No Touch & Gos allowed

[Flying Wild]

Just wondering whether anyone has come across a flying school banning solo student pilots from conducting touch & gos?
My flying school (one of the main ones in the UK which happens to have a fairweather base in the US) has this week done just that, much to the surprise of many, students and instructors alike.
Touch & gos are allowed when dual, however the instructor must be the one to lower the flaps whilst the student maintains directional control and manages the throttle.
It strikes me as slightly absurd that students will not be able to get experience of touch and gos whilst solo, but instead must conduct full stop landings before taxiing back to the active.
1. It is a waste of precious training time.
2. We are paying a not insignificant amount for our course, only to loose out on time in the air in order to taxi on the ground.

Interested to see views on this.

[v6g]

Mmmm ... very strange - not a good environment for learning in. Sounds like you're wasting your money there mate - I suggest going elsewhere.

[A and C]

It's a way of getting more money from you because you are no doubt paying on "chock to chock" time or the dredded Hobbs metre and so the clock is running all the time.

The aircraft/engine time is flying time only so you are paying for the flying and the only cost that "school" is incuring when you are taxing is the fuel that you are burning.

I think that I can guess who would pull a stunt like this!

[Deano777]

Get out of there as quickly as you can mate. Just explain how they want you to do your solo circuit consolidation? :ugh:

[Mikehotel152]

Sounds absurd to me. We were encouraged to stick to fullstops until we had done an hour or two in the circuit post first solo because it is a little frantic when you're a newbie, but a blanket ban?! :confused:

FWIW, I would say that it would not be an easy decision for wg100 to go against the perceived wisdom of sticking to one training provider. If he/she is at one of the bigger FTOs, in the dewy eyes of a prospective employer the genuine silliness of this blanket ban might be outweighed by the FTO's overall reputation.

[Re-Heat]

I've not heard of any accident, let alone incident, of a student losing directional control while raising the flaps on a touch and go. The most common incident I have heard of is PIO, which should of course be briefed to go-around, and would occur regardless if unstable. Certainly not a directional control loss on ground or incident due to takeoff with full flap on solo flight.

Perhaps someone who made this absurd decision could point people towards one - not to mention one without mitigating factors.

Most of the real world permits touch and go at second solo, leaving the only justification appearing to be financial...

[portsharbourflyer]

As an instructor once I have authorised someone to fly solo then I have to be happy that they are competent to manage all the workload on a touch and go; if you haven't got the spare capacity to raise flaps on a touch and go and maintain directional control then you are not ready to fly solo. So this does seem rediculous.

A few years back there were problems with the electric selector switches on the C152/150, which often meant that the flaps were sometimes not in the postion selected, which could cause problems on a touch and go, but even with regard to this touch and go's are part of the solo consolidation.

[steggers]

I would like to put across a point here. I'm a PPL holder with a night rating. For the night rating one of the criteria is to do 5 touch-and-go's solo before you can obtain your night rating. As this is the case how would anybody be able to obtain this rating at that airfiled????????

[jb5000]

I think you'll find that it is 5 take offs, and 5 full stop landings for the night rating.

Only time I've heard of this is complex aircraft to stop someone accidentally raising the gear instead of the flaps.

Have you thought to ask why they have done this?

[A and C]

I think you will find that it is Five full stop landings that you require for the night qualification.


Please some one name the outfit that has imposed this rule.

[YYZ]

A&C... err, the CAA? has always been so..

YYZ

[Phil O'Rupp]

Sounds a bit silly. The only time I could see that being even remotely valid would be in a retractable where the gear and flap levers could be confused. We don't recommend solo circuits for low-time retractable pilots but can't understand how that would be an acceptable rule most basic trainers with fixed u/c.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

I preffered to restrict my students to full stop landings for the first 2 hours of circuit consolodation. Hour 3 would involve touch and go's.

A T&G is not that much extra pressure and not more than that involved in doing a go around which is obviously a madatory competency.

Nonetheless your first solo hours are full of adrenalin, elation, fear and fun. It often makes best practice to have your student slow things down by full stops, backtracks and takeoffs. At worst it costs him some time in the air but at best it lets him sharpen his ground handling and checklist skills and allows time for the adrenalin to ebb.

