Phenom 300 Training

The Phenom 300 is an amazing airplane. For a single pilot jet, this Brazilian monster is big, sexy, advanced, fast, and flies high and far.

I just finished up the Phenom 100 to Phenom 300 “Upgrade Experience” course at Embraer CAE Training Services (ECTS) in Dallas, Texas. This five-day course is built to allow pilots already type rated in the Phenom 100 to transition to the Phenom 300. The normal initial type-rating course for the Phenom 300 is seventeen days.

I expected the differences between the two airplanes to be few but I discovered that they are many. It’s no wonder the authorities didn’t want the two airplanes to share a common type-rating.

The first day is all “ground school”. Well, it’s really all ground school because even the “flights” are made in a simulator. But day 1 was all in the classroom. Instructor Lowell spent the session comparing the similarities and differences of the Phenom 100 and the Phenom 300. We reviewed all limitations, memory items, procedures, and systems. For each of these, Lowell presented slides showing tables or photos contrasting the two types of aircraft.

The maximum takeoff weight of the Phenom 300 is 17,968 pounds, which compares to 10,472 pounds for the Phenom 100. With 3,380 pounds of thrust per side, the Phenom 300 has nearly double the thrust of the Phenom 100, giving it significantly better thrust-to-weight ratio. We were warned that the resultant acceleration would make it easy to exceed the relatively low maximum flap extended speed of 180 knots after takeoff. On my first sim session, I learned that it is necessary to pitch to approximately 18 degrees nose up after takeoff to prevent a flap overspeed.

One really nice optional feature of the Phenom 300, which is actually now an option on the Phenom 100 as well, is TCAS II. I have never before flown a G1000 airplane with TCAS II. The symbology is fantastic. With a Resolution Advisory (RA), you don’t only get a vertical speed target, you also get a pitch target. It looks very similar to a highway-in-the-sky box.

One of the many changes from the Phenom 100 to the 300 is the TEST panel. On the Phenom 100, the test panel is comprised of three buttons located to the left of the copilot control wheel. On the Phenom 300, additional test features such as the baggage smoke detector and ice detector, require more space, so the panel has been relocated to the lower left panel ahead of the electrical panel and is now a rotary knob.

The hydraulic system is significantly different. The 100 uses a single electric hydraulic powerpack to pressurize the hydraulic system. Hydraulic system users are the landing gear and brakes. On the 300, the hydraulic system is pressurized by an engine driven pump on each engine. The users include the landing gear and brakes, but also mutli-function spoilers (more on this later), the spring-loaded-rudder-booster system, and the stick pusher. On the 100, the stick pusher uses an electric motor.

The electrical system on the two types are nearly identical, except that the 300 has higher capacity starter-generators.

On the 300, upon activating the starter for the second engine start, the running engine automatically accelerates to 72% N2 to provide more current from that generator for the 2^nd engine start. Curiously, it does this whether or not a GPU is plugged in and supplying power to the aircraft (at least in the simulator).

The 300 has a pressure refueling system. The 100 is fueled over-wing only. The pressure refueling system, also known as a single-point refueling system, is smart. The pilot can pre-select the desired fuel quantity in pounds and the system automatically shuts off when the desired fuel quantity is reached.

The multi-function spoilers serve three purposes: speed brakes, ground spoilers, and roll spoilers. Speed brakes may be deployed at any speed and are very effective in slowing the airplane. They may not be used with flaps. When flaps are extended, the speed brakes automatically stow. Additionally, the speed brakes automatically stow if decelerating below 110 knots and if the thrust levers are advanced. The ground spoilers automatically deploy on landing and during rejected takeoffs. The ground spoilers automatically stow at 30 knots on rollout. The roll spoilers provide supplemental roll control in the low speed flight regime when the flaps are extended (in any position other than up/0).

Another difference between the aircraft is pitch trim control. The Phenom 100 uses trim tabs at the trailing edges of the elevators. The Phenom 300 has a horizontal stabilizer that moves to trim. Tabs at the trailing edges of the elevators are used to lighten control forces automatically.

The Phenom 300 has a ventral rudder under the tailcone that provides yaw damping automatically when the yaw damper control is switched off.

