Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

OK a simple emergency question for all the would be pilots and pilots! I want to see who will come up with the answer first!

Although he completes the external checks and everything is fine, A student pilot is so excited that he takes off without carrying out his pre-flight checks. He is about to do some circuits that would involve touch and go's. As he turns downwind round a left circuit, he is having to fight the controls to keep the aircraft in straight flight. Aircraft keeps wanting to roll left. As he turns for the final approach, the aircraft's controls start getting stiffer and stiffer and he is physically having to exert excessive force on the controls to stop the aircraft from rolling left, and possibly stalling.

He just about manages to land the single angine aircraft safely using some the learned skills, only to find out what was the problem soon after.

a) what actions he took to land the aircraft safely and without stalling?
b) what could have caused the aircraft to behave in such a potentially fatal manner?

He/she did not remove the Pitot Tube cover and didn't have any airspeed indication. His Rudder Trim was possibly not set in the neutral position and his airspeed was low enough to make the aircraft want to stall and enter an incipient spin.

Recovery is power up and nose down to increase airspeed and airflow over the left wing and apply right rudder.

He she probably didn't dip the tanks and so the aircraft may have been left wing heavy. This is just a minor factor!

Thanks for trying Paphitis! Also thank you for your other detailed replies.
Your answer to the above incident for part (a) is correct! The action would provide what we would call a 'skid' and allow the aircraft touch down safely - albeit with full rudder, a lot of forward pressure on control column and increased power to maintain the correct glide path.

The answer to part (b) for this actual incident at an Airfield in UK (by a close associate many moons ago) was in fact due to incomplete pre flight checks!

The person in question did not bother with checking the state of the auto pilot. It should always be OFF during take off and in a circuit. On this occasion it was left ON by ground crew who checked the power to the navigational instruments. Autopilot was tuned to a nearby VOR and it kept trying to roll towards its direction. Beacause of the terrain take off and crosswind legs were unaffected.

For crying out loud BigOz, why didn't you just tell me that the aircraft had and AP?

I had assumed that there was no 3 axis AP, because the kid would've been flying something light like a C152/C172 for example and most don't have APs.

I have couple of questions to Paphitis and BigOz.

I have never flown with a AP, so I don't know what happens when the pilot comes and turns everything electrical on to go for a flight. I only had "trim tap" adjuster to help fly with less effort on the yoke.

If the AP was left ON from previous flight, but all electrical systems were turned off, would that not then disengage the AP automatically, or would the AP remain ON when the next pilot comes along for a flight, turns on the electrical system, and then takes off without the take off check list. The question is, does the AP needs to be turned off manually before all the electrical system is shut down, so that when the next pilot turns on the electrical system on, that the AP also remains OFF.

Some older light aircraft have only very basic AP. It can be just a little switch which makes the aircraft roll Left or Right and enter a Climb or Descend. There is no Auto throttle or Altitude Hold. There usually is a Heading Hold coupled to the Heading Bug which you set on the Horizontal Situation Indicator (HSI). More advance AP, can be coupled to Track TO or From a VOR, maintain a Localizer (LLZ) and Glide Slope for an Instrument Landing System Approach. Most light aircraft don't have this level of automation, unless they are IFR category.

If the Auto Pilot is left on but the Master is turned OFF, and then subsequently when another pilot comes along and turns the Master, the AP would be ARMED and there should be an AP red light on the Annunciator Panel directly in front (or to the side) of the pilot. The AP is merely ARMED but will not track on anything until it is instructed to either maintain a Heading (HDG) Bug, or maintain a VOR, LLZ and Glide Slope, or Climb and Hold a particular Altitude. I will try and not get ahead of myself, because most light aircraft will only have a HDG Hold AP. The light aircraft that BigOz mentioned was coupled to a VOR and therefore aircraft kept wanting to turn towards the station.

Therefore, the AP could be ON and ARMED but not tracking or holding anything. It is on Standby. If the HDG bug switch is ON or the VOR switch is left on, then the AP will want to turn and intercept the set Heading on the HSI or turn to intercept the set Track TO or FROM the set VOR navigation aid.

BigOz stated that it was the mechanic that had left the AP ON, so, does that then mean that the pilot took the plane from the mechanic while all the electrical system was already running, which may explain that the AP was still in the ON position..??

There are a few things that don't quite add up.

For example, even if the AP was engaged and it is coupled to a VOR, then the pilot is EASILY able to overpower the AP. The AP can be set to anything, but a Pilot is still able to place his hands on the yoke and make any control inputs whatsoever regardless on whether the AP is ON or not. So I still don't really understand what BigOz is trying to say really. The AP would not have been an issue at all!

Also, there is an AP disengage toggle on the Yoke next to the Press To Talk (PTT) and Electric Trim switches. This is standard. The pilot should have noticed the Annunciator Indications and pressed the A/P disengage!

Also, are there no indicators anywhere on the dash board that shows the AP is activated in ON position.?? If there is one, how come this pilot did not see that the AP was activated, which was causing him the problems.

Yes, there most certainly is.

