Expensive Brain Fart!

[Joe Zuffoletto]

No disrespect to anyone, but I reserve the right to select flaps up on touch down. It's a useful practice when used with caution.

 

I agree. My PPL instructor taught me to do it to prevent locking up the wheels when braking, thus putting bald spots on the tires. It works.

[WardHolbrook]

This was preventable.. I offer my unsolicited advice: don't touch any thing but power and radios until you come to a stop. Make landing practice to a full stop (rather than touch and go's)...

 

Thank you for sharing this. I'm sorry that you have to go through this experience. You are correct in your analysis. Changing configurations on the runway isn't something to be done lightly - especially in a retract. It's one thing if you're operating out of a marginal runway, but seriously, how many of us do that? Things like resetting flaps should be left until you're clear of the active. 

[WardHolbrook]

 

 

There is no reason to need to lift flaps on roll out....its a waste.  After my incident I spend some time really learning how to do short field langings.  It is much better to approach 5kts slower over the end of the runway than to do some quick cockpit gymnastics and get the flaps up.  

 

Come in a bit slower over the numbers (don't drag it all the way down final slow, just slow up before the numbers) keep attention to the throttle and get it set up so you can have a slight nose up attitude and whatever speed that is maintain it to the ground.  If it starts to sink, you will feel it and add just a touch of power, just a bit. If you do it right it will be done flying when you get it on the ground.

 

I have a feeling people who are lifting flaps up on roll out (and it was me last year) are doing it for 2 reasons.  LANDING TO FAST or are busy business people and there is about 10 secs where there isn't much to do and they feel as if they have to do something, so "lets start cleaning up the airplane on roll out".

 

I've landed in 1700 foot grass strips with trees on one end and had room to spare, but you have to hit your speeds right.  Remember the prop is your friend and at any time you can put a little more wind under the roots of the wings if you need to, but you must pay attention, air speed decays quickly if your behind the ball.  Way better in my opinion than retracting the flas up on roll out.

 

The commercial guys don't do this for a reason.

 

Aaron

Correct on all counts. When I'm in my work airplane and the guy in the right seat gets going on the after landing checklist while we're still on our landing roll out, I respectfully threaten him with broken fingers if he touches the flaps or airbrakes until we've cleared the runway or slowed down to taxi speed. It's no different in "little" airplanes. Granted, there are some scenarios where you'd want to raise the flaps on the landing rollout. But seriously, do you need to practice that? And another question - How much is this is "using one bad technique to compensate for another?" I love all of those "undocumented", "extracurricular" techniques that some pilots are all too quick to adopt. They justify their special techniques on "We seemed to...", "I felt that...", "I suspect..." hmmm, I guess that these are now the new flight test parameters. I learned a long time ago that this "feeling" stuff doesn't mean much when it comes to aircraft performance. The last time I looked, "Takeoff" involved more than just getting airborne and mushing along in ground effect. The takeoff distance charts in light planes get you to 50' AGL and climbing. Without the appropriate testing, all you're doing is assuming that you're doing better... and as the OP found out, there's always the issues of screwing around with some very significant configuration changes at that phase of the takeoff or landing. As always, you guys are the PIC and you can do what you want.

[jetdriven]

Right on, Ward.  Follow the lead of the professional pilots, on the centerline, at the exact approach speed, and dont touch anything until clear of the runway.

[gregwatts]

Right on, Ward.  Follow the lead of the professional pilots, on the centerline, at the exact approach speed, and dont touch anything until clear of the runway.

 

+1

 

The problem is, that many of these pilots never get any real training that professionals get. They pick up bad habits and after repeating them over and over, they become convinced that their way is correct.

[bd32322]

+1

The problem is, that many of these pilots never get any real training that professionals get. They pick up bad habits and after repeating them over and over, they become convinced that their way is correct.

Errmm too much small pilot bashing going on

Professionals are trained to produce the same safe behavior over and over by following set procedures because their employers do not want to sink their business by losing aircraft and people. In my opinion thats like always flying with the FAA examiner in the co-pilots seat. And thats not safe behavior either. I can recall quite a few airline crashes where the crew got over-subscribed trying to troubleshoot and follow procedures and didnt fly the plane (AF 447 comes to mind)

GA flying is all about flexibility, a license to learn from others in this case, from orgs like AOPA, from instructors in biannual reviews etc, and then modify your checklists and behaviors to make it safer for yourself. We train ourselves in such scenarios if we feel we need it. No one hands us scenario training. We have the freedom to try different ways of flying and pick one that best suits us. Ofcourse freedom comes with a price.

