Slowing down for approach without risk of shock cooling and fast enough?

[Alexb2000]

I've owned two T182T's and I'm on my second T206H.

I keep it real simple, descending out of cruise I just pull throttle, no mixture, or prop. On approach same thing no changes to anything except throttle. I'll fly the approach at 120-140 indicated depending on conditions. At the FAF I pull to 16 inches and if I'm fast a notch of flaps. That gives me a basic glide path descent. I don't put in any more flaps until the MAP. I don't change anything from that point on except flaps and reducing throttle more. What could be easier?

My CHT's don't vary more than 70 degrees from cruise to shutdown (400-330). That much temperature change over 10-15 minutes isn't going to do any harm IMO.

Something like a Cessna 400 is a different story, but that's beside the point.

 

[petrolero]

When IFR I slow down way before FAF. ATC requests for more speed will be unheeded inside about 3 NM from the FAF. I'm the pilot, ATC is not (anyway ATC usually includes the qualifier "as much as practical"). If it doesn't work for ATC then they can break me out or the CJ3 behind me. I want everything stabilized and predictable.

When doing VFR practice approaches, I'll change speeds to accommodate other pilots trying to get their approaches in.

 

[Henning]

Lance's comments on cylinder head cooling are accurate, but this is a Turbo 182, and turbochargers are far more vulnerable to rapid cooling problems. So, you might not hurt the cylinders, but you could trash the turbo. A TIT gauge is very useful in managing power reductions with turbochargers.

No, untrue, turbos have no great vulnerabilities in these regards. What turbos are vulnerable to is too much fuel and heat coking up the turbine section.

 

[Alexb2000]

My IR DPE actually got mad at me for slowing down prior to the FAF. He was an Eagle pilot and said flying like that will cause everyone behind you to fall out of the sky. I did the ride in a 172 and he wanted as much speed as possible prior to the FAF. I didn't really want to change technique on the ride, but it worked out fine. Interesting how other DPE's like it slow.

 

[poadeleted20]

My IR DPE actually got mad at me for slowing down prior to the FAF. He was an Eagle pilot and said flying like that will cause everyone behind you to fall out of the sky. I did the ride in a 172 and he wanted as much speed as possible prior to the FAF. I didn't really want to change technique on the ride, but it worked out fine. Interesting how other DPE's like it slow.

Your DPE was seriously out of line to say that. Aircraft behind you are neither your problem nor your responsibility when flying an instrument approach -- that's up to the controller. Further, as long as you operated within the POH limitations and PTS standards, a DPE telling you to fly the approach faster than you choose is violating FAA Order 8900.2. For reference, what the PTS says about airspeed on approach is "Establishes the appropriate aircraft configuration and airspeed considering turbulence and wind shear" (nothing about traffic behind you) and then "maintains airspeed within ±10 knots".

Finally, every DPE who's ever checked one of my IR trainees has always complimented my trainee for slowing down to an appropriate speed (for a 172, something like 80 knots, or maybe 90-100 for a Bonanza or Cirrus) early, like at the IAF. Their comment is usually something like, "That's a wise decision to give yourself more time to think during the approach and not have to make configuration changes in the middle of trying to fly the approach."

 

[Alexb2000]

Your DPE was seriously out of line to say that. Aircraft behind you are neither your problem nor your responsibility when flying an instrument approach -- that's up to the controller. Further, as long as you operated within the POH limitations and PTS standards, a DPE telling you to fly the approach faster than you choose is violating FAA Order 8900.2. For reference, what the PTS says about airspeed on approach is "Establishes the appropriate aircraft configuration and airspeed considering turbulence and wind shear" (nothing about traffic behind you) and then "maintains airspeed within ±10 knots".

Finally, every DPE who's ever checked one of my IR trainees has always complimented my trainee for slowing down to an appropriate speed (for a 172, something like 80 knots, or maybe 90-100 for a Bonanza or Cirrus) early, like at the IAF. Their comment is usually something like, "That's a wise decision to give yourself more time to think during the approach and not have to make configuration changes in the middle of trying to fly the approach."

I understand, but what do you do about it on a checkride? I sure didn't want to start an argument. He wanted 100-110 or whatever that 172 would do in level flight. In retrospect I understand what he was saying, at busy airports you should be able to fly them fast just to go with the flow. I know when I go into class B's and I tell them I can give them 140 to the marker they sound relieved.

 

[poadeleted20]

I understand, but what do you do about it on a checkride? I sure didn't want to start an argument. He wanted 100-110 or whatever that 172 would do in level flight.

