ete easley

Table Of Contents
Apr 97 . Mr. P-3, a biography of Jay Beasley.. ............................................................................... i Jun 66 - Too Much Too Soon ( Last letter mailed from Mr. Beasley ) ................................................... ii Aug 68 - P-3 Pilot Training....................................................................................................... .l - Landing The P-3 or whatever.. ....................................................................................... .4 1974 1974 - On the Ground, Rudder is the Primary Directional Flight Control .............................................. 6 Jul 75 - Flight Idle at 2000 Feet................................................................................................ .7 May 76- Short Field Landing..................................................................................................... 8 Jan 79 - Minimum Control Speed Training..................................................................................... 9 Jan 80 - Multi-Engine Training.. ................................................................................................ .ll Jan 80 - About Vmc Air.. ........................................................................................................ .13 Sep 80 - High Efficiency Engines.. .............................................................................................. 14 1980 - Engine Discussion.. ..................................................................................................... -15 Jul 81 - Inflight Engine Trends, Country Style.. ............................................................................ ..16 Aug 81 - Turbine Inlet Temperature vs Horsepower and Fuel Flow.. ..................................................... -18 Feb 82 - Landmarks in the Traffic Pattern...................................................................................... .19 Feb 82 - Discussion, Mostly Con.. ............................................................................................... 20 - Trim ....................................................................................................................... .21 1982 1982 - Touch and Go Pattern.. ................................................................................................ .22 1982 - Stalls ....................................................................................................................... 23 1983 - Log Book 463 ............................................................................................................ 23 Apr 84 - Safety.. ................................................................................................................... -25 Apr 84 - Give Yourself a Few Brakes.. ......................................................................................... 26 Nov 84 - Hints to Instructors.. ................................................................................................... .28 1984 - Landing Gear Extensions.. ............................................................................................ .36 Jan 86 - Narrow Runways And Their Effects on Aircraft Durability ...................................................... 38 Feb 86 - To Steer or Knot to Steer, Static/Loose Propeller Blade Check.. .............................................. .40 Aug 86 - Filter Lights.. ............................................................................................................ .41 Jan 87 - Prop Internal Flow Check ............................................................................................ -42 Jan 87 - Propeller Procedures.. ................................................................................................. .43 Jan 87 - Maintenance Checkflights............................................................................................. .44 Mar 87 - Operation With a Pitchlocked Propeller............................................................................. .45 Ott 87 - K-13.. ..................................................................................................................... .46 Feb 89 - No-Flap Landings ....................................................................................................... .47 Apr 89 - Why No-Flap Landings Should be Practiced. ....................................................................... 48 Ott 89 - P-3 Operations History.. ............................................................................................... .50 Ott 89 - Turbine Life ............................................................................................................. .52 Ott 89 - NTS Check................................................................................................................ 53 Nov 89 - Instructions ............................................................................................................... .54 1989 - operations ............................................................................................................... ..5 6 Feb 90 - Computer In-Flight Engine Check History.......................................................................... .57 Ott 90 - Anti-Icing Lights.. ...................................................................................................... .58 1990 - The Ragged Edge....................................................................................................... .59 1990 - Why Some of the Numbers and Procedures ........................................................................ .61 Jan 91 - Short Field Landing Practice .......................................................................................... .67 Jan 91 - Flight Demonstrations .................................................................................................. .67 1991 - What To Do When....................................................................................................... 68 1991 - Backup Checks For Lights, Horns, Whistles---. ................................................................... .71 Jan 93 - Reduced Power Takeoffs................ .;. ........................................................................... .74

Jay Rivers Beasley

1914-1996

Jay Beasley is an aviation legend. Born in Waxahachie, Texas; he first soloed in 1932; has flown over 50 difherent models of aircraft; has tested over 25 different military aircraft including the P-38, C60, Hudson Bomber, PV-1, B-37, B-17, P2V-5F, and P-3; has twice been decorated with the Navy Distinguished Service Medal, and has been selected as Honorary Naval Aviator #l 1 . . . all as a civilian pilot. His logbook, if you can read the bent and curled pages, reveals over 20,097 hours total flight time, around 9,479 of which are in the P-3. He has kissed the runway in excess of 3 1,479 times in the P-3 alone. But Jay will tell you, or anyone else that will listen, that his greatest passion lies with being an tiuence on piloting - and one would be hard pressed to fjnd a P-3 aviator today, from Ensign to Admiral, who has not read of heard of; or flown with Jay. These pages are an attempt to compile all his written guidance on operating the Orion. Marked with adherence to sound aviation principles, and written with home-spun humor, they contain the wisdom of one whos done it alL Each of these articles submit to one common aviation paradigm: common-sense. We believe they will improve every aviator who reads and absorbs their insight. The application of Jay Beasleys common sense approach to aviation continues to apply as our technological improvements in Maritime Patrol Aviation expand. For this reason, we have reprinted the sage and entertaining advice of Jay which was published by Patrol Squadron Thirty One. Since Jays unfortunate passing May 15, 1996 it is important that all P-3 aviators young and old learn and heed the wisdom of our communitys greatest pilot. M. L. Holmes Patrol Squadron Thirty
1

TOO MUCH TOO SOON- 28

A number of years ago the three Natops Evaluators and I re-wrote the P-3 Ditching procedures. There had been two 9 for sure,and probably some more airplanes lost during the ridiculous low airspeeds some people were flying. They ditched a number of P-2's without loss of life by just plain landing on the water at the lowest comfortable speed with adequate control. No mention of numbers. So when we came to the four engine ditching instructions we said to go land on the water. No practice needed,because it is a normal landing; ' Wellsir,I ran into a problem the first trip after the-re;vision hit the streets. A number of idiots said they would not accept a procedure ti:ey coulc"nt practice. Normal four engine ditching,that is. .So I had to explain that someone will stall the airplane because they might flare at 10 or so feet above the target altitude. A perfect landing is a stall about six inches above the ground. A stall at six inches above a chosen simulated altitude could b.e hazardous. So sometimes a lot of forethought is behind some of the procedures. YOU cannot practice all potential emergencies,but some folks try. If a P-3 is as unreliable as they make out,1 would not even come to work. Most of the time everything works better than your car. The following is a list of emergencies not practiced for one reason or another. Sird strikes: Near misses: Actual ditching: Bail out: Actual fires and smoke removal: Actual engine and APU fires: Boost out landings: Landing on unprepared runways: Landing with nose gear retracted: Landing with only one main gear extended; Landing with flat tires: Emergency brake operation: Propeller auto-featrer on takeoff: Propeller overspeed on takeoff: Propeller pitchlock on landing: Propeller de-couple: Engine bog-down on aborts: Actual brake fires: Locked flight controls: Loss of all airsreed indications: Actual two engine landings with the props feathered: HP antenna retrieval+ using- overw&ng,hakch: P-3 instability at 19 knots above VNX: Blowing birds out of oil scoop during flight: I know how to set up most of this,but I'm not telling!

I I

Jay Beasley

ii

onsiderable progress has been made in overcoming the subtitled problem in the P-3 program. For instance, boost-out landing practice has been reduced to the necessary minimum. It has, however, been revealed on occasion that dangerous situations are still being induced by instructors usually during their first few months in the new bird.

P-3 Pilot Training

Sensible Amounts of Emergency Procedures Practice Can Be Valuable

The average training emergency in the P-3 is very easily handled, since the aircraft has an abundance of power, is easily controlled, and has considerable system redundancy. The fact that the pilot under instruction can usually do a good job of handling the situation from the beginning may later lead him into a state of overconfidence. It may also influence the instructor to pile on more problems in order to get the students attention. A situation of this sort can, and has, caused aircraft accidents.

to stable, perceptive students. Unfortunately, pilots vary in ability and temperament, which places greater unappreciated responsibilities on the instructor. Each pilots potential must be fully developed, but always with due regard to safety. It must be considered that he will not only perform all of the maneuvers accomplished during training, but may add a few of his own after he is checked out in the squadron.

Use Horse Sense

Common sense and judgment must prevail at all times during training and squadron operations. How far to go in training is always questionable, as it is obvious that all potential emergencies cannot be practiced. There are aviators with 15 years experience who have never lost an engine in flight, while others have had more than their share. Lack of training has no doubt caused a i r c r a f t damage, whereas overtraining has also been costly. In almost every case, though, sound judgment would have reduced the hazards. A good example in training was the hot and cold attitude toward single-enginereverse practice in the P-2 Neptune. In the past, some commanding officers refused to allow this practice in the squadron but sane
1

Every Pilot Is Different

An instructor certainly should not be bound so tightly by the syllabus that he is restricted in imparting valuable techniques

tioned its use under actual conditions if needed. Without previous practice this last resort could produce striking results, pun intended. NATOPS Is In The Act NATOPS is the development, by many very competent pilots and assorted people, of the best known ways to handle a particular aircraft under normal and emergency conditions. It is inevitable that some people will be dissatisfied with the procedures, since they had no part in their creation. Some feel that they are hamstrung with trivial numbers and words. Others feel content to regard NATOPS as a book of law to be used, if necessary, in defense of their own poor judgment. The NATOPS officers, evaluators, and model managers are always in search of improved procedures and welcome suggestions by all crew members. Todays state-of-the-art toward standardization is a far cry from only a few years ago when each VP squadron had its own SOP. It was frightening to observe conflicting procedures at each base, and sometimes in the same hangar, in the operation of identical aircraft. It is the obligation of all pilots to interpret NATOPS as it is designed. It provides the best available operating instructions for most circumstances, but no manual is a substitute for sound judgment. Multiple emergencies, adverse weather, or terrain may require modification of the procedures herein. Certain remote potential emergency procedures should be practiced if they are intended to be used in squadron operation. Judgment must be exercised in determining which to practice and how often. Generally, one or two satisfactory demonstrations are sufficient. Among the maneuvers which are possiblypracticed too often are two-engineout, no-flap, and ultra-short-field landings. The P-3 NATOPS manual forbids multiple emergencies in the pattern and emergencies of any kind at night. Such ridiculous things as shutting off all hydraulic boost pumps just after takeoff, pulling on power lever cables, and practicing boost out stalls should never be done. Taxiing down an 11,000 runway to within 3000 of the end, then practicing short field takeoffs might be hard to explain to the accident board.
2

Windmill Starts
On occasion engine starts have failed at a base without spare parts. This situation may be demanding enough to continue the trip without a lengthy delay. The decision to windmill start the engine or make a threeengine takeoff with subsequent airstart will depend on several factors. First of all, an inspection should be conducted to determine that the starter cannot be engaged to the engine by troubleshooting the associated systems. Inoperative engine position (i.e. No. 1 or No. 4) and pilot experience, as well as gross weight and runway length, are only some of the other considerations. The recommended maximum weight for a threeengine takeoff is 100,000 lbs under ideal conditions. Neither procedure is difficult provided proper techniques are used. However, on numerous occasions tires have been blown resulting from brake application for directional control. Probably in every occasion the pilot had not been trained for the maneuver. During a windmill start the pilot has but one responsibility, to accelerate to a maximum of 90 kts and stop on the runway, whether or not the engine starts. On a threeengine takeoff he must become airborne and clear existing obstacles before performing an airstart. Engine failure during this period would create the situation that a single-engine pilot faces on every takeoff. Since the acceleration and stopping distances will generally be less than that required for a three-engine takeoff, it would seem more practical to start the engine on the ground. The NATOPS windmill start procedure is very complete and concise, but a few helpful hints may be in order. Each crew member must clearly understand his duties and functions, which can only be accomplished by reading the procedures and streamlining them into a concise briefing. The pilot in command must not concern himself with anything but directional control and stopping the aircraft. Instrument scan at this time could allow a swerve to progress requiring immediate action. Oddly enough, the natural reaction is to stomp on the brakes rather than decrease asymmetrical power when rudder and aileron are no longer adequate. In summary, the pilot must keep his

l7w m

eyes on the runway, the flight engineer unfeathers and monitors the start, and the copilot is the program director. He also has the responsibility of assisting the pilot with the ailerons. Aileron positioning is very important during acceleration, particularly if No. 1 engine is inoperative. When the abort is commenced, and as power is being developed on No. 1, the aileron should be applied in the opposite direction upon command of the pilot. Remember that it is no disgrace to abort the takeoff roll should a rapid swerve occur. Taxi back and try again. It would be embarrassing to blow a main mount or grind the nose tires to shreds. Flight-Idle Approach from 1000 This maneuver could possibly be the most hazardous of all training maneuvers, and its value is questionable. The only practical value of the maneuver would be an approach over extremely high terrain to a short runway. Conditions of this nature exist at only a few remote airports and then only on certain runways. Several airplanes including a fourengine prop jet transport, have been demolished during training because the pilots inexpertly performed this maneuver. Proper airspeed must be maintained all the way down to the beginning of the roundout to flare. Too slow an approach can, of course, result in rapid decay of airspeed during the flare resulting in an unexpected sink rate even though the aircraft is rotated nose high. Due to the hazards involved and questionable practical use of the technique, it may be well to consider its removal from the training syllabus. Many instructors no longer require students to perform this item but prefer to demonstrate one per customer. This may backfire, as the student is most likely to perform for the crew soon after being designated as a plane commander. Perhaps a more realistic training maneuver would be to simulate a normal glide slope approach, breaking-out and going contact at 100-1.50 with 140 kts or greater close into the threshold of an imaginary short runway. At this point the power could be reduced to flight idle and a safe landing executed. This may impress the student that a smooth landing can be made near the normal touchdown point when exces3

sive airspeed prevails on short final. Floating halfway down the runway with excessive power is poor practice under any condition. This habit-forming ultrasmooth landing technique has created the need for full reverse and maximum braking at places like Norfolk and Burbank. Add a tailwind and possible hydroplaning and the roll out could be extremely marginal. Fly the airplane and make it work for you to fit all varying conditions. The loss of two engines on one side of a four-engine airplane has been a rare, actual occurrence. However, since the possibility exists, the procedure of approach and landing should be performed during pilot checkout. The need for repeated two-engine landing practice is usually exaggerated during training creating unnecessary hazards and robbing the transitioning pilot of flight time needed to improve normal techniques. Once the student has satisfactorily demonstrated this procedure, repetition should be discontinued. A concise briefing and practice at altitude can, no doubt, save valuable flight time and possible hazards in the traffit pattern. This is particularly true for twoengine waveoffs. Power settings are the determining factor for a good approach to a landing. Regardless of the number of engines being used, a normal approach can be made providing the total SHP is that required. For instance, at normal pattern weights, approximately 1000 SHP for each of the four engines (i.e. 4000 SHP) is required for downwind, tapering to a nominal value at touchdown. Using two symmetrical engines, the downwind leg should require each to be set at approximately 2000 SHP. Using two engines on one side, the SHP required should be about 2200 each to counteract the yaw factor. At the go-degree position about 700 SHP is required on each of the four engines. For two symmetrical engines the requirement would be about 1400 SHP and for two on one side about 1500 each. In all cases, the total SHP required on short final should total approximately 2000. Since power settings are all important in performing this maneuver, the first landing should be made using symmetrical engines. This will allow the student to concentrate on power settings and a normal pattern without the worry of directional control and rudder trim adjustments. The

fuel controls are adjusted to meet starting limitations, it is common for the horsepowers to be negative at flight idle at slow airspeeds. Should a cut be made at the proper flare speed, the resulting negative thrust could cause rapid deceleration to a hard landing. Therefore, power control during the flare and touchdown, as well as throughout the approach, becomes highly important. An ideal approach to a landing is one during which the speed and power are gradually reduced so that at time of touchdown the thrust is zero. However, since flight idle power is usually negative and may vary from engine to engine, it would be virtually impossible to select power lever positions producing zero thrust while looking at the runway. This problem can be alleviated by making gradual power reductions to definite desired settings producing the proper deceleration and flare speed. Generally the last observed horsepower will be about 500 SHP across the board just prior to entering the flare. As the flare is established, ease off the power. Naturally the speed will diminish as the flare is established and the power is reduced. To arrest the resulting sink rate it will be necessary to tilt the wing to a higher angle to create some new lift. Detection of the sink rate is commonly known as seat of the pants, which is controlled solely by visual reference to some moving portion of the runway ahead of the aircraft. The preceding method of landing conventional airplanes on runways has been the accepted practice since the beginning of aviation. However, other methods are being taught by some instructors. To eliminate the possibility of an abrupt power reduction at the flare, students are being prompted to never land with less than 500 SHP across the board. With a total of 2,000 horsepower the aircraft will float for a considerable distance should an effort be made to hold it off, especially as the weight decreases. Remarks are often made that the airplane is difficult to land when it is light. This means that the pilot is incapable of reducing power with one hand while easing back pressure with the other without ballooning or dropping it in. Perhaps his instructor couldnt do it either. To make the airplane land at the intended touchdown point many pilots will actually push the nose down until contact is made with the runway. The next action is to nail the nose wheel to the deck to prevent
5

any possibility of subsequent flight, then remove the 500 horsepower by snapping the power levers to flight idle. This is not. a landing, its an arrival. An ASW aircraft is an expensive platform for sophisticated electronic gear and not a vehicle to plumber around in and walk away contented. A smooth landing is always the desirable way to end a flight, but not if it requires the entire length of the runway. Perhaps if the basic rules of flying are reviewed from time to time, smooth landings can be made with a lot of runway remaining. Some pilots can consistently make fairly smooth landings by touching down in a flat attitude with considerable power, and much too fast. Fast touchdown speeds do not usually present any problem on a normal runway. However, once a pilot develops this habit, problems could arise on short runways and on those covered with ice. From observation, the pilots who land fast are usually the ones who approach too slow having to add power to make the threshold. Some pilots worry about jockeying the power levers back and forth. Usually the power is reduced in order to slow up to 1.35 in order to extend land flaps. The nose must be pushed over to avoid a rapid airspeed decrease, and the proverbial three hands full of trim must be applied at once, because the hand is now needed on the power levers to add thrust for the landing. It would seem that many of the basic rules of flying have been discarded for the new state of the art. The new state of the art does not exist, but new people appear from time to time. It still takes more power to maintain airspeed in a turn than is required in level flight. Flaps are installed on airplanes so that they may be flown slower. Landing flaps are normally extended to reduce speed but not right at the last minute. It is still easier to put the flaps out to slow the airplane than it is to slow the airplane to put the flaps out. When landing the objective is to stop and this becomes more difficult when power is being added instead of reduced. If it is consistently necessary to add power to get to the runway, it would seem logical that too much power was reduced someplace in the approach. Perhaps too much emphasis is sometimes placed on airspeeds and altitude at certain positions in the pattern and not enough on power settings and glide slope. The airplane flies on thrust which produces

IW

speed. By setting the horsepower correctly and pointing the nose to the end of the runway the correct airspeed is usually attained for the respective position, in the pattern. If the horsepower indicators can be included in the scan pattern they become flight instruments and the best of all backup for the airspeed indicators. On occasion the airspeed indicators do malfunction and the horsepower indications can be somewhat comforting.

Quote from the NATOPS book. At the base leg position, complete the landing checklist and commence a visual descending/decelerating approach so that the airspeed slowly tapers to 1.35 Vs (APPROACH flaps) or 1.3Vs (LAND flaps) as the flare is established. It is not desirable to arrive at these speeds early on final approach. Ease off power as flare is established. Be that as it may.

On the Ground Rudder is the Primary Directional Flight Control

uring the early stages of P-3 pilot transition the instructor usually demonstrates the advantageous effect of aileron deflection during the ground roll. The purpose of this demonstration is a build up to the realization that rudder alone may not be sufficient to correct for a yaw during adverse conditions. These conditions would be power loss of an outboard engine at a critical speed on takeoff and inoperative engines during reversing. The technique of using aileron to aid marginal rudder control is not confined to the P-3, as many pilots have assumed. Ailerons are effective for steering on the ground due to the up travel being greater

tion. The wing with up aileron will have the greater drag creating a yaw In that direction. In addition, aileron deflection will affeet the footprint pressure and area of the tires creating a difference in frictional drag. The combined forces can be used to a great advantage, but sometimes to a disadvantage. Rudder is the primary directional flight control. during ground roll, ailerons, should be used as an aid only when the rudder is inadequate. It is a natural tendency for a pilot to attempt to steer the aircraft with his hands when a wheel is available. Handle bars would no doubt produce the same results. Since childhood these two controls have been available as a means of maintaining or changing direction. There is little or no tendency to steer with a control stick even though it would produce the same results. It is recommended during crosswind takeoffs to hold a slight amount of aileron

than the down travel in degrees of deflec-

into the wind in order to attempt to equalize the wind drag. The windward wing has an effective higher angle of attack and a slight amount of up aileron will somewhat relieve it. At this time the rudder will effectively be in the opposite direction to prevent weather cocking. Identical action should be taken during crosswind landing roll out. The use of ailerons only to maintain heading on touch and go landings is poor practice. Here again, the rudder is the primary control and ailerons are not needed. In fact, any aileron deflection changes the airfoil and causes loss of lift. Pilots who steer primarily with the ailerons are one step behind the airplane. Should a yaw suddenly aileron followed by rudder and sometimes brake. During normal full stop landings the rudder should be used as the primary control for maintaining direction. With power set evenly any place in the Beta range the rudder is very effective down to a comfortable low speed. Over controlling with ailerons followed by out of phase footwork and random asymmetric reversing with an individual brake application or two are the main causes of ground incident on the runway. A contributing factor to the incident rate in two engine landing practice is the incorrect use of ailerons. Objectively the ailerons should be used to counteract the yaw created by reversing two on one side. They should be held in the full deflected position until their effectiveness is minimal. In the case of an actual two-engine landing, it would be highly desirable to spoil the lift on the wing with the inoperable

develop, the first action would be to apply

The &@Jf&&dt?v

engines. Since no reverse flow of air is available, this can only be done with up aileron, which in addition creates frictional drag on the footprint. Directional adjustments should be made primarily with the rudder. The ideal amount of reverse applied would be that sufficient to maintain heading with full

opposite aileron and approximately threefourths full opposite rudder. A slight amount of rudder travel is retained for changes in the wind. Should less rudder be required, more reverse thrust can be applied. Random aileron movement is apt to set up a chain of events leading to incidents.

he HamilE Standard propeller was ins talled on twelve Electra aircraft in 195 9. The normal procedure for NTS checks was :hen the same as it is now. During tests of the First airplane, I landed with the number one crop feathered the first twelve flights. The -eason was that during the NTS check on :limbout the NTS would continue to decay until the 5 th and 10th stage bleeds would Ipen, requiring engine shutdown. On subsequent restart the prop would again feather is soon as NTS occurred. Some of you in the :lee t have experienced this malfunction and nust realize why a normal NTS check should ,e obtained to ascertain the probability of a normal restart. A stabilized RPM during NTS Lc tion is all important. Why did it take so many flights to find :he problem to be a simple misalignment of :he NTS bracket? The state-of-the-art had lot yet reached this level. Once this problem yas corrected, the number one propeller lroduced a normal NTS check, but the same :ondition existed on two more props on this ;ame airplane. I began thinking about what :ould have happened should I have, for some eason, selected flight idle on a short final. f NTS had occurred on these engines, they :ould have all failed at a crucial time. I lecided to perform another check on the NTS system in addition to the normal check durng climbout. The Electra test profile called for a :limb to altitude, performing various checks ts required, ending with an autopilot coupled LS approach. The logical time to perform a light idle check would be at approach speed it a safe but fairly low altitude. Since the ILS approach at Burbank requires 2,800 feet over he outer marker, a good place to perform he idle check is in between the marker and .he runway. Most of the time the altitude was tbout 2,000 feet and the airspeed about 140 mots. To stay on the glideslope approach, Tower had to be maintained regardless of the lumber of engines being used. To prevent

Flight Idle Check at 2000 Feet

overworking the autopilot the power was reduced to flight idle on two symmetrical engines and advanced on the other two. After a lengthy observation of perhaps 10 seconds the engine power settings would be reversed. Had the Electra profile required level flight at about 2,000 feet at any time, this check might have been made then. The desired condition for the engine/prop combination is a true airspeed which corresponds to about 140 knots IAS at about 2,000 feet of altitude. It really doesnt make any difference where the check is made as long as this condition is met. For instance, a check can be made at 1,000 feet at about 143 knots or at 3,000 feet at 137 knots to get the same true airspeed which results at 2,000 feet at 140 knots. An inflight evaluation check can be made about 143 knots in just one round of the field. If NTS action is experienced, a thorough investigation should be made. Ascertain that air is not being bled off by leaks in the plumbing or an anti-icing valve being stuck open. NTS action at flight idle should not be a downing gripe after these inspections are made. However, if the RPM continues to decay with NTS action, it definitely should be a down gripe. The most common cause of an NTS at flight idle is a lean fuel control. It is most prevalent on number two engine. The reason is that number two is started first day after day from an APU with marginal air supply. Due to poor acceleration the engine may start hot unless the mixture is leaned. When this adjustment is made to prevent hot starts, which are not tolerated, NTS will usually occur at flight idle. NTS is, by far, the lesser of the two evils. The NATOPS Functional Checkflight Procedures are based on a flight profile for a complete check of the aircraft and its components. It originated at Lockheed and is based on the maiden flight of each new airplane. The same procedure would be used after a rework. With the current squadron

maintenance program, it is seldom that a complete profile is required. Thus, it is permissible to alter altitudes and so forth as long as comparable conditions are met. Terrain clearance during initial runs and restricted areas played a major role in the design of the complete profile. For instance, at the time the propellers are first feathered at Burbank we are over terrain which required at least 9,500 feet. The true airspeed is sometimes performed while crossing Los Angeles enroute to the next inertial mark. Regulations require altitude greater than 10,000 feet when exceeding 2 50 knots IAS. And so on. There is no substitute for good judgment in performing checks. With a simple propeller change there is no real necessity to climb to 11,000 feet for a feather check, especially when IFR conditions prevail. In turn, there is no necessity in checking flight idle horsepower at exactly 2,000 feet as long as the true airspeed required is obtained. Lets apply judgment and common sense to the Flight Idle check as it is written on page 3-50 in the A/B manual and 3-56 in the c manual. LEVEL (2000 ft.) a. Altitude 2000 ft. maximum; 130 to 140 knots b. Retard power to flight idle LIMIT: (1) No NTS shall occur (2) All engines within 200 horsepower of each other The reasoning person making this check should first of all allow time for a stabilized condition at a constant airspeed. This cannot be accomplished if all four throttles are pulled to flight idle, and the procedure does not say that. Perhaps it should

say retard each power lever to flight idle. I am quite sure that most people would not dream of making an NTS check on all four engines at the same time for fear of malfunction on more than one prop. With more than one misaligned NTS system the same thing could happen while descending at flight idle. It has been mentioned that some folks are descending with full flaps at a very high rate! Why, why? The book says LEVEL, and you cant stay level very long at a constant airspeed with no power. The restriction regarding the 200 horsepower spread is simply. I found that directional control is greatly reduced at flight idle after touchdown if, for instance, number one had minus 200 HP and number four had positive 100 HP. It takes full rudder to hold the airplane straight while cleaning up for a touch and go. Add a crosswind and the situation becomes worse. (Brakes somehow get into the act about here.) A horsepower spread between the inboard engines is not so critical. A REAL PROBLEM Patron Umptyump has been ordered to be home based at Las Vegas to patrol Lake Head for the next decade. The field elevation there is 1,868 feet! Should we perform the Flight Idle check at 2,000 feet, or fly over to Death Valley to perform it? Why not make use of the first page in the NATOPS book where it says, use your head and make the check at about pattern altitude at 130 to 140 knots. Dern It.

