Another reason why I should own instead of rent

[nddons]

This happened the day before Thanksgiving:

<H1 class=headline>UPDATE: Crites Field reopens after mishap

By Darryl Enriquez of the Journal Sentinel
Posted: Nov. 26, 2008
Waukesha County's Crites Field is now open for air traffic following a mishap this afternoon in which a four-seat aircraft slid off of the main runway into an adjacent muddy field, an airport official said.
The pilot decided to abort his takeoff, which caused the plane to skid off the runway, the official said. Neither he nor his passenger was hurt.
Crites was closed for a short while as flight officials made sure the airplane was not a safety problem for other air traffic, the official said.

</H1>

This was a 2001 C-172SP that I occasionally rent, and was my backup for my IR training. (I currently use a 1997 C-172R for my IR training because it has an HSI and ADF.) Now it's toast - bent wing, bent firewall, and broken landing gear. Fortunately no one was hurt, but there goes the redundancy.

 

[KennyFlys]

I'd like to know why they aborted. That's a preliminary I'll look for if you post the registration number.

 

[gprellwitz]

But Stan, if you owned, wouldn't rental be your redundancy if something went wrong with your plane? So this sort of thing could affect your redundancy even if you owned.

 

[Trapper John]

But Stan, if you owned, wouldn't rental be your redundancy if something went wrong with your plane? So this sort of thing could affect your redundancy even if you owned.

Good point.

Also, if you own and put your plane on leaseback, this kind of thing can happen.

Or, if you have a partnership, your partner can bend aluminum, too.

I would think if the FBO has a good rental business, they'll find a replacement 172 pretty quickly.


Trapper John

 

[ScottM]

This happened the day before Thanksgiving:

</H1>

This was a 2001 C-172SP that I occasionally rent, and was my backup for my IR training. (I currently use a 1997 C-172R for my IR training because it has an HSI and ADF.) Now it's toast - bent wing, bent firewall, and broken landing gear. Fortunately no one was hurt, but there goes the redundancy.

I know the feeling Stan.

This was my rental plane.

That was a guy saying the "big snow mound" caused him to lose control;

I guess the words too fast and lose of control are not in his vocabulary.

This coupled with the 3 hour per day rental charge for long trips just made it no longer feasible to rent.

 

[nddons]

I'd like to know why they aborted. That's a preliminary I'll look for if you post the registration number.

N833SP. Thanks Ken.

 

[nddons]

But Stan, if you owned, wouldn't rental be your redundancy if something went wrong with your plane? So this sort of thing could affect your redundancy even if you owned.

Very true, Grant. Except if I bent it, then it's all on me. (Or using a current term that I can't stand: "my bad.")

Good point.

Also, if you own and put your plane on leaseback, this kind of thing can happen.

Or, if you have a partnership, your partner can bend aluminum, too.

I would think if the FBO has a good rental business, they'll find a replacement 172 pretty quickly.


Trapper John

Good point, John. Hopefully they will replace it soon.

 

[John Baker]

Owning your own airplane has several advantages. First, your plane never smells like puke when you open it up, that is unless you have a problem. Since you are in charge of maintenance, you know for a fact that it is well maintained, that is as long as you are not a nickel and dimer. You get to leave most of your flight stuff on board when you go home. Your plane is always waiting for you, no one else. You can fly anytime you want to, no scheduling, just take off and have fun whenever you feel like it.

If you have an error in judgment, your insurance company will take care of it for you, as long as you have kept your insurance up.

A decent used airplane costs about as much as a new car. You should have around ten grand extra per year to keep it up and fly it.

I've owned my Warrior for a little over two years, and after renting, I would not have it any other way. I think I worry more about bending my warrior than I do about bending myself, you get attached to the darn things. I know I would be very bummed out if I saw her upside down like the one in Scott's post.

My Warrior, ain't she purty?
John

 

[gprellwitz]

Very true, Grant. Except if I bent it, then it's all on me. (Or using a current term that I can't stand: "my bad.")

I fully agree, but it seems much more likely that it'll be down because the annual went a little longer than expected or that light bulb went out at just the wrong time and you can't get a replacement Sunday evening. I have an acquaintance who, with his family, had three planes. There was one time when they were ALL down for maintenance simultaneously!

 

[steingar]

Never rented an aircraft without some sort of problem. Disincentive to fly, gotta pay each time. My aircraft gives me an incentive to fly; fixed costs are already paid.

 

[Trapper John]

My Warrior, ain't she purty?

