Getting to know the Seneca

flyingcheesehead

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
24,256
Location
UQACY, WI
Display Name

Display name:
iMooniac
Going up to CAD this weekend was one of the very few instances where a twin is actually cheaper than a single. (4.4 hours around the lake last year in the 182 *$109/hr = $479.60, 1.9 over the lake this year in the Seneca * $242.50/hr = $460.75.)

So, I took the Seneca. It was my third flight in a Seneca. #1 was with Dr. Bruce, did an engine out. #2 was at Wisconsin Aviation in their Seneca II, N6878C (which is not nearly as nice as Bruce's! :no:), just getting used to doing everything. #3 was again in 78C going to Cadillac.

I think I'll tell the story and just scatter my comments and questions throughout. Please feel free to comment and advise on anything contained herein! :yes:

We loaded the bird up to just shy of gross weight. 100 lbs of bags in the baggage compartment, 40 lbs of flight bags in the middle seats, and 525 lbs of me + good-sized CFII/MEI in the front, and full fuel (extended tanks, 123 gallons/738 pounds of 100LL) put us at 4568 gross, just two pounds under the Seneca II's MGTOW of 4570.

I calculated that with the conditions for the flight we should have a takeoff roll of around 1100 feet, accelerate-stop of about 1900 feet, and a climb of 220fpm on one engine. Cruise speed at 32"/2300 RPM at 9000 feet was calculated to be 165 KTAS, and sure enough, we trued out right at 165. Not too bad when a 12,000 hour airframe still makes book numbers! :no:

I looked at a couple of routes. Airways would have taken us via BAE MKG HIC but that made kind of a loop and was 41nm farther than direct. So, I filed IFR, V9 OSH MTW MBL at 9,000 feet. I chose the route because it was 24nm shorter and kept me over territory I'm much more familiar with (and it's a route I flew in July in the 182), making improved situational awareness easier which I figured would be good in an airplane that's relatively new to me.

We packed our stuff in the bird and strapped in. CFI has insisted that I use the Piper checklists on this plane rather than making my own. :dunno: Luckily, I've been doing lots of flying (130 hours last year) and I've pretty much ingrained the IFR procedures into my head, so not having my own checklist didn't turn out to be that big of a deal.

OK, time to start. I haven't flown a fuel-injected airplane in a while. Following the checklist: Prop full, mixture rich, throttle full. Run the left primer pump for several seconds. Throttle back to idle, left engine mags on, crank left engine starter. Vroom, cough, sputter, quit. Okay, throttle up, prime for two more seconds, throttle idle, and try again. At the direction of my CFI, I kept cranking until the engine actually started and stayed that way. (Felt like I was starting a turbine or something!) Engine's going, oil pressure's good, alternator is charging. Lather, rinse, repeat on the second engine, which started on the first try.

Man, it's cool to start two engines. :yes: :goofy: :) So cool, that I actually forget I'm now burning money at the rate of over four dollars a minute! :hairraise:

The checklist says to run the boost pumps on low for 1-3 minutes in cold weather to attain smooth engine operation. The right engine is still a bit rough and I go to turn the boost pump on low, but Joe (CFI) says that's for hot weather. Huh? It says below 20 F. :dunno:

So... When SHOULD the boost pumps on the Seneca be used? When would you use the high setting?

OK, now for ground leaning. Joe says that we only need to pull the mixture back a little on these engines, maybe the width of the mixture knob (actually, the metal arm to the knob would be more accurate). Okay.

We leave the engines running at 900-1000 RPM. I switch one engine to crossfeed while I listen to the ATIS, and then switch it back to "on" and switch the other engine to crossfeed while I get the clearance (As filed, up to 5, 9 after 10). We taxi off to the wide-open area at the north end of the East ramp to do the runup.

The runup begins with a feather check at 1000 RPM, pulling each prop lever all the way back to the feather position and looking for the RPM to begin dropping, then immediately pushing the knob back to full forward. Then, it's up to 1900 RPM for the normal mag check, exercise the prop, check alternate air, vacuum, etc. We switch off one alternator at a time, checking to make sure the other picks up the load and that they once again split the load when both are back on.

Now, time to do all the stuff that's not on the checklist: Set up the radios, do a VOR check, and call ground for taxi clearance. As expected, we got cleared to 21 via Juliet and Bravo. There'd been a very nice Lear 40 that called up just before us and got the same taxi clearance. Though we were quite a ways ahead of him, I told Ground that we'd wait for him to go past so they could depart and I wouldn't feel rushed.

I checked the instruments as we rolled down the taxiways, and paused short of the runway to clear the controls, check trim, go through my last-minute checks (GUMPS, Lights, Camera, Action, 5 T's).

Joe briefed the takeoff, which went something like this: "If we lose one on the roll, prior to blue line, or with usable runway remaining, we chop and drop even if we'll go off the end. Heavy braking. If it'll fly, we clean it up and go..."

What are the elements of a good takeoff briefing? How about in a single? (I do that sometimes, just to remind myself that I don't want to turn back too low...)

So... Fuel selectors on. Pumps off. Gear down and showing three green. Mixtures rich. Props forward. Seat belts on. Doors locked and bump-checked. Lights on. Transponder - ALT. HSI set to proper course, with bug on runway heading. Time hacked. I think through what to do with the throttles as I take the runway, take two deep breaths, and...

"Madison Tower, Seneca 6878C short of 21 ready for takeoff."
"Seneca 78C, fly heading 140, runway 21, cleared for takeoff."

