Intentionally blocking static system?

skyflyer8

skyflyer8

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
967
Display Name
Display name:
skyflyr
What do you think about a flight instructor taping over a static port before a student's lesson to "simulate" a static system failure?

Legal? Safe? Common? Good idea?
 
skyflyer8 said:
What do you think about a flight instructor taping over a static port before a student's lesson to "simulate" a static system failure?

Legal?
Click to expand...

Disabling a required system before a flight? Not legal.

Safe?
Click to expand...
Yes, given that the "problem" is known in advance and assuming the instructor remembers to remove the tape after the flight.

Common?
Click to expand...
I think not.

Good idea?
Click to expand...
Definitely not.
 
I agree with Steve that it is not legal.

Does the plane have an alternate static source?

If its in VFR, I think its "safe". VSI and Altimeter will be gone, airspeed indication will be skewed.

My first instructor said his instructor intentionally blogged the pitot-tube to see how well he did his preflights. He didnt catch it.

I would say this. Test the quality of his preflights. "Make him pay for his mistake". What I mean by this is, yes, tape over it. Don't say a word. Let him inspect it, let him start it, and sure, taxi all the way to the runway. Then when you're ready for take off, tell him "NOPE. Can't go. Taxi back to the ramp so we can untape the static port you missed". (Don't let him just untape it there. lol) Hopefully after that, he'll never make the mistake of not checking again.
 
My instructor used to use clear tape on the static, but that was to check my pre-flights (never missed it). We talked about the effect of a static or pitot being plugged.....but never simulated it.
 
I would be hesitant to tape it as a check for preflight inspection quality, the sticky residue could lead to dirt and other contaminants making it a legit blockage.

Same effect can be met with a discussion of the pitot-static (and gyroscopic for that matter) instruments and then covering them up in flight.
 
Perhaps this is where a simulated failure on a flight simulator can come in handy.

Even microsoft flight sim at home... Won't be loggable, but I would think it could show the results of a clogged static port in the instruments.
 
MarkL said:
I would be hesitant to tape it as a check for preflight inspection quality, the sticky residue could lead to dirt and other contaminants making it a legit blockage.

Same effect can be met with a discussion of the pitot-static (and gyroscopic for that matter) instruments and then covering them up in flight.
Click to expand...

My nickname - smillin Bob - started when I was a flight instructor. I would use smilie stickers and put them on the plane in important to check areas that complacent people always overlook -- On the Cessna's that would be the trim tab actuator rod (under the elevator), occasionally on the bottom of a brake line near the fitting to the calipers, under the cowling (where you should check for additional oil leaks)..... and a few other places but I never put them near critical components that could be affected by the sticker - like the pitot drain hole or the static port.

Legal? I think that depends on both the required instruments for the operation being conducted as well as the aircraft's TCDS as well as (since it was knowingly done) not placarding things IAW 91.213. I don't see how all of those could be met in the situation described.... so I'd say the way the instructor did it was definitely not legal.

Bob
 
I agree with the replies so far. Maybe it is something you could do to see if someone catches it on a preflight, but I don't think it should be left that way for the actual flight, for legal and safety reasons. This is probably one of those things you could argue to death - how "real" to make a "simulation." Wanted to see what others thought before putting my foot in my mouth... I'm trying to mentor a couple new instructors.
 
Hey Kate, good to see you back on here. :)

And no, I don't think it's a good idea. How real to make the simulation? Well, let's go crash a plane so we can "simulate" how to survive in the wilderness then. :loco:

The line isn't a thin one IMO, but taping over the static port should be across the line for pretty much anyone.

When you land and get ramp checked, what's the FAA gonna do with that hard-earned CFI ticket?
 
bob_albertson said:
Legal? I think that depends on both the required instruments for the operation being conducted as well as the aircraft's TCDS as well as (since it was knowingly done) not placarding things IAW 91.213.
Click to expand...
91.205 requires airspeed and altimeter for even day VFR -- and blocking the static system kills both, making all flight illegal. End of story.
 
skyflyer8 said:
I agree with the replies so far. Maybe it is something you could do to see if someone catches it on a preflight, but I don't think it should be left that way for the actual flight, for legal and safety reasons. This is probably one of those things you could argue to death - how "real" to make a "simulation." Wanted to see what others thought before putting my foot in my mouth... I'm trying to mentor a couple new instructors.
Click to expand...

My CFII would occasionally sabotage my plane (i.e. put a rubber chicken in the cowling, flip off the slave switch on my HSI, etc.) during my IR trainng, but I caught them all. But I'm 100% sure he would have not forgotten about them if I missed them, though.
 
I have done it but flunked the student on the taxiway, shut down and had him remove it before we continued. All taxiways go a bit down resulting AMAZING airspeed indications (40 knots IAS at slow taxi, Taxiway alpha at Echo, at PIA). He'll never miss it again.

But I'd never allow flight to occur with it in place. My clipboard has a red mylar over it when I have such a condition (and I never explain why that's there....) and it is MANDATORY that flight not occur in that condition, it's MY butt on the line at the FSDO.
 
Last edited:
Kate great to hear from you again! I was going to say its a really crappy idea then I read Bruce's post and If you do it that way or smiling bob's way I think it would be a good learning tool. But the CFI should never let the nose cross the hold short line with something like that. Probably a good way of letting the CFI know if the student has a higher likelihood of killing the CFI
 
AdamZ said:
I was going to say its a really crappy idea then I read Bruce's post and If you do it that way or smiling bob's way I think it would be a good learning tool. But the CFI should never let the nose cross the hold short line with something like that.
Click to expand...

I don't think as a learning tool it would be any more effective at the hold short line than on the ramp just before engine start.
 
I did have an actual blockage of the static port in flight during IR training, on an ILS approach but it wasn't staged. Caught it, closed the vents, opened the alternate static, mentally corrected for airspeed, and no big deal. I don't think it would have occurred to the instructor to intentionally block it but it did end up being a good training excercise. I agree it's illegal and a bad idea to intentionally do it though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top