No more runups

On a separate note though, how many people do a thorough post-flight check and does it change the way you subsequently do a pre-flight? If you're the only operator of your plane and it lives in a secured hanger, would you consider a post flight walk-around of any value to speed up your next pre-flight?


Wiping off bugs, cleaning off oil, and polishing the windscreen gets me up close to every part of the airframe. Cleaning is inspecting.
 
I do a quick post flight, check the oil, do a walk around looking for anything obviously amiss. I always check my fuel tanks to check how I did with fuel management between the two tanks.

John
 
I do a quick post flight, check the oil, do a walk around looking for anything obviously amiss. I always check my fuel tanks to check how I did with fuel management between the two tanks.

John
Checking the oil on a hot engine makes my fingers hurt just thinking about it!
 
Checking the oil on a hot engine makes my fingers hurt just thinking about it!
That's what a Leatherman's for! I do it frequently on flight school planes that have just been flown by a student or renter of unknown capabilities.

Ryan
 
Post-flight oil check?
Well, not exactly a post-flight oil check, but with a busy flight school, it might as well be. The last guy may have landed it 15-30 minutes before, and there's no way I'm taking off without verifying it has a decent oil level.

Ryan
 
A post flight oil check always seems to indicate about 20qts of oil, with only a 12qt capacity.
 
Post-flight oil check?

How do you know how much you have?

I look under the belly -- covered in oil? There's a problem...

By the time you have the plane tied down, all the oil that belongs in the sump is pretty much going to be there. Hot oil flows quite quickly.
 
The only time you shouldn't do a run up is when you are in too big a hurry to sump the tanks either. That's so when the engine quits from the water in the fuel that you didn't know about it will happen at a higher altitude because you didn't waste the fuel in the lines by doing the run up. That will give you more time to find an empty spot on the ground upon which to crash land your lazy ass.
 
The only time you shouldn't do a run up is when you are in too big a hurry to sump the tanks either. That's so when the engine quits from the water in the fuel that you didn't know about it will happen at a higher altitude because you didn't waste the fuel in the lines by doing the run up. That will give you more time to find an empty spot on the ground upon which to crash land your lazy ass.

If I have water in my tanks, I have bigger problems - as in as soon as I start flying, all that fuel will vent ouverboard.
 
Isn't water heavier than fuel? Won't it be the first thing through the lines after start-up? Or are you worried about the fuel lines that feed from the top of the tank?

The only time you shouldn't do a run up is when you are in too big a hurry to sump the tanks either. That's so when the engine quits from the water in the fuel that you didn't know about it will happen at a higher altitude because you didn't waste the fuel in the lines by doing the run up. That will give you more time to find an empty spot on the ground upon which to crash land your lazy ass.
 
Isn't water heavier than fuel? Won't it be the first thing through the lines after start-up? Or are you worried about the fuel lines that feed from the top of the tank?

Sure, it's heavier. But the lines on many aircraft from the low point of the system to the engine will contain enough fuel to get you into the air if you don't waste it with a useless run up. Happens all to often according to the accident reports.
 
One thing to consider prior to starting that was recommended in an ABS article some time ago. Do your control check before you even start the engine. You'll have a better chance of hearing if something is amiss that might not be enough to affect the feel of the controls. Makes sense and doesn't add anytime to the process.


I always move the controls as I'm rolling out. No one likely reconnected them between flights but you never know what's shifted or how a seat belt might have been routed or what's been placed in the floor at my passenger's feet.

On a separate note though, how many people do a thorough post-flight check and does it change the way you subsequently do a pre-flight? If you're the only operator of your plane and it lives in a secured hanger, would you consider a post flight walk-around of any value to speed up your next pre-flight?
 
CITGFRSS (seat stops) and LCA on the roll.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What does CITGFRSS and Lights, camera, action stand for?
 
The only time you shouldn't do a run up is when you are in too big a hurry to sump the tanks either. That's so when the engine quits from the water in the fuel that you didn't know about it will happen at a higher altitude because you didn't waste the fuel in the lines by doing the run up. That will give you more time to find an empty spot on the ground upon which to crash land your lazy ass.

Because I disagree with you I'm lazy. Wow you sure must be smart.
 
CITGFRSS (seat stops) and LCA on the roll.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What does CITGFRSS and Lights, camera, action stand for?

Not sure about CITGFRSS, but I was taught that lights, camera, action means strobes/landing light/etc. (whatever is appropriate for the conditions), camera meaning the transponder to ALT, and action meaning the takeoff.
 
One thing to consider prior to starting that was recommended in an ABS article some time ago. Do your control check before you even start the engine.


Yes. I do a control check before engine start. I found a
small problem with the controls by doing that, there was a
"click" in the chain and sprocket.
 
