Jump to content

What a dilemma!


FastEddieB

Recommended Posts

Dilemma - A dilemma (Greek: δί-λημμα "double proposition") is a problem offering two possibilities, neither of which is practically acceptable.

 

In another thread, its being discussed whether its better to be slightly over gross or to potentially have too little reserve to comfortably make a proposed flight.

 

I think that shows bad thinking, as if those are the only two options.

 

Wrong! There's virtually always another option, which is to either not make the flight or plan a shorter leg.

 

It's like asking whether VFR it's better to climb through a thin overcast to get on top or to scud run beneath a low ceiling. While that and the prior discussion may have academic interest, to the extent pilots are actually making decisions like that they are putting themselves and their passengers at risk by choosing a bad option simply because it seems "less bad" than another.

 

Anyway, if and when someone runs out of fuel, saying "It was because I didn't want to fly over gross" won't carry much weight. And if and when someone gets violated for exceeding gross weight limits, saying "I had to in order to have enough fuel" is equally unlikely to impress the FAA.

 

This is probably all pretty obvious, but I'm afraid some here may take these discussions the wrong way and rationalize unsafe and/or illegal behavior in this way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ed,

What kind of censorship would you impose on the discourse to keep some people from rationalizing unsafe or illegal behavior?

 

Who are the "some" people you are worried about? I'll give you a release if you mean me. :)

 

Isn't most of the exchange on this site between alleged experts who disagree on the very topics that worry you? Who will play referee? Roger?

 

What makes you think that anyone on here would believe the FAA would give you a bye if you were caught flying over gross? We were all trained as pilots to understand weight and balance.

 

What makes you believe that flying an airplane that weighs more than it's permissible gross weight is unsafe? 1321 will kill you? Don't we have examples that prove that is not so?

 

Now, I will be the first to say that many of my posts are prompted by disagreement with some operation that I think is not best practice, so based on my personal experience I would submit that there are not going to be many threads addressing something that is illegal or is felt to be unsafe that is not flagged by someone with that concern.

 

If you are worried about development of a FD CT culture on this site that condones illegal or unsafe behaviors, I submit that we had better first look at our maintenance and modification discussions and see how they line up with the FAA and ASTM regs.

 

One way to obviate the sense that "they're all doing it; it's OK" is to make a point in a thread that there is a reg or safety issue.

 

I agree an "8 over" culture can develop. Probably every one of us believes the police won't ticket till we get more than 10 over (except in school zones, of course, or speed traps) so we come to believe we are entitled to run 8 over with impunity. If we get a ticket, we get mad. But none of us would protest that it's legal to run 8 over even if it has become a social norm.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm on the road, so I'll have to pretty much let my post stand and let others weigh it's value.

 

You asked a lot of questions, but allow me to just address the first:

 

No call for censorship of any kind was meant to be expressed nor implied.

 

As to the other nine questions, I'll let them slide for now - again, I think my post was clear enough on my position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did make the 'I changed my mind' post with tongue in cheek.

 

I replied several times to this owner arguing that he cannot safely assume that he can fly heavy. I never expected it to lead to a fuel emergency over a densely populated area.

 

Tongue in cheek or not I would rather see him heavy than to run out of fuel on that approach, that doesn't mean I advocate either.

 

Hopefully an emergency in his 1st 10 hours will show him that he doesn't own a super-plane and it is subject to a variety of limitations that have to be taken seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ed,

 

This is a trick question. The answer is neither they are both unsafe.

 

Loops work. :o:D

 

See what you started Eddie ;)

 

This is an excellent example of why some questions get discussed. Now, it is clear that a barrel roll in an SLSA CT is not legal. But why is it unsafe? It is a usually between 0.5 and 2-3 g maneuver. Nothing knows it's upside down. What is the unsafe part?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an excellent example of why some questions get discussed. Now, it is clear that a barrel roll in an SLSA CT is not legal. But why is it unsafe? It is a usually between 0.5 and 2-3 g maneuver. Nothing knows it's upside down. What is the unsafe part?

 

Failing the maneuver and over stressing the aircraft?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did make the 'I changed my mind' post with tongue in cheek.

 

I replied several times to this owner arguing that he cannot safely assume that he can fly heavy. I never expected it to lead to a fuel emergency over a densely populated area.

 

Tongue in cheek or not I would rather see him heavy than to run out of fuel on that approach, that doesn't mean I advocate either.

 

Hopefully an emergency in his 1st 10 hours will show him that he doesn't own a super-plane and it is subject to a variety of limitations that have to be taken seriously.

