Training videos

[cagarini]

I am thinking of producing videos on the following:-

1) Approach configuration - flap and speed selection on various type of approach.
2) Tips for accurate landings
3) Circuits, Circling procedures
4) Non precision approaches - NDB, VOR, RNAV etc
5) Diversions
6) Engine failures
7) Use of Route 2

I might go on to a sort of "advanced" look at generic non-normal handling and some specific failure situations. e.g. Hydraulics, Flight Controls etc

How does this sound?

It sounds like Heaven Peter! Looking forward to it!

[400guy]

I've been modifying my web page, and as a part of the modifications I've set side an aerowinx folder.

I've put the links to the training videos there.

Britjet, I hope this is ok with you, if not I'll remove them.

The main page is http://kingmont.com,  and the aerowinx directory is in the frp://ftp.kinhmont.com link there under flightsims.

The mods to the main page are still incomplete, so some of the links there may be inop.

jj

[400guy]

typo, it should have read ftp://ftp.kingmont.com

[Peter Lang]

Hi Peter,

I just want thank you very much for producing these interesting and informative videos. They are really great.

Peter

[J D ADAM]

Hello Peter,
                  Thank you for your great videos.  Watching them (repeatedly) makes me realize how little I know in understanding the Queen, but at least I am learning!

Cheers,

Derek

[Britjet]

jj,

My preference would be access to the Training videos were kept "in house" via this forum.
I think that the more facilities that are available uniquely and directly here, the better for PSX.

Cheers,

Peter

[400guy]

OK I'll remove the link

[Raj Hoonjan]

Just a heads up..

I am thinking of producing videos on the following:-

1) Approach configuration - flap and speed selection on various type of approach.
2) Tips for accurate landings
3) Circuits, Circling procedures
4) Non precision approaches - NDB, VOR, RNAV etc
5) Diversions
6) Engine failures

I might go on to a sort of "advanced" look at generic non-normal handling and some specific failure situations. e.g. Hydraulics, Flight Controls etc

How does this sound? Comments and suggestions very welcome.

Cheers!

Peter

Hi Peter,

Sounds like a plan!

Interestingly, I found a blog sometime ago that gave a couple of tips on flying the 747:

http://karlenepetitt.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/tips-on-flying-boeing-747-and-other.html

I'd be interested to hear your views, and anyone else, on the techniques described in the blog, particularly on Tip 2.

Anyway, pleasant evening to all as I attempt to circuit around Heathrow!

Kind regards
Raj

[400guy]

pitch or power for speed ?

I think 3 different folks would give you 3 different answers.

It'r really "EITHER or BOTH" in my personal opinion.

They both effect speed,

I presonally used pitch for speed and power for rate of descent/climb.

Old carrier pilot

[Britjet]

Hi Raj,

Thanks for the blog link. I don't agree with the author at all. You don't "throttle back" jets to idle, and then bring the power up. For one thing you would have 300-odd nervous passengers, and if I was the other pilot I think I would be nervous too!

The 747 flies by "datums". Set figures, pitch angles, thrust levels, that work. I will be showing this in detail in the next couple of videos.

One thing I do agree with is speed control on the approach. Primarily, thrust controls speed, pitch controls glidepath. This is the same for all jet transport aircraft. (It is ironic that this is the complete opposite of how you teach someone to fly an approach in a Cessna.)  With the inertia of large airliners, pitching is not fast enough to control speed, while a very small pitch range will have large effects on the rate of descent, hence the difference.

400guy is quite correct though, I would say, in that the result is effectively a "blend" of the two, and in fact on the 747 changing thrust will also affect your pitch angle due to the "pitch couple" from the under slung engines.

JJ - thanks - by the way, I didn't think there were any "old" carrier pilots ? LOL..

Cheers,

Peter

[Raj Hoonjan]

Thanks for taking the time to respond gents.

Always good to hear different view points.

Looking forward to the videos.

Regards
Raj

[Peter Lang]

(It is ironic that this is the complete opposite of how you teach someone to fly an approach in a Cessna.)

Thats true. In the Cessnas I usually fly the procedure for landing is:
trim set for speed
control the descent rate with the throttle.

