This was a check-ride?
I thought the FAA check airman were there mostly for checking new captains?
Interesting how almost everybody learns a little bit differently. I just know what hand I write with and that's the reference point.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
This was a check-ride?I'm a little sensitive to this, as I experienced a similar situation in a 1900C (without the disastrous finale, of course). 400 pounds of company materials got loaded in aft baggage without being added to the manifest we were given. So we departed Boston for Burlington four inches out of limits aft and at MGTOW, while our load sheet showed within limits and 400 pounds under gross.
The plane handled squirrelly as hell and was real twitchy in all axis, but especially pitch. The 1900 tended to load aft, and we often flew with CG at the aft limit, where it had a tendency to squirrelliness, so we weren't particularly alarmed by the behavior at first, but as fuel burned off , and it didn't get any better we began to wonder. Unfortunately, we had an FAA inspector aboard plugged into the intercom, so we couldn't talk about it, just make hand signals back and forth.
I thought the FAA check airman were there mostly for checking new captains?We made it to Burlington and even managed a greaser landing, but when two husky rampies hopped up in aft baggage to throw down the bags, the old girl sat right down on her tail, launching the Fed from the airstair door where he was standing to an undignified heap in a puddle on the ramp.
Interesting how almost everybody learns a little bit differently. I just know what hand I write with and that's the reference point.My girlfriend, an accomplished motorcyclist, equestrian, and mechanic before I taught her to fly, has a similar affliction applying to communication, not function.
It's an additive effect; more power plus leftward pull working through a longer moment arm makes for a startling first takeoff when the owner gets his plane back with its shiny new proboscis. Not only the longer moment, but also more keel area forward usually creates the need for a skeg or dorsal fin aft to compensate.The turboprop conversions all usually make way more power, which regardless of nose length would cause a greater swing at power up correct? I would think if power remained the same the longer nose would be more stable not less. Conversely a shorter nose would cause a bigger swing if power remained the same, correct?
This was what was called a route check. If they need to go somewhere and don't feel like spending hours in the car, they just "drop in" on an airline flight going in the right direction for a no-notice observation of a crew or two in everyday operations. Needless to say, this isn't popular with airline people as it often results in bumping an additional passenger and/or displacing any scheduled jumpseat riders.This was a check-ride?
I thought the FAA check airman were there mostly for checking new captains?
So, it's kind of the aerial pop-quiz?This was what was called a route check. If they need to go somewhere and don't feel like spending hours in the car, they just "drop in" on an airline flight going in the right direction for a no-notice observation of a crew or two in everyday operations.
Ivan, where did you come up with that conception of the forces at work? It doesn't look like any of the diagrams I've seen of P factor. What shows up in pilot training manuals is a depiction of a left-pointing arrow with its tail feathers at the propeller hub and a value attached multiplied by its distance from the CG to give a moment. This is contrasted with a drawing of the same aircraft with its piston engine replaced by a much lighter turboprop, which requires an extended nose for balance. Now the left arrow is farther from the CG and has a larger moment value, which translates to a heavier right foot to keep the plane out of the weeds alongside the runway. A number of larger single engine planes (Beaver, Otter, Courier, Porter, Air Tractor, etc) have popularized these turboprop conversions, and occasionally startled their pilots with the vehemence of their leftward swing under power.
Cheers,
Wes
That's right, and the further forward of the CG that pull to port is applied, the more leverage it has to displace the aircraft from it's heading, IE to pivot the aircraft about its vertical axis.Because of the difference in angle of attack between the prop blades on each side, the starboard blades generate more thrust than the port side blades and there is asymmetric thrust Forward which causes a pull to port.
I suppose you could call it a pop quiz, although there's no "quizzing" involved; the Inspector just sits there, listens to the communications and observes the crew's routine procedures, takes notes and writes a report for his/her supervisor. In the rare case of exceptional crew performance, either good or bad, he/she will offer a critique to the crew or write up a violation of FARs, if warranted. In my experience, this was rare, and usually the Inspector went off and left the crew wondering.So, it's kind of the aerial pop-quiz?
And he ended up with the plane flipped onto it's back?
That's right, and the further forward of the CG that pull to port is applied, the more leverage it has to displace the aircraft from it's heading, IE to pivot the aircraft about its vertical axis.
Cheers,
Wes
I prefer the NTSB report over Wiki. IIRC, not only was the elevator misrigged, but so was elevator trim, so when they set the elevator trim correctly (according to the trim indicator) it was actually trimmed much more nose-high than indicated.By the way, the Beech 1900D crash wasn't entirely an Aft CoG problem if the Wikipedia link was accurate.
There was an error in the rigging of the elevators so that full control deflection was not possible.
Either the Aft CoG or lack of elevator controls alone would not have been fatal, but together they were.
I am neither an engineer nor a mathematician, so my understanding is defined by what I've seen in training manuals and simplified discussions such as "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators".Is P-factor a vector to PORT or is it an imbalance of two FORWARD vectors each with a lateral offset?
I suppose you could call it a pop quiz, although there's no "quizzing" involved; the Inspector just sits there, listens to the communications and observes the crew's routine procedures, takes notes and writes a report for his/her supervisor. In the rare case of exceptional crew performance, either good or bad, he/she will offer a critique to the crew or write up a violation of FARs, if warranted. In my experience, this was rare, and usually the Inspector went off and left the crew wondering.
The case of the 1900 that sat down on its tail was a different scene altogether. That Inspector was bruised on his butt and his ego, as well as water and glycol stained on his expensive suit, and he was justifiably pretty irate. He relieved the Captain and me of our licenses and wrote us up for careless and negligent operation and numerous other FAR violations, incuding falsifying flight documents. Since the baggage door got dinged against one of the baggage carts when the plane sat down, he declared it unairworthy and the company had to send another plane and crew to fly the one hop to complete our trip sequence. This turned out to be in vain, as none of the seven passengers going on to PLB would get on one of our planes, and the company wound up sending them on in taxis and limousines.
The thing that saved our bacon was that I still had the manifest sheet we were given in BOS and it agreed with my weight and balance flimsy, and didn't reflect the 400 pounds of extra cargo that was actually there. Piedmont's BOS station wound up taking the rap for the fiasco, and some dispatcher down there lost his license.
Cheers,
Wes
Strictly speaking, they can't. Any Inspector can route check a crew as long as they have that company's ops specs for that aircraft available as a reference. That is not a checkride, per se, but an operational observation. There's no interference with the crew's duties allowed and no intervention except in the case of gross misconduct, and is supposed to be invisible to the public.Wes,
I always thought it odd that an FAA "person", could give you a Checkride on a plane they are not current and or qualified in. Government oversight at its best...
Cheers,
Biff