Checklist

[Larry D. Cosby]

Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing checklist.
Larry

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in news:3e97f
:

> Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
checklist.
> Larry
>
>
>

Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop

Never heard the S before.


There used to be CIGARTIP

Which was:

Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R', Trim 'I'
I don't know either and Props

Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine tobacco)

Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.


Betie

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 21, 3:46 pm, "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net>
wrote:
> Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing checklist.
> Larry

A pre landing check, critical in Complex airplanes (defined as
controllable prop, flaps, and retractable gear)

Gas
Undercarriage
Mixture
Prop
Seat Belts, Switches

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Larry D. Cosby wrote:
> Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing checklist.
> Larry
>
>
There are a few versions, but one widely used is;
Gas,Undercarraige,Mixture,Prop, Safety Harness

--
Dudley Henriques

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, Dan > said:
>On Mar 21, 3:46 pm, "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net>
>wrote:
>> Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing checklist.
>> Larry
>
>A pre landing check, critical in Complex airplanes (defined as
>controllable prop, flaps, and retractable gear)
>
>Gas
>Undercarriage
>Mixture
>Prop
>Seat Belts, Switches

Or for people who are worried about a gear-up, it's

Gear
Undercarriage
Make sure the gear is down
Put the gear down if it isn't
See the gear down lights?


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
"I find your lack of clue...disturbing" - SithAdmin Vader.

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in news:3e97f
> :
>
>
>
> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
> checklist.
> > Larry
>
> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
>
> Never heard the S before.
>
> There used to be CIGARTIP
>
> Which was:
>
> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R', Trim 'I'
> I don't know either and Props
>
> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine tobacco)
>
> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
>
> Betie

Neither of those had a gear check?

Unless R stands for "Retractable?"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

(Paul Tomblin) wrote in
:

> In a previous article, Dan > said:
>>On Mar 21, 3:46 pm, "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net>
>>wrote:
>>> Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
>>> checklist. Larry
>>
>>A pre landing check, critical in Complex airplanes (defined as
>>controllable prop, flaps, and retractable gear)
>>
>>Gas
>>Undercarriage
>>Mixture
>>Prop
>>Seat Belts, Switches
>
> Or for people who are worried about a gear-up, it's
>
> Gear
> Undercarriage
> Make sure the gear is down
> Put the gear down if it isn't
> See the gear down lights?
>
>

Very good.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
:

> On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in news:3e97f
>> :
>>
>>
>>
>> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
>> checklist.
>> > Larry
>>
>> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
>>
>> Never heard the S before.
>>
>> There used to be CIGARTIP
>>
>> Which was:
>>
>> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R', Trim
'I'
>> I don't know either and Props
>>
>> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine tobacco)
>>
>> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
>>
>> Betie
>
> Neither of those had a gear check?
>
> Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
>

Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?


Bertie

[Kloudy via AviationKB.com]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
:
>

>
>Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>
>Bertie

Oh good lord, man.

To make sure they're down!


*geeez.*

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200803/1

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Kloudy via AviationKB.com" <u33403@uwe> wrote in
news:8180da195218d@uwe:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
:
>>
>
>>
>>Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>>
>>Bertie
>
> Oh good lord, man.
>
> To make sure they're down!
>
>
> *geeez.*
>

I would have thought the difficulty in turning the engine over would
suffice. Though I bet it's been tried!




Bertie

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 21, 4:17 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
> :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in news:3e97f
> >> :
>
> >> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
> >> checklist.
> >> > Larry
>
> >> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
>
> >> Never heard the S before.
>
> >> There used to be CIGARTIP
>
> >> Which was:
>
> >> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R', Trim
> 'I'
> >> I don't know either and Props
>
> >> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine tobacco)
>
> >> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
>
> >> Betie
>
> > Neither of those had a gear check?
>
> > Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
>
> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>
> Bertie

Thought you were answering the OP, where he asked for the Landing
checklist...

I never do GUMPS on takeoff -- the T/O checks would be something like
TBSMCPMPTHFFR, which isn't a very useful mnemonic...

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dan > wrote in news:4a64d767-4322-4a3a-b428-
:

> On Mar 21, 4:17 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
>> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in news:3e97f
>> >> :
>>
>> >> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
>> >> checklist.
>> >> > Larry
>>
>> >> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
>>
>> >> Never heard the S before.
>>
>> >> There used to be CIGARTIP
>>
>> >> Which was:
>>
>> >> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R',
Trim
>> 'I'
>> >> I don't know either and Props
>>
>> >> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine
tobacco)
>>
>> >> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
>>
>> >> Betie
>>
>> > Neither of those had a gear check?
>>
>> > Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
>>
>> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Thought you were answering the OP, where he asked for the Landing
> checklist...
>
> I never do GUMPS on takeoff -- the T/O checks would be something like
> TBSMCPMPTHFFR, which isn't a very useful mnemonic...
>
>
Cigmftt for any thing up to a twin Beech always worked fo me. The extra
T was for the tailwheel lock. The 3 was two crew anyway, so we used a
read and challenge for that, but it wasn't much more than that.

Bertie

[Bob F.[_2_]]

Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter what
you do with the switches.

--
Regards, BobF.
"Dan" > wrote in message
...
> On Mar 21, 4:17 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
>> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in news:3e97f
>> >> :
>>
>> >> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
>> >> checklist.
>> >> > Larry
>>
>> >> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
>>
>> >> Never heard the S before.
>>
>> >> There used to be CIGARTIP
>>
>> >> Which was:
>>
>> >> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R', Trim
>> 'I'
>> >> I don't know either and Props
>>
>> >> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine tobacco)
>>
>> >> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
>>
>> >> Betie
>>
>> > Neither of those had a gear check?
>>
>> > Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
>>
>> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Thought you were answering the OP, where he asked for the Landing
> checklist...
>
> I never do GUMPS on takeoff -- the T/O checks would be something like
> TBSMCPMPTHFFR, which isn't a very useful mnemonic...
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Bob F." > wrote in
:

> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter
> what you do with the switches.
>

Though I knew some tit who used to pull the lever up at the start of the
take off roll and rely on the prox switch on the gear to do the rest for
him.

Guess what?


Bertie

[gatt[_2_]]

"Dan" > wrote in message
...

> I never do GUMPS on takeoff -- the T/O checks would be something like
> TBSMCPMPTHFFR, which isn't a very useful mnemonic...

Any others? One of the instructors here uses "Lights, Camera, Action"
when cleared to enter the runway. (Strobe, Transponder, release
brake/roll)

-c

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Bob F. wrote:
> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter what
> you do with the switches.


Do you want to bet? All it takes is for a microswitch to unload for a second
and the interlock is no longer part of the equation. While I can't think of a
specific episode while taxiing, I do recall a case where the pilot selected gear
up just before starting his take off roll. He apparently thought it would look
cool for the gear to suck up the instant he took off. Unfortunately he didn't
lift off cleanly and skipped instead. Oops!



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

gatt wrote:
> "Dan" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> I never do GUMPS on takeoff -- the T/O checks would be something like
>> TBSMCPMPTHFFR, which isn't a very useful mnemonic...
>
> Any others? One of the instructors here uses "Lights, Camera, Action"
> when cleared to enter the runway. (Strobe, Transponder, release
> brake/roll)


I used CIFFTERS:

Controls, instruments, fuel, flaps, trim, engine runup, radios, switches



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

> Or for people who are worried about a gear-up, it's
>
> Gear
> Undercarriage
> Make sure the gear is down
> Put the gear down if it isn't
> See the gear down lights?
>

It's now nine months that I've been flying a fixed gear airplane.

I'm *stiill* paranoid.

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter what
> you do with the switches.
>


You have got to be kidding...?

Or else flying a fixed gear.


Dan Mc

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
> gatt wrote:
>> "Dan" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> I never do GUMPS on takeoff -- the T/O checks would be something like
>>> TBSMCPMPTHFFR, which isn't a very useful mnemonic...
>> Any others? One of the instructors here uses "Lights, Camera, Action"
>> when cleared to enter the runway. (Strobe, Transponder, release
>> brake/roll)
>
>
> I used CIFFTERS:
>
> Controls, instruments, fuel, flaps, trim, engine runup, radios, switches
>
>
>
God I'm pedantic!! :-)))))))))))

I used
"Every good pilot must take off fine check"

and

"Every good pilot must land fine check"

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bob F.[_2_]]

Sure, I'll take the bet anytime, you see this is an old, old aviation joke.
If this happens while taxiing, the plane goes down. the wheels stay right
on the ground. The gear may "retract" but the don't go "up". HeHe.

And do you know what kind of gum a pilot chews when he goes through the
list. Ans: Rigley's Checklist gum

--
Regards, BobF.
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote in message
...
> Bob F. wrote:
>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter
>> what
>> you do with the switches.
>
>
> Do you want to bet? All it takes is for a microswitch to unload for a
> second and the interlock is no longer part of the equation. While I can't
> think of a specific episode while taxiing, I do recall a case where the
> pilot selected gear up just before starting his take off roll. He
> apparently thought it would look cool for the gear to suck up the instant
> he took off. Unfortunately he didn't lift off cleanly and skipped
> instead. Oops!
>
>
>
> --
> Mortimer Schnerd, RN
> mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com
>

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bob F. wrote:
> Sure, I'll take the bet anytime, you see this is an old, old aviation
> joke. If this happens while taxiing, the plane goes down. the wheels
> stay right on the ground. The gear may "retract" but the don't go "up".
> HeHe.
>
> And do you know what kind of gum a pilot chews when he goes through the
> list. Ans: Rigley's Checklist gum
>

So YOU'RE the guy who was sticking that gum up under the panels of our
airplanes huh????????
:-)))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bob F.[_2_]]

I think I know. In the mid '70s sometime, I was giving a BFR to a guy in an
Arrow. Just before rotation and liftoff, he quickly reached over and
flipped up the gear lever. It was so quick, I was petrified an hypnotized
at the same time. After we got out out of the area I asked him in a real
stern voice, "What did you just do!". He explained how the squat switch
worked, like I didn't know, an continued to tell me how he likes to get that
all out of the way so he can concentrate on reducing MAP and RPM, turning,
etc. This guy was doing this for the last 200 hours in his Arrow. We
continued the discussion when we got on the ground. I also changed my
behavior to always be ready for the hand coming over with any pilot in a
retract gear airplane. I happened so quick.

This brings to mind a point to remember for you ATP guys in training. The
examiner does not like to see your hand in any position where he has to
wonder what you are about to do. Don't rest your hand on ANY control. If
you are going to exercise it. Move your hand over, do it, then return to
some neutral position. This really is a CRM tactic so that the Pilot Flying
(PF) and Pilot Not Flying (PNF) have no confusion about what's going on.

--
Regards, BobF.
"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
> "Bob F." > wrote in
> :
>
>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter
>> what you do with the switches.
>>
>
> Though I knew some tit who used to pull the lever up at the start of the
> take off roll and rely on the prox switch on the gear to do the rest for
> him.
>
> Guess what?
>
>
> Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Bob F." > wrote in
:

> I think I know. In the mid '70s sometime, I was giving a BFR to a guy
> in an Arrow. Just before rotation and liftoff, he quickly reached
> over and flipped up the gear lever. It was so quick, I was petrified
> an hypnotized at the same time. After we got out out of the area I
> asked him in a real stern voice, "What did you just do!". He
> explained how the squat switch worked, like I didn't know, an
> continued to tell me how he likes to get that all out of the way so he
> can concentrate on reducing MAP and RPM, turning, etc. This guy was
> doing this for the last 200 hours in his Arrow. We continued the
> discussion when we got on the ground. I also changed my behavior to
> always be ready for the hand coming over with any pilot in a retract
> gear airplane. I happened so quick.
>
> This brings to mind a point to remember for you ATP guys in training.
> The examiner does not like to see your hand in any position where he
> has to wonder what you are about to do. Don't rest your hand on ANY
> control. If you are going to exercise it. Move your hand over, do
> it, then return to some neutral position. This really is a CRM tactic
> so that the Pilot Flying (PF) and Pilot Not Flying (PNF) have no
> confusion about what's going on.

I'll second this. "arming" your hand has the added disadvantage of aming
your mind to hear what you expect to hear rather than what's actuall
been said. So if the non handling pilot has his hand on the flap lever
in anticiaption of the next logical command, which might be the next
stage of flaps, he's more likely to make the error of moving the handle
regardelss of what the other guy might say next. some of the saddest
word you might ever hear in an airplane are "Oh sorry, I thought you
said."



Bertie
>

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bob F. wrote:
> Don't rest your hand on ANY
> control. If you are going to exercise it. Move your hand over, do it,
> then return to some neutral position. This really is a CRM tactic so
> that the Pilot Flying (PF) and Pilot Not Flying (PNF) have no confusion
> about what's going on.
>

This is interesting Bob. I'm involved with a human factors work group on
accident prevention as we speak.
Our venue of course isn't dealing with multi-engine CRM but rather the
aerobatic demonstration scenario. We're attempting to come up with
suggestions to present to the representative governing bodies that will
make our venue safer.
I'd be interested to know if your above comment includes throttle, or in
your case, (throttles) when the aircraft is at and below pattern altitude.
We of course are dealing with single pilot CRM.


--
Dudley Henriques

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 21, 8:13 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:

>
> I used
> "Every good pilot must take off fine check"
>
> and
>
> "Every good pilot must land fine check"
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

OK.. help me out...

those mean..?

[Bob F.[_2_]]

That's also an interesting question. I don't know what your experience or
training is, with respect, but in an airliner, the last time the PF has his
hand on the throttle is at V1 at which point you remove your hand off the
throttle and place it, now both of your hands, on the yoke. It's not until
much later into the flight that the PF will ever touch the throttle again.
All commands are directed to the PNF to do. This is a curious ritual on
take off, and varies slightly by airline manual. Here's how it goes. At
stop position on the runway, the PF places his hand on the throttles,
advances them part way to see that all engines are coming alive with roughly
the same power and then says to the PNF, "Set Take Off Thrust" at which
point the PNF has his hand(s) over the PF's hand and pushed the throttle to
the predefined calculated power setting. The PF does NOT look at the
settings and is concentrating on the take off. The PNF will concentrate on
engine settings and will make very fine settings until V1. The PNF is also
watching other controls and will call out any anomalies to the PF. He will
not take action by himself. The PNF will call out a cross check at 80 Kts
and the PF will confirm (his AS is active and reading 80kts). The PNF will
call out the V1 speed and the PF will pull his hand off the throttles, to
the yoke. The reason for this is to show that the PF (Captain has command)
and can abort before V1. Past V1, you take off no matter what. The PNF
calls Vr and the PF rotates, and targets V2. The PNF calls positive rate,
the PF says gear up and the PNF brings the gear up. The climb out is at V2
and the PNF calls 400 ft, The PF call for new specific power settings and
flap settings, the PNF confirms and reduces power, makes the adjustment,
and adjusts flaps. It goes quick. That's what happens below pattern.

You can see the sequence is rigid and regimented and at no time is anyone
doing anything out of sequence. The main part of the flight is also loaded
with paperwork. A similar ritual is performed on approach and landing. One
ritual that is not taught in GA that the 121 guys do, is the sterile cockpit
rule. I'd also like to see more GA rules about getting everyone in the
airplane when close to airports to look for traffic. This is no time for
chit-chat.

I also spent a lot of time at Moffet Field in their Human Factors center and
I was also a member of RTCA identifying human factor problems, writing MOPS
and setting standards. I worked on designing the Aviation Telecommunication
Network around the world. This is a post ACARS II network. We never could
figure out if you had a server on the ground and you were receiving a data
file in say a laptop in your airplane, is that uploading or downloading?
And a more serious problem...with enough laptops, can you receive enough
bits to cause the airplane to go over gross? ;-)

Too much rambling here. Did I give you a glimpse of the airline world?


--
Regards, BobF.
"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
> Bob F. wrote:
>> Don't rest your hand on ANY control. If you are going to exercise it.
>> Move your hand over, do it, then return to some neutral position. This
>> really is a CRM tactic so that the Pilot Flying (PF) and Pilot Not Flying
>> (PNF) have no confusion about what's going on.
>>
>
> This is interesting Bob. I'm involved with a human factors work group on
> accident prevention as we speak.
> Our venue of course isn't dealing with multi-engine CRM but rather the
> aerobatic demonstration scenario. We're attempting to come up with
> suggestions to present to the representative governing bodies that will
> make our venue safer.
> I'd be interested to know if your above comment includes throttle, or in
> your case, (throttles) when the aircraft is at and below pattern altitude.
> We of course are dealing with single pilot CRM.
>
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Dan wrote:
> On Mar 21, 8:13 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>
>> I used
>> "Every good pilot must take off fine check"
>>
>> and
>>
>> "Every good pilot must land fine check"
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> OK.. help me out...
>
> those mean..?

ALL; altimeter
GOOD; gas
PILOTS; prop
MUST; mixture
TAKE; trim
OFF; oil pressure,
FINE; flaps
CHECK; cowls, controls, carb ht.

Same on base, replace with LAND; gear

--
Dudley Henriques

[[email protected]]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
> :

> > On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in news:3e97f
> >> :
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
> >> checklist.
> >> > Larry
> >>
> >> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
> >>
> >> Never heard the S before.
> >>
> >> There used to be CIGARTIP
> >>
> >> Which was:
> >>
> >> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R', Trim
> 'I'
> >> I don't know either and Props
> >>
> >> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine tobacco)
> >>
> >> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
> >>
> >> Betie
> >
> > Neither of those had a gear check?
> >
> > Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
> >

> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?


Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd Aero Commander
and didn't check the gear switch.

About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear sucks up
and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing gets
airborne.

Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly skin and
more paint.

That's why a gear check for takeoff.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bob F. wrote:
> That's also an interesting question. I don't know what your experience
> or training is, with respect, but in an airliner, the last time the PF
> has his hand on the throttle is at V1 at which point you remove your
> hand off the throttle and place it, now both of your hands, on the
> yoke. It's not until much later into the flight that the PF will ever
> touch the throttle again. All commands are directed to the PNF to do.
> This is a curious ritual on take off, and varies slightly by airline
> manual. Here's how it goes. At stop position on the runway, the PF
> places his hand on the throttles, advances them part way to see that all
> engines are coming alive with roughly the same power and then says to
> the PNF, "Set Take Off Thrust" at which point the PNF has his hand(s)
> over the PF's hand and pushed the throttle to the predefined calculated
> power setting. The PF does NOT look at the settings and is
> concentrating on the take off. The PNF will concentrate on engine
> settings and will make very fine settings until V1. The PNF is also
> watching other controls and will call out any anomalies to the PF. He
> will not take action by himself. The PNF will call out a cross check at
> 80 Kts and the PF will confirm (his AS is active and reading 80kts).
> The PNF will call out the V1 speed and the PF will pull his hand off the
> throttles, to the yoke. The reason for this is to show that the PF
> (Captain has command) and can abort before V1. Past V1, you take off no
> matter what. The PNF calls Vr and the PF rotates, and targets V2. The
> PNF calls positive rate, the PF says gear up and the PNF brings the gear
> up. The climb out is at V2 and the PNF calls 400 ft, The PF call for
> new specific power settings and flap settings, the PNF confirms and
> reduces power, makes the adjustment, and adjusts flaps. It goes quick.
> That's what happens below pattern.
>
> You can see the sequence is rigid and regimented and at no time is
> anyone doing anything out of sequence. The main part of the flight is
> also loaded with paperwork. A similar ritual is performed on approach
> and landing. One ritual that is not taught in GA that the 121 guys do,
> is the sterile cockpit rule. I'd also like to see more GA rules about
> getting everyone in the airplane when close to airports to look for
> traffic. This is no time for chit-chat.
>
> I also spent a lot of time at Moffet Field in their Human Factors center
> and I was also a member of RTCA identifying human factor problems,
> writing MOPS and setting standards. I worked on designing the Aviation
> Telecommunication Network around the world. This is a post ACARS II
> network. We never could figure out if you had a server on the ground
> and you were receiving a data file in say a laptop in your airplane, is
> that uploading or downloading? And a more serious problem...with enough
> laptops, can you receive enough bits to cause the airplane to go over
> gross? ;-)
>
> Too much rambling here. Did I give you a glimpse of the airline world?
>
>
An excellent look indeed. Sounds like you've done some good work in the
flight safety field.