There is an Annunciator Panel, and this would have indicated if the AP was Armed. If it was set to a heading Bug, then a HDG symbol will also appear on the Annunciator Panel. If it was coupled to a VOR, then either a VOR or NAV symbol will also appear on the panel. If it was coupled to an ILS, then an LLZ and GS symbol will appear on the panel!

I have a hard time to believe, that anyone who goes for a flight, experienced or beginner, that they did not go through the check list.!!

Me neither.

The instructor that signed him off would have ensured that the student pilot was well drilled in completing ALL checklists.

There are certainly many questions left unanswered by our dear friend BigOz!!!

On a side note, when my flight medical was active many years ago, I would receive from the FAA quarterly( I think) safety news letters with real case scenarios as what BigOz described. They were very educational to know what silly mistakes can be made by pilots as well as problems with the aircraft, and to look out for them. As I've said, they were very educational.

If your Student Pilot Licence is still active and an ARN, then you should still be receiving these. Give the FAA a call and find out.

In Australia we get a magazine (Journal) published by CASA called Flight Safety.

[Kikapu]

OK a simple emergency question for all the would be pilots and pilots! I want to see who will come up with the answer first!

Although he completes the external checks and everything is fine, A student pilot is so excited that he takes off without carrying out his pre-flight checks. He is about to do some circuits that would involve touch and go's. As he turns downwind round a left circuit, he is having to fight the controls to keep the aircraft in straight flight. Aircraft keeps wanting to roll left. As he turns for the final approach, the aircraft's controls start getting stiffer and stiffer and he is physically having to exert excessive force on the controls to stop the aircraft from rolling left, and possibly stalling.

He just about manages to land the single angine aircraft safely using some the learned skills, only to find out what was the problem soon after.

a) what actions he took to land the aircraft safely and without stalling?
b) what could have caused the aircraft to behave in such a potentially fatal manner?

He/she did not remove the Pitot Tube cover and didn't have any airspeed indication. His Rudder Trim was possibly not set in the neutral position and his airspeed was low enough to make the aircraft want to stall and enter an incipient spin.

Recovery is power up and nose down to increase airspeed and airflow over the left wing and apply right rudder.

He she probably didn't dip the tanks and so the aircraft may have been left wing heavy. This is just a minor factor!

Thanks for trying Paphitis! Also thank you for your other detailed replies.
Your answer to the above incident for part (a) is correct! The action would provide what we would call a 'skid' and allow the aircraft touch down safely - albeit with full rudder, a lot of forward pressure on control column and increased power to maintain the correct glide path.

The answer to part (b) for this actual incident at an Airfield in UK (by a close associate many moons ago) was in fact due to incomplete pre flight checks!

The person in question did not bother with checking the state of the auto pilot. It should always be OFF during take off and in a circuit. On this occasion it was left ON by ground crew who checked the power to the navigational instruments. Autopilot was tuned to a nearby VOR and it kept trying to roll towards its direction. Beacause of the terrain take off and crosswind legs were unaffected.

For crying out loud BigOz, why didn't you just tell me that the aircraft had and AP?

I had assumed that there was no 3 axis AP, because the kid would've been flying something light like a C152/C172 for example and most don't have APs.

I have couple of questions to Paphitis and BigOz.

I have never flown with a AP, so I don't know what happens when the pilot comes and turns everything electrical on to go for a flight. I only had "trim tap" adjuster to help fly with less effort on the yoke.

If the AP was left ON from previous flight, but all electrical systems were turned off, would that not then disengage the AP automatically, or would the AP remain ON when the next pilot comes along for a flight, turns on the electrical system, and then takes off without the take off check list. The question is, does the AP needs to be turned off manually before all the electrical system is shut down, so that when the next pilot turns on the electrical system on, that the AP also remains OFF.

Some older light aircraft have only very basic AP. It can be just a little switch which makes the aircraft roll Left or Right and enter a Climb or Descend. There is no Auto throttle or Altitude Hold. There usually is a Heading Hold coupled to the Heading Bug which you set on the Horizontal Situation Indicator (HSI). More advance AP, can be coupled to Track TO or From a VOR, maintain a Localizer (LLZ) and Glide Slope for an Instrument Landing System Approach. Most light aircraft don't have this level of automation, unless they are IFR category.

If the Auto Pilot is left on but the Master is turned OFF, and then subsequently when another pilot comes along and turns the Master, the AP would be ARMED and there should be an AP red light on the Annunciator Panel directly in front (or to the side) of the pilot. The AP is merely ARMED but will not track on anything until it is instructed to either maintain a Heading (HDG) Bug, or maintain a VOR, LLZ and Glide Slope, or Climb and Hold a particular Altitude. I will try and not get ahead of myself, because most light aircraft will only have a HDG Hold AP. The light aircraft that BigOz mentioned was coupled to a VOR and therefore aircraft kept wanting to turn towards the station.

