WWI Replica Safety

Joe Perkel · 1 June 2009, 03:24 AM

Quote:

The purpose is to remember the "feel of flight", using all your senses to fly. Lastly, I will "chair fly" in the cockpit my Dr.1 in the hanger based on what other Dr.1 pilots have said about the flying characteristics. I understand that the Decathlon is not a Dr.1, but the intention is to remember and feel the flying.

Joe

You've got the "right stuff" here, mostly between the ears!

You fly in two completely different realms as far as "feel" goes. Your day job is inertia management so long as you have power, ala Gimli Glider, or Hudson A320, then your father's "training syllabus", would come in quite handy!

You're gonna do quite fine in your DR.1!

j ferguson · 1 June 2009, 03:34 AM

Guys,
I think my concern, which may be unwarranted, was how you might ascertain whether the plane being flown for the first time is actually ok.

Surely, the first flights would be well within the least stressing envelope looking to make sure brakes, if so equipped, suspension - bungees, skid or tail wheel are rigged right. And maybe the problems which do show up won't be subtle. My concerns were entirely related to airframe and rigging issues, something I don't know much about. This may be the answer to my concern - my ignorance, not any significant likely exposure. Or???

Joe Perkel · 1 June 2009, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by j ferguson

Guys,
My concerns were entirely related to airframe and rigging issues, something I don't know much about. This may be the answer to my concern - my ignorance, not any significant likely exposure. Or???

John,

Not unwarranted at all!

No doubt the test flight is serious business, and the NTSB reports are quite well stocked with examples of pilot /owner apathy in this regard, (Last flight 10 years ago, Home Depot hardware, mud dauber nests in intakes,.. etc). Even if you don't fly the thing, one's selection of an inappropriate test pilot, would still be the builders irresponsibility. What we can do on the fabrication side, is to insure that all known published standards and procedures are followed to the letter, regardless of kit built, one-off, or what have you.

The recent in flight break-ups of Zenair CH 601's (suspected flutter), caused me to review the test flight manual (AC 90-89A) section 4, for information regarding this, as your questions to rigging brings this issue to bare. Interesting to note, that the flutter cycles of 5-20 Hz, are difficult if not impossible to detect, can occur at any speed (including T.O.), and that a 1/4 kt increase in airspeed, is all that may be required for catastrophic failure. So rigging of the flight controls as per manufacturer or published procedures, is the order of the day.

Clearly, there is more to this than to simply, "kick the tires and light the fires". Those people make it harder on the rest of us.

joepilot · 1 June 2009, 04:51 PM

Joe,

Thank you for referencing AC 90-89A. Good stuff. Keep referencing stuff for us to look at.

Joepilot
check 6

Machinbird · 6 June 2009, 07:08 PM

On another aviation forum, members recently discussed good reference materials on the subject of test flying. A link to a PPRUNE forum discusion of reading material relating to test flying can be found here:
Great Test Flying Books? - PPRuNe Forums
Happy reading,
Sid

Blue Max Aviation DR1 · 7 June 2009, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Perkel

Joe

You've got the "right stuff" here, mostly between the ears!

You fly in two completely different realms as far as "feel" goes. Your day job is inertia management so long as you have power, ala Gimli Glider, or Hudson A320, then your father's "training syllabus", would come in quite handy!

You're gonna do quite fine in your DR.1!

COMMENTS UPON COMMENTS ABOUT TEST FLIGHTS OF REPLICAS

Flight should be a sensing of everything around you. Vibrations, tremors, sounds, smells… An aircraft speaks to you as a partner in the relationship. Treat it with the intimacy and respect it deserves and your aircraft will never let you down. Betray it and you are dead. A whiff of glycol in a Mustang was an attention getter. Electrical smells another riveting stimulus. A rattling or rumbling sound from an engine whose normal note is part of your life. A tremor through the control column, rudder pedals, or seat of your pants… the scent of overheated metal to indicate something out of the ordinary.

Unfortunately, modern aviation does everything to insulate us from the basic realities of flight. Students aren’t allowed the wild, disorienting experience a first spin. Because of this, their first real meeting with an unexpected spin is usually fatal! Instructors are careful not to frighten people with real stalls and other stomach churning events. (Not good for business and vomit on expensive upholstery is difficult to remove.) Good sound-proofed luxury cockpits, with cigarette lighters, air conditioning and good upholstery …separate society from the real elements of flight.

Don’t go too fast…or too slow, rate one turns, 500 fpm up and down, and you will stay in the center of the machine’s flight envelope and never be challenged.

Those who mess around with World War One replicas, and other antique concepts, are really using a Time Machine to escape from today’s, non-challenging approach to flight. However, by doing so, they raise the potential of trouble.

The testing of our types of aircraft requires a special touch, a special pilot, a special person who has maintained the ancient rituals, much as an African witch doctor retains past rituals for his tribe. These rituals can be brought out when a finished replica is ready for its first flight…flights.