Short Field Landing

difficulty in gradually reducing power and are prone to land with the proverbial 500 horsepower. To prevent floating on the ground cushion they may push the nose down slightly to force the airplane on the deck. This is better than landing long, but it results in higher than desired speed and sink rate. The average Navy runway is about 8,000 feet long. The old adage is to land in the first one-third in order to make a passing
8

ery few are made on short runways, but a great many are performed on average and even long runways. Reasons for landing too far down the runway are numerous, but they all add up to improper deceleration after crossing the threshold. Touchdown at the proper airspeed without floating off the runway requires a reduction in thrust combined with increased lift to offset the sink rate. Many pilots have

lt would seem that a good pilot would larrassed to land 2,700 feet down the I. This wide tolerance, if accepted, be habit forming and be cause for vhen landing at Norfolk or Burbank, lly coupled with not uncommon tail snd water on the surface. Spectators et many thrills. Perhaps the worst exhibitions occur he pilot elects to give the Admiral a nooth landing. He is prone to leave rer on, and maybe add some, to reduce k rate to minimum. Many times the t will be on the heavy side to prevent .ays in taking on fuel for the next leg. suit of this combination is obvious. [ding will be long and the touchdown vi11 be fast, perhaps so fast that the .ll hesitate in selecting the Beta range. lly the airplane will stop before runf the runway.

Certain airports tend to promote long landing habits. Navy Jacksonville is one of the worst even though the obstacles on approach are nonexistent. The arresting gear on runway 9 is about 1,100 feet from the approach end, right at the desired touchdown spot. If the wire is knocked down a lengthy delay occurs before the next landing is made. The wire now becomes the barrier, and, to ensure missing it, the pilot tends to land 2,000 feet down the runway. The wire on runway 27 is placed 2,000 feet from the approach end and frequently gets knocked down because of the habit of touching down long on runway 9. Now the habit pattern develops to land about 3,000 feet down the runway and pilots easily fall prey to the disadvantages. The young ambitious type, in giving the Admiral the nice ride he deserves, is apt to land in the last half, or maybe the last third of the runway. It happens. But it shouldnt. (there are no long runways)

bairnurn Control Speed Training

; of training pilots in P-3s and other zhines resulted in more and more : approaches to flying. Not to seek out ate emergency situations, but to face in determining where to draw the tiinimum control is an area in flight g which is frequently violated. The ms in realism have caused a few accind numerous incidents. A simple ap-

preach to the necessary training could be this. If symmetric power is lost on takeoff roll, and you cannot go straight, stop. In flight under the same conditions reduce symmetric power in order to go straight if ground contact is imminent. If altitude can be traded to airspeed, perform this transaction to regain control, clean up the airplane, and go home.

Obviously the most critical time for power loss is on takeoff. It is mandatory that a pilot must demonstrate his ability to execute a takeoff with an engine failure at the critical speed. The odds against engine failure at this point are no doubt astronomical but the requirement is valid. The odds against a second failure within seconds of the first engine malfunction are even greater, and this type training by fearless instructors would seem to be invalid. With an engine chop after refusal speed the P-3 still accelerates rapidly to liftoff speed, and 140 knots is attained shortly thereafter. It is almost inconceivable that another engine would fail in this short time span, and a true professional would not use such a weapon to get the students attention. There are other ways to create humility, should this be necessary. The practice of mandatory flap retraction at 140 knots on climbout with engine failure is not only amateurish but is not in compliance with NATOPS. If the airplane is climbing and accelerating on three engines, leave the flaps set and re-enter the pattern. If unable to return, retract the flaps and proceed elsewhere at three engine climb and cruise speed. Historically the most critical time for slow flight with engine failure is during Vmc Air demonstrations and waveoff practice after ditching drills, and not on takeoff. This tragedy has not been confined to the P3 community. The airlines took a heavy toll during the early years of the jet transports. They now perform most of these maneuvers in simulators and have all but eliminated accidents during related training. It is safe to assume that the first 140 knots are the most difficult to attain and that subsequent flight will be faster unless deliberate action is taken for training maneuvers and landing approaches. At 140 knots on critical climbout, aircraft configuration would be gear up and flaps at takeoff position. This speed would seem ideal for Vmc practice for a number of reasons. Takeoff should be the most critical portion of the flight, configuration should be for that environment, and the worst conditions could be simulated with a good safety margin. The speed is well above stall and well above Vmc with two on one side since the power will be limited by practicing at a safe altitude of 8000 feet. In addition to power limitations caused by altitude it should be further limited by using 925 TIT, resulting
10

in about 3200 SHP, standard day. In order to get any valuable Vmc training at 140 knots it will be necessary to use only two engines. To get the same effect with three engines a much lower speed would be necessary causing the margin of safety to diminish. Since this is a training exercise and not a test of aircraft performance, much is to be gained in the atmosphere of safety by a good margin. Control can be simulated to be marginal by not using full rudder and aileron deflection. If the pilot can expertly conduct the maneuvers and corrections under these conditions, he can also do them under more stringent circumstances. The concept that the airplane will go straight only if the favorable bank angle is maintained can be made indelibly in the mind of the student, just as if higher power and lower speeds were used. Waveoff practice can be accomplished with perfect safety. The student can relax and learn to fly rather than be in a state of panic most of the time. Simulate feather engines one and two with gear up and flaps set at approach at about 8000 feet, airspeed 140 knots, power 925 TIT on engines three and four. Position rudder and aileron to fly straight with 5 degrees right wing down. The ball will be slightly out of center, otherwise the airplane would turn to the right. In the beginning, prime concern should be given to airspeed control and constant wing attitude. Later, altitude retention must be included. It is very important that the student be able to look out the window at least part of the time and maintain heading, bank angle, and nose attitude. With concentration he will be able to conduct a double scan as would be necessary during flight close to the terrain. While holding a constant rudder deflection ease off aileron a slight bit and note the airplane starts to turn when the bank angle departs the optimum. Reapply aileron slowly and note the turn stops when 5 degree wing down is regained. The demo can only be accomplished with constant rudder position to simulate full travel of the surface. Ease off aileron again until wings are level and hold this attitude to simulate that aileron increase is not available for recapture of bank angle. Slowly reduce power on number four engine to induce bank angle return to 5 degrees right wing down then slowly reapply power. Repeat these maneuvers until the student can perform them using pri-

nary visual scan with frequent reference to nstruments. In most cases students will fly nstruments at altitude and disregard visual .eferences. When something unusual hap>ens he has to see it on the instrument panel, lecide what it is, then decide what to do about t, and do it. This all takes time. To be able to *eat t instinctively from visual references hen check the details on the instrument )anel is the answer. If you can see outside, ook for the big picture then add finesse rom inside. Two engine waveoff practice can be ccomplished by reducing power on engine hree and four to 1000-1200 SHP in a descent t 140 knots, wings level and ball centered. ipply 925 TIT gradually while rolling in 5 .egrees right wing down and sufficient ruder to prevent yaw. This maneuver should be one with primary visual reference, using a loud or object on the horizon, and frequent ut secondary instrument scan. Repeat the raveoff until the student can use power, ileron, and rudder simultaneously and intinctively, then add elevator for altitude djustments. The common tendency is to start climb before directional control is estabshed, and on instruments at that. Rememer that there are no instruments depicting angars, towers, and other hazards to low !vel flying. Conversely, airspeed cannot be :ad looking only at these objects. Once the above procedure is inrained, a two-engine waveoff is easy. Pilots ill be able to apply more and more power, nd more rapidly, as they become profient. The same procedures apply to three agine waveoffs. Directional control must I established before a climb is attempted. rom a landing approach, with respectable .rspeed, a three engine waveoff is an easy maneuver. From a ditching drill, with much ss respectable airspeed, it is most likely tat symmetric power application must be

favored in order to maintain directional control. A slight loss in altitude with directional control is more desirable than a possible greater loss caused by improper action. In summary, the purpose of this paper is to add safety to some of the training maneuvers. The reason for using two engines on one side for Vmc practice is to be able to fly with marginal control at airspeeds which are not marginal. The suggested speed is about 40 knots above stall and about 20 knots above Vmc, two on one side with full power available at 8,000 feet. Yet marginal control techniques can be perfected and used when the occasion arises where control really is marginal. Waveoff practice is also safe in this environment and can be perfected in preparation for the time it is really needed. As for the need of an actual two-engine waveoff on landing, perhaps it is over-emphasized. The time you would go around is when the approach is too high and too fast. Only an incompetent would attempt one when too low and too slow. If this situation presented itself, add some power and try to make the runway. If you can do that, you dont need to go around. As far as the runway getting fouled, when you are in the flare on two engines, this is adding far, far too much romance by an amateurish instructor. A word of caution: When the student is on a two engine waveoff he will have full rudder tab and a lot of leg muscles pushing on the rudder. Be prepared when you elect to bring in the power on the simulated engines. Some of them keep on kicking the same rudder with superhuman strength, particularly if they are on instrument scan, and you have to return to two engines. Really. You have to be ready. Keep em flying.

asic concern in flying seems to e the problem of staying airborne with power .ilure. At this time gravity has no opponent rd the ability to cope and think about it does It exist. Obviously it is necessary to plan lead for such emergencies should they ler happen.

Multi-Engine Training
11

Power failure in a single engine airplane can cause considerable inconvenience, since the escape routes are limited to bailout or to a hazardous forced landing. During the early years of aviation the powerplant was the most unreliable part of the airplane. Forced landings were an ev-

eryday occurrence, and pilots quickly side at or near Vmc is more unlikely. learned to always have a landing site sePast records reveal that engine-out lected when at all possible. training has caused far more mishaps than The first multi-engine airplanes were in actual operation, when almost everything actually built in order to carry more pay- functions correctly most of the time. After load, since there were few engines powerful the loss of a number of jet airliners the enough to handle the requirements. Safety airlines now do the two-on-one-side bit in in numbers was not the prime concern, al- the simulator - because of the danger as well though an added engine could certainly be as the cost. Obviously some training must be useful in prolonging flight even if altitude done in all areas of operations for reasons of could not be maintained. In order to take safety. If nothing else, the pilot must be advantage of the remaining engine, the pi- mentally satisfied that he can handle the lot had to be able to fly straight with asym- airplane under reasonable but adverse conmetric power. Otherwise he would have to ditions. Many, many incidents have occurred throttle the remaining engine and glide to a practicing engine-out takeoffs and landlanding as in a single engine airplane. Obvi- ings when the student wasnt actually ready ously, some training is necessary so that the and the instructor didnt realize it. How do pilot can take advantage of the extra power you know when he is actually ready to peravailable. form? Only after he has demonstrated time Now we are off and running. Instruc- after time that he can hold the airplane tors can make it very exciting with all the straight without thinking when an engine new goodies to play with. Decision, Refusal, is throttled. In order to ascertain that he can Vmc ground, Vmc air, engine out ditching indeed do this, he must display his ability to practice, two engine go- arounds, and other go straight at all times with primary refer: maneuvers too scary to repeat. ence to scenery outside the cockpit. With In primary training the single primary reference to the instruments his powerplant seems to function perfectly ex- first effort is to keep the wings level on the cept on rare occasions when over auxiliary attitude indicator, and a yaw will develop. fields. On two engine airplanes you can al- Remember that he learned to fly in a singlemost bet that one of the powerplants will fail engine airplane where wings level meant on every training flight. It is against the fairly straight flight. With asymmetric power rules, however, for both engines to fail. On this is not always true. four engine airplanes two of them will fail, During visual flight at altitude have and, more than likely, they are on the same the student practice straight and level lookside. It almost seems that multi-engine air- ing out the window primarily, with freplanes, are more dangerous than single- quent reference to the instruments. In a engine jobs, since the more engines you short time he will be able to maintain attihave exposed to possible failure, the more tude and altitude with minimum scan. At this chances they will fail. Or something. It has time explain that directional control must be always been a mystery how four Spads could maintained when an engine is throttled by fly day after day without engine problems, the use of the primary directional control, when four similar engines installed in one rudder. Continue this exercise until it is secairplane have multiple failures. It is com- ond nature to go straight by visual refermon knowledge that five-out-on-one-side ence, if available, then check for details on landings were made in the ten engine vin- the instrument panel. tage B-36 -just to separate the men from the After he has performed well at altiboys. tude, slowly reduce power on one engine at When and how often should engine about 140 knots after liftoff to see if the failures be simulated in training. This seems student will inherently fly straight and not to be a direct function of the instructors let a yaw develop. Repeat this action someimmaturity. For obvious reasons the student time during the approach. In both cases must demonstrate that he can handle the restore the power as soon as an observation situation with failure of the critical engine is made. The objective is to ensure that the at the critical time. One good performance in student will not ever quit flying the airthis area should be enough, considering the plane while barking out commands for reunlikelihood of number one engine failing medial action. (This has been one of the at one knot past Vmc. Failure of two on one chief causes of incidents related to loss of
12

control). Once the altitude and pattern training is satisfactory there should be no problem connected with simulating engine loss on the runway. Remember one thing - you cant blow a tire unless it is touching the runway. Proper ins true tion can certainly lessen this menace of stomping on brakes when the rudder would have done the job if used early enough.

One other thing - the most important thing about flying is to make the airplane go in its intended path - whether it be straight, in a turn, inverted, or whatever. Command barkers and skeptics often will focus on the malfunction and forget where they are going. It only takes a second to get behind the airplane, sometimes. Keep em flying!

lmost fifteen years ago a Commanding Officer told me that during their deployment to Adak almost all takeoffs were made downwind, even in VFR conditions, the reason given was that a takeoff on a certain runway required a left turn using 30 degrees of bank for terrain clearance during initial climbout They elected to takeoff in the opposite direction, even with tailwinds as high as 17 knots, to avoid a possible Vmc problem! Someone had spread the word that if number one engine failed in a 30 degree left bank, Vmc would be 201 knots and they usually had only 160 during the initial turn, When I recovered from shock we sat down and talked things over before making a demo flight to clear up this misconception. During the flight all doubt regarding controllability was eliminated by flying a coordinated 30 degree banked turn to the left with both left engines at flight idle. Many times since I have been confronted with this same bit of nonsense. The most recent was in 1979, when several pilots were apprehensive about losing number one engine while making a left turn out of Cubi. Someplace along the line there are classroom ins true tors feeding misinformation to the students about Vmc air, This should be carefully monitored. By definition, Vmc is the lowest speed at which the airplane can be flown straight with asymmetric power, The higher the power, the higher the minimum speed will be. The ideal airplane attitude is wings level, but lower speeds can be flown using a favorable bank angle when the chips are down. Over thirty years ago the FM ran extensive tests on cargo airplanes to find that a 5 degree favorable wing down attitude was the optimum for the lowest speed to maintain

About Vmc Air

heading. Bank angles greater than the optimum caused intolerable loss of lift, while flatter angles requires greater airspeed. In any case fly with wings level when possible. During the Electra/P-3 testing it was found that 5 degree wing down away from the failed engine produced the lowest speed at which heading could be maintained - Vmc. Conditions were with number one engine feathered and 5 degree right wing down using full right rudder and varying amounts of asymmetric power, it was noted that, under the same conditions, the airspeed had to be increased by 26 knots with 5 degrees of left wing down. To be specific, each degree of bank angle less than the optimum needs a 2.6 knot increase to fly straight, obviously this formula works only in bank angles near level attitude. Now we are off and running for some good old NATOPS questions. It is a pity that the question makers sometimes have not used common sense, causing misconceptions, to say the least. To say the most, accidents could happen taking off downwind, as in the first paragraph, when it is not necessary. A typical question might be as follows: Find Vmc air in a 30 degree left bank with number one feathered and the other three at 4,600 SHP. The answer expected could be 201 knots! Solution: Vmc with 5 degrees right wing down would be 110 knots. 30 degrees left wing down is 35 degrees away from optimum multiplied by 2.6 gives 91 knots which must be added to 110 resulting in Vmc of 201 knots!!! This means that 201 knots would be required to fly straight with 30 degrees left wing down and number one engine out. A P-3 flies very well on downwind leg with two out on one side and 160 knots with the wings level. Why would any-

13

one attempt to fly straight with 30 degrees wing down. That cant even be accomplished on four engines without losing altitude in the horrible sideslip, probable flameout of two engines with anything other than full tanks, and possibly a little dorsal fin bending. To fly straight the wings have to be somewhere near level. During the turn out of Cubi, Adak, Burbank, or wherever, should an engine quit, continue the turn in balanced flight to the desired heading, then roll the wings level and proceed elsewhere - just like you would do on Saturday when nobody is watching! Basic training is to drop a wing when a turn is desired. When the turnis no longer desired, level the wings. With low airspeeds and asymmetric power a few tricks may be useful in prolonging flight. If the wrong wing gets down it may be necessary to reduce power long enough to get the.good wing down, then re-apply the power. One thing is certain, if you cant prevent the airplane from turning when straight flight is necessary, the power must be reduced and altitude loss accepted. With the P-3 you have to work at it to get in this position. Poor training has also caused another obstacle in the art of VP flying. People have been known to fly MAD traps at speeds of 2 20 knots and more to stay above the deadly 201 knot Vmc in a 30 degree left bank should number one fail. Egad! You can lose number one, two, and three in a left bank at 150

knots, apply normal rated power on number four, roll the wings level and hunt for a place to land on the water. Naturally the power would have to be reduced to fly straight with diminishing airspeed. Heres one for you. What is Vmc with number one failed and the rest at 4,600 while in a 30 degree right bank? since 30 degrees is 25 past optimum, multiply this by 2.6 knots and get 65 knots. Subtract 65 from the normal 110 knots and the new Vmc is 45 knots! Even if stall hasnt occurred nobody in their right mind would believe this. Nobody should believe the 201 bit either. When an engine fails in flight the airplane wants to roll as well as yaw. Allowing the wing on the failed engine to remain low will penalize the performance because the airplane is in a forward slip - a maneuver designed to lose altitude without gaining airspeed. Over-reaction, in this case, would be desirable so that the good wing would be down from the start. If the airspeed is ample for directional control, the wings can be leveled for best performance. After all, downwind and final approaches are flown wings level, since there is no need for other techniques with normal power and speeds. If you need to, hold the good wing down. If you dQ!ft, dQl'ft, Wh&WX YQU 618, dQdt kt tie bad wing get down. Keep em straight.

High E$iciency Engines

t is highly unlikely that older overhauled engines will produce much more than 100% power. For certain, the efficiency will not improve after the normal break-in period. Invariably, the computed 104-106% engines turn out to be mere 100% efficient. This is an easy detection by noting high fuel flow along with high power for a given TIT. One or more bad thermocouples can cause the fuel control system to by-pass less fuel resulting in higher powers and higher fuel flows. The source of the trouble is apparently the ground run data. At best the 1050/ 4300 check is sort of tongue-in-cheek for extreme accuracy, with so many variables

present. It should still be used until something else is devised, but fuel flow readings must be observed more closely. It must be assumed that older engines are more apt to be 100% or less than they are to be 105%. A careful observation and recording of fuel flow readings along with horsepower output may reveal bad thermocouples. For instance, if #l and #4 engines produce 4100 horsepower at the same fuel flow, but #4 TIT is cooler by 20 degrees, then something is wrong with #4 TIT indication. If the TIT is the starting point, #4 would appear to be more efficient unless fuel flow is taken into consideration. The more power you have, the more fuel you burn. The following is an example that I see
14

frequently in flying with the Fleet. All numbers are approximate and horsepower and fuel flow gauges are calibrated. !&-plane OErend an2ysis . #4 99% * 105% 105% 100% Predicted power at 1010 TIT: 4300 4100 4060 4300 Actual power Observed: 4300 4100 4060 4300 Fuel flow observed: 2200 2200 2100 2100 When the power was reduced on #l and #4 to 4100 the fuel flows all read the same! All of the engines are actually lOO%, or at least they all produce the same power and are comparable in efficiency.

When conditions similar to those above are observed pull the power back to 100% after a stabilized reading is taken. At normal rated it is unlikely that a severe overtemp would occur, but it certainly could at max power. Turbine life can probably be extended if power is limited to 100%. Should the engine efficiency actually be 105% there is no valid reason to use more than lOO%, since aircraft performance is based on 100%. Should the engine be only 100% but computes to he 105% due to false TIT readings, then there is a good reason not to accept the extra power. Perhaps a good operating technique would be to set desired takeoff power to as near 100% as predictable. On weaker engines the limiting factor would be TIT. Horsepower would be the limiting factor on stronger engines.

orecast power is that to be expected at either 80 knots or zero airspeed when a selected TIT is set. The resulting SHP will be affected by OAT and pressure altitude. For instance, figure 11-19 indicates that 4120 SHP can be expected at 80 knots on a standard sea level day. Under the same conditions 4110 SHP is forecast at zero airspeed. Since all performance is based on 100% forecast power it would seem logical to use only 100% for takeoff and climb. On weak engines the power would be limited by TIT. On so-called high power engines the thrust should be limited by SHP, usually attained at a lower TIT. Predicted power is a bootleg term for SHP to be expected as a result of the latest 1050 ground run. Since the hingepoint of the evaluation is primarily TIT, a malfunction in this system can result in a false SHP reading greater than actual. Inoperative thermocouples can cause a normal engine to produce excess SHP, since the TD system will not bypass the normal amount of fuel. The added fuel to the combustion can greatly increase the output at a selected TIT creating a false evaluation of the engine. Continued use of this condition, particularly at MAX power, can result in turbine blade failure - since the TIT can be
15

Engine Discussion
much higher than indicated. Engine performance is of particular importance in two areas, takeoff and cruise. All charts are based on 100% engines, both in thrust and specific fuel consumption. If the aircraft takes off in the specified distance using 100% power, and if MAX range and loiter airspeeds are maintained with the specified fuel flow, there should be little cause for further concern. Engine performance can be measured on every takeoff by comparing the SHP produced at a given TIT with that forecast. If the SHP is low there is a problem. If it is higher than forecast there is usually a problem with thermocouples and the power should be reduced to 100% value. Years ago, each squadron had its own rules on determining when to takeoff or to abort. In general most crews would go providing the SHP was no more than 200 low, which closely compares to our present 95%. During this era engine performance was measured by forecast power at 1010 or 1077 and not by the latest 1050 check. Further evaluations were made by comparing actual fuel flows to those in the loiter and MAX range tables. The 1050 trend got into the system, with good intent, only a few years ago. In

is? comn[ete
many cases it has been valuable in the fix for tired engines. In many cases it has caused good engines to become tired before their time because of malfunctioning TIT systems creating over-temps at high power and accepted by the crews unknowingly. During climb and cruise the SHP, and not TIT, should be set evenly across the board. The aircraft flies on thrust (SHP) and not TIT. When the SHP is even and the fuel flows are even all of the engines are of the same fuel efficiency - providing there are no gauge errors. Fuel efficiency determines range and endurance and is of prime contern along with engine performance at takeoff. The performance can be increased by a malfunctioning TIT sys tern, but the fuel flow will also be greater when a given TIT is maintained. If a SHP is maintained the fuel flow will remain normal with a lower Indicated TIT. Troubleshooting is easier and more accurate in flight than on the ground for a number of reasons. For instance, the aircraft is always into the wind. Average variations in OAT are of little consequence when fuel flows and SHP are the hingepoints instead of the seemingly variable TIT indications.

Inflight Engine Trends

Country Style
ince the airplane flies on thrust, and not TIT, it seems logical that horsepower settings should be of prime concern during takeoff, climb, and cruise. To climb at 950 across the board or to cruise at 925 when the horsepowers and fuel flows are uneven does not conform with maximum performance for the situation. In many cases, due to faulty TIT indications, the turbine is being exposed to higher than suspected temperatures resulting in premature removal, if not destruction. The following procedures are offered as operational tips: TAKEOFF Determine predicted power of 100 percent for normal rated or desired power. For example, at 1010 TIT, 4100 SHP can be expetted on a sea level standard day, whereas only 3 600 would be produced on an 86 F day. Should these indications be exceeded by any significant amount, the power should be reduced to 100 percent. It is not uncommon to see horsepowers exceeding 100 percent by as much as 300 SHP with corresponding high fuel flows. Invariably these engines are computed to 104-106 percent on the proverbia128 day 1050 check. Invariably when horsepowers are matched across the board, the fuel flows also match, but the TIT on the

high powered engines reads lower. Obviously the TIT indicating system is at fault giving false horsepower readings - a common everyday condition. It has been noticed that the flight engineers will reduce power to 4600 SHP when it is exceeded on cold days at 1010 TIT. They do not, however, reduce power from 4300 to 4100 on a standard day at 1010. Most aborted takeoffs occur when the horsepower does not come up to the predieted on engines rated at 104-106 percent. In almost every case the engine is a mere 100 percent but made to look better by inoperative thermocouples. Should one or more of these thermocouples start to work the horsepower will indicate less than predicted and create an abort situation under the present rules. Most of the time the airplane is taxied to the highpower area and a new 1050 check usually resulting in a new engine efficiency of less than before. On the next takeoff the engine meets the predicted and everyone is happy to go. Aborts are wasteful of fuel, time consuming, and sometimes hazardous. Consideration should be given to using 100 percent power for takeoff. The limiting factor would be TIT on weak engines and horsepower for so-called high power engines. CLIMB The 950 TIT setting for climb is an arbitrary figure which is less than 1010 but

more than 925. It is suggested that a comparative check of horsepower be made across the board when 950 is set. The high powered engines should be reduced to conform with the engine producing the lowest horsepower at 950. If the fuel flows at this point also match across the board the engines are all of the same efficiency. The TIT on the high powered engines will invariably read lower and the engines are obviously running hotter than indicated. At training weights there is no reason to use 950 for climb. It is suggested that the first power reduction for climbout be made to 3000 across the board. In most cases the fuel flows will match closely, but the TIT may vary. Symmetrical power should be maintained for all subsequent flight.
CRUISE

For a great many years all cruise control settings were determined from the Operating Tables, and with great success. Flight engineers kept fuel logs using fuel flow indications and frequently predicted arrival fuel to within a few hundred pounds after lengthy flight. From observation fuel flow gauges are either very, very accurate or obviously malfunctioning. Its as easy to read ten pounds of fuel flow as it is to read a tenth of a percent rpm - or easier. Then along came Jet Plan and other forms of cruise control and a lot of people forgot, or never knew how to use the Operating Tables. It is suggested that the Loiter Tables be used periodically enroute to the training area or whenever convenient. Select the chart for the aircraft configuration, usually B, and set up loiter for the weight and altitude. To save time use the autopilot for maximum stability. Adjust fuel flow/horsepower until airspeed is stable. At this time compare actual fuel flow with chart fuel flow. If they are the same, the engines are 100 percent efficient. Note that there is no mention of TIT on the charts. Note also that a delta T only affects horsepower, requiring more on hot days to get the required indicated airspeed resulting in a higher true airspeed and greater distance traveled. Indicated airspeed and fuel flow are the constants while horsepower and true airspeed are the variables. Using this method the so-called 105 106 percent engines invariably come down
17

to near 100 percent and many times the socalled 96 percent engines come up in performance. Although engine efficiency cannot be computed to be 99.9 or 100.1, one-half percent is easily identified. TIT indications may vary only a few degrees at loiter power whereas they may have a wide spread at high power. The thermocouples appear to be variable, inconsistent, and unpredictable. The loiter charts eliminate the most unreliable indication - TIT. There is no better way to detect a change in engine efficiency than to make a comparison check of all four engines. If the horsepowers and fuel flows match each other, the engine performance is the same. Should an engine suddenly, or gradually begin using more fuel with matched horsepower across the board, then that engine should be inspected for the common ailments. These checks can be made on every flight without special effort and the advantages are countless. The 28 day 1050 check was designed with good intent to detect changes in efficiency/performance. Instead it became a weapon causing many unnecessary aborts usually because an unrealistic high power was not attained as predicted. To make it worse this high powered engine may have improved with old age, which should arouse suspicion of bad TIT indications. Certain ground runs are necessary but they can be minimized if comparative trends are conducted in flight.
ADVANTAGES

a.

b.
C.

d e. f.