Therefore, the AP could be ON and ARMED but not tracking or holding anything. It is on Standby. If the HDG bug switch is ON or the VOR switch is left on, then the AP will want to turn and intercept the set Heading on the HSI or turn to intercept the set Track TO or FROM the set VOR navigation aid.

BigOz stated that it was the mechanic that had left the AP ON, so, does that then mean that the pilot took the plane from the mechanic while all the electrical system was already running, which may explain that the AP was still in the ON position..??

There are a few things that don't quite add up.

For example, even if the AP was engaged and it is coupled to a VOR, then the pilot is EASILY able to overpower the AP. The AP can be set to anything, but a Pilot is still able to place his hands on the yoke and make any control inputs whatsoever regardless on whether the AP is ON or not. So I still don't really understand what BigOz is trying to say really. The AP would not have been an issue at all!

Also, there is an AP disengage toggle on the Yoke next to the Press To Talk (PTT) and Electric Trim switches. This is standard. The pilot should have noticed the Annunciator Indications and pressed the A/P disengage!

Also, are there no indicators anywhere on the dash board that shows the AP is activated in ON position.?? If there is one, how come this pilot did not see that the AP was activated, which was causing him the problems.

Yes, there most certainly is.

There is an Annunciator Panel, and this would have indicated if the AP was Armed. If it was set to a heading Bug, then a HDG symbol will also appear on the Annunciator Panel. If it was coupled to a VOR, then either a VOR or NAV symbol will also appear on the panel. If it was coupled to an ILS, then an LLZ and GS symbol will appear on the panel!

I have a hard time to believe, that anyone who goes for a flight, experienced or beginner, that they did not go through the check list.!!

Me neither.

The instructor that signed him off would have ensured that the student pilot was well drilled in completing ALL checklists.

There are certainly many questions left unanswered by our dear friend BigOz!!!

On a side note, when my flight medical was active many years ago, I would receive from the FAA quarterly( I think) safety news letters with real case scenarios as what BigOz described. They were very educational to know what silly mistakes can be made by pilots as well as problems with the aircraft, and to look out for them. As I've said, they were very educational.

If your Student Pilot Licence is still active and an ARN, then you should still be receiving these. Give the FAA a call and find out.

In Australia we get a magazine (Journal) published by CASA called Flight Safety.

Thanks for the usual in-depth explanation, Paphitis,

I agree with you, that something just does not add up with the AP story problem in what BigOz stated. That's the reason why I raised some questions, which you have answered. If it was the AP, then the problem would and should have been solved very quickly and not last about 2-3 minutes, the time that would take for a small plane to complete the Downwind leg, then on to BASE before turning onto the Final Approach. I'm assuming that, when BigOz states that it was a "student pilot" who gave this scenario, that he is a novice student pilot to aviation and not a student pilot for a commercial licence or greater. If it's the former, then I can't see how or why a small aircraft would have such a complicated AP system where he could not have been able to turn it off in a second. These small aircraft cockpits are so small, it would be very hard to miss all indicators that would show that the AP was armed.!!

I'll look into the FAA for those safety news letters, but I have been inactive for a long time as far a flying, therefore the FAA probably thinks I have crashed and died.!..

[Paphitis]

OK a simple emergency question for all the would be pilots and pilots! I want to see who will come up with the answer first!

Although he completes the external checks and everything is fine, A student pilot is so excited that he takes off without carrying out his pre-flight checks. He is about to do some circuits that would involve touch and go's. As he turns downwind round a left circuit, he is having to fight the controls to keep the aircraft in straight flight. Aircraft keeps wanting to roll left. As he turns for the final approach, the aircraft's controls start getting stiffer and stiffer and he is physically having to exert excessive force on the controls to stop the aircraft from rolling left, and possibly stalling.

He just about manages to land the single angine aircraft safely using some the learned skills, only to find out what was the problem soon after.

a) what actions he took to land the aircraft safely and without stalling?
b) what could have caused the aircraft to behave in such a potentially fatal manner?

He/she did not remove the Pitot Tube cover and didn't have any airspeed indication. His Rudder Trim was possibly not set in the neutral position and his airspeed was low enough to make the aircraft want to stall and enter an incipient spin.

Recovery is power up and nose down to increase airspeed and airflow over the left wing and apply right rudder.

He she probably didn't dip the tanks and so the aircraft may have been left wing heavy. This is just a minor factor!

Thanks for trying Paphitis! Also thank you for your other detailed replies.
Your answer to the above incident for part (a) is correct! The action would provide what we would call a 'skid' and allow the aircraft touch down safely - albeit with full rudder, a lot of forward pressure on control column and increased power to maintain the correct glide path.

The answer to part (b) for this actual incident at an Airfield in UK (by a close associate many moons ago) was in fact due to incomplete pre flight checks!

The person in question did not bother with checking the state of the auto pilot. It should always be OFF during take off and in a circuit. On this occasion it was left ON by ground crew who checked the power to the navigational instruments. Autopilot was tuned to a nearby VOR and it kept trying to roll towards its direction. Beacause of the terrain take off and crosswind legs were unaffected.

For crying out loud BigOz, why didn't you just tell me that the aircraft had and AP?

