PlasticPilot.net

Avatar

Fuselages made of composite are like plastic - I'm the Plastic Pilot who flies the plastic planes
This is my blog, and it's about modern general aviation, glass-cockpits, FADECs, but also aviation in general


Photo Contest !

Just in case you missed it, I’m running an aviation photo contest to celebrate the 500th post on this blog. Click here to read more, submit your picture, and get a chance to win a photo book, a tee-shirt, or a mousepad. Good Luck !


Transition to Complex Aircraft

The FAA defines a “complex aircraft” as “one which has manually or automatically controllable pitch propeller, flaps, and retractable landing gear”. An aircraft with more than 200 horsepower is defined as “high performance”. A “technically advanced aircraft” is generally defined as “one with an IFR approach-approved GPS with a moving map and a coupled autopilot”. The Saratoga whose cockpit is shown on this picture corresponds to all three definitions.

As for all transitions to new aircraft type, switching to a complex aircraft requires decidated training. I don’t have a lot to says about flaps, mostly because I never flew a flapless aircraft. The extra power, propeller and gear management are not big issues, but require some extra attention.

More than 200 horsepower means better climb performance, and higher en-route and approach speeds. Sataogas, Bonanzas, or Cessna 210 all have cruising speeds in the 150 knots range, and normal speed on shirt final in the 85 knots range. This is 25 percent faster than a C172 or PA28, requiring faster thinking. This is usually not a problem in cruise, but being up to the speed on approach is something else, and the extra actions required by the variable pitch propeller and retractable landing gear makes it even more challenging.

An important limiting factor that pilots shall not forget is the engine cooling principle. Powerful engines, and particularly turbo equipped ones, really don’t like abrupt power reductions. This is because the fuel itself plays an important role in engine cooling and lubrication. As an example, on the 300 hp normally aspirated Saratoga, it is not recommended to reduce manifold pressure below 13 inches on approach. Power reduction and speed management require more attention and planning that a weaker engine.

The variable pitch propeller allows for better performance, both during climb and cruise, than a fixed pitch propeller, which is always a bad compromise. If you fly a single-lever, FADEC controlled engine, you’ll simply have to set a percentage of power. Easy. If you’re flying a classical plane, having a variable pitch prop will require you to take care of an extra lever - the blue one - and an extra gauge - the manifold pressure. Setting power will then mean adjusting the manifold pressure with the throttle, and then the RPMs number using the propeller lever. Not really complex, but as most operators recommend to reduce power during the initial climb, this induces additional pilot workload at this rather critical phase of flight. The propeller is also reset to high RPM (low pitch) on short final, as preparation for a possible go-around - one more check on short final.

Handling the landing gear is not exactly complex. Retract it after take-off, extend it before landing, and that’s it. It’s however important to reduce speed to the maximal allowed value before extending it, and then to compensate for the extra drag once it’s down. An additional check on short final should normally protect you from the shame of a belly landing. Some say that there are two kind of pilots flying aircraft with retractable landing gears: those who already had a belly landing, and those who will have their soon… I keep my fingers crossed to remain in the second group.

The other thing to know about the landing gear is how to extend it if the normal procedure is not working. Depending how the system is designed, this can be as simple as pulling a lever, or terribly long, like turning a crank… 50 times !

There is a simple mnemonic that I use when flying complex aircraft. While on short final, I call for Red - Blue - Green. Red is for the mixture to full rich, Blue for the propeller to high RPM, and Green for the landing gear indicator. Red - Blue - Green: simple and efficient.

All in all, upgrading to a complex aircraft requires to manage two more systems (propeller and gear), a bit more anticipation, and requires to actually manage the power reduction. Because of their higher mass, flying complex and high-performance aircraft make use of pitch-trim a must, even when small adjustments are needed. Depending on your previous experience, the transition to your first complex type will last between 4 and 8 hours.

Because of the higher fuel consumption, and more expensive insurance premiums induced by the retractable landing gear, the hourly cost of complex aircraft are well above those of more simple one. The extra speed partly compensate for the higher cost, particularly if you fly long legs, but don’t expect it to be cheaper in the end.

Read more:

Comparison between the Saratoga and Bonanza emergency landing gear extension systems

Photo gallery showing the details of a PA32 Saratoga cockpit

Operation of a single-lever FADEC controlled engine

If you enjoyed this post, don't keep it secret !


Category: Flying Tips
Tags:

Light Aircraft Cockpit Room - A Personal Survey

I’m a tall pilot - slightly over 1m90 - and it’s not always easy. Cockpit designers do their best, but some planes can’t simply be flown by pilots over 1m80. The Liberty XL2 is not a good memory in this respect, so I won’t even mention it.

My head did hit plane ceilings on a couple of occasions because of turbulence, and that’s no good. In most planes I have to set the seat in full backwards position, and sometimes this is not really enough. Bringing a Piper yoke to full deflection is not possible if I carry a too large kneeboard.