I fail to see what special training we are missing that our instructors, orgs like AOPA and type clubs cannot provide.

[jetdriven]

Errmm too much small pilot bashing going on

Professionals are trained to produce the same safe behavior over and over by following set procedures because their employers do not want to sink their business by losing aircraft and people. In my opinion thats like always flying with the FAA examiner in the co-pilots seat. And thats not safe behavior either. I can recall quite a few airline crashes where the crew got over-subscribed trying to troubleshoot and follow procedures and didnt fly the plane (AF 447 comes to mind)

GA flying is all about flexibility, a license to learn from others in this case and from orgs like AOPA, then modify your checklists and behaviors to make it safer for yourself. We train ourselves in such scenarios if we feel we need it. No one hands us scenario training. We have the freedom to try different ways of flying and pick one that best suits us. Ofcourse freedom comes with a price.

 

The price is currently 60 grand for repairing your airplane when you grab the wrong switch on rollout too.  There is a reason airlines are 200 times safer from an accident/100K hour standpoint (and 400 times safer from a fatality standpoint)  than the average GA operation.   Last year they were infinitely safer, we had no domestic 121 fatalities. The 135 air taxi operators are six times safer per 100K hours, and they fly the same airplanes GA pilots do. I can also say from experience they fly through far worse weather and much more often than the average GA pilot.

 

http://www.nbaa.org/ops/safety/stats/

[RJBrown]

They do not fly the same planes. Who flys air taxi in a Mooney? No one. Cut the BS. 135 flys the top of the market. No 172s there either. My "Airline" is 22 years old it has never had a fatality or even an accident. Stats tell what ever story you want. If you don't like GA Go home Yankee. We choose our risks and take the consequences. Airlines avoid risk way above the pilots pay grade. They don't leave much to the pilots do they? At Air Randy I make all the decisions. At United most are made for you. If you really look at the stats "BigIron" driver do no better in GA than the rest. A friend and 747 captain left his 195 on the side of a mountain near Aspen. Should I blame your training for his families death?

[WardHolbrook]

They do not fly the same planes. Who flys air taxi in a Mooney? No one. Cut the BS. 135 flys the top of the market. No 172s there either. My "Airline" is 22 years old it has never had a fatality or even an accident. Stats tell what ever story you want. If you don't like GA Go home Yankee. We choose our risks and take the consequences. Airlines avoid risk way above the pilots pay grade. They don't leave much to the pilots do they? At Air Randy I make all the decisions. At United most are made for you. If you really look at the stats "BigIron" driver do no better in GA than the rest. A friend and 747 captain left his 195 on the side of a mountain near Aspen. Should I blame your training for his families death?

 

Actually, I have Part 135 in a Mooney. As for relative safety, I think you've got it all wrong. Safety comes from from your mindset and approach to flying as much as anything. The safety record for professionally flown Part 91 corporate jets historically ranks right up there with the best Part 121 Flag Carriers. Some years the airlines seem to do a little better, other years the corporate guys take the prize. To me, this shows that it's not all of those Part 121 rules and regulations that provide the safety benefit, it's the professional approach. What is "a professional approach" to flying? Do you have to be a professional to have a professional approach to flying? Of course not. Does taking a professional approach in any way take away from the pleasure and enjoyment of flying? Not in the least, me and all the pros I've ever flown with still grin ear-to-ear when we're committing aviation. As far as "big iron" pilots dying in GA accidents, it happens but there are always those guys guys who think that a big fat logbook filled with transport category jet time somehow shields them from the effects of complacency or carelessness. Not true. I think the key to all of this is discipline - the ability to tell yourself and others "NO". We've all got different skill and experience levels. We all fly aircraft with different capabilities. What we all need is the ability to say NO to ourselves when we're looking at scenarios that our outside of our skill or experience level and/or the capabilities of the airplane we're flying.  For some of us, in general aviation, it's going to take a total paradigm shift. I believe that it starts at the very beginning when we ask the question - What's the bare minimum I have to do to earn my license? After that, the question frequently becomes - What's the bare minimum I have to do to keep current? Because many folks equate currency and proficiency, seldom do you ever hear anyone ask the question - What do I have to do remain proficient? I understand the financial pressures that most of us are under, but whatever the cause, the lack of training and proficiency becomes very apparent when peruse our accident histories. Throw in a bit of "lack of discipline" (the ability to tell yourself "NO") and bingo - another busted up airplane or worse. Fly safely my friends.