I had assumed that there was no 3 axis AP, because the kid would've been flying something light like a C152/C172 for example and most don't have APs.

I have couple of questions to Paphitis and BigOz.

I have never flown with a AP, so I don't know what happens when the pilot comes and turns everything electrical on to go for a flight. I only had "trim tap" adjuster to help fly with less effort on the yoke.

If the AP was left ON from previous flight, but all electrical systems were turned off, would that not then disengage the AP automatically, or would the AP remain ON when the next pilot comes along for a flight, turns on the electrical system, and then takes off without the take off check list. The question is, does the AP needs to be turned off manually before all the electrical system is shut down, so that when the next pilot turns on the electrical system on, that the AP also remains OFF.

Some older light aircraft have only very basic AP. It can be just a little switch which makes the aircraft roll Left or Right and enter a Climb or Descend. There is no Auto throttle or Altitude Hold. There usually is a Heading Hold coupled to the Heading Bug which you set on the Horizontal Situation Indicator (HSI). More advance AP, can be coupled to Track TO or From a VOR, maintain a Localizer (LLZ) and Glide Slope for an Instrument Landing System Approach. Most light aircraft don't have this level of automation, unless they are IFR category.

If the Auto Pilot is left on but the Master is turned OFF, and then subsequently when another pilot comes along and turns the Master, the AP would be ARMED and there should be an AP red light on the Annunciator Panel directly in front (or to the side) of the pilot. The AP is merely ARMED but will not track on anything until it is instructed to either maintain a Heading (HDG) Bug, or maintain a VOR, LLZ and Glide Slope, or Climb and Hold a particular Altitude. I will try and not get ahead of myself, because most light aircraft will only have a HDG Hold AP. The light aircraft that BigOz mentioned was coupled to a VOR and therefore aircraft kept wanting to turn towards the station.

Therefore, the AP could be ON and ARMED but not tracking or holding anything. It is on Standby. If the HDG bug switch is ON or the VOR switch is left on, then the AP will want to turn and intercept the set Heading on the HSI or turn to intercept the set Track TO or FROM the set VOR navigation aid.

BigOz stated that it was the mechanic that had left the AP ON, so, does that then mean that the pilot took the plane from the mechanic while all the electrical system was already running, which may explain that the AP was still in the ON position..??

There are a few things that don't quite add up.

For example, even if the AP was engaged and it is coupled to a VOR, then the pilot is EASILY able to overpower the AP. The AP can be set to anything, but a Pilot is still able to place his hands on the yoke and make any control inputs whatsoever regardless on whether the AP is ON or not. So I still don't really understand what BigOz is trying to say really. The AP would not have been an issue at all!

Also, there is an AP disengage toggle on the Yoke next to the Press To Talk (PTT) and Electric Trim switches. This is standard. The pilot should have noticed the Annunciator Indications and pressed the A/P disengage!

Also, are there no indicators anywhere on the dash board that shows the AP is activated in ON position.?? If there is one, how come this pilot did not see that the AP was activated, which was causing him the problems.

Yes, there most certainly is.

There is an Annunciator Panel, and this would have indicated if the AP was Armed. If it was set to a heading Bug, then a HDG symbol will also appear on the Annunciator Panel. If it was coupled to a VOR, then either a VOR or NAV symbol will also appear on the panel. If it was coupled to an ILS, then an LLZ and GS symbol will appear on the panel!

I have a hard time to believe, that anyone who goes for a flight, experienced or beginner, that they did not go through the check list.!!

Me neither.

The instructor that signed him off would have ensured that the student pilot was well drilled in completing ALL checklists.

There are certainly many questions left unanswered by our dear friend BigOz!!!

On a side note, when my flight medical was active many years ago, I would receive from the FAA quarterly( I think) safety news letters with real case scenarios as what BigOz described. They were very educational to know what silly mistakes can be made by pilots as well as problems with the aircraft, and to look out for them. As I've said, they were very educational.

If your Student Pilot Licence is still active and an ARN, then you should still be receiving these. Give the FAA a call and find out.

In Australia we get a magazine (Journal) published by CASA called Flight Safety.

Thanks for the usual in-depth explanation, Paphitis,

I agree with you, that something just does not add up with the AP story problem in what BigOz stated. That's the reason why I raised some questions, which you have answered. If it was the AP, then the problem would and should have been solved very quickly and not last about 2-3 minutes, the time that would take for a small plane to complete the Downwind leg, then on to BASE before turning onto the Final Approach. I'm assuming that, when BigOz states that it was a "student pilot" who gave this scenario, that he is a novice student pilot to aviation and not a student pilot for a commercial licence or greater. If it's the former, then I can't see how or why a small aircraft would have such a complicated AP system where he could not have been able to turn it off in a second. These small aircraft cockpits are so small, it would be very hard to miss all indicators that would show that the AP was armed.!!

I'll look into the FAA for those safety news letters, but I have been inactive for a long time as far a flying, therefore the FAA probably thinks I have crashed and died.!..