There are two flap panels on each wing of the Phenom 300, as opposed to one flap panel on each wing of the 100. The 300 uses a relatively conventional drive system to actual the flaps, with a single electric motor actuating all of the flap panels simultaneously through mechanical linkages. The Phenom 100 has sophisticated computerized position monitoring system to prevent asymmetric extension of the flaps. There is no mechanical interconnect.

The pneumatic deicer boots on the Phenom 100 are replaced by bleed-air heated leading edges on the wings and horizontal stabilizer of the Phenom 300. Owing to this more sophisticated deicing system, the bleed air system on the Phenom 300 is a bit more complex than that on the 100. Pilots now have manual control of not only the Pressure Regulating Shutoff Valves but also of the Flow Control Valves for pressurization. Under normal circumstances, these are all controlled automatically, however the pilot can manually close any of the valves.

The maneuver profiles of the 300 are a bit simpler than that of the 100. For example, the flap position for all approach and landing maneuvers is position 3. It doesn’t matter if you’re making a precision or non-precision approach, single engine or two engine, and even circling, in all cases you use Flaps 3. Full flaps should be available someday, and then this simplicity will change.

On the 2^nd day, our sim session was a cold, nasty day scenario out of New York’s JFK airport. We learned about how to operate the anti-icing systems, their limitations, and impact on flight procedures. The requirements for use of anti-icing systems on the 300 are identical to those of the 100; engine heat must be used in visible moisture with temperatures of 10C or below, all other anti-icing equipment must be used in visible moisture with temperatures of 5C or below. There are a couple of interesting differences, however. For example, when the wing and stabilizer anti-ice system is enabled on the ground, the surfaces do not begin to heat. Instead, an “ARMED” CAS message is displayed. Approximately at liftoff, the surfaces begin to heat up automatically. Another interesting difference is that the wing and horizontal stabilizer heat have an “anti-ice envelope”. For example, if you attempt to activate the system above 30C, the surfaces do not heat up and an “INHIBIT” CAS message is displayed. Like the 100, approach speeds are significantly higher with the anti-ice systems on.

Also on the 2^nd day, we got our first crack at various types of instrument approaches and the airwork that must be flown on any type rating checkride.

Day 3 was a hot and high scenario. On takeoff out of 6,159 foot elevation Cheyenne, Wyoming with a temperature of 25C, I lost an engine at V1. I was quite pleased with the single engine climb performance, reaching 1,000 feet AGL and cleaning up the flaps quickly. We then came around for an ILS with a single engine missed approach.

My perception is that the 300 requires more rudder force during single engine takeoffs and go-arounds than the 100 does. Although the 300 has a rudder boost system, it also has about double the thrust of the 100. Your legs will feel it. I’ll have to visit the gym a bit more before my next 300 recurrent training.

Also on the 3^rd day, we had the opportunity to practice TCAS II RA response and TAWS escapes, as well as an emergency descent. The emergency descent is made with gear down and speed brakes extended. 9,000+ FPM descent rates are expected.

My instructor got a bit mean toward the end of the sim session, giving me a right generator failure followed by a left engine failure. With a loss of both generators, the electrical system automatically configures to the “Electrical Emergency” mode, isolating the main DC busses and keeping the emergency and central busses powered. In Electrical Emergency mode on the 300, you lose ALL trims. This was a big shock to me. You don’t even have backup elevator trim. Changes in airspeed yield big changes in elevator force. It took quite a bit of strength and stamina to limp the airplane back to the runway on a single engine. With no flaps and no normal brakes, the landing roll was long. It was good to practice this worst-case scenario.

Day 4 was essentially a mock checkride. This session and the checkride are based out of JFK again. This checkride is like every other type rating checkride you might have already taken. The tasks that generally must be performed include steep turns, stalls, unusual attitude recoveries, two non-precision approaches, one of which must be hand-flown and one of which must have a course reversal, two single-engine ILS approaches, one of which must be hand-flown, a single-engine missed approach, a balked landing, a visual approach, and a no flap landing. There’s also a circle-to-land approach thrown in there somewhere.

Day 5 was the oral and practical test. On the oral, if you know the limitations, memory items, and basic systems functionality, you’re all set. There are no trick questions. The night before, I prepared by studying over dinner at Vito's Restaurant on the south edge of DFW airport. I highly recommend it.

I love this airplane. The design is very well thought out and the performance is breathtaking.