[jetdriven]

They do not fly the same planes. Who flys air taxi in a Mooney? No one. Cut the BS. 135 flys the top of the market. No 172s there either. My "Airline" is 22 years old it has never had a fatality or even an accident. Stats tell what ever story you want. If you don't like GA Go home Yankee. We choose our risks and take the consequences. Airlines avoid risk way above the pilots pay grade. They don't leave much to the pilots do they? At Air Randy I make all the decisions. At United most are made for you. If you really look at the stats "BigIron" driver do no better in GA than the rest. A friend and 747 captain left his 195 on the side of a mountain near Aspen. Should I blame your training for his families death?

 

Wow, calm down, Randy.  For one thing, 135 air taxi operators operate a large portion of the Bonanza, Baron, and 206, 207, and Twin Cessna fleet. Many of these airplanes are approaching 20-30K hours on the airframes. Some are not maintained very well. Many of their pilots just meet the 135 mins, which IIRC was 1200 hours. They fly in all kinds of weather. Yet their accident rate (2010) still stands at one sixth that of GA on average.  Take out the experimentals (Which skew the rates up for GA) it is still several orders of magnitude safer.

 

The dispatcher and the PIC are jointly responsible for the flight, but it is the PIC, and him alone, who makes operational decisions WRT routing, weather, altitudes, attempts, diversions, and emergencies.  You follow the FAR's and you follow the SOP, but those regs are written in blood.

 

When I fly with other GA pilots, I am sometimes surprised at the total lack of ability. They don't know how their GPS or autopilot works. They never scan for traffic.  Ball is never in the center. They park the RPM and mixture in the same place for every flight and hope it doesn't burn more than the book says. They mismanage fuel, land to the side of the runway, make six turns and 12 radio calls (instead of a straight in) to approach and land at a nontowered field. Some of them have never done a deep stall, and the majority have never done a spin. So, for "safety and to be conservative", They never bank more than 30 degrees,  approach at half flaps, 15 miles an hour above book speed, touch down halfway down the runway, set it down on all three wheels, and then burn the brakes down trying to stop on the remaining part.   They don't know the numbers for their airplane, and they frequently lose control of their machines on clear VFR days.I once had a student who had 60 hours and needed a few hours to polish up for the PPL checkride. He had never done a full-flap landing.  All of these can be resolved with proper training.  The COPA, Bonanza PPP, and Mooney Safety Foundation are proof of this. They cut the accident rate in HALF.

 

Comparing Air Randy, with 22 years and 1500 hours of safe service, to 121 airlines who flew 20-30 million hours last year alone, without a single fatality, well, that speaks for itself as well.  Its like comparing a bottle rocket to the NASA Apollo moon landing Program.  Now that 10^-9 safety factor designed into those big jets plays a role, but they still must be managed by men.  They also make far fewer mistakes.

 

My apologies to N1026Fand his Ovation. I am pretty sure he is a competent pilot with plenty of skill, but in this circumstance a bad habit and muscle memory took over.  Same with Aaronk25. Contratulations to both of you guys for having the balls to publicly admit what happened so we can all take something away from it.  Hopefully others learn from their mishaps and prevent a few more.

[Hank]

Byron, your math is bad. Corp jets six times safer than GA is less than a single order of magnitude; removing Experimentals makes it even less than an order of magnitude, not 'several.' An order of magnitude is one thing being 10 times another.

How much of the 'professional corporate jet' accident rate is due to higher aircraft capability than in GA? Our Mooneys are far from the bottom of tbe GA capability list. How much is due to the second pilot in the cockpit? to rigid and enforced procedures, deviate at the risk of your job? to required airport minimums? Not many Corp. pilots drop over the trees to land at my 3000' home field, but we have ~50 GA planes based there. How much is safety improved when the pilot flies 50-80 hours per month? I'm fortunate to be on the high end of personal GA at 85-110 annually, but some winter months I am lucky to fly a single hour. What does frequent emergency-filled simulator check rides do for pilot proficiency and safety?