Given that a run-up and control check takes a few seconds, I'm wondering what the possibly reasons could be for not doing it aside from the (misguided) notion that it's not necessary or serves no useful purpose? Could it be thinking that goes something like "what I don't know can't hurt me?" Maybe wishful thinking that it's not necessary and that what I'm about to do is so safe and reliable that there's nothing to worry about? In other words, is this a psychological malfunction?

In ten years and roughly 1600 hours of flying bugsmashers I've had a few problems detected on run ups but nothing yet that would have killed me. Have I wasted all those run ups? I've had homeowners insurance for the last ten years too and my house hasn't burned down. Have I wasted those premiums? My answer to both question is that I got a good return on my investment - I sleep very well.
 
By the time you have the plane tied down, all the oil that belongs in the sump is pretty much going to be there. Hot oil flows quite quickly.

It does, but are you sure you're getting a correct indication on the stick?

:dunno:

I dunno -- I've flown rental birds and checked the oil each time, but that's pre-flight, not post-flight.
 
Always do a runup. TWICE I've had mags fail between quick flights with stops for passengers or fuel. They worked great when shutdown and five minutes later one mag is DOA. You won't necessarily notice on the engine monitor while taxiing at idle.
 
Is there any POH that doesn't say to do pre-flight and a run up before every flight?
 
The probability of it breaking between a morning flight and
an afternoon flight is the same as the probability of it breaking
between the last flight of the day and the flight the next day.
Or the likelihood of it breaking on Diana's airplane at Gaston's sometime between the runup on the flight right before she and I went up and our takeoff, only to lead Chip to radio "does your airplane always trail smoke?"

That'll get your attention.
 
So how many do a run up after each trip around the pattern?

How many do a run up during the roll on touch-n-goes?

Why not? A mag could have failed on the last trip around the pattern - I might even argue that it is more likely to fail on that last trip around the pattern that it would if sitting quietly in the hangar for the past two weeks.

Where do you draw the line? Is it really every time the wheels leave the ground?

Tim
 
One thing to consider prior to starting that was recommended in an ABS article some time ago. Do your control check before you even start the engine. You'll have a better chance of hearing if something is amiss that might not be enough to affect the feel of the controls. Makes sense and doesn't add anytime to the process.

I like doing a full range-of-motion check when everyone is strapped in with everything on their lap that's going to be there for take-off. I can check not only that the ailerons and elevator are rigged properly (not likely they aren't) but also that I can move the yoke through it's full range without hitting someones knees or charts (quite likely I can't). I'll leave that check where it is in my run-up flow, but I think I'll start paying closer attention when I move the yoke around after unlocking the controls when I'm getting the plane ready for startup. Thanks for pointing that out.
 
So how many do a run up after each trip around the pattern?

How many do a run up during the roll on touch-n-goes?

Why not? A mag could have failed on the last trip around the pattern - I might even argue that it is more likely to fail on that last trip around the pattern that it would if sitting quietly in the hangar for the past two weeks.

Where do you draw the line? Is it really every time the wheels leave the ground?

Tim
It seems rather reasonable to do the run-up before you take to the sky for the first time since that engine's been running.
 
It does, but are you sure you're getting a correct indication on the stick?

:dunno:

I dunno -- I've flown rental birds and checked the oil each time, but that's pre-flight, not post-flight.
On rentals, I have tried to do pre- and post-checks. I want to see trends. How often, as example, will another renter inform anyone that he added 3 qts engine oil after a 2 hour flight? Otherwise, you're relying only on mx logs and that will most likely be after the fact. This goes for any system and component on the beast.
 
Why not? A mag could have failed on the last trip around the pattern.
In my last case it wasn't a mag, but a throttle cable that got stuck on a touch and go in a taildragger. It was pretty interesting getting it back to the runway with only 1700 RPM or so over the hill country.

Ryan
 
Also important for suction-cup mounted handheld GPS units. On my plane it can interfere with the hand controlling the yoke.

I like doing a full range-of-motion check when everyone is strapped in with everything on their lap that's going to be there for take-off. I can check not only that the ailerons and elevator are rigged properly (not likely they aren't) but also that I can move the yoke through it's full range without hitting someones knees or charts (quite likely I can't). I'll leave that check where it is in my run-up flow, but I think I'll start paying closer attention when I move the yoke around after unlocking the controls when I'm getting the plane ready for startup. Thanks for pointing that out.
 
Runup - the instructor that gave me my flight review (with no "b" word :wink2:) suggested a quick mag check after each taxi back - and in these days of "low" lead 100, I thought it was a good idea - lead fouling happens.

Preflight - Just got back from an acro contest and I watched the tech inspection guy do about 4 or 5 aircraft (external visual inspections). I think he only gave one a no-comment green light. On the rest he found problems of varying degrees of significance (loose exhaust system banging on (and wearing) the cowl, loose jamb nut on an aileron push rod, sagging tailwheel spring, excess slop in elevator linkage...).
 