I read it back and pull onto the runway. Onto the centerline, stop. Hold the brakes, push the throttles to 30" MP and let them stabilize a bit. Brake release, push to 38" MP, hold the centerline, watch for overboost, airspeed alive, engine gauges green, up above red line, rotate, and we're airborne. Pitch for 89 KIAS, no runway left, gear selector up, there's 400 AGL, start the left turn, "Seneca 78C, contact departure," confirm gear up and locked, remove hand from gear selector, finish the turn, "Over to departure, 78C, G'day," pitch down a little, switch the audio panel back to Com1, accelerate to 100 KIAS, "Madison Departure, Seneca 6878C climbing through 2,600, 140 assigned," pull back (very carefully, sensitive engine controls!) to 35" MP for the climb, "Seneca 78C, radar contact, turn left heading 070," pull the props back a bit, "Left 070, 78C," twist the bug, start the turn, adjust the throttles slightly to match MP on both sides, finish the turn, start to sync the props, "Seneca 78C, climb and maintain 9,000, turn left 020 and join V9, resume own navigation," give up on the props, twist the bug, start the turn, read back the clearance, nudge the throttles forward to gain back the couple of inches of MP we've lost, finish the turn, let Joe mess with the props.

And that's just the first two minutes. :eek: I'm beginning to see why they want 700TT or 100 multi as well as 25 in type to rent this bird.

Deep breaths.

Fly.

Look outside the airplane.

Wow. we're just a few (maybe 4-5) miles due east of the airport, nearing 4,000 feet. We're stabilized in the climb at a little over 100KIAS and making 1350 FPM, which again exactly agreed with the book value I'd calculated. I'm again impressed that a 12,000 hour airframe is making book performance! Of course, I can't be impressed for too long, it's time to nudge the throttles back up to 35" MP again.

As we near 5,000 feet, Joe says "Confirm cleared to 9,000" and I said "Affirmative." At 5,100 feet, he pushes the yoke over and calls Departure to confirm, which they do. "Sorry, it's my name on the flight plan and my ticket." Yup. I forgive him, as I'm sure that at the almost-overwhelming pace of those first two minutes, he's got to watch like a hawk and make sure I get everything done right and he doesn't know what I'm doing in what order unless I say something, which I didn't because my hands were full without talking.

Climbing through 7,800 feet we get handed off to Chicago Center. We continue the climb to 9,000 and intercept the airway almost as soon as we reach cruise altitude. I began to relax a lot more during the climb. Once you get this bird going, she's just an airplane, after all. I just have to remember to keep nudging the throttles forward as we climb. You'd think I'd be used to this after flying with a CS prop so much, but I fly the 182 at WOT until descending near the destination most of the time.

I make the turn onto the airway and begin my cruise checklist. Trim forward. Time hacked. Landing lights off. Pumps off. Power back to 32" MP and 2300 RPM. Mixtures set. Compass... Wait, I don't need no steenkin' compass, I have a slaved HSI here! :D Cowl flaps closed. Cruise checklist complete, and it'd time to start navigating off OSH.

The middle section of the flight seems relatively easy. Just regular old IFR procedures, and enjoying the view.

Just prior to OSH, Center told us to maintain present heading for traffic, then a couple minutes later cleared us direct MTW and handed us to GRB approach. A brief busy moment in an otherwise relaxed cruise, I did a quick TIT, took a wild guess that the course to MTW would be 085 (I was only off by a degree), started the turn and called Green Bay. We flew over Lake Winnebago which is now nicely iced over and populated with ice fishermen. (You southerners don't know what you're missing, not being able to eat an icefish. :rofl:)

As we neared the Lake Michigan shoreline, we were handed off to Minneapolis Center. In contrast to Lake Winnebago, Lake Michigan was almost completely free of ice. There's snow on the shoreline, and some ice floating near the western edge, but the rest is clear blue water.

Joe also suggested that I start briefing the approach as we were starting over the water. Huh? I'm still navigating off MTW, and I'll fly both sides of MBL too... I was thinking of waiting until near MBL so that I wouldn't confuse myself too much.

I'd decided to fly the NDB 25 approach into CAD. Winds were whipping out of the west, and I don't get to do much with NDB's in our club planes. (182 doesn't have an ADF, one Archer's is inop, the other Archer I do not fly IFR or at night.) Originally I thought that was a kind of crazy thing to do, but the only approaches to 25 are an NDB and a GPS, which this bird was not equipped with. Besides, I've done plenty of ILS approaches lately, and they're really not that hard. Another challenge sounded good. So, I started briefing, slowly.

I'd calculated that I would need to begin my descent right about at MBL, and Center cleared us to descend to 4,000 at pilot's discretion prior to that. I pulled the first inch of power and reported leaving 9,000.

Hmmm. Go down, airplane! One inch isn't much. I pitched down but wasn't able to get more than about a 300 fpm descent without getting excessively fast. Wait a minute, pull another inch. Still 300fpm. Pull back to level, slow to 138KIAS so I can throw out a notch of flaps. Pull another inch of MP. OK, now we're starting to get somewhere. Pull another inch, slow down again, below 129KIAS and drop the gear. Okay, now we're talking. 700fpm to catch up with my desired descent profile.

Joe said that once below 25" MP it's pretty much OK to pull power at any rate. I'd have thought that with the Seneca's fixed wastegates, it would be better to keep pulling power slowly. :dunno:

About 10 miles out we were cleared for the approach. I finished briefing and setting up just about as I crossed the NDB. I was no longer ahead of the airplane, but I did at least manage to stay with it and not get taken for a ride.

I'd never realized this, but... An HSI makes flying an NDB approach really darn easy! Twist the OBS to the desired inbound course, and attempt to make the arrows look the same. Cool! :yes: So, despite the fast airplane, it was probably the best NDB approach I've ever flown, or at least the easiest.