 

I just think we must be aware of the message we're sending if we imply aerobatics in a non-aerobatic plane may be safe.

 

Maybe this pilot absorbed similar information over time and surmised it was OK to roll his Cirrus:

 

http://www.flyingmag.com/technique/accidents/cirrus-sr22-crash-flight-data-reveals-low-aerobatics

 

An academic discussion of how Bob Hoover can roll a B-707 while pouring iced tea is one thing, and I will engage that discussion.

 

But I do not ever want to leave the impression that it's safe to do so in a S-LSA. The words we put here can be seeds for other pilot's future decisions - that's quite a responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are confusing pilot competence with airplane structural capability. An idiot can wreck an Extra 300. Tex Johnson rolled the 707, Bob Hoover poured the water in the Aero Commander.

 

I would be astonished if a CT could not be safely rolled, and if that were proven to be the case I would want to know about it. It is conceivable that I could be caught in clear air turbulence or a clear roll cloud or a miniburst and the airplane could be violently maneuvered. I'd hope that my attempt to recover would not pull the wings off in a CT when it might not in a Remos or RV-12 or something else that one would otherwise consider to be comparable.

 

This discussion sounds to me like priests and nuns teaching sex education. Uh, hello?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a decision that gets made for me from time to time, upsets happen in the lee of high terrain. Being upset is a lot like inadvertent IFR in some environments its just a matter of time. When it happens how do you react? Do you have the skills and awareness? If so then its likely no big deal.

 

When dealing with rotors and air with a big vertical component it makes more sense to me to keep my airspeed in a safe range than to worry about violating a pitch attitude limitation. Generally an aerobatic attitude is needed to prevent loading up the wings. I do see 2 sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stab is our (CTSW or LS) weak point on our fuselage. The guy killed in Italy found this out the hard way. You don't do aerobatic maneuvers with a composite plane with a stab like ours. It was never designed to handle those types of maneuvers in mind. Go look how it is attached and what really hold it together. Then watch it flex and shake on the ground during a high rpm run up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CT wing is really strong. The same design, and aerofoil, but a few feet longer, will be used in the CT4 at double the max weight. That's how much margin the CT wing has. High g's don't necessarily put a lot of force on the stabilator, but high airspeeds do. If that trim tab goes, you're done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding Roger's comment, #15, I've noticed the stabilator shake on a high rpm ground run up. Does anyone know if this shake continues while flying? I assume not, or we would feel the vibration. If the stab doesn't shake during flight, what is the dynamic that causes shake on static ground run up and not while flying?

 

Roger Kuhn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No shake in the air. You would feel it and the higher the speed the worse it should get. It's just the turbulence on the ground run that causes this shake you can see and feel. There were a few that had in air shake or flutter. That's one reason why that FD SB came out for some stab mods on certain stabs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just posted on the Cirrus Owner's site:

 

Utah County deputy killed in small plane crash

Posted on: 10:19 am, September 6, 2013, by Meredith Forrest Kulwicki and Caroline Connolly, updated on: 09:35pm, September 6, 2013

 

SPANISH FORK, Utah — As police departments from across the state attended Sgt. Derek Johnson’s funeral on Friday, the Utah County Sheriff’s Office began mourning the loss of one of their own.

Sgt. Jay Lessley, 40, was killed Friday morning in a small plane crash near Spanish Fork airport.

 

“It’s one of those things when you think, ‘when is this going to end?’” said Sgt. Spencer Cannon, Lessley’s long time boss and friend.

 

For about three years, Lessley had been piloting search and rescue operations for the Sheriff’s Office. One of his many accomplishments, Cannon said, during his nearly ten year career with the department.

 

According to authorities, Lessley was off duty on Friday, volunteering as a test pilot, when the small experimental plane he was controlling suddenly crashed on private farm land west of the airport around 8:00 a.m.

 

Many of Lessley’s colleagues were preparing to pay their respects to Sgt. Johnson when they were notified of the accident.

 

“Most people who were involved in this investigation of the crash today were getting ready to attend the funeral of Sgt. Derek Johnson this morning,” said Cannon. “It just compounds the tragedy having it happen at a time when we’re giving so much focus to another law enforcement officer, who heroically gave his life protecting his community.”

 

Friday’s ride was the fourth one Lessley had done for the plane manufacturing company, SkyCraft, which is based in Orem. According to company spokesman Paul Glavin, Lessley was testing the somewhat rare SD-1 plane, kit-built by a private owner.

 

“This is the first one built in the U.S. There are about 25 of them flying around the world,” Glavin said.

