C208 Intitial sim training requirments?

[Bobby868]

Who is dictating that we need to do the Caravan ground school and sim initial course; Cessna, TC or both?

[Doc]

TC Cessna doesn't care.

[single_swine_herder]

It came from a part of the risk management study which permitted single engine IFR operations in Canadian commercial service.

[2R]

They even dictate you take a course on icing as well.
Maybe they are scared someone might land gear up.

Eventually they will make pilots take a course on how to take enough fuel, try not to forget your lunch course, and for some of the pop and chip drones a special two day course on how to remove the POGO stick before take-off with a special t-shirt for those that can pass the course on the first try.

We should make it a case of beer every time someone forgets to remove the POGO schitck before flight, wearing the captain pogo t-shirt for a week is not enough punishment. By the way where I grew up a case of beer has twenty four beers in it

[Doc]

Requiring pilots to take an FSI course (or equivalent) is a VERY good idea IMHO. Here's why. The Caravan is most often flown by younger pilots who are working for bush type operations. They have received NO professional type training in the past. Most of the time (yes it is, with very few exceptions) it's here's the book. Study. We'll tool around for an hour or two, then off you go.
An FSI course on the 'van is the very first exposure to "procedures, scan, check list....professional" type training. The learn stuff that will also help them in their Navajo (etc.) flying, by broadening their knowledge base.
Take the course. It's not coming out of YOUR wallet.

[switchflicker]

IFR only, take the course (Simulator) where ever you like as long as the sim has TC approval. If I remember correctly, you can do the groundschool in house if you wish.

No sim required for VFR only operations.

Sw

[Doc]

Close. It's IFR and night VFR with pax. If you don't let it lapse (PPC i.e.) for more than 24 months, you only have to do it once. Lapse back to an initial....and it's off to FSI for you.

[single_swine_herder]

Not all that long after a Fedex Caravan came out of the sky in Winnipeg due to ice and claiming the life of a nice young pilot, I had one young guy in Thompson tell me he was brand new to the airplane, that he was fresh off the sim course.

Then when we went out to the airplane to go fly, he declared to me as the ACP that we were ready to go.

Meanwhile there was about 4 inches of fresh snow on all flight surfaces ..... and before some wag says ..... "Oh, what's the big deal, it would have blown off in the takeoff roll." There was also about a half inch of ice frozen to the top of the wing and stab under the fresh snow because it had been brought out of a hot hangar into precip the night before.

But wait .... it gets better, the Company President and the Director of Maintenance (famous for coining the term "accepted northern maintenance practises,) wouldn't let him de-ice using in-house fluid, nor bring it into the hangar because both methods were "too expensive." I came back an hour later and the poor bugger and one of his sympathetic buddies were still sweeping and banging away on the airframe with broom handles..... something that's always great for the paint.

During the entire time period, the Chief Pilot was in his office appearing to be doing something important. We had a rather animated chat about the concept of clause "J" in the General Conditions of all Canadian AOCs ... "The operator shall run a safe operation." Then a similar conversation took place with the President .... a fellow not noted for being calm, cool, and collected when confronted with an allegation that his pride and joy operation was in his opinion being undeservedly slandered.

Then I went back to the hotel..... I was done attempting to fly with them for the day.

[esp803]

I certainly found it useful to actually run the emergency drills time after time. Mind you after testing out the flameouts "Throttle Idle, Ignition on, Throttle back up" in real life, I am 100% certain I would never catch it in time even with the sim training.

E

[ctmorawetz]

I fly for a survey operator doing mostly VFR with the odd IFR flight in the Caravan. On the initial captain upgrade (we fly them two crew), we go to FS. I found it very helpful to practice the emergencies in the sim, even though I already had 100 hours in the left seat and 400 on the right side. If it's not out of your wallet, go for it!

[Doc]

Not all that long after a Fedex Caravan came out of the sky in Winnipeg due to ice and claiming the life of a nice young pilot, I had one young guy in Thompson tell me he was brand new to the airplane, that he was fresh off the sim course.

Then when we went out to the airplane to go fly, he declared to me as the ACP that we were ready to go.

Meanwhile there was about 4 inches of fresh snow on all flight surfaces ..... and before some wag says ..... "Oh, what's the big deal, it would have blown off in the takeoff roll." There was also about a half inch of ice frozen to the top of the wing and stab under the fresh snow because it had been brought out of a hot hangar into precip the night before.

But wait .... it gets better, the Company President and the Director of Maintenance (famous for coining the term "accepted northern maintenance practises,) wouldn't let him de-ice using in-house fluid, nor bring it into the hangar because both methods were "too expensive." I came back an hour later and the poor bugger and one of his sympathetic buddies were still sweeping and banging away on the airframe with broom handles..... something that's always great for the paint.

During the entire time period, the Chief Pilot was in his office appearing to be doing something important. We had a rather animated chat about the concept of clause "J" in the General Conditions of all Canadian AOCs ... "The operator shall run a safe operation." Then a similar conversation took place with the President .... a fellow not noted for being calm, cool, and collected when confronted with an allegation that his pride and joy operation was in his opinion being undeservedly slandered.

