PA28 Checkout

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

LousyFisherman
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 578
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 8:32 am
Location: CFX2
Contact:

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by LousyFisherman »

niss wrote: but the fact remains that when I'm flying it's always life or death.
hey, that's my job!!!! I not only endanger myself but everyone else in Southern Alberta when I fly!
Okay, you're in Onterrible, I suppose I could use the help there

:mrgreen:

LF
---------- ADS -----------
 
Women and planes have alot in common
Both are expensive, loud, and noisy.
However, when handled properly both respond well and provide great pleasure
lhalliday
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 5:30 pm

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by lhalliday »

A personal datum: I gave myself a Beech Musketeer for my birthday.

With 180 hours PIC in PA28 the insurance company are looking for a checkride with a CPL or higher who is familiar with the type. No specifics on time or maneuvers, but from the test flight and discussions with the former owner (who will be doing the checkride) we'll concentrate on landings, since the sight picture on final is radically different from a Cherokee or a 172.

...laura
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by photofly »

How is the sight picture radically different in a Beech Musketeer from a Cherokee? Do you land inverted?
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
lhalliday
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 5:30 pm

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by lhalliday »

A lot more nose-down. With a glareshield that is lower to begin with.

...laura
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by PilotDAR »

the insurance company are looking for a checkride with a CPL or higher who is familiar with the type.
A little thread drift... The CPL standard seems to be a lazy default for the insurer. Yes, if you have access to a CPL who is willing and suitably experienced, that pilot could be a good choice. However, the better choice could be a PPL who has a lot of experience and total flying time, particularly if the aircraft type is uncommon. I earned my CPL more than three decades after being a PPL, and only because I was requested to have a CPL for flying I was requested to do. Prior to having the CPL, I donated my time for many checkouts over the decades, because I had the experience on type, and was locally available. Insurers seemed fine with that. A recently licensed CPL with low experience, and perhaps little on type might not be your best choice.

Bear in mind that there are a lot of types out there which are very difficult for "rental" pilots to access to build experience (I refer to aircraft like Mooneys, Bigger single Cessnas and Pipers, and amphibians, for example). You will often find that the experience on these types resides with "private" owners who fly recreationally, rather than CPL's who fly them for work. Though, yes, when the topic is a fixed gear PA-28, any CPL hopefully can figure one out!

Owners (new owners in particular) are not doing themselves, nor other owners any favours by caving in to insurer's demands for conditions of check out. Yes, I strongly support checkouts, mentoring and experience building, but insurers are often not the best people to assess who should be performing these checkouts, particularly on uncommon types. Look for the pilot who has time on type, flies regularly, and also has varied experience on other types. Choosing someone who is more close to you, who could be available for ongoing support is wise too.
since the sight picture on final is radically different from a Cherokee or a 172.
Don't become too hung up on sight picture. Yes, seeing where you are going is important, but as long as you can see where you are going, learn to understand where the plane is going, over where you see it could go. All certified aircraft meet the requirements for visibility, and they are presented for certifiers in great detail. Some aircraft meet them with what seems to be little excess (Piper Cheyenne II, and DC-3 come to mind), other types with lots (Partinavia Observer, for example). Then there are the taildraggers whose sight pictures change when the tail wheel is down (Cessna 180/185, Stearman or Harvard, for example). And types whose sight picture is really poor at certain phases of flight (most high wing aircraft during a more steep turn to base or final). All of these types meet the requirement for pilot visibility, and are indeed fine to land (though taxiing the taildraggers demands lots of attention), but their sight pictures are different. If I had my way, no high wing aircraft would be certified without skylights, but that's another discussion).

Focus more on everything you can see outside for a sense of where the plane is in space, and its motion relative to the desired flight path, rather than fixating on the runway visible ahead of you. Of course you need to see the runway to line up, but just because you have the runway nicely fixed in the optimum place in the windshield does not assure a good approach, nor a safe landing. Some aircraft (Bigger Cessna amphibians, for example) require quite steep descent angles for a gliding approach. Excellent sight picture if done right, but a decent sign picture (like that for a powered approach) will result in a less than safe gliding approach. ANd then there's the sight picture of landing on a surface which is not a marked runway, and everything changes again. The bigger picture view will give you much more information for more precise landings.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by PilotDAR on Sat Aug 20, 2016 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
lhalliday
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 5:30 pm

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by lhalliday »

I flew some circuits with the former owner last night. As expected a correct round out and flare felt like we were about to drive the plane in to the runway. I flared way too high the first couple of times then it clicked. Personally, I found it more effective to trim the plane for a good approach speed, keep the approach stabilized, and let the nose find its own way.