There is nothing to say that the one who built the aircraft is not that special person, even if his experience is limited.

Sitting in the cockpit, of the challenge , sometimes with your eyes closed, sensing what might or could happen is not a bad approach. Becoming a part of the aircraft by spending time with it in a bonding situation, is important. It must become familiar to you, an extension of your own body and mind.

I have used this approach on many aircraft. The Lancaster was the biggest. I really had no one to help. Most of those I spoke to had knowledge of one part of the Lancaster’s operation, not the entire thing. Time on type was not necessarily and asset. My RCAF squadron had a pilot with 1900 hours on Lancasters, but didn’t know how to start it without a flight engineer!

So I did it by myself.

I walked around the Lancaster..looked up at it.. kicked the tires…sat in it….learned the control positions and ran the engines, starting them as I started the Merlin in my Mustang…and probably talked to it, like someone gentling a horse. (…psyching myself up to the challenge.) On the day of my flight, someone gave me an old check list, printed on well worn tatty legal-sized page. Folded as if it had spend its lifetime in someone flying suit pocket.

And then I climbed in the rear hatch, scrambled up through the dark cavernous fuselage, settled into the pilot’s seat, strapped in, fired up and flew KB-976 at an air show – with a leg broken the night before. I got a cast five days later.

Thank God for hand-controlled air-brakes.

I have one hour and ten minutes Captain time on the Lancaster – and one hour and ten minutes total time.

One must look to the past to deal with our challenge.
Reading Dick Bach’s books is a good starting point. His view of the aircraft/pilot relationship is one of the best. He is especially good with old aircraft.

Now, after I have offered all of this philosophical garbage… remember the Fokker Dr.1 is like no other aircraft on your first flight, no matter what your previous experience might be! It is an experience that will remain in your thoughts forever!!

Charles Boddington launched me on my first flight and that hour is indelibly imprinted to be revived whenever I want to remember moments of anxiety, exhilaration and triumph.
Lynn

joepilot · 7 June 2009, 07:16 AM

Blue Max Aviation Dr.1 - Outstanding words. Yes electrical smell is very riveting. As I look back on my flight training from my father - I have a great appreciation for the "feel of flight" he imprinted on my soul. Over the years it is amazing what my ears spoken to me in flight and that I have learned to listen to the jet. Great words, thank you.

Joepilot
√6

Joe Perkel · 7 June 2009, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue Max Aviation DR1

"...Flight should be a sensing of everything around you. Vibrations, tremors, sounds, smells… An aircraft speaks to you as a partner in the relationship..."

"...A whiff of glycol in a Mustang was an attention getter..."

"...Electrical smells another riveting stimulus...."

"...A rattling or rumbling sound from an engine whose normal note is part of your life..."

"...A tremor through the control column, rudder pedals, or seat of your pants… the scent of overheated metal to indicate something out of the ordinary...."

"...Those who mess around with World War One replicas, and other antique concepts, are really using a Time Machine to escape from today’s, non-challenging approach to flight. However, by doing so, they raise the potential of trouble...."

"...The testing of our types of aircraft requires a special touch, a special pilot, a special person who has maintained the ancient rituals,..."

"...There is nothing to say that the one who built the aircraft is not that special person, even if his experience is limited...."

"...It must become familiar to you, an extension of your own body and mind..."

"...I started the Merlin in my Mustang…and probably talked to it, like someone gentling a horse. (…psyching myself up to the challenge.) ..."

"...the aircraft/pilot relationship is one of the best. He is especially good with old aircraft. Flight is a religion to Dick as reflected in Jonathan Livingstone Seagull."

"...Now, after I have offered all of this philosophical garbage… "

Lynn

Philosophical garbarge?,..hardly! Quite the little gold mine of nuggets in this single posting. My sincerest thanks for taking a moment to share this invaluable wisdom.

hank jarrett · 7 June 2009, 10:31 AM

There was a discussion started on the Pilots Reports thread that started to get pretty technical and we are going to move over here to continue it. I think that thread is the right place for us to put our posts in on how our planes feel, fly and handle from a non-test pilot view. The part we move here will look at more of the safety and technical side including how we can derive what makes our machines handle well or poorly, and more importantly, how we can fix it. I would recommend anyone interested in this area read the other thread too.
Hank

TexasGR · 8 June 2009, 11:14 AM

Hank:

Yes, I can see this thread is a better fit.

I know I looked at this before, but either there was small section that became acrimonious, or I confused it with another thread, so I abandoned it.

Scanning it, I can see now that there is some very valuable information throughout, in particular on initial testing, so I'll need to take a day or so to read this thread thoroughly.

Once I've done that, I'll ask my question again if it still makes sense and wasn't answered earlier.

Thanks,
Brian