That's a great shot! Did you stage it, or a pro photographer?


Trapper John

 

[John Baker]

That's a great shot! Did you stage it, or a pro photographer?


Trapper John

Actually, that was one of the pictures that was on Controler when I bought it. I don't know who actually took it, the shot was taken on an airport out in east Texas. I had looked at more than a few airplanes, Warriors, Archers, and what I thought was a great Dakota. I had my mechanic go through three airplanes, and he nixed every one of them.

It is not all that cheap to have that done. I saw the Warrior on the Internet and called the guy. He was a true Texan with that friendly Texas drawl. I took a chance and paid to have it ferried from east Texas to Gillespie field, I had sent him a hefty deposit as well. He sent me that photo and a few others.

The plane was already enrout to San Diego when I started looking closer at the photos he sent. I could not see the cowling latches in the photos so I got to thinking they had been Photo Shoped to death. So now I'm sweating bullets, since I had already had a Warrior ferried down from Los Angeles that turned out to be a pile of flying trash.

The plane showed up, it looked even better than the photos. The pilot brought it into the flight school at Gillespie and more than a couple of people thought it was a brand new bird. (it's a 1978). Their mechanic looked it over for a few hours and gave me a thumbs up. I completed the transaction then and there.

John

 

[KennyFlys]

I've now had this tail number on a post-it by my monitor for a while. So, I finally looked it up. They have the probable cause posted and the facts aren't pretty. This was easily preventable but a rushed performance overruled common sense; not to mention lack of training.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20081201X60951&key=1

The pilot reported that the autopilot was inadvertently engaged while taxiing to the departure runway. The pilot and his passenger attempted to disengage the autopilot by depressing the "A/P" button on the unit's control panel. The pilot reported that there were warning buzzers sounding as they attempted to disengage the autopilot.

If the control wheel switch wasn't disabling the autopilot, the flight should have been terminated at that point and the plane grounded or the autopilot disabled by the breaker and placarded accordingly.

The pilot eventually turned off the avionics master switch in order to completely power down the autopilot. After he reestablished power to the avionics, the autopilot appeared to be disengaged. He then contacted the control tower for a takeoff clearance.

How much time elapsed to properly set up and perhaps a test of the autopilot? Apparently not much and no test at all.

The elevator trim was not in the takeoff position, with the indicator showing a nose-up trim setting of about 8/10 of its total travel.

This would have been discovered after an autopilot test followed by reconfiguring the trim for takeoff.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

The pilot's failure to maintain aircraft control during takeoff and his failure to ensure that the elevator trim was properly set before takeoff. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's lack of autopilot system knowledge.

There's no excuse for this one.

 

[Tristar]

It's just a flesh wound!

It really depends on the company as to how quickly the plane will be back on its wheels or replaced. We had a 152 go down in a field 2 years ago and its still in a hanger but we also have 29 airplanes to take its place. If you only have one or two, its a bigger issue.

 

[Trapper John]

I've now had this tail number on a post-it by my monitor for a while. So, I finally looked it up. They have the probable cause posted and the facts aren't pretty. This was easily preventable but a rushed performance overruled common sense; not to mention lack of training.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20081201X60951&key=1


If the control wheel switch wasn't disabling the autopilot, the flight should have been terminated at that point and the plane grounded or the autopilot disabled by the breaker and placarded accordingly.


How much time elapsed to properly set up and perhaps a test of the autopilot? Apparently not much and no test at all.


This would have been discovered after an autopilot test followed by reconfiguring the trim for takeoff.


There's no excuse for this one.

As long as we're in full Monday Morning Quarterback mode...

The pilot reported that he had minimal experience with the use of an autopilot and that he had not received training on the autopilot system installed in the accident airplane.

Doesn't make the pilot less of a dufus for what he did, but it sounds like the CFI that did the checkout let the guy down...


Trapper John

 

[gismo]

As long as we're in full Monday Morning Quarterback mode...

The pilot reported that he had minimal experience with the use of an autopilot and that he had not received training on the autopilot system installed in the accident airplane.

Doesn't make the pilot less of a dufus for what he did, but it sounds like the CFI that did the checkout let the guy down...


Trapper John

While I agree with you, I also believe that unless things have changed dramatically since the last time I was "checked out" in an airplane by a CFI (it's been a while), operation of the avionics and especially the autopilot has always gotten minimal attention if any. As much as I hate the idea of more rules to follow I think it would be a reasonable idea for the FAA (or more likely the insurance companies) to require that a checkout involve at least enough time with the autopilot to guarantee that the checkee learn how to disable it and what issues exist WRT trim malfunctions.