The airplane is always into the wind (IAS) for which there is a fuel flow on the chart. There are no fuel flows for ground operation and a wind change can affect power output. Unreliable TIT indications are eliminated. Errors in OAT are minimizes since a delta T only affects SHP and TAS, whereas a ground one degree error could mean about 40 SHP. Turbine life should increase since false reading high powered engines will be exposed by erroneous TIT indications. An enormous amount of fuel is not wasted every 28 days. Airlines do it in flight.

Turbine Inlet Temperature Horsepower &d Fuel Flow

t has been observed that high engine performance is blindly accepted on 28 day trend checks. As long as it is 100 percent or above little concern is given unless the performance increased several percent from the previous evaluation. It is inconceivable that the check results in performance as high as 108 percent month after month without arousing curiosity regarding the TIT indicating system. This is only possible since fuel flow is not one of the inputs in the calculation. When the SHP and fuel flow are higher than those of the opposite engine a good procedure would be to reduce the higher to match the lower and compare fuel flow. Should they be the same the engines have the same performance and the TIT indicating system is in error. The following was taken from squadron records:

a.
SHP F/F %

Summertime

1050 4100 2100 100.5

#2

1050 4100 2100 100.5

#3

1050 4300 106

2200

#4 1050 4100
2100

100.5

SHP 4300 F/F 2200 % 100

Wintertime #2 #3 3x30 1012 4300 4300

2200

100

2200

#4 1032 4300
2200

106

100

It is obvious that number three engine has the same performance since the power and fuel flow matches across the board, but the TIT is 20 degrees colder on that engine. This squadron is blessed with expert mechanics who exhausted every possibility of malfunctions in the TIT system and have been forced to live with it. They now have an engine that jumped from 102% to 111% and

holding. Every component in the TIT system has been tested, replaced, swapped, and spit on without finding the problem. According to the trend analysis they are blessed with a 111 percent engine. However, when the horsepower is matched with the opposite engine the fuel flow also matches but the TIT reads 50 degrees lower!!!! The flight crews have come to the rescue by using 100 percent forecast power using SHP instead of TIT. Otherwise the turbine would be subjected to very high actual temperatures. Due to heavy workloads and the extremely difficult and time consuming task of pulling thermocouples, maintenance departments are reluctant to work on engines producing more than 105-106 percent on the 1050 run, although most agree that a few thermocouples may be inoperative. This is understandable, but turbine pro tee tion should be afforded. The horsepower gauge could be placarded to use 100% NATOPS forecast power chart instead of 100 percent of a predicted 108 percent engine - for example. The universal use of reduced power for takeoff is the saving factor in life of the turbine. Even so, the 111 percent engine described above would be running at 1060 instead of 1010 degrees at normal rated, it also would be near 1000 at climb TIT. Flight crews can prevent this by setting horsepower from the forecast power charts for takeoff and by matching power with the engine producing the lowest SHP at 950 TIT for climb. Until the thermocouple/TIT indicating system is improved back to where it was about twenty years ago it may be better to use the horsepower gauges as the primary indicators. For engines rated at 100 percent and above, use the forecast power from the NATOPS book and not all of the predictedsuch as 108 percent. Weaker engines should be limited by TIT.

18

Landmarks in the Tra$ic Pattern

he runway is a landmark. Pilots are encouraged to look at it frequently especially after turning off the 180, yet they are discouraged in looking at other objects on the ground for reference. Perhaps the logic behind this is that there are no landmarks in the carrier Navy other than the deck. There is no question that proper spacing abeam the runway and a properly banked turn will result in the proper line-up for a centerline landing in normal conditions. In perfectly calm conditions the published downwind heading will maintain the proper spacing and a constant angle of about 20 to 2.5 degrees will result in good line-up. This is certainly not true when abnormal wind conditions exist, which is most of the time. It should be permissible to fly a path over the ground at all times in order to always be in position. When fly-to points around the pattern are available they can be used to advantage in getting to the final flyto point, the runway. Experienced pilots use this procedure, although some are reluctant to admit it, for whatever reason. The more experience you have, the more you look out the window to compensate for abnormal conditions before you get out of position. Wouldnt it be nice if all P-3s flew the same path over the ground as well as the same speed so that a perfect interval could be maintained in the touch and go pattern! It is rather hard to fly the same path over the ground unless you look at the ground. It is not uncommon to have to alter the downwind heading as much as 15 degrees to maintain proper spacing abeam the runway. Should the crosswind cause the airplane to drift toward the runway a good lineup may be impossible causing a missed approach. An experienced pilot will detect and compensate to maintain the pattern, whereas a student may need some help. This help is the fly-to point at the 180, which has been determined as Ua pretty good place to be. At this point he can be taught to anticipate a rate of turn which will intersect the extended centerline. Wouldnt it be nice if a centerline could be painted on the ground as far as a couple of miles from the approach end! Crosswinds are not the only menace

at downwind attitude. It is not uncommon to be flying into a brisk headwind, even though the tower is reporting calm conditions on the runway. This happens frequently at Brunswick when the duty is runway 01. The gear is lowered abeam the approach end and, after the normal time to check extension and brakes, the turn off the 180 is initiated. After turning final you find yourself almost on top of the runway with too much altitude. Why not fly downwind far enough to be over the bridge during the turn, since that is the place where you usually are. In the case of a brisk tailwind it may be necessary to initiate the turn off the 180 before the gear is down to keep from getting too deep in the pattern. To accomplish all this reference must be made to landmarks other than the runway, since it is a right hand pattern. Here, also, is where a knowledge of the extended centerline is handy, and it is relative to the red barn. A similar condition frequently exists at Moffett in the pattern for 32 when the wind at 1500 is brisk out of San Francisco Gap. Flying the downwind heading of 140 degrees will put you in too close abeam and perhaps cause an overshoot of the centerline. Noise abatement at Moffett has in the past been a strong issue, mainly because pilots were careless about flying over a huge apartment complex. To remedy this it was agreed to fly a pattern over the terrain that was least objectionable. The fly-to point is the mobile home park to the right of the freeway opposite the Emporium department store. Just south of the Emporium are the apartments to be avoided if practicable, so you turn just outside of them. This places you about 1000 feet at the 90, which is about right for a 1500 foot pattern. Then, sure enough, here comes the Libbys Can at about 700 feet, which is right on glide slope. Speaking of the Libby Can. It should only be referred to if the student is inconsistent in his glide slope. Everyone does not see the same and what looks good to one may not look the same to another. Radar glide slope altitude at the Libby Can is about 700 feet, and if pilots keep observing this angle time after time they will develop three degree eyeballs to the extent that no terrain reference is

19

I Pm

needed at any time or place. If a pilot already has three degree eyeballs he should not be bothered. The same goes for downwind leg. If he consistently keeps the airplane spaced properly abeam and rolls out on the centerline on glide slope he should not be bothered. There are some who come out of the training command who have excellent perception. Others need help. Barbers Point is an innocent looking airport with unexpected traps. The approach to runway 4, the most frequently used, is over water, which seems to induce flat vailing windshear line paralleling the coast sometimes causing a sinkhole on short final. In the bounce pattern the tower usually clears you downwind outside of Navy housing. You had better turn anyway, because if you continue up wind too far ILS traffic into Honolulu can he a hazard. The requested fly-to point for the 180 is just outside of the refinery and Campbells office building. This is what sets up the low appreach, since you end up deeper than desired at the 90. To remedy this, descent should not commence until the coastline is reached. If the gear is extended abeam the approach end of the runway, power will have to be added to maintain speed and altitude, so why not consider dropping the gear further downwind on this runway. Continued flat approaches on runway 4 can develop 2 degree eyeballs for all runways, and that seems to be the way it is in Barbers Point.

glideSlOges. To make it worse there is a pre-

The pattern at Jacksonville presents no particular problems except flatter than desired approaches over the river to runway 27 and longer than desired touchdowns on runway 9 in order to clear the arresting gear. Here again the winds at pattern altitude can be stronger than expected requiring modified downwind headings and almost square base legs to roll out on the centerline early. Why worry about being on the centerline until you get on very short final? Because if you do it that way you wont really knowaboutthecrosswindunti~yougetthere. When there is only one runway to land on it doesnt make sense to worry yourself into a dither about a few knots. On a normal big airplane approach you always have at least a mile straight in, providing you are on the centerline when the wings are first leveled. Put in as little crosswind correction as necessary to stay on the centerline all the way down to the runway. This correction normally changes as the altitude diminishes. By all means dont automatically set up wing down opposite rudder just because somebody, like the tower, says there is a crosswind. Prove it to yourself first. People have been known to mis-read the wind. The wind may differ in direction and velocity from where you are and where the reading is taken. It is not uncommon to have a tailwind on both ends of the runway at Brunswick - and calm at midfield.

Discussion Mostly Con

1. Landmarks should not be used, since they are different on each airport. Answer: No kidding. 2. You may confuse one for another. A lot of street intersections look alike. Answer: Thats what airlines say about luggage at the claim area. 4. They may tear down the Libbys Can just when you have learned to depend on it. Answer: Watch and see what they erect in its place. The airport was here a long time before the apartments were built, so there. Answer: If you can win this one you can be a real hero. What is wrong with flying over the hospita1 repeatedly all day long? Answer:You might be unlucky enough to have a surgeon allergic to noise. 5. 3. Sometimes you cant see the so called fly-to point in bad visibility. Answer: Then you shouldnt be in the VFR bounce pattern.

6.

20

7.

I dont even know where the hospital is located. Answer: youve got me on that one. Most approaches to strange airports are made straight-in and under control. Answer: True, but that doesnt keep someone in the cockpit from observing +errain for obstructions and checksay we entered the VFR bounce rn after the first straight-in landNould we be expected to establish landmarks during the first round e field? Ner:Absolutely. If the first pattern awkward, adjust the next to new narks or an adjustment relative to xisting ones. do we have to look out and down so L in the pattern when we could profit by flying instruments and adjusthe approach on short final? Ner: It is a lot easier and a lot safer )k down and ahead to keep the air: in position at all times while still taining sufficient instrument scan

for details. 11. Would good knowledge of landmarks keep people from landing at the wrong airport? Answer: It surely would help. 12. Looking out the window too much might make you land short unless you really do have the so-called three degree eyeballs. Answer : This is very true, particularly approaching over water with every one in the cockpit looking at or for the runway and no one with the necessary partial instrument scan. Three degree eyeballs can dwindle to a much flatter angle causing contact with a flat surface. This has been done several times in commercial and in military airplanes. The scan must be outside, inside, inside, outside, and so on. Over the years most good pilots acquire the ability to fly precision VFR almost by accident. Why wait for this to happen when the opportunity is readily available from the ground up and from day one.

8.

beginning there were no trim tabs lanes. Straight and level flight was ed by manual pressure on the conthe Wright Brothers machine the re warped by means of a shoulder vorn by the pilot. No doubt a wing *plane called for constant pressure in a sore shoulder. Ground adjustere made until the airplane flew s-off. le first ailerons were patented by .rtiss. Control wheel operated, they greater maneuverability and com)ugh hands off conditions required .s adjustments to the wing trailing his time Curtiss is reported to have adjustable springs to apply preshe controls for pilot relief. Elevator ressure could be adjusted in a simi.er, but the rudder always required jotwork regardless of such devices. trns were made by visual reference
21

to the ground. Excessive wind on one side of the face meant either a slip or a skid. Increased engine noise at the same throttle setting meant increased airspeed. History reveals that the Wright brothers tied a length of yarn to the canard assembly which served as a slip and skid indicator. A high string meant slow flight while one aligned with the belt buckle might have meant best cruise speed. So what else is new! As aviation progressed, adjustable horizontal stabilizers were developed for airplanes with tandem seating causing variable changes in the center of gravity. At first the adjustments were made on the ground at the stabilizer, then later they could be made from the cockpit. In almost all cases the vertical stabilizers were adjustable only on the ground. Wing heaviness was remedied by adjusting flying wires for wash-in or wash-out. If the airplane could not be flown in balanced flight hands-and-feet-

It%? sf?v

off, it was flown holding necessary pressures which were sometimes fatiguing. Helpful devices such as springs or bungee cords were some times ins talled for comfort on long flights. It was not until the early thirties

that airplanes had cockpit adjusted trim devices on all three controls. Prior to this the pilot kept the airplane In trim with the controls but now he could use the trim tabs for that purpose.

Touch and Go Pattern

ontrol pressures on the P-3 are very light making temporary out-of trim conditions intolerable. For instance, at lift-off speeds the normal setting of 5 degrees right is insufficient for feet-off flying. If more tab is wound in it will have to be wound out as the power is reduced for downwind. A good procedure is to trim the rudder for downwind power and speed and leave it alone from then on. It usually required about two degrees of right trim at 160 knots, gear up, flaps at approach, and power at 1,100 even across the board at 90,000 pounds. If the power is kept even during all the adjustments the airplane will stay in trim without additional rudder pressure. Should the urge to trim be felt, look at the horsepower gauges. If they are uneven do not use the trim tab, as it was set for even power. This procedure will make the pilot include the horsepower gauges in his scan pattern and keep them married-up during the approach. The airplane flies on thrust and knowing what it is at all times is an input to the brain transmitted to hands and feet. Pilots who have the rudder tab moving throughout the approach with even power applied always appear to be going for a ride rather than flying the airplane. A sudden gust during the flare can cause them to lose the center line because theyre flying with the tab rather than with their feet. A remedy for this is to make them land on center line with the tab mis-set, which will require good footwork. There are many thoughts on the subject of rudder tab settings for engine-out landings. Since the rudder tab is not set zero on four engine landings, then it should not be at zero at any other time. To get the tab neutral for a three or two-engine approach

is more appropriate. NATOPS says the rudder tab may be adjusted with a change in power if desired. It is not in the least difficult to land two on one side with 10 degrees into the good engines and that is about neutral trim on short final. Tab adjustments as the flare is entered may create more problems than if footwork is applied. Some instructors say that zero tab is important for full rudder application during two-engine reversing. It is not at all difficult to kick full rudder at this time and more rudder surface is available with tab application. For instance, if engines three and four are reversed, left rudder is required. Full right tab, meaning the tab is actually to the left, would give additional left rudder surface. This would be impractical and should not become a procedure. Why not set the tab to something reasonable and comfortable then go ahead and make the airplane behave as you wish. The proverbial three hands of elevator trim as soon as the flaps are selected to land position came from delaying flap extension until very short final, which is the hard way to fly. It is much easier to extend the flaps at a higher airspeed and altitude and trim in a relaxed atmosphere and only as needed. Many pilots get all the trim in before it is needed and allow the nose to come up and airspeed to diminish requiring a new appreach to be started. A more professional way would be to trim only as needed but as often as needed, except during or just prior to the flare. Fly the airplane in its intended path with the flight controls then use the trim tabs for comfort. Naturally some predetermined trim tab positions are set prior to takeoff.

22

very pilot should be able to recognize the warning of an impending stall. This warning is known as buffeting and it occurs several knots prior to the actual stall. With flaps fully retracted there is considerable warning but it diminishes with flap extension. At full flaps there is little spread between buffet and actual stall. Pilots should begin buffet stalls with flaps up and minimum positive power then progress with flap extension. Buffet stalls with more than a few hundred horsepower set are not recommended and repeated demons trations are unnecessary and undesirable. Since full stalls can shake the electronics unnecessarily, they are not recommended. On occasion aircraft are reported to stall faster than the chart speeds. This is usually caused by improper pilot technique but could be for other reasons. The following have been found to be the reasons - in order. Power settings at flight idle: Minimal power should be set so that there is no possibility that it will be negative at time of buffet. Negative power will increase stall speed by several knots. A good technique is to set 300 SHP about 30 to 40 knots ahead of stall. It will drop to about 200 as buffet is encountered. Trim the elevators for the last time about 20 knots ahead of expected buffet. From this point on hand and foot fly the airplane so that the desirable stick forces increase as the speed decreases. Decelerating too slowly: All test procedures call for a one-knot

Stalls
per second decrease in airspeed as stall is approached. If the deceleration is only onehalf knot per second the airplane may be descending too fast, causing the wind line to be increasing its angle to the wing (angle of attack) and accelerating the stall. Decelerating too fast: A rapid decrease in airspeed will increase the angle of attack to the point of stall at a higher than normal speed. (Accelerated stall). Airspeed indicator calibration: On occasion one or both indicators may read a few knots faster than the master. When the test equipment is installed the static sys tern should be closely monitored for minute leaks. Leading edge tape and butt seals: An extruding wrinkle in the tape parallel to the leading edge can have the effect of a stall strip, increasing stall speed. The seals between the leading edge sections can wear away, leaving a deep gap which could divert normal airflow over the wing. Summary: The purpose of this paper is to minimize the discrepancies sometimes generated on maintenance check flights, none of which create downing gripes. In repetition, the prime causes are power settings and pilot technique in airspeed deceleration. Keep the nose down.

f 1010 climb and cruise above 92 5 are ever to be legally reinstated we are going to have to use judgment and not blindly set the TIT and take what we get. For some time the East Coast has been flying above 30,000. The West Coast needs to
23

Log Book 463

fly high for extended range in some areas. flying above 30,000 requires high TIT to get there and to stay there, The Allison engine will undoubtedly perform as advertised providing the operator does not exceed the limits. We must be wary that 1010 may not be

1010 but a lot hotter. This can be determined by observing the SHP obtained by setting a desired TIT on takeoff roll. Use of the FORECAST power charts in the NATOPS book should be used instead of the PREDICTED power obtained from the latest 1050 run. Due to thermocouple behavior the latter can vary from day to day and can give false readings on the high side. It is inconceivable that the two 108% engines and the two 100% engines on the same airplane burn the same amount of fuel at the same horsepower. It almost dictates that all four engines are either 108 or 100%. During tests conducted last year at lO,OOO, 240 knots, 3300 SHP it was noticed that the fuel flows averaged 1620 pounds on all engines whether they were rated at 108 or 100 percent on the 1050 run. Tests were conducted on newly delivered airplanes and flown on consecutive days with identical weights and atmospheres. The higher rated engines, without exception, ran cooler in TIT than ones rated at 100%. Sometimes 2.5 to 30 degrees. Prolonged operation at 1010 on these engines could affect turbine life. Now it has been pretty well accepted that the airplane flies on thrust rather than TIT. Crews are setting the horsepower even across the board on climbout at 950 by adjusting them to the engine with the lowest SHP at that TIT. If 950 is set on all engines the so-called 108 percenters would pull more power and use more fuel and the airplane would fly funny. The real reason for matching powers to the 100% engine is to prevent higher than indicated TIT on the other engines. Why cant this concept be applied to takeoff??? Years ago no one worried about whether the engines were 108% or 100%. They were happy to see at least 100% of FORECAST power and most had a NO-GO limit they used for aborts. This number varied but was generally about 200 SHP less than that expected at 100%. At 4000 SHP that equates to 95 percent. So what else is new? Why must Normal Rated be set for the first takeoff of the day during the winter when a lower power setting could be used for evaluation of 100% using the zero airspeed chart? Examples: RP-01 has number one engine rated at 108% and the rest at 100% Using max
24

power at max gross weight on a Moffett standard day the SHPs read. 1. 2. 3. 4. Why? 4900 $g 4600 TlT 1077 L FF-off scale <

Would you pull number one back?

The same airplane takes off again at max power and max weight at Barbers Point on a typical hot day of 86 degrees F. SHPs read. 1. 2. 3. 4. 4300 4100 4100 4100 TlT 1077 u FF-2 200 -2100 -2100 -2100

Would you pull back number one? Why not? It is being over temp-ed with TIT indication problems. LM-01 has four engines rated at 108% on the 1050 runs. On a standard day at Brunswick the FORECAST power charts indicate that 1010 TIT should produce 4100 SHP, but the following readings were observed: 1. 5. 4: 4ulO l TIT 1010 ll FF-2300 <

Would you reduce power on all four? Why not? The TIT indication on all four engines is low. In this case if the 100% FORECAST power of 4100 SHP is set, the TITs might read about 980(which is really 1010). If this airplane is operated for a long period of time using indicated TITs alone for setting power, you can expect a shortened turbine life. If 980 is really 1010, then 925 could really be 950, and 1077 could be over 1100. To prove that the engines are not really 108% set up max range carefully and compare actual and chart fuel flows. With a chart fuel flow of 1000 pounds per hour you would have to see an actual of 80 pounds less to be 108% efficient. The best observed so far by this writer is 101% since the Dash 14 hit the Fleet. When only one or two engines on an airplane are rated very high on the 1050 run they stick out like sore toes. When all four

are rated high, as has been prevalent in the past two years, methods other than engine comparison must he used. We have to compare what we get at a TIT with what we should get using the FORECAST power charts. All performance is based on 100% power. Using only 100% of desired power should lengthen the life of the turbine and enable the use of higher powers needed to

climb over weather and cruise at higher elevations. You can always two-block the engines in emergencies. The engine is no better than its operator, and it has been that way since they were invented. Who would think of accelerating to max rpm in your sports car before shifting to the next gear when you are only going two blocks.

Safety
he only way anyone will ever fly a P-3 by themselves will be when it is stolen. Otherwise there will always be three people in the cockpit, and they should work together instead of the way people do it. Navy training seems to bring out the bad in some people since almost every flight is a check ride of some magnitude, and some of the some people cant contain themselves. Not only cant they control themselves, they sometimes enlist the help of a third party to help confuse the up-and-coming aviator. If it takes two people to fool a young pilot, there is something wrong. One person should be able to do it. The very idea of attempting to distract the pilot into not extending the gear at the proper time is childish at best. It should be the responsibility of each crew member to see that the gear is extended at the desired time. As a copilot or flight engineer dont hesitate to prompt the pilot, even if he is a Flag rank. As a pilot giving instruction dont feel that you are destroying training when you prompt your crew to act at the proper time. Pretty soon acting at the proper time will become as natural as retracting the gear after liftoff. How do fighter pilots get by so well? No doubt its because they have no one in the cockpit to distract from their routine. It is highly unlikely that they give themselves fires, pull circuit breakers, power losses, prop fails to feather, and dozens of other problems that seem to prevail in twopilot airplanes. Sometimes it seems like the more engines you have and the more pilots you have

the more dangerous it is. Obviously it was meant to be the opposite. Training flights sometimes become monsters in that nothing works as advertised. For instance: Why wont the prop completely feather when the engine catches on fire? Why is it that it always takes both bottles to put out the fire? Why is it that the adjacent engine always fails instead of an additional one on the opposite wing? Why does something always happen, especially arguments, in the holding pattern? Its all because the name of the game is GOTCHA. If you think it is bad now, you should have seen it in the early days of the P-3, before the simulators appeared. Obviously a certain amount of GOTCHA is necessary, but most of it could be eliminated with common sense training. It reminds me of a true story from the DC-3 days on American Airlines. Captain Hap Russell returned to the cockpit after a lengthy visit with the passengers. Copilot Bob Baker said, Hap, there are twenty-three things wrong in the cockpit, and I will give you just three minutes to find them. Hap said, And I will give you just thirty seconds to put them back where they were when I left the cockpit. Common sense can be taught providing the teacher has some of his own and does not selfishly keep it from the student while waiting for normal, but slow, development. Be a teacher instead of a check pilot. It really works.

25

n-9

Give YourselfA Few Brakes

f you were one of us who learned biplanes without steerable tailwheels or brakes, you might appreciate the modern airplanes even more. You may recall seeing photographs of Jennies and some post WWI airplanes equipped with wooden hoops beneath the lower wing tips. They were called wing skids and were installed to prevent damage to the wings during groundloops. Not only did groundloops happen accidentally, they were also taught as a means of stopping the airplane on landing rollout if the airport suddenly got too short. A ground loop to the left required a throttle burst, full left rudder, and full right aileron. Sometimes it went against the grain to add power when you were trying to stop, but it was the only way to reverse course to keep from going through a fence. They used fences in those days to keep cattle from wandering into the flying field. The technique of taxiing in close quarters might be compared to taking a ship through the Canal without a tug. Without someone to hold the wings it was often necessary to get out of the airplane and lift the tail for a new direction, then get back in and start over. Taxiing out for takeoff sometimes required a faster than desired speed to prevent weather cocking. Taxiing downwind took special handling since full left rudder could cause the airplane to go right with enough wind velocity. You soon learned that technique in the use of the rudder was mandatory for ground operation as well as flight. It was a real treat to taxi an airplane equipped with brakes. Crosswind taxiing is easy with the brake applied when needed. To be able to stop and do the engine check prior to takeoff was the next best thing to sliced bread. Not to have to use the groundloop maneuver to stop landing rollout made you feel good all over. But there were some who had not been trained to properly use the brakes and they some times applied too much

and nosed over the airplane, breaking the propeller. When multiengine airplanes became predominant in the military and commercial fields, brakes and power adjustments were the tools for guiding the airplane over the ground and parking it at the desired spot. With the exception of the C-54, none of the airplanes built before or during WWII were equipped with nose steering. It was designed to facilitate close parking at the airline terminals. Obviously, it also became a nicety for taxiing, takeoff, and landing. Brakes were still needed to control taxi speeds and landing rollout. Pilots were taught to use brakes when needed, and only when needed. Riding the brakes during taxi could overheat them, then, as now. There was no such thing as selective pitch in those days. Even with the throttles closed the thrust was still positive, so the use of brakes was necessary sometime during rollout and taxi. To repeat, the use of brakes was part of the training, just as it should be today in the P-3 program. Reversible pitch propellers were first put on airliners in 1946. The low pitch stop could be broken, sending the blades to the reverse stop. Selective pitch between these settings was not available. Initial deceleration on landing rollout was accomplished by selecting reverse pitch and throttle opening to the desired RPM. Keeping the props in reverse for a lengthy period at very low airspeeds could overheat the engines, so the normal procedure was to come out of reverse at some reasonable speed such as 40 or 50 knots and use the brakes thereafter. A pilot using reverse to slow from fifteen knots to five knots in order to turn off the runway would have been run off the airport for being an amateur. Selective pitch, as we know it, came along with the turboprop. It is better than sliced bread. You can select any blade angle desired for the situation at hand. Sometimes this is overdone, particularly at very low

26

airspeeds. The rookie pilot may have been taught not to use the brakes except as a last resort. We will go into this deeper later on. Airline pilots flying the P-3s mother, the Electra, use the brakes as necessary to smoothly and quietly stop the airplane, but they dont ride the brakes while taxiing. The original P-3 pilots operated in the same manner for a number of years, and without any problems, as they were taught not to ride the brakes. Naturally there are some hot-dogs who will spoil the best of deals. They would use heavy braking on repeated short field landing practice and eventually get the wheels so hot the fuses would blow out. Some people use poor judgment. For several years there were a few problems with overheated brakes in normal operation and training. Then VP-30 moved to a new hangar at Patuxent. This hangar was at the seawall which meant a long downhill taxi was necessary when returning from a flight. At that time the normal procedure was to taxi with engines in low RPM using the APU for electrical power. Usually when any reverse pitch was used the engines would bog down, as they frequently do in the good old summertime. So it was decided to shut down the outboards and leave the inboards in normal RPM in order to have reverse available when desired. Now as much reverse as needed could be used to slow the airplane from its downhill acceleration. But the rookie may not have absorbed this and still might be reluctant to use much reverse, in which case the airplane went faster than before. With a very soft shoe technique he night ride the brakes with such finesse that the instructor failed to notice it, resulting in hot brakes at the flight line. Another location conducive to hot brakes was Wallops Island, where the taxi-back for takeoff was rather severely downhill. Several times our rookie brake riders overheated the wheels enough to cause a flat tire, and that creates hate and discontent at outlying fields. So the word finally went out that if you as much as touch a brake while the airplane is in motion you get a down. This is an overkill and has caused several near disasters. A below average rookie may even run off the end of the runway to keep the brakes cool. It has happened several times. The same type will go by the north cross at Moffett at ten miles per hour using full reverse and not even a toenail of brake. Then he will accelerate with a lot of power and repeat the same
27

malpractice at the next turnoff. It almost looks like the use of any brake at all is forbidden while on the runway, it is tolerated on the taxi way, and you can stomp on them all you like going through the bird bath. Years ago we put out the information that you should never step on the inboard brake during a fully deflected turn. At this time the turn will pivot on the strut, meaning one wheel will turn backward and the other forward. Locking the brake at this time will create a severe twisting moment in the area where the gear bolts onto the wing causing possible fuel leaks. To prevent this ever happening an overkill was created saying you must never use the inboard brake during a turn - never. This may explain some of the runway marks on the sides of the nose tires. The times that you must be careful are usually at the flight line when the lineman knows only square turns. It is seldom that a square turn should be necessary clearing the runway. In summary, pilots should be taught from day one the proper use of brakes. Without this training an aborted takeoff could result in running off the end of the runway or the blowing of tires also causing runway departure. It seems amateurish to go to ground idle to stop an airplane going five knots on dry surfaces. It is more childish to pass up a turnoff from the runway at five knots and no braking, causing the airplane behind you to have to go around. Most Navy runways have a turnoff about 5,000 feet from the approach end. With a ten knot headwind at about 80,000 pounds landing weight all you have to do is select ground idle or less and the airplane will be at a crawl at the turnoff. Naturally you have to touch down in the first 1,500 feet at a speed not exceeding 1.3Vs and go into Beta without too much delay. Set the power even and you will find that the rudder is effective to a very low speed. This business of steering the airplane with power rather than rudder is outlandish. Yet you see it every day when the rudder is held neutral and the throttles are all over the quadrant trying to go straight. It almost looks like stopping the airplane requires super technique, when it is really quite easy. To repeat, just come over the ramp without delay, set the power even, use the rudder, and use nose steering as the rudder becomes less effective. If slow approaching the turnoff use a little and get off

The C~lev

the runway. Then stay off the brakes as much as you can until the next deceleration or stop as necessary. All this may not work on icy runways and taxiways and a lot of training in the use of selective pitch is necessary. However, once this is accomplished, and the surface is dry, we should operate for that condition. If

it isnt raining we wont use the windshield wipers. The P-3 brakes can be used as necessary to stop the airplane without problems. Like any other multi-disc assembly they will not tolerate constant pressure caused by sneaky brake riders.