PIO is the biggest hazard on first solo sessions.

At the end of the day its a decision taken by the CFI and your instructor. Trust them.

WWW

[A and C]

The name of outfit that applied the no touch & go rule not the night flying requirments.............. I think that we had all worked out who mandates the reqirements for the night qualification.

[Number Six]

Just a thought - could this be related to the "student" paranoia that has sprung up in some quarters in the UK since the sad accident to the young lad at Southend ?

[Flying Wild]

Funnily enough, no reason was given initially, but further questioning seems to link it to a couple of incidents earlier in the year, at least one of which involved a collision with a taxiway sign due to exiting the rwy too fast. The other reason was due to people not being stabilised on approach by 200ft.
Now I had thought that both these things had been countered, firstly by banning use of the first exit off the rwy which is makeable, but if you are too fast you could spin off. Secondly instructors were briefed to ensure students knew what stabilised appoaches were, were able to do them, and if not, were comfortable with go arounds. No incidents have been heard of since, so there is an overwhelming sense of bafflement at why this rule was brought in.
Senior management is due out here shortly, so I imagine he will be approached about this PDQ.

[TelBoy]

Just a thought. My FIRST ever solo was two touch and go then a full stop to collect the instructor. This was in a C152 that needed the electric flap leaver holding until the flaps were in position.

This was FAA training in winter windswept Texas - where the men are men and the women are grateful:)

Sounds like a rip off to me and any school that will do things like that are also likely to "add some extras" in elsewhere making your PPL expensive. Also add in factors like you will have more hours in your log book, but NOT P1 for extra ratings etc.

All the very best with your flying mate.

[BillieBob]

YYZ - JAR-FCL 1.125 states

Night qualification. If the privileges of
the licence are to be exercised at night, at least
five additional hours flight time in aeroplanes
shall be completed at night comprising 3 hours
of dual instruction including at least 1 hour of
cross-country navigation and five solo take-offs
and five solo full-stop landings. This qualification
will be endorsed on the licence.

Touch and go landings do not fulfil the JAA requirements.

I think you will find that the other matter is a knee-jerk reaction to a rising accident rate.

[A and C]

I find it so sad that I guessed correctly at the perpitrators of this nonsense and feel so sorry for the young hopefulls who have entrusted large amounts of hard won cash to them.

I have been in the business for nearly thirty years and little has changed, the new guys get suckered in by the gold bars and potted plants and swiftly have there cash removed before they know any better.

[nickyjsmith]

By the time you get to first solo and beyond you should be able to cope with this level of multi-tasking, if not then you are being pushed before ready or have not got enough multi-tasking capacity and surely that should have been found during aptitude testing.
This worryingly sounds like a knee jerk reaction to trying to get people through the system too quickly rather than safely.
If anything, this could cause confidence problems, as students might not feel trusted.

[JB LFPN FLYER]

I guess your flight school is just making the future " pilots " trained in glass cockpits , and full 3 axes auto pilot for PPL ...

Very strange , but hey , you'll be flying an airbus anyway ;)


Good luck to you ,


JBB ( who's going to go and do some Touch and Goes on a grass runway with a A/C without even a artificial horizon :p )

[Todders]

Sounds to me like these might be german imposed rules!

Oh and alpha 1 is easy to make.

[Flying Wild]

Sounds to me like these might be german imposed rules!

Oh and alpha 1 is easy to make.

I think not, as the German students here are still conducting solo T&Gs

[Nichibei Aviation]

Sometimes when there is a heavily used airfield without ATC services, it is difficult to integrate departures between touch & go/arrival traffic.

[Flying Wild]

Sometimes when there is a heavily used airfield without ATC services, it is difficult to integrate departures between touch & go/arrival traffic.

I can assure you that this is an ATC controlled airfield. In the past when the pattern had gotten too busy, they have been the ones to ask for full-stop-taxy-backs. Now it is a blanket thing for the whole of this flying school.

[A and C]

You have not understood how flying time is recorded in the aircraft log books and charged to the student if you can't see why this is about money, go back, read my first post on the subject and try to understand that he company is £££££ ahead from this move.