Yes, the AP (all APs) can be disengaged by simply pressing one toggle (A/P switch as illustrated above) on the yoke. But even if that didn't happen (I can't imagine a pilot flying around with an AP on and not realising it) then the pilot can still offer control inputs. The AP can be overpowered very easily. There is no need to fight the aircraft. The AP can be overpowered with one hand.

The AP was not the issue at all!!!

[Get Real!]

Public Notice:

Due to Turkish Cypriot deception, no further bets are accepted on this forum!

Scam artists and other fraudsters enticing members will be prosecuted in GR’s Court of (dirty) Law...

You've been warned...

[YFred]

OK a simple emergency question for all the would be pilots and pilots! I want to see who will come up with the answer first!

Although he completes the external checks and everything is fine, A student pilot is so excited that he takes off without carrying out his pre-flight checks. He is about to do some circuits that would involve touch and go's. As he turns downwind round a left circuit, he is having to fight the controls to keep the aircraft in straight flight. Aircraft keeps wanting to roll left. As he turns for the final approach, the aircraft's controls start getting stiffer and stiffer and he is physically having to exert excessive force on the controls to stop the aircraft from rolling left, and possibly stalling.

He just about manages to land the single angine aircraft safely using some the learned skills, only to find out what was the problem soon after.

a) what actions he took to land the aircraft safely and without stalling?
b) what could have caused the aircraft to behave in such a potentially fatal manner?

He/she did not remove the Pitot Tube cover and didn't have any airspeed indication. His Rudder Trim was possibly not set in the neutral position and his airspeed was low enough to make the aircraft want to stall and enter an incipient spin.

Recovery is power up and nose down to increase airspeed and airflow over the left wing and apply right rudder.

He she probably didn't dip the tanks and so the aircraft may have been left wing heavy. This is just a minor factor!

Thanks for trying Paphitis! Also thank you for your other detailed replies.
Your answer to the above incident for part (a) is correct! The action would provide what we would call a 'skid' and allow the aircraft touch down safely - albeit with full rudder, a lot of forward pressure on control column and increased power to maintain the correct glide path.

The answer to part (b) for this actual incident at an Airfield in UK (by a close associate many moons ago) was in fact due to incomplete pre flight checks!

The person in question did not bother with checking the state of the auto pilot. It should always be OFF during take off and in a circuit. On this occasion it was left ON by ground crew who checked the power to the navigational instruments. Autopilot was tuned to a nearby VOR and it kept trying to roll towards its direction. Beacause of the terrain take off and crosswind legs were unaffected.

For crying out loud BigOz, why didn't you just tell me that the aircraft had and AP?

I had assumed that there was no 3 axis AP, because the kid would've been flying something light like a C152/C172 for example and most don't have APs.

I have couple of questions to Paphitis and BigOz.

I have never flown with a AP, so I don't know what happens when the pilot comes and turns everything electrical on to go for a flight. I only had "trim tap" adjuster to help fly with less effort on the yoke.

If the AP was left ON from previous flight, but all electrical systems were turned off, would that not then disengage the AP automatically, or would the AP remain ON when the next pilot comes along for a flight, turns on the electrical system, and then takes off without the take off check list. The question is, does the AP needs to be turned off manually before all the electrical system is shut down, so that when the next pilot turns on the electrical system on, that the AP also remains OFF.

Some older light aircraft have only very basic AP. It can be just a little switch which makes the aircraft roll Left or Right and enter a Climb or Descend. There is no Auto throttle or Altitude Hold. There usually is a Heading Hold coupled to the Heading Bug which you set on the Horizontal Situation Indicator (HSI). More advance AP, can be coupled to Track TO or From a VOR, maintain a Localizer (LLZ) and Glide Slope for an Instrument Landing System Approach. Most light aircraft don't have this level of automation, unless they are IFR category.

If the Auto Pilot is left on but the Master is turned OFF, and then subsequently when another pilot comes along and turns the Master, the AP would be ARMED and there should be an AP red light on the Annunciator Panel directly in front (or to the side) of the pilot. The AP is merely ARMED but will not track on anything until it is instructed to either maintain a Heading (HDG) Bug, or maintain a VOR, LLZ and Glide Slope, or Climb and Hold a particular Altitude. I will try and not get ahead of myself, because most light aircraft will only have a HDG Hold AP. The light aircraft that BigOz mentioned was coupled to a VOR and therefore aircraft kept wanting to turn towards the station.

Therefore, the AP could be ON and ARMED but not tracking or holding anything. It is on Standby. If the HDG bug switch is ON or the VOR switch is left on, then the AP will want to turn and intercept the set Heading on the HSI or turn to intercept the set Track TO or FROM the set VOR navigation aid.

BigOz stated that it was the mechanic that had left the AP ON, so, does that then mean that the pilot took the plane from the mechanic while all the electrical system was already running, which may explain that the AP was still in the ON position..??

There are a few things that don't quite add up.

