fbpx

 

  • Re: Cruise RPM

    by » 2 days ago


    I have been involved in GA for nearly 3 decades and nothing surprises me about crazy regulations that don't make much sense. I have given you an insight into some of the aircraft regulation madness but the pilot licensing craziness is even worse. Trying to understand the rules and remain compliant is not trivial in the UK. Even those tasked with explaining the rules to owners and pilots don't always understand them fully.

    Most of this is brought about due to legacy standards or trying to adjust international standards to make them work locally.


  • Re: Cruise RPM

    by » 2 days ago


    Yes everything Kevin says is correct, it's not dangerous though, our POH has the correct TO roll etc to accommodate the pitch setting (indeed 4800 static for my CT2k also) and lower power.

    IIRC for my AC it's 230m to clear a 50t object as an example.

    Another silly rule is that all Flight Design CT's have the selectable wing tanks disabled and instead are interconnected... this means if you don't park perfectly level your fuel drains from the higher tank to the lower tank and will overflow out the breather if you're fairly full leaving a nice puddle of fuel under your wing waiting to catch fire! 😤   


  • Re: Cruise RPM

    by » 2 days ago


    The most annoying mandatory mod on the Eurostar was the shortening of the joystick. If you are tall like me, it means that your legs get in the way since the end of the stick now hits your knees. The rationale for this was that 2 adults could exert too much force on the stick and exceed the maximum G loading. 


  • Re: Cruise RPM

    by » 2 days ago


    That is annoying! As pilots we should be trusted to fly our aircraft within it's limits... you wouldn't try and fly at 20kts knowing the stall speed is 40kts for example (random numbers).

    The rationale for my fuel selector issue is a pilot was doing low level circuits of his passengers house whilst taking pictures with only around 20L of fuel on board, the engine stopped (fuel starvation) and he had to land in a field, it was believed he was also out of balance not helping what little fuel there was be at the correct end of the selected wing tank (the root).

    So now we have to cross feed our tanks because of pilot error... but only in the UK of course.


  • Re: Cruise RPM

    by » 2 days ago


    Hi Karl,

    ".........., it's not dangerous though, our POH has the correct TO roll etc to accommodate the pitch setting (indeed 4800 static for my CT2k also) and lower power."

    Artificially reducing the engines output, below what it is rated for, must increase risk, for the reasons I mentioned earlier.

    It matters not one jot, that the POH has been adjusted to accommodate such bureaucratic nonsense - your aircraft will not perform as well as an identical aircraft, in another jurisdiction, where such limitations do not exist, thus increasing the risk of an incident.😈


You do not have permissions to reply to this topic.