Here are a couple of photos taken in various planes, showing the distance left between my head and the ceiling. At first, the PA28 Archer II. The space is not that large, but the leg room is fine.

Its bigger sister PA32-Saratoga offers a bit more space for head, but this is at a price of a very low visibility over the dashboard. Not that much of an issue when flying IFR, except when it comes to flare. Because of the club seating - passengers in row 1 are flying backwards - the pilot’s seat can’t be taken backwards enough, and any kneeboard can possibly prevent to take the yoke to full deflection. On the plus side, the club seating makes possible to slip an A4 sized kneeboard between co-pilot and passenger seats.

One of the best aircraft I flew regarding overhead space it the Bonanza. There’s not plenty of horizontal space, but the cockipt it rather high, vertically speaking. Another good thing for cockpit organisation is the presence of a pocket below the pilot’s seat, very practical for checklits.

What about the plastic plane then ? The DA40 cockpit is slightly different, as the seat can’t be adjusted, and the stick is fixed into the seat. To fit (almost) all pilots, the rudder pedals can be adjusted to various depths. Once the canopy is closed, it gets quite close to my head, so I get deep in the seat when the ride gets turbulent.

I did not found a suitable picture from a C172, but regarding cockpit access and vertical space, it’s a pleasure to fly it. I don’t push the seat to the fully backwards position when flying the C172, because of the special position for boarding…

If you have personal feed-back on cockipt space, let me know in comment… particularly if you’re in the opposite situation, and fly with cushions

==============

Because of the horrible bug, no comments are allowed on this post. Here is one that Sylvia from www.fearoflanding.com sent me per e-mail:

I have the opposite problem - I’m just under 1m53. Funnily enough, I like the Saratoga too as it allows me to go further forward than most planes. It’s probably the only plane that I edge back a little bit to get the right fit. The C172 is a pain, I need a cushion behind my back to be able to comfortably reach the pedals. Really I’d like a pillow underneath as well to lift me up a bit but I end up too embarrassed.

I’ve not flown many other planes. I used a very small cushion in the Tobago - I think I have pretty much used cushions on every plane except the Saratoga.

We carry a step-ladder around with us too as I can’t check the oil without it!

* Sylvia *

If you enjoyed this post, don't keep it secret !


Category: Pilots Talk
Tags:

All Planes I Flew

If you ever wanted to know more about me but never dare to ask, this post is for you. To share more of my experience I decided to list the eight types of aircrafts I flew, in chronogical order.

At first, the swiss built AS-202 Bravo, the basic trainer on which I got my private license. A very simple two seater, 999kg maximum take-off weight (to reduce landing fees), and clearly underpowered with its 160 HP engine. It cruises at 90 knots and stalls are really… impressive. This makes it a very good basic trainier.

Next came the Piper PA28 Archer (and Warrior). A true four seater with better performance. 160 HP for the Warrior and 180 HP for the Archer, and a cruising speed around 120 knots. It’s a much better glider, and managing speed on final became a bit more of an issue. It is on this type that I also discovered autopilots !

Next step up, still in the Piper familly, the PA32R-301 Saratoga. Retractable gear, variable pitch prop, and 300 HP for six seats and a cruising speed of 150 knots ! This is the first complex plane I flew and at the time of writing the type I flew the most, and to the greater distance. I made the transition to prepare for my IFR ticket. Two axis autopilot, GNS430, HSI, … and lot of fun !

For the IFR training, I flew on a Beechcraft Bonanza F33A. It was wonderfully equipped: dual GNS430, Air Data Computer, dual needle RMI. And I’ve been truely seduced by its aerodynamics, requiring precise flying skills.

My next transition was to the first “plastic plane” with a “plastic engine”: the DA40 TDI. I wrote a lot about his in the modern aviation category. FADEC, composite body, a very easy to fly plane. The stalls are impressively stable. Not exactly rocket speed (115 - 120 kts) with the Thielert engine, but fine to fly leisurely. I also flew it IFR with a G1000… making it fully modern ! This picture is the source of the PlasticPilot logo.

I have only 19 minutes and two landings in my logbook with the PA28-236 Dakota. 235 HP, variable pitch prop, but fixed gear. I flew it when my instructor invited me to land on a frozen lake !

When I started the FADEC challenge, I needed more opportunities than the DA40, so I took a familiarization training on Cessna 172 TDI. It was my first Cessna, and first high wing plane, but after the Saratoga and the Bonanza, training on a simple airplane again was not exactly hard.

I had the opportunity to test fly the Liberty XL2 in summer 2007, and to summarize it is a funny little plane once in flight… the hard part is getting it in the air.

I don’t know yet what will be the next one, but it could be PA18 SuperCub for some glacier landing, DA50 when available, or may be a turbo Saratoga. If I get millionaire, I will probably start flying PC-12 or TBM850.

If you enjoyed this post, don't keep it secret !


Category: Pilots Talk
Tags:


   

Partners


     

Blogs networks