Now came the toughest part of the flight. The winds were really blowing. It began getting quite turbulent way back at 4300 feet. On final, we were getting tossed around quite a bit. Since the Seneca is a much heavier airplane than I'm used to, I was having some trouble. (Heck, I even had a little trouble with the 182 when I first started flying that for the same reason... It just takes time.)

So, there I am wrestling the plane down final, and I still don't know if I was helping or hindering the ride! The plane responds somewhat slower due to its weight (yeah, I know, inertia), so I think that by the time I was getting the plane about back to where I wanted it, the turbulence was helping me go right through where I wanted to be... As if my control inputs were out of phase from where they should have been to counteract the turbulence.

I somehow managed to get the plane down OK, but it sure wasn't pretty. It wasn't until after I'd landed that I found out I had an audience - Rick and Nigel had been holding short in Nigel's Bonanza when I landed. :redface:

Okay, I'm gonna take a break and post this part. A few more observations on the return flight in the next post...
 
Hi Kent.

Even at full gross at 600 msl, if it stumbles within 3 seconds of rotation, the shortest runway at Dane will allow you to stop.

GROUND EFFECT UNTIL Vy!.

Three inches of MP reduction per minute per the POH. Start the power reduction while still in cruise @ 9000....before the nose goes over!

Aren't HSIs GREAT?

I love it!
 
Even at full gross at 600 msl, if it stumbles within 3 seconds of rotation, the shortest runway at Dane will allow you to stop.

Yep... Just getting used to the bird, so calculating every little thing. Joe pretty much kicks my tail on that stuff. :yes:

Three inches of MP reduction per minute per the POH. Start the power reduction while still in cruise @ 9000....before the nose goes over!

Aha. I bet three inches would have allowed a decent descent.

How far back do you pull the power before you start descending?

Aren't HSIs GREAT?

Yes!!!

I'm looking forward to more time in this bird in the months to come. It's a challenge, but it'll be nice to master it.

I'm sure my bank account isn't so keen, though! :eek:
 
Nice post Kent! Glad to see you're getting some twin time. Brings back memories of all the stuff I was figuring out when I first got in the Baron.

Keep the posts coming. I still read a lot about systems, avionics, autopilots, etc. No matter how much you fly them, lots of homework to do if you really want to know what everything does before you push buttons, pull levers, etc.

Flying by numbers is great to reduce workload. If one can have a couple power settings in mind, it can really simplify things.

Best,

Dave
 
Dear Kent,
Great write-up.
The Apache is so much lighter than the Seneca. I flew the Cougar before finishing my multi in the Apache. It felt much heavier than the Apache.
It is great to have the power of a twin. When I fly most singles now, everything seems to move in slow motion. The twin zooms up. The Apache climb rate stays over 1000' per minute for quite a while.
You should come with when I fly up to Minnesota next time.
ApacheBob
 
Joe briefed the takeoff, which went something like this: "If we lose one on the roll, prior to blue line, or with usable runway remaining, we chop and drop even if we'll go off the end. Heavy braking. If it'll fly, we clean it up and go..."

What are the elements of a good takeoff briefing? How about in a single? (I do that sometimes, just to remind myself that I don't want to turn back too low...)

My multi takeoff briefing is as follows: If partial or complete loss of engine power below blue line, throttles to idle and stop straight ahead. If above blue line, continue takeoff unless sufficient runway exists for landing.

In gliders we say: In the event of tow failure, below 200 feet, maintain a safe speed and land straight ahead. Above 200 feet, maintain a safe speed and land ahead or behind.

For singles, I think the glider briefing would be sufficient, but with 500 instead of 200. Or higher depending on airplane/pilot.

I read it back and pull onto the runway. Onto the centerline, stop. Hold the brakes, push the throttles to 30" MP and let them stabilize a bit. Brake release, push to 38" MP, hold the centerline, watch for overboost, airspeed alive, engine gauges green, up above red line, rotate, and we're airborne. Pitch for 89 KIAS, no runway left, gear selector up, there's 400 AGL, start the left turn, "Seneca 78C, contact departure," confirm gear up and locked, remove hand from gear selector, finish the turn, "Over to departure, 78C, G'day," pitch down a little, switch the audio panel back to Com1, accelerate to 100 KIAS, "Madison Departure, Seneca 6878C climbing through 2,600, 140 assigned," pull back (very carefully, sensitive engine controls!) to 35" MP for the climb, "Seneca 78C, radar contact, turn left heading 070," pull the props back a bit, "Left 070, 78C," twist the bug, start the turn, adjust the throttles slightly to match MP on both sides, finish the turn, start to sync the props, "Seneca 78C, climb and maintain 9,000, turn left 020 and join V9, resume own navigation," give up on the props, twist the bug, start the turn, read back the clearance, nudge the throttles forward to gain back the couple of inches of MP we've lost, finish the turn, let Joe mess with the props.

And that's just the first two minutes. :eek: I'm beginning to see why they want 700TT or 100 multi as well as 25 in type to rent this bird.

Deep breaths.

Fly.

Look outside the airplane.

heh this reminded me of my first 10 or so hours in the 421. It is a really good feeling when you can get your mind wrapped around everything thats going on though. Makes you feel like you actually know something.
 
For singles, I think the glider briefing would be sufficient, but with 500 instead of 200. Or higher depending on airplane/pilot.

Someone (Ron?) will have to post the reference, but IIRC there was an article saying that even pilots who had been practicing the turn-back were having trouble completing it from 7-800 AGL. Never tried it myself, maybe I should...
 
Someone (Ron?) will have to post the reference, but IIRC there was an article saying that even pilots who had been practicing the turn-back were having trouble completing it from 7-800 AGL. Never tried it myself, maybe I should...

