capacity of safety pilot PIC, while my client's plane was flown for a specific purpose flight by another pilot. The pilot flying under my supervision, was highly experienced, though low time on this class of aircraft. We briefed the flight well, though some basic care items could have been briefed (and conducted) better. I take responsibility for that, and learned something.

Throttles were rushed up from idle to takeoff power, rather than being eased in, and similarly being rapidly closed in flight. Speed management was a little lacking, in that although the V speeds were being attended to, flaps and gear were being extended near the limiting speeds, which is just harder on things (the client did mention to me that a single gear door is $14,000). And upon landing, the mains touched, and the nosewheel was let down to the runway, where holding it off for a while would have been every bit as easy, so it experienced less shock and high speed. Later in the flying, I did demonstrate how I would like to see the plane flown, and why. Probably I should have done this first, though I was trying to show respect for his experience.

I like to treat other people's planes as though they are my own. Yes, the plane can stand it, and nothing was really exceeded, but it was still wear and tear, which could have been reduced for no operational loss in the purpose of the flight. I did take the opportunity to diplomatically tell the pilot flying that we could go a little more easy on the plane, and I know he had the willingness to do this, but is was just not quite natural for him in this type. I'm sure that his care for his flying will allow him to embrace a more gentle approach to handling the plane. In the mean time, I have learned that a little more briefing in a collaborative way could be helpful, even just in wear and tear, and I will do better next time....

[photofly]

I wonder what the owner would say about you letting another pilot bang the plane around like that :-/

[PilotDAR]

I wonder what the owner would say about you letting another pilot bang the plane around like that :-/

I was safety pilot at the owner's request, for the purpose of allowing the other pilot to fly the plane. The owner thanked me for my support, and being patient with the work to be accomplished.

While trying to be respectful, and diplomatic, I was trying to give credit due to the other pilot for his experience. I may have not explained as much as I could have about how we were going to conduct the flight, in terms of finesse. The required elements were well accomplished.

[Canoehead]

Great post PilotDAR. I have a term I like to use to describe the very things you mentioned.

Mechanical sympathy.

[cgzro]

I've seen this a bit with the old planes I fly. Often pilots are quite aggressive with an 80 year old planes. There is a sort of finesse that is required. Its also true of high performance aerobatic planes where abruptness results in premature airflow separation and there is a 'just right' approach that takes some time to learn and is even different in different types of planes. Often its a sort of controlled violence. Hard to describe.

[oldncold]

completely relate to your predicament. vmo on the pc12/45 was 236 knots barberpole. . .38mach dammest thing to train young guys not to max all the time on descent. I'd fly 1o knots under ,encourage them to do likewise. Fast forward thousands hours would they feel good about the tail let go. Or wing seperated I got frustrated.especialy when cp says no worries.

well a couple of years after I left the aircraft came up with the wing demate and bolt inspection guess what >2 aircraft in that fleet had cracks that required the spar wing fittings being replaced . and that was not a cheap repair maybe the old n cold was right after all. ya sure but maxing any airframe all the time. ends up costing a lot more taker a easy

[trey kule]

I am with you 100%.
I see this on initial hires all the time. Finese starts with training, but more so attitude.

I hope your post will encourage some to try and make every flight perfect.

[Braun]

I wonder what the owner would say about you letting another pilot bang the plane around like that :-/

To be fair his post seems rather constructive as he admits he could of handled the situation better and then goes on to say how and why. More threads could be like this!

[schnitzel2k3]

The amount of pilots not respecting the equipment on a regular basis makes me nervous flying high cycle machines in a busy flight department.

IMO, its an attitude that's been instilled in you, likely before you were a pilot, the term mechanical sympathy is a great way to summarize it.

The way you take care of your personal items (motorized or not) can be indicative of how you'll treat the airplane.

