Cambridge 302 Gear/Airbrake Warning - How to Test?

On Sep 9, 7:23*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

You don't have to power it down. Simply unlocking the brakes/spoilers
with the gear up will produce an alarm. You can turn the alarm on and
off by locking/unlocking the brakes/spoilers with the gear up.
Powering up/down does nothing different. That does not test the speed
enabled (spoilers unlocked on takeoff) alarm however.

By the way, with the 303, you'll get an appropriate text message on
the screen depending on which alarm it is.

On Sep 9, 7:23*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

It is documented. See page 8 of the 302 manual.

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?


"Darryl Ramm" wrote in message
...
"Dan Marotta" wrote:
If your spoilers "suck open" and you don't recognize it, you shouldn't
be flying.

But those pilots clearly are flying. And are killing themselves and
hurting passengers etc.in depressingly familiar accidents.

In the case of the C302 (and hopefully ClearNav vario) this feature
works very well and I would connect in any glider I owned. The limit
with these things is does having a lots of these alarms just end up
confusing/distractions and can the pilot handle and respond to the alarm
(and given how far behind the aircraft some seem this may be a problem).
But a "it's there problem" attitude and just sitting by while pilots
kill themselves is not going to help this sport or those pilots. And yes
if somebody is clearly having problems with safe spoiler
operation/handling emergencies/distractions etc. my first call would be
time with a good instructor not add a gadget but those gadgets may have
a place as well.

Darryl

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)

Yes, I still agree.

If you'll read my statement again, you'll see that I said "If your spoilers
**suck open** and you don't recognize it..." There's a big difference in
the spoilers being unlocked and open.

A slowly failing mechanizm will likely be overlooked, and I understand that,
but the sudden noise, drag, and loss of lift of open spoilers better be
recognized *immediately* or, as I said before, you shouldn't be flying.


"Mark" wrote in message
...
On Sep 9, 10:00 am, "Dan Marotta" wrote:
If your spoilers "suck open" and you don't recognize it, you shouldn't be
flying.


Well Dan,

What if the pilot locked the spoilers as part of their using a written
pre-takeoff checklist. Maybe, the detent mechanism was slowly failing
and the first sign of this progressive failure was the first time the
spoilers opened on tow. Maybe they opened in conjunction with some
turbulence after the tow was well under way. Maybe the climb rate was
still 3-400 FPM all the way to release. Do you still agree with your
statement??

Mark

What about the guys who routinely, and with knowledge, begin takeoff with
their spoliers partially opened. I do that when I'm flying the rented LS-4
as it feels to me like it improves aileron control early in the takeoff
roll. I close and lock the spoilers as soon as control is assured. In my
Mosquito, I begin takeoff roll with flaps full negative as I did in my
previous LS-6. Would you deny me a hookup even after I announced to you
that my spoilers are open and why?

I'm talking about the (apparently) sleeping pilots who, at 200 feet fail to
notice that the spoilers have just popped open without command. I've read
of the tow pilot taking that glider pilot to safe altitude, releasing him
within good landing position, and then watching him fail to reach the
airport because he never recognized the problem. And, please, let's not
start another radio discussion.


"Martin Gregorie" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:00:53 -0600, Dan Marotta wrote:

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

Maybe other outfits should adopt my club's new-for-2011 change in launch
procedu the cable is NOT put on unless the pilot announces "Brakes
locked" before asking for 'cable on'.


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

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?



"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)

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?

Documented Tones - I mis-spoke. After a careful review of the 302
manual all the tones are documented in various scattered parts of the
manual - sometimes within the various screen settings and more clearly
in Section 7 "Flying with the Cambridge DDV". This shows that re-
reading the manual following the euphoria of new-avionics-itis is
important.

I would have preferred a concise review of the tones...something like;

Climb Tone -
In Climb mode, lift is indicated by a broken audio
tone.
The tone's pitch and beep rate are proportional to
the climb rate.
Sink Tone -
Sink is indicated by a continuous tone.
The tone's pitch is proportional to the sink rate.
Speed to Fly Tones -
In Cruise mode, short beeps and the UP arrow mean
you should slow down (pull up).
A continuous tone and the DOWN arrow mean you
should speed up (push over).
No tone indicates correct speed to fly.
Minimum Speed Warning Tone -
A di-di-dah “Slow Alarm” tone will be heard if the
glider's airspeed is below the threshold.
Gear/Airbrake Warning Tone (optional) -
A “European Police Car” sound will be heard when;
1) Unlocking the airbrakes when airspeed rises
above 25 knots.
2) During flight with the landing gear retracted
and the airbrakes are unlocked.

The above should include references to the relevant sections of the
manual.

Thanks again, John

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 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