A lot of pilots have problems because they don't understand that when it quits you need to get that nose down like NOW and bank quickly with at least 45 degrees. I can do 500 in a 172 pretty easily. Most of the time I'm going to land straight ahead because I'm confident about my abilities to put down in a field in the day. At night things change a bit and I will turn back at 600. You must consider winds into the equation along with runway length. In a 172 I really do need about 4,500 ft of runway to turn back. Anything less than that and I'm likely not to make it back to the runway due to the slow climb rate. Give me a 15 knot headwind and I can turn back with much less of a runway. It's possible that it could be hard to get down to land on it though so being comfortable with steep turning slips is very useful.

Turning around should only be done if you have no other option.

Stuff like that is the stuff you must learn from practice and thought. The PTS and FARs are not the bible of safety as some people on this forum seem to believe.
 
A few more observations on the return flight in the next post...

My return flight route was the reverse of the flight up. We took off just before sunset. Startup and runup was all normal. Weather was pretty good, so we decided to take off and get our clearance in the air.

I'd barely lifted off when the airplane decided to remind us to remain vigilant at all times. With nary a cough, the left engine decided to take a nap. It was still running, but not developing full power. MP was still matched up between the engines, but fuel flow was much lower on the left, and I had a legful of right rudder. :eek:

Here's where I really appreciated CRM. I flew, Joe played with the engine. I circled back towards the airport and prepared to make a precautionary landing if needed. I'm not quite sure what Joe did, but he did manage to coax the engine back to full power. I turned back west and continued climbing and called Center for our IFR clearance.

We were treated to a stunningly beautiful sunset as we crossed the eastern shore of Lake Michigan:

DSCN3313.jpg

DSCN3318.jpg


Everything else was fairly uneventful until we got to MSN. My approach to landing was better than it was at CAD, and I was stabilized, and right at the speed I wanted (about 85 on short final). Joe told me to pull the power off at maybe 30' AGL. Starting the flare, Joe says "Go around." I complied, but I was like "Huh???? What for?" He said I was about to get too slow to keep the nose from dropping, but I wasn't pulling that hard and I don't think I was that slow yet, and I was probably down to less than 1' AGL with the mains. I still don't know what (if) I did wrong. ??? From our conversation, it sounds like maybe I pulled the power faster than he thought I was going to or something. It also sounds like the best technique is to pull the power slowly as you're beginning the flare.

Joe wanted to keep his multi night currency, so he did three landings while he talked through what was going on and what he thought I did wrong. None of his landings were very good, and at least one would fit into the "downright scary" category in my book.

Finally, I got another chance. I made a fairly long downwind so as to give myself a chance to get stabilized on final. This time, I kept power in down to where I started pulling back, and pulled the yoke and the throttles simultaneously and slowly. That resulted in the best landing either of us had in the airplane for the weekend. It wasn't a greaser by any means, but I'd call it "decent" and I'm pretty hard on myself when judging my landings. Joe said that was about as good as you can do at night in a multi. I should have gone around the pattern again so I could prove him wrong. ;)
 
Kent, those are a couple of great writeups. You're right, those sinsets are beautiful!
 
Very nice narrative kent. I enjoyed it but probably not as much as you did flying it.
 
Nice stories Kent. As you can see, it's not hard to get spoiled by the performance of a twin on two engines.

But one thing you posted confused me. You said the HSI made the NDB approach easy and you used the OBS on the HSI for that. Was this a Sandel EHSI (they do have NDB pointers on them)? If there's a NDB pointer on a HSI it's actually a form of RMI and very few mechanical ones have them and in any case there's no knob turning at all, you just have to keep the RMI/ADF pointer on the intended heading.
 
But one thing you posted confused me. You said the HSI made the NDB approach easy and you used the OBS on the HSI for that. Was this a Sandel EHSI (they do have NDB pointers on them)? If there's a NDB pointer on a HSI it's actually a form of RMI and very few mechanical ones have them and in any case there's no knob turning at all, you just have to keep the RMI/ADF pointer on the intended heading.

Nope, regular mechanical HSI. But, rather than having to visualize what the pointer *should* look like when mentally transferred to the DG, I could just set the pointer on the HSI, making the wind correction angle blatantly obvious. When one matches the other, you're on course.
 
Wow, Kent, what a fantastic write up. I'm very jealous of your escapades. You've been having entirely too much fun with your flying lately.
 
Nope, regular mechanical HSI. But, rather than having to visualize what the pointer *should* look like when mentally transferred to the DG, I could just set the pointer on the HSI, making the wind correction angle blatantly obvious. When one matches the other, you're on course.

Ah, now I get it. I've done the same thing when I had an ADF in the panel.
 
Wow, Kent, what a fantastic write up. I'm very jealous of your escapades. You've been having entirely too much fun with your flying lately.

Yup. :D :yes: :goofy:

Actually, I'd say "lately" goes back to Jan. 2006. I had at least one flying adventure every month in 2006 except November.

And yes, I am working on a video. :D
 
Great write up Kent. I enjoyed it. A twin is awful tempting to me, but....
So what was up with the left engine? As I understand it, you were flying over Lake Michigan, at night, in winter with a questionable engine.
 
Last edited:
Great post, Kent. I'm thinking about a Commercial and a Multi at some point. Your posts have great "real world" details. Thanks and keep them coming.
 
Great write up Kent. I enjoyed it. A twin is awful tempting to me, but....
So what was up with the left engine? As I understand it, you were flying over Lake Michigan, at night, in winter with a questionable engine.

