On pre-flight inspections

D Ramapriya wrote:
Has any of you has ever discovered something during the pre-flight
inspection that necessitated a significant deferrment of your flight
plan or a cancelation altogether? Just curious, that's all.

Landing light inop before night X-C, scrubbed flight.

Failed attitude indicator, scrubbed flight.

Aircraft overdue for annual inspection, scrubbed flight.

Carcass of bird found on leading edge of wing. Had dispatcher remove it,
conducted flight as scheduled.

.... Alan
--
Alan Gerber
PP-ASEL
gerber AT panix DOT com

Franklin "Franklin wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 01:13:50 -0500, Tim wrote:

"Franklin " "Franklin wrote in message
...

Stealth pilot,

Maxwell's self-admitted failures are easy to read. See, he is not
complaining about my pointing out his failures.

Why do you?

Franklin

No, I didn't feel the need to comment because you're obviously a dumb
ass.

Maxwell or Tim or Stealth Pilot
I am having trouble keeping up with your multitude of sock puppets.
Could you settle on one and stfu?

Franklin


That sock loves to have have conversations (even arguments) with
himself. He pretends to challenge his own socks. It looks convincing
but don't believe it.

For added confusion he suggests he's me. I guess I'm flattered.

Franklin "Franklin wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 01:13:50 -0500, Tim wrote:

"Franklin " "Franklin wrote in message
...

Stealth pilot,

Maxwell's self-admitted failures are easy to read. See, he is not
complaining about my pointing out his failures.

Why do you?

Franklin

No, I didn't feel the need to comment because you're obviously a dumb
ass.

Maxwell or Tim or Stealth Pilot

I am having trouble keeping up with your multitude of sock puppets.

Could you settle on one and stfu?

Franklin


How sweet. Two puppets pretending to have an argument and name dropping
me.

Why bother? I don't have a reputation to lose.

Stealth Pilot wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:14:03 -0400, Franklin "Franklin
wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:30:57 -0500, Maxwell wrote:

Badly frayed cable on the horizontal stabilizer. AI caught it while
fueling the aircraft. Showed it to the pilot who decided it would
make back home, about 30 miles. AI actually begged his pax to stay
behind. At about 200' on take off the cable failed. Aircraft did a
complete loop impacting the ground at about a 60 degree angle.
Nothing left of the aircraft more than knee high. Engine buried
about 2'. Pilot died instantly, but the pax with all broken bones,
struggled for help for almost 5 minutes before expiring.

The guilt you should feel for not stopping both of them. What a cad
you are.

Franklin

franklin you should be ashamed of yourself.
you have no details of the incident other than what maxwell posted so
you are not in a position to judge him.
you have no idea what condition the cable actually was.
if the aircraft was refuelling it made the last flight ok and there is
nothing to say that the pilot may have been correct.

in this world you are free to make your own choices ...and wear the
consequences.
when was the last time you flew an aircraft?

tragic as it was maxwell isnt to blame.

Stealth pilot

Both "Maxwell" and "Franklin " are both socks by the
same puppeteer. His socks are insulting one another.

I posted something similar to the following to Ramapriya:


-------------- START -------
Please excuse my namesake's behavior. Unfortunately he's a sock who is
antagonising you in the hope that you will retaliate against me. That
sock has a long history and lots of names. He spends his day setting up
elaborate trolls with carefully disguised identities.

(1) In alt.comp.freeware he's well-known as "Bear Bottoms", "Ari", David
W" and literally dozens of other names.

(2) In the aviation groups he's known as Maxwell, Payton Byrd and many
other names which posters here know better than I do.

(3) He hangs out on 1960s/1970s music groups like the Beatles, Zeppelin,
Doors, Genesis, Jethro Tull, and so on.

(4) Unsurprisingly, a k00k like him hangs out on the 2600 and hacking
groups.

Although retired, he still fantasizes about being a pilot or special forces
operative which is why you see a lot of him. The only thing he can fly is
a toy airplane.

His attempts to be irritating:
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/a46d34973796b1f6
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/672961a0af8ac7d6
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/5ae56dab596230fa
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/fd54722dd2020e57
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/e522b0bedbe2bb0a
-------------- END -------

"Franklin" wrote in message
...

Both "Maxwell" and "Franklin " are both socks by the
same puppeteer. His socks are insulting one another.

I posted something similar to the following to Ramapriya:


-------------- START -------
Please excuse my namesake's behavior. Unfortunately he's a sock who is
antagonising you in the hope that you will retaliate against me. That
sock has a long history and lots of names. He spends his day setting up
elaborate trolls with carefully disguised identities.

(1) In alt.comp.freeware he's well-known as "Bear Bottoms", "Ari", David
W" and literally dozens of other names.

(2) In the aviation groups he's known as Maxwell, Payton Byrd and many
other names which posters here know better than I do.