Treat it as a test question. You tell the examiner you are the PIC, and you're not letting a controller push you into doing something you don't feel comfortable doing, and which is contrary to the recommended way to fly this airplane. If that doesn't work, tell the examiner you wish to discontinue for safety, and then finish with someone else. Give your instructor a full report of this, so s/he can report the examiner's improper conduct to the FSDO.

In retrospect I understand what he was saying, at busy airports you should be able to fly them fast just to go with the flow.

He may have been saying that, but he was wrong. I'll bet he can't find any FAA regulation or guidance to support his position, either.

I know when I go into class B's and I tell them I can give them 140 to the marker they sound relieved.

And if you go off the end of the runway, to whom do you think the investigating Inspector will give the 709 ride -- you, or the controller?

The point here is that you are the PIC, not the controller. You make the final decision about what is the safe way to fly your plane. You fly the plane the was it was designed to fly, and you never let the controller make his/her problem your problem.

 

[Palmpilot]

I'll never forget the first takeoff of my private pilot checkride. I was doing a soft field takeoff in the manner that my instructor taught me, and the DPE thought I had the nose too high. I said that was the way my instructor wanted it, and went back to doing it the way I was taught, because it didn't seem like a good idea to experiment with a new way of doing things on the checkride. (And I did pass!)

 

[Jaybird180]

Treat it as a test question. You tell the examiner you are the PIC, and you're not letting a controller push you into doing something you don't feel comfortable doing, and which is contrary to the recommended way to fly this airplane. If that doesn't work, tell the examiner you wish to discontinue for safety, and then finish with someone else. Give your instructor a full report of this, so s/he can report the examiner's improper conduct to the FSDO.

Sounds good, but I'll bet most won't have the fortitude to take that route. As a result it may be more practical to cooperate and graduate.

 

[Alexb2000]

Treat it as a test question. You tell the examiner you are the PIC, and you're not letting a controller push you into doing something you don't feel comfortable doing, and which is contrary to the recommended way to fly this airplane. If that doesn't work, tell the examiner you wish to discontinue for safety, and then finish with someone else. Give your instructor a full report of this, so s/he can report the examiner's improper conduct to the FSDO.

He may have been saying that, but he was wrong. I'll bet he can't find any FAA regulation or guidance to support his position, either.

And if you go off the end of the runway, to whom do you think the investigating Inspector will give the 709 ride -- you, or the controller?

The point here is that you are the PIC, not the controller. You make the final decision about what is the safe way to fly your plane. You fly the plane the was it was designed to fly, and you never let the controller make his/her problem your problem.

I guess that would have been the other option. If I would have failed because of it then I certainly would have complained.

I understand what being PIC means, but it just makes sense to work with ATC so things go smoothly. We get guys flying NORDO over the DFW departure path at 11.5, because that's their right. If they would take a slight heading change all would be well, but these guys want the airliners to move instead. B.S. IMO.

BTW- ATC has never demanded I fly any speed, they have asked what speed to expect or requested best forward speed. I've been flying my bird long enough to know what I can give without compromising safety.

Maybe it's just the Texas way to fly.

 

[poadeleted20]

Sounds good, but I'll bet most won't have the fortitude to take that route. As a result it may be more practical to cooperate and graduate.

Trying to fly the approach 30 knots faster than you've trained is not a recipe for passing the practical test. If you lack the fortitude to tell the examiner you're not going to do that when you do not have to, what will happen when a controller tries to get you to do something beyond the capability of yourself or your plane later on? And as I said, I know examiners who'll do something like this as a test of your command skills.

 

[poadeleted20]

I guess that would have been the other option. If I would have failed because of it then I certainly would have complained.

And in that case, I have little doubt your complaint would have been sustained.

I understand what being PIC means, but it just makes sense to work with ATC so things go smoothly.

This wasn't a case of working with ATC, this was a case of an examiner asking you to do something above and beyond your training, the PTS, and your POH. I've told ATC in the past that I cannot fly an approach as fast as they want, and they've always accepted that. Worst thing that happens is you have to loop back behind the faster traffic, but if I have the gas to do that, I'm OK with that.

We get guys flying NORDO over the DFW departure path at 11.5, because that's their right. If they would take a slight heading change all would be well, but these guys want the airliners to move instead. B.S. IMO.

I won't comment other than to say that has nothing to do with what speed you fly your approach.

BTW- ATC has never demanded I fly any speed, they have asked what speed to expect or requested best forward speed.

See what I mean?

I've been flying my bird long enough to know what I can give without compromising safety.

Good. Now teach your students to be the same -- know what you and your plane can do safely, and stick with it no matter who wants you to go beyond your training/experience capabilities.