Hints To Instructors
eat elevation as well as fore and aft position is important. The student is prone to sit a bit too high at first. A desirable elevation is one where he can see the annunciator lights but cannot see the nose of the airplane. If he can see the nose he is apt to be inconsistent in the flare because he may not be looking far enough down the runway for good depth perception. Whatever portion of the runway observed should move ahead with the airplane (probably 1,000 - 1,500 feet). Sink rate is much easier to detect with the acute angle observation rather than the more obtuse angle when looking down the slope of the nose. Use of Rudder While Taxiing It is very important in flying to have the eyeballs and feet hooked together through the brain. Many of the Incidents are caused by the pilot having to think about which control to use when something happens. Without a doubt the rudder is the most important directional control. By teaching the student to use the rudder while taxiing, this potential problem will go away. Even in the flight line area teach the use of left rudder in a left and right rudder when you want to stop the turn. Its effect will be minimal but the procedure will be indelible. When on the taxiway in no wind conditions the rudder is quite effective at normal taxi speeds. This will save a lot on nose tire wear, but best of all teach the student to instinctively kick the rudder. There is no 50 knot rudder switch, but the control is more effective than at 49 knots. Also better at 20 than it is at 10. Use of Brakes During Taxi It is more important that the student be taught not to ride the brakes, which they
28

are prone to do in the flight line area. If he does it here consistently he may sneak on a little on the taxiway, particularly with a tailwind. However, controlling the airplane entirely with selective pitch, as may be necessary on ice, is unprofessional and can create other hazards, such as FOD ingestion. Make all normal stops with the brakes rather than a lot of reverse. You are in some degree of reverse when the blade angles are aft of Start. Yoke Position On Normal Takeoff It is best not to hold any fore or aft pressure on the yoke on a normal takeoff. The elevators are already being held forward by the force link tab. Holding any more forward pressure will flatten out the tires and struts to the point where a rough runway can set up a porpoiseing action. During abnormal takeoffs where directional control is marginal, it is certainly no help to nail the nose to the ground. Likewise on landings with asymmetric reverse. So how do you know when trouble may arise on takeoff? You dont, but until it happens leave the yoke alone. Follow Through On Rudders The instructor must follow through on the rudders at all times on takeoff and landing. You must always be ready to kick rudder should the student become confused and use the wrong control. To digress, if he has been taught to use rudder while taxiing he is less apt to need help. Rotation On a normal takeoff it is unnecessary and unprofessional to yank an airplane into

the air although some instructors teach this for some very questionable reasons. As the airplane gets lighter during landing practice the nose assumes a nose down attitude making the total arc of rotation greater. The nose down attitude is caused by the wing starting to fly earlier and rising up on the struts. This should not prompt a violent rotation in itself. A gentle pull on the yoke with one hand will ensure a gentle liftoff at a reasonable, low speed. After all, what is wrong with breaking ground at 123 instead of the proverbial 12 1 when it is a smoother action? If the runway is starting to get short, yank it in the air. Sometimes it is hard to break a student from abruptly rotating because he may have learned it in the Training Command. He can usually be cured by making him use one hand only, not both.

Power Control in the Pattern In the above paragraph, lets assume that the touch-and-go was made using 3,000 horsepower and it was pulled back to 2,500 at about 145 knots. Teach the student to gradually accelerate to 160 and hold that speed to the 180 position. This will require a gradual power reduction beginning about 200 feet below pattern altitude so that a huge power change is not necessary all at once. Teach him baseline power settings to fly 160 knots wings level, approach flaps, and gear up. For instance, at 90,000 pounds about 1,100 horsepower is required in level flight, but it requires about 200 more to hold the airspeed in a normal pattern bank. So, at this weight, when pattern altitude is reached during a turn, about 1,300 horsepower will be required, tapering to about 1,100 downwind. Teach the student that the airplane will also fly at 150 knots with the same power if 160 is never reached (L/D curve). Rudder Trim All normal P-3s fly with about two degrees of right rudder trim on downwind with the power set precisely even. On some P-3s some of the instruments are imperfect and the ball may not be centered when the airplane is perfectly trimmed. As long as the power is kept even during the approach it will not be necessary to readjust the rudder trim when reductions are made. Teach students to leave the tab alone. If they feel an urge to trim look at the horsepower first, as it will usually be uneven at the time. This will teach the student to always know what the power is all around the pattern. This information is passed from the eyeballs through the brain to the fingers. On touch and gos it is recommended that the rudder trim be left at the downwind setting and just hold the rudder for the short interval from takeoff to pattern altitude. Otherwise, for some reason, the rudder tab will remain well to the right on a short approach making the student think there is a crosswind.

Stay Over the Centerline

As the nose wheel is lifted from the runway the airplane wants to turn left and a gentle rudder application is required to stay over the centerline. This is caused by the loss of the stabilizing nose wheel footprint and propeller factor created by the increased attitude. Some instructors allow the students to offset this yaw by applying right wing down, which produces a forward slip. This maneuver is used to lose altitude without gaining airspeed, which is wrong on takeoff. It may take some time to get the student to anticipate and apply rudder as required. At first he will wait until he sees the yaw then apply rudder to fly sideways for a spell. In this case tell him you will be helping him kick rudder at the proper time. It still boils down to getting the feet and eyeballs toge ther.

Power Reduction
On a normal light weight takeoff, partitularly in the bounce pattern, there should be no reluctance to make the first power reduction at reasonable speeds before the gear is fully retracted. Some instructors say this could be habit forming and some may do it when they are bagged out on a hot day. Well, if they dont know better than that, help them get another job.

Landmarks
Except in rare completely calm conditions the downwind heading must be altered

29

ThP w

to stay in the proper spacing abeam the runway. This crab angle can vary a great deal at places like Brunswick and Jacksonville. It is a great help to the Student, and to others in the pattern, to be over the same place at the key 180 every time. A path over the ground must be flown to the runway, which is a landmark. On a strange airport space yourself properly abeam the runway then look ahead for a landmark at the end of the 180. If a drift occurs, crab as necessary. The next time around adjust the turn and flight path to be over the landmark which may be a house, parking lot, or something to be avoided, such as the apartment complex at Moffett, or the office building at Barbers Point. If everyone flew the same track it would certainly simplify thing for pilots and the tower.

Gear Extension
Drop the wheels at the 180, check the detent right then, place your fingers on the panel just below the indicator, and leave them there until gear down is indicated. Then read the checklist. The pilot in the left seat does not have to wait until the gear is down to check the detent. He can do it anytime the handle is in the down position. Many times a student will concentrate on the gear indicator during extension and allow the airplane to turn and usually climb. When the gear is extended the C/G moves aft, so it is necessary to drop the nose a slight bit to prevent gaining altitude and subsequently losing airspeed. Teach the student to check the brakes inflight as he would on the ground. On occasion the in-flight brake may not function and the wheels can still be turning at the 180. Stamping on the brakes at this time will stop rotation suddenly and shake the airplane badly. All you need to see is a slight movement on the pressure gauge and this can be obtained with a gentle brake application. There is no valid reason to check them one at a time or more than once. The big reason for checking the brakes at this time is to ensure that they are not parked. It is possible to become airborne with the brakes parked on solid ice. It has happened.

begin at the 180 and make the first power reduction. The old standby 700 horsepower may not work, and having to add power every time in the pattern is certainly not professional. A good workable gouge is to reduce the power 200 from the stable downwind horsepower. Gradually reduce this power around the pattern to about 400 - 500 as the threshold is approached. Ease off power as the flare is established and during subsequent touchdown. It is much easier to ease off a little power at a time than to take off a whole bunch and have to add it back. It also teaches the student to know the power at all times during the approach. This is very important for a number of reasons. If the airspeed is lost from a birdstrike, or such, there should be no panic if the pilot has been accustomed to having a certain horsepower at a point in the pattern. The airplane flies on thrust and if it is set properly you can point the nose at the runway and do a safe job of landing with loss of airspeed indication.

Landing Pattern Example

A normal pattern at 90,000 pounds should be flown in this manner. The horse-. power would normally be about 1,100 at 160 knots on downwind leg. Drop the wheels at the 180 and lower the nose a very slight amount. Do the thing with the checklist while reducing the power to 900 horsepower and turn off the 180 on the proper track aver the ground. At the 90 the speed should be about 145150 with about 800 horsepower. As final approach is intercepted the power must be reduced to about 700 horsepower with wings level, otherwise the speed will increase. Extend flaps as soon as practicable, allow the nose to fall through, adjust trim and power as required. You do not have to put in adVance trim. You may reduce power before trimming if you desire. You may trim a bit, adjust power, trim, adjust power, and so on. There is no earthly reason to fly slow in the pattern as long as you can land in the first 1500 feet of runway at the proper speed. Flying slow on four engines and fast on two doesnt make any sense at all. Why not fly all the pattern as if you are on two engines, then when the big day comes nothing will have to be altered. Just make a normal pattern but dont go below 145 until you have it in the bag. The airplane does not know how many engines are running as long as the power is adequate. Most people have quit
30

Power Settings and Airspeeds

As the gear is being extended drop the nose slightly to offset the aft C/G change and drag increase. Consider the glide slope to

teaching that you have to be at 1.3 5 when the flaps are extended or that you have to touch bases around the pattern. But there are still a few instructors that teach everybody by the numbers when it is not necessary except in isolated cases. Lets drag up the weak rather than drag down the strong. Elevator Trim The three hands full of trim as flaps are extended has to go. This started years ago when they wouldnt let you put the flaps out until short final. At this point you had to be at 100 feet and 1.35. Ridiculous as well as very difficult. The present day procedure is to extend flaps as desired, hopefully early on final, allowing ample time to get properly trimmed before getting to the threshold. Yet there are still instructors who want all the trim in at once. When the student puts in all of the allowable trim at once he is prone to allow the nose to come up because of overtrim. When this happens airspeed will be lost not only from increased drag but from ballooning effect of increased lift from the flaps. At this time he will probably add power and have to start a new approach. As viewed from the side, a straight in glide slope would require a lower nose attitude with full flaps than with approach flaps due to a change in the camber and subsequent lift pattern of the wing. Thus it is very important to allow the nose to fall through before adding trim. At this time add only the trim needed but keep adding it as the speed diminishes. All of the trim should be in by the threshold so that the hand is on the throttles before the flare. When students have difficulty in landing nose high it is usually by not enough nose up trim and they are reluctant to pull harder. Some of them think they are not allowed to add trim after the initial application. To break an undesirable habit pattern ask the student to reduce a little power as the nose falls through before he touches the trim. Encourage him to make small adjustments and as often as he likes. There is no such thing as a definite degree of elevator trim, such as 15, required for a landing. The center of gravity determines the trim needed. Rolling Out On Centerline Hopefully when the wings are leveled on final approach the airplane is at
31

least lined up with the runway if not the centerline. However, some ins true tors allow the student to angle in and have all the work to do right at the last. Teach the student how the centerline looks all the way in, as it will take him quite a spell to learn it by himself. Plan the roll out to final to be on the centerline if possible. Keep flying to the centerline as necessary, then you wont have to do it when close in and can concentrate on landing, primarily, without chasing it during the flare. Crosswinds When the tower reports the wind dont just blindly set up a crosswind correction and hold it to touchdown. Get on the centerline and stay there all the way in, and you will know more about the wind than anyone else. Wind direction changes with altitude loss in almost every case. Put in as little correction as necessary to stay in position. In a great many cases too much correction is applied and held to a horrible touchdown. Remember that if the airplane is staying on the centerline without any correction, then there is no crosswind at that point. If the airplane tends to drift off the centerline put in just enough correction to stay there. When someone records the wind direction and velocity on the clearance pad, such as 190 at 41 you know he is a victim of bad instruction. While he is writing it down he will probably drift off the centerline, wind or no wind. Discourage such amateurish procedures and fly the airplane. What difference does the wind report make when you only have one runway for landing? Power Required Knowing the power normally required throughout the approach with the gear down and various flap settings is very important. If the gear has not been extended the power will be a lot less for the airspeed and should stick out like Bonnies big toe that some thing is wrong. Get tower approval sometime and try it to a reasonable altitude. Rules Described As Instructor Technique Some people teach that you cant turn off the 180 until the gear is locked down, and you cant descend until you turn, and all

sorts of amateurish procedures. You m a y start a slight descent as the gear is being extended prior to turning off the 180. You may start turning before the gear is comple tely down if conditions warrant alterations to the pattern. With a strong tailwind on downwind leg you will most likely have to turn early to avoid being blown out of the normal pattern. There are times at Brunswick, in particular, that you will be flying into a brisk headwind on downwind leg, in which case you will have to alter power reductions and turning off the 180 to keep from being too close to land. The secret is to look out the window and fly a track over the ground which takes you to the runway day after day. Flying instruments around the pattern is for the birds. Actually, birds wouldnt try it. Nose High Touchdown Explain to the student why the nose attitude should be high at touchdown. You pull the nose up to stop the sink rate by -creating some new lift. The only way any airplane can be landed smoothly at a slow airspeed is to tilt the wing to a higher angle during the flare, or roundout. Think about holding it off and not letting it touch the runway. Sink rate can also be stopped with additional power, but this is a fix and not a normal technique. Actually you dont care where the nose is, except to land slow it must be up. To land flat in crosswinds the nose will be lower so you can land faster, reducing the component to something acceptable. In areas of prevailing high surface winds landings are usually made in a fairly flat attitude. When you get home to calm conditions you should be able to land a lot slower with the wing tilted up. Touch and Go Landings Many students quit flying the minute the mainmounts touch the runway and let the nose prang down hard. Others will purposely nail the nose wheel so the new evolution of three wheels on deck, re-set my flaps, re-set by trim can be started for the go. A good procedure here is to ask the student to lower the nose gently as if the tires are thin while the instructor raises the flaps to takeoff and resets the trim. By the time you see the flaps are in the box you will be ready to say you can go. As far as slowing to 100
32

knots before starting the go, you will be near this speed or slower if the landing is made at the proper nose attitude. As an instructor, never actually look at the elevator trim indicator during the cleanup. Keep your eyes on the runway, check the flap indicator, and give permission to go. You will have already noticed about how much trim the student has used on approach, and this will be a clue as to how much to take out. Actually, it is not that critical. What is critical is not watching the runway during all that goes on with student pilots and engineers. Always keep your feet on the rudders so you can immediately react if the student malfunctions. Dont call rotate until you see your own preferred minimum horsepower across the board (at least 2,000). Never create a power loss on a touch and go. There is too much going on under normal conditions with throttles out of rig, and things of that sort, to start teasing the animals at this point. Make sure the student closes the throttles after the mainmounts are on the deck. This will ensure no further unwanted flight. Full Stop Landings Too few are made during training, but this is an unresolved problem created by heavy traffic. Since practice of full stops is insufficient, the instructor must find other means to teach the proper technique. One good demo is worth a thousand words. But before you demo the landing use about 500 words. Be sure that the student realizes that any reduction of blade angle from the low pitch stop has some braking action. Minimum blade angle, or Ground Start, is usually sufficient to slow the airplane to a very low speed at light weights and light winds at the usual 5000 foot finger. For certain, it is seldom necessary to use more than Ground Idle, which is a lot of reverse in itself. Obviously at some time or another the student must be allowed to use full reverse for a spell then ease the throttles forward as the speed slows enough to anticipate clearing the runway. At this time a little brake will finish off the roll out. Most airports have a convenient turnoff at about 5000 feet in one direction and 3000 in the other. Teach the student to bring the throttles over the ramp without delay, but smoothly, to about an inch below flight idle. This will be more than adequate to acti-

The C.w

--

._.

vate the Beta lights for the benefit of the engineer. Do not encourage the student pilot to look at the Beta lights but to look at the runway. When you hear a lot of new noise and the airplane is going straight, you know things worked as advertised. Now you can readjust the throttles for the desired reverse pitch. Most of the landing incidents are caused by the pilot grabbing the throttles and jerking them all the way back before he makes sure he has perfect directional control. Teach them to take it easy. After all, he wouldnt think of jamming the throttles full forward on takeoff with disregard to directional control and instrument readout. Or would he? Jacksonville is an airport with a great many fingers for turning off the runway. Setting the reasonable Ground Idle or less will normally slow you to a speed comfortable for turnoff with a bit of brake. Can you use the inside brake during a turn? Of course you can except for fully deflected turns, usually in the flight line area. Whatever you do, dont stop on the runway until the Tower starts to bellyache. Taxi off then stop so someone else can land. A disgusting performance is where the first turnoff is 6000 feet and you touch down at the 1000 foot marker, pull full reverse for about 3000 feet and almost to a stop, then add power almost to flight idle to accelerate to the turnoff, then use full reverse again and go by it at about ten miles an hour instead of using a little brake. When the time is ripe, encourage the student to land on this runway. Select Start, turn loose of the throttles and ailerons, and use the rudder for directional control. With a ten knot wind down the runway, rudder is all you need almost to a stop if the power is even across the board. Random use of ailerons and power is unnecessary, unprofessional, and sometimes downright dangerous. Some pilots really make a landing roll out look very difficult with all the threshing-around in the cockpit. In most cases they do not use the rudder at all. Thats bad. The instructors job is to make it easy. When its easy its a lot safer. Airwork A thorough series of power exercises should be conducted to acquaint the student with what is required for various flap settings, gear up and down, for pattern air33

speeds. Simulated approaches are invaluable when the student is learning to set the power for the various configurations in the pattern. Teach him to move the throttles then look to see the result. pretty soon he will be able to look out the window and stay in the groove while making small power adjustments. A good thing to point out is one knob, or movement of the throttle one inch is worth 500 horsepower. Two inches is 1000 and one eighth inch is 100 horsepower. Once he gets the mechanics of moving throttles it gets easier and easier. Remember, move the throttles then look at the horsepower. If you let him watch the change in horsepower he will usually get out of the groove. After awhile he will be able to do it any way he wants because peripheral vision will develop and allow him to see a change in scenery while looking inside. Before any power failures are created on the runway it is very important that you know the student will instinctively kick rudder in the right direction. This can be accomplished at altitude by having him home on a cloud or landmark while you vary the power. Increase asymmetrical power settings by using your left hand on 1 and 2 and your right on 3 and 4 throttles going back and forth for a big thrust change. When he gets good at this leave all four throttles at the same power and keep moving your hands. He will usually keep up the former rhythm and let the airplane turn. This may hurt his feelings but it is necessary to let him know he has good peripheral vision. He could see your hands moving clear across the cockpit while looking dead ahead. Now you must repair the friendship. Have him look at a cloud out the left window and repeat the exercise. Ask him not to think about it but not to let any scenery move. He will be amazed that he can go straight under varying power conditions while looking any place. Now we have his eyeballs and his feet hooked together, which was the goal all along. The next exercise is to get him to fly a visual turn noting bank angle and rate of turn. Pull the power back on an outboard and make him hold the same bank angle and turn rate looking outside. He may glance at the ball for comfort. Repeat this until he doesnt need to glance at the ball then vary the power back and forth until he needs no further help. Then do it using the inboard engine until you feel that he can fly the airplane visually without constant instru-

ment scan and without using the rudder tab. Practice two engine waveoffs at altitude while homing on a cloud. The gear does not need to be down, but approach flaps should be set and the airspeed 140-145 knots. Demo power application on 3 and 4 about 10 10 TIT and let the airplane roll slightly and yaw slightly to the left, which is an intolerable situation. Recover by reducing power and lowering the nose for a fresh start. The next demo is to be done correctly. Apply power on 3 and 4 with simultaneous right wing down and right rudder while looking out the window and at the airspeed with your third eye. When the direction of flight is under control, pull the nose up gently keeping the airspeed above Vmc. When a positive rate of climb is indicated simulate gear retraction. Here again your peripheral vision will enable you to luok both inside and outside without heading change. Impress on the student when he performs the maneuver that he is flying down a runway with hangars on both sides. If he turns any he will hit one of them. This exercise is not difficult unless the ins true tor starts flying over his head using very high powers and very low airspeeds. Some people have done this and gotten into trouble. Think about it this way-the need to go around is nil unless you are too high and too fast on final. If you get too low or too slow only a nut would try to wave off. Put on a little more power to reach the runway, not start all over. Then you hear the one about the truck crossing the runway when you are about to flare. This is putting far too much romance in aviation. Vmc air should be in the syllabus some time or other. The way it is written in the instructors guide is the guideline. Remember we are teaching a procedure necessary to be used when the chips are down. It is not meant to be an airshow as some have demonstrated. The reason for using 140 knots on two engines is to make control marginal while comfortably above stall. We do not feather engines, we leave the gear up, where it would be just after takeoff. One of the daredevil instructors performed all this at a deployment site at 4000 feet, gear down, full flaps, number one feathered, at 120 knots. On the two engine waveoff they ended up at 1500 feet. There are some things you cant do. Recently one of our allies almost bought the farm trying to fly in the big leagues, but was too fresh from the fern club. A demo is in order for the first go around. It takes some
34

people several tries before the procedure sinks in. After all, all their flying lives they have been taught to fly wings level. Now they must fly wing down. You can expect to have to repeat the maneuver several times for some people. To make it easier for the student tell him not to worry about altitude at first. The important thing is to go straight at the constant airspeed. Any change in airspeed will change the control deflection requirements to stay on heading. Once he has mastered this you can start working on the altitude retention. A good brief on the entire procedure will save you a lot of frustration, as it is a little confusing to some of the bad listeners. A good old fashioned manual MAD Comp is about as good a training exercise as was ever invented. The roll maneuver used to be taught in primary. It was called rolling on a point and used to teach coordination of feet, hands, and eyeballs. However, it is too much to expect to get this back in the syllabus. Especially when a mere handful of instructors can do it themselves. This is not meant to be a cheap shot, just a needle. Engine out Landings Three-engine landings require no special techniques to be used. Always fly a normal pattern as if four engines are operating. Remember that the airplane flies on total thrust and set the power accordingly. If it takes 4400 total horsepower to go downwind with four, it will take at least that much with three, Or 1467 on each of the three engines running. In this case the first power reduction is not to 700 or 900 but probably to 1200 etc. It may be helpful to the student to make the first two-engine landing with symmetrical engines operating. This will promote confidence that the airplane does indeed fly well with half the engines if the power is used properly. He also will not have to worry about rudder trim. Now comes the landing with only engines three and four operating. Here again, if at all practicable, make a normal everyday approach using the same ground reference as before. If you are coming from the East and landing to the East make a normal downwind entry, not wider and deeper. The downwind power at 90,000 pounds will still be 4400 horsepower, with a little more for the yaw factor, at 160 knots with approach flaps.

The Cis

There is no good reason to delay getting approach flaps. As a matter of fact it could cause confusion in speeds and power settings. Just act as if the airplane does not know it has a problem. Drop the wheels at the same spot as always if the platform is stable in speed/power relationship. Do not drop the wheels until the tower assures you that you are the number one airplane in the pattern, at which time you can think about having the runway made. Here again, power reductions must be made with foresight. A common tendency is to pull off way too much turning off the 180 and having to add it back. Just take off a little at a time to fly normally. The 145 knot minimum until the landing is assured is nothing more than a reasonable speed that is well above Vmc just in case you did have to wave off. After you extend the flaps you most certainly will taper the speed to something less. Now hear this. In the old days there were some instructors who would make you go around of you got below 145, right down to the flare. There are times at certain airports, such as Brunswick and Barbers Point, when wind shears may drop the airspeed 10 to 15 knots temporarily someplace in the approach. Add some power to mend the situation, but dont take it around. The use of rudder tab for engine out landings has been a controversy for years. In the old days before boost controls the tabs were powerful controls, just as they are on a P-3 boost out. With boost on the tab settings can easily be overpowered and the adjustments are not so critical. How many times have you seen a student constantly playing with the rudder tab all around the pattern and ending up with as much as ten degrees to the right on the landing and not realizing it? There are some instructors who insist that the rudder trim tab be at zero prior to the flare on engine out landings but apparently dont care where it is on normal touchdowns. In fact, the normal setting for a norma1 landing is about two degrees right rudder on a normal P-3. About the worst thing you can do is start flying the airplane with the rudder tab on short final, especially when it was all trimmed up at the time. To set it to zero is wrong. To have someone else do it is even worse. Remember that it is necessary to hold a lot of right rudder on down wind and base

final approach when the trim is usually about 10 - 11 degrees to the right. People dont seem to mind using a lot of foot pressure around the pattern but they hate it on landing. All that is necessary is to use a little left foot pressure to counteract the right tab. Go straight regardless. With the trim tab set to read right it is actually to the left which will make the rudder deflection greater when left rudder is kicked during reverse of three and four engines. To sum it up, a student should be taught to fly the airplane and not go for a ride using the trim tabs. You can impress him during the work at altitude by doing engine out work without the aid of the rudder tab. The most important thing in this paragraph is the landing of the airplane and not where the trim tab was set. Some students may be led to believe that if the tab is not set at a certain place the landing may be a disaster. If they prefer to play with the tab and do a perfect job, let them. But dont make them do it when it screws up the landing.