As you mentioned pilotdar, while this pilot was experienced, they still had the attitude to learn and in this case they were willing to change their habits to help take good care of the machine in future. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bit of a show and they went back to their 'old' ways once you stepped out of the cockpit. You never know though.

Nice post.

S.

[Chris M]

I had an argument with an instructor about this sort of thing a while back. He wanted to see more aggressive recoveries from unusual attitudes so after a couple "faster!" comments I asked him to demo one. I could hear the controls slamming against their stops.

Never mind the fact that crazy fast movements are a bad way to recover from unusual attitudes when you may be disoriented already (IMO), slamming the controls of any machine is not something that makes me happy. When it's a 40 year old training plane with 20,000 hours even less so. Must come all that time swinging wrenches.

[photofly]

There are times when it's appropriate to treat an aircraft with kid gloves. That may be almost all of the time.

But there are times when it's appropriate, even vital, to make full use of the aircraft flight characteristics. That might mean rapid and full aileron input to get maximum roll rate, or pulling something close to the relevant g limit, to avoid unintended ground contact. Being ready to do so might even save your life, one day. It's entirely appropriate that flight students are taught this and shown how to do it without hesitation or fear - so they have an inkling of what the aircraft can do if the need arises.

I can't speak to what the instructor did that day, but asking for more rapid and aggressive control movements should not be considered inappropriate. If the 20,000 hour training airplane isn't able to support the full range of control inputs that the designer intended, it should be considered un-airworthy and grounded.

You're welcome to argue with your flight instructor, if you wish, but his or her role isn't to please you and make you happy. It's to teach you, per the Flight Instructor Guide, "to have mastery over the aircraft; to fly with verve and spirit to the limit of the aircraft's flight envelope;".

[PilotDAR]

"to have mastery over the aircraft; to fly with verve and spirit to the limit of the aircraft's flight envelope;".

Well.... How about "to have mastery over the aircraft, and be safely able to fly with verve and spirit to the limit of the aircraft's flight envelope".

An aircraft is a consumable, and we agree that some consumption of it's life will occur every time we fly it. But, through careful handling, we can keep that consumption low, and save cost, with no operational loss in many cases. There are a number of things that I occasionally have to do to planes, which are in the "higher" consumption realm. These include repeated changes in power through the full range in flight, and very high speed flight. While doing those, I try to make sure that the factors I can control are exploited to cause the least wear and tear (like good management of cowl flaps for cooling, and seeking very smooth air for high speed or full control use flying). It is very rare that I think that hard landings or premature lowering of a nose or tailwheel has any benefit - the third wheel will get the least time rolling with weight on it that I can manage.

I like the term mechanical sympathy, it suggests that we know that sometimes we will have to be more rough with the plane, but at least we're thinking about it, and doing our best. Hopefully, all the rest of the time, we are treating the plane gently.

[schnitzel2k3]

There are times which require a flight crew to operate near or at the envelopes edge, agreed, but hopefully your skill and experience as an aviator can keep from 'consuming' more of the aircraft's potential than you actually need on a regular basis.

I think pilotdar is referring strictly to the normal operating phases of flight, not emergency (stall, imminent ground contact, ect.). I think there is a general consensus that, in these realms, we use the envelope and more (if the situation requires) to escape.

S.

[5x5]

But there are times when it's appropriate, even vital, to make full use of the aircraft flight characteristics. That might mean rapid and full aileron input to get maximum roll rate, or pulling something close to the relevant g limit, to avoid unintended ground contact.

While this may be true, I'd guess that more than 99% of us will never encounter any actual scenario you can describe where this would be necessary. Regardless, you can still reach maximum performance limits without "slamming" or being harsh with the controls. I always get a little concerned when I hear people talking about "aggressive" control inputs since I associate aggressive with a mindset not in full control. I would posit that any time you are stressed enough that you use such a rapid movement that the controls forcefully reach the stops you are essentially out of control. And that would mean quite possibly you're doing the wrong thing anyway.

