Post #6 What do i think?? well, i think a lot...

One thing that i never really took that far into consideration that we learned in class was the conventional vs counter rotating props and the extreme effect on each. there is such a difference between the two, and i'm glad i'm flying a plane that is counter rotating. knowing the extreme effects of each, advantages, and disatvantages is very helpful. the one thing i would like to add is that i wish we learned a lot more about turbine engines, not just props. -we always learn certain things in the plane that helps prepare us for the future, so why not learn it on the ground?? One thing that i loved was when we went out to the Seminole at the hanger, because at that point i havent flown it, so it was great insight. It was very beneficial seeing where everything is and getting a better understanding of how it works by seeing it in person. Another thing that i liked was how short the class is. it didnt drag on and on, it was very direct, to the point, lesson by lesson days. The class wasnt scatterd or jumbled around, it was in sync with identifiable sections. Julie, you did a wonderful job teaching it and i enjoy hearing your stories and getting real insight of real world twin flying. Probably the only thing that was kinda a downer was the workload. at times, there was quite a bit of homework stacked up, and most of my time consisted of multi. -but i understand why since the class is just over a month long.
The stuff we learned linked really well to my ground instruction, because it flew by and i knew my stuff when my instructor asked. i felt confident, and feel confident flying the twin and other twins alike and being able to describe them. The second thing that i learned that was vitally important was engine out ops and emergencies. we went into great depth about it which is great for real life scenarios. i never would have imagined how important it is to go over an engine out proc prior to the flight with given WX conditions. I feel safer as well.

Post #4 'one thing leads to another' -rock song by The Fixx

Just the first sentence is funny but true: It's an unfortunate aviation paradox that a strong desire to reach a destination sometimes means never getting there. We look at this flight like a bunch of poor situations kept happening one after another, but yet, this kind of stuff happens everyday worldwide, its just a matter of assessing the situation correctly, priortizing, and thinking safety. These pilots unfortunately chose poor decisions and the wrong course of action. The very sad part of this whole event is the fact that Rifle, the alternate ariport was clear below 12000 with light winds. Now i cant imagine the pressure of unhappy clients not being able to make the expesive dinner party because of a trip to the alternate. -And the only person to blame is you, the PIC. but i gess thats sometimes whats needed. And what's more important? the lives of the passangers or getting to a dinner. On top of everything else, they were illegal in terms of not making the airport on time for noise abatementcy, executing an approach that was illegal because circling was NA at night and it wasn't day, not only that, the weather minimums were already bad and deteriorating, and 2 CL-600's went around prior to the crash. The pilot should have expected to divert or plan for a go-around, not to land at Aspen, and that's what i think his downfall was. He expected to land, when you have to plan for the worst, not the best. Plus, they only carried enough fuel for one shot on the approach then enough to Rifle. I feel that was a poor decision, because the more fuel the better. In my eyes, safety was not the concern, and was in the back of their minds. Hearing the two jets prior to them go around was a sinking feeling to the pilots when its something that should be taken calmly. This accident definately could have been prevented, especially because they followed a road to the right which they they thought would lead them to the runway. The poor ADM, judgement and failure of co-pilot backup is what lead to this to happen.

SLC2.TCH Departure Climb Gradient??

First off these are the Weather Conditions i used for Wednesday@10:40am:
OAT@4227: 19
OAT@7800: 14
OAT@8300: 13
Weight: 3650
Wind: LTVB

Secondly, these are the Seminole Calculations i used for Wednesday@10:40am:
Climb Performance One Engine Operating Gear Up:
@4227: 50'/min
Climb Performance Both Engines Operating Gear Up:
@4227: 1000'/min
@7800: 750'/min
@8300: 625'/min

For departing runway 17 it states: minimum climb of 260' per NM to 6000. then with minimum climb of 400' per NM to 8300. (depending direction)

-YES we can do this departure with both engines operating because we meet the climb gradient minimums, but NOT on one engine.


For departing runway 35 it states: minimum climb of 260' per NM to 7800. then with minimum climb of 260' per NM to 7800, ATC climb of 340' per NMto 7500. (depending direction)

-YES we can do this departure with both engines operating because we meet the climb gradient minimums, but NOT on one engine.