Lance,

I dunno, I was just flyin' the plane. That's what CRM is for, right? Letting the CFI worry about the engines. ;)

Actually, since that's exactly what happened, I really don't know what he did to bring it back, but he's an incredibly cautious person so when he said we were good to go, I trusted him. The engine also performed fine the rest of the way up to altitude and over to the lake (36nm from CAD to MBL, then a few more to the lake), so I wasn't really worried about it. :no:
 
I am with Lance on this one. The CFI should tell you what happened.
I once had to abort a takeoff because of a cross-feed issue (forgot to re-open the right fuel feed).
If the CFI knew what happened, even if it was his boo-boo, he should admit it. Sometimes we learn more from other's mistakes.
Great write up.
:blueplane:
ApacheBob
 
I am with Lance on this one. The CFI should tell you what happened.
I once had to abort a takeoff because of a cross-feed issue (forgot to re-open the right fuel feed).
If the CFI knew what happened, even if it was his boo-boo, he should admit it. Sometimes we learn more from other's mistakes.
Great write up.
:blueplane:
ApacheBob

If for no other reason than you could experience the same symptoms when he's NOT in the plane, I'd want to know what he did/changed to fix it.

Great write-up, by the way. Thanks for sharing the story.
 
I am with Lance on this one. The CFI should tell you what happened.
I once had to abort a takeoff because of a cross-feed issue (forgot to re-open the right fuel feed).
If the CFI knew what happened, even if it was his boo-boo, he should admit it. Sometimes we learn more from other's mistakes.

I didn't ever think it was a mistake on his part - He didn't touch anything until after the engine had already lost some power. And, as it turns out, it was mechanical:

The fuel flow on the left engine was at 0. I took a second look at the
gauge and realized that it was pegged at 0 from the other end of
the travel. To fix it I leaned the mixture to make the flow
comparable to the working engine.

The shop was able to repeat the problem. The fuel controller wasn't
regulating fuel to the engine. It was letting the full pressure
of the pump directly to the injector distributor, instead of
recycling the excess fuel back to the tank. They didn't actually
need to do much to fix it, though.... Once they started adjusting
it, it started working correctly. A chunk of something had
gotten jammed in the precision internal passages of the fuel control
unit and caused it to not regulate.
 
"The fuel flow on the left engine was at 0. I took a second look at the
gauge and realized that it was pegged at 0 from the other end of
the travel. To fix it I leaned the mixture to make the flow
comparable to the working engine.

The shop was able to repeat the problem. The fuel controller wasn't
regulating fuel to the engine. It was letting the full pressure
of the pump directly to the injector distributor, instead of
recycling the excess fuel back to the tank. They didn't actually
need to do much to fix it, though.... Once they started adjusting
it, it started working correctly. A chunk of something had
gotten jammed in the precision internal passages of the fuel control
unit and caused it to not regulate. "

and that makes you "good to go" across the lake, at night, in winter? :hairraise:

Not hacking at you that's for sure. The CFI was PIC. Lord knows I'm not qualified to say much of anything about multi engine operations, but it seems like you took away the redunduncy safety factor of having two engines as soon as you were in the air.
 
Not hacking at you that's for sure. The CFI was PIC. Lord knows I'm not qualified to say much of anything about multi engine operations, but it seems like you took away the redunduncy safety factor of having two engines as soon as you were in the air.

Remember, the engine was producing full power for a good 20 minutes before we hit the lake shore. Were it a single, I would have probably turned back anyway, even though it was behaving. If the engine was developing less than full power, or full power on an intermittent basis, I'd have turned back. But, with the left engine behaving for a significant length of time, I felt comfortable crossing the lake.

That's why there's two. ;)
 
I understand what you are saying Kent, but I think this is a dangerous attitude to have when operating and especially when owning twins. Using the other engine as an excuse to tolerate some issues with one engine can lead to some serious maintenance issues. Best to keep them both in tip top shape, as if you life was depending on it. Cause it is.
 
I understand what you are saying Kent, but I think this is a dangerous attitude to have when operating and especially when owning twins. Using the other engine as an excuse to tolerate some issues with one engine can lead to some serious maintenance issues. Best to keep them both in tip top shape, as if you life was depending on it. Cause it is.

Obviously squawked and fixed already...

OK, poll time. :dunno:
 
Kent:

I've re-read this after responding to your survey page. Sounds like you departed in cross-feed and the instructor caught the error and fixed it, but didn't share that information with you, is that correct?

I'm going to assume it is. My opinion is the instructor seemed more concerned about getting the time in with you than teaching. I'm not a CFI, but if this was me, I'd want that instructor asking me if I was comfortable with the flight proceeding. If I wasn't comfortable, we should return to base!

In order for me to get comfortable, he'd have to explain what happened in a manner I could understand and agree with. Was he supposed to be instructing? Is that what he did?

There are issues with cross feed. Air can get into lines. There are folks that put the plane in cross feed, didn't move back to the main tanks long enough before departure and had both engines hic-cup or worse on departure. BPPP teaches either testing cross feed in the air with plenty of altitude, or moving back to mains long enough before departure to be sure there is no interruption in the fuel system on departure.

Anyway! My 2 cents is he wasn't 'teaching'; he was being macho don't worry it will still fly guy. Not the kind of guy I want as my instructor.

Best,

Dave
 
I understand what you are saying Kent, but I think this is a dangerous attitude to have when operating and especially when owning twins. Using the other engine as an excuse to tolerate some issues with one engine can lead to some serious maintenance issues. Best to keep them both in tip top shape, as if you life was depending on it. Cause it is.


Couldn't of said it better myself!
 
I've re-read this after responding to your survey page. Sounds like you departed in cross-feed and the instructor caught the error and fixed it, but didn't share that information with you, is that correct?

Negative. I already posted the problem in this thread. Fuel controller got jammed and the fuel flow went off the top end of the scale. He leaned the mixture to match the fuel flows to compensate for the problem, and we completed the flight with the mixtures split.

