Tips & tricks from our readers

General Aviation News has a very active community of readers who comment on our stories. 

Most of the time comments are about a story and how much the person enjoyed it. Other times commenters are disagreeing with what the story says or with another commenter.

Interspersed with these comments are tips and tricks that our readers have discovered through their own flying.

In this new feature, we present some of those tips and tricks. If you have your own tips or tricks you’d like to share, please send them to [email protected] with Tips & Tricks in the subject line.

A Gut-Wrenching Decision

The needless fatality described in the NTSB accident report “Flight into IMC fatal for pilot” invokes a couple of timeless aviation adages: “There are old pilots and bold pilots, but very few old bold pilots” and “I’d rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air than in the air wishing I was on the ground,” says William Green.

Just about every pilot has been in that situation at least once and most of us old timers have been there numerous times. It’s almost always a gut-wrenching decision.

You initiated the flight for a specific and often important purpose, and there will be consequences for not completing it as planned. It might be that you’ll miss a business appointment or sleeping in your own bed rather than a motel room. The reasons for accepting the risk that the weather might not be as bad as forecast are good ones.

What all too often causes the decision maker to make the wrong choice is the attitude of “I can handle this.” The real culprit is that none of us can envision dying — that only happens to those other idiots who took off knowing the flight would be risky. The simple fact is NO risk should be acceptable when it can be avoided by tying down the aircraft and waiting for the circumstances to improve until the flight can be made safely.

After reading this and other similar accident reports, most of us likely ask ourselves would we have done the proper thing in that situation. Would we have allowed the pressure to get there and the perceived estimation of our own flying skills overcome that voice telling us “This is a bad idea.”

What makes accident reports such as this one so valuable is that we can benefit from the wrong decisions those pilots made and be reminded that it could happen to us if we don’t prioritize safety above all other considerations.

Hand Propping

In response to Attempt to hand prop 182 goes awry, Wild Bill notes: Hand propping is a high risk proposition, and requires strict mitigation of risk to be safe. But it can be done safely, and has been done safely hundreds of times a year, ever since Orville and Wilbur started the first airplane engine over 100 years ago.

Some tips for solo hand propping safely:

Throttle setting: An aircraft should start and run with the throttle at idle. Proper priming technique ensures this. Higher settings means more thrust, which increases risk. Starting at idle ensures minimal thrust against whatever method we’re using to hold the aircraft in place. It also means that if there’s a failure and the aircraft “escapes,” it’ll be traveling a lot slower.

Brakes – especially parking brakes: Don’t trust ’em. Students have set the brakes on aircraft that we then moved by hand. Yes, it felt pretty heavy, but still moved! Chock BOTH wheels because an aircraft can pivot on one chocked wheel. In non-electric-equipped aircraft, modify a set of chocks by adding some line, enough so that one chock can be set in front of each wheel, and a tail that can be lead into the cockpit. You then chock just the front side of the wheels with that set of chocks, start the aircraft, climb in, and once set, pull the chocks from inside. If they get stuck, give it a little throttle, then idle, the aircraft wheels should rebound off the chocks, hold there with brakes and pull the chocks.

On tailwheel aircraft: Keep the tail tied down while starting. Once running at a low idle, and you’re sure things are under control, then you can untie the tail and climb in. Here again, an extra long line, with the right knot, can make that possible from inside the cockpit.

Limit the Run Time: When hand propping, turn off the fuel valve. A great many hand propping accidents involve aircraft running away, and colliding with things, usually expensive or immoveable things. We can mitigate some of this risk by limiting the amount of available fuel. We open the fuel valve, allow the system to fill, prime the engine, then close the valve. This should provide enough fuel to start and enter the aircraft, where you can then turn the valve back on and proceed. If things go bad, the engine will run out of fuel, and stop of its own accord, maybe before the aircraft gets across the ramp and into the side of a hangar or other aircraft. Most aircraft will run at idle for about a minute, more or less (your mileage may vary), with the valve off. This is easy enough to check. Next time you shut down, simply do so by closing the fuel valve and timing it.

Like every operation in aviation, it requires risk assessment, followed by mitigation of risk, which allows us to perform that operation safely. If we can’t mitigate risk, then the decision becomes whether the remaining risk is worth it. But that’s an entire topic all by itself.

A Good Investment

In response to Sonex lands on top of another airplane, Sam Parsons notes: Landing lights with a wig wag feature and strobes are well worth the investment as it makes you hard to miss visually on final.

When I see someone waiting to take the runway when I am on final I am wired and waiting to pull the trigger on the go around and sidestep.

The Mk1 eyeball [A pilot’s unaided vision] is the primary instrument and its misuse was the key element that contributed to this accident. The radio is backup, but as it may not be there, do all you can to stand out visually.

Stabilized approaches 

Adding to the discussion of One Pilot’s View: A Stable Approach, Cary Alburn notes: As the saying goes, practice makes perfect. But as another saying goes, perfect is the enemy of good enough.

In the dynamic environment of flying, and especially in approaches and landings, expecting each one to be perfect will mean excessive go-arounds. So a perfectly executed stable approach followed by a greasy smooth landing every time is an unattainable goal.

Every pilot should create reasonable limits for himself/herself that say “this is good enough” and continue to land, or “this isn’t good enough” and go around. With enough practice, “this is good enough” will happen most of the time.

The Flare

John Swallow added his thoughts about stable approaches as well: With advancing years, hours, and number of landings comes the realization that there’s only one place in the circuit that is of real importance: The flare. Regardless of what went on before hand, in the flare you strive to be at the right attitude, the right altitude, and on speed.

You can have the damnedest circuit ever executed since Wilbur broke ground at Kitty Hawk, but you must nail altitude, attitude, and speed in the flare. And with increasing experience will come the knowledge of what to do to achieve that end regardless of what preceded it.

I’ve been flying since the middle of the last century and in over 60 years of flying, I’ve only overshot once due to an “unstable approach” — and it wasn’t so much unstable as just high on final. The runway was long enough to safely land, but the landing would have been long and I would have become the object of “ridicule and scorn” from the assembled “judges” drinking morning coffee at the flying club.

I have also started side slipping right from the downwind position, maintaining the slip through base to final with airspeed slowly falling and altitude decreasing right into the flare. Technically, not a “stable’ approach,” but a controlled approach…

With experience will come the knowledge of knowing not only IF an approach is unstable, but whether it’s unstable AND untenable…

Fuel Efficiency

William A. Quirk, llI, an Alaskan pilot, says he agrees with Ben Visser’s  tips to improve fuel efficiency in your airplane. First, I lower my engine rpms on cruise flights between 2,250 to 2,350 rpms. Then, I use maximum engine lean, which saves one gallon of fuel each flying hour compared to flying with a rich mixture.

I don’t compromise high engine temperatures on my cylinders because I have an engine analyzer for all four of them on my Lycoming O-320 engine. I never let the CHT rise above 330°F and the EGT above 1,350°F. This gives me safe temperatures for the cylinders and maximum lean that safely lowers fuel consumption.

I have currently run out my Lycoming engine with 2,040 flying hours and my leaning procedure has been excellent the entire duration.

Story updated January 15, 2021 to correct chalk to chock.