Three miles out from the airport, the pilot of the C-340A announced he was doing a straight-in. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) determined the larger, faster airplane was not configured for landing as its approach speed was 180 knots. The published flap extension speed for the C-340A is 160 knots, and the landing gear extension speed is 140 knots.

Muscle memory, checklist use, and procedures often go hand in hand. Had the pilot of the C-340A flown the traffic pattern for the airport beginning with maneuvering for 45-degree angle entry on to the downwind at midfield, he might have remembered to slow down the airplane and configure it for landing.

NTSB reports are full of similar but thankfully mostly non-fatal events that can occur when the pilot on a straight-in forgets the landing gear—often at a non-towered airport. 

At a towered airport, the controllers often contact the pilot and advise them that their gear is not down with a simple “check gear” query. NTSB investigations into gear-up landings often include a statement from the pilot, who note that the straight-in, devoid of the usual cues such as turning on to the 45 or downwind, resulted in forgetting to run the checklist, which included the action of lowering the landing gear with the phrase “gear down and locked.”

Many instructors, myself included, advocate for at least three gear checks: downwind, base, and final. In the faster aircraft such as a twin, the landing gear is often deployed on the 45 as a means to help slow down the aircraft.

In a fixed-gear airplane you don’t have to worry about the landing gear position, but checking the position of the gear if possible (like looking out the window in the high wing aircraft) is a good habit.

Verbalizing the checklist on each leg of the pattern is also a good habit. There may be things that are “deferred,” such as putting the propeller to full as one does on final in a complex airplane to facilitate a go-around if needed.

My U.S. Air Force Academy-trained instructor beat this into me—and recitation had to end with “check list complete” in my authoritative pilot voice.

On a straight-in approach, you miss the cues for aircraft configuration changes, such as power reduction and addition of flaps.

Here’s a teachable moment: dropping all the flaps at once can potentially bend metal if the aircraft is outside of V_FE, and will trigger a pitch change that catches many novice pilots by surprise. The natural reaction is to take all the flaps out in one movement, which makes the bad situation worse.

I demonstrate this to the learner at an appropriate altitude and at a flap-friendly speed in the practice area just so they know what it feels like and what it does to the airplane and why it is not something you want to mess with when you are close to the ground.

We then discuss how the incremental deployment of flaps prevents the pitch surprise, as does following the prelanding checklist on each leg of the pattern to achieve the published speeds for each leg as recommended by the manufacturer.

Poor Approach, Poor Landing

One of the first lessons to be taught to the novice pilot is that a poor approach results in a poor landing. If you are behind the airplane, as in slow to reduce throttle, start the descent, deploy flaps, that landing will be ugly. This can happen during straight in approaches as the legs of the pattern are a reminder to the pilot to run the checklist and reconfigure the aircraft.  Instead, the pilot relies on experience and knowledge of the aircraft performance to determine when to do configuration changes. This experience is best gained with a seasoned CFI next to you and flown in an appropriate environment, like at a towered airport when the pilot requests and ATC grants a straight-in approach.

Straight-ins at non-towered airports are especially dangerous as we learned by the Watsonville collision. When an aircraft comes bombing into a pattern already occupied by other aircraft, it is very much like running a red light. There may be someone closer than you think on a collision course. You can’t slam the brakes on an airplane in the air. Entering the pattern on the 45 at pattern altitude provides better situational awareness as it gives the pilot more of an opportunity to scan for traffic, see and avoid it.

It is for this reason many instructors discourage their learners from doing straight-in approaches. While I agree they are not a good idea at a non-controlled airport, they should be, at the very least, briefed and the scenario flown in the practice area so the learner knows when to refer to the checklist, when to reduce power, when to lower the flaps, etc.

Outside a request from a tower, there are times when a straight-in is called for, such as when a magneto fails a few miles outside the traffic pattern and the airport is the closest suitable runway.

This is the scenario I use with my learners, as I experienced it in the real world as a learner. My CFI demonstrated the proper technique, troubleshooting the issue to no avail, calling my attention to the diminished engine power available and sight picture, and ensuring that we had the runway made before applying flaps and reducing the power to idle.

Many years later, I was the CFI and had this happen. The straight-in and landing was a nonevent. The chief mechanic brought me fragments of metal that had been the left magneto to show my ground school class.

Another scenario where a straight-in is appropriate is when the weather that was VFR or MVFR drops to IFR and you, the noninstrument-rated pilot in the non-IFR-equipped aircraft need to get down quickly.

Don’t Be That Pilot

There are pilots who, when they hear another pilot on the radio state they are planning to do a straight-in approach, will scold the pilot or even threaten to call the FAA on them. This is not a discussion to have on the radio.