I think all pilots should be taught to understand and experience the full capabilities of their aircraft, but also the basic concept of controlled inputs with smoothness, rate of application and magnitude based on the situation at hand.

[photofly]

99% of us will never have a power loss in flight either, but those that do should be glad of the time we all spent training for what to do in such circumstances.

If we want to play the "quite possibly" game, then quite possibly using immediate and full aileron without pussying over whether the word "aggressive" is appropriate, whether you have achieved precisely quite the right state of Zen before commencing the manoeuvre, or whether you'll hurt the feelings of the control stops - may just prevent a midair collision. Who knows. You can deal with the bruised ego of your AME after you land safely.

I'm all in favour of treating your mechanical devices with respect. But good training includes teaching when and how respect gets put aside in favour of survival.

[AirFrame]

If we want to play the "quite possibly" game, then quite possibly using immediate and full aileron without pussying over whether the word "aggressive" is appropriate, whether you have achieved precisely quite the right state of Zen before commencing the manoeuvre, or whether you'll hurt the feelings of the control stops - may just prevent a midair collision.

I forget where I first read words to this effect, but the quote I remember is "The limits are to be followed if you wish to make another flight in the airplane. If there will be no further flights in the aircraft, there are no limits." In other words, if it's your ass or the airplane's, save your ass first.

That being said, my personal opinion is that any potential midair collision is better avoided with elevator than aileron... Rolling makes your wings and the other aircraft's wings meet in a cross pattern - Which takes a larger altitude separation to ensure a miss. Wings level, you only need to clear the other airplane by the height of it's fuselage (or maybe the tail).

[trey kule]

The sense I got fromPilotDars original post was that he was referring to proper handling of the aircraft. A very reasonable philosophy.
It seems however, that some of the posters have taken it to extremes, and used emergency situations and unusual attitudes as generalized examples.

Perhaps some less extreme examples are in order.
On an approach, for example, a pilot is a bit high. Now , a small reductions in power, maintain airspeed and as the glide slope nears center again, or the runway sight picture, a bit of a readjustment. That, is to me what a professional pilot does to go easy on the plane engines.
More typical , is a huge reduction in power, a spirited descent rate, and a huge addition of power...often after the aircraft has descended to low. Watching a pilot pump the throttles up and down on an approach is painful...and yes, of course, occassionally it is necessary due to turbulence. But lets keep in mind that is the exception and not treat it as a generalized way to do a normal approach.

Failure to plan a descent properly resulting in the flaps going down at limit speeds, gear out at max limit...the list goes on.

Holding the nose wheel on the runway on a small aircraft because we want to play airline pilot and rotate at a certain speed rather than letting the plane fly off. Letting the nose gear slam on after landing,

These are the types of things, I think PilotDar was referring to. Not the. Extreme, do it or die manoevers

As to the experienced pilot. Heavy aircraft have some systems and procedures that have nothing in common with small aircraft. The conversion back to small aircraft can present almost as much a challange to a retired airline captain as the original transition up.

As to student instructor conflicts. Unless you were there, and sometimes even if you were, it is only speculation.

[NAT2]

Our birds pay my mortgage and our depatment only has two, with parts slowly becoming scarce. It's my livlihood and the tool of my trade, so damn right a little mechanical sympathy is in order. However, I treat rental cars like I own them too. Just an upbringing thing.

[schnitzel2k3]

What he said ^

S.

[iflyforpie]

I'd actually argue that during emergencies is the time you need to be the MOST smooth and careful.

How many have jammed the throttle in and had the engine cough because the poor accelerator pump couldn't keep up with the rush of air into the engine?

How many have had an engine backfire when you chop throttle too quickly?

How many have had an opposite wing drop with an aggressive aileron input?

How many have had a control come off in your hand? (like carb heat or a control grip?)

How many have gone right past the stall warning into a full stall or incipient spin when fooling around?