If this T&G ban is by the outfit that I suspect then 30 years of watching the GA business strongly sugests that money is the only motivation that the company has, they constantly been the masters of the hidden charge and restrictive rule to squeeze the last drop of money from the student.

Of course I could be wrong but I would guess that some minor inccident had been grabbed with both hands as a way of increasing income at the student pilots expence.

The T&G has been at the heart of pilot trainning since avation started so why all of a sudden has it become unsafe?

I would like to think that I have misjudged the situation but only time will tell.

[low n' slow]

I agree. It's a money thing. They found an area in which they can save money and claim it's for safety. It's foolproof unfortunately.

/LnS

[Life's a Beech]

Wingo

What about the sensible students who haven't paid up front?

[YYZ]

BillieBob

Thanks for the information but that is exactly what I was saying to A&C?

And A&C, Please read the way you have worded your post, my understanding was that you were questioning who implemented the night qual requirement? and rest assured, not everyone on this website will be aware of everything.

YYZ

[dartagnan]

some schools dont authorize touch and gos, too many got incidents by switching the gear instead of flaps, etc...

insurance companies pay for these incidents/accidents at a point they will ask you to not fly anymore...even grass runway are prohibited when you need to know soft landings.

when you have 2-3 plane crash in a month, like short of fuel or forgot to lower the gear and hard landing.
view the cost of the maintenance. I can see why they dont allow you to fly the plane they way we want...who to blame at the end?

just go in a flight schools, and see how some of us treat planes.
planes not tied down, flight control not secure, key and master switched on, food & paper on board...

if some were a little bit more respectful toward the plane they fly, schools wont pay some much insurance...

[smala01]

Is this a blanket ban on all T&G`s until you pass the test, or merely an extra restriction to be signed-off when you become proficient DURING the course?

I know a couple of schools that operate to the latter.

[Cyclone733]

Is there going to be a taxi surcharge due to increase tyre wear and more fuel burn due to higher numbers of squished bugs on the airframe?

[BongleBear]

I did my ppl out in florida. Training was done summer 2001, and there was no rule about touch and goes, but then went back for 50 hours flying in 2005 and the rule was now in place for students. I thought it was stupid, just put it down as a money making scheme, but then a few days later I took off after a touch and go with landing flaps still out. So I can see the case for and against. Im sure it wont catch on, I fly 737s out of Liverpool now and it would cause havoc if light aircraft had to full stop after each landing- im sure atc just wouldnt allow it for spacing.
I think one of the most important points during the ppl course is to put more and more responsiblity and trust in a student pilot, upto the point where they are capable of being pic. So wheres the sense in saying 'we no longer have faith in you performing a touch and go'?
Take your case to the head of training, get a petition going or something. If its who i think it is then theyre desperate for students anyway so theyll aim to keep the customers!

[Nichibei Aviation]

more fuel burn due to higher numbers of squished bugs on the airframe?

There is no higher fuel burn. Let me remind you that fuel burn is a rate.
No, the TAS wil be lower and it will take more time to reach your destination. You will just take more time/pay more to reach the same destination. :hmm:


There is certainly a financial aspect to it but I don't think it's that significant.
How many hours do you solo in the pattern? 5 to 10?
Imagining that half of that time is spent taxiing, you have 2.5 to 5 hours where the engine is turning at close to idle, saving maybe 4 gal/hour on a C-150 and around 6 gal/hour on a C-172/PA28.
That may save the school up to 100$ per student.
It is not really significant.
Don't forget that maintenance is a big cost for a school, certainly engine maintenance (about 20 000$ every 2000 hours).

[Cyclone733]

Nichibei Aviation,

If it's the flight training school I think it is, the 'joke' is that a fuel surcharge was introduced when they changed their fleet from older AVGAS guzzling aircraft to aircraft running on lesser amounts of the cheaper Jet A1.

Making the fixed price course up to 4k more than expected

Oh and I forgot the extra wear and tear on the brakes

[Nichibei Aviation]

There are different flight schools that do this.

I am not refering to any of them but trying to clarify that all the saving that may bring is just around 100$ per student on an entire training...
Not much when you consider that they rip you off a few dozen K-bucks on your entire training!!