I have witnessed this at nontowered airports. I tell my learners not to engage that person. Focus on flying the airplane. If you are the pilot doing the straight-in for any of the above mentioned reasons—weather, a mechanical issue, or perhaps even an airsick passenger that necessitates getting on the ground quickly but not declaring an emergency—wait until you get on the ground before you get into a “discussion” with the other pilot. 

The post Why Straight-In Approaches Aren’t So Straightforward appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1976 Cessna 340A.

I do not think the Cessna 340 ever set the general aviation market afire, but I always considered the airplane a sweet spot among light twins. It was larger than the 310, with cabin-class features like a center aisle and an airstair door that meant passengers did not have to clamber through the front door and over the seats to reach the roomy cabin.

The 340 was not big enough, however, to be mistaken for one of its larger relatives, such as the 414 Chancellor or 421 Golden Eagle. Those airplanes had a Part 135 feel, while the 340 was clearly a Part 91 machine just right for hauling one’s spouse and children to distant vacation destinations.

I grew accustomed to seeing the 340 belonging to an airport neighbor at Sussex, New Jersey (KFWN). He flew regularly, so I often saw the aircraft’s arrivals and departures. A few years ago, after falling out with the airport’s owner—about what, I am not sure— he decamped to Blairstown (1N7), just over 20 nm away. I watched from the gas pumps as he left for good, accelerating hard and lifting off about a third of the way down the 3,500-foot runway. Impressive.   

This 1976 340A has 6,712 hours on the airframe, 309 hours on its left engine and 1,146 hours on its right engine since overhaul. Both engines have undergone RAM VI conversions for increased performance. The left and right propellers have accumulated 322 hours and 1,146 hours, respectively, since overhaul.

The pane includes a PMA-7000B audio panel, Garmin GNS 530W GPS/Nav/Com, GNC 255, GTX345 transponder, S-Tec 3100 autopilot with yaw damper and trim, Aspen Pro-1000 MFD, Garmin 796 GPS, WX500 Stormscope, Shadin fuel totalizer, and JPI EDM760 engine analyzer.

Other notable equipment includes full de-ice boots, RAM vortex generators, factory air conditioning, built-in emergency oxygen, partial copilot instruments, Cleveland wheels and brakes, and composite tail cone. The aircraft’s interior was refurbished in 2017, and the exterior was repainted in 2023.

Pilots who wish to give family, friends, and business associates a smooth, comfortable airliner experience in a scaled-down package should take a look at this 1976 Cessna 340A, which is available for $365,000 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Things to Think About When Moving Up to a Light Twin
• FLYING Magazine: The Most Fuel-Efficient Piston Twins
• Plane & Pilot: Cessna 340

The post This 1976 Cessna 340A Is a Cabin-Class, Load-Carrying ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1978 Cessna 340A.

General aviation was booming during the 1960s and ’70s, and like many aircraft manufacturers, Cessna was looking for niches to fill. The company saw an opportunity in the market between its light twin, the 310, and the heavy, pressurized cabin-class 414 Chancellor. The 340 was aimed at people who liked the 310’s performance but wanted a few “big airplane” features, such as more cabin space, pressurization, air conditioning, and an airstair passenger door.

Early 340s came with 285 hp engines, but the 340A was upgraded to 310 hp per side. Many 340s received more powerful engines during overhauls or through conversions from companies like Ram, which offered modifications to boost horsepower to as much as 335. There were even STOL kits available for the 340 that made it an extremely flexible, traveling multiengine aircraft.

This 1978 Cessna 340A has 7,917 hours on the airframe, 1,469 hours on engine 1 since overhaul and 670 on engine 2 since overhaul. Both props have 187 hours since overhaul. The aircraft’s fuel bladders were replaced and a windshield hot plate installed in 2014. The cabin has six seats and the 340A’s useful load is 1,820 pounds. The 340A’s interior was refurbished in 2008 and the aircraft received new paint in 2013.

This aircraft’s panel includes dual Garmin GNS 430W nav/comms, a radar altimeter, weather radar, Garmin GTX 345 transponder, Garmin GMA 340 audio panel, and an Insight graphic engine monitor.

If you are looking for a fast light twin with pressurization and other comfort features that give it the feel of a small airliner, you should check out this 1978 Cessna 340A, which is available for $239,900 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com

• FLYING Magazine: Things to Think About When Moving Up to a Light Twin
• Plane & Pilot: Cessna 340

The post Cessna’s Pressurized, Air-Conditioned 340A Is a Family-Friendly ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.