Comments on: Partial panel and fixed gear

By: Thomas R.

Thomas R. — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:05:23 +0000

I recently completed initial training at the Recurrent Training Center in Savoy Ill. for a Cessna 340A. I went there expecting a simplistic paper pushing waste of time, I was very wrong. It was an excellent training session that consisted of unexpected system failures at “unannounced” times. What I quickly learned is when we are students learning either VMC or IFR partial panel lessons we become accustomed to seeing our CFI or CFII reach over with post-it notes, drop a pencil in a mock attempt to not see him shut off fuel to an engine, pull a circuit breaker or any countless other attempts to simulate a real life emergency. What we have is a signal to start looking, in the simulator and real life we don’t receive these clues and we are lured into complacency. In one of my sessions at RTC the attitude indicator was failed and I almost did a “Carnahan”. I was amazed how difficult it was to assimilate the information the gauges were telling me into a flying solution. Even though I was in a simulator, in a 65 degree room, I was sweating for real. It has made me a firm believer in simulator training. Especially helpful were the engine out on departure failures, it was excellent training to understanding the control inputs necessary for multi-engine survival in extreme situations. In my particular case, after exiting the simulator and mentally reviewing the attitude indicator failure I reassessed my former opinion that Mr. Carnahan “Lost it”. He did, to be sure, but the AI failure in flight is a very deadly situation. In my plane I am currently having the turn coordinator moved down one position and my avionics shop is installing an electric attitude indicator with a slip indicator in its position. I will the have both an electric and vacuum driven AI adjacent to each other. If they are not in total agreement I’ll have and immediate indication and a solid “clue” that one is lying to me and crosscheck accordingly.

Be safe.

Thomas R.

By: david

david — Mon, 19 Dec 2005 02:31:22 +0000

Thanks for the comment, Frank. What I’d expect would be speed stability, not roll or pitch stability — in other words, it might still be hard to keep the wings level, but when you fail to do so, the plane will not accelerate as fast into a spiral — that gives you a lot more time to recover, and it’s my guess that that’s why fixed-gear planes don’t get into as much trouble partial panel — quite simply, you can get away with being much sloppier.

One experiment I’m thinking of trying on a nice smooth day is flying my Warrior up to a safe altitude, letting go of the yoke, and watching what happens. Will I end up in a fast tight spiral, or just a stable descending turn?

By: Frank Ch. Eigler

Frank Ch. Eigler — Sun, 18 Dec 2005 23:43:00 +0000

I still wonder aobut the advice to drop the gear. It can change pitch attitude, will change the power/drag. It may not add stability. It seems like unless one practices with that configuration, it may confuse/hurt more than it helps.

I’ll try it on GXRP and report. As a preliminary data point from experience, ordinary partial panel practice on the Aztec is only mildly stressful, because it’s such a stable airplane already.