SPIFR

Haha! I have .7 actual and all has been with an instructor... so you expect me to fly single pilot IFR in IMC conditions?!? F-no. Single Pilot IFR is one of the most challanging things any pilot can do, and i will completely agree with that. The position i'm in right now, i would have to say NO, i wouldnt fly IFR with just myself on board. One main reason is that i have never done SPIFR before, therefore i have a lack of expierence in that catagory. Even if i may feel safe or confident in my instrument ability, I won't put myself in a situation i don't want to be in. Getting my instrument rating like all (including Westminster College) students we train for that single pilot situation, but are we really ready?? We always train with that instructor there next to us, even if he/she just sits there and watches, but we always know in our right minds that 'that' instructor can always take over, or help out. What happens if we got ourselves in a situation where we hoped that instructor was sitting there. Perhaps workload increased on an IMC approach, or 1 or 2 instrument failure, or any other circumstance where we needed that "other" pilot to help out. Quite frankly, i don't want to be there, i would rather wait till i have someone onboard because you can't expect the inevitable or destiny. If you care about safety and know your limits/abilities you will have that second person. This article made me realize how much tasks and objectives there are for just one pilot, and if you add bad weather, an instrument malfunction, increased radio comm, distractions, fixations, fatigue, physical condition, and anyting else that might effect you as a single pilot. I know i'm not ready to be there, although someday i will be, haha probably when i have more than .7 actual time :)

Cessna 310 W/B problem IS a problem...

This problem is making me upset, i cant find the airplane weight, i can't find the airplane moment, and the arms are no where to be found. And there are so many seats and only 5 people. -where the hell do they go, and the cargo?!? not only that, its a 70 page doc. for something that should only take maybe 3 pages.

Wet Sump??

A wet sump is an oil management lubercation design for a 4 stoke engine. It's a 'wet' sump design because it uses a built in reservior for the oil. The oil lubercates the engine by gravity and is collected at the base with a pan, then is pumped back to the top of the engine. This design is usually used under high G's because of the usage of gravity.

Blog Post #2

First off, a short circut is different than an open circut because the electricty is flowing on a different path than the one intended. the current is trying to find the easiest pathway to its source. This can create damage, start a fire, and now the aircraft is unairworthy.
I thought this article was interesting in the fact that it had a generic 'shut down' procedure no matter what aircraft one was flying, and it made sense too. the point of the article is really to act immediately in an orderly manner. for instance, it states: stay calm, contact ATC, look for tripped circut breakers/turn off components, activate fire extingusher, and then prepare to land which is basically troubleshooting and finding where the problem is. Now, the Seminole POH states turn off master as first item while the article tells you to turn it on and see if that is the source so you can monitor the effects. The seminole basically states to turn ALL electrical equip off and eliminate anything and so does the article, except it states if you have time to troubleshoot you should, but priority is getting the plane on the ground. If i have a lot of altitude and have an electircal malfunction in the future, i have time to troubleshoot in which i shall with the master switch, but basically my priority is getting the plane down on the ground safely because my life is more important than the plane's. I will declare an emegency, turn all equip off, and activate the fire extinguisher. but hopefully this never happens in the future...

Blog Post #1

The majority of aircraft in general aviation are single engine aircraft, but the rest of aviation (about 87%) consists of multiengine aircraft. If i'm going to proceed and press further within this industry i'm at least going to need to know how to fly and gain hours in a twin engine aircraft. I hope in this class that i not only learn about twin piston aircraft, but turbine and jet engine aircraft alike. Not only that, but the systems they share in order to operate. I hope to expand on the topic and learn more in depth (than the commercial level) about the pressurization, gear, oxygen, electrical, and fuel systems. -because evey airplane is different, and i'll only fly the seminole once. Maybe not even twin aircraft, but 2 or more engines such as the 747 or C-17. I expect to learn why some multi aircraft have anhedrial and dihedrial standing wings with engines mounted on top or bottom, and its benefits. I expect to expand my knowledge in the catagory not just on the seminole, but all planes alike. I want to be able to see a Challenger CL-600 or a BAE-146-Avro and know something about them, especially the design characteristics, and aerodynamic benefits. I want to know why some planes are designed the way they are. perhaps a MD-80 vs an A321, something that carry's a similar amount of passangers.