Fact / Fear / Safety

[DieselFan]

I've been watching more videos and one thing I've noticed is my apparent lack of fear for "NO MAN'S LAND". Why is it that pilots fear it so?

I'm reminded of the Robben Island debate that occured here a while ago.

One of the 1st Q's I ask pilots/instructors is "How many precautionary or emergency landings have you done", followed by "could it have been avoided?". The one mentioned that in 20 Years (+-8000 hours) he had only one engine out, but as a direct result of not adhering to the services (spark plugs dirty) and not his UL.

Is it perhaps that those pilots fortunate enough to own a brand new UL are more confident / daring and that 2nd hand UL's tend to be unreliable that we are so cautious, or is it that many pilots have been flying for a very long time and are still worrying about problems of "yesterday"?

Do pilots who fly Cessna's etc also freak out when flying over water? I've noticed that Americans or those who fly there tend worry a lot less? Surely if one keeps to his/her services and preflights the chances of having an engine out are as remote as the wing falling off?

There's a ride offered in the Waterberg whereby a helicopter flies EXTREMELY close to cliffs and at times even sideways, you can hear everybody screaming onboard. Why aren't they scared of an engine out?

Please don't bite my head off , I'm just concerned as to how concerned I should be - if that makes sense?

[kb]

There's a ride offered in the Waterberg whereby a helicopter flies EXTREMELY close to cliffs and at times even sideways, you can hear everybody screaming onboard. Why aren't they scared of an engine out?

Hey DieselFan, Regarding that heli ride, I've done it a number of times, I know EXACTLY which one you are referring to. When I started my heli license, my instructor was telling me that on a basic Cessna, there are 160 moving parts, in total. On a basic RH22, there are over 3100 moving parts, and so the maintenance is more thorough. I am NOT saying that Cessna mechanics do not do the job properly, but on a heli, there are more things to go wrong, and therefore the checks seem to be more stringent. We all know also, that when the motor on a chopper stops, it has a glide ratio that is not quite as good as a cennsa (to be read with a sh!tload of sarcasm). This particular chopper, being a turbine, combined with the relevant pilot's 37 yrs of experience, including military, movie's stunts etc, made me feel 110% safe at all times. The pilot has since left that operation, and the new pilot is not flying the way that it was done in the past, purely cause he doesn't know how to fly in that manner. Just a thought.
The views above are purely my own, and no credit / discredit is meant in any way, to any person.

[Morph]

Microlights are different to GA (General Aviation) planes in that they don't have certified engines and a vast majority are 2 stroke (which are prone to suddenly stopping). GA engines and 4-stroke ML engines are more reliable and have significantly longer service intervals. A major on a 2-stroke is every 300 hours whereas the 912/914 is every 1200 hours. However this does not mean that engine failures in the air are "Common".

In this entire year of flying here in Cape Town where there are approximately 40 or more regular pilots I personally have heard of 2 forced landings due to engine failure, one (Rotax 503 single ignition) and another 503 Dual Ignition in a Bush Baby. The first instance the plane had been standing for a very long time and the pilot flew without servicing the plane and as a result spark plug failure put him down in a field, no damage to aircraft or pilot. Number 2 was with a Bush Baby who had previously had an engine seizure at 10 hours due to incorrect fuel mix. The engine was "repaired" and a couple of hundred hours later seized solid. Again the plane was in reach of the airfield and no damage to pilot and pax or plane, except for the engine of course.

However, please note that in both these cases the pilot had a safe spot to land within gliding distance. Both of these events could have been fatal if over the ocean, or inhospitable terrain.

I personally believe majority of engine-outs are avoidable with decent maintenance. Personally, I had my engine cough and splutter over Blouberg and after switching the electric fuel-pump on flew perfectly to a safe landing, albeit with adrenaline pumping. On inspection the fuel filter was clogged up. I saw it was dirty at preflight but didn't think it needed a clean. Now I clean it even with the slightest hint of dirt. Now this could have happened on any engine, 2 or 4 stroke.

If you are fastidious with ensuring your fuel is good, filters are clean and engine regularly serviced you should not have to worry about engine out's.

I have heard, that even Cessna pilots get nervous over vast stretches of water.

There is very little chance of survival from a microlight if you crash way out at sea. No flotation devices, life jackets etc.

[DieselFan]

There's a ride offered in the Waterberg whereby a helicopter flies EXTREMELY close to cliffs and at times even sideways, you can hear everybody screaming onboard. Why aren't they scared of an engine out?

On a basic RH22, there are over 3100 moving parts, and so the maintenance is more thorough.

Precisely. So if a heli has a worse glide ratio, is at times flying slower than a UL and has a greater chance of something going wrong with the motor (using the keep it simple argument that gets tossed around so often) then surely if you were scared on a UL you would be petrified on a HELI.

Not for a moment am I saying that Helis are unsafe but to prove a point that the fears shown by a perceived most (I use this word carefully) of UL pilots is therefore unnecessary as UL's are slower, better glide ratio and blablabla, now if a helicopter with all it's complexities can be pushed to such extents without fear of crashing etc what are we worrying about?

My point is that the arguments about "making a motor more complicated affects it's realibility" are not true, it may make servicing it more expensive tho.

