Cambridge 302 Gear/Airbrake Warning - How to Test?

Well, then, I agree with you Eric, and understand your position.


"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
...
On 9/10/2011 1:04 PM, Dan Marotta wrote:
I saw your previous statement, Eric. And maybe I misunderstood what
you said.

I assume you said that you've mistakenly taken off with spoilers
unlocked. That's an oversight that I'm not railing about. Answer me
this: Assuming the spoilers sucked open sometime after liftoff, did
you recognize it and close them, or did you fly blissfully along
wondering why it was suddenly so noisy and your climb rate had
diminished, not to mention the sudden drop causing your head to bang
the canopy?

In one cases, I did tow along blissfully for a while, but it wasn't noisy,
my climb rate did not diminish, and there wasn't any sudden drop. It would
be great if those things happened, but they don't happen on an ASW 20 B
when the spoilers slowly extend under tow. At some point, I realized I was
flying at a higher than usual AOA for the speed I was being towed at. That
perception was delayed because I was at a contest, flying with water,
behind a fast, powerful towplane (twice the climb rate of the one in our
club), and so was not familiar with the correct attitude.

In the other case, they opened about 10' off the ground, a few seconds
after liftoff. There was no extra noise, there was no reduction in climb
rate, but I did notice a drop (but not sudden) that I first attributed to
a sinking air or wind shear, but after "a few seconds" (5? 10?) I realized
something was wrong, checked the spoilers - oops - and closed them. Again,
being towed by a powerful tow plane.

At high speeds, spoilers will act like you wrote (sudden opening, noisy,
big drop), but at tow speeds, they can open so gently it's not immediately
evident. My guess: this is probably what happens a lot of times when the
spoiler suck open during the tow, and why the pilot doesn't recognize it
immediately, and sometimes not at all.

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
...
On 9/10/2011 12:19 PM, Dan Marotta wrote:
Why must we continue to try to make everything safe for everyone?
Some people should just NOT be flying aircraft. Or riding
motorcycles, or driving cars. I think we'd all be better served
if these folks were told to stop flying. But then we'd have to
ask: "Who certified them as safe and competent in the first
place?"

Sorry if I sound harsh, but there are too many incompetent people
in the world, the result of putting their self esteem above their
safety. If they can't do it, why not just tell them so?

Sometimes we do, but it's not an easy task determining who is
incompetent, or if currently incompetent, will become competent. In
a recent post, you wrote:

If your spoilers "suck open" and you don't recognize it, you
shouldn't be flying.

Perhaps you missed my earlier response to that statement, but the
basic idea was: I know many competent pilots, including myself,
that have had this happen to them.

As many have pointed out, accidents are happening to pilots that
appear competent and are certainly experienced. It's not just the
obvious bozo that's having accidents.

-- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us"
to email me)



--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

And yet another good example! You guys have opened my eyes some on
not-so-obvious malfunctions. My harsh comments were for those who don't pay
attention. I can think of two glaring examples: One in which an open
canopy resulted in a low release, failed turn back, broken glider, and two
injured people, one of whom was a paying passenger. The pilot was a CFIG!
The other, also an open canopy, resulted in the pilot towing to a safe
release altitude while holding the canopy down, then unable to deploy the
spoilers (didn't have 3 hands), and being unable figure out how to slip or
extend the pattern, flew the length of the 8,000+ foot runway and crashed
beyond the end. The pilot survived with, IIRC, minor injuries, but the
glider was damaged.

Since the second mentioned accident, the club has emphasized training on
slips to landing. Frankly, I would have slipped in the direction of the
canopy hinge (I think it was side-opening), momentarily released my hold on
the stick, locked the canopy, and continued the flight.


"BruceGreeff" wrote in message
...
Things go wrong - sometimes in ways that look like you are incompetent.

I had my airbrake over centre adjusted wrong at an annual inspection.
First tow there was much excitement and rudder waggling. Every time I
locked the lever back, every time they popped open 20 seconds later.
Eventually just wedged them and flew, the aerotow was slower to climb
because I could not hold the brakes entire ly closed with my thigh - but
at least I was not having 20foot excursions the whole time.

Lots of comments when I landed.

Geometry checked and overcentre load adjusted correctly. Suddenly pilot
competence increased substantially...

So - yes we try to make things safe because things can go wrong. There is
a fine line before sanitising to the point of pilots becoming dangerous.

Unfortunately some folk just can't ever get safe. In our club operation
they then have the choice of continuing with a safety pilot, or going back
to being a spectator. Fortunately there are very few who fail to recognise
their own limitations. It is one of the reasons folk drift away.

Hard call to make, but it is better to have someone alive and resentful of
your decision than dead.

On 2011/09/10 9:47 PM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 9/10/2011 12:19 PM, Dan Marotta wrote:
Why must we continue to try to make everything safe for everyone? Some
people should just NOT be flying aircraft. Or riding motorcycles, or
driving cars. I think we'd all be better served if these folks were told
to stop flying. But then we'd have to ask: "Who certified them as safe
and competent in the first place?"

Sorry if I sound harsh, but there are too many incompetent people in the
world, the result of putting their self esteem above their safety. If
they can't do it, why not just tell them so?

Sometimes we do, but it's not an easy task determining who is
incompetent, or if currently incompetent, will become competent. In a
recent post, you wrote:

If your spoilers "suck open" and you don't recognize it, you shouldn't
be flying.

Perhaps you missed my earlier response to that statement, but the basic
idea was: I know many competent pilots, including myself, that have had
this happen to them.