I'm not completely comfortable yet, but I'm close...

...laura
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by photofly »

The best way to get a visual appreciation of the landing view is to take a good hard look at things just before you begin the takeoff roll.

And you should always trim the plane for a good approach speed and keep the approach stabilized, in any kind of airplane.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by PilotDAR »

Thread drift...
And you should always trim the plane for a good approach speed and keep the approach stabilized, in any kind of airplane.
"Stabilized" is a term which can be understood different ways in the context of an approach. I could fly at a constant heading (aligned with the runway centerline :wink: ), constant speed, and constant descent rate, and we would all call that stabilized. If I fly a constant rate turn from downwind, through base, to final, straightening out just back of the threshold, with a steady rate of descent, and speed slowing uniformly to the flare, would that be a stabilized approach?

Yes, the sight picture with the nose light during the takeoff roll is what you are looking for as you flare to land. it will be a combination of how much runway you can see over the nose (if any), and how high your eyes are above the runway. The standard Piper/Cessna tricycle height is pretty common, but you have to pay more attention when you're flying an amphibious floatplane, or landing a flying boat in the water (or worse, going from one to the other in the same day!)
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5861
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

photofly wrote:The best way to get a visual appreciation of the landing view is to take a good hard look at things just before you begin the takeoff roll.
I disagree. What you want is the view of the landing attitude which is the view you have just before the wheels touch. The view you have at the start of the takeoff roll is most definitely not the view you want to see when the wheels touch,

Personally I demonstrate the landing attitude by, with me handling the controls, starting the takeoff roll and when I am going fast enough pitch up to the attitude I want to see just before the wheels touch, that is the proper attitude to give a nice tail low main wheel first touch down. I then reduce power enough so the airplane won't become airborne and hold that for so that the student can get a good look at what they should see.
And you should always trim the plane for a good approach speed and keep the approach stabilized, in any kind of airplane
"stabilized" approach has unfortunately become a some what debased term. Strictly speaking stabilized approach criteria only apply to large airplanes. Their large levels of inertia mean that deviations from the ideal speed and approach path can't be quickly corrected and can quickly escalate into a dangerous situation. This why all major air carriers have stabilized approach criteria and any significant deviation from those criteria requires a mandatory
go around.

Light aircraft can correct even large deviations from the conventional straight in, on speed, trimmed on the VASI final approach ( ie the conventional definition of "stabilized" approach ) safety and uneventfully, with good piloting skills. For light aircraft I prefer to think desired performance instead of stabilized approaches. In other words that means that the aircraft speed and flight path are what the pilot wants. This requires the pilot to know what the desired performance should be at every part of the approach, be able to recognize deviations from the desired performance and have the skills to regain the desired performance.

One exercise I did with all my commercial and instructor students is to start a straight in approach at 2000 feet, 4 miles final pointed at the runway at cruise power. The required landing is a touch down on the numbers with full flap for a short field landing. This obviously requires large power, attitude, and configuration changes. Done well the flight path to the runway should be a straight line with a tail low, on speed touch down. To do this the pilot has to judge what speed, attitude and configuration is the right one at each part of the approach. This is a far as possible from a "stabilized" approach but is perfectly safe if the "desired performance" is maintained throughout the approach. In a large airplane this approach would be suicidal.

However that been said what approach you fly is dependent on where you are in your flying training and experience. Trying to make a pre solo student do what I just described is an exercise in futility. Generally for lower time pilots I recommend that you reduce the variables you need to juggle. So if you set up a nice stable approach on speed, in trim and with a good flight path by at least 500 feet AGL on final, the chances for a good landing are higher.

Similarly if i teaching a new airplane, or flying a new one myself, we will start with those kind of approaches until he/she gets comfortable before trying an approach that introduces more variables.
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by photofly »

Big Pistons Forever wrote:
photofly wrote:The best way to get a visual appreciation of the landing view is to take a good hard look at things just before you begin the takeoff roll.
I disagree. What you want is the view of the landing attitude which is the view you have just before the wheels touch. The view you have at the start of the takeoff roll is most definitely not the view you want to see when the wheels touch,
I didn't say it was the same view. I said it was the best way to get a good appreciation of what the landing view should be.

