Cyprus-Forum.com

[Cap]

Cessna landing in Paphos.
I personally loved the video, have no idea how well this kid did...
Your views?

[kurupetos]

I have been following his videos for some time now. The kid is remarkable. Congrats boy.

My name is Demetris Gregoriou and I am 18 year old aspiring private pilot from Cyprus.

[Paphitis]

Didn't watch the entire video.

But I noticed he was running a lean fuel/air mixture (red lever next to throttle) at low attitude, which is not right. That's pretty poor engine management. His scan for other traffic was poor. He needs to learn how to break the sky into segments and focus into each segment to pick out aircraft in the distance. By constantly moving your head, you will not see the plane flying directly towards you which would be a mere dot. Needs to learn some Human Factors and Aeromedicine on how the brain processes visual cues.

He did not look out before turning and maintain it throughout the turn.

Just poor Airmanship really or Treat and Error Management, common in training.

Approach was constant. Good if he maintained good speed control and Rate of Descent.

Radio procedures were non standard.

He is learning which is all good. Pretty good for someone learning.

He use to work for Cyprus Airways btw before learning to fly. Was going to get a job if the airline didn't go under.

[Cap]

Wow...
Pretty unnerving when all you see is a bunch of teenagers...

[Robin Hood]

I agree with Pahitis comments and, as a simple ppl holder (not current) and not claiming to be an expert I will yield to his commercial experience........ but:

He is learning which is all good. Pretty good for someone learning

Are you saying he is a student pilot? He has to be qualified with a ppl otherwise he could not carry passengers .... which he obviously was. He should not be learning ......he should be gaining experience not learning with passengers on board!

FWIW:

I heard no ATC traffic reference that the 1000’ altimeter setting was on the QNE (height above the runway) or the QNH (altitude amsl), although not much difference on this approach but he was flying over a lot of hills. I don’t know what Paphos use, I assume QNE for light aircraft?

He reported ‘On Finals’ after he had turned, instead of telling the tower he was ‘Turning Finals’, giving the tower time to abort his ‘finals’ before clearing him ‘to land’.

I also found it strange that he turned on the landing lights whilst still on the downwind leg? Normally you would do this as you turned onto the final approach or late on the base leg. It is the tower that needs to see the lights on a small aircraft at 1-2NM as it does on a large one at maybe 10-12NM ......... not drivers on the Paphos-Limassol hiway!

PAPI (two red and two white – horizontal array) are set for a commercial airliner’s approach at a 3 Degree descent angle. It would show all white to a light aircraft with a steeper descent angle, so would be pretty meaningless for a 172.

IMO: his base leg was too far downwind of the runway threshold and seemed to be too low.

Also he ‘flew’ the aircraft onto the runway and didn’t flare, so that it would effectively ‘stall’ onto the tarmac and stay on the ground, too easy to bounce if you keep the airspeed high enough to still fly.

A light aircraft usually has a circuit height of 1000’ QNE and a base leg much closer to the threshold of the runway. Reason: if using the runway for both large civil aircraft and light aircraft, a long final (as he did) at 60-65kts (?) by a light aircraft could impact on jet traffic on a final approach behind him travelling at maybe three times his speed but waiting for him to ‘clear’ the active runway to get their clearance to land.

I also noticed Paphos has no ‘fast turnoff’ from the runway, another reason for flying a tighter base leg ........... you can get out of the commercial jets way that much quicker after landing.

His ‘mechanical’ skills in actually flying the aircraft were OK ....... but that is the easy bit.

[Cap]

Anybody else?

English please.

[Paphitis]

As with everything else, Robin Hood has no clue on what he is talking about, but still has pages of pointless waffle to add.

QNH not QNE. The most fundamentally stupid and most dangerous error, which is drummed into a pilot before they are allowed to fiddle with an Altimeter.

Furthermore, Landing Lights are turned on as early as 15 nms out. The idea is to be seen by other aircraft outbound.

In addition, students with a Restricted Licence or whatever they call that these days is allowed to carry passengers.

Jesus Christ!

[Robin Hood]

As with everything else, Robin Hood has no clue on what he is talking about, but still has pages of pointless waffle to add.
QNH not QNE. The most fundamentally stupid and most dangerous error, which is drummed into a pilot before they are allowed to fiddle with an Altimeter.
Furthermore, Landing Lights are turned on as early as 15 nms out. The idea is to be seen by other aircraft outbound.
In addition, students with a Restricted Licence or whatever they call that these days is allowed to carry passengers.
Jesus Christ!

I defer to your knowledge that is obviously more updated than I have. It should be, you say you make a living out of it ........... I simply expressed my view based on my experience of learning to fly on an identical aeroplane in the late 80's.

When I learned to fly at Hawarden(BAe) and later Liverpool, where I gained an IMC and night rating, the rule was to use QNE in the circuit, as it gives the altimeter reading as the height above the runway. Once leaving the airfield I was taught to use QNH, when 'departure' gave the altimeter setting ........ which they always stated as “XXXX QNH” as it gave me height amsl which relates to the heights referenced on an aviation map.

But there again with only some 137 hrs on the Cessna 172 /Piper 181 Warrior and 53 hrs on the Cessna152 learning the basics to get a CAA PPL, it was all wasted because obviously my CAA qualified instructors had no clue what they were talking about!

Landing lights at 15 miles on a light aircraft, ..... all he would have on would be the beacon and strobes...... a light aircraft at 15 miles from the airfield, would not even be anything like in a landing configuration, and would not be lining up for a landing against departing traffic ..... unless he was stupid! Not a very intelligent remark for a 'professional'!

An outbound aircraft would be unlikely to even see landing lights of 172 at 15 miles! As a qualified pilot, you must know that you point the front end up toward the sky by pulling the column back when taking off or you end up making a big hole in the perimeter fence .......and ‘going by road’! I have yet to see an aircraft that takes off in level flight let alone nose down so that he can see the landing lights of any traffic heading straight at him!

There is now a ‘sports’ pilot rating and a ‘recreational’ pilots rating both have restrictions. These did not exist when I learned to fly. You were either a qualified pilot empowered to carry non-fare- paying passengers or you were not. I apologise for my lack of updated knowledge.

Let’s face it Paphitis; you are no more than a rather unpleasant, ignorant, arrogant, self opinionated, boastful, know-all that completely lacks the ability to engage in a civilised discussion and cannot tolerate the concept that you could possibly be wrong ........ on anything ........ and you frequently are wrong !

[CBBB]

Let’s face it Paphitis; you are no more than a rather unpleasant, ignorant, arrogant, self opinionated, boastful, know-all that completely lacks the ability to engage in a civilised discussion and cannot tolerate the concept that you could possibly be wrong ........ on anything ........ and you frequently are wrong !

Who said that?

[Robin Hood]

Let’s face it Paphitis; you are no more than a rather unpleasant, ignorant, arrogant, self opinionated, boastful, know-all that completely lacks the ability to engage in a civilised discussion and cannot tolerate the concept that you could possibly be wrong ........ on anything ........ and you frequently are wrong !

Who said that?

I did! You have a problem with that?

You think that does not describe Paphitis' childish and often foul and offensive responses on this forum? As Milti has pointed out, I will stick to my opinion unless it is proven to be wrong ...... but I don't resort to ' .... colourful language' just because someone disagrees with me. Proving something wrong is not difficult to do .....if the responder has the facts, as he shows in this thread ..... I got something wrong and I apologised. At least he doesn't resort to sarcasm like some I could mention.