 

Prior to taking off, Glavin said Lessley met with other company staff to discuss the flight path for the morning. However, about 15 minutes into the test, Glavin said Lessley veered slightly off course from the agenda.

 

“He was performing a maneuver called an aileron roll, where he rolls the airplane 360 degrees, and this is not an approved maneuver in the aircraft,” Glavin said.

 

After one successful completion of the turn, onlookers were both surprised and excited by what the plane could do, but as Lessley attempted a second one, the aircraft responded differently.

 

“Then, on his second effort of performing this maneuver, something apparently did not go correctly,” Glavin said.

 

While he would not speculate on what happened, Glavin said something could have malfunctioned inside the plane because it was not structured to operate in such a manner.

 

As the plane descended, Lessley attempted to use the parachute, but Glavin said it did not deploy properly.

 

“Based on the speed and condition of the aircraft, it was not a successful deployment of the parachute,” he said. “It worries us that it did not work in this case and had tragic consequences, but it is very likely that the aircraft was not suited for an appropriate deployment of the parachute.”

 

Lessley leaves behind a wife and daughter. The National Transportation Security Board is investigating the crash.

 

 

 

(bolded - mine. I wonder if he read online that it was a perfectly safe maneuver?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An aileron roll is a perfectly safe maneuver, of course. Why would it not be? The fact that someone does one wrong does not make it unsafe. The fact that an aileron roll is a perfectly safe maneuver does not mean that any untrained pilot should go out and do them. A stall is a perfectly safe maneuver, but I would not do a power on stall at 50 ft AGL.

 

What does the fact that it was not approved in that aircraft tell us? Very little. It does not tell us that the airplane can't do it. It does not tell us that the airplane was tested for that maneuver and found to be unable to perform it acceptably. My main point in this discussion is that it is useful to know what an airplane can and can't do and that a simple proscription to a maneuver is gives us very little information about the real capabilities of the airplane.

 

If this had been an aerobatic airplane would it have done the aileron roll successfully? Who is to know?

 

Here's what the company web site says:

 

"All of our airplanes are manufactured at our factory in Orem, Utah, with each SD-1 Minisport handcrafted by the SkyCraft team to ASTM standards for Light Sport Aircraft. Due to our location’s high elevation and extreme desert temperatures, our airplanes are built to withstand harshly unfavorable flying conditions. Once our planes roll off the assembly line, they are flight tested at Spanish Fork Airport (U77) to safety standards well beyond what is required by the FAA."

 

"With the design and materials imported from the Czech Republic, our airplanes are then factory-built to ASTM standards on location in Orem, UT. Each plane then undergoes rigorous flight testing beyond what is required by the FAA and ASTM until the plane is ensured to be 100% safe for many years of flight."

 

We don't have enough info and I have not searched the FAA database to see if this was a company built plane or a private plane, but in any event the activities described in the news article don't appear to be out of line with what one might have expected. Given that the company tested - we don't know what that entailed - to beyond FAA standards - whatever that means - there is nothing to indicate that anyone thought an aileron roll was unsafe.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, just curious, which is safer in a CT, snap rolls or barrel rolls? ... I wonder if he read online that it was a perfectly safe maneuve? [from some guy on the internet]

 

Quite the straw man argument Eddie. You didn't ask if it was safe, you asked which is safer, a fair question as long as you don't argue that the answer means that I'm asserting its save to exceed the limitations.

 

I have asserted that the 30 degree pitch limitation seems counter productive in big lift or sink, why stall or over speed? Safe airspeed comes first but we see on this very forum a new pilot that did respond for a long time that the answer is always a level deck attitude. He was so locked into that thinking that he argued that 'strait and level' meant a level deck angle.

 

When acting as a test pilot one must be well read on the limitations of the design he is testing, the screw up here was a lack of a parachute while doing aerobatics, the question of what some guy on the web said isn't relevant, this is a test pilot not a student.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stab is our (CTSW or LS) weak point on our fuselage. The guy killed in Italy found this out the hard way. You don't do aerobatic maneuvers with a composite plane with a stab like ours. It was never designed to handle those types of maneuvers in mind. Go look how it is attached and what really hold it together. Then watch it flex and shake on the ground during a high rpm run up.

 

I agree that the stab connection is a weak point, but wasn't the failure in Italy a function of a changed design in the trim tab from a partial trim to to a full length trim tab, without sufficient reinforcement or engineering design? I thought there was an AD to address that design flaw. Now, apart from flying overspeed as an air demonstration exercise.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...