I'm going to assume it is. My opinion is the instructor seemed more concerned about getting the time in with you than teaching. I'm not a CFI, but if this was me, I'd want that instructor asking me if I was comfortable with the flight proceeding. If I wasn't comfortable, we should return to base!

This CFI is not airline-bound, he's in his 40's and has a "real" job too. He's also incredibly conservative, and has cancelled a flight with me in the Seneca because he wasn't feeling 100%. (Not a lesson, so we took the 182 and I was PIC instead.)

I also was not uncomfortable at all... We had a problem, we handled it, and the engine was producing power with no hiccups at all for a good 20 minutes before we got to the lake.

In order for me to get comfortable, he'd have to explain what happened in a manner I could understand and agree with. Was he supposed to be instructing? Is that what he did?

I saved learning what happened until later - I had my hands full enough as it was. Not quite as much as the first post in this thread, but it's still a very new bird to me. And yes, he was instructing the entire trip, both ways. I learned a lot. :yes:

BPPP teaches either testing cross feed in the air with plenty of altitude, or moving back to mains long enough before departure to be sure there is no interruption in the fuel system on departure.

At MSN, I ran the crossfeed on one side while listening to and copying the ATIS, and then switched to crossfeed on the other side while getting the clearance. Then, ran without crossfeed for the taxi and runup. Is that enough time? (That is actually the kind of thing I was hoping to learn on this thread.)

Anyway! My 2 cents is he wasn't 'teaching'; he was being macho don't worry it will still fly guy. Not the kind of guy I want as my instructor.

That's actually about as close to the opposite of Joe as you can get, fortunately. In fact, the first time I flew with him he wasn't even a CFI yet (and I don't know if he'd even started working on it), I just used him as a safety pilot. I learned so much just from that that I thought "Gee, it'd be nice if he was a CFI..." :yes:
 
Just realized I forgot a couple of things on the return flight.

In cruise, and still in good VMC, Joe had me blow the boots to see what the effects were. We also turned on the hot props for a bit so I could see how much juice they suck down. Wow... I'd hate to lose an engine (and its associated alternator) in icing conditions! Theoretically one alternator can handle it, but you'd be pushing that one to the max.

Shorly after crossing OSH, we got into some IMC. I got about 0.2 of actual and a chance to use the ice light. Cool. :)

All in all, the trip gave me some very valuable experience. Lookin' forward to more!
 
Negative. I already posted the problem in this thread. Fuel controller got jammed and the fuel flow went off the top end of the scale. He leaned the mixture to match the fuel flows to compensate for the problem, and we completed the flight with the mixtures split.


I don't think I would have continued the flight, overwater or not, with a mixture control problem. It's awfully easy to jump to conclusions about such a problem in the air but such conclusions are incorrect as often as not, and the real cause could have been a precursor to something more serious. For all you two knew, the MCU or fuel pump could have developed a significant leak and was spewing raw fuel all over the place. Or maybe something came apart and simply fell into a position that resulted in excessive fuel flow but was likely to move again the next time the plane hit an "air pocket" with the new position resulting in no flow. It was even possible that you'd diagnosed the problem correctly except for the fact that it might have gotten far worse to the point where full lean was still too rich. That said, if I was already over the lake and well away from the shore first crossed, I probably would have continued towards the other shore.
 
Well, I finally got a chance to have a chat with my CFI about this again.

First of all, he said the power loss wasn't as significant as I'd thought - Maybe the equivalent of 5" of MP or so. (Just to be clear, we didn't actually lose any MP.) Not the half or so that I'd thought. I'd only really been paying attention to putting rudder in, and it occurred to me after he said this... Duh. Book climb for flight conditions was 1350 fpm with both engines, or 220fpm OEI. We were still getting about 1000-1100fpm, so that would indicate around 75% power remaining in the bad engine.

Second... Well, I hadn't been runnin' the knobs all the time on the previous flight. Too busy paying attention to IFR stuff and flying the plane. (see first post in the thread...) Joe was the one who leaned it on the first flight. He said the mixtures were split on every flight for the weekend (He took it down to YIP on Saturday night and returned on Sunday before we flew back to MSN). So, it wasn't ice.

I'm guessing that simply lifting the nosewheel was where the yaw began, and it took me a couple of seconds to recognize and compensate with rudder.

Another thing with my CFI is that he's like a squawk-o-matic machine. Some renter pilots and other CFI's will simply compensate for a problem ("Gee, you have to split the mixtures on that plane, that's normal.") My CFI, OTOH, squawks everything and scrubs a fair number of flights too. Because of his attitude towards safety, I have no doubt at all that we were safe to cross the lake and I never did have any doubts. In fact, for this particular trip, he actually told me a couple of months ago when we first scheduled the trip to line him and the airplane both out not only for the times I wanted (Friday noon through Sunday evening), but also all day Monday so that if there were any issues with maintenance, weather, or whatever that he wouldn't feel any pressure to get home.

Sound better now? :yes:
 
One other point...

Remember that I'm a complete n00b when it comes to this airplane. How much did you know about a C172 on your second lesson? Heck, I've got quite a few hours in the 182 now (not sure exactly, but I'd guess in the 150-200 range) and I know that bird quite well, but I haven't stopped learning. I have a whopping 5.1 hours in the Seneca now, and I know it like I know Egypt.

So, remember that everything I post about the Seneca is from the perspective of a n00b and my perceptions of things are vastly different than someone who has lots of hours in the airplane.
 
Sound better now?

Wow, the crickets in here are deafening.

Now, back to the purpose of the original post...

I have a whopping 5.1 hours in the Seneca now, and I know it like I know Egypt.