One of the biggest mistakes a person can make is not understanding the diff between fear and respect as fear causes mistakes.

I'm not attacking anyone who does fear but instead I'm trying to show that there's no reason for fear.

[DieselFan]

Hmm my mother just called and found out that I've started my mpl, she btw was the one who went on the heli and her first reaction was, "Oh dear please be careful!", so I gave her the heli arg -The maneuvers should scare you not the idea of falling out the sky.

Not for a moment am I saying that Helis are unsafe but to prove a point that the fears shown by a perceived most (I use this word carefully) of UL pilots

and mothers / friends / ground dwellers

[mike laatz]

Not a bad idea to follow the old adage: "Don't fly over anything you can't land on".

[RV4ker (RIP)]

Don't think it legal to go more than glide range from Coast line in a single blik without floatation devices etc on board...

[kb]

Don't think it legal to go more than glide range from Coast line in a single blik without floatation devices etc on board...

Agree on the "above water floats " thing

[krusty]

Don't think it legal to go more than glide range from Coast line in a single blik without floatation devices etc on board...

Something like that. The further out you want to go, the higher you need to be in order to ensure that you can always glide back.

[loansharkblv]

Hi DF,

Another aspect of water one needs to watch out for is the fact that it is a lot harder to hit than ground. Had a long chat one day to a bloke whose friend was killed after ditching in the sea – The thing with water is that is grabs at the front wheel and the moment you stop skiing over the surface brings you to a VERY abrupt halt with the bar giving you a fairly decent smack in the chest to the extent of possibly breaking ribs and all the associated nasties. At this point it is fair to assume that trying to then put on a lifejacket or reaching for the flotation device becomes a lot more difficult than when rehearsing it on the ground thus increasing the chances of breathing water.

All being equal, my personal opinion is that I would rather get the a/c nice and stable and bail out a couple of meters above the surface, remembering to kill the engine, etc,etc. Better yet, if you’re a/c is fitted with one of those nice big red handles, Pull that……..

Also, with reference to safe gliding distance from the shoreline, get tons of experience before tempting fate, don’t rely on basic maths and the a/c’s published glide ratio – the winds of fate can be very fickle.

Also if you have to ditch far out at sea and you have a PAX onboard remember to take a swiss army knife along as protection against the johnies, the theory being that when they start circling, simply jab your PAX and calmly swim of to a safe distance.

[Chaz]

Erm Loanshark remind me to never pax with you anywhere at anytime Swiss Army knife huh :D :D :D Then again seeing as i cant swim i will just have to hold onto you for dear life :D :D :D

You's in Flying
CHAZ

[DieselFan]

Hi DF,

Another aspect of water one needs to watch out for is the fact that it is a lot harder to hit than ground. Had a long chat one day to a bloke whose friend was killed after ditching in the sea – The thing with water is that is grabs at the front wheel and the moment you stop skiing over the surface brings you to a VERY abrupt halt with the bar giving you a fairly decent smack in the chest to the extent of possibly breaking ribs and all the associated nasties. At this point it is fair to assume that trying to then put on a lifejacket or reaching for the flotation device becomes a lot more difficult than when rehearsing it on the ground thus increasing the chances of breathing water.

Shot thanks for the warning, funny thing tho I was just lastnight thinking that "landing" in the sea or dam for that matter wouldn't be too bad and I did concceive the jumping out part with motor off, however what you mentioned was a shock! So what actually causes the death, strapped in under water and drown etc? Is it from the wheel catching and would it actually be possible to jump out?

PS I don't have a swiss knife, will a Panga do?

One should always have a possible landing site in mind when flying, be it over water, land, mountains etc.
Many moons ago, I (stupidly) changed fuel tanks over the middle of Hartebeestpoort Dam.

How does one change fuel tanks? What would the config look like?

[Morph]

How does one change fuel tanks? What would the config look like?

You usually have two tanks either coming to a 3-way tap or alternatively each having their own tap and feeding in to a t-piece. I hate this sort of thing.

I had a Skyfox that had 3 tanks, a 25liter above the pilot, and two 10l behind each of the seats. I originally had 3 taps but it scared the Sh!t out of me so I used the top tank to feed via a tap to a 4-way connector at the bottom of the other two rear tanks. ( 1- tap to top tank, 2 and 3 to rear tanks and 4 to fuel pump.) In this way I would use the top tank to gravity feed the bottom tanks. You coudn't leave the tap open or it would overfill the bottom tanks. I hated it, It was too complex to have fuel level sensors, I was always nervous of getting air in the system etc.

[Microwave]

Demon, I used to hate that arrangement with my mainair with a tap behind the seat. It was positioned in such a way that one could'nt just lean over and switch it either. You had to actually bend right round to see it and lean awkwardly over and switch it. To do this at low level was not my favourite pastime

I feel much better now with a single large tank and no fancy fuel switches.

[Junkie]

Hear Hear - kept the old tanks for 2 years and turfed them out tin the trash this weekend. Didnt even hesitate or feel bad about it.

Best thing the brits ever did for the Mainairs

Hows that Q450 - bloody nice but me thinks ill be spending me pennies on a Rans S10 or Bushbaby... Sorry Big G