There is much more to the lower accident rate than having the Corp. Office make most of your pre-flight / dispatch / landing requirements / alternates decisions for you and giving them to you written down for each flight. There is no Dispatch Office to arrange anything for me, or that I can call to discuss questions / concerns.

And yes, I just completed another MAPA PPP, complete with IPC, and flew with a safety pilot for foggle time (proficiency, not number of logged approaches) prior to making a trip with forecast IMC that did not occur.

[Cruiser]

Let's face it. The Commerical pilot flying record is safer than Private pilots. No doubt about it.

 

We have a local flying service Part 135 that uses everything from a couple of PA28 Archers, a Saratoga and two King Airs.

[WardHolbrook]

Byron, your math is bad. Corp jets six times safer than GA is less than a single order of magnitude; removing Experimentals makes it even less than an order of magnitude, not 'several.' An order of magnitude is one thing being 10 times another.

How much of the 'professional corporate jet' accident rate is due to higher aircraft capability than in GA? Our Mooneys are far from the bottom of tbe GA capability list. How much is due to the second pilot in the cockpit? to rigid and enforced procedures, deviate at the risk of your job? to required airport minimums? Not many Corp. pilots drop over the trees to land at my 3000' home field, but we have ~50 GA planes based there. How much is safety improved when the pilot flies 50-80 hours per month? I'm fortunate to be on the high end of personal GA at 85-110 annually, but some winter months I am lucky to fly a single hour. What does frequent emergency-filled simulator check rides do for pilot proficiency and safety?

There is much more to the lower accident rate than having the Corp. Office make most of your pre-flight / dispatch / landing requirements / alternates decisions for you and giving them to you written down for each flight. There is no Dispatch Office to arrange anything for me, or that I can call to discuss questions / concerns.

And yes, I just completed another MAPA PPP, complete with IPC, and flew with a safety pilot for foggle time (proficiency, not number of logged approaches) prior to making a trip with forecast IMC that did not occur.

 

It's not the airline dispatcher, it's not the ubber restrictive Part 121 (or Part 135) rules and regulations, it's not the airline's op specs and it’s not the Boeing or Airbus equipment. Part 91 corporate pilots have none of that to support us and there are relatively few BBJs in the corporate fleet and yet, year after year, we run neck and neck with the major airlines when it comes to overall safety record. Like I said, some years they will come out on top, other years it’s the Part 91 Corporate guys who take the trophy. I still say it's the experience, the training, and the discipline – call it the professional approach - together with having adequate equipment for the task at hand. 

As far as equipment goes, a pilot of that caliber will know when it’s safe to fly and when he should pull the plug. We get paid the big $$$ to say no – but you won’t last very long in this career if you say no when it wasn’t necessary or didn’t when it was. It doesn’t matter whether you’re flying turbine or piston, single or multi, FIKI or whatever. You adapt. A turbo FIKI radar equipped twin properly flown by an experienced, well trained pilot can safely handle a very high percentage of what an airliner can handle – it is done every single day. The exact same thing goes for a Mooney M20; but, like I said earlier, it absolutely requires appropriate equipment, adequate training, an experienced pilot (there really is a difference between 4000 hours of experience and one hour of experience repeated 4000 times) and finally the discipline to “stay between the lines” of aircraft performance and regulations. 

It takes a healthy commitment and for many GA pilots, it will require a total paradigm shift. Far too many GA pilots approach the whole issue of training and currency from the perspective of what is the absolute minimum I have to do to be legal? It will always be difficult or impossible for those guys to check three out of those four boxes. 

[bd32322]

I am inclined to believe the biggest things holding us back are:

Recurrent training beyond the biannual.

Emergency procedures training.

The hows of weather and not just the ability to read forecasts.

Finally equipment certainly makes a big difference

But my original beef is with the statement that somehow we are trained less. I dont think thats true at all. We are trained adequately to fly our planes and we dont have to ape corporate/airline pilots thinking they know best. Its up to us to be honest and get the recurrent training we need. A fun and simple thing I do is to get rental checkouts in new aircraft i havent flown in ... Gets basic flying cleaned up and its fun to fly a new plane. Or do some aerobatics ... Or take a multi engine aircraft through all its handling envelope.

[bd32322]

Let's face it. The Commerical pilot flying record is safer than Private pilots. No doubt about it.

 

We have a local flying service Part 135 that uses everything from a couple of PA28 Archers, a Saratoga and two King Airs.