So, let me pull my questions out:

CFI has insisted that I use the Piper checklists on this plane rather than making my own. :dunno:

Is it really that bad to make my own checklists on a complex bird like this? Especially since I'm basing them on the book checklists?

The checklist says to run the boost pumps on low for 1-3 minutes in cold weather to attain smooth engine operation. The right engine is still a bit rough and I go to turn the boost pump on low, but Joe (CFI) says that's for hot weather. Huh? It says below 20 F. :dunno:

When should the boost pumps on the Seneca be run? What effects do they have? When would you use the "HI" setting?

(Yes, some of this is answered in the POH, but I'm more interested in what really happens and whether they are good for anything else.)

OK, now for ground leaning. Joe says that we only need to pull the mixture back a little on these engines, maybe the width of the mixture knob (actually, the metal arm to the knob would be more accurate). Okay.

Is that due to the turbo? Or are the knobs just that much more sensitive than I'm used to?

The runup begins with a feather check at 1000 RPM, pulling each prop lever all the way back to the feather position and looking for the RPM to begin dropping, then immediately pushing the knob back to full forward.

I found it difficult to get when I should be pushing the prop back forward, and what I was really looking for other than just a tiny drop in RPM. How should the feather check work when successful, and what differences would indicate failures of which parts?

What are the elements of a good takeoff briefing?

Joe also suggested that I start briefing the approach as we were starting over the water. Huh? I'm still navigating off MTW, and I'll fly both sides of MBL too... I was thinking of waiting until near MBL so that I wouldn't confuse myself too much.

Okay, so how should I go about this? I normally use PAIN CALL in order, meaning I set up the radios before I really do the full approach briefing. How do those of you with 150+ knot airplanes go about doing your approach briefings? I guess I could try just studying the plate earlier on which would improve the speed at which I could get everything done later on.

Joe said that once below 25" MP it's pretty much OK to pull power at any rate. I'd have thought that with the Seneca's fixed wastegates, it would be better to keep pulling power slowly. :dunno:

It also sounds like the best technique is to pull the power slowly as you're beginning the flare.

Bruce (and other Seneca drivers), is this what you do? Stabilized with power and slowly pull yoke and power at about the same time?

In cruise, and still in good VMC, Joe had me blow the boots to see what the effects were.

I noticed that not all the segments of the boots deflated at the same rate. Is that normal? Also, how long should the boots stay inflated and how quickly should they deflate?

He said the mixtures were split on every flight for the weekend (He took it down to YIP on Saturday night and returned on Sunday before we flew back to MSN). So, it wasn't ice.

This is a biggie. Were we still stupid to go at all, or cross the lake? :dunno: I almost hesitate to ask, because this is actually the least important question. It's done and in the past. I'd rather focus on the others, which will help me learn about the plane.
 
Wow, the crickets in here are deafening.

Now, back to the purpose of the original post...



So, let me pull my questions out:



Is it really that bad to make my own checklists on a complex bird like this? Especially since I'm basing them on the book checklists?
No, not bad. Especially delaying the "Landing lights off" item until after 3000 agl.
When should the boost pumps on the Seneca be run? What effects do they have? When would you use the "HI" setting?
Only for in flight engine driven pump failure, and then in the "Hi" setting. Low will support about 8 gph, which isn't enough to fly except in descent or a max dawdle
(Yes, some of this is answered in the POH, but I'm more interested in what really happens and whether they are good for anything else.) Is that due to the turbo? Or are the knobs just that much more sensitive than I'm used to?
MP is on a postive feedback loop. You move the throttles only as much as you can hear a change
I found it difficult to get when I should be pushing the prop back forward, and what I was really looking for other than just a tiny drop in RPM. How should the feather check work when successful, and what differences would indicate failures of which parts?
you want to get the feather down to where the engine is only able to sustain about 1100 rpm. Much lower and the anti unfeather pins may drop, and you may NOT be able to get them out (800 rpm).
Okay, so how should I go about this? I normally use PAIN CALL in order, meaning I set up the radios before I really do the full approach briefing. How do those of you with 150+ knot airplanes go about doing your approach briefings? I guess I could try just studying the plate earlier on which would improve the speed at which I could get everything done later on.
Yes. This is a 160 knot bird. Start earlier
Bruce (and other Seneca drivers), is this what you do? Stabilized with power and slowly pull yoke and power at about the same time?
I reduce mp 3" per minute per the POH until at 22" before letting the nose go over.
I noticed that not all the segments of the boots deflated at the same rate. Is that normal? Also, how long should the boots stay inflated and how quickly should they deflate?
They are on a six second timer. These timers fail frequently and you should blow the boots only with your fingers ON THE BREAKER THAT YOU WILL PULL TO LET THEM DOWN. Otherwise you will have NO pressure pumps left after 18 psi for half a minute. Can you say no gyros?
This is a biggie. Were we still stupid to go at all, or cross the lake?
YES. I stand by my earlier post. Your CFI may be a great equipment operator but has a hole in his judgement. And if he wants to debate it, let him post here. He'll get demolished. I've turned back when I was within minutes of a "nicer" ending, because i REFUSE to depart with a known deficiency. That has garnered me several students. Sorry, Kent. :no:
:dunno: I almost hesitate to ask, because this is actually the least important question. It's done and in the past. I'd rather focus on the others, which will help me learn about the plane.
No, I'm afraid it is the MOST important question. Because he has the potential to remain your mentor and you will acquire his "it's OK" attitude. It's NOT OKAY when you die. Really.

You let your trust in the legal PIC and the complexity of the machine shut down your judgement. It's a LONG slog back across the lake on one. The TSIO360-EB1B is NOT designed to make 220 hp for very long. Certainly not for an hour at 88 knots.
 