For example, even if the AP was engaged and it is coupled to a VOR, then the pilot is EASILY able to overpower the AP. The AP can be set to anything, but a Pilot is still able to place his hands on the yoke and make any control inputs whatsoever regardless on whether the AP is ON or not. So I still don't really understand what BigOz is trying to say really. The AP would not have been an issue at all!

Also, there is an AP disengage toggle on the Yoke next to the Press To Talk (PTT) and Electric Trim switches. This is standard. The pilot should have noticed the Annunciator Indications and pressed the A/P disengage!

Also, are there no indicators anywhere on the dash board that shows the AP is activated in ON position.?? If there is one, how come this pilot did not see that the AP was activated, which was causing him the problems.

Yes, there most certainly is.

There is an Annunciator Panel, and this would have indicated if the AP was Armed. If it was set to a heading Bug, then a HDG symbol will also appear on the Annunciator Panel. If it was coupled to a VOR, then either a VOR or NAV symbol will also appear on the panel. If it was coupled to an ILS, then an LLZ and GS symbol will appear on the panel!

I have a hard time to believe, that anyone who goes for a flight, experienced or beginner, that they did not go through the check list.!!

Me neither.

The instructor that signed him off would have ensured that the student pilot was well drilled in completing ALL checklists.

There are certainly many questions left unanswered by our dear friend BigOz!!!

On a side note, when my flight medical was active many years ago, I would receive from the FAA quarterly( I think) safety news letters with real case scenarios as what BigOz described. They were very educational to know what silly mistakes can be made by pilots as well as problems with the aircraft, and to look out for them. As I've said, they were very educational.

If your Student Pilot Licence is still active and an ARN, then you should still be receiving these. Give the FAA a call and find out.

In Australia we get a magazine (Journal) published by CASA called Flight Safety.

Thanks for the usual in-depth explanation, Paphitis,

I agree with you, that something just does not add up with the AP story problem in what BigOz stated. That's the reason why I raised some questions, which you have answered. If it was the AP, then the problem would and should have been solved very quickly and not last about 2-3 minutes, the time that would take for a small plane to complete the Downwind leg, then on to BASE before turning onto the Final Approach. I'm assuming that, when BigOz states that it was a "student pilot" who gave this scenario, that he is a novice student pilot to aviation and not a student pilot for a commercial licence or greater. If it's the former, then I can't see how or why a small aircraft would have such a complicated AP system where he could not have been able to turn it off in a second. These small aircraft cockpits are so small, it would be very hard to miss all indicators that would show that the AP was armed.!!

I'll look into the FAA for those safety news letters, but I have been inactive for a long time as far a flying, therefore the FAA probably thinks I have crashed and died.!..

And if you did, it would serve you right for taking a crash course instead of the normal one.

[denizaksulu]

Public Notice:

Due to Turkish Cypriot deception, no further bets are accepted on this forum!

Scam artists and other fraudsters enticing members will be prosecuted in GR’s Court of (dirty) Law...

You've been warned...

I was going to call upon the services of the GrimReaper, then you turn up.

[BirKibrisli]

If we applaud Bananiot for criticising his own side,we cannot turn around and criticise Kikapu for doing the same...They both have the right to their opinions and the right to speak them openly and freely...We don't have to agree with them,and we have the right to shoot them down for it,hopefully with intelligent and sensible discussion...

The problem is that it hurts more when critsicm is coming from your own side. That is why the TCs are very hard on Kikapu and the GCs on Bananiot...It is true that we need more Kikapus and Bananiots in this forum...That would indicate that more and more people are managing to see the "other" side's perspective...

Having said all that, I think Banainot has more credibility than Kikapu simply because he does criticise the TCs as well when the ocassion arises...I could be wrong,and would be delighted to be proven wrong,but I cannot remember Kikapu ever criticising or disagreeing with any GC on this forum...And I have not seen Kikapu ever defending and TC even when they are unfairly attacked...for example,when certain individuals keep going on the TCs being the Ottoman remnants,or guilty of the deeds of the Ottomans going back to 1571,or leaving their homes voluntarily to aid Turkey's expansionist Taksim policy during 1963-74,Kikapu remains silent...What he doesnt consider is that silence for most people indicate agreement...Yet it is not possible for a sensible,intelligent person and a TC, to agree that all TCs are thieves,cockroaches,traitors to their country,and hell bent on helping Turkey to achive her imaginary expansionist ambitions...It is not possible for any sensible person to believe that the TCs were wrong in opposing ENOSIS when they did,and the way they did it,which was the only realistic option they had...Yet when all these accusations are thrown at us,Kikapu will insist on keeping silent...
That I think is what is puzzling most TCs here,including myself,who did my share of criticising my own side in the past...The excuse that "I moved on,and now only consider the future" does not wash with me...Kikapu must have his own personal reasons for doing what he does...It is upto him to tell us what those reasons are ,if he so choses...If not we have to respect his decision and his right to conduct himself the way he sees fit...We do not have the right to speculate as to what those reasons might be...We have every right to attack his arguments but not his person...