Runup - the instructor that gave me my flight review (with no "b" word :wink2:) suggested a quick mag check after each taxi back - and in these days of "low" lead 100, I thought it was a good idea - lead fouling happens.

We do a hot mag check, too, just before pulling the mixture, to make sure the switch is shorting both mags and a P-lead hasn't broken off somewhere. Find that sometimes. And don't do it at anything above idle or the exhaust system suffers...

Dan
 
+1 on the hot mag check before shutdown. The first thing I usually do after jumping out of the plane is pull the prop through a bit to get the blades out of the way of the towbar. It's helpful to make sure the prop won't bite.

I used to belong to the "mag check once a day" group - until I had an inflight mag failure and later found I'd flown my return flight through some pretty skanky weather on one mag. That made me a bit more conservative. Only time I've skipped the mag check recently was flying out of Haiti - if the prop was turning I was leaving!!
 
We own our own planes, do our own maintenance in our own hangers and I do all the cleaning. (funny how that works...) I also do much of my own maintenance and 100 hour inspections, and I DO know what I'm looking for.

I do a typical runup, mag check and pre-flight on first flight of the day.

I might do a rolling runup before the next flight, but not always. We just did a 4 hour long mag check before we stopped for fuel, complete with continuous engine monitor checks. I watch the rpm on takeoff, and make sure the fuel tanks aren't hemorrhaging. The tires are obviously fine and we'd fly without suction anyway.

I do a walk around inspection to check for in flight birdy/tree damage when we stop for fuel, and I clean the windshield.

I ground lean for taxi and and do the lights, camera, action thing as I roll onto the runway for take-off.

When we are done for the day I will sometimes do a p-lead check. I do a post flight inspection after we get the plane back in the hanger, unless we have maintenance scheduled before the next flight, or those times when I am just too damn tired. I will know if it has been inspected before the next flight because I will be the one doing it, and I always clean the windshield when I do. It can be a week later but I know I've looked the plane over because I'm the only one who cleans the windshield. :rolleyes2:
 
How many carbs, exhaust systems or oil pumps did you have?

+1 on the hot mag check before shutdown. The first thing I usually do after jumping out of the plane is pull the prop through a bit to get the blades out of the way of the towbar. It's helpful to make sure the prop won't bite.

I used to belong to the "mag check once a day" group - until I had an inflight mag failure and later found I'd flown my return flight through some pretty skanky weather on one mag. That made me a bit more conservative. Only time I've skipped the mag check recently was flying out of Haiti - if the prop was turning I was leaving!!
 
We do a hot mag check, too, just before pulling the mixture, to make sure the switch is shorting both mags and a P-lead hasn't broken off somewhere. Find that sometimes. And don't do it at anything above idle or the exhaust system suffers...

Dan

Oops - I did plenty of LOP mags checks at cruise and 2450RPM in my bonanza :fcross:.
 
NTSB Identification: ERA10FA414
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, August 10, 2010 in Orange, MA
Aircraft: CESSNA 172, registration: N21363
Injuries: 2 Fatal.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.
On August 10, 2010, at 2115 eastern daylight time, a Cessna 172M, N21363, was substantially damaged when it impacted trees and terrain shortly after takeoff from Orange Municipal Airport (ORE), Orange, Massachusetts. The two certificated private pilots on board were fatally injured. Night visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for the flight, destined for Hancock County - Bar Harbor Airport (BHB), Bar Harbor, Maine. The personal flight was conducted under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91.

According to a lineman at ORE, he received a telephone call from one of the pilots earlier in the day to arrange for after-hours fuel service. The pilot and lineman agreed that the pilot would call upon arrival at ORE. The lineman stated that he received the call at 2026, and traveled about 5 minutes from his home to the airport to fuel the airplane. As instructed by the pilots, he serviced the airplane's fuel tanks "to the top" with 26.9 gallons of 100LL aviation fuel. The lineman stated that both pilots appeared "normal and alert." The lineman finished fueling the airplane at 2055, and observed that the pilots did not "sump" the fuel tanks prior to departure.

The pilots requested that the lineman escort them to runway 32, since they were unfamiliar with ORE. Using the airport vehicle, the lineman drove in front of the airplane and directed the pilots to the runway. The lineman sat in the vehicle with the windows open as the pilots conducted an engine run-up prior to departure, and stated that the run-up sounded "normal."

The lineman watched the airplane depart ORE about 2110. He stated that the takeoff seemed "smooth" and "normal," and the engine "sounded like it was getting full power." The lineman observed the airplane make a right turn towards the north after takeoff.

A witness, who was at his home near the departure end of runway 32, heard the accident airplane fly overhead as it took off. He stated that the engine was "spitting and sputtering" and producing popping noises, which seemed to "smooth out" as the airplane turned away. He stated that the airplane appeared to be climbing, but "not as fast" as other airplanes.