Engine Out Reversing

A lot of improvement has been made over the years in stopping the airplane with asymmetric reverse, but every once in awhile someone gets a little carried away and gets off the runway on three engines, yet. The secret is to take it easy at first until you see what you have. Then you can do what is necessary. For example when you come over the ramp on one, two, and three, with number four cut, the airplane will want to turn left and you must be prepared to counteract with right rudder and right aileron, favoring symmetrical power on the inboards. Wind in full aileron and have the copilot hold it there. Do all steering with the rudder and power, and nose steering if the runway starts to get narrow. It would be better to skin the tires than to get off the runway. You may use nose steering for takeoff so why cant you use it during landing roll out as a cure for a loss of heading control. In training, the instructor wants to see the student control the airplane without the use of nose steering, playing no hydraulics and slick runways. Some of that is necessary training but impress on the student that if nose steering is available use it when control is being lost. You have no doubt seen people leaving the

when landing with one and two

tab is not effective to prevent this. About the first time your right foot gets a rest is on

OUtj

as the

center of the runway at a very low speed

because they fear getting a down if they steer, or use the brakes. All that muck should

The -In

stop. Then there is the student, and some pilots, who keep the rudders neutral during roll out and also on takeoff. You must work on this type to use rudder while taxiing and all other times on the runway when the airplane wants to turn for whatever reason. There may also be a confusion about where you put the ailerons during an engine out roll out with a crosswind. Always use the ailerons in the direction you wish to go. When the airplane wants to weathercock to the left with a left crosswind use right rudder and right aileron. Do not attempt to steer with the ailerons. If full aileron seems to be too much keep it there anyway and ease off on the rudder, and power if it is too asymmetric. What ever you do, dont let the student vary aileron, rudder, and power at the same time, as this is very difficult and can easily cause disaster. When significant crosswinds exist and there are runways in several directions suitable for emergency landings, it would be wise to select one to your advantage. Most of the bases do not offer this choice except when the wind is straight across the runway. Two engine out on one side reversing is not difficult unless you panic. Nobody has had a problem in the real life actual dozen or so two-engine landings. Not so for practice, simulating two out. This is usually caused by a misunderstanding of what is expected of the student. First of all it is hardly feasible that two on one side will fail when the runway is icy and number one hydraulic system is inoperative-for possible nose steeringetc. The best pilot in the world might not be able to handle something like this when he is expected to pull full reverse on a long runway. It is nice for the student to find out how far he can go, but it is doubtful of this importance when most of the incidents occur with a lot of runway left. Its also embarrassing at the long green table. The following is a suggested example and procedure: Before landing, simulating

one and two out, conduct a cockpit seating to a unanimous decision that the airplane should try to turn right when three and four are reversed. Also make a decision that/ regardless of what the airplane tries to do, we are going to try to make it go straight. After touchdown, without hesitation, come over the ramp with all four to about halfway to Start, to ensure activation of the 2 8 degree pitchlock reset switch. Start coming back with three and four and go straight with left rudder and left aileron. The objective now is to apply full left aileron and hold it there, but the pilot in the left seat cannot make his arm twist that far, so the copilot must do it. Should full aileron make the airplane start left keep it there and pull more reverse and adjust rudder for steering. Do not ever use the ailerons for steering, as this will set up a chain reaction of everything in the cockpit thrashing around, including brakes. As the airplane slows, ease off some reverse, and use nose steering during the last part of the roll out. Use brakes as necessary to stop and taxi off the runway. There has been some misunderstanding about what the student does with his left hand when he gives up the aileron wheel to the copilot. Some say they will get a down if they as much as get it close to nose steering. Baloney. Let him put his hand on the wheel but not use it until the end of normal control on roll out-or if the runway starts getting too narrow. In the latter case the instructor should have already taken over with all the throttles. Further techniques are the usual items such as be sure the props on the simulated engines are in the Beta range. You will know without looking when the airplane goes straight after coming over the ramp with all four and hearing a lot of noise. Nail the nose wheels to the deck. When slowed on roll out, ease one and two back toward Start preventing forward thrust. And so on. Instructing is fun, and teaching is even more gratifying. Try it.

ou hear all sorts of famous sayings such as, There are those who have and those who will. This little jewel is usually quoted by those who landed, or almost landed, wheels up. Of all the pilots I have known, 99 44/100 percent have not had the occasion to rely on

Landing Gear Extension

36

this statement. Another that you hear is, He had made up his mind to land and no earthly warning would have prevented wheels up landing. Then there was the famous one about the pilot saying he couldnt hear the tower calling him about the gear because

IbP s

pairing tower instructions. Pilot and engineer ins true tion at times requires considerable conversation in the cockpit which may divert attention from the prime duties. A suggestion is that as you near the 180 put your hand on the gear handle as a habit. Recently I rode through seven radar approaches at an East Coast base. The operators were students under supervision. On each approach they advised us to run a cockpit check on downwind leg. On two of the seven approaches they did not mention that the gear should be down. Here again, after turning base leg put your hand on the gear handle and hold it there until the gear is extended. It was mentioned above that it takes 300 more horsepower per engine to drag the gear in level flight at 160 knots with appreach flaps. It also takes less power than

normal to maintain the glideslope when the gear is up. Being a proponent of having the right power set for the occasion it has always been a mystery how someone can fly an approach with the gear up and not be suspicious, since so little power is required. Perhaps more attention should be paid to power required in the pattern and with airspeed control rather than just blindly putting all your chickens in one basket - the airspeed indicator. Until we get better gear warning systerns we must be very cautious. After we get better systems we must be very cautious. Airline people all work together to prevent mistakes. We can also. Turning base with the wheels touch and go

Narrow Runways
And l%eir Eflects on Aircraft Durability
was a all airplanes tall skids tail wheels, even airlinwhen Igeneralorlittle boy airplanes did had ers. Most aviation not even have brakes. Believe me, you learned to use the rudder or else you ended up someplace undesirable. Although not every airport had runways to stay on, there were plenty of times when we landed on two lane roads and taxied to a filling station. Other times a farmer would mow a swath through high grass so it could be used as a runway for hopping passengers. The width of this runway was seldom much more than the lower wingspan. For a highwing monoplane it was usually about twenty feet, because you didnt want to pay the farmer for any more than the minimum crop that we destroyed. Nobody seemed to worry about narrow runways and few people had problems. You just reminded yourself on every approach that the airplane might want to wander away from the straight and narrow and you were not about to let it. This did not require superior ability, you were trained from day one to look through the windshield and go straipht. Since you looked outside the cockpit almost all the time the eyeballs and feet stayed hooked together without even thinking about it. Although Tail Draggers are almost a thing of the past, everyone could learn something from flying one. Naval aviators fortunate enough to have learned in a Stearman or SN-J have never had a problem staying on the runway in our modern airplanes. Pilots learned to use the rudder to counteract even the slightest departure from the intended track. If they hadnt they would have ended center of gravity is aft of the mainmounts in such airplanes. This means that with any outside force starting a swerve, the airplane would like to turn around and go down the runway tall first. In tricycle gear aircraft the opposite is true, since the center of gravity is far ahead of the mainmounts. Regardless of what type aircraft is flown, we must be ready to counteract any divergence from the centerline immediately. Over reaction at this time is desirable. You can always take a little from too much, but you may not be able to add what is necessary to too little if the divergence has progressed to any extent. We must take whatever measures are necessary to stay on the runway during landing roll out. It must be embarrassing to fly a perfect mission and end up in the ditch at home plate. The primary control for going straight on the ground is the rudder, fol38

up in a groundloop out in the ditch. The

stop landings. If you stop, a lengthy delay would occur before release for takeoff. There are outlying airports available, some with runways long enough for stop and go practice. This must be monitored carefully for those who land long and still try to stop midfield. Perhaps the answer is to teach the proper stopping technique whenever the occasion does arise, instead of a lot of noise, threshing around in the cockpit, aileron fanning, and general confusion. Before the student is given a lot of full stops he must learn to fly a consistent traffic pattern using the proper power settings. It is very important to know the power required for downwind, base, and final. In order to be consistent with this he must fly the same pattern over the ground. The runway is a landmark, so why cant he use Joes Service Station as a 180 fly-to point. Next he must be able to sense the proper glide slope visually. Then, of course, comes multiple touch and gos until he can land properly and take off without leaving the centerline. Now he is ready for full stops. The student has probably witnessed a few horrible examples of how not to stop and may be apprehensive. A good demo from the right seat will allay those fears. Bring the throttles over the ramp smoothly and evenly to about halfway between Start and Ground Idle. Remove your right hand from the ailerons, lift your left hand above the throttles, and steer with the rudder. Directional control can be maintained to a very slow speed when the wind is down the runway. When control seems to be getting marginal ease on the brakes and stop on the center line. All during the demo call out the fact that you are not using aileron or steering with reverse

thrust, but with your feet. Now its the students turn and ten to one he will do a pretty good job of emulating your demo. This time let him use nose steering as control gets marginal, then brakes. You must also make him aware that the airplane will gradually slow down enough to make the normal 5000 foot turn off. Otherwise he will want to panic and make sure it stops, then have to taxi for a spell. Three-engine landings should be no problem, even in moderate crosswinds. Bring all throttles over the ramp into the Beta range but leave the asymmetric one ahead of the others until you are sure of directional control with rudder and ailerons. As you select more reverse from the asymmetric propeller wind in full aileron in the proper direction and have the copilot hold it there. Place your left hand on nose steering for ready use if needed. As the aircraft slows, ease the throttles forward to about the Start position using the brakes and steering to finish off the roll out. Moderate winds even from the wrong side should not warrant getting off the centerline. Remember one thing. Staying on the runway is a must. If the thing tried to leave centerline apply an immediate correction on the too much side. The correction applied yesterday may not be enough today. If it isnt, put in everything available. If that isnt enough make use of positive power, steering, brakes, and mild cussing. It would really be interesting to know why so many airplanes have gotten off the runway lately when it was such a rare occasion in the years gone by. It must have something to do with experience.

he Blue Book describes a normal takeoff in this manner. The pilot should initiate directional control, using nose wheel steering. The rudder becomes effective between 50 and 60 knots. Release nosewheel steering and maintain directional control with the rudder. Maybe the description for takeoff could be expanded by teaching the full use of full right rudder from the beginning until there is no longer a need to steer. The speed at this time may be less or more than 50

To Steer or Knot To Steer

knots, depending on power and wind conditions. Some folks may believe that there is no need to use rudder until 50 or 60 knots appears on the airspeed because it is not effective. Rudder is effective at one knot but more and more as the speed increases, so why not take advantage of every thing available. In the Blue Book description for landing it says, maintain directional control, using the rudder down to 60 knots. Below 60 knots, use engine power, nosewheel steering, or both.

40

Perhaps this description could be expanded by teaching continued use of the rudder along with power and steering as needed to stay on the centerline, or at least on the runway. With the throttles set about halfway between Start and Ground Idle the rudder is effective down to a very low speed when the wind is down the runway. As this speed is reached ease the throttles toward start and finish off the roll with nose steering, as well as rudder, and brakes. About the worst thing anybody can do is place a restriction on the use of a control, such as nose steering when directional control is at stake. It should not be necessary to use steering above 60 knots if the power is even and the rudder is used. Nor should it be necessary on normal three engine landings if rudder and ailerons are used. But if flight controls, including power, are inadequate,

then use nose steering to stay on the centerline. just like the big boys on the airlines do. The use of steering without first using flight controls is not acceptable. Diret tional control should be maintained with flight controls, steering, and brakes, if necessary. Another about the worst thing anybody can do is monitor the airspeed indicator after Beta is selected when they should be looking down the runway. Alert eyeballs send a message to the brain to tell the feet to do something right away when only a slight divergence from the centerline occurs. The P-3 is a mans airplane that a boy can fly if he pays attention. It will also bite you someplace if you just go along for a ride and pay more attention to the numbers than going straight. And thats the straight of it.

Filter Lights
t is very rare, but once in a while a fuel panel filter light comes on in flight. On a couple of occasions, incidents which were near accidents, occurred, making you wonder if an unscheduled landing should have been made. Case histories reveal that the lights came on due to faulty switch settings. Digest 19 says A filter light which illuminates when pressure drop across the engines low pressure filter elements indicate their useful life has nearly expired. How they define nearly is not explained. The Electra and C-130 have fuel filter systems identical to the P-3 but do not have filter lights. Nothing on record indicates engine malfunction due to clogged filters. It makes you wonder if filter lights are necessary or even desirable. Throughout the years, I have noticed the vigilance displayed by the crews in taking fuel samples on preflights. I have yet to see fuel contamination or water in the jars placed by the ladder. It is illogical that only one tank would have contaminated fuel when the same fuel truck or hydrant is used. More than one filter light on might be cause for concern. To my knowledge this has never happened. Contamination in one tank could occur if debris left from the tank sealant repair is not removed by vacuum cleaners. In
41

this case the filters should have clogged on ground runs and check flights and not during mid-deployment. All of the fuel filters are automatitally by-passed should they become clogged. If you are worried about enough fuel being delivered to the fuel control, a simple check can be made. Apply max power to the suspect engine and its opposite. If the power is the same, taking into consideration engine efficiencies, then there is ample fuel to the engine. An automobile which will go only thirty mph with full throttle probably has a clogged fuel line filter. When it is replaced normal operation is restored. All engines will experience a power loss when insufficient fuel is delivered to the carburetor or fuel control. Once on the first flight of a P-3 the filter light on number four engine came on. I turned off the boost pump for several seconds. When it was turned on again the filter light went out and stayed out the rest of the flight. Its worth a try. NATOPS says if a filter light comes on and the engine continues to operate normally, continue operation. Inspect nacelle for fuel leaks. If fuel is visible, secure the engine. It is possible that filter lights have caused more trouble than if they didnt exist.

If only one comes on, and there are no fuel leaks, It seems safe to assume switch settings are to blame. If a max power comparison is made with the opposite engine it seems logi-

cal that adequate fuel is being delivered to the fuel control. The Electra and C-130 do not have filter lights to worry about.

Prop Internal Flow Check

Static/Loose Propeller Blade Check
A
11 static checks must be made at normal operatin oil temperature. They should be made on a scheduled routine basis and at any time in between when the prop appears to be operating abnormally. Normal time is 18 to 19 seconds. The extra time is the result of routing the oil through the pitchlock regulator. Should the times be the same for circuit breakers in or out, then pitchlock reset would be inoperative. Should the time be normal circuit breakers out but excessive with them in, then it exposes a bad regulator. Propellers with high time internal flow of 22 or 23 seconds with c i r c u i t breakers out usually will not terminate the aux pump with the breakers in. If the pump does terminate it may take up to 35 or 40 seconds. On occasions with very high internal flow the low pitch stop may not release until pitchlock reset is disabled. When the basic feather time is excessive the common fix is to re-seal the dome. LOOSE PROP BLADES Exert fore and aft pressure on the Elades to check for looseness in the hubs The travel, if any must be measured metal to metal and not blade bending and subsequent springback.

l Pull pitchlock r e s e t circui t breakers in order to check the b a s i c hydraulic flow. Use the PCO, unfeather button, and throttle to position the blades to full reverse, and check visually. Punch the feather button and record the time from full reverse to feather. The average time is about 16 setonds. This time only be observed by recording the time the number one pump light is out. From light off to light on. Using the PC0 continuously, unfeather the prop and re-position the blades to full reverse, visually noting the pause at the low pitch stop. The Beta light should come on after the low pitch stop releases.

can

Push in the pitchlock reset circuit breakers. Repeat the above cycle, recording the time to go from full reverse to feather.
l

42

Propeller Procedures
he contents of this paper are my own thoughts on propeller operation and are not to be used without NATOPS approval. I am attempting to bring out basic logic which I hope will influence people to size up the situation and not act too hurriedly to secure a malfunctioning propeller. The blades of a propeller are always trying to go flat to an angle of least resistance. With a fixed pitch prop this is impossible and rpm is controlled by power and airspeed. Those of you who fly small airplanes have noticed that some props are pitched for takeoff and climb and others for cruise. With a takeoff prop the climb is good but cruise airspeed is limited by allowable engine speed. Likewise a cruise prop will bite more air at a lower rpm in level flight but it has degraded performance for takeoff and climb. Variable pitch became available about 1933. I was there. The P-3 prop is unique in that it always turns 100% when operating normally. When more or less power is demanded the governor will not allow the rpm to change but instead sends a signal to the control to port more or less oil to one side or the other to change pitch and balance out the situation. Oil pressure alone keeps the prop from overspeeding. Without it NTS will not function, nor will Beta follow-up. The prop could end up on the low pitch stop except for good old pitchlock and its companion, the fuel topping governor. Pitchlock is good and is an emergency system which acts when the propeller hydraulic pressure is lost. Looking into the past I wish we had had it on P38s and P-2s When a prop overspeeds the fuel topping governor is tasked with pulling away fuel from the engine to prevent further overspeed, which would occur with the propeller blades at a fixed pitch when pitchlocked. For example: If the prop oversped and pitchlocked at 106% the fuel topping governor would take away all the fuel except just enough to run the engine. Horsepower would be at or near zero. Reducing airspeed would allow the rpm to drop slightly and also to allow the fuel governor to give the engine more fuel. At about 104%
43

the horsepower available would he near normal for the situation. Accept a little noise and go home. To reduce the airspeed to 100% might affect range. Remember the prop ran away for some reason. The most logical one is insufficient oil pressure. With this in mind we must suspect that the prop might be incapable of feathering. Whatever you do dont pull the handle and destroy the pitchlock which is performing as it was designed to do. Good old pitchlock prevented further overspeed and the fuel topping governor also came to the rescue. Above 106% there will be no horsepower available. Below that there will be. We have lost one airplane and almost lost another because the handle was pulled with an overspeed and no prop pump lights on. Right by the book! We tried to change the book In 1979 but the NATOPS biggies would not allow it. Maybe they will this time. We did manage to get some warning words printed to say maybe you shouldnt pull the handle after you had already done it. Happy Hour conversation: Our cost per hour is down from last month. We have had only six engine out landings, and, of course, thats good training. Our AIMD bill is up significantly, but thats out of another pocket. n Before the P-3 came along it was illegal to shut down an engine with intent to restart below 6000 and away from an airport. Logic behind this was that the prop might not unfeather. So whats so different about a P-3? Only that the prop is more complex and thus more apt to have malfunctions of slight or serious nature. Having been in the VP business for thirty-five years I was utterly amazed to find many people who would never have shut down a P-2 engine now had no qualms whatsoever about shutting down and restarting a P-3 engine at any altitude in the middle of nowhere. I remember one of the East Coast Commanding Officers feathering and unfeathering 1 & 4 twenty-seven times on a surveillance run from Argentina to Lages. Both at the same time too. Such bliss had to be corrected and that is when I started the procedure of feathering number one about

The m

an hour after takeoff and starting it up about 30 minutes before landing. It was much safer to rig ships on three engines than what they had been doing, that is - cruising at 5000 on two engines and rigging on four. There is one former C.O. who never shut down an engine for loiter during his 30 months in the front office. When loiter was needed he flew four engine max endurance speeds and came home repeatedly with as much fuel as anyone else who had feathered, and lost no engines as a result of restarts. He is not a scaredy cat, he is sensible. He has also won the Aviator of the Year Award. A P-2 would fly about as far at 2000 as it would at 9000 on the reciprocating engines. A P-3 wont do that. Low altitudes eat a lot of fuel with jet engines. Sales promotion of the P-3 replacing the P-2 prompted the procedure of shutting down engines to save fuel. Stopping motors at high altitude saves almost no fuel and sets you up for marginal propeller performance when they are unfeathered, particularly in very cold air. Seals and 0 rings shrink and can allow oil flow in the wrong directions, sometimes

resulting in overspeeds. Forty years ago we termed seal shrinkage as Cold Flow. Landing gear struts would, a great many times, go fl a t overnight in cold climates. With this in mind maybe we shouldnt tease the animals by feathering props at high altitudes. Or low altitudes. To some people Lets go ahead and put number one in the bag has about the same significance as Pass the butter, please. Many times this action is unnecessary and little more than a prestige factor. M ar kmy words. As you get older you will shut down fewer and fewer engines. Before an engine is shut down with intent to restart, even on training flights, it would be wise to know that the internal flow of oil in the prop is normal. This can be determined by a simple static check performed and recorded periodically on post flight or after any engine run when the oil is warm. This should be available to the flight crew for preflight. Its cheap.

Maintenance Cbeck$i?igbts
his paper is written to explain why some when the propellers were feather checked. of the checks are made at certain speeds and altitudes and why it may not be necesNTS Checks sary to assume these conditions in every case. Originally there were two climb speed A long time ago the Navy was given schedules. The present one as well as 190 the profile for a full-blown first production knots all the way to altitude. We used 190 flight of a P-3 right off the assembly line at knots and were usually finished with the the fat tory. The NATOPS Functional NTS checks before reaching .8,000 feet. On Checkflight Checklist was derived from this occasion there were traffic and climatic deLockheed profile. lays preventing completion by the time this The original profile was designed to altitude was reached. Since the true airspeed conform with topography, VFR altitudes and increases with altitude it was sometimes necspeed and local restrictions in the Burbank essary to slow the airplane in order to get an area. To say nothing of being in position for NTS above 8,000. By trial and error we found the next check. During this 6 hour flight that any normal propeller should NTS at coordinates were changed enough to evalu- 8000 or below at 170 knots. This became a ate the inertial navigation while other sys- hard and fast rule and if you flew at more terns were being checked. For instance, en- than a knot or two from 170 you were apt to gine performance checks were, and still get a down. Another hammerhold someare, made at 17,500 feet in order to stay VFR. times used by amateur NATOPS officers. If Stalls were conducted on the descent back to the prop checked out at a higher speed it was about 10,000 feet where the MAD was com- a good one. If the altitude was above 8,000, pensated. NTS checks were made shortly af- and it NTSd, it was good. Twenty three years ter takeoff during the climb to 9,500 feet later I was able to get NATOPS to allow you to
44

make NTS checks at climb airspeed at any altitude. It may be necessary to open the cross-ship bleed valves to get a good reading. This presents no problem and allows a reasonable climb airspeed when grossed out. However, there may be propellers which will not NTS above 8,000 and 170 knots, although this is rare. In this case a squawk is written for maintenance.

Propeller Checks
Feather checks were made early in the flight In order to report the airplane airworthy and safe to fly over congested areas. At this time we were at 9,500 feet to satisfy an eastbound VFR altitude and also to clear the mountains. We used 195 knots as a target speed, plus or minus a few. By using the same airspeed all four props could be compared for feathering time and mechanical feather RPM. Near the end of the profile we feathered at cruise speed with the shutdown lever, sometimes erroneously called Ehandle. When a prop needs a recheck on a subsequent flight or if a new one has been installed, it is not necessary to climb to any defined altitude as long as the TAS is about what it would be at 10,000 feet and 190 - 200 knots. The TAS on a standard day at 9,500 and 195 IAS is 22 5. So if there is no other reason to climb to this altitude just fly a faster indicated. Save fuel.

Trim Check
The recommended speed of 2 5 0 knots is a ballpark figure meaning it is about cruise speed. As the empty weight of the P-3 has increased over the years, so has the power required to make this speed. Thus, some times the rudder tab needs to be set to a higher degree than the original 21 degree limit. This is not critical as the tab effectiveness dwindles to almost no increase past 18 or twenty increments. Set the aileron and rudder tabs to neutral. Keep wings level with the ailerons and

trim rudder until there is no longer a heading change in progress, now trim the ailerons, if necessary, and the airplane should fly hands off. Engage the autopilot and fine trim to the 3 axis trim indicator. If the balls are not in the middle there is something wrong with them, not the airplane, At Pensacola you were taught that if the ball is centered you go to Heaven. Not so unless the ball reads centered on the ground with wings level. Check this on preflight. The Navy specs for buying the FDS attitude indicators leaves something to be desired. When many of these indicators are set on a level surface in the lab the balls will not be centered. This means the balls are not aligned with the instrument itself. It also means that the balls will never be centered in flight. unless the mounting holes in the instrument panel are drilled off-set to make the balls center with airplane level. Obviously, if the indicator is replaced with a good one, then. its ball would be out of center. On preflight note the position of the ball. Sometimes both balls will be out of center in opposite directions. This would really mess up a trim check if the starting point is the ball instead of a steady heading with wings level. An intelligent squawk might read, pilots ball rides a ball to left when the airplane is in trim. Copilots ball centered. A number of years ago a pilot complained that a certain airplane flew like it had been bent out of shape. I asked him if the ball was in the middle. He retorted with, When I fly the ball is always centered. so I said, Maybe thats the problem. For over twenty years I have tried to get the boost off check airspeed reduced to 180 knots from 250. It is almost impossible to evaluate the controls at such a high airspeed. After all, you would not be entering the landing pattern at high speed, so why not evaluate maneuverability at some thing realistic. That is why the trim checks are made to simulate cruise speed. I finally gave up*

n 1966 we decided to run some additional tests on the actions of a pitchlocked prop, since diverse opinions made it advisable. The test was made on P-3 number 5 174 while
45

Operation With A Pit&locked Propeller

I was at the controls. The fuel governor test switch was activated on number three engine. At that time the switch had to be held to the ON position instead of being two position,

as it is now. The prop was pitchlocked at 15,500 feet at 260 knots and 2350 SHP. Immediately the RPM went to 106% and the SHP became negative 200. Obviously the fuel topping governor had done its job by taking away all the fuel except just enough to run the engine. Throttle movement had no effect on horsepower and it remained at minus 200. The following numbers were observed during reduction of airspeed and altitude with the throttle full forward: 240 knots r-pm 105.4% SHP 750 220 knots rpm 105% SHP 1250

14,500 13,500 10,500 7,500 6,500

r-pm 102%

SHP 3400

m 1030 TIT 1056 TlT 1070 TlT 1070 TIT 1070

rpm 101.8% SHP 3650 rpm 101% x-pm 100% rpm 98.5% SHP 4100 sl3.P 4500 SHP 4600

200 knots rpm 104.8% SHP 1850 190 knots rpm 104.5% SHP 2200 180 knots x-pm 104.2% SHP 2450 160 knots rpm 104% 150 knots SHP 2900

rpm 103.5% SHP 3200 TIT 1010 SHP 3200 TIT 1018

140 knots rpm 103%

At this time a descent was begun at 140 knots with the other three engines at flight idle. The following was observed:

Descent was continued to 6,200 at 140 knots during which the SHP was held at 4600 by throttle movement while the rpm continued to decay towards the minimum desired of 95%. An attempt to unlock the pitchlock at this time was unsuccessful and the prop had to be feathered. Obviously had the airspeed been increased the rpm would have also increased. Another test was run at 1000 at 180 knots when the blade angle was relatively low. Initiating pitchlock at this time resulted in rpm in excess of 105% and SHP at plus 200. Any attempt to climb at this airspeed resulted in rpm increase and SHP decrease. An increase in airspeed while level at 1000 resulted in the same. This is why you have been encouraged to unfeather at a high airspeed and at a higher altitude to be at a higher blade angle should the prop have a hydraulic malfunction.

n 1961162 several TPS graduates testing the P-3 suggested that the rudder forces be inhibited at high speeds. They were fighter pilots who feared an uneducated VP pilot might apply full rudder at 405 knots and bend the tail feathers. To begin with it is next to impossible to apply huge amounts of rudder at 405 knots. Secondly, no VP pilot would attempt to do this for any reason. Until about 1976 the Rudder Boost Cutout circuit breaker was never pulled except on periodical functional checks by ground personnel. About this time frame the simulator hit the streets with a number of inputs previously not visible during normal and emergency operations. One was that the rudder
46

K-13
pressure increased somewhat when operating with less than takeoff flaps and asymmetric power set. The simulator seems to exaggerate these forces to the point where adequate rudder travel is not available. As a result the pulling of K-13 was adapted under certain conditions of flight. NATOPS says: 1. Which two are lost? Should it be pulled with symmetric power in case another engine is lost and a go-around is necessary? Why? Are several engines apt to fail on

Pull K-13 on two engine landings.