Hi Bir,

Actually, you will find I have hell of a lot more posts making criticism of the GC's past events than Bananiot will ever have against the TCs. If you can access my first 6 months posts here on the forum, you will see what I'm talking about, therefore my credibility is intact.!

Spending endless hours of going back and forth on the same topics is the reason why I do not get into conversation about the past anymore. I have no hidden agendas, only I don't want to waste time by going around in circles. If you enjoy such "merry-go-round", then have fun. You yourself have only recently joined this "merry-go-around", so tell me Bir, how you managed to sort anything out with the GCs yet.?? Has the past events changed.? I don't think so, so while you are debating about the past and I choose not to get involved in it anymore, but does not mean I agree with what happened in the past to be correct or justifiable. I do not need to challenge every statement made by the GCs members here on the forum in order for me to remain credible. Lets not "throw the baby out with the bath water", or else it would become the case of labelling anyone "guilty" for choosing not to engage in the same topic over and over again. I wish you luck if you want to do so yourself, which is your provocative, but please allow me the same courtesy for not getting involved in the same "merry-go-around" conversation of the past.

For me, the future is what is important. When I pick on the NeoPartitionists and contradict their stance for wanting partition, is only because that is what they want to do, is to partition the island. Would you expect me to go along with them.?? This is at present time reality. This is where we are. Going back to past history is not going to change anything. That's why it is called history. It has already happened, but the permanent partition of Cyprus has not happened yet. This is something we can all do something about to alter the course of the future. This is what I'm interested in. This is what I argue for.


In any case, here is my very first post on the forum. You decide if I never argued against the GCs or against Piratis, since he is the most outspoken in reminding us of the past. You will some posts made by yourself also in the thread below. Take a look in what you said at the time.

Piratis & company are stuck in year 1571

Thu Apr 20, 2006 8:55 pm

I have been reading most of the post by Piratis for the last month or so, specially regarding the "Cyprus problem", and most of the time, he defends the actions taken by the Greeks against his fellow citizens ( Turks ), because of what had happend 400 years ago. Well, no wonder there won't be any settlement on the Island and will remain divided way beyond our life time. If grudges can be kept for that long for the claimed deaths of 20,000 in Nicosia back in 1571, then I expect, it will take another 130 years from 1974 for the deaths of claimed 6,000 lives. I have no idea how long the Turks grudges will last for the deaths they have suffered in the hands from their trusted fellow citizens (Greeks ).

Piratis likes to point out that the whole problem was just a " intercommunual disagreements" and it should be left to them to work it out. So then, why was it not worked out between 1963 to 1974 when the majority could have made "wrongs done" corrected. It actually goes back to 1960, when the ink wasn't dry yet on the signed agreements between the parties to make Cyprus an independent country, when the plans were being formed to slowly but surely do away with the minority citizens. Not necessarily kill them all, but exile most, otherwise I would not be here to write this, since I was one of the 700 citizens taken at gun point in Nicosia ( Kücük Kaymakli ) to a detention center at some University building and kept there for a week in 1963 at age 8 years old. We were lucky to be captured by Greek soldiers that chose not to do us harm to about 30 people hiding in one room. Not so lucky were the family not far from us who were gunned down in their bath tub.

Perhaps had ( Turks ) they known the grudges of 1571 were still alive and well, they would have not fallen victims to their fellow citizens ( Greeks ). We can all scratch our heads for solutions and what ifs, but too much blood have been spilt over dirt and national pride. Lets hope future generations do not follow Piratis & company's foot steps.

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... pu&start=0

Hi Kikapu,
I hope you didn't get me wrong. I didn't mean to say you have little credibility,I meant to say you both had a lot of credibility (this was implied because I was comparing you to Bananiot!) but ,for me,Bananiot's was more...When Bananiot posts anything you know it is coming from a GC,even if you have never read one single post of his before...When you post,these days,people assume you are a GC...Your arguments are exactly the same as some of the fanatical GC arguments,while I cannot think of one Bananiot post that can be confused with a fanatical TC post...

But Bir, you are viewing Bananiots posts as a TC, is the reason why his posts does not come across as a fanatical TC. The GCs on the other hand sees Bananiots posts as a "traitor and a appeaser to the Turks". It is all a matter of prospective. For the GCs, they can easily confuse Bananiot to a fanatical TC if they did not know him better. The GCs do not see me as a fanatical GC with my posts, only the TCs do, those who do not like what I have to say. It all depends from which angle one is looking from.!

That is my opinion anyway,and I will not dwell on it...You are not in this forum to please me...The problem with not revisiting the past is simple...We cannot possibly reunite Cyprus until we come to terms with what happened in the past...Till we realise that there are a lot of mistrust and bitterness between the communities,and this will not simply go away by wishing it...We need to objectively and dispassionately analyse the past,learn the lessons,and start building bridges...Like when you have a serious medical condition,and the doctor is not at all interested in your past medical history,or even in a proper diagnosis...He tells you there is a miracle cure now and whatever the problem if you apply this new miracle cure all will be well...Your miracle cure is Democracy,human rights and the EU principles,but the patient will not take that pill till you convince him you know what he suffers from,really understand his condition, and he can trust you with his life...Saying trust me,swallow this pill,it is the best thing available will not do it...Anyway I am sure you know what I am talking about...You have chosen to join the chorus line of GCs urging the TCs to swallow a pill they are not convinced is good for them...So what is the point of insisting? That is the "merry-go-round" the dead end,the impossible dream...And the longer you refuse to look at the past the more the status quo will continue to turn into the permanent solution...That solution is Partition,and you can also be accused now of being a neo-Partitionist,because your present stand will lead only to Partition...Sorry,but that is how I see it...