Regards
Peter

[cagarini]

You guys all have a serious problem with power in your flying things... It's all a lot simpler for me !!!   Pitch for speed, spoilers and fw slip for rate of descent, thermals and orographics for rate of climb!

One day airliners will glide, again!  

 :roll:

[Ivo de Colfmaker]

Hi Peter,
Thank You very much for those instructive video's
learning a lot out of it.
ivo

[Arnout van Maanen]

Peter,

Many thanks in creating these training video's!! I appreciate that!! looking forward to the next ones.

Arnout

[pcpilot]

Hi Peter,

Many thanks for the quality videos you have produced. They have been a great learning tool for me.

I am looking forward to the accurate landing video. I am struggling at the moment to master a smooth flare in the touch down zone.

Once again many thanks.

Graham.

[JP59]

Hello Britjet,

First of all I would like to congratulate and thank you for sharing your professional experience with enthusiasts like me, with these very clear and useful videos.

I would have a request about an RTO video. I have a full scale 744 simulator (shell included). I often do procedures training with a friend who did ATPL courses with me, for MCC training purposes. Last time we decided to do RTO training with different scenarios. We first though it was an easy procedure, but it rapidly looked more difficult than it looks like. The different scenarios we did were :

- Failure before 80kts (RTO required)
- Engine failure between 80Kts and V1 (RTO required)
- Electrical failure (no fire) between 80Kts and V1 (according to the FCTM, no RTO required)
- Engine failure after V1 ("Go decision" then ENG OUT operation)

The third case caused trouble within our cockpit. In fact, it is very difficult to distinguish the failure "class" and take the decision to go or stop, because the aircraft is accelerating very fast at this time and you have to take the decision within a second (before to reach V1). I think real pilots have some "tips" to recognize the failures and accelerate the decision process. I would like you to share your experience about this subject with us with a dedicated video(s). Is it possible ?

Thanks again

[Britjet]

Thanks to all!

Jean-Philippe - that sounds like a great setup!
Re your third case - you can't make a go-no go decision without proper diagnosis, and there isn't time.
The Boeing recommendations are designed to be black and white, so there is no thinking to be done. You will find their recommendations in the QRH, in the manoeuvres section, rather than the FCTM viz..

80 kts to V1...
1) Fire or fire warning (any fire, not just an engine)
2) Engine failure
3) Predictive windshear warning
4) If the aircraft is unsafe or unable to fly
5) Nothing else!

Accident investigations find that the majority of take-off accidents are caused by the crew trying to stop and failing to do so safely. It is usually better to take the problem into the air. Even an apparently serious electrical problem is fixable once you get going.

I will think about an RTO video, but to be honest it might get a little complicated!
As always, there will be more than one way to fix an RTO situation, and as you are finding - multi-crew RTO is a challenge!

Cheers

Peter

[JP59]

Thanks for the quick and clear answer. I understand the black or white philosophy. My question is about : what does the QRH means by engine failure ? Is it just the ENG X FAIL EICAS message, or does it cover more situations like unusual noises, abnormal indications or over-limit indications ? Or is it : "anything wrong about one or more engine" ? Could you precise that for me please ?

An example which comes to my mind is the foreign object (bird) before V1 causing a short time abnormal engine indication. Is it considered as an engine failure and should the STOP decision be taken in that situation ?

I understand there is a wide range of scenarios leading to RTO and it will be difficult to do a video for each case.

[Britjet]

Hi JP
Ok - to positively identify an engine failure you need "two or more parameters", one of which MUST be an instrument indication. But external effects are allowed -  so for example..


1) A RED EGT and a loud bang
2) A large loss of EPR and a swing
3) N1 and EGT both exceed.

For instrument indications - two are required because one might just be gauge error (for example an engine showing a red EGT)

A "bang' and a "swing" towards the bang would not be sufficient (it could be a tyre-burst). A FOD (eg bird) ingestion would not be a failure unless it satisfied the parameters above...

An under-performing engine could be accepted if EGTs etc were within acceptable limits. For example an EGT overtemp would not be a stop decision.

Hope this helps..

Peter