2.

Pull K-l 3 on no flap landings.

,tJ

approach and a go-around become necessary? 3. There are no requirements for pullingK-13 on a three engine landing. Is this because another engine is not likely to quit making a go-around improbable? Yet there is a WARNING about checking available field length for a no flap landing!!!

pulling K- 13. The student had never heard of the K-13 but before touchdown he was well schooled by the engineer and instructor pilot and everybody forgot the gear, except the tower at the last minute. FACTS 1. 2. The Electra does not have the K- 13 systern. Takeoffs are made with maneuver flaps at high altitude fields, enhancing performance. Airlines use the overspeed technique on almost all airplanes. P-3s are restricted for takeoff with less than takeoff flaps set because of the K-13 sys tern. SUGGESTIONS 1. Eliminate the circuit for rudder boost cutout. It is not needed for normal flight envelope. At the time adequate hydraulit power is needed a circuit breaker must be pulled to get it under certain conditions. Fly with the K-13 circuit breaker out all of the time. Revert to the procedures used the first 14 years. Leave the breaker in all of the time. It can always be pulled should you run out of rudder when the flaps are less then approach, low airspeed, lots of inoperative engines, and possibly actual #l hydraulic system failure. This was never reported.

It almost sounds like inadequate rhyme or reason for pulling K-13. ASSUMPTIONS AND WHAT IFS Unless both hydraulic systems are operating, rudder control is degraded under certain conditions. What if the #l hydraulic system fails in a MAD trap at 300 feet and two engines on one side fail about the same time. What if two engines on the same side fail just as maneuver flaps are selected on climbout. Who is going to raise the flaps between the time the first engine and the second engine fail just after liftoff? This was going on a few years ago. The instructor would demand that the flaps be raised by 140 knots or else another engine would quit. There were no reports of rudder problems with K- 13 in. Why not pull K- 13 during practice takeoffs as well as landings. At a reserve base a P-3 touched number two prop on the runway and flew around the field successively. Primary cause, K-13. The student pilot of S-3 background was given a two engine landing on his fourth hop. Prior to reaching the 180 the engineer asked about

2. 3.

ewer than 100 have been made because the flaps would not extend from full up position.
l

No-Flap Landings
Landings short of the runway have occurred many times.
47

The tail was never dragged on actual landings.

. The tail has been dragged many times practicing.

l

Why do we still keep practicing such foolery when it requires a full stop and as much as 15 minutes to get off the ground again at busy airports. At a time when flight hours are at a premium it seems that other maneuvers are more important. Such as repeated precise normal patterns and touchdowns at the proper speeds and areas of the runway. The answer is that its fun, so the younger pilots say. Some instructors say it is necessary to teach pitch control. You dont have to be on final approach to teach pitch

control. Some say its the challenge of picking a touchdown spot and landing on it (like short of the runway). I thought we always tried to land in a small area of the runway. But after observation I am seeing long landings made like they were 20 years ago. Dont digress to amateurish flying in the normal everyday environment while wasting time doing no-flappers because it is a departure from boredom. The following is a conservative estimate of landings: Unit VP Total Total Total Hours Landings Units Landings 150,000 450,000 24 10,800,OOO 1,760,OOO 1,040,000 240,000 280,000

RAG 220,000 880,000 2 RES UTIL NAXI 40,000 20,000 20,000 80,000 40,000 40,ooo 13 6 7

T o t a l 14,120,OOO The odds against having to make a noflap landing are about 141,000 to one. I was

unlucky in having to make one in my exposure to 31,497 landings in the P-3. That one was in the YP-3, which was a mutilated Electra. Every pilot should have made a noflap landing prior to solo. Just to know in his own mind that he could do it if necessary. This should be done in RAG training with expert instructors. Then forget it, just as we finally did with no-boost landings. Only two boost-out landings have been made for real, and they were unnecessary. Both times the crews failed to understand the basic electrical system in trying to restore partial power. The odds on having to make a boos t-out landing are 14,000,OOO to two. Odds for normal landings are near one to one. It seems shameful that pilots have to fly a NATOPS warm-up session before the evaluator steps aboard. Have they been unsafe for the past year? Think about having to do a no-flap or two engine landing without recent practice. Egad, its enough to drive you nuts. Somehow the pilots always come through with flying colors when the chips are down, and without recent practice. Must a no-flapper be made on a NATOPS check when records show that the pilot was once qualified? No. Normal landings are not boring if done right.

Why No-Flap Landings Should Be Practiced By Joe Anymouse

1. They are trying to take all the fun out of flying by methodically taking these sotermed risky maneuvers out of the program. Ans: ASW flying is risky enough without teasing the animals. As a pilot matures he gets his thrills out of a precise submarine chase and a precise uneventful arrival at home plate. Even though the odds are 150,000 to one that you will ever have to make one, it could still happen. An s: True. Once a one engine landing had to be made in an Electra, so perhaps this should be practiced also. As a matter of fact some Navy pilots were doing this about twenty years ago, until NATOPS came out with a restriction against cre48

ating power losses on more than two engines. Navy pilots get bored, it seems, unless there is some sort of an emergency on every flight. . 3. No flap approaches teach the student that pitch attitude does in fact control airspeed and power controls rate of sink. Just like they said at Pensacola. An: Does this happen only on final approach, or can it be demonstrated at any time? Wasnt this taught throughout training or is it just on no flap P-3 landings? No flap approaches teach a pilot to pick a spot on the runway and land on it. us: Isnt every approach made with this in mind or is the touchdown spot

2.

4.

The v

--.

_.

only important on a no-flapper? 5. No flap landings teach the student not to let the nose prang down hard as soon as the main mounts touch the runway. An: Is he allowed to do this on other landings? If so we had better start over with some new ins true tors who will not allow such action. A very lame excuse for doing no-flappers. No flap landings teach the student the importance of the 13 5 knot limit for selecting Beta. An: Since when do the props know what flap setting you have. Its true that no flap landings have been made short of the runway, but not very many. Things like this happen once in a while. An s: Things like this should never hapnen. However, it is easy to misjudge how high the wheels are above the deck when the cockpit is cocked up to a very high angle. There is a worthwhile move on to monitor pitch attitude on the indicator as well as eyeballing.

6.

7.

8. So the airport neighbors bitch about approaches being too low and scaring them half to death. Let them. The airport was here first. An: If you can win this one they will hire you as manager of any major airline airport. 9. No flap landings are fun and normal landings are nothing. Ans: That just about sums up the question in hand. It is amazing that many pilots take no pride in precision landing technique, but grade themselves on emergencies, where there are acceptable tolerances. Maybe they cant make a perfect normal landing. Comments I have heard some wild excuses for not giving up no flap landings. Some so wild that I am reluctant to repeat them for fear of hurting feelings. Like the one about underwing Ice buildup to the point of the flaps being frozen to the wing, necessitating a noflapper in absolutely intolerable weather. Nobody is trying to eliminate no flap
4Y

landing training. But once a pilot is qualified cease practicing and spend the flight time on something more useful. Most of the time everything works, so why dont we practice with that in mind. Years ago we did no flap boost out landings. Now that will separate the men from the boys. Had this maneuver been kept in the training we would certainly have lost some airplanes. Only two were made for real, and they didnt have to be made. The crews were lax in their basic knowledge of the electrical system. Now get this - boost out landings came close to being put back in the training because some JOs told a Flag that they would bail out rather than make a boost out landing. This was only a few years ago. I suggested to the Flag that if this sort of thinking prevailed it might be necessary to give the crews actual bailout practice!!! Believe it or not. A long time ago I was at Barbers Point doing classroom and flight training. About twenty years ago I was making headway in getting people to quit doing so many noflappers and more normal landings. So help me the launch airplane took off with 127,500 gross for an Alpha, and had a flap asymmetry when the flaps were retracted to full up. They dumped all they could, flew for ages with the gear down for fuel burn, and finally wisely elected to land before dark even if they were overweight. They touched down at about 140 kts, which was about right, but about 2500 feet down the runway. Too fast to select Beta, right? They stopped on the very end of the runway with very hot brakes. A good job? No, he should have gone around and landed with a lot less runway behind him. Now get this, for the next week just about every landing at Barbers Point was a no flapper. All of the squadrons decided they had better practice up. None of this proved a thing because the average landing weight was 85,000 (91,320 was max). So maybe we should practice heavy weight no flappers to make it real should it be getting dark etc. Egad, if such a situation exists fly to Patuxent or Edwards or someplace where there is a super long runway. Flying is dangerous. Why make it more so by all this practice for highly unlikely emergencies. Look at the number of tires blown on practice two engine landings (hundreds) versus those blown on real two engine landings (one).

P,, Operations History

wenty-seven years ago a new toy appeared in the VP world. One that could go to 30,000 feet with a light load and hot pilots. Most VP personnel had never been above 10,000 and they were in for some new thrills. Thunderstorms are just starting to get mean at about 20,000 and people got the daylights kicked out of them, since ATC wasnt always holding their hands as they do now. The

and the first P-3Bs weighed about the same, but a lot more power was available and used when it wasnt necessary. For instance, the RAG squadrons, flying both models at the same weight, would use Normal Rated for touch and gos. And you couldnt change their thinking about the Long Green Table if they used reduced power on the Dash 14 and failed to use all available power if some thing

slang of the day was, We will go at Thirty Thou. This, fortunately, did not last very long because enough power just wasnt available with the Dash 10 engine to go anyplace with a gross load. And then came Dash 14. Originally the engine manufacturer said turbine blade sulphidation started at 9 5 5 TIT. Later they said it was 935 TIT. Since the Dash 10 engine ran 93 2 for Normal Rated, a huge problem didnt exist at the time. Dash 14 Normal Rated is 1010 TIT, which is 78 degrees hotter and certainly well into the sulphidation range. Now hear this - the P-3A
50

happened! To top it off, Max power was used for the first takeoff of the day with a TIT of 1077 vice 97 1. With malfunctioning thermocouples severe damage could be inflicted unknowingly. The state-of-the-art in those days was; TIT is always correct and some engines were a lot better than others, even though they used a lot more fuel. See Digest 29. The Commander of Wings Pacific noticed that the turbine failure rate was becoming alarming on the Dash 14. Investigating, he found that a lot of people were flight

--

.-.

planning from Moffett to Barbers Point at 400 knots. This meant 1010 TIT all the way. This was also going on back East, but the High Muckedy Mucks hadnt caught it yet. The Admiral put out a message saying the maximum allowable TIT for cruise was 92.5. He had come up with this number because it is about two thermocouples less than 93.5 , where Allison said sulphidation begins. r\rQthiIlg XWgiC, just CO-ilU-LlQIl E?XMA D!X IQ 3 lot of confusion about where 925 was the limit, the Admiral made it for all conditions except takeoff. After all, climb power on the Dash 10 was 932. By this time the P3-B had started to take on some weight and 925 just wouldnt do the job under a lot of conditions. One of the conditions was that the Hole was 1200 miles away from Moffett. Unable to climb a sufficient altitude for the mission the crews had to decide between scrubbing the mission, which is not helpful in promotions, or to sneak on some more power. They found 950 TIT for climb to be a great help. Soon, Autovon conversations made this more or less the standard, although it isnt in the Blue Book. Again, it was a matter of common sense and survival of the mission. So now the student going through the RAG had another number to learn. 1077 or 1010 for takeoff, 950 for climb, and 925 for cruise. Whether you need it or not! Newer models of the P-3 keep getting heavier, just as the PV-1 did in WWII. Available power stays the same, but the adversary keeps moving the Hole farther and farther away. Lockheed makes a change in the cabin differential so you can be comfortable at altitudes of 30,000 or so, but you cant get up there without using more than 950. Well, maybe, in spite of what Allison says, 1010 TIT wont hurt anything. And it probably wont if 1010 is only 1010. To blindly set 1010 without having made an observation of power vs TIT on takeoff could be your demise. It must be considered that thermocouple read lags can be erroneous either by malfunction or design. If you do not use more than 100% power you are not likely to overtemp the turbine blades. All aircraft performance is based on 100 percent power. In another article I mentioned that it was noted that one of the engines on an airplane was predicted to be 108%, while the others were 100%. Using the FORECAST power chart it was determined that 4100 SHP was expected at 1010.4100 was developed on the
51

100% engines but the so-called 108% pulled 4400 SHP. Pulling the power back to 4100 on that engine gave a TIT reading of 980, which is really 1010. Continued operation of this engine at the same TIT as the other three would mean an overtemp condition throughout the flight, day after day. Perhaps it might be wise to label each TIT gauge to say For 1010 TIT set 980 or some such warning. If we ZUX WQ- gQ@ tQ be Z&k tQ QF%3te at 1010 we must pay attention to such things. Is there a real good reason to fly at altitudes above 30,000? There could be in areas of the Pacific where transit range is critical. It would seem that high altitudes are really not that beneficial in running up and down the East Coast, for example. But it does give you a little style with the big boys on the airlines. It also makes you a burden on ATC when they would like for you to climb to a higher altitude like in right now and you are already about out of power and certainly need at least 1010 to comply. But look at those fuel flows - wow. Think about those turbines. wow. Personally I would prefer to have everything below 29,000 as my back yard even when able to go higher at low weights. And keep the turbines cool. Good reasons should always be considered, but not taken for granted by rote. Is there a good reason why we can accept 3600 SHP at Barbers Point as being Normal Rated for the first takeoff of the days training flight but cant select that power at Moffett on a standard day? It would be assumed that the takeoff in Hawaii would be dangerous if this thinking prevails. Is there a good reason to climb enroute to the training area at 950 TIT when something less, such as 3000 SHP would do the job? Yet you may be asked by ATC to expedite climb. This would be a good reason to use 950. what if it took 1010 to comply with ATCs request? Then use your common sense and think about turbine damage. Some RAG pilots have told me that if they dont make the students memorize 1010,950, and 925 settings they are apt to use too much or too little power, using their own judgment. Bosh, a great part of pilot training is to help the student learn to use common sense for any situation at any time. Of late there have been entirely too many turbine failures. It makes you wonder if were not running the engines too hard when there is no real good reason for doing so. Keep em cool.

mhp m

Turbine Life
erhaps turbine life can be extended by the use of reduced power for takeoff on training flights. There of course must be a limit as to how far the power must be reduced, just to keep the hot-dogs in line. The average airwork/bounce flight weighs in the vicinity of 100,000 pounds at the start and ends up at about 80,000. The use of normal rated power for the first takeoff has been the accepted practice. Normal rated horsepower varies a great deal with ambient temperature, yet little is done to compensate. At Barbers Point you can bet that at midday the ambient will be 86 degrees F or 30 degrees C. Forecast power is 3600 at 1010 TIT. Without considering wind or slope the takeoff distance would be 2900 ft. Nobody seems to be concerned that this is a critical situation. Yet to try to get someone to take off at Moffett on a 59 degree F day at 3600 horsepower or at Brunswick with an ambient of 3 2 degrees F at 3600 is almost impossible. They will think of many excuses why this is a bad and dangerous practice. So the poor people at Barbers Point or Jacksonville suck hind tit, breaking ground at 2900 feet when the Moffett group uses only 2700 feet at 3600 horsepower and the fatcats at Brunswick get off in 2400 feet at the temperatures mentioned above. And then we have the crews who accept PREDICTED powers of 110 percent performance from the last 1050 run and blindly set the prescribed TIT. The Blue Book says to use Charts ll-13,11-18, or 11-19 in forecasting power available for takeoff. This is FORECAST power, which is 100 percent. PREDICTED power is a bootleg term for 1050 TIT. The Book goes on ,to say you must abort the takeoff if YOU don t get 95 percent of FORECAST (thats 95% of 100%). Furthermore it says that excessive horsepower could be indicative of a TIT indicating system problem and power should be reduced to the FORECAST horsepower. At no place does the Blue Book acknowledge Predicted power. Back to blindly setting TIT with thermocouple problems. If only one engine exceeds forecast power it stands out like a sore

toe and the engineer will usually pull the throttle back to match the others. But if all four engines are predicted to be 108% or so it is unlikely that he will reduce the power to what it should be at 100%. In this case all four engines would be in overtemp condition at normal rated and at the accepted 950 climb power. Here is where we can prolong turbine life by not using over 100%. Lets say that Forecast power was 4100 horsepower at 1010, but we got 4400 across the board. Pull the throttles back to 4100 horsepower and read the TIT to be 980. This is really 1010. Accordingly 930 or so would really be 950 TIT. Perhaps it would be a good idea to label the horsepower gauges to set 980 to get 1010 using a sticker. Records show that for years new engines delivered to the factory to be installed in P-3s have varied from 102 to 114 percent, stamped on the containers. I find it hard to believe that a precision piece of machinery like a jet engine would vary that much in clearances, friction, and so forth. I find it easy to believe that there is an inconsistency in thermocouple behavior, whether it be by malfunction or the design. Once at Moffett they showed me the box the new engine came in with 119% stamped on it. This engine had nine bad thermocouples, fresh from the factory. No fuel was being bypassed, hence all the power. It was frightening to find they had been flying it this way. Assuming a training flight is part ah-work, 10,000 feet or less, a good procedure might be this. Instead of climbing at 220 knots at 950 TIT use 190 knots and about 3000 horsepower to maintain not more than 900 TIT. The slower speed was originally one of two approved climb airspeeds. It gives you more evasive maneuvering for traffic as well as more time to train on the way to the area. The 220 knot schedule is to be used for enroute to the destination. The following numbers were taken from the power available chart. In both cases the OAT was standard plus 10 degrees during the climb.

52

2. 3.

4. 5.

Note relative position of the throttle knob to the one adjacent. Open bleed valve and observe the horsepower to drop about 250 and stop. If the duct system has a bad leak the horsepower would continue to drop, in which case the bleed valve must be shut off immediately. Considering that the horsepower drop and stop was normal, retard the throttle to flight idle without too much hesitation to observe normal rpm and feather valve action. Open throttle to its original relative position to the adjacent. Shut off bleed valve and watch for horsepower recovery to almost the original, the difference that for increased alti tude. This proves the bleed valve did indeed close. If the light stayed on it

and wing mod valves.

would mean only a minor opening and not a great cause for concern. Try to blow it all the way closed for comfort. This does not in any way defy NATOPS. You may open the bleed valve above a minimum of 800 horsepower. Twenty-five years ago someone was afraid that if a severe duct leak existed the prop might decouple if the throttles was at flight idle, but as much as 800 horsepower set would prevent that. Conjecture at best, but a justifiable precaution. Step 3 has a built in precaution for severe leaks, and the flight engineer soon learns to expect about a 30% drop in power when all the valves are open. To watch the bleed valve close by recovery of horsepower must be an advantage over the present method of teaching to advance the power to read positive before closing the bleed.

Instructions
he comparison of engines is perhaps the most important indication available for performance trends. It is most unlikely that four engines on the same airplane will be rated at 96 percent or at 105 percent. Most likely they will be near 100 percent when horsepowers and fuel flows match evenly across the board. The TITs may vary. If an engine gains in performance (say from 100 to 103 percent) it is most likely that one or more thermocouples have failed to sense properly. Should the performance drop from 103 to 100 percent it is not unreasonable to think that one or more thermocouples have become active. When engines start dropping below 100 percent it is reasonable to assume that the performance is being degraded by a dirty or damaged compressor, an air leak, or a damaged turbine for whatever reason.

on a previous evaluation. This would be the actual horsepower developed divided by the forecast. Example: 3600 was forecast at 1010 but the actual was only 3500. The percentage would be 97.2.

Takeoff:
Record horsepower readings at the selected TIT. If the horsepower exceeds the forecast reduce the power to forecast as per NATOPS. Read the TIT and assume that is the correct reading for 100 percent. Example: 4100 was forecast at 1010, but 4400 was read on an engine. By division the engine would appear to be 107 percent but when the power was reduced to 4100 the TIT read 980. Then 980isreallylOlO,andabout925wouldhe950. At a convenient time record engine performance percentages.

Before Starting Engines:

Record OAT in the airplane and the Tower. RecordfromCharts ll-13,11-18,0r 11-19 the desired Forecast Power and TIT required to obtain this power. ( 1 l- 13 is the easiest to use since it covers more information). Record performance percentage obtained
54

Climb:
Set precisely 3000 horsepower across the board. Record fuel flow and TIT. Fuel flows must be captured as a group before much of an altitude change occurs. The actual values are of

nh? vm

little concern at this time. On occasion a fuel flow may be erratic or read as much as 100 pounds higher than the rest. This is usually caused by corrosion on the connections and will follow the transmitter when the gauges are transposed. Record TITs with the horsepower even across the board. When the powers and fuel flows are even and the TIT is noticeably low on an engine, invariably that engine will be rated high on the performance reading due to malfunctioning or redesigned thermocouples. Of course it is possible to have all four engines look the same with good or malfunctioning thermocouples and not be suspicious until takeoff horsepowers are compared with Forecast. With the power set precisely even on all four engines open all four Anti-ice valves simultaneously - not one at a time. If the horsepower drops the same amount on each engine they are all good or all bad. On occasion one engine may drop only half as much as the others indicating one of the valves was open or didnt open. If the valve was already open the anti-ice light would come on ahead of the others and a power loss should have been noticed on takeoff. If the valve did not open at all the anti-ice light would not come on. Sometimes a horsepower drop will only be half, then a short time later the other half. This would be a sticking valve and should be squawked. Close the valves simultaneously - not one at a time - with the power set precisely even and note the same rise in power. On occasion an anti-ice light may stay on for several minutes after the rest have gone out. This is usually a bad sensor switch setting and should be of little concern providing the same power rise was witnessed across the board. If a valve failed to close as indicated by a half rise there would be no cause for alarm because it was noticed by watching the horsepower gauges.

must be even across the board at something above crossover and the altitude and airspeed held constant. This is a much more accurate check than could be made on the ground since the airplane is always into the wind with a constant velocity - airspeed. Since so many variables exist with altitude, airspeed, and temperature it would take a computer program to predict the compressor discharge for every condition. In this case a comparative reading will suffice. In addition to the compressor reading an evaluation can be run on duct leakage and bleed valve opening. Open cross ship bleed valves: Open an engine bleed valve and note a snappy rise on the manifold gauge. (A bleed valve only partially open will rise slowly). Note a slight horsepower drop followed by a recovery toward the original setting. This means the cross ship duct has been filled with air and there is no duct leakage. Should the horsepower not rise at all would mean a slight duct leak. Should a large drop in power occur it would mean a severe duct leak. Read compressor output: Close bleed valve then bleed down manifold pressure by opening then closing a wing mod valve. Repeat for other engines: On a maintenance check flight with speed and area restrictions it might be that you elect to check compressors two engines at a time. That is two set at around 900 TIT to ensure being above crossover, and two at flight idle. It is very important that the two which were at flight idle are set at the same horsepower the first two were set at and that the airspeed and altitude are the same. Compressor discharge will be much higher from a 3000 horsepower blade angle blowing a lot of air into the scoop than from a flatter flight idle blade angle even though the rpm is 100%. These checks are invaluable in troubleshooting as well as for trend analysis. For instance: Number two engine was noticed to have a slight power loss on takeoff, but within acceptable tolerance. No discrepancy was noticed on the anti-ice valve check, but the compressor output was slightly lower than
55

Cruise:
A compressor discharge check should be made sometime during the flight, preferably prior to descent from cruise altitude toward landing at home plate. The power

The r&p&&&&9

the others. This condition had not existed on previous checks. Now it can be assumed that there is an air leak in the plumbing system, or a bird has been ingested, or some similar malfunction. If the anti-ice and compressor checks are normal, then the problem must be in the turbine assembly. At least you have made preliminary investigations and can give maintenance information that will save many man hours, instead of merely squawking the engine for a slight power loss. For many years airlines have made all their engine checks in flight except when component changes require a ground check. A simple status sheet is filled out on each flight giving power, fuel flow, pressure and temperature readings and so forth. A P-3 is an airliner with a bomb bay. For a training bounce flight such a check would be a burden, so a Forecast Power check on takeoff would suffice. Not much can be wrong if 100 percent power is available. Power should be limited to horsepower on so called 108% engines and to TIT on weak engines. Fuel Efficiency Check: Set up Loiter or Max Range using the tables for weight, configuration, and indicated airspeed. It may be necessary to interpolate for weight brackets etc. Adjust horsepower even across the board to obtain the exact airspeed specified in the tables. Use the autopilot and

allow time for a stabilized reading. This sometimes takes several minutes, but it is very important. Fill in the blanks. Any difference between actual fuel flow and chart fuel flow will reflect engine fuel efficiencies the chart being 100 percent. Note the absence of TIT on the charts. Note that indicated airspeed and fuel flow do not vary with a change in OAT, but that horsepower and TAS do. Horsepower readings on the chart are those for a standard day. Correction factors must be applied for non-standard ambient temperatures. With all the recent malfunctions of airspeed indicators it is possible that one might exist which could be detected on the efficiency check. For instance: The airspeeds seem excessively high for a given SHP setting yet the horsepowers and fuel flows match the Charts. There have been airspeed indicators of late which read as much as 19 knots too fast. This would certainly show up as lots of airspeed for not very much horsepower and fuel flow. Since people started using a TIT (925) for cruise a large error in IAS could exist and go unde tee ted until someone prangs the airplane on landing because of inadequate speed. Remember at a given configuration and weight it takes a given amount of thrust to go some speed. Since the horsepower gauges are the only ones frequently calibrated, it can be assumed they are the most accurate for obtaining speed.

Operations
other Wing should not schedule an operational flight which requires loiter shutdown of engines. Engines should not be shutdown to extend time on station except when National Security is at stake. Then anything goes. When fuel tanks have been dipped or observed to be full, and a fuel log is kept, land with the legal 6000 pounds vice 8000. Reference should be made to the loiter or max range tables to ascertain the fuel flow readings are not grossly in error. A faulty power supply can cause the readings to be 200 pounds low. Takeoff power should not exceed 100% of forecast except in emergencies. FORECAST
56

power is read from the charts on pages 1 l-37 and 1 l-38. PREDICTED is the bootleg term for the results of the most recent 1050 engine run. Note that 1010 on a standard S/L day should produce 4100 SHP. On a 30 degree day it would be 3600. If the power is more than FORECAST reduce it to FORECAST and read the TIT, which is in reality 1010. This can be the result of faulty thermocouples. For instance number one engine produced 4400 instead of 4100. When power was reduced to 4100 the TIT read 980. Then 980 is really 1010. By the same token 1077 could actually be over 1100 TIT. Use 1010 for climb to as high as prac-

ticable enroute. Remember the TIT may read only 980. Use the exotic equipment in the airplane to find most miles per pound and fly that airspeed for a given weight (Pacific cruise or Atlantic cruise or whatever). During loiter conditions fly max endurance on four engines. Trial and error will determine power to be added for turns. Extend the 56 day cycle for the fuel consuming high power runs to 90 days. When flight crews are trained to make all of these checks in flight the ground run can be eliminated, except when various components are replaced or adjusted. In-flight checks are much more accurate since you are always into a steady wind. You have already checked forecast performance on takeoff roll. A lot of fuel is wasted and a lot of time is consumed taking absolute OAT readings. Whose OAT readings do you use on takeoff? The Towers? Do you use 1050 for takeoff? Then why arent the ground runs made at

lOlO? I can answer all those questions. During the past few years almost all new engines have produced about 110% PREDICTED horsepower. It seems odd that this exists except for a new thermocouple design hitting the streets about the same time. Use FORECAST for extended turbine life. A good article to read is Digest 29. I forgot to mention that all P-3 performance charts are based on 100% power. Turbine life can certainly be extended by not overtemping consistently. Just about everything about saving fuel has already been said. If you can think of something else speak up. Such as when waiting in line at the Moffett fuel pits, shut down all but number two engine, since all turns will be made to the right - except for the South hydrant. Prevail on the High Muckedy Mucks to not yield to contract pressures and buy or borrow some more fuel trucks for Moffett and Barbers Point. Use the pits for transients.