Then I went back to the hotel..... I was done attempting to fly with them for the day.

You do know, of course, that this used to be a pretty common attitude not all that long ago.
I was in KBUF many years ago with a Twin Otter. As we taxied in, the freezing rain started. We were overnighting. United Airlines offered me their hangar for $100, including in and out. I called the twit that ran our gong show. He said.."Too much money. Deice in the morning!" So we did.....to the tune of $1500! In the immortal words of Bugs Bunny..."Niah, What a Maroon"

Then there was the US Air pilot who deiced the leading edges of his BAC111, with the pointy end of his fire ax.

[Bobby868]

Thanks for the insight. I've looked through the CARs and can't find a reference / details of these requirements. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong section.

[Doc]

Thanks for the insight. I've looked through the CARs and can't find a reference / details of these requirements. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong section.

Don't think you'll find it in CARS

[Aft CofG]

I don't know how to insert the links to the web pages, but I sort of know how to copy and paste...



723.22 Transport of Passengers in Single-Engined Aeroplanes

The standard for transport of passengers in a single-engined aeroplane under IFR or VFR at night is:

(1) General

(a) only factory built, turbine-powered aeroplanes are permitted;

(b) the turbine-engine of the aeroplane type must have a proven Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) of .01/1000 or less established over 100,000 hours in service; and

(c) pilot training in accordance with subsection 723.98(24).
(amended 2000/12/01; previous version)

(2) Aeroplane Equipment Requirements

(a) two attitude indicators which are powered separately and independently from each other;

(b) two independent power generating sources, either of which is capable of sustaining essential flight instruments and electrical equipment;

(c) an auto-ignition system, or alternatively, the Company Operations Manual must specify that continuous ignition must be selected "ON" for take-off, landing and flight in heavy precipitation;

(d) a chip detector system to warn the pilot of excessive ferrous material in the entire engine lubrication system in all regimes of flight;
(amended 2003/06/01; previous version)

(e) a radar altimeter;

(f) a manual throttle which bypasses the governing section of the fuel control unit and permits continued unrestricted operation of the engine in the event of a fuel control unit failure;

(g) sufficient supplemental oxygen to allow for an optimal glide profile during an engine out let-down from 25,000 feet until a cabin altitude of 13,000 feet;
(amended 2003/06/01; no previous version)

(h) an electronic means of rapidly determining and navigating to the nearest suitable aerodrome for an emergency landing; and
(amended 2003/06/01; no previous version)

(i) sufficient emergency electrical supply to power essential electrical systems, including auto pilot flight instruments and navigation systems, following engine failure throughout the entirety of a descent at optimal glide speed and configuration from the aeroplane’s operating level to mean sea level.



And from 723.98(24)



(24) Single-engine Aeroplanes Carrying Passengers VFR at Night or Under IFR

The following training is required:

Pilot in Command
(amended 2006/06/30; no previous version)

(a) initial training in an approved synthetic training device, including all emergency procedures that cannot be safely practiced in the aeroplane;

(b) training in the aeroplane in accordance with the following training requirements:

Training Requirements
(amended 2006/06/30; no previous version)

INITIAL RECURRENT
Ground Aeroplane Simulator Ground Aeroplane Simulator
20.0 2.0 6.0 7.5 1.0 N/R
1. Ground training times do not include self-study or examination times.

2. Written exams are mandatory at completion of both Initial and Recurrent Ground Training.

3. Synthetic training device and Aeroplane times are Pilot Flying (PF) times only.

(c) Required Synthetic Training Device Exercises

(i) use of checklists

(ii) aeroplane fire on ground or while airborne

(iii) engine fire on ground and in flight

(iv) engine failure in flight

(v) inadvertent encounter with airframe icing conditions and operation of de-icing and anti-icing equipment

(vi) hydraulic, electrical, and other system malfunctions (as applicable)

(vii) loss of pressurization and emergency descent, (if applicable)

(viii) recognition and recovery from turbulence and windshear on approach and landing

(ix) rejected take-offs and landings

(x) missed approach and go-around

(xi) straight-in and circling approaches, with emphasis on non-precision procedures

(xii) Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) containing crew coordination as applicable to the operation, in accordance with paragraph 723.107(1)(f).
(amended 2006/06/30; no previous version)

The following training is required:
(amended 2006/06/30; no previous version)

Second in Command
(amended 2006/06/30; no previous version)

(a) training in the aeroplane in accordance with the following training requirements:
(amended 2006/06/30; no previous version)

Training Requirements
(amended 2006/06/30; no previous version)

INITIAL RECURRENT
Ground Aeroplane Simulator Ground Aeroplane Simulator
20.0 2.0 N/R 7.5 1.0 N/R
1. Ground training times do not include self-study or examination times.

2. Written exams are mandatory at completion of both Initial and Recurrent Ground Training.

[pdw]

There was a certain number of Van accidents to do with freezing precipitation (usually around the mid-latitudes) since the 1990's, and one had to look close sometimes to determine if icing was or was not involved (was often too warm at the surface to determine after). It may have been a much higher number ... what is the number ?