No one disagrees on that. Question is why are they safer?

[scottfromiowa]

Wow, calm down, Randy.  For one thing, 135 air taxi operators operate a large portion of the Bonanza, Baron, and 206, 207, and Twin Cessna fleet. Many of these airplanes are approaching 20-30K hours on the airframes. Some are not maintained very well. Many of their pilots just meet the 135 mins, which IIRC was 1200 hours. They fly in all kinds of weather. Yet their accident rate (2010) still stands at one sixth that of GA on average.  Take out the experimentals (Which skew the rates up for GA) it is still several orders of magnitude safer.

 

The dispatcher and the PIC are jointly responsible for the flight, but it is the PIC, and him alone, who makes operational decisions WRT routing, weather, altitudes, attempts, diversions, and emergencies.  You follow the FAR's and you follow the SOP, but those regs are written in blood.

 

When I fly with other GA pilots, I am sometimes surprised at the total lack of ability. They don't know how their GPS or autopilot works. They never scan for traffic.  Ball is never in the center. They park the RPM and mixture in the same place for every flight and hope it doesn't burn more than the book says. They mismanage fuel, land to the side of the runway, make six turns and 12 radio calls (instead of a straight in) to approach and land at a nontowered field. Some of them have never done a deep stall, and the majority have never done a spin. So, for "safety and to be conservative", They never bank more than 30 degrees,  approach at half flaps, 15 miles an hour above book speed, touch down halfway down the runway, set it down on all three wheels, and then burn the brakes down trying to stop on the remaining part.   They don't know the numbers for their airplane, and they frequently lose control of their machines on clear VFR days.I once had a student who had 60 hours and needed a few hours to polish up for the PPL checkride. He had never done a full-flap landing.  All of these can be resolved with proper training.  The COPA, Bonanza PPP, and Mooney Safety Foundation are proof of this. They cut the accident rate in HALF.

 

Comparing Air Randy, with 22 years and 1500 hours of safe service, to 121 airlines who flew 20-30 million hours last year alone, without a single fatality, well, that speaks for itself as well.  Its like comparing a bottle rocket to the NASA Apollo moon landing Program.  Now that 10^-9 safety factor designed into those big jets plays a role, but they still must be managed by men.  They also make far fewer mistakes.

 

My apologies to N1026Fand his Ovation. I am pretty sure he is a competent pilot with plenty of skill, but in this circumstance a bad habit and muscle memory took over.  Same with Aaronk25. Contratulations to both of you guys for having the balls to publicly admit what happened so we can all take something away from it.  Hopefully others learn from their mishaps and prevent a few more.

AND WO-MEN...

[scottfromiowa]

I retract flaps on rollout...not anymore. I will do after exciting active. For those who have heard that awful sound of their bird sliding down asphalt and concrete...trust that you want to do all you can do to NOT be that guy. Make her better than pre-incident. Glad only metal. Always think those that have and those that will...and you won't.

[N1026F]

Thanks to this site and those of you who have shared your thoughts and condolences. But I work for people who are seriously injured or who have lost loved ones; this was just property damage and, yes, an injured pride that up to this point could silently say, "poor other pilot, shouldv'e thought that one over." 

Nonetheless, I think the process of discussing this will save some claims in the future that may have occurred. If an accident or two can be prevented--we'll never know--then the real value of this site is worth supporting with whatever small price to pay in order to keep it a high quality operation.  I know I learn a lot from other pilots. I wish I had learned this one thing faster, but...

[aaronk25]

I retract flaps on rollout...not anymore. I will do after exciting active. For those who have heard that awful sound of their bird sliding down asphalt and concrete...trust that you want to do all you can do to NOT be that guy. Make her better than pre-incident. Glad only metal. Always think those that have and those that will...and you won't.

I landed our club flight design 2 weeks ago and being new to us sure enough there was a couple issues. Someone changed the brake pads previous to us and didn't torque them properly and when I applied the brakes the bottom bolt holding the pad came loose and with the exotic light weight jagged brake rotor design the pad broke off the and the top pad banged around in the cowl and got wedged inbetween the rotor sheard in half and came banged around some more.

Long story short on roll out there was a bunch of metallic banging and scraping and it was a terrible familiar sound. One I never want hear again. Beautiful landing followed by bang...Erek ...bang....and grinding metal..