The airline industry I'm sure places the same importance on CRM as we do
dealing with the high performance single pilot environment. The two
venues of course are quite different, each with their own individual
methods for optimizing safety in the cockpit environment; the airline
aspect naturally having to deal with the added crew factor and the pros
and cons of the implied interaction there.

In a way, your environment is even more complicated than ours for this
reason alone. We deal with the interactive relationship between the
conscious and sub conscious as a single pilot attempts to deal with the
extremely high multi-task environment we have in low altitude display
flying where both the macro and micro aspects of this scenario can pile
on causing over task. It's more complicated for your scenario I believe,
because of the added factor of crew interaction where tasking and
sequence responsibility have to be clearly defined.

In our venue, throttle is considered as a prime control and as such
requires the placement of the hand on that control during all operations
at and below pattern altitude.

It goes without saying that in handling high performance military type
single engine airplanes where engine and aerodynamic factors at low
altitudes can require instant power adjustment as a preemptive as well
as a reactionary measure, that having the hand on the throttle is
mandatory to satisfy the flight safety issue.

I have carried this philosophy into my primary and aerobatic instruction
as well and encourage all GA pilots flying single pilot to use this
procedure.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bob F. wrote:
>> That's also an interesting question. I don't know what your
>> experience or training is, with respect, but in an airliner, the last
>> time the PF has his hand on the throttle is at V1 at which point you
>> remove your hand off the throttle and place it, now both of your
>> hands, on the yoke. It's not until much later into the flight that
>> the PF will ever touch the throttle again. All commands are directed
>> to the PNF to do. This is a curious ritual on take off, and varies
>> slightly by airline manual. Here's how it goes. At stop position on
>> the runway, the PF places his hand on the throttles, advances them
>> part way to see that all engines are coming alive with roughly the
>> same power and then says to the PNF, "Set Take Off Thrust" at which
>> point the PNF has his hand(s) over the PF's hand and pushed the
>> throttle to the predefined calculated power setting. The PF does NOT
>> look at the settings and is concentrating on the take off. The PNF
>> will concentrate on engine settings and will make very fine settings
>> until V1. The PNF is also watching other controls and will call out
>> any anomalies to the PF. He will not take action by himself. The
>> PNF will call out a cross check at 80 Kts and the PF will confirm
>> (his AS is active and reading 80kts). The PNF will call out the V1
>> speed and the PF will pull his hand off the throttles, to the yoke.
>> The reason for this is to show that the PF (Captain has command) and
>> can abort before V1. Past V1, you take off no matter what. The PNF
>> calls Vr and the PF rotates, and targets V2. The PNF calls positive
>> rate, the PF says gear up and the PNF brings the gear up. The climb
>> out is at V2 and the PNF calls 400 ft, The PF call for new specific
>> power settings and flap settings, the PNF confirms and reduces
>> power, makes the adjustment, and adjusts flaps. It goes quick.
>> That's what happens below pattern.
>>
>> You can see the sequence is rigid and regimented and at no time is
>> anyone doing anything out of sequence. The main part of the flight
>> is also loaded with paperwork. A similar ritual is performed on
>> approach and landing. One ritual that is not taught in GA that the
>> 121 guys do, is the sterile cockpit rule. I'd also like to see more
>> GA rules about getting everyone in the airplane when close to
>> airports to look for traffic. This is no time for chit-chat.
>>
>> I also spent a lot of time at Moffet Field in their Human Factors
>> center and I was also a member of RTCA identifying human factor
>> problems, writing MOPS and setting standards. I worked on designing
>> the Aviation Telecommunication Network around the world. This is a
>> post ACARS II network. We never could figure out if you had a server
>> on the ground and you were receiving a data file in say a laptop in
>> your airplane, is that uploading or downloading? And a more serious
>> problem...with enough laptops, can you receive enough bits to cause
>> the airplane to go over gross? ;-)
>>
>> Too much rambling here. Did I give you a glimpse of the airline
>> world?
>>
>>
> An excellent look indeed. Sounds like you've done some good work in
> the flight safety field.
>
> The airline industry I'm sure places the same importance on CRM as we
> do dealing with the high performance single pilot environment. The two
> venues of course are quite different, each with their own individual
> methods for optimizing safety in the cockpit environment; the airline
> aspect naturally having to deal with the added crew factor and the
> pros and cons of the implied interaction there.
>
> In a way, your environment is even more complicated than ours for this
> reason alone. We deal with the interactive relationship between the
> conscious and sub conscious as a single pilot attempts to deal with
> the extremely high multi-task environment we have in low altitude
> display flying where both the macro and micro aspects of this scenario
> can pile on causing over task. It's more complicated for your scenario
> I believe, because of the added factor of crew interaction where
> tasking and sequence responsibility have to be clearly defined.
>
> In our venue, throttle is considered as a prime control and as such
> requires the placement of the hand on that control during all
> operations at and below pattern altitude.
>
> It goes without saying that in handling high performance military type
> single engine airplanes where engine and aerodynamic factors at low
> altitudes can require instant power adjustment as a preemptive as well
> as a reactionary measure, that having the hand on the throttle is
> mandatory to satisfy the flight safety issue.
>
> I have carried this philosophy into my primary and aerobatic
> instruction as well and encourage all GA pilots flying single pilot to
> use this procedure.
>


Yeah, rthere;s a few differences between flying the two as far as
throttle goes. the autothrottle is king nowadays. It sets takeoff thrust
instead of PNF ( actually the FE did it in every three crew airplane
I've flown) but it's generally disengaged right after the thrust is set
autmatically and just manitains the thrust postion. It can do the
approach, but if you;'re hand flying it is generally verboten to use the
autothrottle as you just have a mess if you do ( try controlling the
speed with a nudge of pitch when the autothrottle is fighting you) but
in fact, the hand on throttle thing is even more critical in a jet when
on approach thna it is with a prop driven airplane. Swept wing airplanes
are mostly less speed stable than straight wing airplanes. That is, the
drag doesnt decrease nearly as much as it does when you lose a bit of
speed, so the airplane is less inclined to seek it's original speed if
you've lost or gained a bit. This means you have to be a bit more
assertive with the thrust to keep your speed in line. This is
exacerbated by the nature of jet thrust. When you slow down in a prop
aircraft, the prop blades are naturally getting a better bite,. they
have a slightly higher AoA ( yes, even constant speed props) and they
tend to pull the airplane back to it's original speed. Not so mush with
a jet. While tractive effort is increased if you lose a bit of speed,
it's negligable compared to that which you get with a prop.
having said all that, modern jet engines are all high bypass fans and
really almost proppeler driven. Wings have significantly less sweep than
they used to since manufacturers are using other tricks to get a decent
speed out of them, so the 757 or the 737 NG is significantly easier to
fly on approach than the old 727 was. And I've heard that the 707
required you to get up the day before in order to stay ahead of it!


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

wrote in :

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
>> :
>
>> > On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in news:3e97f
>> >> :
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
>> >> checklist.
>> >> > Larry
>> >>
>> >> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
>> >>
>> >> Never heard the S before.
>> >>
>> >> There used to be CIGARTIP
>> >>
>> >> Which was:
>> >>
>> >> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R',
Trim
>> 'I'
>> >> I don't know either and Props
>> >>
>> >> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine
tobacco)
>> >>
>> >> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
>> >>
>> >> Betie
>> >
>> > Neither of those had a gear check?
>> >
>> > Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
>> >
>
>> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>
>
> Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd Aero
Commander
> and didn't check the gear switch.
>
> About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear sucks up
> and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing gets
> airborne.
>
> Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly skin and
> more paint.
>
> That's why a gear check for takeoff.
>
>

Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:---
:

> Dan wrote:
>> On Mar 21, 8:13 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>>
>>> I used
>>> "Every good pilot must take off fine check"
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> "Every good pilot must land fine check"
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dudley Henriques
>>
>> OK.. help me out...
>>
>> those mean..?
>
> ALL; altimeter
> GOOD; gas
> PILOTS; prop
> MUST; mixture
> TAKE; trim
> OFF; oil pressure,
> FINE; flaps
> CHECK; cowls, controls, carb ht.
>
> Same on base, replace with LAND; gear
>

For bass shouldn't it be

Airplanes
Can
Eat
Gas

?

Bertie

[WJRFlyBoy]

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:13:53 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

> I used
> "Every good pilot must take off fine check"
>
> and
>
> "Every good pilot must land fine check"
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

????????

[Ron Garret]

In article >,
Dudley Henriques > wrote:

> Larry D. Cosby wrote:
> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing checklist.
> > Larry
> >
> >
> There are a few versions, but one widely used is;
> Gas,Undercarraige,Mixture,Prop, Safety Harness

I always got confused whether G was Gas or Gear, so I started using
STUMP:

Seatbelts
Tanks
Undercarriage
etc.

rg

[buttman]

On Mar 21, 6:08*pm, Dan > wrote:
> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>
> > Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter what
> > you do with the switches.
>
> You have got to be kidding...?
>
> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>
> Dan Mc

Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on the
gear.

Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor is
not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from underneath
you.

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 22, 7:53 am, buttman > wrote:
> On Mar 21, 6:08 pm, Dan > wrote:
>
> > On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>
> > > Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter what
> > > you do with the switches.
>
> > You have got to be kidding...?
>
> > Or else flying a fixed gear.
>
> > Dan Mc
>
> Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on the
> gear.
>
> Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor is
> not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from underneath
> you.

DOH!

Right..

The problem isn't manifest while taxiing -- it's getting almost
airborne and settling, as others have posted.

[Ron Natalie]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> "Bob F." > wrote in
> :
>
>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter
>> what you do with the switches.
>>
>
> Though I knew some tit who used to pull the lever up at the start of the
> take off roll and rely on the prox switch on the gear to do the rest for
> him.
>
> Guess what?

Prox switch, what is that :). You raise the handle on my plane and the
next sound you hear is the prop hitting the pavement. Even on planes
with squat switches you want to make sure the switch is down before
moving the aircraft.

There's about three different "make sure the handle is down" before
cranking.

[Ron Natalie]

buttman wrote:
> On Mar 21, 6:08 pm, Dan > wrote:
>> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>>
>>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter what
>>> you do with the switches.
>> You have got to be kidding...?
>>
>> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>>
>> Dan Mc
>
> Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on the
> gear.
>
> Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor is
> not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from underneath
> you.

Negatory good buddy. Maybe not the mains, but a lot of planes
can get the nose gear going up enough to hit the prop.

Even the starter motor will cause the hydraulic pump to give enough
pressure to pull the Navion nose gear up over center. And I've only
seen one Navion with a squat switch interlock.

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 22, 8:41 am, Ron Natalie > wrote:
>
> Negatory good buddy. Maybe not the mains, but a lot of planes
> can get the nose gear going up enough to hit the prop.

The Bonanza mains certainly won't (close inboard), but the nose gear
-- might.

I really never want to know.

[Bob F.[_2_]]

Consider a slow taxi and not at rest. But I would guess the breaker would
pop first if you're not moving. Or maybe the gear motor burn up before the
gear would give at rest.

--
Regards, BobF.
"buttman" > wrote in message
...
On Mar 21, 6:08 pm, Dan > wrote:
> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>
> > Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter
> > what
> > you do with the switches.
>
> You have got to be kidding...?
>
> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>
> Dan Mc

Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on the
gear.

Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor is
not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from underneath
you.

[Jay Maynard]

On 2008-03-22, Bob F. > wrote:
> This brings to mind a point to remember for you ATP guys in training. The
> examiner does not like to see your hand in any position where he has to
> wonder what you are about to do. Don't rest your hand on ANY control. If
> you are going to exercise it. Move your hand over, do it, then return to
> some neutral position. This really is a CRM tactic so that the Pilot Flying
> (PF) and Pilot Not Flying (PNF) have no confusion about what's going on.

Does this include not keeping your hand on the throttle during and
immediately after takeoff? Every pilot I know was taught to do this...
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 21, 8:13*pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>
> I used
> "Every good pilot must take off fine check"
>
> and
>
> "Every good pilot must land fine check"
>

Hey Dudley,

Please elaborate. Thanks.

Wil

[William Hung[_2_]]

On Mar 22, 10:59*am, William Hung > wrote:
> On Mar 21, 8:13*pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>
>
>
> > I used
> > "Every good pilot must take off fine check"
>
> > and
>
> > "Every good pilot must land fine check"
>
> Hey Dudley,
>
> Please elaborate. *Thanks.
>
> Wil

Scratch that Dudley. I just saw yuor reply.

Thanks,
Wil

[Bob F.[_2_]]

Hi Jay,

Yes and no. You have to read what I just wrote and keep it in context. Yes
on a small airplane, keep your hand on the throttle during those phases you
mentioned. That's what you are expected to do. If you are holding onto the
throttle in preparation for it's immediate use, that's where it should be.
If your are at cruse and for no reason just rest you hand there, then that's
the wrong thing to do. A good bump could result in an unintentional
throttle setting. You're doing the right thing teaching that way.

--
Regards, BobF.
"Jay Maynard" > wrote in message
...
> On 2008-03-22, Bob F. > wrote:
>> This brings to mind a point to remember for you ATP guys in training.
>> The
>> examiner does not like to see your hand in any position where he has to
>> wonder what you are about to do. Don't rest your hand on ANY control.
>> If
>> you are going to exercise it. Move your hand over, do it, then return to
>> some neutral position. This really is a CRM tactic so that the Pilot
>> Flying
>> (PF) and Pilot Not Flying (PNF) have no confusion about what's going on.
>
> Does this include not keeping your hand on the throttle during and
> immediately after takeoff? Every pilot I know was taught to do this...
> --
> Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
> http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
> http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
> Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

[Bob F.[_2_]]

Jay,

I just had another thought about your clarification question. I would call
the state you described the "active ready" position. (I just made that up).
Not "rest". That's why what you are teaching is the correct thing to do.
--
Regards, BobF.
"Bob F." > wrote in message
. ..
> Hi Jay,
>
> Yes and no. You have to read what I just wrote and keep it in context.
> Yes on a small airplane, keep your hand on the throttle during those
> phases you mentioned. That's what you are expected to do. If you are
> holding onto the throttle in preparation for it's immediate use, that's
> where it should be. If your are at cruse and for no reason just rest you
> hand there, then that's the wrong thing to do. A good bump could result
> in an unintentional throttle setting. You're doing the right thing
> teaching that way.
>
> --
> Regards, BobF.
> "Jay Maynard" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 2008-03-22, Bob F. > wrote:
>>> This brings to mind a point to remember for you ATP guys in training.
>>> The
>>> examiner does not like to see your hand in any position where he has to
>>> wonder what you are about to do. Don't rest your hand on ANY control.
>>> If
>>> you are going to exercise it. Move your hand over, do it, then return
>>> to
>>> some neutral position. This really is a CRM tactic so that the Pilot
>>> Flying
>>> (PF) and Pilot Not Flying (PNF) have no confusion about what's going on.
>>
>> Does this include not keeping your hand on the throttle during and
>> immediately after takeoff? Every pilot I know was taught to do this...
>> --
>> Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
>> http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
>> http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
>> Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

buttman > wrote in
:

> On Mar 21, 6:08*pm, Dan > wrote:
>> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>>
>> > Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
>> > matter wh
> at
>> > you do with the switches.
>>
>> You have got to be kidding...?
>>
>> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>>
>> Dan Mc
>
> Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on the
> gear.
>
> Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor is
> not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from underneath
> you.
>



Wow, an even bigger idiot than I thought.

As soon as I saw someone post about trying the old gear up witch and rely
on the squat, I thought of you.


And you can get the gear up on the ground, fjukkwit. For one thing the
nosewheel will happily retract and if you're taxiing the rolling of the
mains will happilly allow the wheels to move., once they're over center you
are on your belly.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Ron Natalie > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> "Bob F." > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
>>> matter what you do with the switches.
>>>
>>
>> Though I knew some tit who used to pull the lever up at the start of
>> the take off roll and rely on the prox switch on the gear to do the
>> rest for him.
>>
>> Guess what?
>
> Prox switch, what is that :). You raise the handle on my plane and
> the next sound you hear is the prop hitting the pavement. Even on
> planes with squat switches you want to make sure the switch is down
> before moving the aircraft.
>
> There's about three different "make sure the handle is down" before
> cranking.
>

It's just a type of switch. I should have said squat switch. A lot of
airplanes have a second switch in line that won't allow the gear to
retract regardless of the handle position. others have a mechanical lock
that restricts movement of the gear handle whilst on the ground.


Bertie

[buttman]

On Mar 22, 10:20*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> buttman > wrote :
>
>
>
> > On Mar 21, 6:08*pm, Dan > wrote:
> >> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>
> >> > Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
> >> > matter wh
> > at
> >> > you do with the switches.
>
> >> You have got to be kidding...?
>
> >> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>
> >> Dan Mc
>
> > Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on the
> > gear.
>
> > Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor is
> > not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from underneath
> > you.
>
> Wow, an even bigger idiot than I thought.
>
> As soon as I saw someone post about trying the old gear up witch and rely
> on the squat, I thought of you.
>
> And you can get the gear up on the ground, fjukkwit. For one thing the
> nosewheel will happily retract and if you're taxiing the rolling of the
> mains will happilly allow the wheels to move., once they're over center you
> are on your belly.
>
> Bertie

You sound like you speak from experience...

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

buttman > wrote in
:

> On Mar 22, 10:20*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> buttman > wrote
>> innews:69b2392f-451a-4072-b7aa-ae4cb87f0
> :
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 21, 6:08*pm, Dan > wrote:
>> >> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>>
>> >> > Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
>> >> > matter wh
>> > at
>> >> > you do with the switches.
>>
>> >> You have got to be kidding...?
>>
>> >> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>>
>> >> Dan Mc
>>
>> > Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on
>> > the gear.
>>
>> > Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor is
>> > not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from
>> > underneath you.
>>
>> Wow, an even bigger idiot than I thought.
>>
>> As soon as I saw someone post about trying the old gear up witch and
>> rely on the squat, I thought of you.
>>
>> And you can get the gear up on the ground, fjukkwit. For one thing
>> the nosewheel will happily retract and if you're taxiing the rolling
>> of the mains will happilly allow the wheels to move., once they're
>> over center yo
> u
>> are on your belly.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> You sound like you speak from experience...


Of course I do, that's because I am. But I've never retracted the gear
on an airplane.

I certainly haven't gone around making idiotic statements like you just
did, either.



Bertie

[[email protected]]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> wrote in :

> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
> >> :
> >
> >> > On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in news:3e97f
> >> >> :
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing
> >> >> checklist.
> >> >> > Larry
> >> >>
> >> >> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
> >> >>
> >> >> Never heard the S before.
> >> >>
> >> >> There used to be CIGARTIP
> >> >>
> >> >> Which was:
> >> >>
> >> >> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R',
> Trim
> >> 'I'
> >> >> I don't know either and Props
> >> >>
> >> >> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine
> tobacco)
> >> >>
> >> >> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
> >> >>
> >> >> Betie
> >> >
> >> > Neither of those had a gear check?
> >> >
> >> > Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
> >> >
> >
> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
> >
> >
> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd Aero
> Commander
> > and didn't check the gear switch.
> >
> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear sucks up
> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing gets
> > airborne.
> >
> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly skin and
> > more paint.
> >
> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
> >
> >

> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.

Semantics.

From the C172RG checklist in the POH:

Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

wrote in :

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:
>
>> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
>> >> :
>> >
>> >> > On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in
news:3e97f
>> >> >> :
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a
landing
>> >> >> checklist.
>> >> >> > Larry
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Never heard the S before.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> There used to be CIGARTIP
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Which was:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R',
>> Trim
>> >> 'I'
>> >> >> I don't know either and Props
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine
>> tobacco)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Betie
>> >> >
>> >> > Neither of those had a gear check?
>> >> >
>> >> > Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
>> >> >
>> >
>> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>> >
>> >
>> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd Aero
>> Commander
>> > and didn't check the gear switch.
>> >
>> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear sucks
up
>> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing gets
>> > airborne.
>> >
>> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly skin and
>> > more paint.
>> >
>> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
>> >
>> >
>
>> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
>
> Semantics.
>

No, seperate checklist.

> From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
>
> Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN

In the pre takeoff checks?




Bertie
>
>

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> buttman > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Mar 22, 10:20 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>> buttman > wrote
>>> innews:69b2392f-451a-4072-b7aa-ae4cb87f0
>> :
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Mar 21, 6:08 pm, Dan > wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>>>>>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
>>>>>> matter wh
>>>> at
>>>>>> you do with the switches.
>>>>> You have got to be kidding...?
>>>>> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>>>>> Dan Mc
>>>> Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on
>>>> the gear.
>>>> Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor is
>>>> not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from
>>>> underneath you.
>>> Wow, an even bigger idiot than I thought.
>>>
>>> As soon as I saw someone post about trying the old gear up witch and
>>> rely on the squat, I thought of you.
>>>
>>> And you can get the gear up on the ground, fjukkwit. For one thing
>>> the nosewheel will happily retract and if you're taxiing the rolling
>>> of the mains will happilly allow the wheels to move., once they're
>>> over center yo
>> u
>>> are on your belly.
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> You sound like you speak from experience...
>
>
> Of course I do, that's because I am. But I've never retracted the gear
> on an airplane.
>
> I certainly haven't gone around making idiotic statements like you just
> did, either.
>
>
>
> Bertie
>
>

Hitting the gear switch on some of the old hydraulic system airplanes on
the ground could produce "interesting" results.
I believe Ron Natalie checked in with some comment on the Navion. He and
Margy own one.
It's been years, but I seem to remember a clear warning in the Navion's
manual directed to this issue.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:G_-
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> buttman > wrote in
>> news:7b12f292-846a-4203-895d-4d1006d9bfe4
@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> On Mar 22, 10:20 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>> buttman > wrote
>>>> innews:69b2392f-451a-4072-b7aa-ae4cb87f0
>>> :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 21, 6:08 pm, Dan > wrote:
>>>>>> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>>>>>>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
>>>>>>> matter wh
>>>>> at
>>>>>>> you do with the switches.
>>>>>> You have got to be kidding...?
>>>>>> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>>>>>> Dan Mc
>>>>> Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on
>>>>> the gear.
>>>>> Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor
is
>>>>> not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from
>>>>> underneath you.
>>>> Wow, an even bigger idiot than I thought.
>>>>
>>>> As soon as I saw someone post about trying the old gear up witch
and
>>>> rely on the squat, I thought of you.
>>>>
>>>> And you can get the gear up on the ground, fjukkwit. For one thing
>>>> the nosewheel will happily retract and if you're taxiing the
rolling
>>>> of the mains will happilly allow the wheels to move., once they're
>>>> over center yo
>>> u
>>>> are on your belly.
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>> You sound like you speak from experience...
>>
>>
>> Of course I do, that's because I am. But I've never retracted the
gear
>> on an airplane.
>>
>> I certainly haven't gone around making idiotic statements like you
just
>> did, either.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>>
>
> Hitting the gear switch on some of the old hydraulic system airplanes
on
> the ground could produce "interesting" results.
> I believe Ron Natalie checked in with some comment on the Navion. He
and
> Margy own one.
> It's been years, but I seem to remember a clear warning in the
Navion's
> manual directed to this issue.
>

I think the old manual Mooneys were pretty easy to get wrong as well.
there was one at Montgomeryville that kneeled down at the pumps when
someone who was looking for the parking brake undid the handle. Never
flew one, but there's some sort of collar that can be slid away and
alows the selector handle or lock handle to move and unlock?


Bertie

[[email protected]]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> wrote in :

> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
> @mail.specsol.com:
> >
> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
> >> >> :
> >> >
> >> >> > On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in
> news:3e97f
> >> >> >> :
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a
> landing
> >> >> >> checklist.
> >> >> >> > Larry
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Never heard the S before.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> There used to be CIGARTIP
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Which was:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the 'R',
> >> Trim
> >> >> 'I'
> >> >> >> I don't know either and Props
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine
> >> tobacco)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Betie
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Neither of those had a gear check?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd Aero
> >> Commander
> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
> >> >
> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear sucks
> up
> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing gets
> >> > airborne.
> >> >
> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly skin and
> >> > more paint.
> >> >
> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
> >
> > Semantics.
> >

> No, seperate checklist.

> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
> >
> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN

> In the pre takeoff checks?

In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist procedures".

It then has:

preflight inspection
before starting engine
starting engine
before takeoff
takeoff
etc.

"Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight inspection and
before starting engine.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:G_-
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> buttman > wrote in
>>> news:7b12f292-846a-4203-895d-4d1006d9bfe4
> @a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
>>>> On Mar 22, 10:20 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>> buttman > wrote
>>>>> innews:69b2392f-451a-4072-b7aa-ae4cb87f0
>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 21, 6:08 pm, Dan > wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>>>>>>>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
>>>>>>>> matter wh
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> you do with the switches.
>>>>>>> You have got to be kidding...?
>>>>>>> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>>>>>>> Dan Mc
>>>>>> Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on
>>>>>> the gear.
>>>>>> Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor
> is
>>>>>> not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from
>>>>>> underneath you.
>>>>> Wow, an even bigger idiot than I thought.
>>>>>
>>>>> As soon as I saw someone post about trying the old gear up witch
> and
>>>>> rely on the squat, I thought of you.
>>>>>
>>>>> And you can get the gear up on the ground, fjukkwit. For one thing
>>>>> the nosewheel will happily retract and if you're taxiing the
> rolling
>>>>> of the mains will happilly allow the wheels to move., once they're
>>>>> over center yo
>>>> u
>>>>> are on your belly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>> You sound like you speak from experience...
>>>
>>> Of course I do, that's because I am. But I've never retracted the
> gear
>>> on an airplane.
>>>
>>> I certainly haven't gone around making idiotic statements like you
> just
>>> did, either.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>>>
>> Hitting the gear switch on some of the old hydraulic system airplanes
> on
>> the ground could produce "interesting" results.
>> I believe Ron Natalie checked in with some comment on the Navion. He
> and
>> Margy own one.
>> It's been years, but I seem to remember a clear warning in the
> Navion's
>> manual directed to this issue.
>>
>
> I think the old manual Mooneys were pretty easy to get wrong as well.
> there was one at Montgomeryville that kneeled down at the pumps when
> someone who was looking for the parking brake undid the handle. Never
> flew one, but there's some sort of collar that can be slid away and
> alows the selector handle or lock handle to move and unlock?
>
>
> Bertie

Kind of spoils the whole mood for the flight :-)))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

wrote in :

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:
>
>> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
>> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >
>> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
>> >> >> :
>> >> >
>> >> >> > On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in
>> news:3e97f
>> >> >> >> :
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a
>> landing
>> >> >> >> checklist.
>> >> >> >> > Larry
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Never heard the S before.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> There used to be CIGARTIP
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Which was:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the
'R',
>> >> Trim
>> >> >> 'I'
>> >> >> >> I don't know either and Props
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine
>> >> tobacco)
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Betie
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Neither of those had a gear check?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd Aero
>> >> Commander
>> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
>> >> >
>> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear
sucks
>> up
>> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing
gets
>> >> > airborne.
>> >> >
>> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly skin
and
>> >> > more paint.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
>> >
>> > Semantics.
>> >
>
>> No, seperate checklist.
>
>> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
>> >
>> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
>
>> In the pre takeoff checks?
>
> In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist
procedures".
>
> It then has:
>
> preflight inspection
> before starting engine
> starting engine
> before takeoff
> takeoff
> etc.
>
> "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight inspection and
> before starting engine.
>
>

But not in the before takeoff checks.
It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety inspection (
your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned) And often
before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the before takeoff
checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down at that point.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

>>
>> I think the old manual Mooneys were pretty easy to get wrong as well.
>> there was one at Montgomeryville that kneeled down at the pumps when
>> someone who was looking for the parking brake undid the handle. Never
>> flew one, but there's some sort of collar that can be slid away and
>> alows the selector handle or lock handle to move and unlock?
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Kind of spoils the whole mood for the flight :-)))
>

Yeah, I think the prop was vertical as well, just to add injury to
insult.


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>>> I think the old manual Mooneys were pretty easy to get wrong as well.
>>> there was one at Montgomeryville that kneeled down at the pumps when
>>> someone who was looking for the parking brake undid the handle. Never
>>> flew one, but there's some sort of collar that can be slid away and
>>> alows the selector handle or lock handle to move and unlock?
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> Kind of spoils the whole mood for the flight :-)))
>>
>
> Yeah, I think the prop was vertical as well, just to add injury to
> insult.
>
>
> Bertie
>
Ouch!! At least when this happens you get a new found bounce in your
step with all that weight out of your wallet that was there before it
happened.
:-)



--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> wrote in :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
> @mail.specsol.com:
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
>>> @mail.specsol.com:
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>> Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 3:53 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Larry D. Cosby" <lcosby at knology dot net> wrote in
>>> news:3e97f
>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a
>>> landing
>>>>>>>>> checklist.
>>>>>>>>>> Larry
>>>>>>>>> Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Never heard the S before.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There used to be CIGARTIP
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which was:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Controls, Instruments, Gas, Altimeter. can't remember the
> 'R',
>>>>> Trim
>>>>>>> 'I'
>>>>>>>>> I don't know either and Props
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Good one for simple lightplanes is CIGMFT. (Cig means fine
>>>>> tobacco)
>>>>>>>>> Controls Instruments Gas Mixture Flaps Trim.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Betie
>>>>>>>> Neither of those had a gear check?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unless R stands for "Retractable?"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd Aero
>>>>> Commander
>>>>>> and didn't check the gear switch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear
> sucks
>>> up
>>>>>> and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing
> gets
>>>>>> airborne.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly skin
> and
>>>>>> more paint.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's why a gear check for takeoff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
>>>> Semantics.
>>>>
>>> No, seperate checklist.
>>>> From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
>>>>
>>>> Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
>>> In the pre takeoff checks?
>> In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist
> procedures".
>> It then has:
>>
>> preflight inspection
>> before starting engine
>> starting engine
>> before takeoff
>> takeoff
>> etc.
>>
>> "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight inspection and
>> before starting engine.
>>
>>
>
> But not in the before takeoff checks.
> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety inspection (
> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned) And often
> before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the before takeoff
> checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down at that point.
>
>
> Bertie
>
Yeah. That scraping sound as you try to taxi into position is a dead
giveaway :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>> I think the old manual Mooneys were pretty easy to get wrong as
well.
>>>> there was one at Montgomeryville that kneeled down at the pumps
when
>>>> someone who was looking for the parking brake undid the handle.
Never
>>>> flew one, but there's some sort of collar that can be slid away and
>>>> alows the selector handle or lock handle to move and unlock?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>> Kind of spoils the whole mood for the flight :-)))
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, I think the prop was vertical as well, just to add injury to
>> insult.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> Ouch!! At least when this happens you get a new found bounce in your
> step with all that weight out of your wallet that was there before it
> happened.
>:-)
>
Actually, I know it was vertical. The line boy who was pushing it from
the pumps nearly had his toe taken off by the prop. It was the only
Mooney based at Montgomeryville at the time. Only one I know of anyway.
I remeber it was a wooden wing airplane. Always liked the look of it. I
still have a pic of myself next to it, somewhere.

When the pins are in in an airliner, maintenance will happily move the
handle inside the flight deck. I was broken down away from base with a
ruptured main actuator that needed replacement and rigging. They needed
us out at the airplane because none of them were cleared for engine runs
and they needed the power form the engine driven pumps to do the job (
actually they needed a special precision pump that could move the gear
actuator precisely, but they didn;t have one)
Not a nice feeling seeing that handle move on the ground. They didn't
fix it and we all retired to the rathskeller.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:


>>
>> But not in the before takeoff checks.
>> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety inspection (
>> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned) And
>> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
>> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down at
>> that point.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> Yeah. That scraping sound as you try to taxi into position is a dead
> giveaway :-))
>

Heh heh. there's an apocryphal story about a DH Comet that landed wheels up
and they didn't realize it until they found that even full power wouldn't
move the airplane..

There was an Electra at Shannon, Ireland a few years back that tried to
land wheels up and went around after having lost three engines ( I think it
was number 1 that kept going) they managed to get around the pattern and
land. That one is true. I've seen the airplane.

Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>>> I think the old manual Mooneys were pretty easy to get wrong as
> well.
>>>>> there was one at Montgomeryville that kneeled down at the pumps
> when
>>>>> someone who was looking for the parking brake undid the handle.
> Never
>>>>> flew one, but there's some sort of collar that can be slid away and
>>>>> alows the selector handle or lock handle to move and unlock?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>> Kind of spoils the whole mood for the flight :-)))
>>>>
>>> Yeah, I think the prop was vertical as well, just to add injury to
>>> insult.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> Ouch!! At least when this happens you get a new found bounce in your
>> step with all that weight out of your wallet that was there before it
>> happened.
>> :-)
>>
> Actually, I know it was vertical. The line boy who was pushing it from
> the pumps nearly had his toe taken off by the prop. It was the only
> Mooney based at Montgomeryville at the time. Only one I know of anyway.
> I remeber it was a wooden wing airplane. Always liked the look of it. I
> still have a pic of myself next to it, somewhere.
>
> When the pins are in in an airliner, maintenance will happily move the
> handle inside the flight deck. I was broken down away from base with a
> ruptured main actuator that needed replacement and rigging. They needed
> us out at the airplane because none of them were cleared for engine runs
> and they needed the power form the engine driven pumps to do the job (
> actually they needed a special precision pump that could move the gear
> actuator precisely, but they didn;t have one)
> Not a nice feeling seeing that handle move on the ground. They didn't
> fix it and we all retired to the rathskeller.
>
>
>
> Bertie

Do you mean Hi Line when you say Montgomeryville or Turner?

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>> But not in the before takeoff checks.
>>> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety inspection (
>>> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned) And
>>> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
>>> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down at
>>> that point.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> Yeah. That scraping sound as you try to taxi into position is a dead
>> giveaway :-))
>>
>
> Heh heh. there's an apocryphal story about a DH Comet that landed wheels up
> and they didn't realize it until they found that even full power wouldn't
> move the airplane..
>
> There was an Electra at Shannon, Ireland a few years back that tried to
> land wheels up and went around after having lost three engines ( I think it
> was number 1 that kept going) they managed to get around the pattern and
> land. That one is true. I've seen the airplane.
>
> Bertie
>

Lucky guys.

--
Dudley Henriques

[buttman]

On Mar 22, 1:00*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
But I've never retracted the gear
> on an airplane.


jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of gear
systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear. Talk
about making idiotic statements.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

buttman > wrote in news:dd0aa204-0954-4dcb-9daf-
:

> On Mar 22, 1:00*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> But I've never retracted the gear
>> on an airplane.
>
>
> jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of gear
> systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear. Talk
> about making idiotic statements.
>

Yes, you do.


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

buttman wrote:
> On Mar 22, 1:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> But I've never retracted the gear
>> on an airplane.
>
>
> jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of gear
> systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear. Talk
> about making idiotic statements.

I believe he meant "on the ground". It's sort of a deductive reasoning
thing :-)


--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> buttman wrote:
>> On Mar 22, 1:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> But I've never retracted the gear
>>> on an airplane.
>>
>>
>> jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of gear
>> systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear. Talk
>> about making idiotic statements.
>
> I believe he meant "on the ground". It's sort of a deductive reasoning
> thing :-)
>
>

He's a regular Inspector Clousseau.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>>> But not in the before takeoff checks.
>>>> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety inspection
>>>> ( your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned)
>>>> And often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
>>>> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down
>>>> at that point.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>> Yeah. That scraping sound as you try to taxi into position is a dead
>>> giveaway :-))
>>>
>>
>> Heh heh. there's an apocryphal story about a DH Comet that landed
>> wheels up and they didn't realize it until they found that even full
>> power wouldn't move the airplane..
>>
>> There was an Electra at Shannon, Ireland a few years back that tried
>> to land wheels up and went around after having lost three engines ( I
>> think it was number 1 that kept going) they managed to get around the
>> pattern and land. That one is true. I've seen the airplane.
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
> Lucky guys.
>

Yeah, they just forgot. I forget how they got around the gear horn.
Might have been u/s or maybe the system is primitive and can be defeaed
by, say, a high power setting or something. I doremember reading that
they had had a very long night.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>>> I think the old manual Mooneys were pretty easy to get wrong as
>> well.
>>>>>> there was one at Montgomeryville that kneeled down at the pumps
>> when
>>>>>> someone who was looking for the parking brake undid the handle.
>> Never
>>>>>> flew one, but there's some sort of collar that can be slid away
>>>>>> and alows the selector handle or lock handle to move and unlock?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>> Kind of spoils the whole mood for the flight :-)))
>>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I think the prop was vertical as well, just to add injury to
>>>> insult.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>> Ouch!! At least when this happens you get a new found bounce in
>>> your step with all that weight out of your wallet that was there
>>> before it happened.
>>> :-)
>>>
>> Actually, I know it was vertical. The line boy who was pushing it
>> from the pumps nearly had his toe taken off by the prop. It was the
>> only Mooney based at Montgomeryville at the time. Only one I know of
>> anyway. I remeber it was a wooden wing airplane. Always liked the
>> look of it. I still have a pic of myself next to it, somewhere.
>>
>> When the pins are in in an airliner, maintenance will happily move
>> the handle inside the flight deck. I was broken down away from base
>> with a ruptured main actuator that needed replacement and rigging.
>> They needed us out at the airplane because none of them were cleared
>> for engine runs and they needed the power form the engine driven
>> pumps to do the job ( actually they needed a special precision pump
>> that could move the gear actuator precisely, but they didn;t have
>> one) Not a nice feeling seeing that handle move on the ground. They
>> didn't fix it and we all retired to the rathskeller.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Do you mean Hi Line when you say Montgomeryville or Turner?
>
Hi Line? Must have been before my time. The one that wan't turner. the
one on 309.It was just called Montgomeryville for as long as I knew it.



Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think the old manual Mooneys were pretty easy to get wrong as
>>> well.
>>>>>>> there was one at Montgomeryville that kneeled down at the pumps
>>> when
>>>>>>> someone who was looking for the parking brake undid the handle.
>>> Never
>>>>>>> flew one, but there's some sort of collar that can be slid away
>>>>>>> and alows the selector handle or lock handle to move and unlock?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>> Kind of spoils the whole mood for the flight :-)))
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, I think the prop was vertical as well, just to add injury to
>>>>> insult.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>
>>>> Ouch!! At least when this happens you get a new found bounce in
>>>> your step with all that weight out of your wallet that was there
>>>> before it happened.
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>> Actually, I know it was vertical. The line boy who was pushing it
>>> from the pumps nearly had his toe taken off by the prop. It was the
>>> only Mooney based at Montgomeryville at the time. Only one I know of
>>> anyway. I remeber it was a wooden wing airplane. Always liked the
>>> look of it. I still have a pic of myself next to it, somewhere.
>>>
>>> When the pins are in in an airliner, maintenance will happily move
>>> the handle inside the flight deck. I was broken down away from base
>>> with a ruptured main actuator that needed replacement and rigging.
>>> They needed us out at the airplane because none of them were cleared
>>> for engine runs and they needed the power form the engine driven
>>> pumps to do the job ( actually they needed a special precision pump
>>> that could move the gear actuator precisely, but they didn;t have
>>> one) Not a nice feeling seeing that handle move on the ground. They
>>> didn't fix it and we all retired to the rathskeller.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> Do you mean Hi Line when you say Montgomeryville or Turner?
>>
> Hi Line? Must have been before my time. The one that wan't turner. the
> one on 309.It was just called Montgomeryville for as long as I knew it.
>
>
>
> Bertie
>
That was Hi Line. Right where 202 and 309 met. I managed that field for
a while. We had a light tower right in front of the office shack. Don't
know where the name Hi Line came from; probably from Ed Size, the guy
who owned the field when I was there. I believe he bought it from Vito
Bruzas. Lou Cristaldi and I were the CFI's there at the time. Right
before Buddy Turner went into the ridge.
I'll bet you and I were within a few months of knowing each other :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> buttman wrote:
>>> On Mar 22, 1:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>> But I've never retracted the gear
>>>> on an airplane.
>>>
>>> jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of gear
>>> systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear. Talk
>>> about making idiotic statements.
>> I believe he meant "on the ground". It's sort of a deductive reasoning
>> thing :-)
>>
>>
>
> He's a regular Inspector Clousseau.
>
>
>
> Bertie

It's unbelievable he doesn't like us. We're such lovable people :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[mariposas rand mair fheal]

In article >,
Dudley Henriques > wrote:

> buttman wrote:
> > On Mar 22, 1:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> > But I've never retracted the gear
> >> on an airplane.
> >
> >
> > jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of gear
> > systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear. Talk
> > about making idiotic statements.
>
> I believe he meant "on the ground". It's sort of a deductive reasoning
> thing :-)

i wonder about someone who doesnt realize the distinction

arf meow arf - i dont like squishy
i think i hit a wookie on the expressway
nobody could do that much decoupage
without calling on the powers of darkness

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:H-
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> buttman wrote:
>>>> On Mar 22, 1:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>> But I've never retracted the gear
>>>>> on an airplane.
>>>>
>>>> jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of gear
>>>> systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear. Talk
>>>> about making idiotic statements.
>>> I believe he meant "on the ground". It's sort of a deductive
reasoning
>>> thing :-)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> He's a regular Inspector Clousseau.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> It's unbelievable he doesn't like us. We're such lovable people :-)
>

I, myself , am a cupcake.

Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>
>>>>> But not in the before takeoff checks.
>>>>> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety inspection
>>>>> ( your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned)
>>>>> And often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
>>>>> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down
>>>>> at that point.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>
>>>> Yeah. That scraping sound as you try to taxi into position is a dead
>>>> giveaway :-))
>>>>
>>> Heh heh. there's an apocryphal story about a DH Comet that landed
>>> wheels up and they didn't realize it until they found that even full
>>> power wouldn't move the airplane..
>>>
>>> There was an Electra at Shannon, Ireland a few years back that tried
>>> to land wheels up and went around after having lost three engines ( I
>>> think it was number 1 that kept going) they managed to get around the
>>> pattern and land. That one is true. I've seen the airplane.
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> Lucky guys.
>>
>
> Yeah, they just forgot. I forget how they got around the gear horn.
> Might have been u/s or maybe the system is primitive and can be defeaed
> by, say, a high power setting or something. I doremember reading that
> they had had a very long night.
>
>
> Bertie

Speaking of long nights, did you catch the news the other night about
the two line pilots falling asleep and overshooting their destination on
one of the Hawaiian Islands? Apparently they were all coupled up on
cruise and went right through the VOR null. ATC woke them up going
outbound on the reciprocal. I missed on how far out they got, but one
things' for sure. There wasn't much in front of them to land on and they
were supposedly fueled up for the short haul.
Unbelievable :-)))))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:H-
:
>>
> That was Hi Line. Right where 202 and 309 met.

That's the place. neverheard it called high line, though. Vito was part
owner when I was there which must have been a few years later. The line
up was Vern Moyer, Henry "Dutch" Gronendahl, Vito and Ron Gruver. Vito
did a lot of my instruction. He was kind of scary to me, and the
necceisty for him to pick up his left hand with his right to put it on
the throttle when he took control was pretty exciting. We never dared
ask, but the rumour around the field was that he was injured in a
banner towing accident.

I managed that field for
> a while. We had a light tower right in front of the office shack.

Yeah, myself and another airpoert brat, who now commands a 777 for AA,
climbed up it one night after everyone had gone.

Don't
> know where the name Hi Line came from; probably from Ed Size, the guy
> who owned the field when I was there. I believe he bought it from Vito
> Bruzas. Lou Cristaldi and I were the CFI's there at the time. Right
> before Buddy Turner went into the ridge.
> I'll bet you and I were within a few months of knowing each other :-)
>
Maybe. I would have started there in the late sixties. I had been flying
at PGC before that. I vaguely remember a guy named Lou who flew the CAP
T-34 a lot. Might be the guy you mention, but I never had him for an
instructor. Ed Size I never heard of. Vern has an operation at Easton
now., Dutch married big money and I think Vito is still alive.
somewhere.


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:H-
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> buttman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 22, 1:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>> But I've never retracted the gear
>>>>>> on an airplane.
>>>>> jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of gear
>>>>> systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear. Talk
>>>>> about making idiotic statements.
>>>> I believe he meant "on the ground". It's sort of a deductive
> reasoning
>>>> thing :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> He's a regular Inspector Clousseau.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> It's unbelievable he doesn't like us. We're such lovable people :-)
>>
>
> I, myself , am a cupcake.
>
> Bertie

...and I of course am a harmless lovable fuzzball.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

mariposas rand mair fheal > wrote in news:mair_fheal-
:


> i wonder about someone who doesnt realize the distinction

oh we don't wonder about him at all.


Bertie

[[email protected]]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> wrote in :

> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
> @mail.specsol.com:
> >
> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >
> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd Aero
> >> >> Commander
> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear
> sucks
> >> up
> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing
> gets
> >> >> > airborne.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly skin
> and
> >> >> > more paint.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
> >> >
> >> > Semantics.
> >> >
> >
> >> No, seperate checklist.
> >
> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
> >> >
> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
> >
> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
> >
> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist
> procedures".
> >
> > It then has:
> >
> > preflight inspection
> > before starting engine
> > starting engine
> > before takeoff
> > takeoff
> > etc.
> >
> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight inspection and
> > before starting engine.
> >
> >

> But not in the before takeoff checks.
> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety inspection (
> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned) And often
> before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the before takeoff
> checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down at that point.

Semantics.

The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to perform before
each flight.

There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety inspection"
anywhere in it.

YMMV with other POH's.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:


> Speaking of long nights, did you catch the news the other night about
> the two line pilots falling asleep and overshooting their destination
on
> one of the Hawaiian Islands? Apparently they were all coupled up on
> cruise and went right through the VOR null. ATC woke them up going
> outbound on the reciprocal. I missed on how far out they got, but one
> things' for sure. There wasn't much in front of them to land on and
they
> were supposedly fueled up for the short haul.
> Unbelievable :-)))))
>

Oh completely believable!
BTW, we don't use VORs anymore except to update the inertial stuff, if
even that. If we fly to a VOR it could just as well be any other
waypoint in the box for the nav value it's providing. Spooky eh?
The both guys falling asleep is enough of an issue that they have alarms
in the flight deck that go off if you don't play with something for over
15 minutes. Best thing to do if you're both feeling dozy is for one guy
to get very uncomfortable and the other to take a 15 minute nap. Our
human factors training even gives advice on how to power nap and my
company condones the practice. The alternative is uncontroled microsleep
( when your head nods for a few seocnds and you wake up again abruptly)
which is completely beyond even the most determined person's control and
is very dangerous if it;'s happening on approach.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

wrote in :

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> wrote in
>> :
>
>> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
>> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >
>> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
>> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd
>> >> >> > Aero
>> >> >> Commander
>> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear
>> sucks
>> >> up
>> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing
>> gets
>> >> >> > airborne.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly
>> >> >> > skin
>> and
>> >> >> > more paint.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
>> >> >
>> >> > Semantics.
>> >> >
>> >
>> >> No, seperate checklist.
>> >
>> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
>> >> >
>> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
>> >
>> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
>> >
>> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist
>> procedures".
>> >
>> > It then has:
>> >
>> > preflight inspection
>> > before starting engine
>> > starting engine
>> > before takeoff
>> > takeoff
>> > etc.
>> >
>> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight inspection
>> > and before starting engine.
>> >
>> >
>
>> But not in the before takeoff checks.
>> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety inspection (
>> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned) And
>> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
>> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down at
>> that point.
>
> Semantics.
>

Nope. Different stages of operation distinct from each other.


> The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to perform before
> each flight.
>
> There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety inspection"
> anywhere in it.
>
> YMMV with other POH's.


No, not a POH at all.
So, your preflight checklist includes the runup? Not even a cub does
that.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:0YednZs4e-
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:H-
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> buttman wrote:
>>>>>> On Mar 22, 1:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>> But I've never retracted the gear
>>>>>>> on an airplane.
>>>>>> jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of
gear
>>>>>> systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear.
Talk
>>>>>> about making idiotic statements.
>>>>> I believe he meant "on the ground". It's sort of a deductive
>> reasoning
>>>>> thing :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> He's a regular Inspector Clousseau.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>> It's unbelievable he doesn't like us. We're such lovable people :-)
>>>
>>
>> I, myself , am a cupcake.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> ..and I of course am a harmless lovable fuzzball.
>

I've seen your pic, where's the fuzz?


Oh wait, never mind.


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:H-
> :
>> That was Hi Line. Right where 202 and 309 met.
>
> That's the place. neverheard it called high line, though. Vito was part
> owner when I was there which must have been a few years later. The line
> up was Vern Moyer, Henry "Dutch" Gronendahl, Vito and Ron Gruver. Vito
> did a lot of my instruction. He was kind of scary to me, and the
> necceisty for him to pick up his left hand with his right to put it on
> the throttle when he took control was pretty exciting. We never dared
> ask, but the rumour around the field was that he was injured in a
> banner towing accident.
>
> I managed that field for
>> a while. We had a light tower right in front of the office shack.
>
> Yeah, myself and another airpoert brat, who now commands a 777 for AA,
> climbed up it one night after everyone had gone.
>
> Don't
>> know where the name Hi Line came from; probably from Ed Size, the guy
>> who owned the field when I was there. I believe he bought it from Vito
>> Bruzas. Lou Cristaldi and I were the CFI's there at the time. Right
>> before Buddy Turner went into the ridge.
>> I'll bet you and I were within a few months of knowing each other :-)
>>
> Maybe. I would have started there in the late sixties. I had been flying
> at PGC before that. I vaguely remember a guy named Lou who flew the CAP
> T-34 a lot. Might be the guy you mention, but I never had him for an
> instructor. Ed Size I never heard of. Vern has an operation at Easton
> now., Dutch married big money and I think Vito is still alive.
> somewhere.
>
>
> Bertie
>
From what you are saying I think you came a bit after me. I just can't
remember if Size bought the operation from Vito or sold it to him.
You are right about Cristaldi and the T34. I've flown that T34 myself
having been a check pilot in that aircraft for CAP while I was there.
Lou was also a CAP check pilot. They kept it in the Tee Hangars way down
to the left of the flight office toward the big water tower. That was a
nice T34 BTW.
I remember having a student named Jordan who owned a Cessna 170 based
there. His father was an insurance guru. They lived in a virtual palace
in Villanova. :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:0YednZs4e-
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:H-
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> buttman wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 1:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>> But I've never retracted the gear
>>>>>>>> on an airplane.
>>>>>>> jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of
> gear
>>>>>>> systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear.
> Talk
>>>>>>> about making idiotic statements.
>>>>>> I believe he meant "on the ground". It's sort of a deductive
>>> reasoning
>>>>>> thing :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> He's a regular Inspector Clousseau.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>> It's unbelievable he doesn't like us. We're such lovable people :-)
>>>>
>>> I, myself , am a cupcake.
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> ..and I of course am a harmless lovable fuzzball.
>>
>
> I've seen your pic, where's the fuzz?
>
>
> Oh wait, never mind.
>
>
> Bertie

Hey...I told my wife I was getting a haircut. She said "which one?"
:-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>
>> Speaking of long nights, did you catch the news the other night about
>> the two line pilots falling asleep and overshooting their destination
> on
>> one of the Hawaiian Islands? Apparently they were all coupled up on
>> cruise and went right through the VOR null. ATC woke them up going
>> outbound on the reciprocal. I missed on how far out they got, but one
>> things' for sure. There wasn't much in front of them to land on and
> they
>> were supposedly fueled up for the short haul.
>> Unbelievable :-)))))
>>
>
> Oh completely believable!
> BTW, we don't use VORs anymore except to update the inertial stuff, if
> even that. If we fly to a VOR it could just as well be any other
> waypoint in the box for the nav value it's providing. Spooky eh?
> The both guys falling asleep is enough of an issue that they have alarms
> in the flight deck that go off if you don't play with something for over
> 15 minutes. Best thing to do if you're both feeling dozy is for one guy
> to get very uncomfortable and the other to take a 15 minute nap. Our
> human factors training even gives advice on how to power nap and my
> company condones the practice. The alternative is uncontroled microsleep
> ( when your head nods for a few seocnds and you wake up again abruptly)
> which is completely beyond even the most determined person's control and
> is very dangerous if it;'s happening on approach.
>
>
> Bertie
>
Don't know if these guys were on the INS or something else, but I
vaguely recall somebody mentioning VOR. Could have been an early inter
island shuttle type if so. I didn't catch the type involved.
You know the press....if they missed a waypoint, that's a VOR!

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:
>
> Hey...I told my wife I was getting a haircut. She said "which one?"

You've got more than one?


Bertie

[Matt Whiting]

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:0YednZs4e-
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:H-
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> buttman wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 1:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>>> But I've never retracted the gear
>>>>>>>>> on an airplane.
>>>>>>>> jejehjehjehejhehjjeheh fjukkwjit. A self proclaimed master of
>> gear
>>>>>>>> systems, yet never retracted a single airplane's landing gear.
>> Talk
>>>>>>>> about making idiotic statements.
>>>>>>> I believe he meant "on the ground". It's sort of a deductive
>>>> reasoning
>>>>>>> thing :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> He's a regular Inspector Clousseau.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>> It's unbelievable he doesn't like us. We're such lovable people :-)
>>>>>
>>>> I, myself , am a cupcake.
>>>> Bertie
>>> ..and I of course am a harmless lovable fuzzball.
>>>
>>
>> I've seen your pic, where's the fuzz?
>>
>> Oh wait, never mind.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Hey...I told my wife I was getting a haircut. She said "which one?"
> :-)
>

You have more than one? Lucky stiff! :-)

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>> Speaking of long nights, did you catch the news the other night
>>> about the two line pilots falling asleep and overshooting their
>>> destination
>> on
>>> one of the Hawaiian Islands? Apparently they were all coupled up on
>>> cruise and went right through the VOR null. ATC woke them up going
>>> outbound on the reciprocal. I missed on how far out they got, but
>>> one things' for sure. There wasn't much in front of them to land on
>>> and
>> they
>>> were supposedly fueled up for the short haul.
>>> Unbelievable :-)))))
>>>
>>
>> Oh completely believable!
>> BTW, we don't use VORs anymore except to update the inertial stuff,
>> if even that. If we fly to a VOR it could just as well be any other
>> waypoint in the box for the nav value it's providing. Spooky eh?
>> The both guys falling asleep is enough of an issue that they have
>> alarms in the flight deck that go off if you don't play with
>> something for over 15 minutes. Best thing to do if you're both
>> feeling dozy is for one guy to get very uncomfortable and the other
>> to take a 15 minute nap. Our human factors training even gives advice
>> on how to power nap and my company condones the practice. The
>> alternative is uncontroled microsleep ( when your head nods for a few
>> seocnds and you wake up again abruptly) which is completely beyond
>> even the most determined person's control and is very dangerous if
>> it;'s happening on approach.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> Don't know if these guys were on the INS or something else, but I
> vaguely recall somebody mentioning VOR. Could have been an early inter
> island shuttle type if so. I didn't catch the type involved.
> You know the press....if they missed a waypoint, that's a VOR!

Oh it could have been a VOR, the point is the Fligh tManagement System just
treats them like any other point in space. it doesn't use them to naviaget,
only to check it's position. So when we fly to one we aren't using any
direct info from the VOR.

I thnk it was an Airbus, but it's happened quite a lot over the years.
First exposure I had to it was on a DC-7. I was jumpseating and woke up in
some heavy weather to see both pilots out cold and the FE messing around
with something up front. A friend of mine was deadheading on a ANT 124 and
went up to ask the crew if they wanted some coffee when they were mid-
atlantic and there was nobody in the flight deck! They'd all gone to bed.

There's a cartoon about it here, scroll down a bit

http://www.aviatorwebsite.com/acatalog/airline-greeting-cards.html

And the old saw "I'd like to die in my sleep like my buddy Joe did, and not
in screaming teror like his passengers"
There was a very good cartoon depicting two guys snoring away and drooling
on aredey with the caption, "Ever vigilant, the Captain scans the overhead
panel while the copilot checks the status of the window heat with his
cheek.

Thing is, we're only human and this area falls firmly into the territory of
what I was talking about before regarding vigilance.

Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>
>>>> Speaking of long nights, did you catch the news the other night
>>>> about the two line pilots falling asleep and overshooting their
>>>> destination
>>> on
>>>> one of the Hawaiian Islands? Apparently they were all coupled up on
>>>> cruise and went right through the VOR null. ATC woke them up going
>>>> outbound on the reciprocal. I missed on how far out they got, but
>>>> one things' for sure. There wasn't much in front of them to land on
>>>> and
>>> they
>>>> were supposedly fueled up for the short haul.
>>>> Unbelievable :-)))))
>>>>
>>> Oh completely believable!
>>> BTW, we don't use VORs anymore except to update the inertial stuff,
>>> if even that. If we fly to a VOR it could just as well be any other
>>> waypoint in the box for the nav value it's providing. Spooky eh?
>>> The both guys falling asleep is enough of an issue that they have
>>> alarms in the flight deck that go off if you don't play with
>>> something for over 15 minutes. Best thing to do if you're both
>>> feeling dozy is for one guy to get very uncomfortable and the other
>>> to take a 15 minute nap. Our human factors training even gives advice
>>> on how to power nap and my company condones the practice. The
>>> alternative is uncontroled microsleep ( when your head nods for a few
>>> seocnds and you wake up again abruptly) which is completely beyond
>>> even the most determined person's control and is very dangerous if
>>> it;'s happening on approach.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> Don't know if these guys were on the INS or something else, but I
>> vaguely recall somebody mentioning VOR. Could have been an early inter
>> island shuttle type if so. I didn't catch the type involved.
>> You know the press....if they missed a waypoint, that's a VOR!
>
> Oh it could have been a VOR, the point is the Fligh tManagement System just
> treats them like any other point in space. it doesn't use them to naviaget,
> only to check it's position. So when we fly to one we aren't using any
> direct info from the VOR.
>
> I thnk it was an Airbus, but it's happened quite a lot over the years.
> First exposure I had to it was on a DC-7. I was jumpseating and woke up in
> some heavy weather to see both pilots out cold and the FE messing around
> with something up front. A friend of mine was deadheading on a ANT 124 and
> went up to ask the crew if they wanted some coffee when they were mid-
> atlantic and there was nobody in the flight deck! They'd all gone to bed.
>
> There's a cartoon about it here, scroll down a bit
>
> http://www.aviatorwebsite.com/acatalog/airline-greeting-cards.html
>
> And the old saw "I'd like to die in my sleep like my buddy Joe did, and not
> in screaming teror like his passengers"
> There was a very good cartoon depicting two guys snoring away and drooling
> on aredey with the caption, "Ever vigilant, the Captain scans the overhead
> panel while the copilot checks the status of the window heat with his
> cheek.
>
> Thing is, we're only human and this area falls firmly into the territory of
> what I was talking about before regarding vigilance.
>
> Bertie
Great cartoon!

So true. We are after all, only human..........MOST of us that is!! :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>> Hey...I told my wife I was getting a haircut. She said "which one?"
>
> You've got more than one?
>
>
> Bertie

Hold on....I'm counting.........3 I think!!!

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:



> From what you are saying I think you came a bit after me. I just
> can't
> remember if Size bought the operation from Vito or sold it to him.
> You are right about Cristaldi and the T34. I've flown that T34 myself
> having been a check pilot in that aircraft for CAP while I was there.
> Lou was also a CAP check pilot. They kept it in the Tee Hangars way
> down to the left of the flight office toward the big water tower. That
> was a nice T34 BTW.
> I remember having a student named Jordan who owned a Cessna 170 based
> there. His father was an insurance guru. They lived in a virtual
> palace in Villanova. :-))

Yeah, must ahve been a few yeas earlier. HiLine ust have been the FBO's
name and went with your guy. Pretty sure Vito was a partner with Vern.
He sure didn;t drive an instructors car ( you know,a 12 year old
plymouth that had to be push started) He had a Chrysler Imperial,

I nearly cry every time I see the shopping center that's replaced the
airport. Also, the "Montgomeryville Mart" behind the field is also gone
What a magical place that was! Sort of an early Wal-mart/flea market
where the hillbillies were their own bosses instead of corporate
automatons. Wonder if Ken had a stand seling mexican jumping beans or
something?
Always full of cheap and wonderful goo gaws you would never see anywhere
else. It was just north of the field. Someone landed in it once. Someone
also hit Charlie Chips one day. That was a suicide and IIRC just before
my time.
The Charlie Chips offices are now an adult book store. I think
Friendlies is now a KFC or something.
When I started there the north half of the runway was still unpaved, but
it was paved full length by the time I finished my private. Winter ops
were on the southern part of the runway only, if possible.



Bertie



Bertie
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>> Hey...I told my wife I was getting a haircut. She said "which one?"
>>
>> You've got more than one?
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Hold on....I'm counting.........3 I think!!!
>

So, the treatment is working! ;)

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Speaking of long nights, did you catch the news the other night
>>>>> about the two line pilots falling asleep and overshooting their
>>>>> destination
>>>> on
>>>>> one of the Hawaiian Islands? Apparently they were all coupled up
>>>>> on cruise and went right through the VOR null. ATC woke them up
>>>>> going outbound on the reciprocal. I missed on how far out they
>>>>> got, but one things' for sure. There wasn't much in front of them
>>>>> to land on and
>>>> they
>>>>> were supposedly fueled up for the short haul.
>>>>> Unbelievable :-)))))
>>>>>
>>>> Oh completely believable!
>>>> BTW, we don't use VORs anymore except to update the inertial stuff,
>>>> if even that. If we fly to a VOR it could just as well be any other
>>>> waypoint in the box for the nav value it's providing. Spooky eh?
>>>> The both guys falling asleep is enough of an issue that they have
>>>> alarms in the flight deck that go off if you don't play with
>>>> something for over 15 minutes. Best thing to do if you're both
>>>> feeling dozy is for one guy to get very uncomfortable and the other
>>>> to take a 15 minute nap. Our human factors training even gives
>>>> advice on how to power nap and my company condones the practice.
>>>> The alternative is uncontroled microsleep ( when your head nods for
>>>> a few seocnds and you wake up again abruptly) which is completely
>>>> beyond even the most determined person's control and is very
>>>> dangerous if it;'s happening on approach.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>> Don't know if these guys were on the INS or something else, but I
>>> vaguely recall somebody mentioning VOR. Could have been an early
>>> inter island shuttle type if so. I didn't catch the type involved.
>>> You know the press....if they missed a waypoint, that's a VOR!
>>
>> Oh it could have been a VOR, the point is the Fligh tManagement
>> System just treats them like any other point in space. it doesn't use
>> them to naviaget, only to check it's position. So when we fly to one
>> we aren't using any direct info from the VOR.
>>
>> I thnk it was an Airbus, but it's happened quite a lot over the
>> years. First exposure I had to it was on a DC-7. I was jumpseating
>> and woke up in some heavy weather to see both pilots out cold and the
>> FE messing around with something up front. A friend of mine was
>> deadheading on a ANT 124 and went up to ask the crew if they wanted
>> some coffee when they were mid- atlantic and there was nobody in the
>> flight deck! They'd all gone to bed.
>>
>> There's a cartoon about it here, scroll down a bit
>>
>> http://www.aviatorwebsite.com/acatalog/airline-greeting-cards.html
>>
>> And the old saw "I'd like to die in my sleep like my buddy Joe did,
>> and not in screaming teror like his passengers"
>> There was a very good cartoon depicting two guys snoring away and
>> drooling on aredey with the caption, "Ever vigilant, the Captain
>> scans the overhead panel while the copilot checks the status of the
>> window heat with his cheek.
>>
>> Thing is, we're only human and this area falls firmly into the
>> territory of what I was talking about before regarding vigilance.
>>
>> Bertie
> Great cartoon!
>
> So true. We are after all, only human..........MOST of us that is!!
> :-))
>

The other one I described was even better and on every bulliten board of
every airline on the planet ( except Germany and Singapore) for a
couple of years. I have it somewhere, but where I have no idea.
Bottom line is ost airines allow naps on the flight deck if the need
arises. Oin some long haul stuff they send extra crew to cover so the
sleepyhead can go to the bunk if there is one. Doing ten hours with
nothing to do but follow a pink string and chekc the fuel every hour can
put anyone to sleep!

Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>
>
>> From what you are saying I think you came a bit after me. I just
>> can't
>> remember if Size bought the operation from Vito or sold it to him.
>> You are right about Cristaldi and the T34. I've flown that T34 myself
>> having been a check pilot in that aircraft for CAP while I was there.
>> Lou was also a CAP check pilot. They kept it in the Tee Hangars way
>> down to the left of the flight office toward the big water tower. That
>> was a nice T34 BTW.
>> I remember having a student named Jordan who owned a Cessna 170 based
>> there. His father was an insurance guru. They lived in a virtual
>> palace in Villanova. :-))
>
> Yeah, must ahve been a few yeas earlier. HiLine ust have been the FBO's
> name and went with your guy. Pretty sure Vito was a partner with Vern.
> He sure didn;t drive an instructors car ( you know,a 12 year old
> plymouth that had to be push started) He had a Chrysler Imperial,
>
> I nearly cry every time I see the shopping center that's replaced the
> airport. Also, the "Montgomeryville Mart" behind the field is also gone
> What a magical place that was! Sort of an early Wal-mart/flea market
> where the hillbillies were their own bosses instead of corporate
> automatons. Wonder if Ken had a stand seling mexican jumping beans or
> something?
> Always full of cheap and wonderful goo gaws you would never see anywhere
> else. It was just north of the field. Someone landed in it once. Someone
> also hit Charlie Chips one day. That was a suicide and IIRC just before
> my time.
> The Charlie Chips offices are now an adult book store. I think
> Friendlies is now a KFC or something.
> When I started there the north half of the runway was still unpaved, but
> it was paved full length by the time I finished my private. Winter ops
> were on the southern part of the runway only, if possible.
>
>
>
> Bertie
>
>
>
> Bertie
>
My memories of the place include climbing that damn tower to check the
beacon one winter day with the air temp in the teens. There was a small
restaurant right next to the property if you walked out to the highway
and turned right. We used to walk over there and drink all their coffee.
You're right. Those were great days.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>> Hey...I told my wife I was getting a haircut. She said "which one?"
>>> You've got more than one?
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> Hold on....I'm counting.........3 I think!!!
>>
>
> So, the treatment is working! ;)
>
> Bertie

I think it's Cy's Hair Club for Men :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Speaking of long nights, did you catch the news the other night
>>>>>> about the two line pilots falling asleep and overshooting their
>>>>>> destination
>>>>> on
>>>>>> one of the Hawaiian Islands? Apparently they were all coupled up
>>>>>> on cruise and went right through the VOR null. ATC woke them up
>>>>>> going outbound on the reciprocal. I missed on how far out they
>>>>>> got, but one things' for sure. There wasn't much in front of them
>>>>>> to land on and
>>>>> they
>>>>>> were supposedly fueled up for the short haul.
>>>>>> Unbelievable :-)))))
>>>>>>
>>>>> Oh completely believable!
>>>>> BTW, we don't use VORs anymore except to update the inertial stuff,
>>>>> if even that. If we fly to a VOR it could just as well be any other
>>>>> waypoint in the box for the nav value it's providing. Spooky eh?
>>>>> The both guys falling asleep is enough of an issue that they have
>>>>> alarms in the flight deck that go off if you don't play with
>>>>> something for over 15 minutes. Best thing to do if you're both
>>>>> feeling dozy is for one guy to get very uncomfortable and the other
>>>>> to take a 15 minute nap. Our human factors training even gives
>>>>> advice on how to power nap and my company condones the practice.
>>>>> The alternative is uncontroled microsleep ( when your head nods for
>>>>> a few seocnds and you wake up again abruptly) which is completely
>>>>> beyond even the most determined person's control and is very
>>>>> dangerous if it;'s happening on approach.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>
>>>> Don't know if these guys were on the INS or something else, but I
>>>> vaguely recall somebody mentioning VOR. Could have been an early
>>>> inter island shuttle type if so. I didn't catch the type involved.
>>>> You know the press....if they missed a waypoint, that's a VOR!
>>> Oh it could have been a VOR, the point is the Fligh tManagement
>>> System just treats them like any other point in space. it doesn't use
>>> them to naviaget, only to check it's position. So when we fly to one
>>> we aren't using any direct info from the VOR.
>>>
>>> I thnk it was an Airbus, but it's happened quite a lot over the
>>> years. First exposure I had to it was on a DC-7. I was jumpseating
>>> and woke up in some heavy weather to see both pilots out cold and the
>>> FE messing around with something up front. A friend of mine was
>>> deadheading on a ANT 124 and went up to ask the crew if they wanted
>>> some coffee when they were mid- atlantic and there was nobody in the
>>> flight deck! They'd all gone to bed.
>>>
>>> There's a cartoon about it here, scroll down a bit
>>>
>>> http://www.aviatorwebsite.com/acatalog/airline-greeting-cards.html
>>>
>>> And the old saw "I'd like to die in my sleep like my buddy Joe did,
>>> and not in screaming teror like his passengers"
>>> There was a very good cartoon depicting two guys snoring away and
>>> drooling on aredey with the caption, "Ever vigilant, the Captain
>>> scans the overhead panel while the copilot checks the status of the
>>> window heat with his cheek.
>>>
>>> Thing is, we're only human and this area falls firmly into the
>>> territory of what I was talking about before regarding vigilance.
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> Great cartoon!
>>
>> So true. We are after all, only human..........MOST of us that is!!
>> :-))
>>
>
> The other one I described was even better and on every bulliten board of
> every airline on the planet ( except Germany and Singapore) for a
> couple of years. I have it somewhere, but where I have no idea.
> Bottom line is ost airines allow naps on the flight deck if the need
> arises. Oin some long haul stuff they send extra crew to cover so the
> sleepyhead can go to the bunk if there is one. Doing ten hours with
> nothing to do but follow a pink string and chekc the fuel every hour can
> put anyone to sleep!
>
> Bertie

I noticed that myself when flying the DC8 up to Fairbanks. God it gets
boring sitting there like that. You look at the panel; look
outside...nothing there...it's 1AM :-) You check the panel again...all
as before.....you swap a few jokes with the right seat....heard um all
before.....recheck the panel.....AH HA!!! COFFEE!!! God I loved
Capital's Stews!! Of course those were the days when a stew was a STEW!!
Nowadays I don't know. Some of the stews today are so light in the
loafers they can fly without the airplane :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>
>>> From what you are saying I think you came a bit after me. I just
>>> can't
>>> remember if Size bought the operation from Vito or sold it to him.
>>> You are right about Cristaldi and the T34. I've flown that T34
>>> myself having been a check pilot in that aircraft for CAP while I
>>> was there. Lou was also a CAP check pilot. They kept it in the Tee
>>> Hangars way down to the left of the flight office toward the big
>>> water tower. That was a nice T34 BTW.
>>> I remember having a student named Jordan who owned a Cessna 170
>>> based there. His father was an insurance guru. They lived in a
>>> virtual palace in Villanova. :-))
>>
>> Yeah, must ahve been a few yeas earlier. HiLine ust have been the
>> FBO's name and went with your guy. Pretty sure Vito was a partner
>> with Vern. He sure didn;t drive an instructors car ( you know,a 12
>> year old plymouth that had to be push started) He had a Chrysler
>> Imperial,
>>
>> I nearly cry every time I see the shopping center that's replaced the
>> airport. Also, the "Montgomeryville Mart" behind the field is also
>> gone What a magical place that was! Sort of an early Wal-mart/flea
>> market where the hillbillies were their own bosses instead of
>> corporate automatons. Wonder if Ken had a stand seling mexican
>> jumping beans or something?
>> Always full of cheap and wonderful goo gaws you would never see
>> anywhere else. It was just north of the field. Someone landed in it
>> once. Someone also hit Charlie Chips one day. That was a suicide and
>> IIRC just before my time.
>> The Charlie Chips offices are now an adult book store. I think
>> Friendlies is now a KFC or something.
>> When I started there the north half of the runway was still unpaved,
>> but it was paved full length by the time I finished my private.
>> Winter ops were on the southern part of the runway only, if possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> My memories of the place include climbing that damn tower to check the
> beacon one winter day with the air temp in the teens. There was a
> small restaurant right next to the property if you walked out to the
> highway and turned right. We used to walk over there and drink all
> their coffee. You're right. Those were great days.
>

Oh yeah, the 309 diner. It was one of those stainless steel things that
were slightly bigger than the old "railway car" type, but still only
about a dozen tables. They had great burgers. The worst thing about
Montgomeryville were the crappy T hangars. I remenber having to have
someone come over with a tractor to get the doors open on more than one
occasion.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Speaking of long nights, did you catch the news the other night
>>>>>>> about the two line pilots falling asleep and overshooting their
>>>>>>> destination
>>>>>> on
>>>>>>> one of the Hawaiian Islands? Apparently they were all coupled up
>>>>>>> on cruise and went right through the VOR null. ATC woke them up
>>>>>>> going outbound on the reciprocal. I missed on how far out they
>>>>>>> got, but one things' for sure. There wasn't much in front of
>>>>>>> them to land on and
>>>>>> they
>>>>>>> were supposedly fueled up for the short haul.
>>>>>>> Unbelievable :-)))))
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh completely believable!
>>>>>> BTW, we don't use VORs anymore except to update the inertial
>>>>>> stuff, if even that. If we fly to a VOR it could just as well be
>>>>>> any other waypoint in the box for the nav value it's providing.
>>>>>> Spooky eh? The both guys falling asleep is enough of an issue
>>>>>> that they have alarms in the flight deck that go off if you don't
>>>>>> play with something for over 15 minutes. Best thing to do if
>>>>>> you're both feeling dozy is for one guy to get very uncomfortable
>>>>>> and the other to take a 15 minute nap. Our human factors training
>>>>>> even gives advice on how to power nap and my company condones the
>>>>>> practice. The alternative is uncontroled microsleep ( when your
>>>>>> head nods for a few seocnds and you wake up again abruptly) which
>>>>>> is completely beyond even the most determined person's control
>>>>>> and is very dangerous if it;'s happening on approach.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>
>>>>> Don't know if these guys were on the INS or something else, but I
>>>>> vaguely recall somebody mentioning VOR. Could have been an early
>>>>> inter island shuttle type if so. I didn't catch the type involved.
>>>>> You know the press....if they missed a waypoint, that's a VOR!
>>>> Oh it could have been a VOR, the point is the Fligh tManagement
>>>> System just treats them like any other point in space. it doesn't
>>>> use them to naviaget, only to check it's position. So when we fly
>>>> to one we aren't using any direct info from the VOR.
>>>>
>>>> I thnk it was an Airbus, but it's happened quite a lot over the
>>>> years. First exposure I had to it was on a DC-7. I was jumpseating
>>>> and woke up in some heavy weather to see both pilots out cold and
>>>> the FE messing around with something up front. A friend of mine was
>>>> deadheading on a ANT 124 and went up to ask the crew if they wanted
>>>> some coffee when they were mid- atlantic and there was nobody in
>>>> the flight deck! They'd all gone to bed.
>>>>
>>>> There's a cartoon about it here, scroll down a bit
>>>>
>>>> http://www.aviatorwebsite.com/acatalog/airline-greeting-cards.html
>>>>
>>>> And the old saw "I'd like to die in my sleep like my buddy Joe did,
>>>> and not in screaming teror like his passengers"
>>>> There was a very good cartoon depicting two guys snoring away and
>>>> drooling on aredey with the caption, "Ever vigilant, the Captain
>>>> scans the overhead panel while the copilot checks the status of the
>>>> window heat with his cheek.
>>>>
>>>> Thing is, we're only human and this area falls firmly into the
>>>> territory of what I was talking about before regarding vigilance.
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>> Great cartoon!
>>>
>>> So true. We are after all, only human..........MOST of us that is!!
>>> :-))
>>>
>>
>> The other one I described was even better and on every bulliten board
>> of every airline on the planet ( except Germany and Singapore) for a
>> couple of years. I have it somewhere, but where I have no idea.
>> Bottom line is ost airines allow naps on the flight deck if the need
>> arises. Oin some long haul stuff they send extra crew to cover so the
>> sleepyhead can go to the bunk if there is one. Doing ten hours with
>> nothing to do but follow a pink string and chekc the fuel every hour
>> can put anyone to sleep!
>>
>> Bertie
>
> I noticed that myself when flying the DC8 up to Fairbanks. God it gets
> boring sitting there like that. You look at the panel; look
> outside...nothing there...it's 1AM :-) You check the panel again...all
> as before.....you swap a few jokes with the right seat....heard um all
> before.....recheck the panel.....AH HA!!! COFFEE!!!


Yeah, aside from anything else, the coffee ritual occupies your
attention for a few minutes. A bit of comfort.
You're right, though. can be exruciatingly boring.
with a two crew aircraft you're never al that comfotable getting up to
stretch your legs, either, espeially if you got a new kid with you.

God I loved
> Capital's Stews!! Of course those were the days when a stew was a
> STEW!! Nowadays I don't know. Some of the stews today are so light in
> the loafers they can fly without the airplane :-)
>

Oh 'I think they were always there.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> From what you are saying I think you came a bit after me. I just
>>>> can't
>>>> remember if Size bought the operation from Vito or sold it to him.
>>>> You are right about Cristaldi and the T34. I've flown that T34
>>>> myself having been a check pilot in that aircraft for CAP while I
>>>> was there. Lou was also a CAP check pilot. They kept it in the Tee
>>>> Hangars way down to the left of the flight office toward the big
>>>> water tower. That was a nice T34 BTW.
>>>> I remember having a student named Jordan who owned a Cessna 170
>>>> based there. His father was an insurance guru. They lived in a
>>>> virtual palace in Villanova. :-))
>>> Yeah, must ahve been a few yeas earlier. HiLine ust have been the
>>> FBO's name and went with your guy. Pretty sure Vito was a partner
>>> with Vern. He sure didn;t drive an instructors car ( you know,a 12
>>> year old plymouth that had to be push started) He had a Chrysler
>>> Imperial,
>>>
>>> I nearly cry every time I see the shopping center that's replaced the
>>> airport. Also, the "Montgomeryville Mart" behind the field is also
>>> gone What a magical place that was! Sort of an early Wal-mart/flea
>>> market where the hillbillies were their own bosses instead of
>>> corporate automatons. Wonder if Ken had a stand seling mexican
>>> jumping beans or something?
>>> Always full of cheap and wonderful goo gaws you would never see
>>> anywhere else. It was just north of the field. Someone landed in it
>>> once. Someone also hit Charlie Chips one day. That was a suicide and
>>> IIRC just before my time.
>>> The Charlie Chips offices are now an adult book store. I think
>>> Friendlies is now a KFC or something.
>>> When I started there the north half of the runway was still unpaved,
>>> but it was paved full length by the time I finished my private.
>>> Winter ops were on the southern part of the runway only, if possible.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> My memories of the place include climbing that damn tower to check the
>> beacon one winter day with the air temp in the teens. There was a
>> small restaurant right next to the property if you walked out to the
>> highway and turned right. We used to walk over there and drink all
>> their coffee. You're right. Those were great days.
>>
>
> Oh yeah, the 309 diner. It was one of those stainless steel things that
> were slightly bigger than the old "railway car" type, but still only
> about a dozen tables. They had great burgers. The worst thing about
> Montgomeryville were the crappy T hangars. I remenber having to have
> someone come over with a tractor to get the doors open on more than one
> occasion.
>
>
> Bertie
>
That's the place! I can taste those burgers now. I smothered mine in
fried onions and laced it with Ketchup. On a good day, as I was walking
back to the flight office, if I had been wearing roller skates, I could
have given a great demonstration of Newton's Third....if you follow my
drift here :-))
I think they finally rebuilt the Tee Hangars. The one the T34 was in was
fairly new. It had a small office in it as well.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> From what you are saying I think you came a bit after me. I just
>>>>> can't
>>>>> remember if Size bought the operation from Vito or sold it to him.
>>>>> You are right about Cristaldi and the T34. I've flown that T34
>>>>> myself having been a check pilot in that aircraft for CAP while I
>>>>> was there. Lou was also a CAP check pilot. They kept it in the Tee
>>>>> Hangars way down to the left of the flight office toward the big
>>>>> water tower. That was a nice T34 BTW.
>>>>> I remember having a student named Jordan who owned a Cessna 170
>>>>> based there. His father was an insurance guru. They lived in a
>>>>> virtual palace in Villanova. :-))
>>>> Yeah, must ahve been a few yeas earlier. HiLine ust have been the
>>>> FBO's name and went with your guy. Pretty sure Vito was a partner
>>>> with Vern. He sure didn;t drive an instructors car ( you know,a 12
>>>> year old plymouth that had to be push started) He had a Chrysler
>>>> Imperial,
>>>>
>>>> I nearly cry every time I see the shopping center that's replaced
the
>>>> airport. Also, the "Montgomeryville Mart" behind the field is also
>>>> gone What a magical place that was! Sort of an early Wal-mart/flea
>>>> market where the hillbillies were their own bosses instead of
>>>> corporate automatons. Wonder if Ken had a stand seling mexican
>>>> jumping beans or something?
>>>> Always full of cheap and wonderful goo gaws you would never see
>>>> anywhere else. It was just north of the field. Someone landed in it
>>>> once. Someone also hit Charlie Chips one day. That was a suicide
and
>>>> IIRC just before my time.
>>>> The Charlie Chips offices are now an adult book store. I think
>>>> Friendlies is now a KFC or something.
>>>> When I started there the north half of the runway was still
unpaved,
>>>> but it was paved full length by the time I finished my private.
>>>> Winter ops were on the southern part of the runway only, if
possible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>> My memories of the place include climbing that damn tower to check
the
>>> beacon one winter day with the air temp in the teens. There was a
>>> small restaurant right next to the property if you walked out to the
>>> highway and turned right. We used to walk over there and drink all
>>> their coffee. You're right. Those were great days.
>>>
>>
>> Oh yeah, the 309 diner. It was one of those stainless steel things
that
>> were slightly bigger than the old "railway car" type, but still only
>> about a dozen tables. They had great burgers. The worst thing about
>> Montgomeryville were the crappy T hangars. I remenber having to have
>> someone come over with a tractor to get the doors open on more than
one
>> occasion.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> That's the place! I can taste those burgers now. I smothered mine in
> fried onions and laced it with Ketchup. On a good day, as I was
walking
> back to the flight office, if I had been wearing roller skates, I
could
> have given a great demonstration of Newton's Third....if you follow my
> drift here :-))
> I think they finally rebuilt the Tee Hangars. The one the T34 was in
was
> fairly new. It had a small office in it as well.
>

Nah, they got worse to the end, though a new row was added about 1972
and they were better. Montgomeryville died about 1978. We flew over in a
flight of three Stearmans that day. I have no idea when the airport came
to be, though.


Bertie

[Roger[_4_]]

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:46:34 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>"Kloudy via AviationKB.com" <u33403@uwe> wrote in
>news:8180da195218d@uwe:
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>Dan > wrote in news:252806d9-1056-4209-b52b-
:
>>>
>>
>>>
>>>Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>>>
>>>Bertie
>>
>> Oh good lord, man.
>>
>> To make sure they're down!
>>
>>
>> *geeez.*
>>
>
>I would have thought the difficulty in turning the engine over would
>suffice. Though I bet it's been tried!

Some years back I watched a guy in a Mooney try a go-around after the
gear failed to jack it up high enough for the prop to quit leaving
chaw marks. He (or the guy in the right seat) realized the folly in
that and then gave up. Starting at the numbers there was a line of
chaw marks fairly far apart which suddenly got real close together.
Then there was a couple hundred feet of clean runway followed by more
wide spaced chaw marks and then skid marks. He slid over half a mile
before leaving the runway.

I walked the runway to pick up "spare parts" and shot photos along the
way. I should post those. I also have a nice shot of a Beech
Mousekateer...er Musketeer setting mostly on its nose with its tail
feathers sticking way up in the air after doing a very nice imitation
of a Porpoise while landing down wind and in front of a large crowd.

I was the one interviewed as a witness. I only answered what I was
asked. I pointed out the bent push rod for the starboard main which
would not put the gear down. I did not offer my opinion it got that
way from trying to jack up the airplane while it was sliding on the
gear doors. No one asked about the melted tire rubber on the inside
of the nose gear doors.<:-))

Actually it did surprisingly little damage to the outside. Of course
it meant a complete engine tear down and new prop.
>
>
>
>
>Bertie
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:45:37 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>"Bob F." > wrote in
:
>
>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no matter
>> what you do with the switches.
>>
>
>Though I knew some tit who used to pull the lever up at the start of the
>take off roll and rely on the prox switch on the gear to do the rest for
>him.
>
>Guess what?
>
Ahhhh...Don't the struts start to extend long before the plane is
ready to fly?<:-))

>
>Bertie
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[[email protected]]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> wrote in :

> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> wrote in
> >> :
> >
> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >
> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd
> >> >> >> > Aero
> >> >> >> Commander
> >> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the gear
> >> sucks
> >> >> up
> >> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the thing
> >> gets
> >> >> >> > airborne.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly
> >> >> >> > skin
> >> and
> >> >> >> > more paint.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Semantics.
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> No, seperate checklist.
> >> >
> >> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
> >> >
> >> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
> >> >
> >> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist
> >> procedures".
> >> >
> >> > It then has:
> >> >
> >> > preflight inspection
> >> > before starting engine
> >> > starting engine
> >> > before takeoff
> >> > takeoff
> >> > etc.
> >> >
> >> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight inspection
> >> > and before starting engine.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >> But not in the before takeoff checks.
> >> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety inspection (
> >> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned) And
> >> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
> >> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down at
> >> that point.
> >
> > Semantics.
> >

> Nope. Different stages of operation distinct from each other.

Nope. There is but one checklist.

There are subsection for normal landing, short field landing, etc.,
but it is one checklist

> > The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to perform before
> > each flight.
> >
> > There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety inspection"
> > anywhere in it.
> >
> > YMMV with other POH's.


> No, not a POH at all.
> So, your preflight checklist includes the runup? Not even a cub does
> that.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm referring to the book with the big Cessna logo on the cover which
says 172RG.

And it includes runup.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Roger > wrote in
:

>
> Some years back I watched a guy in a Mooney try a go-around after the
> gear failed to jack it up high enough for the prop to quit leaving
> chaw marks. He (or the guy in the right seat) realized the folly in
> that and then gave up. Starting at the numbers there was a line of
> chaw marks fairly far apart which suddenly got real close together.
> Then there was a couple hundred feet of clean runway followed by more
> wide spaced chaw marks and then skid marks. He slid over half a mile
> before leaving the runway.

Sorry, I'm a bit confused. How did it happen? it just wasn;t down to
begin with or did it begin to retract after touchdown?


I had a drag link fail on a Twin Beech landing once and we went off the
side of the runway and bent the prop. they just bolted a new one on
overnight and we were flying it the next day.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Roger > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:45:37 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>"Bob F." > wrote in
:
>>
>>> Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
matter
>>> what you do with the switches.
>>>
>>
>>Though I knew some tit who used to pull the lever up at the start of
the
>>take off roll and rely on the prox switch on the gear to do the rest
for
>>him.
>>
>>Guess what?
>>
> Ahhhh...Don't the struts start to extend long before the plane is
> ready to fly?<:-))
>

I suppose you could push hard and then rotate sharply. Lots of idiots
out there.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

wrote in :

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> wrote in news:n3fgb5-fbb.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:
>
>> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> wrote in
>> >> :
>> >
>> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
>> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >
>> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
>> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd
>> >> >> >> > Aero
>> >> >> >> Commander
>> >> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the
gear
>> >> sucks
>> >> >> up
>> >> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the
thing
>> >> gets
>> >> >> >> > airborne.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly
>> >> >> >> > skin
>> >> and
>> >> >> >> > more paint.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Semantics.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> No, seperate checklist.
>> >> >
>> >> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
>> >> >
>> >> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
>> >> >
>> >> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist
>> >> procedures".
>> >> >
>> >> > It then has:
>> >> >
>> >> > preflight inspection
>> >> > before starting engine
>> >> > starting engine
>> >> > before takeoff
>> >> > takeoff
>> >> > etc.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight
inspection
>> >> > and before starting engine.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>> >> But not in the before takeoff checks.
>> >> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety
inspection (
>> >> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned) And
>> >> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
>> >> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down
at
>> >> that point.
>> >
>> > Semantics.
>> >
>
>> Nope. Different stages of operation distinct from each other.
>
> Nope. There is but one checklist.
>
> There are subsection for normal landing, short field landing, etc.,
> but it is one checklist
>
>> > The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to perform before
>> > each flight.
>> >
>> > There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety inspection"
>> > anywhere in it.
>> >
>> > YMMV with other POH's.
>
>
>> No, not a POH at all.
>> So, your preflight checklist includes the runup? Not even a cub does
>> that.
>
> I have no idea what you are talking about.

Apparently.
>
> I'm referring to the book with the big Cessna logo on the cover which
> says 172RG.
>
> And it includes runup.


I'm sure it does. So you use one long checklist fot the preflight,
startup and before takeoff checks?

That wouldn't be a checklist it would be a "how to fly a 172" set of
instructions.


Bertie

>
>

[[email protected]]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> wrote in :

> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> wrote in news:n3fgb5-fbb.ln1
> @mail.specsol.com:
> >
> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> wrote in
> >> >> :
> >> >
> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and upholsterd
> >> >> >> >> > Aero
> >> >> >> >> Commander
> >> >> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the
> gear
> >> >> sucks
> >> >> >> up
> >> >> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the
> thing
> >> >> gets
> >> >> >> >> > airborne.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new belly
> >> >> >> >> > skin
> >> >> and
> >> >> >> >> > more paint.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Semantics.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> No, seperate checklist.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist
> >> >> procedures".
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It then has:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > preflight inspection
> >> >> > before starting engine
> >> >> > starting engine
> >> >> > before takeoff
> >> >> > takeoff
> >> >> > etc.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight
> inspection
> >> >> > and before starting engine.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> But not in the before takeoff checks.
> >> >> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety
> inspection (
> >> >> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned) And
> >> >> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
> >> >> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt down
> at
> >> >> that point.
> >> >
> >> > Semantics.
> >> >
> >
> >> Nope. Different stages of operation distinct from each other.
> >
> > Nope. There is but one checklist.
> >
> > There are subsection for normal landing, short field landing, etc.,
> > but it is one checklist
> >
> >> > The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to perform before
> >> > each flight.
> >> >
> >> > There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety inspection"
> >> > anywhere in it.
> >> >
> >> > YMMV with other POH's.
> >
> >
> >> No, not a POH at all.
> >> So, your preflight checklist includes the runup? Not even a cub does
> >> that.
> >
> > I have no idea what you are talking about.

> Apparently.
> >
> > I'm referring to the book with the big Cessna logo on the cover which
> > says 172RG.
> >
> > And it includes runup.


> I'm sure it does. So you use one long checklist fot the preflight,
> startup and before takeoff checks?

Yep.

That's how the instructor doing the training for the complex endorsement
said to do it; follow the manual checklist.

> That wouldn't be a checklist it would be a "how to fly a 172" set of
> instructions.

Nope.

The detail stuff is elsewhere.

The checklist for my Tiger follows the same format.

Hmmm, I looked in the manuals for the 152, 172N and 172R; same format.

The only one that doesn't follow that format is the Cherokee Warrior
from 1973.

I don't have a manual for a Cub.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

wrote in :

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> wrote in news:p6qgb5-fuc.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:
>
>> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> wrote in news:n3fgb5-fbb.ln1
>> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >
>> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> wrote in
>> >> >> :
>> >> >
>> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
>> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
>> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and
upholsterd
>> >> >> >> >> > Aero
>> >> >> >> >> Commander
>> >> >> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the
>> gear
>> >> >> sucks
>> >> >> >> up
>> >> >> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the
>> thing
>> >> >> gets
>> >> >> >> >> > airborne.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new
belly
>> >> >> >> >> > skin
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> >> > more paint.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Semantics.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> No, seperate checklist.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist
>> >> >> procedures".
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > It then has:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > preflight inspection
>> >> >> > before starting engine
>> >> >> > starting engine
>> >> >> > before takeoff
>> >> >> > takeoff
>> >> >> > etc.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight
>> inspection
>> >> >> > and before starting engine.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> But not in the before takeoff checks.
>> >> >> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety
>> inspection (
>> >> >> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned)
And
>> >> >> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
>> >> >> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt
down
>> at
>> >> >> that point.
>> >> >
>> >> > Semantics.
>> >> >
>> >
>> >> Nope. Different stages of operation distinct from each other.
>> >
>> > Nope. There is but one checklist.
>> >
>> > There are subsection for normal landing, short field landing, etc.,
>> > but it is one checklist
>> >
>> >> > The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to perform
before
>> >> > each flight.
>> >> >
>> >> > There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety
inspection"
>> >> > anywhere in it.
>> >> >
>> >> > YMMV with other POH's.
>> >
>> >
>> >> No, not a POH at all.
>> >> So, your preflight checklist includes the runup? Not even a cub
does
>> >> that.
>> >
>> > I have no idea what you are talking about.
>
>> Apparently.
>> >
>> > I'm referring to the book with the big Cessna logo on the cover
which
>> > says 172RG.
>> >
>> > And it includes runup.
>
>
>> I'm sure it does. So you use one long checklist fot the preflight,
>> startup and before takeoff checks?
>
> Yep.
>
> That's how the instructor doing the training for the complex
endorsement
> said to do it; follow the manual checklist.
>
>> That wouldn't be a checklist it would be a "how to fly a 172" set of
>> instructions.
>
> Nope.
>
> The detail stuff is elsewhere.
>
> The checklist for my Tiger follows the same format.
>
> Hmmm, I looked in the manuals for the 152, 172N and 172R; same format.
>
> The only one that doesn't follow that format is the Cherokee Warrior
> from 1973.


Then they're not checklists. They're do lists.


Bertie

[Roger[_4_]]

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 05:46:15 -0700 (PDT), Dan >
wrote:

>On Mar 22, 8:41 am, Ron Natalie > wrote:
>>
>> Negatory good buddy. Maybe not the mains, but a lot of planes
>> can get the nose gear going up enough to hit the prop.
>
>The Bonanza mains certainly won't (close inboard), but the nose gear
>-- might.

Note when setting still the mains tilt inward on a Bo.
If you are even rolling slowly they certainly will retract. When they
are rolling you aren't pulling straight sideways and they can move
easily. Once past the over center lock the gear mechanism is holding
them back as they will be trying to come up faster than the motor can
move them.

It gets a bit confusing trying to explain as the first thing the
retraction mechanism does is "open" the inner doors before starting
the actual retraction of the mains. Once that door passes a given
point the gear will come up...OK, the gear will stay on the pavement
and the plane will come down, but the retraction sequence will happen.
many a Bonanza has found itself setting the exhaust stacks while still
on the taxiway.

>
>I really never want to know.
>
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 02:13:23 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>Roger > wrote in
:
>
>>
>> Some years back I watched a guy in a Mooney try a go-around after the
>> gear failed to jack it up high enough for the prop to quit leaving
>> chaw marks. He (or the guy in the right seat) realized the folly in
>> that and then gave up. Starting at the numbers there was a line of
>> chaw marks fairly far apart which suddenly got real close together.
>> Then there was a couple hundred feet of clean runway followed by more
>> wide spaced chaw marks and then skid marks. He slid over half a mile
>> before leaving the runway.
>
>Sorry, I'm a bit confused. How did it happen? it just wasn;t down to
>begin with or did it begin to retract after touchdown?

The guy "said" the gear failed when they set down but my take was he
hit the gear down switch right after that terrible noise started up
front, or too late to prevent it. In either case it appears to me the
thing was trying to raise the plane before the gear was fully
extended. The nose gear doors were still closed as well..
One we had the plane in the harness we were able to lower the gear
with the exception of the starboard side which had the long push rod
badly bent. That we had to drive a 2 X 6 into place to hold it down.

He was about a half mile from me at the numbers and the Mooney sits
very close to the ground so something could have failed as it set
down on the gear which would have been difficult for me to see, but
....

OTOH this was the first flight after the annual.<:-))

>
>
>I had a drag link fail on a Twin Beech landing once and we went off the
>side of the runway and bent the prop. they just bolted a new one on
>overnight and we were flying it the next day.
>
>Bertie
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[[email protected]]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> wrote in :

> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> wrote in news:p6qgb5-fuc.ln1
> @mail.specsol.com:
> >
> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> wrote in news:n3fgb5-fbb.ln1
> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >
> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> wrote in
> >> >> >> :
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
> >> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and
> upholsterd
> >> >> >> >> >> > Aero
> >> >> >> >> >> Commander
> >> >> >> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was) the
> >> gear
> >> >> >> sucks
> >> >> >> >> up
> >> >> >> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but the
> >> thing
> >> >> >> gets
> >> >> >> >> >> > airborne.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new
> belly
> >> >> >> >> >> > skin
> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> >> >> > more paint.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Semantics.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> No, seperate checklist.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called "checklist
> >> >> >> procedures".
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > It then has:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > preflight inspection
> >> >> >> > before starting engine
> >> >> >> > starting engine
> >> >> >> > before takeoff
> >> >> >> > takeoff
> >> >> >> > etc.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight
> >> inspection
> >> >> >> > and before starting engine.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> But not in the before takeoff checks.
> >> >> >> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety
> >> inspection (
> >> >> >> your preflight begins with this, though it is not partitioned)
> And
> >> >> >> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in the
> >> >> >> before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it wasnt
> down
> >> at
> >> >> >> that point.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Semantics.
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Nope. Different stages of operation distinct from each other.
> >> >
> >> > Nope. There is but one checklist.
> >> >
> >> > There are subsection for normal landing, short field landing, etc.,
> >> > but it is one checklist
> >> >
> >> >> > The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to perform
> before
> >> >> > each flight.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety
> inspection"
> >> >> > anywhere in it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > YMMV with other POH's.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> No, not a POH at all.
> >> >> So, your preflight checklist includes the runup? Not even a cub
> does
> >> >> that.
> >> >
> >> > I have no idea what you are talking about.
> >
> >> Apparently.
> >> >
> >> > I'm referring to the book with the big Cessna logo on the cover
> which
> >> > says 172RG.
> >> >
> >> > And it includes runup.
> >
> >
> >> I'm sure it does. So you use one long checklist fot the preflight,
> >> startup and before takeoff checks?
> >
> > Yep.
> >
> > That's how the instructor doing the training for the complex
> endorsement
> > said to do it; follow the manual checklist.
> >
> >> That wouldn't be a checklist it would be a "how to fly a 172" set of
> >> instructions.
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> > The detail stuff is elsewhere.
> >
> > The checklist for my Tiger follows the same format.
> >
> > Hmmm, I looked in the manuals for the 152, 172N and 172R; same format.
> >
> > The only one that doesn't follow that format is the Cherokee Warrior
> > from 1973.

> Then they're not checklists. They're do lists.

Tell that to the FAA who mandated the standardized format a couple
of decades ago.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

wrote in :

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> wrote in
>> :
>
>> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> wrote in news:p6qgb5-fuc.ln1
>> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >
>> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> wrote in news:n3fgb5-fbb.ln1
>> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >
>> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> wrote in
>> >> >> >> :
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
>> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
>> >> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and
>> upholsterd
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Aero
>> >> >> >> >> >> Commander
>> >> >> >> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was)
>> >> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> gear
>> >> >> >> sucks
>> >> >> >> >> up
>> >> >> >> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but
>> >> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >> thing
>> >> >> >> gets
>> >> >> >> >> >> > airborne.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new
>> belly
>> >> >> >> >> >> > skin
>> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> >> >> > more paint.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Semantics.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> No, seperate checklist.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called
>> >> >> >> > "checklist
>> >> >> >> procedures".
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > It then has:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > preflight inspection
>> >> >> >> > before starting engine
>> >> >> >> > starting engine
>> >> >> >> > before takeoff
>> >> >> >> > takeoff
>> >> >> >> > etc.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight
>> >> inspection
>> >> >> >> > and before starting engine.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> But not in the before takeoff checks.
>> >> >> >> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety
>> >> inspection (
>> >> >> >> your preflight begins with this, though it is not
>> >> >> >> partitioned)
>> And
>> >> >> >> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in
>> >> >> >> the before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it
>> >> >> >> wasnt
>> down
>> >> at
>> >> >> >> that point.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Semantics.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> Nope. Different stages of operation distinct from each other.
>> >> >
>> >> > Nope. There is but one checklist.
>> >> >
>> >> > There are subsection for normal landing, short field landing,
>> >> > etc., but it is one checklist
>> >> >
>> >> >> > The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to perform
>> before
>> >> >> > each flight.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety
>> inspection"
>> >> >> > anywhere in it.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > YMMV with other POH's.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> No, not a POH at all.
>> >> >> So, your preflight checklist includes the runup? Not even a cub
>> does
>> >> >> that.
>> >> >
>> >> > I have no idea what you are talking about.
>> >
>> >> Apparently.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm referring to the book with the big Cessna logo on the cover
>> which
>> >> > says 172RG.
>> >> >
>> >> > And it includes runup.
>> >
>> >
>> >> I'm sure it does. So you use one long checklist fot the preflight,
>> >> startup and before takeoff checks?
>> >
>> > Yep.
>> >
>> > That's how the instructor doing the training for the complex
>> endorsement
>> > said to do it; follow the manual checklist.
>> >
>> >> That wouldn't be a checklist it would be a "how to fly a 172" set
>> >> of instructions.
>> >
>> > Nope.
>> >
>> > The detail stuff is elsewhere.
>> >
>> > The checklist for my Tiger follows the same format.
>> >
>> > Hmmm, I looked in the manuals for the 152, 172N and 172R; same
>> > format.
>> >
>> > The only one that doesn't follow that format is the Cherokee
>> > Warrior from 1973.
>
>> Then they're not checklists. They're do lists.
>
> Tell that to the FAA who mandated the standardized format a couple
> of decades ago.
>
>

I don't have to , if you use it like that, it's a do list.

Look, you don't actually read "insert key and tunr" and then do it, do
you? No. You do your cockpit safety inspection, perhaps with the aid of
a written checklist, then you do your walkaround, hopefully without the
checklist in your hand, then you jump back in and do the next phase,
probabyl using our checklist as a do list ( and the FAA recognise the
distinction, I can assure you) then you yell, clear and start , then
taxi, hopefully without your checkist in front of you. Then you do your
runup, and if you do this with your checklist in your hand you are
definitely no ex-student of mine, then you check all the tiems on your
cjhecklist to make sure the aircraft is prepared. in this process you
picked up and put down your checklist several times. If it's not
partitioned on paper, then it is in practice. So, you have the cockpit
safety check to make sure you don't injure yourself or your airplane
while you are preparing it for flight, then you have your walkaround
check to make sure you don;'t miss any of the drains you should know off
by heart anyway, then you have your pre-start checks to make sure you
don't fry your engine or electrics or have the airplane run away on you
and then you have the pre taxi checklist items ( or after start pre-
2005) and then you have your before takeoff checklist items.
I don't use a POH for my airplane because none was ever written for it.
It's called an aircraft flight manual.
I do have a pilot's handbook (old name for a POH) for the Citabria and
it's divided into four seperate lists for seperate phases of flight.
Doing items from a list is not the best way to use a checklist. It leads
to errors. With a few excepetions, all items should be completed and
then checked. This way you're checking twice, which is a good thing, and
you are able to interact with your airplane in a more natural way.
If you need to use the checklist to set the airplane before engine
start, for instance, then you may deprive yourself of the chance to
learn your airplane and it's systems more intimately.

Bertie


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Roger > wrote in
:

>
> The guy "said" the gear failed when they set down but my take was he
> hit the gear down switch right after that terrible noise started up
> front, or too late to prevent it.


Ah, OK. That crossd my mind, but then I thought, "who could be thatg
stupid?"

In either case it appears to me the
> thing was trying to raise the plane before the gear was fully
> extended. The nose gear doors were still closed as well..
> One we had the plane in the harness we were able to lower the gear
> with the exception of the starboard side which had the long push rod
> badly bent. That we had to drive a 2 X 6 into place to hold it down.
>
> He was about a half mile from me at the numbers and the Mooney sits
> very close to the ground so something could have failed as it set
> down on the gear which would have been difficult for me to see, but
> ...
>
> OTOH this was the first flight after the annual.<:-))
>

Well, knock on wood...


Bertie

[[email protected]]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> wrote in :

> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> wrote in
> >> :
> >
> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> wrote in news:p6qgb5-fuc.ln1
> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >
> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> wrote in news:n3fgb5-fbb.ln1
> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> wrote in
> >> >> >> >> :
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
> >> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote in news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
> >> >> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and
> >> upholsterd
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Aero
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Commander
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump was)
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> gear
> >> >> >> >> sucks
> >> >> >> >> >> up
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while, but
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> thing
> >> >> >> >> gets
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > airborne.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for new
> >> belly
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > skin
> >> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > more paint.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Semantics.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> No, seperate checklist.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called
> >> >> >> >> > "checklist
> >> >> >> >> procedures".
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > It then has:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > preflight inspection
> >> >> >> >> > before starting engine
> >> >> >> >> > starting engine
> >> >> >> >> > before takeoff
> >> >> >> >> > takeoff
> >> >> >> >> > etc.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight
> >> >> inspection
> >> >> >> >> > and before starting engine.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> But not in the before takeoff checks.
> >> >> >> >> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety
> >> >> inspection (
> >> >> >> >> your preflight begins with this, though it is not
> >> >> >> >> partitioned)
> >> And
> >> >> >> >> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it in
> >> >> >> >> the before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already know it
> >> >> >> >> wasnt
> >> down
> >> >> at
> >> >> >> >> that point.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Semantics.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Nope. Different stages of operation distinct from each other.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Nope. There is but one checklist.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > There are subsection for normal landing, short field landing,
> >> >> > etc., but it is one checklist
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to perform
> >> before
> >> >> >> > each flight.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety
> >> inspection"
> >> >> >> > anywhere in it.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > YMMV with other POH's.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> No, not a POH at all.
> >> >> >> So, your preflight checklist includes the runup? Not even a cub
> >> does
> >> >> >> that.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I have no idea what you are talking about.
> >> >
> >> >> Apparently.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm referring to the book with the big Cessna logo on the cover
> >> which
> >> >> > says 172RG.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > And it includes runup.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> I'm sure it does. So you use one long checklist fot the preflight,
> >> >> startup and before takeoff checks?
> >> >
> >> > Yep.
> >> >
> >> > That's how the instructor doing the training for the complex
> >> endorsement
> >> > said to do it; follow the manual checklist.
> >> >
> >> >> That wouldn't be a checklist it would be a "how to fly a 172" set
> >> >> of instructions.
> >> >
> >> > Nope.
> >> >
> >> > The detail stuff is elsewhere.
> >> >
> >> > The checklist for my Tiger follows the same format.
> >> >
> >> > Hmmm, I looked in the manuals for the 152, 172N and 172R; same
> >> > format.
> >> >
> >> > The only one that doesn't follow that format is the Cherokee
> >> > Warrior from 1973.
> >
> >> Then they're not checklists. They're do lists.
> >
> > Tell that to the FAA who mandated the standardized format a couple
> > of decades ago.
> >
> >

> I don't have to , if you use it like that, it's a do list.

> Look, you don't actually read "insert key and tunr" and then do it, do
> you? No. You do your cockpit safety inspection, perhaps with the aid of
> a written checklist, then you do your walkaround, hopefully without the
> checklist in your hand, then you jump back in and do the next phase,
> probabyl using our checklist as a do list ( and the FAA recognise the
> distinction, I can assure you) then you yell, clear and start , then
> taxi, hopefully without your checkist in front of you. Then you do your
> runup, and if you do this with your checklist in your hand you are
> definitely no ex-student of mine, then you check all the tiems on your
> cjhecklist to make sure the aircraft is prepared. in this process you
> picked up and put down your checklist several times. If it's not
> partitioned on paper, then it is in practice. So, you have the cockpit
> safety check to make sure you don't injure yourself or your airplane
> while you are preparing it for flight, then you have your walkaround
> check to make sure you don;'t miss any of the drains you should know off
> by heart anyway, then you have your pre-start checks to make sure you
> don't fry your engine or electrics or have the airplane run away on you
> and then you have the pre taxi checklist items ( or after start pre-
> 2005) and then you have your before takeoff checklist items.
> I don't use a POH for my airplane because none was ever written for it.
> It's called an aircraft flight manual.
> I do have a pilot's handbook (old name for a POH) for the Citabria and
> it's divided into four seperate lists for seperate phases of flight.
> Doing items from a list is not the best way to use a checklist. It leads
> to errors. With a few excepetions, all items should be completed and
> then checked. This way you're checking twice, which is a good thing, and
> you are able to interact with your airplane in a more natural way.
> If you need to use the checklist to set the airplane before engine
> start, for instance, then you may deprive yourself of the chance to
> learn your airplane and it's systems more intimately.

Have you even seen a manual wrtitten within the last 20 years?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

wrote in :

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> wrote in
>> :
>
>> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> wrote in
>> >> :
>> >
>> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> wrote in news:p6qgb5-fuc.ln1
>> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >
>> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> wrote in news:n3fgb5-fbb.ln1
>> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> wrote in
>> >> >> >> >> :
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> wrote in news:4k3gb5-8k8.ln1
>> >> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> wrote in
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> news:tmaeb5-6dn.ln1
>> >> >> >> >> >> @mail.specsol.com:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why would you need a gear check for takeoff?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Corporate pilot picks up the newly painted and
>> >> upholsterd
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Aero
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Commander
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > and didn't check the gear switch.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > About half way down the runway (where the bump
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > was) the
>> >> >> gear
>> >> >> >> >> sucks
>> >> >> >> >> >> up
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > and the newly painted belly scapes for a while,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > but the
>> >> >> thing
>> >> >> >> >> gets
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > airborne.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Once around the pattern and back to the shop for
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > new
>> >> belly
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > skin
>> >> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > more paint.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > That's why a gear check for takeoff.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Nope, that;'s why a cockpit safety inspection.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Semantics.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> No, seperate checklist.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > From the C172RG checklist in the POH:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Section 1, item 2. Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> In the pre takeoff checks?
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > In the POH I have (1981) it has a section called
>> >> >> >> >> > "checklist
>> >> >> >> >> procedures".
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > It then has:
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > preflight inspection
>> >> >> >> >> > before starting engine
>> >> >> >> >> > starting engine
>> >> >> >> >> > before takeoff
>> >> >> >> >> > takeoff
>> >> >> >> >> > etc.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > "Landing Gear Lever -- DOWN" appears in both preflight
>> >> >> inspection
>> >> >> >> >> > and before starting engine.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> But not in the before takeoff checks.
>> >> >> >> >> It appears in every retactable during the cockpit safety
>> >> >> inspection (
>> >> >> >> >> your preflight begins with this, though it is not
>> >> >> >> >> partitioned)
>> >> And
>> >> >> >> >> often before engine start as a precaution. Never seen it
>> >> >> >> >> in the before takeoff checks.. You'd probably already
>> >> >> >> >> know it wasnt
>> >> down
>> >> >> at
>> >> >> >> >> that point.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Semantics.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Nope. Different stages of operation distinct from each
>> >> >> >> other.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Nope. There is but one checklist.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > There are subsection for normal landing, short field landing,
>> >> >> > etc., but it is one checklist
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > The 172RG has a single checklist you are supposed to
>> >> >> >> > perform
>> >> before
>> >> >> >> > each flight.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > There is nothing called anything near "cockpit safety
>> >> inspection"
>> >> >> >> > anywhere in it.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > YMMV with other POH's.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> No, not a POH at all.
>> >> >> >> So, your preflight checklist includes the runup? Not even a
>> >> >> >> cub
>> >> does
>> >> >> >> that.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I have no idea what you are talking about.
>> >> >
>> >> >> Apparently.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I'm referring to the book with the big Cessna logo on the
>> >> >> > cover
>> >> which
>> >> >> > says 172RG.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > And it includes runup.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> I'm sure it does. So you use one long checklist fot the
>> >> >> preflight,
>> >> >> startup and before takeoff checks?
>> >> >
>> >> > Yep.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's how the instructor doing the training for the complex
>> >> endorsement
>> >> > said to do it; follow the manual checklist.
>> >> >
>> >> >> That wouldn't be a checklist it would be a "how to fly a 172"
>> >> >> set of instructions.
>> >> >
>> >> > Nope.
>> >> >
>> >> > The detail stuff is elsewhere.
>> >> >
>> >> > The checklist for my Tiger follows the same format.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hmmm, I looked in the manuals for the 152, 172N and 172R; same
>> >> > format.
>> >> >
>> >> > The only one that doesn't follow that format is the Cherokee
>> >> > Warrior from 1973.
>> >
>> >> Then they're not checklists. They're do lists.
>> >
>> > Tell that to the FAA who mandated the standardized format a couple
>> > of decades ago.
>> >
>> >
>
>> I don't have to , if you use it like that, it's a do list.
>
>> Look, you don't actually read "insert key and tunr" and then do it,
>> do you? No. You do your cockpit safety inspection, perhaps with the
>> aid of a written checklist, then you do your walkaround, hopefully
>> without the checklist in your hand, then you jump back in and do the
>> next phase, probabyl using our checklist as a do list ( and the FAA
>> recognise the distinction, I can assure you) then you yell, clear and
>> start , then taxi, hopefully without your checkist in front of you.
>> Then you do your runup, and if you do this with your checklist in
>> your hand you are definitely no ex-student of mine, then you check
>> all the tiems on your cjhecklist to make sure the aircraft is
>> prepared. in this process you picked up and put down your checklist
>> several times. If it's not partitioned on paper, then it is in
>> practice. So, you have the cockpit safety check to make sure you
>> don't injure yourself or your airplane while you are preparing it for
>> flight, then you have your walkaround check to make sure you don;'t
>> miss any of the drains you should know off by heart anyway, then you
>> have your pre-start checks to make sure you don't fry your engine or
>> electrics or have the airplane run away on you and then you have the
>> pre taxi checklist items ( or after start pre- 2005) and then you
>> have your before takeoff checklist items. I don't use a POH for my
>> airplane because none was ever written for it. It's called an
>> aircraft flight manual. I do have a pilot's handbook (old name for a
>> POH) for the Citabria and it's divided into four seperate lists for
>> seperate phases of flight. Doing items from a list is not the best
>> way to use a checklist. It leads to errors. With a few excepetions,
>> all items should be completed and then checked. This way you're
>> checking twice, which is a good thing, and you are able to interact
>> with your airplane in a more natural way. If you need to use the
>> checklist to set the airplane before engine start, for instance, then
>> you may deprive yourself of the chance to learn your airplane and
>> it's systems more intimately.
>
> Have you even seen a manual wrtitten within the last 20 years?
>

Yep. in fact I wrote one in 1997.


Bertie

[Ken S. Tucker]

On Mar 22, 8:52 am, buttman > wrote:
> On Mar 22, 10:20 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>
>
> > buttman > wrote :
>
> > > On Mar 21, 6:08 pm, Dan > wrote:
> > >> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>
> > >> > Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
> > >> > matter wh
> > > at
> > >> > you do with the switches.
>
> > >> You have got to be kidding...?
>
> > >> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>
> > >> Dan Mc
>
> > > Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on the
> > > gear.
>
> > > Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor is
> > > not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from underneath
> > > you.
>
> > Wow, an even bigger idiot than I thought.
>
> > As soon as I saw someone post about trying the old gear up witch and rely
> > on the squat, I thought of you.
>
> > And you can get the gear up on the ground, fjukkwit. For one thing the
> > nosewheel will happily retract and if you're taxiing the rolling of the
> > mains will happilly allow the wheels to move., once they're over center you
> > are on your belly.
>
> > Bertie
>
> You sound like you speak from experience...

LOL, Bertie experienced: he's a ****in phony idiot.
It was SOP to raise the nose gear on the Banshee,
for ammo servicing, while the a/c was at rest.
Bertie is a queer phony, he's never piloted an a/c,
and it shows.
That's why he hides his phony identity.
Ken

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 23, 4:27 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:

>
> LOL, Bertie experienced:

{diatribe sniped}
..
> That's why he hides his phony identity.
> Ken

Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal, whenever he talks
about airplanes, I read with interest. Whenever you post, I recoil in
horror.


Dan Mc

[Peter Clark]

On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:55:25 -0700 (PDT), Dan >
wrote:

>On Mar 23, 4:27 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
>>
>> LOL, Bertie experienced:
>
>{diatribe sniped}
>.
>> That's why he hides his phony identity.
>> Ken
>
>Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal, whenever he talks
>about airplanes, I read with interest. Whenever you post, I recoil in
>horror.

Ken's in my killfile right next to MX.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> On Mar 22, 8:52 am, buttman > wrote:
>> On Mar 22, 10:20 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > buttman > wrote
>> > innews:69b2392f-451a-4072-b7aa-ae4cb87f0ea7
@n77g2000hse.googlegroups
>> > .com:
>>
>> > > On Mar 21, 6:08 pm, Dan > wrote:
>> > >> On Mar 21, 5:42 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>>
>> > >> > Everyone knows the gear can't come up while taxiing anyway, no
>> > >> > matter wh
>> > > at
>> > >> > you do with the switches.
>>
>> > >> You have got to be kidding...?
>>
>> > >> Or else flying a fixed gear.
>>
>> > >> Dan Mc
>>
>> > > Theres no way the gear can retract while the plane's weight is on
>> > > the gear.
>>
>> > > Even if the squat switch were to fail, the gear retraction motor
>> > > is not going to be powerful enough to bring the gear up from
>> > > underneath you.
>>
>> > Wow, an even bigger idiot than I thought.
>>
>> > As soon as I saw someone post about trying the old gear up witch
>> > and rely on the squat, I thought of you.
>>
>> > And you can get the gear up on the ground, fjukkwit. For one thing
>> > the nosewheel will happily retract and if you're taxiing the
>> > rolling of the mains will happilly allow the wheels to move., once
>> > they're over center you are on your belly.
>>
>> > Bertie
>>
>> You sound like you speak from experience...
>
> LOL, Bertie experienced: he's a ****in phony idiot.
> It was SOP to raise the nose gear on the Banshee,
> for ammo servicing, while the a/c was at rest.

Got a lot of Banshee time, fjukktard?


> Bertie is a queer phony, he's never piloted an a/c,
> and it shows.
> That's why he hides his phony identity.




Bwawhahwhahwhahwhahwhahhwhahw!


Bertie

>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dan > wrote in news:6f0109dd-4fb6-4b90-9e41-
:

> On Mar 23, 4:27 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
>>
>> LOL, Bertie experienced:
>
> {diatribe sniped}
> .
>> That's why he hides his phony identity.
>> Ken
>
> Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal,

Beg your pardon. It's perfect.


whenever he talks
> about airplanes, I read with interest. Whenever you post, I recoil in
> horror.

Nah, he's hilarious.


Bertie

[cavedweller]

On Mar 23, 5:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Dan > wrote in news:6f0109dd-4fb6-4b90-9e41-
> :
>
> > On Mar 23, 4:27 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:

> > {diatribe sniped}
> > .
> >> That's why he hides his phony identity.
> >> Ken

> Nah, he's hilarious.
>
> Bertie

Yabbut, he mentioned Banshee. Hmmmmm....Canajun, ex-RCAF or
RCN....retired. My taxpayer dime.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

cavedweller > wrote in news:778b59ba-a7c0-4d69-
:

> On Mar 23, 5:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Dan > wrote in news:6f0109dd-4fb6-4b90-9e41-
>> :
>>
>> > On Mar 23, 4:27 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
>> > {diatribe sniped}
>> > .
>> >> That's why he hides his phony identity.
>> >> Ken
>
>> Nah, he's hilarious.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Yabbut, he mentioned Banshee. Hmmmmm....Canajun, ex-RCAF or
> RCN....retired. My taxpayer dime.


Don;t think so, though it's possible. More of a plane spotter. His
knowledge of airplanes smacks of that which may be gleaned from an
aviation book written for ten year olds.


bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Owner" > wrote in news:47e6e9e2$0$22861
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> cavedweller > wrote in news:778b59ba-a7c0-
4d69-
>> :
>>
>>> On Mar 23, 5:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>> Dan > wrote in news:6f0109dd-4fb6-4b90-9e41-
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>> > On Mar 23, 4:27 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" >
wrote:
>>>
>>>> > {diatribe sniped}
>>>> > .
>>>> >> That's why he hides his phony identity.
>>>> >> Ken
>>>
>>>> Nah, he's hilarious.
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> Yabbut, he mentioned Banshee. Hmmmmm....Canajun, ex-RCAF or
>>> RCN....retired. My taxpayer dime.
>>
>>
>
>
>> Don;t think so, though it's possible. More of a plane spotter. His
>> knowledge of airplanes smacks of that which may be gleaned from an
>> aviation book written for ten year olds.
>
> You give him too much credit :)

I'm generous to a fault.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dan > wrote in news:674a0cc9-c334-49da-8cd6-f68cd8565f12
@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:

> On Mar 23, 6:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>>
>> > Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal,
>>
>> Beg your pardon. It's perfect.
>
> No it's not.
>
>
>

Of coure it is. it does exactly as I intend. Therefore, it's perfect.


Bertie

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 23, 6:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:

>
> > Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal,
>
> Beg your pardon. It's perfect.

No it's not.

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 23, 6:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
> Nah, he's hilarious.
>
> Bertie

True, in a sprint car wreck sorta way...

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 23, 7:43 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Dan > wrote in news:674a0cc9-c334-49da-8cd6-f68cd8565f12
> @e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Mar 23, 6:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
> >> > Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal,
>
> >> Beg your pardon. It's perfect.
>
> > No it's not.
>
> Of coure it is. it does exactly as I intend. Therefore, it's perfect.
>
> Bertie

Here's a new word to learn: Perception.

[cavedweller]

On Mar 23, 6:43 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Dan > wrote in news:674a0cc9-c334-49da-8cd6-f68cd8565f12
> @e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Mar 23, 6:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
> >> > Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal,
>
> >> Beg your pardon. It's perfect.
>
> > No it's not.
>
> Of coure it is. it does exactly as I intend. Therefore, it's perfect.
>
> Bertie

Quality IS conformance to requirements.....Crosby

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dan > wrote in
:

> On Mar 23, 7:43 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Dan > wrote in
>> news:674a0cc9-c334-49da-8cd6-f68cd8565f12
>> @e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > On Mar 23, 6:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>> >> > Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal,
>>
>> >> Beg your pardon. It's perfect.
>>
>> > No it's not.
>>
>> Of coure it is. it does exactly as I intend. Therefore, it's perfect.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Here's a new word to learn: Perception.



Here's an old one

**** off.


Oh that's two. Sorry to be starting you on such a sgteep learning curve
but there it is.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

cavedweller > wrote in
:

> On Mar 23, 6:43 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Dan > wrote in
>> news:674a0cc9-c334-49da-8cd6-f68cd8565f12
>> @e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > On Mar 23, 6:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>> >> > Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal,
>>
>> >> Beg your pardon. It's perfect.
>>
>> > No it's not.
>>
>> Of coure it is. it does exactly as I intend. Therefore, it's perfect.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Quality IS conformance to requirements....

zachery

bertie

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 23, 8:04 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Dan > wrote :
>
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 7:43 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> Dan > wrote in
> >> news:674a0cc9-c334-49da-8cd6-f68cd8565f12
> >> @e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> > On Mar 23, 6:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
> >> >> > Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal,
>
> >> >> Beg your pardon. It's perfect.
>
> >> > No it's not.
>
> >> Of coure it is. it does exactly as I intend. Therefore, it's perfect.
>
> >> Bertie
>
> > Here's a new word to learn: Perception.
>
> Here's an old one
>
> **** off.
>
> Oh that's two. Sorry to be starting you on such a sgteep learning curve
> but there it is.
>
> Bertie

Logging onto a newsgroup: $1
Typing on a Dell Laptop: $1250
Reading Bertie's Bedside manner posts: Priceless

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dan > wrote in
:

> On Mar 23, 8:04 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Dan > wrote
>> innews:e922b9b2-bfff-40bf-894f-160061412413
@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.c
>> om:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 23, 7:43 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> Dan > wrote in
>> >> news:674a0cc9-c334-49da-8cd6-f68cd8565f12
>> >> @e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >> > On Mar 23, 6:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>> >> >> > Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal,
>>
>> >> >> Beg your pardon. It's perfect.
>>
>> >> > No it's not.
>>
>> >> Of coure it is. it does exactly as I intend. Therefore, it's
>> >> perfect.
>>
>> >> Bertie
>>
>> > Here's a new word to learn: Perception.
>>
>> Here's an old one
>>
>> **** off.
>>
>> Oh that's two. Sorry to be starting you on such a sgteep learning
>> curve but there it is.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Logging onto a newsgroup: $1


You pay to log ont usenet?


> Typing on a Dell Laptop: $1250


You really are an idiot.


> Reading Bertie's Bedside manner posts: Priceless
>

I already knew that too.

Bertie

[Dan[_10_]]

On Mar 23, 8:42 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:

>
> > Logging onto a newsgroup: $1
>
> You pay to log ont usenet?


High speed access from home has a cost.

Is the internet access they provide you in The Home included in the
monthly fee?

Or is Medicare covering that?

:-)

Have a good night. I'll be back to taunt you a second time tomorrow.

Maybe you sahre his simemring uncertainity that if he's wrong, he's
made a huge mistake

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dan > wrote in news:05bb7b6b-e8e0-4cd0-81af-
:

> On Mar 23, 8:42 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>>
>> > Logging onto a newsgroup: $1
>>
>> You pay to log ont usenet?
>
>
> High speed access from home has a cost.
>
> Is the internet access they provide you in The Home included in the
> monthly fee?
>
> Or is Medicare covering that?
>
>:-)


Lame


>
> Have a good night. I'll be back to taunt you a second time tomorrow.
>
> Maybe you sahre his simemring uncertainity that if he's wrong, he's
> made a huge mistake
>

Oh yeah. I live in dread.


Bertie

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Dan" wrote:

> Well Bertie's bedside manner is less than optimal, whenever he talks
> about airplanes, I read with interest. Whenever you post, I recoil in
> horror.

Hee-hee-hee!

Perfect.

LOL-of-the-day.

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[Ken S. Tucker]

On Mar 23, 3:10 pm, cavedweller > wrote:
> On Mar 23, 5:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
> > Dan > wrote in news:6f0109dd-4fb6-4b90-9e41-
> > :
>
> > > On Mar 23, 4:27 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
> > > {diatribe sniped}
> > > .
> > >> That's why he hides his phony identity.
> > >> Ken
> > Nah, he's hilarious.
>
> > Bertie
>
> Yabbut, he mentioned Banshee. Hmmmmm....Canajun, ex-RCAF or
> RCN....retired. My taxpayer dime.

Have a look at the Banshee Trivia here,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2H_Banshee#Trivia
Ken
PS:Shooting down Bertie would be good sport if
here wasn't a dang turkey.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in news:39b5ce52-be25-
:

> On Mar 23, 3:10 pm, cavedweller > wrote:
>> On Mar 23, 5:21 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>> > Dan > wrote in news:6f0109dd-4fb6-4b90-9e41-
>> > :
>>
>> > > On Mar 23, 4:27 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" >
wrote:
>> > > {diatribe sniped}
>> > > .
>> > >> That's why he hides his phony identity.
>> > >> Ken
>> > Nah, he's hilarious.
>>
>> > Bertie
>>
>> Yabbut, he mentioned Banshee. Hmmmmm....Canajun, ex-RCAF or
>> RCN....retired. My taxpayer dime.
>
> Have a look at the Banshee Trivia here,
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2H_Banshee#Trivia
> Ken
> PS:Shooting down Bertie would be good sport if
> here wasn't a dang turkey.
>

You couldn't shoot anythign but your own foot, fjukkwit.


Bertie

[cavedweller]

On Mar 23, 11:48 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:

> > Yabbut, he mentioned Banshee. Hmmmmm....Canajun, ex-RCAF or
> > RCN....retired. My taxpayer dime.
>
> Have a look at the Banshee Trivia here,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2H_Banshee#Trivia

Aw, do you mean you had to look it up and didn't know it already?

> Ken
> PS:Shooting down Bertie would be good sport if
> here wasn't a dang turkey.

That's up to you but I wish you wouldn't sound like the village idiot
while you do it.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 21, 6:51 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
> I think I know. In the mid '70s sometime, I was giving a BFR to a guy in an
> Arrow. Just before rotation and liftoff, he quickly reached over and
> flipped up the gear lever. It was so quick, I was petrified an hypnotized
> at the same time. After we got out out of the area I asked him in a real
> stern voice, "What did you just do!". He explained how the squat switch
> worked, like I didn't know, an continued to tell me how he likes to get that
> all out of the way so he can concentrate on reducing MAP and RPM, turning,
> etc. This guy was doing this for the last 200 hours in his Arrow. We
> continued the discussion when we got on the ground. I also changed my
> behavior to always be ready for the hand coming over with any pilot in a
> retract gear airplane. I happened so quick.

So many OWTs that get the "average" pilot into trouble.
Relying on the squat switch to keep the gear down is one of the
stupider ways to wreck a good airplane. On the Cessna single retracts,
the squat switch is on the nosegear, since the mains are spring tubes
and there's no relative movement to use to activate a microswitch. The
nosegear strut closes the switch when it's extended, and since these
oleos are known to get sticky, the switch can be closed with the
airplane on the ground. Sitting still. With the engine off. They are
often closed immediately after landing in the rollout, especially on
the 182RG, whose mains are farther forward and an aft CG will keep the
strut extended. The nosegear retracts forward and will do so with
incredible speed with any amount of weight at all on it. We have a
rule that the pilot doesn't touch the flaps until he's stopped, since
some can get the flap and gear levers mixed up, especially while still
rolling and their attention is divided. We've had a couple of close
calls with that.
You can count on spending many AMUs if you retract that
nosegear on the ground, whether the engine is running or not. A
running drop is just much more expensive. Fooling with the gear lever
while on the ground is just plain stupid, as is ignoring the checklist
item that demands that you make sure the lever is down before you
switch on the master.
In the flight training industry we hear of such dumb things
all the time.

Dan

[Ken S. Tucker]

On Mar 24, 4:47 am, cavedweller > wrote:
> On Mar 23, 11:48 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
> > > Yabbut, he mentioned Banshee. Hmmmmm....Canajun, ex-RCAF or
> > > RCN....retired. My taxpayer dime.
>
> > Have a look at the Banshee Trivia here,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2H_Banshee#Trivia
>
> Aw, do you mean you had to look it up and didn't know it already?

Of course I didn't know. I did a search, *Banshee kneeling*.
Don't need a brain to be a genius if you have the internet.

> > Ken
> > PS:Shooting down Bertie would be good sport if
> > she wasn't a dang turkey.
>
> That's up to you but I wish you wouldn't sound like the village idiot
> while you do it.

Well I don't like talking down to Bertie.
Ken

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

wrote:
> On Mar 21, 6:51 pm, "Bob F." > wrote:
>> I think I know. In the mid '70s sometime, I was giving a BFR to a guy in an
>> Arrow. Just before rotation and liftoff, he quickly reached over and
>> flipped up the gear lever. It was so quick, I was petrified an hypnotized
>> at the same time. After we got out out of the area I asked him in a real
>> stern voice, "What did you just do!". He explained how the squat switch
>> worked, like I didn't know, an continued to tell me how he likes to get that
>> all out of the way so he can concentrate on reducing MAP and RPM, turning,
>> etc. This guy was doing this for the last 200 hours in his Arrow. We
>> continued the discussion when we got on the ground. I also changed my
>> behavior to always be ready for the hand coming over with any pilot in a
>> retract gear airplane. I happened so quick.
>
> So many OWTs that get the "average" pilot into trouble.
> Relying on the squat switch to keep the gear down is one of the
> stupider ways to wreck a good airplane. On the Cessna single retracts,
> the squat switch is on the nosegear, since the mains are spring tubes
> and there's no relative movement to use to activate a microswitch. The
> nosegear strut closes the switch when it's extended, and since these
> oleos are known to get sticky, the switch can be closed with the
> airplane on the ground. Sitting still. With the engine off. They are
> often closed immediately after landing in the rollout, especially on
> the 182RG, whose mains are farther forward and an aft CG will keep the
> strut extended. The nosegear retracts forward and will do so with
> incredible speed with any amount of weight at all on it. We have a
> rule that the pilot doesn't touch the flaps until he's stopped, since
> some can get the flap and gear levers mixed up, especially while still
> rolling and their attention is divided. We've had a couple of close
> calls with that.
> You can count on spending many AMUs if you retract that
> nosegear on the ground, whether the engine is running or not. A
> running drop is just much more expensive. Fooling with the gear lever
> while on the ground is just plain stupid, as is ignoring the checklist
> item that demands that you make sure the lever is down before you
> switch on the master.
> In the flight training industry we hear of such dumb things
> all the time.
>
> Dan
>

I also don't like dealing with flaps in the roll out and discourage this
practice in new pilots. There's only one concern during the roll out;
that's aircraft control. Plenty of time to clean it up at the turnoff.
Of all the dumb things a pilot can do in an airplane, relying on a squat
switch has to be near the top of the list.
Pilots flying older airplanes with hydraulic gear systems have
additional issues to consider. Many of these airplanes will indeed
retract if the gear handle is misused on the ground. The Navion I
believe has this issue.
Warbirds are particularly susceptible. The P51D for example, has a
mechanical downlock that prevents the gear handle from being selected UP
on the ground IF the fairing door release handle has been pulled and the
aircraft is parked. When the engine starts, the doors retract, and the
linkage is lost. If you are taxiing a P51 and hit the gear handle to the
up position, you stand a VERY good chance of having a much lighter
wallet soon thereafter :-))


--
Dudley Henriques

[cavedweller]

On Mar 24, 12:32 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
> On Mar 24, 4:47 am, cavedweller > wrote:
>
> > On Mar 23, 11:48 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
> > > > Yabbut, he mentioned Banshee. Hmmmmm....Canajun, ex-RCAF or
> > > > RCN....retired. My taxpayer dime.
>
> > > Have a look at the Banshee Trivia here,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2H_Banshee#Trivia
>
> > Aw, do you mean you had to look it up and didn't know it already?
>
> Of course I didn't know. I did a search, *Banshee kneeling*.
> Don't need a brain to be a genius if you have the internet.
>
> > > Ken
> > > PS:Shooting down Bertie would be good sport if
> > > she wasn't a dang turkey.
>
> > That's up to you but I wish you wouldn't sound like the village idiot
> > while you do it.
>
> Well I don't like talking down to Bertie.
> Ken

Oy!

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> On Mar 24, 4:47 am, cavedweller > wrote:
>> On Mar 23, 11:48 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>>
>> > > Yabbut, he mentioned Banshee. Hmmmmm....Canajun, ex-RCAF or
>> > > RCN....retired. My taxpayer dime.
>>
>> > Have a look at the Banshee Trivia
>> > here,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2H_Banshee#Trivia
>>
>> Aw, do you mean you had to look it up and didn't know it already?
>
> Of course I didn't know. I did a search, *Banshee kneeling*.
> Don't need a brain to be a genius if you have the internet.
>
>> > Ken
>> > PS:Shooting down Bertie would be good sport if
>> > she wasn't a dang turkey.
>>
>> That's up to you but I wish you wouldn't sound like the village idiot
>> while you do it.
>
> Well I don't like talking down to Bertie.

Oh, you're talking to me, are you fjukkwit?

I thought you said you killfiled me, liar boi?


Bertie

[cavedweller]

On Mar 24, 12:32 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:

> > > Have a look at the Banshee Trivia here,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2H_Banshee#Trivia
>
> > Aw, do you mean you had to look it up and didn't know it already?
>
> Of course I didn't know. I did a search, *Banshee kneeling*.
> Don't need a brain to be a genius if you have the internet.

Oh, sure. Somehow that search phrase just popped into your head?

[Ken S. Tucker]

On Mar 24, 11:19 am, cavedweller > wrote:
> On Mar 24, 12:32 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>
> > > > Have a look at the Banshee Trivia here,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2H_Banshee#Trivia
>
> > > Aw, do you mean you had to look it up and didn't know it already?
>
> > Of course I didn't know. I did a search, *Banshee kneeling*.
> > Don't need a brain to be a genius if you have the internet.
>
> Oh, sure. Somehow that search phrase just popped into your head?

LOL, by process of elimination, I've never heard of
a VooDoo kneeling...etc..leaving only the Banshee,
so how could I loose?
It's light, just an additive to the thread, that some
fella's might be interested in, that's all, no big deal.
Ken

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> On Mar 24, 11:19 am, cavedweller > wrote:
>> On Mar 24, 12:32 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote:
>>
>> > > > Have a look at the Banshee Trivia
>> > > > here,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F2H_Banshee#Trivia
>>
>> > > Aw, do you mean you had to look it up and didn't know it already?
>>
>> > Of course I didn't know. I did a search, *Banshee kneeling*.
>> > Don't need a brain to be a genius if you have the internet.
>>
>> Oh, sure. Somehow that search phrase just popped into your head?
>
> LOL, by process of elimination, I've never heard of
> a VooDoo kneeling...etc..leaving only the Banshee,
> so how could I loose?

Plenty of practice.

And it's "lose", fjukktard.



Bertie

[Margy Natalie]

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
>> buttman > wrote in

>>>
>>> You sound like you speak from experience...
>>
>>
>>
>> Of course I do, that's because I am. But I've never retracted the gear
>> on an airplane.
>> I certainly haven't gone around making idiotic statements like you
>> just did, either.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>>
>
> Hitting the gear switch on some of the old hydraulic system airplanes on
> the ground could produce "interesting" results.
> I believe Ron Natalie checked in with some comment on the Navion. He and
> Margy own one.
> It's been years, but I seem to remember a clear warning in the Navion's
> manual directed to this issue.
>

The gear handle DOWN is on the pre-start checklist for good reason. We
had a friend who'd just spent MONTHS working on his plane. The plane
was standing there in the hangar looking proud and he cranked the engine
and the nose gear gave way and it spent many more MONTHS in the hangar.
He was NOT happy with himself. I'm sure he checks the handle position
much more carefully now.

Margy

[John Ousterhout[_2_]]

Larry D. Cosby wrote:
> Hi, I was wondering what the acronym GUMPS stood on a landing checklist.
> Larry
>

My Ex-wife used to say "I don't think John is a very good pilot. Every
time we're about to land he has to read the instructions again,"

- J.O.-