A_and_C wrote:
Unfortunately " airmanship" has become the label for anything instructors don’t fully undersand but do because they have been told to do it rather than airmanship being common sense applyed to flying.
Instructors are trained to instruct and generally do it well. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they understand why they instruct the way they do.
I am looking at this from both sides……….. I do have an instructors rating.
It was my engineering experience that first set me off on the track of asking if airmanship was being used as common sense applied to aviation or a catch all for things that instructors did not quite understand.
Go to any U.K. Airfield and watch the way people shutdown a Lycoming, it would surprise me if 2% comply with the Lycoming SB on the subject………. but the actions would be perfect for a Gypsy Major…………. Why ? Because that’s what the instructor told them to do……. Why?……….. Because that’s what he was told on the instructors course……. Why ? Because that’s the way that it was done in the past.
A_and_C wrote:
Go to any U.K. Airfield and watch the way people shutdown a Lycoming, it would surprise me if 2% comply with the Lycoming SB on the subject
What SB is that and what does it say? (Most people would refer to the POH and not on an engine SB.)
A_and_C wrote:
and this retains items of "good practice " that have become outdated.
Really? Into the wind is common sense. There are no adverse affects of running up into the wind. It is perfectly safe, and you have full control of the aircraft. Running up with a tail wind, I can think of several potentially dangerous effects, even though they seldom “hit” :smile. Think of engine fire for instance. A tail wind will potentially do more damage. It’s like pointing a blow torch into the wind instead of with the wind. Other things are slippery ground. A tail wheel run up with a strong tail wind, on snow – I mean it will require years of practice to be able do it, and often it would simply be physically impossible. Doing it into the wind is always possible, it always work, even for fresh students.
It really is a no brainer. It is a habit that just work every single time, even though in most circumstances with light wind it makes no practical difference because Murphy seldom pays a visit. This is indeed a typical example of airmanship, because it will miniseries the possibility of Murphy doing his business.
LeSving wrote:
Think of engine fire for instance. A tail wind will potentially do more damage. I
Are you serious? The risk of engine fire during the run-up should dictate that it is done into the wind? Also I don’t follow your explanation that the damage would be worse with a tailwind.
I agree that on a slippery surface it would be easier to stay put with a strong headwind compared to a tailwind.
On the other hand with a strong headwind you will do the run-up at a lower power as the power required to attain the run-up rpm will be lower. The chance of this happening is small, but certainly much larger than the chance of an engine fire during the run-up!
An engine fire during run-up seems highly unlikely to me. All I can say with my very limited experience is that for us the difficulty is mainly even getting the engine temperature above the 50 degree Celsius required for take off in the first place. Apparently the Rotax engine doesn’t produce much heat. It certainly doesn’t care where the wind comes from.
Take a tail wheel aircraft, position it at 90 degrees to a 15 or 20 kt wind, get out and walk away. Watch what happens. If you get distracted that can still happen while you’re at the controls. With that in mind, there’s no point in doing an engine run-up that makes the aircraft jitter around and bounce lightly on its tail wheel while the possibility of yawing into the wind lurks in the background if (for instance) your heel slips off one brake pedal. If that happens facing into the wind you pull the throttle closed and the plane stops.
Yes, some aircraft are forgiving. No, not all interesting and common aircraft are so forgiving. @LeSving’s ‘airmanship’ point is a good one, you may decide on many days and types that it’s not necessary but I think the taxiing default should be to position the plane and controls carefully with respect to the wind.
This is the first time I’ve heard of NOT turning roughly into wind to do run-ups
Me too. I have been flying for a little over three years, PPL for almost two, and until now have always tried to turn roughly into wind.
That is what I was taught, and I didn’t question it until now! I’m pretty sure my Pooley’s check list says ‘into wind’ too (the check list my flying school sold me). The few experienced pilots I fly with do the same.
Until now I had not registered that the POH says nothing about into wind for the power checks (I have read it) so I’ll not be so worried about it in future.
Why do schools teach it? Who knows, perhaps it has the potential to increase brakes off to brakes on chargeable time?!!??
What other uneccessary habits/practices might I have been taught?
I want to share a guide to engine handling by Continental Motors I came across somewhat accidentally, which treats the subject of ground run-up. If you go to page 39 you will find the part about run-up and the reasons why one should turn into the wind to perform the run-up. It also states that one should not clear plug fouling by leaning during run-up… It probably also says lots of other interesting things that I have not had time to read yet 
While I take the point that pointing a taildragger into wind is a very good idea there is very little advantage to be had by scrubing tyres trying to make turns on narrow taxiways just to get a tricycle gear aircraft pointed precisely into wind.
Airborne again says that pilots look in the POH for operating instructions, this should be true but some checklists published in the U.K. are using Gypsy engine practices for Lycoming engined aircraft so I feel I am fighting an uphill struggle to even get POH practice adopted.
As an operator of a number of training aircraft I have been lucky enough to work with a CFI who will adopt practices derived from manufactures publications into the SOP’s. but we are not operating a flying training sausage factory and would prefer to spend a little more time & effort to ensure the student pilots get a well rounded education.