I stand by what I said.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5861
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

photofly wrote:
Big Pistons Forever wrote:
photofly wrote:The best way to get a visual appreciation of the landing view is to take a good hard look at things just before you begin the takeoff roll.
I disagree. What you want is the view of the landing attitude which is the view you have just before the wheels touch. The view you have at the start of the takeoff roll is most definitely not the view you want to see when the wheels touch,
I didn't say it was the same view. I said it was the best way to get a good appreciation of what the landing view should be.

I stand by what I said.
I have to say I am struggling to see what value noting the attitude of the airplane when it is sitting on all three wheels with the oleo's compressed, has. It won't be the correct attitude for lift off and it will be unobtainable for touchdown unless you touchdown nose wheel first. I guess I am missing something so please explain.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by PilotDAR »

When I'm flying something new, or first time in a long time, I will use the view before I open the throttle to calibrate my eye height for the landing on a runway. This will not be the view upon landing, unless you're about to have a very hard landing! If I'm checking myself out in a tricycle or floatplane, I'll fly a few stalls at altitude to get a sense of the pitch attitude I could and should see as I touch down. Then, I'll fly downward toward the recalled eye height, intending to raise the nose toward the stall attitude I saw previously. Allowing myself some time to feel it down in the flare.

If a taildragger or flying boat, it's going to be just as Photofly says, the landing attitude is the pre takeoff attitude. With those landings eye height, and feeling down the last foot or two becomes critical to a precise landing. (This knowing that I default to wheel landing taildraggers).

Until you're ready to manage your own approach and landing technique on something new to you, a checkout from an experienced mentor is a good idea. I have had the experience of checking out a pilot new to type, to inform them that they need some more dual, to have them inform me that they feel they do not. Oh well... they don't know what they don't know yet, I hope they learn safely somewhere! Always plan to figure it out for yourself, under supervision for the first hour or two, and listen to your mentor!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5861
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

PilotDAR wrote:
If a taildragger or flying boat, it's going to be just as Photofly says, the landing attitude is the pre takeoff attitude. With those landings eye height, and feeling down the last foot or two becomes critical to a precise landing. (This knowing that I default to wheel landing taildraggers).
My comments were specifically in response to the poster "lhalliday's" situation which was making the transition to flying a different but common tricycle geared trainer/tourer. For a tailwheel aircraft the taxi attitude is the landing attitude as I always start with 3 point landings in light taildraggers and therefore I most definitely get the student to recognize that attitude before we go flying and in fact make a note of reminding the student that he/she should make a point of reminding him/herself of the sight picture when they line up for takeoff as that is what they are looking for at touchdown.

I should note that I am generalizing about training on the common types of light taildraggers. There are few which must be wheel landed like say the Swift, and when you get to the bigger taildraggers, that is C 185's and up then a wheel landing will be the preferred method and I would never 3 point something like a Beech 18 or any other heavy multi engine tail dragger. Personally however I would be reluctant to train a low time pilot who has no tailwheel time on the big taildraggers. It would be better IMHO if they got a bit of experience on something more forgiving.
---------- ADS -----------
 
lhalliday
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 5:30 pm

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by lhalliday »

Last fall for fun I played with a Citabria. I found three-point landings a breeze...

...laura
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5861
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

lhalliday wrote:Last fall for fun I played with a Citabria.
Good for you !
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by photofly »

PilotDAR wrote:If a taildragger or flying boat, it's going to be just as Photofly says, the landing attitude is the pre takeoff attitude.
That's precisely what I didn't say. I said that the best way to get an idea of what the view should be on landing is to consider the view before takeoff. I didn't say the views are the same on landing as before takeoff, and I didn't say anything specifically about attitude.

The view depends on altitude too - if you want to avoid flaring 50' too high in a GA plane or trying to drive the aircraft through the runway, take a look at the runway environment before you take off.

You can reach the correct attitude for landing a tricycle-gear GA aircraft by rounding out to wheels parallel with the ground at an appropriate height and airspeed (so almost the same view as you had when starting the takeoff roll) and holding the aircraft off by raising the nose as it slows down.