(3) He hangs out on 1960s/1970s music groups like the Beatles, Zeppelin,
Doors, Genesis, Jethro Tull, and so on.

(4) Unsurprisingly, a k00k like him hangs out on the 2600 and hacking
groups.

Although retired, he still fantasizes about being a pilot or special
forces
operative which is why you see a lot of him. The only thing he can fly is
a toy airplane.

His attempts to be irritating:
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/a46d34973796b1f6
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/672961a0af8ac7d6
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/5ae56dab596230fa
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/fd54722dd2020e57
http://groups.google.ru/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/e522b0bedbe2bb0a
-------------- END -------


The rest may be true, but I'm Maxwell, and I haven't seen anyone use my name
in several months.

In article
,
a wrote:

In how many places does your pre-landing checklist say 'check gear
down'? My first time is at the OM inbound or passing the numbers
downwind, and my last time is in the flare! There's no way to know for
sure, but I suspect a lot of gear up landings happen after someone
aborts a landing and flies a tight pattern: a break in the routine.

Of the three gear-up landings I've personally witnessed, at least two
would not have been saved by this. The pilots in both cases believed
fervently that the gear was *already* down, after having failed to
retract the gear beforehand, and then moved the lever to pull the gear
UP as part of their landing checklist. I don't know the circumstances
surrounding the third so I don't know if it also qualifies here or not.

I'm not saying that your multiple checks are bad or anything, in fact
they make a lot of sense to me, but I wonder at how you might also
prevent the "putting it down twice" accident.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
...

My flight begins when the mains leave the runway.

I agree! That is perfectly logical. But if you are flying under USA
rules the definition of "Flight Time" is a bit different. See FAR Part 1.1

Vaughn

On Jul 31, 8:21*pm, Mike Ash wrote:
In article
,

*a wrote:
In how many places does your pre-landing checklist say 'check gear
down'? My first time is at the OM inbound or passing the numbers
downwind, and my last time is in the flare! There's no way to know for
sure, but I suspect a lot of gear up landings happen after someone
aborts a landing and flies a tight pattern: a break in the routine.

Of the three gear-up landings I've personally witnessed, at least two
would not have been saved by this. The pilots in both cases believed
fervently that the gear was *already* down, after having failed to
retract the gear beforehand, and then moved the lever to pull the gear
UP as part of their landing checklist. I don't know the circumstances
surrounding the third so I don't know if it also qualifies here or not.

I'm not saying that your multiple checks are bad or anything, in fact
they make a lot of sense to me, but I wonder at how you might also
prevent the "putting it down twice" accident.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

For what it's worth, I learned something back when cars had manual
transmissions. I was taught to never hold the shifter, but to move it
or 'slap' it in the right direction with an an open hand. On my
Mooney, the gear switch looks like a wheel, it would be easy to grasp
it -- I never do. Down means pushing it down with my finger tips, , up
means lifting it up with them.

So far it's worked, but there's always tomorrow!

In article
,
a wrote:

For what it's worth, I learned something back when cars had manual
transmissions. I was taught to never hold the shifter, but to move it
or 'slap' it in the right direction with an an open hand. On my
Mooney, the gear switch looks like a wheel, it would be easy to grasp
it -- I never do. Down means pushing it down with my finger tips, , up
means lifting it up with them.

So far it's worked, but there's always tomorrow!

Sensible when you can do it, but not workable for manual gear levers.
The gear lever in my plane is a direct linkage requiring a significant
amount of force, and so I have no choice but to grab it strongly. Worse,
the lever's travel is fore-and-aft, making it extremely non-obvious
which end corresponds to up and which to down!

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On Jul 31, 8:21*pm, Mike Ash wrote:
In article
,

*a wrote:
In how many places does your pre-landing checklist say 'check gear
down'? My first time is at the OM inbound or passing the numbers
downwind, and my last time is in the flare! There's no way to know for
sure, but I suspect a lot of gear up landings happen after someone
aborts a landing and flies a tight pattern: a break in the routine.

Of the three gear-up landings I've personally witnessed, at least two
would not have been saved by this. The pilots in both cases believed
fervently that the gear was *already* down, after having failed to
retract the gear beforehand, and then moved the lever to pull the gear
UP as part of their landing checklist. I don't know the circumstances
surrounding the third so I don't know if it also qualifies here or not.

I'm not saying that your multiple checks are bad or anything, in fact
they make a lot of sense to me, but I wonder at how you might also
prevent the "putting it down twice" accident.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

The way I've always taught this issue to transitioning pilots going
into retracts is to treat any go around as a normal takeoff and
retract the gear. Take it on around and do the normal prelanding
checklist again. The gear lowering is simply a normal procedure.
The key in these situations is to remain as close to a normal habit
pattern as possible.
Dudley Henriques