Narrative:

I was giving dual instruction to a commercial applicant in an small aircraft. I simulated a landing gear malfunction by turning on the control panel light switch. This causes the landing gear position lights to dim so that during daylight conditions they appear to not illuminate at all. The student was unaware of my actions. I did this to observe the student reactions to the situation and demonstrate the proper procedures for rectifying the problem. The student did a good job of trying to solve the problem by using the emergency checklist, but failed to turn the panel light switch off. We then proceeded to home airport (bjc) with student still believing we had a gear problem. He contacted the bjc control tower and requested a low fly-by so that they could see if the gear was down. The tower confirmed that the gear appeared down so we did a go around. At that point I turned the panel light switch back off and when the student extended the gear for landing, we got 3 green lights indicating gear was down and locked. We indicated to the tower that we had positive indication gear down and they cleared us to land. Unaware to me at the time, the tower had sent airport vehicles out to the runway to help in case we had a problem with our landing. I feel it is unfortunate that I allowed this simulated emergency situation progress to a point that included ATC and ground operations at a controled airport. They have better things to do, I am sure. In the future, I will not allow simulations to progress so far.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TWR CTLR IS UNAWARE THAT THE GEAR PROB IS A SIMULATION AND TAKES STEPS BEYOND WHAT THE INSTRUCTOR PLT WOULD HAVE DESIRED.

Narrative: I WAS GIVING DUAL INSTRUCTION TO A COMMERCIAL APPLICANT IN AN SMA. I SIMULATED A LNDG GEAR MALFUNCTION BY TURNING ON THE CTL PANEL LIGHT SWITCH. THIS CAUSES THE LNDG GEAR POS LIGHTS TO DIM SO THAT DURING DAYLIGHT CONDITIONS THEY APPEAR TO NOT ILLUMINATE AT ALL. THE STUDENT WAS UNAWARE OF MY ACTIONS. I DID THIS TO OBSERVE THE STUDENT REACTIONS TO THE SIT AND DEMONSTRATE THE PROPER PROCS FOR RECTIFYING THE PROB. THE STUDENT DID A GOOD JOB OF TRYING TO SOLVE THE PROB BY USING THE EMER CHKLIST, BUT FAILED TO TURN THE PANEL LIGHT SWITCH OFF. WE THEN PROCEEDED TO HOME ARPT (BJC) WITH STUDENT STILL BELIEVING WE HAD A GEAR PROB. HE CONTACTED THE BJC CTL TWR AND REQUESTED A LOW FLY-BY SO THAT THEY COULD SEE IF THE GEAR WAS DOWN. THE TWR CONFIRMED THAT THE GEAR APPEARED DOWN SO WE DID A GAR. AT THAT POINT I TURNED THE PANEL LIGHT SWITCH BACK OFF AND WHEN THE STUDENT EXTENDED THE GEAR FOR LNDG, WE GOT 3 GREEN LIGHTS INDICATING GEAR WAS DOWN AND LOCKED. WE INDICATED TO THE TWR THAT WE HAD POSITIVE INDICATION GEAR DOWN AND THEY CLRED US TO LAND. UNAWARE TO ME AT THE TIME, THE TWR HAD SENT ARPT VEHICLES OUT TO THE RWY TO HELP IN CASE WE HAD A PROB WITH OUR LNDG. I FEEL IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT I ALLOWED THIS SIMULATED EMER SIT PROGRESS TO A POINT THAT INCLUDED ATC AND GND OPS AT A CTLED ARPT. THEY HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO, I AM SURE. IN THE FUTURE, I WILL NOT ALLOW SIMULATIONS TO PROGRESS SO FAR.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.