 

[dmccormack]

While I agree with you, I also believe that unless things have changed dramatically since the last time I was "checked out" in an airplane by a CFI (it's been a while), operation of the avionics and especially the autopilot has always gotten minimal attention if any. As much as I hate the idea of more rules to follow I think it would be a reasonable idea for the FAA (or more likely the insurance companies) to require that a checkout involve at least enough time with the autopilot to guarantee that the checkee learn how to disable it and what issues exist WRT trim malfunctions.

Until this happens...

CFI: "..and then you engage it with the heading bug set..."
Checkee: (Looking out winder) "Yeah, I'm only gonna fly this thing VFR over to Pulaski...."

 

[Trapper John]

While I agree with you, I also believe that unless things have changed dramatically since the last time I was "checked out" in an airplane by a CFI (it's been a while), operation of the avionics and especially the autopilot has always gotten minimal attention if any. As much as I hate the idea of more rules to follow I think it would be a reasonable idea for the FAA (or more likely the insurance companies) to require that a checkout involve at least enough time with the autopilot to guarantee that the checkee learn how to disable it and what issues exist WRT trim malfunctions.

Good points. I'd hate to see someone have to go to avionics ground school to fly a 172, but they are getting pretty complex...knowing how to turn the AP off is important and how it affects trim is important, no doubt about it. But then where do you stop? Using an AP as a basic wing-leveler could save someone's backside, but can you teach just that and stop short of teaching how to do a coupled ILS or GPS approach? I guess I don't really know...


Trapper John

 

[dmccormack]

Good points. I'd hate to see someone have to go to avionics ground school to fly a 172, but they are getting pretty complex...knowing how to turn the AP off is important and how it affects trim is important, no doubt about it. But then where do you stop? Using an AP as a basic wing-leveler could save someone's backside, but can you teach just that and stop short of teaching how to do a coupled ILS or GPS approach? I guess I don't really know...


Trapper John

I know one thing for sure...

Anytime *I* am doing instruction or a BFR in a pilot's personal airplane, I will include a full assessment/refresher training on anything in that airplane.

That said -- if the pilot just ain't gettin it (yeah, it happens), I don't sign off until he/she knows how to shut down anything in the airplane.

Sure, I can refuse to sign off until full proficiency is shown in all areas, but that's not really how the BFR is supposed to work (see http://www.faa.gov/pilots/training/media/flight_review.pdf)

 

[KennyFlys]

You never turn loose any student or pilot who does not know at a minimum how to operate or disable equipment in the aircraft.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

I know the feeling Stan.

This was my rental plane.

That was a guy saying the "big snow mound" caused him to lose control;

I guess the words too fast and lose of control are not in his vocabulary.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=CHI07LA034&rpt=fa

Apparently staying current wasn't in his vocabulary either. The PP had attained 223.3 hours since getting his rating in 1971, last three flights before this were Jan 2, 1988; then five years later on Jan 30, 1993; then a flight review on Nov 24, 2006 before this incident two weeks later on Dec 8. Yikes. Evidence to support that "legally current" is not necessarily equal to competent!

 

[RMCN172RG]

As long as we're in full Monday Morning Quarterback mode...

The pilot reported that he had minimal experience with the use of an autopilot and that he had not received training on the autopilot system installed in the accident airplane.

Doesn't make the pilot less of a dufus for what he did, but it sounds like the CFI that did the checkout let the guy down...


Trapper John

Actually the 172SP I learned in had an item on the checklist to insure that the A/P circuit breaker was out. Since I did not actually get introduced to the A/P until the long night X/C.

One time it was on when I used the aircraft solo and I did notice weird beeps at strange times as it self tested. I figured it out without crashing the plane.

 

[nddons]

It's just a flesh wound!

It really depends on the company as to how quickly the plane will be back on its wheels or replaced. We had a 152 go down in a field 2 years ago and its still in a hanger but we also have 29 airplanes to take its place. If you only have one or two, its a bigger issue.

Yea, it was a total loss. I saw the carcass in the hanger the week before it was hauled off for the insurance company. It was interesting to be able to see exactly what a bent firewall looked like. The engine looked great from the outside, but the prop was bent as was a wing, and the nose and right landing gear were broken clean off. Must have been a heck of a ride.

 

[wildwobby]

Heh, the C150 that landed in grayslake last month is already flying again as of last week.