On 07/16/2012 04:11 PM, Gilles Thesee wrote:
> As a flight instructor and Rotax 914 homebuilder and flyer, I would
> strongly insist on monitoring engine parameters (viz manifold pressure
> and rpm) when setting takeoff/go around power. It is naturally easier
> with conventional gauges with clear legal redlines : one gets quickly
> used to watch the needles reaching the redline from the corner of one's
> eye.
I have quite a few instruments in my modified full width panel. But the
upper three holes are occupied by three conventional gauges: 1) the
manifold pressure, 2) the fuel pressure, 3) the RPM gauge.
These are the only instruments I monitor briefly during the T/O. And as
you say, a needle in some colored zone in a familiar angle can be
absorbed in the blink of an eye, much faster than reading a number and
interpreting its value.
Other instruments are located further down in the panel. Issues like
overtemperatures or even loss of oil pressure can wait until at least a
survivable altitude has been reached.
Further I agree that during a go around it is the worst time to have a
failure of something. I don't think you can safeguard against anything.
A warning light or buzzer would be meaningless in such a situation,
unless of course the go around is optional, but then what was the
purpose of the go around anyway?
The only time I executed a go around was when I was on an announced
short final upwind, while suddenly a twin engine aircraft emerged over
the top of the hill and decided to perform a downwind landing on the
same runway. Not sure what I would have done during an overboost, but
probably I would have opted to get out of there anyway. I don't remember
looking at the gauges I have to admit. Just what I said, some risks are
unavoidable.
Frans
|