Are you willing to land with the jump plane in the name of pilot training?

[diverdriver 5]

You're right. Landing a full load is not an emergency. But it certainly is NOT normal for that jump pilot. It's not something they do all the time. Now add in stress due to needing to be on the ground. What I'm asking for is to broaden our jump pilots experience with targeted training. I'm not saying they have to do takeoffs and landings all day long training. But give em a chnace to see what it's like a couple or three times.


In your example: Getting on the plane for that flight for skydiving makes it ok to not have seats and to sit on the floor. Now, if you took off with no intention to jump but to land again for practice then it's not legal to sit on the floor. The purpose of that flight was to land with no intention to jump. Now, if you boarded with the intention to jump then you can go without seats. If you couldn't jump then you're legal to land. The important thing is that you INTENDED[/I] to jump.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[bob.dino 1]

Quote

And when landing training for engine out in a ME plane you SHOULD NOT feather a good engine but rather simulate zero thrust.

For the non-pilots in the crowd, what's the difference?

[diverdriver 5]

Feathering the prop refers to turning the blades of the prop so they are parallel to the relative wind (airflow) so as to reduce drag. If you've seen Twin Otters shut down the props are in the feathered position. Casas and Skyvans do not feather on shutdown (well, they're not supposed to).

If you feather in flight that prop and engine are taken out of any ability to help you. It's just along for the ride. So, effectively, you have created an emergency. Now, it is common in multi-engine training to secure an engine in flight and let the pilot practice manuevering so as to get a feel for how the plane will act. However, it should never be practiced to actually make a demonstrated single engine landing. If you have to go around you will have to do it on one engine for real and this is risky. The Aerohio crash years ago was a result of just this situation. They had a perfectly working engine but it was useless for a go-around because the prop was feathered.

I have feathered and unfeathered a prop in flight on a Twin otter. It takes quit awhile to unfeather it and it is NOT graceful.

I don't recommend pilots actually feathering the prop for SE landing practice. Use a zero thrust setting. That's a thrust setting so there is zero (near zero) aerodynamic drag. A windmilling prop (engine at idle) causes drag. That's why we feather it in flight if the engine fails. By keeping a zero thrust setting the engine is ready to produce power if necessary almost instantly.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[Zenister 0]

would rather not... training shouldn't be conducted with 'customers' ever.

There are so many ways to simulate situations like this in a controlled environment it is silly to include additional risks to passengers just for added 'realism'

Training is important, VERY important. But there is proper way to do it.. asking for 'crash test dummies' is ludicrous, and could easily invite an obscene number of lawsuits if/when 'training' suddenly becomes the real deal, when it could have been avoided completely.

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[diverdriver 5]

Quote

would rather not... training shouldn't be conducted with 'customers' ever.

There are so many ways to simulate situations like this in a controlled environment it is silly to include additional risks to passengers just for added 'realism'

Training is important, VERY important. But there is proper way to do it.. asking for 'crash test dummies' is ludicrous, and could easily invite an obscene number of lawsuits if/when 'training' suddenly becomes the real deal, when it could have been avoided completely.

You do understand that just about every jump pilot I know got OJT when learning to fly skydivers? From 182s to Casas pilots are trained in the pilot seat with jumpers on board all the time. We train spotting, flying the jump run, dealing with CG shifting, cutting, etc... all on the job with paying passengers. So...are you opposed to ALL jump pilot training with paying passengers on board? Because it happens all the time.

I guess I'm asking where's the threshold?

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[tbrown 26]

Tough question. On the one hand I readily see how important the training and practice is for pilots. On the other hand thoughI'm not comfortable with the idea of assuming any extra risk, no matter how beneficial the experience is for others, or even for my potential safety in a future situation. I have been on three flights that had to come back fully loaded for weather or a developing engine problem (twice on a DC-3, once in a 180 Cessna). All three landings were fine, but I didn't like being on any of them.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !