Primary training in a Hi Perf complex acft

"Kingfish" wrote in message
ups.com...
Total stream-of-consciousness post here...

Anbody learn to fly in a high performance complex aircraft? Bonanza,
Saratoga, 182RG and the like? I know it's possible, just wonder how
much longer it'd take for a student to master something with
significant power and prop & gear controls. (I did all my instructing
in 172s and PA28s)
I watched that goofy Segal movie Executive Decision the other day
where Kurt Russell was a student pilot flying a Bo, and later used his
stellar(?) flying skills to plant a 747 at a GA airport. It got me
thinking about ab initio folks learning in Cirruses (Cirri?)
Obviously with no prop or gear control it's a simpler aircraft to fly
but the performance is equal to or better than a A36.


In Air Force Pilot Training the students take a few rides in a Cessna, then
jump right into a T-37 jet. The jet is easier in one respect -- only
throttles to control the engine, but the higher speed makes you have to
think fast.

Danny Deger

Robert M. Gary writes:

What?? I've never flown a 747 but I teach TAA (technically advanced
aircraft). It is **WAY** more difficult to fly the plane on automation
than to just hand fly it.

No, it is not. It's pushing buttons and turning dials; that's it.

Flying the aircraft (or any aircraft) by hand is an acquired skill, like
riding a motorcycle, skiing, or painting. But running the automated systems
is just a series of procedures. Once you have the procedures memorized,
there's not much to it.

This is why the actual skill requiremens for airline pilots are diminishing.
FBW systems that try to second-guess the pilot and restrict his actions even
when he is flying by hand reduce the required skill even further. The
unstated objective is to make it possible for relatively unskilled technicians
to fly planes safely. One day that goal will probably be achieved; we are far
from it today, but far closer to it than we were even a few decades ago.

The biggest problem we have is pilots
shutting off the system and just hand flying all the time. If I found
myself in the cockpit of a 747 I certainly wouldn't try to learn all
the automation in 5 minutes, I'd probably shut most of it off (maybe
just use heading and altitude hold).

That might be your fatal mistake. It's a lot easier to follow simple
instructions over the radio and set the automation to fly to your destination
and land than it is to try to learn to hand-fly the aircraft in the heat of
the moment. It's not a Cessna, and it's not close enough to one to permit a
smooth transition in ten minutes under extreme duress.

This is one reason why I think a small-aircraft pilot might not be the best
choice as an emergency pilot for a large airliner. He would be too tempted to
try to fly the plane by hand, and he'd end up impacting a mountainside at high
speed, simply because flying by hand is the _last_ thing he should be doing in
that aircraft.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Mar 23, 4:11 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Robert M. Gary writes:
What?? I've never flown a 747 but I teach TAA (technically advanced
aircraft). It is **WAY** more difficult to fly the plane on automation
than to just hand fly it.

No, it is not. It's pushing buttons and turning dials; that's it.

No, its much more complicated than pushing buttons.

In article ,
Jose wrote:

Huh?
182 speeds are only 10-15 knots higher than a 152.

I'd like to see the 152 you fly.

Two people in a 182, the approach airspeed is between 55-60 kts.

Robert M. Gary writes:

On Mar 23, 4:11 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Robert M. Gary writes:
What?? I've never flown a 747 but I teach TAA (technically advanced
aircraft). It is **WAY** more difficult to fly the plane on automation
than to just hand fly it.

No, it is not. It's pushing buttons and turning dials; that's it.

No, its much more complicated than pushing buttons.


--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Robert M. Gary writes:

No, its much more complicated than pushing buttons.

What are the complicated parts?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Two people in a 182, the approach airspeed is between 55-60 kts.

Ok, but flying is more than just approaching.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Mar 23, 4:36 pm, "Kingfish" wrote:
Total stream-of-consciousness post here...

Anbody learn to fly in a high performance complex aircraft?

Yeah, a friend of mine learned to fly in a 1450 HP T-28, and it didn't
cost him a cent.


Bertie

In article ,
Jose wrote:

Two people in a 182, the approach airspeed is between 55-60 kts.

Ok, but flying is more than just approaching.

The original comment was that things happen faster due to higher
airspeeds in all phases of flight. My point was that all one has to do
is pull the throttle back and fly slower.

The original comment was that things happen faster due to higher
airspeeds in all phases of flight. My point was that all one has to do
is pull the throttle back and fly slower.

Well, yes and no. By doing so one flies slower, but now in the 182 one
is flying significantly closer to stall, and in the 152 one is flying
right in the sweet zone. Learning to fly, one should learn all the
flight regimes, and become used to cruise in cruise, and approach in
approach.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.