I wasn't thinking about tail-draggers at the time but I'll leave PilotDAR's comments on that.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Blakey
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 970
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 6:33 pm
Location: Ontario

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by Blakey »

photofly wrote:
PilotDAR wrote:If a taildragger or flying boat, it's going to be just as Photofly says, the landing attitude is the pre takeoff attitude.
That's precisely what I didn't say. I said that the best way to get an idea of what the view should be on landing is to consider the view before takeoff. I didn't say the views are the same on landing as before takeoff, and I didn't say anything specifically about attitude.

The view depends on altitude too - if you want to avoid flaring 50' too high in a GA plane or trying to drive the aircraft through the runway, take a look at the runway environment before you take off.

You can reach the correct attitude for landing a tricycle-gear GA aircraft by rounding out to wheels parallel with the ground at an appropriate height and airspeed (so almost the same view as you had when starting the takeoff roll) and holding the aircraft off by raising the nose as it slows down.

I wasn't thinking about tail-draggers at the time but I'll leave PilotDAR's comments on that.
This definitely does give you a fair idea of the eye-to-wheel height. Not generally a large difference in this for different GA types but a major factor when moving from large aircraft to smaller ones. Think of an Air Canada captain who decided to buy himself a Cherokee.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not after you!
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by PilotDAR »

Certainly Photofly's and BPF's comments were written with landing light tricycle aircraft in mind, and my peripheral thoughts were outside that scope. And, with a Cherokee, there won't be much variation - even a flaps up landing would be difficult to need to fly!

For the small involvement I have with training pilots (small compared to both of them), I find myself training pilots on less common types, and often some unlearning is needed. That's not to say that I think that initial or model conversion training should encompass a broad variation in technique, it should focus on what is being trained.

However, pilots reading in depth discussions here should remind themselves that as they move from type to type, new techniques will become applicable to their flying, and indeed some of the basic techniques will become entirely inappropriate in other types. Learning the ability to do fly a particular model of aircraft well is one thing, and a worthy objective, but learning how to learn new techniques is even better. I want to inspire readers to thing away from flying numbers and attitudes by rote, as their personal flying skills grow, and rather fly the plane as it needs to be flown.

BPF was very correct in his differentiation of "performance" vs "stabilized" with reference to approaches. A pilot who is comfortable flying a model of aircraft, though still willing to learn more about it will find that there are a number of sight pictures for that aircraft 200 feet back on final which could get you right where you want to be over the threshold. The possibilities vary greatly by aircraft type, and it is the pilot's responsibility to safely become aware. This goes right back to competent mentoring during what could be a type checkout.

A pilot experienced on type may demonstrate the different sight pictures possible in that aircraft, and the pilot new to the type should know them. Some offer a opportunity for a great landing, some will require lots of skill to complete a landing, and some should trigger a go around. It is important to recognize one from the latter two. The sight picture seen in a Cessna 182 which is light and has the flaps fully extended will be very different to the same plane at gross weight with four people aboard, and the flaps refusing to extend! For both conditions, the pilot must recognize a bad sight picture, and make it right.

While training a very experienced airliner pilot in his taildragger flying boat, I had a lot of ingrained sight picture in him to overcome. His attitude was excellent, and we did very well with it. I could see that as I demonstrated what it should look like, it was new to him, and he was learning. I also had to overcome his check of "wheels are down for landing" - not always the right thing in an amphibian! Readers here might not be going from one type to another, but should also not close their minds to broader thinking about it either...
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by Cat Driver »

and I would never 3 point something like a Beech 18 or any other heavy multi engine tail dragger.
I always practiced three point landings in every tail wheel airplane I ever flew right up to the C117, the Beech 18 was easy to three point if you can't keep the thing on the runway in the three point attitude you should not be flying it in my personal opinion.
---------- ADS -----------
 
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.
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5861
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: PA28 Checkout

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

Cat Driver wrote:
and I would never 3 point something like a Beech 18 or any other heavy multi engine tail dragger.
I always practiced three point landings in every tail wheel airplane I ever flew right up to the C117, the Beech 18 was easy to three point if you can't keep the thing on the runway in the three point attitude you should not be flying it in my personal opinion.
That is an interesting comment. I also note on Jan 8 2016 you made the following post
Cat Driver wrote:
Damn -- I guess things change - we always landed 2 point from cub to DC3 and everything in between. Much better control -- even taxi except when coming to the final stop the tail ski was in the air, especially in deep snow and slush conditions.
Yup, same here and for many thousands of hours.

But apparently we were taught wrong and did it wrong.
So I guess we are in agreement after all :D
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”