Insurance underwriters have major influence on "requirements", since they have to find a way to mitigate their large payouts where 'on the increase'. Aviation businesses comply by offering the training that helps their premiums remain lower; the "Initial sim training" becomes a part of that plan to reduce rates.

[single_swine_herder]

Aft:

Thanks for publishing the link to the mandatory items required.

It should be noted that very often, a sim service provider's "standard, out of the box generic type training course" doesn't include the mandatory items found under the CASS ...... and the record of training fails to capture the regulation required exercises.

[Bobby868]

Thanks for the post. Interesting read. I do note that there is no minimum amount of time listed in those recommends. Though I believe the industry standard is 10 hours of sim time for the initial.

[pdw]

I've always wondered if a Caravan sim program can simulate practicing flight in v (icing) and viii (LLWS) but when both v+vii are introduced at the same time ... where both affect lift and airspeed negatively, here mainly talking about appoaches or missed-approaches. Effects of torque and P factor are greater when more 'single' hp kicks in, but also that in presence of those conditions the spool-up time can be a huge factor for timely delivery of (adequate adjustment of) thrust.

[single_swine_herder]

The sim is certified to behave like the airplane and yes, multiple effects can be introduced and the flight performance will be represented very realistically. However, generally, multiple unrelated emergencies are not introduced ..... unless requested, and then sure ..... let's see how things react for the training value.

The customer service aspect of sim providers is a big part of the presentation of their training and making sure you go home confident and speaking positively about the facility is imperative. For example, the CASS 703 program for an approved sim based zero-flight time program calls for a demonstration of crosswind operations at 100% of demonstrated. The manager of the sim provider program commented that doing so "would scare the customers." We built our training scenarios to include all required CASS items in an operational environment .... (somewhat similar to a LOFT, but not really) ..... just planning things in a sequence so one item flows into and leads to a quick setup to the next exercise.

[pdw]

The customer service aspect of sim providers is a big part of the presentation of their training and making sure you go home confident and speaking positively about the facility is imperative. For example, the CASS 703 program for an approved sim based zero-flight time program calls for a demonstration of crosswind operations at 100% of demonstrated. The manager of the sim provider program commented that doing so "would scare the customers."

Increasingly more videos are seen of some amazing crosswind landings made by large aircraft where it obviously gets pretty 'scary'. So a high-velocity-crosswind landing that has already been demonstrated can also be demonstrated by the sim program ? Makes sense, and that "doing so" (taking them to the proven crosswind limit) is not necessary if unproductive in every way for EVERYONE involved. Seeing the suspense in those videos of angled/crabbed aircraft, wings touching in one case, ... almost in many others. Setting a bar a bit lower than seen in in the various footage is still going to be a remarkable level of difficulty; even 75% of what's doable in a demo is a pro if those (or manufacturer test pilots) are sticking them onto a runway from these 'very sideways' angles while sometimes near a 'breakeven' groundspeed (or more).


Back to the Caravan. One approach accident report in Rockford Il. Dec 2002 had the component "shifting volatile" (crashed a mile or two from landing), but where icing is not mentioned. There I noticed that icing in fact must have had something to do with control-loss, after studying in great depth the surface analysis that applied. The freezing level was low where the aircraft approached from west of the airport; and the flight was exposed to precipitation conducive to icing while enroute, a 'light catch' at the very least. Mainly the LLWS factor here, but with the ice texture as well.

In another, the Caravan tumbled over southern Kentucky out of a flight path 'infringed upon' by an icing layer (no evidence of icing left in the debris-field at zero-AGL and no proof either). But there, with the analysis of the weather factors, it occurs that very likely a well-monitored airspeed bug on an IAS would be drawing attention to loss of speed/thrust/lift due to blade and wing/stab ice up at 6-7K. Mainly ICING factors here, yet can't underestimate the light shear presence between moving layers when it dips airspeed negatively thereby briefly boosting reduction of an already-ailing lift.

[PilotDAR]

calls for a demonstration of crosswind operations at 100% of demonstrated. The manager of the sim provider program commented that doing so "would scare the customers."

Oh dear! If the "customers" are the pilots, they should rethink what they are doing there if a "100%" crosswind scares them! The Caravan is an amply able aircraft in a crosswind. I believe that the demonstrated crosswind speed is 20 knots.

During one of my certification test flights of a highly modified Caravan I went looking for the big crosswind, to show compliance with the requirement. I flew a half dozen circuits with a direct crosswind of 19 G 25 with no particular difficulty. Another test flight, in Saskatoon, was 29 G 36 at 45 degrees. I chirped tires a little, but had no problem staying down the middle of the runway.

I think a sim is a great place to challenge one's self, and crosswinds are one very important challenge.

[pdw]

That meant 100% of what's been demonstrated. That part of the discussion wasn't about just the Caravans ...

[goaroundthrust]

The pilot that flew the morningstar caravan in Winnipeg that crashed was actually middle age

[pdw]

That's right, she was filling in for a few trips while the regular pilot had time off. She normally operated on a route in Eastern Canada.

[Doc]

The pilot that flew the morningstar caravan in Winnipeg that crashed was actually middle age

So WHAT? Any attempt to stay on topic?