Computer I&F~igbt Engine Checks History

n 1979 I decided to try to reinstate an inflight engine efficiency check, which had gotten away from us with the advent of 925 cruise. Originally the Max Range and Loiter Tables were used to a high degree of success in determining engine trends. The Table numbers are actual readouts of countless tests during the P-3 development. Always, unless circumstances prevented it, this Check was demonstrated on each of my training flights. While I was retired from flying between 1975 and 1980 this part of the flight training drifted away with the advent of 1050 checks and 925 cruise. In 198 1 I enlisted the help of Joe Dupcak, a Lockheed propulsion engineer. Together we worked up some additional engine checks to supplement the F/F comparisons in the Tables. One was a run at 10,000 at 3300 SHP and 240 knots. This check revealed, as suspected, that all of the engines need the same amount of fuel under these parameters, whether they were rated at 108 or 100 percent on the 1050 check. Always the so-

called high performance engines ran at less TIT. On some checks the TIT varied as much as 20 degrees at the same SHP and F/F. Joe Dupcak came up with the idea of engine readouts in flight at stabilized conditions which would be fed into a computer after landing (Airlines have done this for years). Since an engine is at its best at high power I suggested a window of 20,000 to 2 5,000 and a speed of .5 to .5 5 math, since this would be top of climb conditions at mission weights (Later NATC worked up other altitudes and speeds enabling checks to be made on logistic flights). We then enlisted the NAVAIR P-3 desk, Commander Jerry Huss, who passed it to NATC. Lt Paul Deppe, a recent TPS graduate, was assigned to the project. Joe and Paul worked up a good computer program. They found many things, the most revealing one that you cannot use TIT as a hinge when evaluating an engine. Jerry Huss became very interested andcalledaFIATmeeting Jan 17 and 18,1983 in New Orleans (Thats when we got the 28

a? cm day 1050 run extended to 56 days or 150 hours). Paul Deppe and Joe Dupcak made their pitches at this meeting. Allison and NARF were skeptical. At my suggestion Jerry Huss agreed to give 10,000 dollars to Lockheed to continue the project. During 1983 Dupcak, Deppe, and I delivered a computer to VP-16 and VP-48. Joe and Paul ran a training program with me nodding approval in the back ground. At last the procedure was launched. During my squadron visits I must have made a hundred lectures on this subject. Its the only way to go (with a few added features), but it seemed it would never happen. Seven years have gone by since VP-16 got their computer. So I re-invented the wheel by starting the in-flight check - Country Style. When and if all the squadrons get their computers and go ahead to take readings we will be in good shape. To repeat, its the only way to go. Paul Deppes successors at NATC have proved this. Rumor is that all of the squadrons will be equipped to make these checks during this year. I hope so. Now there is some contern as to whether any attempt should be made to evaluate engines in flight. The NATOPS change is completely erroneous and cannot be used, and the phantom writer cannot be found. The concern now is that if my suggested procedures are used they will have to be discarded when the computers come along. So? At least do something. The procedures I designed do a lot more than check engine efficiencies. They check compressors, bleed valves, anti-ice valves, duct leakage and countless other features. They are more comprehensive than a 1050 check and are invaluable in trouble shooting for existing and future malfunctions. They are free. We are going flying anyway. Flight engineers who can run a 1050 check on the ground can certainly do one in flight. And better. When the computer program is finally complete and active we still need a reign on those who will accept too much power on takeoff. This is called performance which can be changed by bad or redesigned thermocouples. If enough of them malfunctioned it would be possible to get a 120% engine while blindly setting TIT and with no fuel being bypassed. So we must evaluate two areas. Fuel efficiency based on F/F vs F/F at an airspeed generated by SHP for a weight and altitude. And performance based solely on TIT and OAT. Why dont we use everything available in conjunction with mandatory requirement, which at the present time is the 1050 run, which is performance period. Then lets make the performance run with the wheels turning instead of parked but only use 100% unless the trees are too tall. Then lets use some method to determine fuel efficiency and trending. The computer system is the best. The Tables are accurate but some folks have trouble in reading 20 pounds of fuel flow. The same folks can see 102.6% rpm. Do something. Ive been working on this a great many years and would like to see some results. Anybody can just sit there.

Anti-Icing Lights
his season alone there have been three engine out landings made because an Anti-Icing light stayed on after engine antiicing was secured. One landing was made under severe conditions at a deployment site. In each case the thermal switch was out of tolerance. Annunciator lights might be likened to idiot lights. They get your attention and prompt you to look for secondary indications. For instance, if the oil pressure light came on you would no doubt check the pres58

sure gauge before shutting down the engine. Horsepower drop and rise can be used as a gauge along with the anti-ice light. Then you have secondary indication of malfunctions or normal operation. When turning on engine anti-ice, be sure to have the horsepower even across the board. Turn on all four switches simultaneously, not one at a time. If all four horsepowers drop the same amount then all of the valves opened. Should one valve fail to

open, or be already open, the horsepower drop will be about half. If it is already open the anti-ice light will come on in advance of t h e others. If it . . x. . d i d n 7 t .g - .+;;... open the ,+.>. light will ) :I. not come :: ...:.. on and : y 0 u ;;.:y. s h o u 1 d ?!,, m o n i t o r CT::.. for ice : :~Y.:. . ; buildmup ;.j& +.3 on the scoop. If ii: 1 no ice is ;.+:....,,: t h e r e ..: monitor ,:,A5 e n g i n e ;. opera_ ,., :Y 1 _:+.,:. . I :.%W tion for ti ..,.

g,:

is not uncommon to see a half drop for a few seconds, then a full drop. This is a sticking valve and should be squawked. Just as important, if not more so, is to observe horsepower rise when turning off anti-ice. Here again have the horsepowers even across the board and make sure none moves the throttles during this observation. If the horsepowers all rise the same amount you can justly assume all of the valves closed. If a light stays on it should be of little consequence, because you saw the valves close with the horsepower rise. There exists some confusion about anti-ice lights. If an anti-ice light comes on

without selecting anti-ice there could be a problem. If horsepower drop occurs when the switch is placed to Anti-Ice then there is a serious m a 1 function and the Blue B o o k says to s h u t d o w n t h e engine. If no drop occurs, t h e valves -~~ are open t o FailSafe for e s o m e reason. .ti!Y= Cont i n u e operation and expect to see a weak engine indication on the InFlight Trend Check. The Blue Book does not address the situation where the light stays on after turning off the switches. Remember - you saw all the valves open and close with even horsepower drops and rises. This should ease your mind. Use your head. I must have discussed this in the classroom and demonstrated this in the airplane and simulator a thousand times. Doesnt anyone ever listen? If so, why not pass it on to someone else. Next to Airplane Flying, Hangar Flying is the best thing since sliced bread.
l

low flight is sometimes over-emphasized in flight training. Except for ditching practice there is little reason to fly a P-3 slower than thirty percent above stall. To fly that slow requires deliberate planning and is rarely accidental. Most reported instances when control was impaired with subsequent severe loss of altitude resulted from. engine-out

l%e Ragged Edge

ditching practice followed by a wave-off. Sudden application of asymme tric power and improper control manipulation resulted in an unexpected stall occurring at higher than normal speed. The reaction at this point may prompt the pilot to pull back on the yoke as the nose falls through instead of easing it forward. This is a common tendency known as clutch, and it usually is the result of

59

some thing happening when it shouldnt. Abrupt elevator deflection in an effort to prevent altitude loss can, of course, accelerate a stall. A yaw at this time will also increase the stall speed on a portion of the wing causing a severe rolling action and probable loss of control. If the airspeed is above Vmc, and the approach to stall is recognized, a safe recovery should be possible providing a yaw is avoided. Loss of altitude is to be expected. T h e only person in the cockpit who knows how much asymm e t r i c power the airplane can tolerate is the pilot at the controls. He should make the power application, not the flight engineer. Symmetric p o w e r should be applied first then the remaining applied at a rate compatible with control. The flight engineer should monitor power settings and limitations. The following is an example of incidents which are remarkably similar in preparation and execution. A ditching drill is given at 8000 feet density altitude. Weight is 100,000 pounds. Number one engine simulated feather. Maximum power available, standard day, is approximately 3900 SHP. Vmc
60

with max power is 100 knots with 5 degrees right wing down, and 113 knots with wings level. Ditch speed with full flaps is 11 knots. Stall buffet speed is 104 knots at zero thrust and something less with power - in balanced flight. At the end of the ditching approach a wave-off is executed from wings level attitude. A command for max power is issued and carried out with vigor by the flight engineer. At this point the best of pilots are apt to yaw and roll in the wrong direction. The roll increases Vmc and the yaw increases stall speed, both of which contribute to unusual maneuvers. There is no reason for control to be lost if symmetric power is applied first. Some altiIoss tude must be accepted. In this case a little power is better than a lot. At lighter weight asymmetric power is adequate for waveoff without loss of altitude. Keep em flying! P.S. The edge becomes more ragged at 80,000 pounds when ditch speed is 103 knots and Vmc is still 113, wings level. Use symmetric power first then bring in the outboard.

Why Some of the Numbers

and Procedures

80 Knots
Historically , piston engines at idle rpm while taxiing or holding for takeoff would foul the spark plugs causing uneven firing and roughness when takeoff power is applied. Usually they would start operating normally after a short period at high power. If they didnt you aborted the takeoff. At Lockheed we concluded that we could stop a P-2 abeam the Fire House but any distance beyond was critical for aborts. At this time the airspeed was usually about 80 knots. This became a useful number which is now industry wide. Since it did become a number it was elected to adapt it to the P-3, although a jet engine is not at all like a piston engine. What makes it important is that someone observes the power output and determines whether to continue or stop. Call 80 knots for a power check is sometimes mis-understood that you dont check the power until 80 knots. Check the power output with the initial application. If its bad at 60 knots, stop the aircraft. It wont get any better at 80 knots like the P-2 engine might. A P-3 will stop on any Navy runway from an 80 knot speed. Ram effect is minimal at 80 knots compared with static power output. Its just a number. If you want to be devilish you can use 78 knots. This number came into recognized existence with the advent of the Transport Category established by the CM about 1947. The old guess we can make this or guess we can stop gave way to engineered calculations. Vl and V2 became the norm. 1.3 was to be the minimum approach speed at the flare. Prior to this time this speed was determined by actually bringing the airplane to buffet stall then adding about 30% to that speed. Since everyone did it this way in flying an unfamiliar airplane the CM made it legal as 1.3. There has always been some confusion about where 1.3 should be obtained. The Book says be 1.3 as the flare is established. One Lockheed pilot said in an article to always be 1.3 at 50 feet and you cant go wrong, even if you take a cut. Dont try that unless you want to make a very hard landing! Obviously if this speed is to be obtained as the flare is established you will
61

never see it, but something more. I fear that too much emphasis is placed on speeds and not enough on being in position on the glideslope on very short final. If you are in the tube you can always tidy up the speed with power adjustment. Almost all long landings are made because the flare speed was too slow requiring power to be left on and creating float. One Jax squadron had an airplane with both airspeeds 11 knots too fast at 160 knots. What are my speeds apparently meant nothing as no one complained until the airplane was transferred to another squadron. What are my speeds must be like pass the salt to some people. They will accept anything you tell them. Once a Captain got in the left seat over New York and asked me what the speeds were in preparation to landing at Brunswick. Am I saying to not check the speeds? No, but make them mean something and dont just make conversation. The P-2 was in the Fleet 30 years without 1.3 or 1.35 or 1.52 etc.

145 Knots minimum for two engine landings.

This is adequate for a high power go-around with two on one side. The book says to maintain at least this speed until the landing is assured. When is the landing assured? Since the airplane does not know how many engines are running the approach should be normal in all respects. The landing should be assured before the gear is extended and for certain when full flaps are put out. From then on the speed diminishes to the flare speed, and normal landing is made. But this isnt the way some of our former immature instructors taught it. If you got below 145 any place during the approach they made you take it around, sometimes over the end of the runway! In case a truck ran across the runway! Egad. Now, nobody with an ounce of brains would go around and start all over when he could add a little power and make the runway. The only time you would go around would be when you are too high and too fast. I have witnessed near misses of Hangars 1 & 2 at Moffett a number of times because this pip-squeak instructor said You

ml? c&@&g&&m

are too slow-take it around. For crying out loud, how are you going to land unless you slow down from 145? While we are on the subject: Since we never know when we may lose a bunch of engines, why dont we fly all approaches as if we are on two engines. Then the day you have to make one you wont have to change a thing. Why fly around on four engines slower than you do on two? Why not barrel around the pattern and get in a lot of landings in a short period? I couldnt have ridden through 3 1,497 P-3 landings in 25 years if we hadnt flown a fast pattern. Besides that you can go to Happy Hour earlier. 135 Knots minimum for no-flap landings: So you dont dust the tail. Originally there was no speed restriction and the tail was dragged frequently, especially on the early models, which were tail heavy. By flying the approach to touchdown at a higher speed you have to be a lot flatter, lessening the chances of tail contact. Some of our engineering people and some of your technical minded instructors will try to snow you with coefficient of lift or some rot, but its just plain Land flatter so you dont hit the tail. To land flat you have to fly faster. Most things are simple and logical. 170 Knots maxim urn for pulling overwing hatch: The technical pitch is that higher speeds might collapse the aft bulkhead, which probably has some merit. One saving grace is that you probably couldnt pull it out anyway at a critical structural speed. The simple answer is that 170 is maximum for full flaps. with smoke in the airplane coming from a cabin fire you would want to get down to the ground and land or else to bail out. At 170 you can extend full flaps or anything you want to do. Makes sense. 2 75 Knots maximum for extending maneuver flaps: Originally the speed was 225, which it still is in my book. During the early operating days shipping surveillance runs were made at 250 knots indicated. Somebody at the Test Center taught them to go to Flight Idle and Maneuver Flaps at first radar contact. It seemed an impossible task to get them out of
62

the habit so Lockheed raised the speed. A poor solution. Anybody with an once of brains would not overstress the flaps when it isnt necessary in the slightest. 300 Knots for gear extension: This was instigated to keep pilots from making emergency descents at Vne where you had better think about starting to round it out at about 8,000 feet. It is almost always unnecessary to sling the gear out at 300 knots. It is terribly hard on the nose nacelle cover plates should they have missing fasteners. Once a plate came loose and cut the wires to the micro switch giving an unsafe gear indication. And it is terribly noisy with a lot of buffeting which must be hard on door hinges etc. If you need to do it, do it. In 9400 P-3 hours I never found the need to do it except for tests. 135 Knots maximum for going in to Beta: When you come over the ramp you effectively cut a lot of fuel to the engine. The prop now says to the engine you have been turning me all day and now I will turn you, since I now have a lot of windmilling energy. The engine says You try it and Ill slip a little NTS to you. But NTS has been blocked out mechanically at 24 degrees coordinator. So if the windmilling force is great enough and the decoupler is weak enough, the prop could decouple. A Lockheed pilot got both inboards to decouple during tests at a high altitude field on a hot day at 162 Knots true airspeed, and about 140 indicated. So it was agreed to say 13 5 knots maximum is a safe speed at most Navy airports. 135 knots indicated is 135 knots true on a standard day. On a 95 degree day at Denver 135 KIAS is about 155 KTAS. Since you never know the value of the decoupler, dont do practice no-flappers at Denver. On the other hand dont run out of runway waiting for 135 knots on high speed touchdowns at sea level airports. This has been done several times. Remember - most of the time everything works as advertised. Dont lose the airplane while saving the decoupler. I have never had a decouple and you most likely wont either. 115 Knots rotation speed: This speed must obviously be above Vmc Air as well as Vmcgr. It varies with gross weight

in order to reach 50 feet at the proper climb speed. The FM terms our 5 0 foot speed as V2, which is best angle of climb. We found during repeated tests that if the rotation was made properly this speed was just about automatic. Over rotation, as some people like to do, is not a good maneuver, likewise under rotation. Since Vmc is a function of power we use 115 knots in training regardless of weight. Then you can use max power if necessary. When hot days and. high altitude fields prevail the power will not be available, So Vmc is less. You are allowed to use an alternate schedule in this case which calls for a lower rotate speed to get the airplane into the air for best acceleration. As the airplane gets lighter in the bounce pattern the nose seems to dig in requiring a lot of rotation. Actually the wing starts to fly giving this impression. How can the wing fly at a nose down attitude? Flap setting forms a wing camber to create lift at this nose attitude. One of my pet peeves was for the pilot to hold the yoke forward during takeoff roll then jerk it into the air. When you hear the nose strut bottom out when you rotate then you know you are a plumber. Some people have all sorts of excuses for over rotation. Anything from getting a clean unstick, even when there is no crosswind, to fear of hitting a prop on the runway should a roll occur! 150 degree maximum TIT for airstarts: Originally air and ground starts were made at 200 degrees max. We were getting a lot of hung starts in the air and found by trial and error that the same engine would start normally at 150 degrees. We asked Allison and they had no answer. You dont need an answer if it works. We asked Allison to give us a limit of 125 degrees, hoping they would not give us 125 which we asked for, but 1.50. Darn if they didnt give us 125 which we were stuck with for over a year. Finally they gave us 150. No one knows why engines dont like 200 degrees for airstarts when they start well on the ground. I dont care, either. It works that way. Speaking of airstarts we originally placed the throttle one inch ahead of flight idle because Allison recommended that position. It worked very well except not everyone had the same conception of an inch. So they made a mark on the squadron for uniformity and called it 48 degrees. Nothing like getting technical with a simple fix!
63

345 Knots maximum for airstarts: You have to have some sort of limit for everything. Allison said the engine would start at this speed. Hamilton Standard said the prop would function normally, and Lockheed said the tail would stay on with a prop malfunction. How can you get 345 true airspeed with a prop feathered without diving the airplane? That would be stupid, wouldnt it. We actually used 404 IAS for some tests of unfeathering. Didnt much want to, but the profile called for it. That was before the 45 degree switch was installed. You might get an NTS inop light with todays procedures. Nobody knows why this is either. Originally, and still on the Electra, airstarts were made with the fuel and ignition on. You merely positioned the throttle then pulled on the unfeather button until about 16% then released it and let the speed sensing system take over. For a long time the airspeed for airstarts were 170 to 210 to be a limit. Loiter speedat80,OOOpoundsis 17Oand21Oat 120,000. We encouraged starts at the higher speed from the beginning, so that the blade angle would be higher should the prop malfunction. It took over twenty years to get this approved. Time passes on, but slowly. A situation such as the following could exist following a malfunction of an engine and followed immediately by amateurism and pandemonium. You are at minimum altitude for two engine loiter and have been flying at 20 knots below loiter speed. (Real Hot-Dog) An engine fire occurs requiring shutdown. Trying to stay above the minimum altitude you let the airspeed bleed off to, say 140 knots, while starting another engine. And it wont light off. Since you are holding out on the feather button the blade angle will stay at 45 degrees and the rpm wont come up high enough for a lightoff. In this case release the button with the fuel and ignition switch on and the rpm will increase to lightoff values. Sometimes you have to improve NATOPS procedures to save your neck. When you get time read the first page and dont hot-dog yourself into such a situation to cause remedial action. NATOPS is the best thing since indoor plumbing. About all you have to do is use common sense. They say common sense cant be taught. Yes it can. But the teacher must have some of his own and not be selfish and wait for the student to develop his own. That takes too long

IlaP cm

sometimes. Preach, preach, preach.

Engine out airwork restricted to no fewer than two engines.

To keep Hot-Dogs from practicing one engine landings. In the past there were people doing this for fun. Actually, its very easy as the airplane needs only 4000 horsepower to go downwind. But people sometimes goofed a little and landed short. There is no record of damage, but it was just a matter of time. One way to stop something is to make it illegal and then you have to watch it.

Starting Number Two First:

I started this in 1962 and have been sorry ever since. The first P-3s had a two speed gear box on number four engine so you could supply the whole airplane with electrical in low rpm. Just like the APU does today. It was designed for airline operation where you started engines 4,3,2,1. At times it was necessary to finish loading with the right hand engines running, just as you sometimes do today. All taxiing was done in low rpm as quiet as a mouse. Prior to takeoff you shifted to normal. If you didnt the coordinator switches would for you, so you cant take off in low rpm! There was one side effect. The APN-14 1 inertial was powered by Bus A alone. If Bus A was transferred to another source during the alignment cycle the system would go to tilt and you spent another 20 minutes getting another alignment. This happened a lot in the winter time when pilots needed more power to taxi through snow and they shifted without getting an OK from the Tacco. So I suggested we start number two first then Bus A will be at home and we can save a lot of time, although it would be non standard. The CO remarked that now we cant load people and equipment while starting engines. Well, you either have to find subs or run an airline. So it became normal to start in this manner even though it was not NATOPS. (NATOPS was just getting started at the time) About a year later they installed an invertor to back up Bus A during power transients. Now you could run Bus A back and forth without losing alignment. I tried to get a NATOPS change back to where it was, but nobody would listen. In fact some Lieutenant told me I knew nothing of NATOPS and would not believe that I had started the procedure. Once some thing gets engraved in the NATOPS headstone it is hard to change. Time marches on. Now wouldnt it be nice to start the right-hand engines first when no ground carts are involved? Occasionally you get to do that on VIP runs. But you cant get in a definite groove unless the APU works every day. You certainly wouldnt start the right-hand motors first using power carts and huffers. I think everybody is smart enough to handle this if they are allowed to.

130 Knot minimum for fuel chopping a pitchlocked prop on final:

This is a number we stuck with in the book before NATOPS came along. Should the blade angle be high, say forty degrees, the engine would be pulling quite a lot of horsepower to stay above 95% rpm. When the fuel was chopped there would be an abrupt power loss. To give the pilot a break we chose 130 knots as something he should be able to handle. Some of our technical minded instructors have been saying its to ensure decouple. Not so. Its merely for airplane control.

Pulling the handle to shut down an engine for loiter:

Originally this was the procedure and was used for about the first year. Pulling the handle had one bad feature. It also shut off the oil to the engine and gearbox. If the prop did not feather (they never do on practice engine fires) you had to push in the handle, pull the circuit breaker, pull the handle again. Barnyard engineering at best. New crews sometimes messed up the circuit breaker Sequence and wrecked the engine. Several times the oil tank shutoff valve burned out in the closed position. Most of the crews recognized this on restart, but some didnt. At any rate an engine out landing was necessary. Due to this possibility I was able to convince the navy to feather with the button with the intent to restart. Then the oil valves were always open. About 1978 Navy engineering got suckered into changing the propeller hydraulic fluid to that used in the F- 14. The F- 14 had a lot of hydraulic leaks and subsequent fires, so they used a fire retardant fluid. I dont ever recall seeing a

64

P-3 prop fire, but it was forced down our throats anyway. Immediately we started having all sorts of prop troubles since the new fluid loosened up carbon which stopped up passages, since it was more detergent. It also caused babbit wipeout in the transfer sleeves, which looks like what happened to the Adak P-3 which lost control of a prop on restart. The crew did not react for sometime in restoring oil to the gearbox as per NATOPS and had to ditch. They, of course, shut down the engine with the handle and it shut off the oil. It took only a little prodding to get the Navy to fly with the oil tank circuit breakers out until a fix was made. Immediately some of our hard headed crew members said they did not like using circuit breakers for switches. The same folks think nothing of pulling Start Essential every time the airplane is shut down. Or the APN-141 on the Super B airplane. The fix has not been made because the money is needed elsewhere. I can see nothing wrong with the present procedures. There are still people who like to loiter engines at high altitudes even though the saving is nominal. In super cold air the prop will not always go to complete feather. Sometimes the rpm increases to NTS and sometimes you can drive it to feather by pulling the handle and hitting the PCO, since the feather valve is now mechanically positioned to feather. Engineers came up with formulas about a yard long as to why the prop didnt go to full feather. Now we had none of this with the old oil. So you can assume the new oil is slightly thicker when it is very cold and the pressure switch on the flux pump cutout gets fooled into thinking the prop is feathered. The fix is to pull the handle and use the PCO. Why dont we just do that in the first place? After pushing this through the NATOPS conference four years ago I got all sorts of criticism. One Mission Commander said if he came to the cockpit and saw number one handle out he would be mad that the pilots did not tell him there was an emergency. So I told him we would push in the handle as soon as the prop feathered and then use the restart checklist to PC0 and he wouldnt know how we got the prop feathered. Others complained that you wouldnt know if the feather jlenoid worked and would on the next reart. There are some things that almost never lil unless boys make it happen with circuit reaker pulling (which they dont like to se as switches). How do you know NTS will ork next time you try it? I suppose we could
65

leave the prop NTSing all the way to on station. Now the punch line. We couldnt use the handle for loiter shutdown in the old days for fear of losing the oil tank valve. Now we can pull the handle because the oil tank valve is always open. Seems like a good simple procedure to me. Checking brakes after the gear is down: The real reason is to make sure they are not parked. It is easy to take off on ice with the brakes parked. Landing on dry runways is hard on tires if the brakes are on. In the old days the pilot eased the brakes on after the wheels were up and locked. This was to prevent wearing of the tire tread by the snubbers mounted in the nacelles to prevent rotation. On airplanes such as DC-~S about half of the wheels stuck out of the nacelles. Sometimes they might turn backward in flight except for the snubbers. If the pilot stomped on the brakes during the retraction cycle a. severe oscillation could occur. In fact, the entire landing gear was slung out of a C-46 twice because the pilot stomped on the brakes about mid-polnt in retraction. About 1956 the FM demanded an automatic inflight brake be designed into new airplanes. Without this feature about 500 pounds would have to be added to the structure of the P-3 landing gear. Just to protect the airplane from plumber brake stompers. Sometimes during landing practice the gear is left down to cool the tires. In this case they are turning at a high rotation speed when the checklist is read. Stomping on the brakes at this time sometimes makes the airplane shudder. It is possible to slip the tires on the rims. if the rotation is high enough and the stomper is a real plumber. You may have seen the align marks on the tires and rims on your preflight. So you dont stomp on the brakes on the ground and you dont stomp on them in the air. Little things like this make a real pilot out of a pretty good one. It amazes me that this seems to be an insignificant item in training. Not only do most people stomp but sometimes several times. Check them good I suppose. A few have checked each brake individually. I suppose thats alright, but dont turn the airplane while doing it. Elevator force link tabs: Originally the Electra did not have this feature. We found that the airplane was very

ThP c&q&&&&m

unstable in pitch. On approach you could go from 140 to 110 knots without any change in stick pressure. So they added a spring loaded tab that would blow up or down with a change of airspeed requiring more up elevator force as the speed diminished. The P-3 is not the only airplane with this feature. Flight idle stops: During the Electra testing the FM pilot went into Beta about 20 feet above the runway, blew out all four tires and cracked the wing skin. He was trying to set a minimum stopping distance from 50 feet and got a little carried away trying to beat Lockheed pilots. So they fixed it so you have to pull a total of about 50 pounds to get over the ramp in flight. Rudder boost cutout: TPS graduates, mostly fighter pilots, are responsible for this system. They said you VP pilots were apt to kick full rudder at 405. They won and you are blessed with K-l 3 and all that. One of the worst things about it is that you cant take off with less than Takeoff flaps set. The Electra is certified to take off either with Takeoff flaps or Maneuver. The lesser setting is used at high altitude fields where power is limited. Airlines call it overspeed and it is used by about all the modern equipment. Performance is enhanced by a good margin. You also are blessed with an unnecessary NATOPS procedure of pulling K-13 at times. If K-13 is that important you should leave it out all the time, takeoff and landing. Some more barnyard engineering. Use of inboard brake in turns This is not critical in any way except in fully deflected turns, most likely encountered when directed by linemen who seem to know nothing but square turns. In this case the mainmount strut is the pivot point with one wheel rolling forward and one backward. Any braking action would create a severe twisting moment on the gear mounting attachment to the wing. Repeated action would most likely loosen the bolts causing fuel leaks. There are plenty of times when use of the inboard brake is not only desirable but necessary when expediting clearing the runway or following gentle turn taxi lines.
66

RAG training, mostly by necessity, sometimes goes to overkill to prevent some novice from doing bad things. If you are taught to never use inboard brake you wont do it during fully deflected turns, although there are times when it would be useful. RAG time is at a premium, so they have to make fast rules. Use your head. Cutting off numbers 1 and 2 hydraulic pumps clearing the runway: For a while a group of flight engineers were teaching this procedure saying you would be saving the life of the pumps. Bosh! Poor Hydraulic pump 1A runs a great deal during the life of the airplane and doesnt seem to have a high failure rate. What is dangerous about cutting off the pumps clearing the runway as a habit is that you may decide to taxi back and take off again, perhaps you didnt notice the engineer shutting off the pumps- its not on the Takeoff checklist. So when you raise the gear all sorts of lights come on and the controls get very stiff. Engine failure at this time could be nasty. Why dont we just go by the checklist, putting the pumps on after start and off on engine shutdown. The above situation has happened a number of times, both in P-3s and airline Electras. Moving throttle on engine being bled for start: Bleed air from an engine is a function of rpm. If the rpm doesnt change the bleed output will not be affected. There are times when a third engine is being started from the bleed of number two which may be a tad ahead of Start for taxi thrust requirements. With a tailwind the airplane picks up an undesirable speed causing the new pilot to ride the brakes. Here we are going too fast with too much thrust and riding the brakes. In this case the throttle on the engines being bled could be retarded as long as the rpm didnt dwindle, which would indeed affect the start. Some people cant seem to move anything a little bit, so thats why they say dont move the throttle on the engine used for start. Have you ever seen a plumber who puts his hand on the throttles and they move - every time? I have. Here again, use your head. Dont exceed taxi speed and ride the brakes when a genteel touch will remedy the situation.