There's being expedient... and there's being aggressive. Kind of like the difference between combustion and detonation. You can be fast, but start out slowly, and as you approach limits, slow down to meet them. If the 0.1 extra seconds is the difference between life and death.. you royally screwed up somewhere.

I lost an engine once, on takeoff. I made it back to the airport because I resisted every urge to pull back as the ground came rushing up and I flew the plane like I drive my car on black ice... like if I even breathed too deeply it was going to depart controlled flight. You look at just about every stall-spin accident... it is caused by aggressive over-controlling of the aircraft.

[Rockie]

It's very simple. Be nice to your airplane as if your life depended on it...because it does.

[Shiny Side Up]

I'd actually argue that during emergencies is the time you need to be the MOST smooth and careful.

How many have jammed the throttle in and had the engine cough because the poor accelerator pump couldn't keep up with the rush of air into the engine?

How many have had an engine backfire when you chop throttle too quickly?

How many have had an opposite wing drop with an aggressive aileron input?

How many have had a control come off in your hand? (like carb heat or a control grip?)

How many have gone right past the stall warning into a full stall or incipient spin when fooling around?

There's being expedient... and there's being aggressive. Kind of like the difference between combustion and detonation. You can be fast, but start out slowly, and as you approach limits, slow down to meet them. If the 0.1 extra seconds is the difference between life and death.. you royally screwed up somewhere.

I lost an engine once, on takeoff. I made it back to the airport because I resisted every urge to pull back as the ground came rushing up and I flew the plane like I drive my car on black ice... like if I even breathed too deeply it was going to depart controlled flight. You look at just about every stall-spin accident... it is caused by aggressive over-controlling of the aircraft.

+1

I'm starting to think there's a correlation between pie consumption and flying wisdom.

[photofly]

How many have the 0.1 extra seconds is the difference between life and death.. you royally screwed up somewhere.

This is obviously true. And if I do ever screw up that badly, I'll take the extra 0.1 seconds, every time. So will you.

The existence of emergencies that are best handled with a frigid immobility of the flight controls doesn't really inform us about emergencies where urgent action is required.

I don't think you're right about stall-spin accidents, either. They're not primarily caused by aggressive control inputs and they're not avoided by teaching students to move the controls more slowly.

The fact remains that it's appropriate and important for flight instructors to make sure their students know what the aircraft they're flying can do. Just as important as knowing when to use that capability, and when not to.

[PilotDAR]

Who remembers the last time that they applied a flight control input to the stop in flight? Rudder in a slip? Yes, regularly for me, but otherwise, full elevator or aileron to the stop? Not too common. For those times when I have applied full elevator, it was probably during intentional stalls or spins. Full aileron? During aerobatics, and occasionally, during a slip. I can't think of a time when I have had to move the control to that position so quickly that I felt the control hit the stop with anything other than a gentle contact. During those intentional maneuvers, things would be pretty messy, if I were slamming controls around - easy in and easy out.

But, as observed, my observation is more intended to apply to the routine habits of everyday flying, and treating the airplane as an extension of yourself. If you went around all day stomping your feet hard as your walked, or flailing your arms and head around, you'd get worn out and hurt. Probably the plane does too!

[cgzro]

Couple of quick points.

- maximum roll/pitch/yaw/climb/etc. rates are not necessarily achieved at full deflection. Rolls are often faster sometimes significantly so at less than full deflection. The RV crowd will be aware of this. Also they can reverse if its done too quickly at low speed.

- also a fast application to full throw may not be as effective as a more steady application. Example is elevator. A rapid application promotes a stall immediately with little to no climb while a more steady application gets you the altitude change you were hoping for before a stall.

-up/down/roll to avoid a collision with another aircraft would depend on performance. In a low performance plane I'd go under and a high performance I'd opt to go over, assuming there was enough time to do so. I agree turning may not be the best thing due to the increased surface area to hit in a bank and you loose visibility of the other aircraft.