Last edited:
Only for in flight engine driven pump failure, and then in the "Hi" setting. Low will support about 8 gph, which isn't enough to fly except in descent or a max dawdle

Any comment on using the "Lo" setting for smoothness after engine start in cold weather?

you want to get the feather down to where the engine is only able to sustain about 1100 rpm.

According to the checklist, you begin the feather check from 1000 RPM... When you do it, what RPM/MP do you start from?

Much lower and the anti unfeather pins may drop, and you may NOT be able to get them out (800 rpm).

Are you saying they drop at 800, or they come back out at 800? Or does it take an A&P to release them? How do they work?

I reduce mp 3" per minute per the POH until at 22" before letting the nose go over.

I meant at landing... Joe made me go around the first time, and I couldn't quite figure out exactly what I did wrong. Perception issue, maybe. It seemed like when we were talking about it just afterwards that I should have kept power in a little longer and/or not pulled it as fast as I did.

That brings up another question, though... Is there a certain MP below which it's OK to pull faster than 3"/min?

They are on a six second timer. These timers fail frequently and you should blow the boots only with your fingers ON THE BREAKER THAT YOU WILL PULL TO LET THEM DOWN. Otherwise you will have NO pressure pumps left after 18 psi for half a minute. Can you say no gyros?

Yikes! Good to know.

I'm going to move the rest to another thread so that maybe I can continue actually learning in this one.
 
Wow, the crickets in here are deafening.

Prolly 'cause I've been too busy to post much.:D


Is it really that bad to make my own checklists on a complex bird like this? Especially since I'm basing them on the book checklists?

Not bad at all, I think it's a good idea. IME manufacturer's checklists are overdone and still manage to skip important issues (do you really need a checklist item to tell you to turn the mags on before starting?). I would suggest however that you run the prototype by someone like Bruce for his comments before printing it up.

When should the boost pumps on the Seneca be run? What effects do they have? When would you use the "HI" setting?

Bruce answered this one pretty well but I would add that in the Baron, which uses a very similar FI system, HI will kill the engine (by flooding it) if the engine driven pump is still working and LO is recommended when taking off or landing when the OAT is high (like above 90F) to prevent fuel boiling. Prior to adding some insulation on the line to the fuel distributor on one of my engines, the engine would quit during the landing rollout if I didn't turn the pump on LO. HI is also used for priming, and LO may be useful when hot starting and the engine doesn't seem to want to keep running. BTW, the hot start procedure for any Continental FI system is to close the throttles and mixtures and run the boost pump(s) on HI for a minute or two. This uses fresh fuel from the tanks to cool the fuel lines (except the one going up to the distributor and the metal lines to the injectors) and more importantly the fuel pump so that the fuel doesn't boil before reaching the fuel servo.

I found it difficult to get when I should be pushing the prop back forward, and what I was really looking for other than just a tiny drop in RPM. How should the feather check work when successful, and what differences would indicate failures of which parts?

This isn't specific to Senecas, but generally you want to see the RPM drop about halfway to normal idle before pushing the levers forward again. I generally do this last in the runnup sequence and close the throttles with one hand while pushing the props forward with the other so the RPM doesn't increase back to the original value. This is more about protecting the props and boots from unnecesssary debris encounters. FWIW, I rarely if ever exersize the props in the governing range before takeoff. IMO if the feathering works and the props stabilize at the correct RPM on takeoff, the governors have to be working just fine. The feather check does a better job of clearing the cold oil from the hub anyway.

Okay, so how should I go about this? I normally use PAIN CALL in order, meaning I set up the radios before I really do the full approach briefing. How do those of you with 150+ knot airplanes go about doing your approach briefings? I guess I could try just studying the plate earlier on which would improve the speed at which I could get everything done later on.

On a normal trip, I usually start studying the approach plates as soon as I can get some idea of the runway in use. With XM weather, that's when I'm about a half hour from the destination. Then I do a final review a few minutes before starting the approach when I'm already slowed down to approach speed. If the trip is shorter than that and in IMC, I often slow to approach speed at 15-20 nm out to give me more time to go over the chart. Something I was taught at SimCom and have started using is putting the important data from the chart on a 3x3 post-it note and sticking that somewhere in my scan field of view. This eliminates the need to glance back at the chart when you're busy flying the approach and it helps commit much of the information to memory.

I noticed that not all the segments of the boots deflated at the same rate. Is that normal? Also, how long should the boots stay inflated and how quickly should they deflate?

I believe this is correct in a Seneca, it's definitely true in my Baron. Bigger airplanes (think King Air or Naveho) use timers to cycle portions of the boots at different times to reduce the airflow requirement. If they all went at once the expansion might be so slow that ice could build on the inflated boots.

This is a biggie. Were we still stupid to go at all, or cross the lake? :dunno: I almost hesitate to ask, because this is actually the least important question. It's done and in the past. I'd rather focus on the others, which will help me learn about the plane.

I think Bruce summarized my thoughts on that pretty well. I might add that this is one of those situations where consideration to how the NTSB report might be written would be useful. Do you want us to read about how you passed several perfectly good airports with an undiagnosed significant engine problem before ditching in the middle of LM?:no: In all honesty, I can't say for sure I wouldn't have made the same call as your CFI but I hope I wouldn't (don't want that in my NTSB report either).
 
LO is recommended when taking off or landing when the OAT is high (like above 90F) to prevent fuel boiling.

See, that makes sense... What doesn't make sense is why the checklist says to run 'em for smoothness in COLD weather.

The Seneca has a separate switch for priming rather than using boost on HI. I forget if that's a second pump or not.
 
Back
Top