Short Field Landing Practice

he Blue Book says to make a flat approach at 1.3 speed. This is a carry-over from the old days when a Soft Field Landing had to be demonstrated for a Transport license from the Department of Commerce. (Before CM and FM) In those days most airports did not have paved runways and it was easy to nose over when the field was muddy. The technique was to come in flatter than usual with a nose high attitude and lots of power. We used to call it hanging on the prop. This is not necessary in a P-3 or similar airplane. In fact, it has caused a large number of blown tires when the pilot paid more attention to the airspeed than the touchdown, causing a slight bounce. During the time weight was supported by the wing instead of footprint a brake application, however slight, would blow the tires. This happened four years in a row at the Patuxent Airshow. One of the VP-30 instructors, who later was Wing Commander, asked me to demonstrate a short field landing. I, in turn, asked him to make a normal approach tapering the airspeed to 1.3 as the flare is established then ease off power to touchdown, and I would do the reversing. He made a perfect touchdown and I immediately came over the ramp to about Start position easing the nosewheel to the deck with the elevators. Then I asked John to apply the brakes. We stopped very short and still had four inflated tires to taxi to the line. Now, that is written in Natops under Short Field Landings. There-after nobody blew the tires at Patuxent Airshows. Perhaps the Natops procedure should

be written to make a normal approach and touchdown instead of dragging it in and trying to spot it on the very end of the runway. Tire marks short of the runway indicate people try to hard sometimes. Only a few runways are shorter than 5000 at Navy airports. If the landing is made 1200-1500 from the approach end there is still ample room to stop well in the confines. But you have to know how to stop. Get into Beta before the nosewheel is on the deck and use up elevator to prevent it from pranging down. As soon as all wheels are on the ground use all the reverse you want. Stand up on the brakes to stop where you desire. Then get off them for cooling. Since power lever action is all mechanical during this action there is no danger -of some of the props not going into reverse. I always came over the ramp before the nosewheel touched the runway, even on engine out landings, and never had an unexpected swerve. There are two kinds of short field landings. One with a short runway and the other with a long touchdown on a normal one. Sometimes, when trying for a grease job, a pilot will land long then have a hard time stopping, such as the incident at Norfolk some years ago. When you need to stop during rollout get in reverse before you apply brakes and you can do wonders. Maybe SHORT STOP practice should be given some thought. Keep em on the runway.

Flight Demonstrations
ome of us have vast experience in demonstrating performance of airplanes whether they be new or old. There are three basic groups of spectators. The potential customers, the dissatisfied customer, and the airshow attendees. The flight profiles are all different, or should be. When an aircraft builder is trying to sell a new design its expert pilots do all sorts
67

of things until they establish an envelope of performance which is operationally safe for everyday pilots to accomplish the mission for which it is built. On occasion the customer becomes disenchanted with the airplanes performance and more d e m o n strations are required by factory and Test Center pilots. In any case the people doing the flying have been trained for the job

either recently or with long-standing experience. Even then it is easy to get out of bounds and do something unnecessary. This takes care of the first two categories. The airshow for the public has been the most dangerous, both in military and civilian performance. It is almost a certainty that someone will step out of bounds unless they are strongly supervised. Take it from me. Ive been there. Oldsters and youngsters viewing the pageant are usually laymen and are not called upon to evaluate performance. They like a lot of graceful flying with a lot of noise. They cant tell the difference between 300 and 350 knots, nor 1.1 from 1.3 speeds. They cant tell 2 Gs from 2.5 Gs, but they are sure to notice a 45 degree pitch attitude. So will every undertaker in town. I am absolutely astonished that grown men would go this far in an airplane like a P3. And to put it down on paper as a guide. Why not do a few rolls and a big lazy loop? The spectators dont need to know about missile launch and mad maneuvers as the commentator may explain. Years ago during the yearly airshow P-3s blew a lot of tires demonstrating short field landings. They then finally realized that you must get into reverse before you use the brakes and that debacle has all but disappeared. But since they did not blow the tires they now backed down the runway then took off with full flaps inadvertently. Goes up like an elevator!!! Airshow Mentality is a new popular term. I would say lack of mentality would be closer. Suggested Profile
l

Rotate at normal speed and insure liftoff at 121 kts. Retract gear and leave flaps at takeoff setting. Climb at 13 1 kts, which is the 4 engine 50 speed and also best angle of climb - the FM V2. This speed has to be at least 115% above stall and 110% above Vmc. 13 1 kts is far above both. This will put the airplane about 1000 above the ground at the end of an 8000 runway. Take off into the wind as always. Enter the pattern for a low and slow pass down the runway with gear down and Land flaps. Minimum altitude 300 at 1.3 speed, but not less than 130 knots. Make the next pass clean at 300 knots. Smoothly roll into a 30 degree banked climbing turn with not more than a 15 degree pitch angle. Use Military Rated throughout the turn. This will usually bring the airplane around near 180 degrees for a poor mans chandelle. Extend flaps as desired beginning recovery to wings level. Minimum airspeed 140 knots. When done gracefully and smoothly this is a crowd pleaser. Its a big airplane and should be flown like one. Make a normal approach so as to be 1.3 as the flare is established. Ease off power for a normal grease job. Immediately upon touchdown enter the Beta range using up elevator to keep the nosewheel from pranging down. Use full reverse and brakes as desired for a Short Field Stop. Demo back-up capability. Remember, you are not Bob Hoover.

Put 12,000 lbs of fuel aboard, bringing the takeoff weight to 85,000 lbs. Use military Power for takeoff and climb to the field boundary.

1.

Number two engine starts very slowly every day from an APU which barely puts out 25 lbs at 16 percent.

What To Do When . . .
3. 4. I..

2.

Number one starts very slowly every day even though good air is being bled from number two.

At a hot deployment site just about every APU in the squadron puts out only about 20 lbs at 16 percent but the first engine accelerates to low rpm within the recommended time limit. The fuel pressure low light does not go

The I.~wv

out in low rpm. 5. You are taking the commodore some place and plan to start number one engine while taxiing. Then you notice number one TIT gauge is inoperative. You are already running late. At about 50 knots on takeoff roll you notice number three TIT about 830 and the horsepower about 2500 at full throttle. You are not yet at 80 knots so you cant do much about it. Just as you have about 900 TIT on the original power application the rpm goes to more than 104 percent and the horsepower drops off. This indicates a pitchlock and it must be dealt with by the book. The prop overspeeds and the power drops off a lot as the gear is coming up. Neither pump light is on. The engineer has been synching up the props. When he finishes and lets go of the switch, number three rpm drops to about 80 percent and the TIT bingos then settles at about 830. Turning off number three synch switch did not help. Then number four did almost the same as number three. Both engines are stalled out but still running. You are demonstrating rpm excursion synch on and synch off. During a series of rather violent throttle movements the rpm dropped to 82 percent and the TIT settled at 828. Subsequent throttle movement had no effect until the TD was placed to null. Just as the gear was selected down all of the annunciator lights came on and stayed on. You are an hour away from the nearest airport and it is below minimums, but another airport is CAVU about another hour away. Due to a real debacle in flight planning, weather going to worms, cockpit confusion, and fuel management (someone had run the APU for a long time from number two tank, and the engineer did not crossfeed properly), you notice that number two tank has less
69

than 1000 pounds of fuel and you have beentoldthatittakesatleast1000pounds to keep number one hydraulic system cool enough to operate. 13. Due to a real bad situation all four tanks are down below 1000 pounds but a place to land is just 30 minutes away. Someone said it takes at least 1000 pounds in 2 and 3 tanks to keep the hydraulic system cool enough to function properly. You would like to know the OAT but the gauge is inoperative. During a practice engine fire the prop feathered and the fire went out with the first bottle discharge.

6.

14. 15.

7.

8.

16. You are on two engine loiter at 190 knots at 1000 feet and a chips light shows up on one of the operating engines. Range is not critical. 17. You are on two engine loiter at 190 knots and 1000 feet and there is a power * loss, roughness, and high TIT on an engine. Range is critical this time. 18. During the preceding debacle the airspeed dropped to about 140 knots, since you cant be below 1000 feet on two or less engines. The engine does not light off at the low rpm held by the 45 degree switch. During normal airstart of number one there is a loud noise and rapid drop in rpm on number two. Someone has shut off the fuel tank selector during crossfeed and the engine quits. You had not run an NTS check on climbout.

9.

10.

19.

20.

11.

12.

21. The start valve light comes on on an engine in flight. Shortly after the engine is shut down another start valve light comes on on the other side of the airplane. 22. During an NTS check the rpm keeps decreasing with each bump of the feather valve. 23. An engine acts like it would like to NTS but just wont quite make it.

It%? r,omruere

24.

It is very inconvenient to fly at 2000 feet for a flight idle check but 1000 or 3000 levels are available. 35.

downwind with a brisk headwind on downwind leg to boot. Its VFR with no GCA practice going on. Fight back. You have knocked down the arresting gear twice and the tower says you will have to leave the pattern if you do it once more. You are in a left-hand pattern on runway four at Barbers Point and the tower gets busy and forgets to clear you downwind. The tower tells you you are clear for a touch and go before you get to the 180, much less report the gear down. You get suckered into an approach side by side with another airplane on dual runways that are the minimum distance apart. You get suckered into a touch and go under the same conditions because the launch airplane fooled around too long after being cleared for takeoff - probably a last minute brief. You are released from approach to the tower at 1500 feet. The tower says to enter downwind. Pattern altitude is 1000 feet. You wonder why your interval elected to fly much wider and deeper all of a sudden and ask the tower about it. Your interval says he is simulating two out and its the same guy who told you that morning that you should always fly a normal pattern regardless. The next day the same clown flies wide and deep again. This time he is doing a no-flapper simulating a boost out pattern. The bar doesnt open until 1700 and you finish at 1500.

25. Number two engine has NTSd for months on the flight idle check and maintenance has exhausted all probable fixes. 26. On the flight idle check number one horsepower was minus 200 and number four was plus 200. 27. You are aware that the synch box has been removed from the rack and reinstalled during the preflight. Due to the propeller test box shortage a phase angle check has not been made although the rpm had been checked OK on a previous flight. They want you to take the airplane on patrol. They need somebody to sit on a contact that is only 100 miles out for a couple of hours until the ready alert can be launched. It had not been able to get airborne. So you go and then have a flap asymmetry on liftoff with takeoff flaps set. You have been on station two hours of a planned four and there is a flap asymmetry with the flaps fully retracted.

36.

37.

28.

38.

29.

39.

40.

30.

31. After liftoff the copilots airspeed, altimeter, and vertical speed indication do not agree with the pilots. Then you recall that the yellow sheet said that the navigators altimeter had been replaced. 32. You are shooting landings at a field which is thirty miles from home plate and you have a flap asymmetry after the flaps are extended to land at about 300 foot altitude. 33. You suddenly realize that you are an instructor pilot making multiple landings and that is when most gear up landings are made. 34. The tower wont change the active runway into the wind because of no good reason except they are in charge. Here you are with a student trying to land
70

41.

42.

43.

44. As soon as you clear the active after landing the flight engineer shuts off both number one and number two hydraulic pumps. 45. Your pilot uses increased power from number two to make a tight left turn

into the fuel pits or birdbath. 46. 47. You wonder what you are doing in this business after so many years. During cockpit preflight you notice that the pilots ball is out of the cage to the left and the copilots is to the right.

56.

After landing at Andrews the left main showed barber pole. You find that the gear is indeed down and locked but the arm which operates the micro switch is missing. The Commodore needs to return to Jacksonville as soon as possible. The weather is CAVU. During Unitas you RON at a field which is 7000 in elevation. NATOPS says the APU is capable of starting a single engine up to 6000 altitude. This is a good liberty town. You are at 23,000 and somebody shut off all tank selectors because the safety wires were at the bottom of the switches instead of at the top. All four engines quit and are NTSing away. NATOPS says 20,000 is maximum for starting the APU. The pressurization is completely lost at flight level 270. ATC will not give you a lower altitude. You are in VFR conditions on your last assigned heading to the approach fix. Dead ahead is a vertical cylinder of cloud the shape of which indicates very unusual air currents. ATC says to maintain heading when you ask for a change. The approach to runway 11 has a moderate windshear at about 500. There is a miniature tornado, commonly called a Devil Dog rising up several hundred feet from the dirt race track. You report all this to the tower, but they dont seem to be alarmed and keep clearing people for touch and gos. You are in the pattern at Patuxent and the tower says, Turn left, turn left now!

48. During flight with the left ball centered the rudder trim is near zero, the copilots ball is really to the right and the autopilot trim indicator isnt centered. 49. Airplane number 01 always trims up with the usual 2 degrees right rudder and l/2 degree left wing down. Today it takes 2 degrees right wing down. The autopilot agrees with your trim. 50. During a maintenance check flight you find it very difficult to move the rudder during boost out at 250 knots. The elevator trim wheel has no effect on nose up trim but works normally for nose down.

57.

58.

59.

51.

60.

52. The copilots aileron control has an abnormal amount of play before it moves the ailerons. 53. When on short final an engine fire warning occurs. 54. When on short final the pilots head slumps forward and the airplane appears to be out of control. 55. All of the airports in Hawaii have been destroyed except the one at Dillingham, and its runways are not stressed for P3s.

61.

62.

Backup Checks For Lights,

Horns, Whistles 1-1
hen I was a little boy engine instruments required were a tach, oil pressure, and oil temperature gauges. An altimeter and wet compass were needed if you planned to stray away from the airport. Now71

a-days there are so many gauges, warning lights and aural devices that we sometimes get confused. Particularly when a warning light bulb burns out, a pressure transmitter fails, or a temperature sensor malfunctions.

Many times an engine is shut down unnecessarily causing unscheduled landings in less than favorable conditions. In a lot of cases a little trouble-shooting would remedy the situation. EXAMPLE Prior to the time when sensitive altimeters were obtainable precise altitude retention was wishful thinking when flying through clouds without an airspeed indicator. The backup was the tachometer. With a constant throttle setting and a fixed pitch prop a decrease in rpm meant a climb, whereas an increase meant a descent. The best of pilots got caught once in a while. Complacency is not new. During the late thirties a number of improvements appeared on transport airplanes. One such machine had a panel of lights to be used in place of a checklist. Before takeoff, for instance, you kept moving things in the cockpit until each and every light went out. That wasnt too bad until a bulb burned out. So they went back to the best, a checklist. In 1939 chips liphts were installed on DC3 engines. A whisker would barely illuminate whereas a chunk would make the bulb burn bright. Naturally most indications were reported dim, especially over Tucson in the good old hot summertime. Mind you, the same pilots had been flying DC-~S over this route for years without losing an engine, and now they realized how dangerous it had been. So most of them would cuss and take the bulb out of its socket until they landed. A mechanic would check the magnetic sump plug and remove the fuzz, in most cases. So they removed the troublesome chips light and went back to the old way. Watch the gauges in flight and periodically check the sump plugs for lumps. Time changes everything. Chips lights in P-3s are controversial. I must have had a couple of hundred. Only once were there chips (a whole hand full) but we also noticed gear box oil pressure fluctuations. Secondary indications should be monitored and locale and weather conditions should be considered before blindly pulling the handle. C-l 30s do not have chips lights.

talk about, but the best indicators are your ears and eyeballs on landing rollout. ,When you come over the ramp toward ground idle, and you hear a noise change, and you continue to go straight, you are in good shape. Several times both bulbs have burned out during my career. The best preventative, of course, is the light check prior to landing. Well prior, and not on final. Fuel filter lights were installed at the request of Navy Engineering. Jet transports use the warning to detect failure of fuel line heaters allowing ice to accumulate in the system at very high altitudes. This hasnt been a problem in P-3s. The filters in the system are bypassed with any restriction. Twice P-3s have made unscheduled landings for a fuel filter light. One at a remote sight without a tower or runway lights in operation, and with the engine shut down to boot. The other was at Cubi at 114,000 pounds and approach flaps. Engines 2,3, and 4 bogged down when Ground Idle was smoothly selected at 134 knots! In both cases the sensor switches were out of tolerance, being very sensitive to adjustment. The Blue Book says if the engine is running normally and there is no visible fuel leak, keep going with a filter light. Heres a suggestion: Push the throttles on the suspect engine and its opposite to 10 10. If the power matches there is no filter clog. C130s and Electras do not have fuel filter lights. Engine anti-ice lights have been the cause of a number of hazardous unscheduled landings, because the light did not go out when the system was turned off. There is a very lame excuse for this caused by poor training. When flying along and the antiice light comes on without anti-ice being selected there could be a problem. Open the valves. If a horsepower drop occurs, the Book says to feather the prop. If no drop is noticed it means the valves went to Fail-Safe open due to electrical problems. Check the electrical panel and keep going. By using the following procedure you can eliminate all doubt about the valves positions. During flight the horsepowers should always be even across the board. Not the proverbial TIT, such as 925. When selecting anti-ice open all four valves simultaneously - not one at a time - and note comparative horsepower drop. If they all drop the same

Beta Lights are something to watch for and

72

amount, the valves are all open. Should one engine indicate only half as much drop it means that one of the two valves did not open or was already open. In the latter case the light would come on earlier than the rest. Sometimes a valve will stick closed for a period of time then open. Thats a squawk and should be remedied. Now lets say that all four horsepowers dropped 200 and all four lights came on near the same time. Good. You may wish to reset the power to the original value, so do so. Now you are out of icing and ready to turn off the heat. Again, have the horsepowers even across the board and use four fingers to simultaneously shut off the valves. If the SHP is even then all the valves closed. If a light remains on longer than you like it means the sensor switch is out of adjustment. Remember, you saw the valves open and close by observing horsepower. It takes cockpit coordination to make this procedure work. The flight engineer should tell the pilot not to be moving the cottenpicking throttles while he is observing the SHP action, otherwise its useless. A frequent check for antiice valves is desirable not only for antiicing but for power loss. There have-been chronic gripes on engines for having a slight power loss on takeoff when the cause was a mere anti-ice valve stuck open. This can be noticed on any climbout or in preparation for NTS checks. Its not a sin to open all anti-ice valves when you plan to only NTS one or two. Preventative troubleshooting saves money and time. Be a pro. Oil pressure warning lights have caused concern at times. The light is an alert to check the gauge and not the primary indication. You pay extra to buy an auto with gauges as well as idiot lights. The light is set off by a sensor switch which is usually pretty accurate. The gauge is the receiver for the oil pressure transmitter mounted on the engine and is most accurate. Lets say that you were flying along and the oil pressure warning light came on. Both pressure gauges and the oil temp gauge are normal. Circuit breakers are all in. I guess if you are still worried you could shut down the engine and watch the gauges go down and come back up when you restart the engine. Use your head. Three times I had a diode fail in flight allowing all warning lights on the panel to come on, like a Christmas tree. So you dont worry about Beta lights because they are already on and

that sort of thing. Read the checklist and go home and land. And cuss a little. Propeller lightshavescared thedaylights out of a lot of people. During the last couple of years new procedures have been developed to remedy the situation. In fact we are back where we were in the beginning, over thirty years ago. Finally. Real bad prop problems have all but been eliminated by good training, keeping your cotton picking hands away from the shutdown handle, and good operator understanding. Number one prop pump light has lost its authority to cause panic. Twelve Electras were built with Hamilton Standard props. There was only one prop pump light for each prop. It was labeled as low level light. In the middle of the Atlantic on the first delivery to KLM the light came on number two. I carefully moved the throttle back and forth and the rpm was steady. After a spell I dared to cut the synch switch off. The rpm was steady at 100 percent and did not follow throttle movement. The synch switch was turned on. I kept staring at the light and it went out after about five minutes. When we got to Holland the prop oil level was normal. The light never came back on during thirty days of flight training. Sounds like a tall tale, but it isnt. Bleed valve lights sometimes stay on after closing the valves. Here again a little troubleshooting can help. Open the wing valves anti-ice valves, and cross ship valves. At about 3000 SHP open the bleed valves and not horsepower drop - usually about 2.5 percent or 750 SHP. Do not move the throttle during the check. Close bleed valve and note recovery of horsepower. If the light stays on dont worry. You saw the light come on, you noted the horsepower drop and recovery. Sometimes you can blow the valve a little more closed by use of another bleed valve. The P-3 was flown about 14 years before the Start Valve lights were installed. After we blew up several starters we learned to watch for a pressure rise on the manifold when the start button popped out. A slow rise meant a sticking valve. A snappy rise was desirable. Even after the Start Valve lights were in operation we still watched for a pressure rise, until some small group detided it wasnt necessary. I could never make myself not watch the rise as well as the light.
73

At Moffett one day the pressure rise walked its way up by increments, yet the light appeared to be normal. I insis ted on a shutdown and inspection. Sure enough the valve chattered when opened and closed and was apt to malfunction at a later date. Those who like a double check should not be discouraged. Some years ago a pilot made a training hop his first flight as a PPC. In the Warning Area number two Start Valve light came on. As per NATOPS the engine was shut down. Shortly after the prop was feathered number four Start Valve light came on. The en-

gine was shut down. There was no APU in the rack. They were down to one generator and one and three engines. The CO advised by radio to unfeather the engines and return to base. The PPC did not head the instructions and made a two engine, one generator landing. Why? They had not performed an NTS check prior to shutting down the engines!!! You wonder if he would have shut down the other engines had the lights come on. You also wonder why the Skipper didnt give him a good spanking.

Reduced Power Takeo$s

wenty-five years ago I tried to get someone interested in using the power needed for takeoff instead of blindly setting Normal Rated for the first takeoff of the day, even at light weights. But, in order to evaluate the engine performance, it was necessary to refer to Zero Airspeed Charts. This was time consuming and cumbersome, so most neglected to do it. Now NATOPS has made it easy with three new power charts - 920 TIT, 950, 980, as well as 1010 and 1077. At Brunswick, on an average winter day, 920 TIT would be adequate for obtaining about 4000 SHP for training weights. This is about the only condition warranting such a low TIT. Yet we are hearing that 920 is being used on standard temperature days at various sites. Boys will be boys. So what is the power needed for takeoff! Almost any day at Barbers Point the OAT is 30 degrees centigrade. Normal Rated is 3 600 SHP and Max Power is 4100. So if it is safe enough at Barbers Point it should be safe elsewhere. Perhaps an agreement can be made to use a reasonable minimum of 3500 SHP for the first takeoff of the day, if you can get it. Consideration must be given to gross weight. A P-3 with a light fuel load could take off with less power than one with the usual 100,000 pound training weight and be just as safe. This gets into the judgment factor arena, which any PPC should be able to handle. Some years ago the thermocouples were redesigned making a normal 100 percent engine look like a 110 percenter. A new engine with these thermocouples might pro74

duce much more horsepower than the others at the same TIT, but the fuel flow would also be higher. When the horsepowers were matched the fuel flows would also match but the TIT would be lower on the new engine. So we can assume the TIT was telling a lie. This condition can happen on all four engines with the same thermocouples installed. Now you can assume that the engines are being overtemped although 1010 is carefully set. This is why one of the new charts is based on 980 TIT. A TIT setting should produce so much horsepower based on air temperature and altitude. If it doesnt, the engine is weak for any number of reasons. If it produces more than 100 percent pull the throttles back to 100 percent and save turbines. All performance is based on 100 percent power, but dont be the first one to hit the trees at 100 percent when 110 percent would have cleared them. Once I was given an airplane with one of the engines rated at 119 percent. It had nine bad thermocouples. When the horsepowers were matched the TIT was 51 degrees colder than the others. Someone told me that a crew had used 920 for takeoff then set 950 for climb. How does that grab you? If you get enough power at 920 for takeoff then climb at 920 or less. Egad. In summary I think the use of the new charts is a giant step forward and will save a lot of money if good judgment is applied. All airlines use the power needed for each condition. We can do it too. Jay Beasley

PATROL SQUADRON THIRTY 20 n/MY 1997

COMMANDING OJ?FICER - CAPT M. L. HOLMES

Commissioned in June 1960, the Pros Nest, is the U.S. Navys Maritime Patrol Fleet Replacement Squadron. VP30s mission is to safely and efficiently provide quality P-3 replacement and international training and fleet support through teamwork. The staff of the Navys largest aviation squadron train approximately 650 officer and enlisted personnel annually, utilizing more than 29 P-3 aircraft of various models. Foreign military personnel from Korea, Thailand, Germany, Netherlands, Chile, and Norway have all received specific aircrew and maintenance training on P-3 operating systems.
Revised by Awl R. C. Presler Compiled by LT T. P. Sheridan Inspired by LCDR R. D. Suttie and of course Mr. Jay Beasley