I don't have a problem in what you say Bir. I'm also not ignoring the past events, nor have I forgotten them or dismiss them as not being important. I just don't want to be on the "merry-go-around" talking about the past that has been/is being discussed to death, and I ask you again, what have you and others have achieved by doing so.? Is everyone ready to embrace each other before there is a Fair & Just settlement. If so, please let me know when the big celebration is going to be so that I can be there to kiss and make up with everyone. The reality is, in order for the past to heal, it is when a settlement is reached that will be Fair & Just, otherwise, forget any kissing and making up. How can such an event take place when on the one hand everyone wants to be friends with the GCs/TCs, and at the same time one has more rights than the other. Just how do you do that if a Fair & Just settlement is not found. I'm all for Fair & Just settlement, only because I learned from the past mistakes, starting with the 1960 constitution. I know where the problems lie and I also know repeating those same problems in the future settlement is only asking for trouble. If asking for fair & Just settlement, True Federation, True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and EU Principles for a settlement in the 21st century as a EU member state makes me a GC fanatic supporter, well, then I guess I am a GC fanatic supporter. It will be better than supporting TC fanatics who are after Taksim and not unified Cyprus. You insist that by me supporting all the western values will only bring partition to Cyprus, you fail to mention that those seeking Taksim only want partitioning of Cyprus. If I'm going to have to make the choice between sticking to my beliefs and principles where every Cypriot citizen deserves to be treated as equal citizens or face TC fanatics Taksim threats, then I will choose to stand by Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and EU Principles.

Anyway my friend, Bir, we are not the ones in the negotiating room. Lets see what they come up with, but let me leave you with a thought for you to ponder on. If you can't trust Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and EU Principles as the case is with the rest of Europe for Cyprus, how can you trust the opposite to serve Cyprus well.??

Anyway my friend, I don't have much time to write for the next few weeks, so don't think I'm ignoring your future posts on this subject.!

The short answer to "what have you achieved discussing the past with the GCs ?" is Nothing Much...But I am still trying to get through to them...Because I really believe that unless we deal with the mistrust and bitterness and suspicion that so obviously exists there is NO WAY we will ever find a solution,just or otherwise...If you and some of the other moderates also believed it and joined in to seriously and objectiv ely discuss the past events we might have a better chance of getting through to each other...I have always acknowledged the pain and suffering of the GCs as you will attest to. But when in return I get told that I am a thief and an Ottoman remanant guilty of everything since 1571,and a Turk but not a Cypriot, and that I went through what I went through in the 50s and 60s to achieve Taksim,there is not much room for understanding or respect to develop...Anyway,I know you will never ignore my posts knowingly and you know I will never ignore yours...So,have a great time doing whatever it is you will be doing,my dear friend,and the Cyprus problem will still be here when you get back...

[Gasman]

Get Real! wrote:

Public Notice:

Due to Turkish Cypriot deception, no further bets are accepted on this forum!

Scam artists and other fraudsters enticing members will be prosecuted in GR’s Court of (dirty) Law...

You've been warned...

Oh dear! I am glad I fastened my seat belt and peeked back in here now!

All the rest of it has gone right over my head. Apart from SOMEONE MADE A BET AND THEN WELCHED ON IT! Very bad form.

[rastan]

I'm sorry guys, I must admit I had quite a few to drink when I last posted here....don't take what I said too seriously....In fact I am flying to the wonderful Island of Cyprus tomorrow! I will actually be visiting both the North & the South of Cyprus - I hate all the politics, but I love Cyprus - I really do think that the time has come for the Greek & Turkish Cypriots to thrash out a deal and unite this paradise island. I am really sorry that I insulted the Greek Cypriots, I have many Greek Cypriot friends here in England - I know it's too late to retract my previous comment but I am bringing some euro's with me to spend in (south) Cyprus....sorry

[kafenes]

I'm sorry guys, I must admit I had quite a few to drink when I last posted here....don't take what I said too seriously....In fact I am flying to the wonderful Island of Cyprus tomorrow! I will actually be visiting both the North & the South of Cyprus - I hate all the politics, but I love Cyprus - I really do think that the time has come for the Greek & Turkish Cypriots to thrash out a deal and unite this paradise island. I am really sorry that I insulted the Greek Cypriots, I have many Greek Cypriot friends here in England - I know it's too late to retract my previous comment but I am bringing some euro's with me to spend in (south) Cyprus....sorry

Well all I can say is I wish you have the worst holiday you'll ever have in you life.