Several other individuals witnessed the airplane flying over the town of Orange. They stated that the engine was "sputtering" and "popping." One witness heard the engine "hum" and "get louder and softer" prior to impact. Another witness, located less than a quarter-mile from the accident site, stated that he heard an engine "humming," and thought it was a car speeding down the road. After hearing the sounds of impact, he realized that it was an airplane. He stated that the engine noise prior to impact was "quieter than a normal airplane."

Review of preliminary Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) radar data revealed that, at 2110:10, a radar target correlated to be the accident airplane was observed northwest of ORE at 1,200 feet mean sea level (msl). The target tracked roughly northeast and climbed to 1,400 feet msl over the next 30 seconds, then tracked northwest and descended to 1,300 feet msl before radar contact was lost at 2110:57. The accident airplane had not contacted any air traffic control or flight service facilities during the accident flight.

The first pilot held a private pilot certificate with a rating for airplane single engine land. On his most recent application for an FAA third-class medical certificate, which was issued in November 2009, he reported 2,788 total hours of flight experience.
The second pilot held a private pilot certificate with a rating for airplane single engine land. His most recent FAA third-class medical certificate was issued in September 2009.

According to FAA records, the airplane was manufactured in 1974, and was equipped with a Lycoming O-320-E2D engine. The airplane's maintenance records were not immediately available for review. The tachometer reading at the accident site was 3256.0 hours.

The wreckage was located at 42 degrees, 35.72 minutes north latitude, 72 degrees, 17.89 minutes west longitude, and approximately 1.2 nautical miles north of the departure end of runway 32 at ORE. The wreckage was examined at the accident scene on August 11, 2010. There was an odor of fuel, and all major components of the airplane were accounted for at the scene.

The initial impact point was identified by freshly cut tree branches found at the base of approximately 70-foot-tall trees located on the crest of a hill, at an elevation of 549 feet. The wreckage path was oriented approximately 60 degrees magnetic and approximately 285 feet in length. Several fragments of plexiglass and both left and right wingtips were found along the path. The main wreckage came to rest among several trees approximately 6 inches in diameter.

The right wing remained attached at the wing root and displayed leading edge crush damage. The leading edge exhibited a concave dent perpendicular to the wing chord, and consistent in size with trees in the vicinity of the wreckage, approximately 2/3 outboard of its span. The fuel tank was ruptured and absent of fuel. The left wing was largely separated at the root, though a small amount of wing skin and control cables remained attached to the fuselage. The wing exhibited extensive crush damage along the entire span. The right horizontal stabilizer remained attached, and the left horizontal stabilizer was separated at its root. The leading edges of both horizontal stabilizers displayed damage consistent with impact with trees. The vertical stabilizer was separated at its base, and remained attached at the rudder attach point. All flight control surfaces were accounted for at the scene. The right aileron remained attached to the wing. The left aileron was found approximately 40 feet north of the main wreckage. The right elevator remained attached. The left elevator was found approximately 10 feet west of the main wreckage. The elevator trim actuator was found in a 5 degree tab-up (nose down) position. The flaps remained attached, and measurement of the flap actuator jackscrew correlated to the retracted position.

Control continuity was established from the ailerons, elevator, elevator trim tab, and rudder to the cockpit area. The cockpit and cabin were substantially impact-damaged. The throttle was found approximately 2 inches aft of the full power position, and was bent approximately 45 degrees to the left about 1 inch from the knob. The mixture control was found in the full rich position. The fuel selector valve was selected to the "BOTH" position.

The airplane was equipped with a two-blade, fixed pitch propeller, which was partially separated from the engine. One blade exhibited S-bending. The opposite blade was bent forward approximately 90 degrees at its mid-span point. Both blades exhibited minor scratching.
The engine remained attached to the airframe. Borescope examination of the cylinders revealed no anomalies. The crankshaft could be rotated by hand, and thumb compression and valve train continuity was established on all cylinders. The top spark plugs were removed, and all were clean and light gray in color, and exhibited normal wear. Both left and right magnetos were rotated by hand and produced spark on all towers. The oil pickup screen and fuel filter were intact and void of debris. The carburetor was broken and separated from the engine. The carburetor floats were significantly impact damaged and the carburetor bowl was void of fuel.

Two handheld global positioning system receivers were recovered from the wreckage and retained for examination at the NTSB Vehicle Recorders Laboratory.

The 2052 reported weather conditions at ORE included calm winds, 9 statute miles visibility, a broken ceiling at 8,500 feet, temperature 24 degrees C, dew point 22 degrees C, and an altimeter setting of 29.86 inches of mercury.

Index for Aug2010 | Index of months
http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/Month.asp
I knew one of these guys...

Ryan
 
Back
Top