As many have pointed out, accidents are happening to pilots that appear
competent and are certainly experienced. It's not just the obvious bozo
that's having accidents.


--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57

On 9/10/2011 3:45 PM, ContestID67 wrote:
Westbender - Thanks for the comments.

Power testing - You don't have to power up/down to test? Hmmm, that
was not my experience - just deploying the airbrakes with gear up
didn't do it, I had to power cycle. Different vintages of 302s?




John,

Something is amiss. If you were entering the landing pattern with your
gear up and you open your spoilers, you definitely should not have to
power cycle the 302 to get the alarm. That would kind of defeat the
purpose. My 302 is 6 years old, however it had the latest firmware
installed this last winter.

On Sep 10, 7:18*pm, Dave Hoppe wrote:
On 9/10/2011 3:45 PM, ContestID67 wrote:

Westbender - Thanks for the comments.

Power testing - You don't have to power up/down to test? *Hmmm, that
was not my experience - just deploying the airbrakes with gear up
didn't do it, I had to power cycle. *Different vintages of 302s?

John,

Something is amiss. If you were entering the landing pattern with your
gear up and you open your spoilers, you definitely should not have to
power cycle the 302 to get the alarm. That would kind of defeat the
purpose. My 302 is 6 years old, however it had the latest firmware
installed this last winter.

I should mention that the update did not change the alarm behavior.

On Sep 9, 5:23*pm, ContestID67 wrote:
I was informed (and verified) that there is a way to easily test the
302 warning system while on the ground.

- Power down the 302
- Unlock the airbrakes with the gear unlocked/up
- Power up the 302

The alarm will then sound (euro siren) after the self test is
complete. *A large upwards pointing arrow will appear in the display,
different than the small speed up/down arrows, meaning I suppose that
your gear is up. *You can silence the alarm by pushing the button.

Yet another undocumented feature/sound from the Cambridge 302!

- John


The power up alarm sounds with brakes unlocked with the gear DOWN and
locked.

After power up test execution the gear warning is as expected - the
gear alarm only sounds if the brakes are unlocked and the gear is not
down locked.

The alarm may also sound on power up with the brakes unlocked and the
gear not down and locked but I can't be sure of that as my assembly
routine has gear down and glider pushed back from trailer before the
batteries are fitted.

Andy

On 9/9/11 3:56 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
the cable is NOT put on unless the pilot announces "Brakes
locked" before asking for 'cable on'.

And if the pilot uses spoilers to get better aileron control at the
start of the takeoff?

Or the wheel brake is on the spoilers and the pilot wants to prevent a
rope overrun?

-Tom

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 19:39:46 -0700, Tom Serkowski wrote:

On 9/9/11 3:56 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
the cable is NOT put on unless the pilot announces "Brakes locked"
before asking for 'cable on'.

And if the pilot uses spoilers to get better aileron control at the
start of the takeoff?

Doing standard UK CBSIFTCBE preflight checks, accepting the cable before
opening the brakes and keeping a hand on the brake lever allows the pilot
to accept the cable with brakes locked, so the confirmation can be made
correctly.

Of course, if you are flying somewhere that doesn't teach a preflight
check which includes opening, visually checking, and then locking the
brakes, doesn't include the checks in every flight under instruction and
which tolerates launches for pilots who skip the preflight check then you
should expect launches with unlocked brakes as well as any consequent
crashes.

Or the wheel brake is on the spoilers and the pilot wants to prevent a
rope overrun?

Totally unlikely on our field, which is, if anything, always slightly
uphill since it has a small hump (on a winch launch the wing runner can
see the winch flashing but the pilot usually can't).

I've only flown on one field where that was necessary, the Wasserkuppe,
and again that's a bit special since you take off downwind and downhill
on a hard runway which is steep enough to require a small wooden wedge in
front of the main wheel to stop the glider running forward while the pilot
(s) get in.

In any case in the UK and other places where the CBSIFTCBE preflight
check is taught the pilot will have cycled the brakes AND DONE A VISUAL
CHECK before unlocking and opening them if the glider needs that for a
successful launch, so the announcement "Brakes locked: cable on, please"
should be redundant.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Sep 10, 7:18*pm, Dave Hoppe wrote:

Something is amiss. If you were entering the landing pattern with your
gear up and you open your spoilers, you definitely should not have to
power cycle the 302 to get the alarm. That would kind of defeat the
purpose. My 302 is 6 years old, however it had the latest firmware
installed this last winter.

Dave - The power cycle testing I refer to is perform on the ground
during/after assembly...not in the air during the landing cycle.

Thanks.

On Sep 11, 8:25*am, ContestID67 wrote:
On Sep 10, 7:18*pm, Dave Hoppe wrote:

Something is amiss. If you were entering the landing pattern with your
gear up and you open your spoilers, you definitely should not have to
power cycle the 302 to get the alarm. That would kind of defeat the
purpose. My 302 is 6 years old, however it had the latest firmware
installed this last winter.

Dave - The power cycle testing I refer to is perform on the ground
during/after assembly...not in the air during the landing cycle.

Thanks.

I see, I guess I misunderstood. When you posted "just deploying the
airbrakes with gear up didn't do it, I had to power cycle.", I assumed
you weren't able to sound the alarm by unlocking spoilers with gear up
on the ground. Glad to hear it's all working for you.

Well,I think that one should not ride a heavy vehicle at a high speed because anytime there will be emergency brake,So,the pilot or the person can easily can slow the speed of that vehicle.