Page 19 - March 2016

try to limit the variables to those that have acceptable risk and for which we are proficient in the permutations that could arise. If we work at it, always learning and thinking ahead, the task is manageable.
Outside the Envelope
If you operate your machine often enough, through design changes, modifications and fixes, and through changes to the airspace environment, you can get a feel for what really matters– to the airplane (anthropomorphically speaking) and to your performance. A safe and illuminating way to get a feel for the airplane, and push both your and the airplane’s performance envelope, is in the sim. T&T readers have access to very realistic and high-quality simulators. After completing the standard syllabus, feel free to do extreme things that you’d never do in your airplane. Try some aerobatics in which you stall or exceed g-limits. Explore the coffin corner, attempt a dead-stick landing in the weather, a total electrical failure and a gear-up landing. Have the sim operator put an inch or two of ice on the plane. Land on a runway with poor or nil braking and take off on a runway shorter than your accelerate-stop distance. Hand fly an ILS all the way to the runway with 500 RVR. These exercises will give you a feel for what it looks like if you violate the rules. How about some violent control reversals or uncoordinated flight control use, or a continued takeoff after an engine failure below decision speed? Simulate the landing gear failing to retract and practice fuel computations with the gear down. Any of these situations can be caused by human error, instrument calibration, the failure of a component or just plain bad luck. Seeing these in the simulator will help you think outside the box–and the envelope.
The more easily we recognize an irregular event, or when we fly outside of normal parameters, the fewer surprises we will face. And the more likely that the flight will remain
within the laws of physics and rules of the Feds. Consistency and proficiency will help to insure this outcome. Was this the airport of intended landing or did we divert? Did we arrive in the terminal area with the amount of fuel intended? Did the descend-via RNAV arrival get us frazzled and make us feel behind? Were we rushed in loading the approach and setting it up? Are we behind because we accepted a turn to final at eight miles when we should have intercepted at twelve? How precisely did we fly the final approach course? Are we scrambling to get the gear and flaps out as we wait for the speed limitations and then chasing the LOC, GS or VNAV? At the airlines we emphasize flying a stable approach–even to the point of having several mandatory “stable” callouts. We must be configured, within airspeed tolerance vs reference airspeed, and maintaining lateral and vertical approach parameters. If not, we are required to abandon the approach. And finally, how consistent are our landings? We judge them, as do our passengers, by touchdown point vs target, smoothness and the deceleration during roll-out. Next is recognizing precisely how the airplane will react at different weights as we reduce power in ground effect, how we manage the crosswind, execute the flare, and finesse the touchdown.
Consistency
Most anyone can learn to fly and land a basic airplane. Mastering the tasks of operating a complex
machine in the weather, however, requires training, practice, planning and discipline. We can’t eliminate mechanical failures, control the weather or manage the actions of others, only our own proficiency and choices. Consistency helps to limit the variables of a flight, and it makes it easier to recognize deviations from our proficiency zone and to remain within the rules. From arrival at the hangar to parking at the FBO, keeping operations consistent will help us recognize when things are not right. Even then, stuff will happen. If you need to save-the- day, stretch the envelope or break some rules, everyone will be glad you’re a bit anal about the process. Especially when the boogeyman fills your windshield. T&T
•
Kevin Dingman has been flying for over 40 years. He’s an ATP typed in the B737 and DC9 with 21,000 hours. A retired Air Force Major, he flew the F-16 then performed as a USAF Civil Air Patrol Liaison Offi- cer. He flies volunteer missions for the Christian organization Wings of Mercy, is employed by a major airline, and owns and operates a Beechcraft Duke. Contact Kevin at Dinger10d@gmail.com
National Flight Simulator Sixth Page
4/C Ad
MARCH 2016 TWIN & TURBINE • 17