About JET A1 aircraft, the cost of JET A1 is significantly lower but maintenance is more expensive.
The Thielert engines for instance, you need to replace them completely every 2000 hours. Their reliability is also not very good.
Also, many schools are buying DA-42 which are very expensive aircraft, about half a million bucks at list price. The fuel costs are significantly reduced but until you can turn that investment into profit, it'll take quite some time.
The DA-42 is a state-of-the-art aircraft but me and my company slightly disagree with its philosophy, certainly when you think that it's the students who will need to pay for this high cost investment.
After all, training shouldn't be a matter of luxury...

But then again you can also start questionnig about schools that prohibite any training when you have more than 6kt X-wind...

[A and C]

I shall try to make this clear.

Background

A few years ago I instructed at a reputable club that was forced to fly a large circuit and we got about 5 T & G landings an hour the average time to solo was about 16 hours.

I now instruct for a club that flys a very tight 800ft circuit , the average time to solo is about 11 hours.

So the first club takes about 5 hours longer to get a student off solo, it is my opinion that the number of landings that the student makes is about the same at both clubs but a student at the first club has to pay for about five more flying hours to reach solo.

Conclusion

The number of landings that a student flys are critical to progress.
Time in the air or taxing when flying circuits has very little effect on student progress.

The money issue

The time recorded in the aircraft and engine log book is take off to touchdown and that is what all the maintenance checks and time critical part lives are based on.

Most schools charge the student chock to chock time so the normaly flying a T&G circuit a student will get about 5-6 landings and 50 minuits in the air for an hours flying assuming about 10 min for the taxi time.

If the student has to taxi back each time the aircraft is only flying for about 20 minuits in each flying hour that the student pays for and the student is not getting the solo practice that they need.

Who wins?

Well lets think about this the school is now charging the same chock to chock rate but only putting 20 minuits of airframe and engine time on the aircraft they are also reducing the fuel burn as the aircraft burns considerably less fuel when taxing than is will in the air.
The student gets about 50% less landings per hour so will probably have to fly a few more hours to get up to the required standard.

As a money making scam its faultless!

[2close]

Who wins?

Well lets think about this the school is now charging the same chock to chock rate but only putting 20 minuits of airframe and engine time on the aircraft they are also reducing the fuel burn as the aircraft burns considerably less fuel when taxing than is will in the air.
The student gets about 50% less landings per hour so will probably have to fly a few more hours to get up to the required standard.

As a money making scam its faultless!

Can't see how the maintenance times are affected as air time is normally calculated from the first Take Off to the last Landing or by some other method such as from the first Brakes Off to the last Brakes On less 0.2 hours for SUTTO, as recorded in the Flight Tech Logs.

I've never heard of anyone calculating air time for each separate flight from a series of Stop and Go circuits.

Saying that, I wholeheartedly agree with you that it does appear to be a revenue creating scheme. If students are now only getting 3 or 4 circuits per hour instead of 6, 7 or even 8 it stands to reason they are probably going to need more flying hours to achieve and maintain the required standard.

But, hey, their taxying will be the best you've ever seen!;)

[A and C]

I can assue you that with that much taxing that is exactly what they will do!

They would be fools not to!!

[Life's a Beech]

Wingo

But you are assuming that the time to completion is the same, a ridiculkous assumption. It is not common for taxy time to be critical in getting a student through the test.

[Cyclone733]

A way to save on landing fees perhaps? eg company is paid £200 an hour, if each landing is £5 getting 3-4 landings an hours instead of 6-7 saves £15 or to put it another way makes an extra 7.5% profit

[Boing7117]

This decision clearly results from the number of runway 'incidents' out in Goodyear over the last 6 months.

Particularly - the really really bad runway incursion that left an a/c written off back in the Summer.

I'm not sure the decision rests entirely with the flying school in question but I suspect the FAA might have put a certain amount of insistence upon the school due to the increased regularity of these incidents.

Obviously it's a disadvantage to any student going out there to train.

I guess the only option would be to try and sneak in some touch n goes at Mobile, Gila Bend, Buckeye - and if you're likely to get caught go to one of the controlled airfields and do it, Chandler / Williams Gateway / Deer Valley?

I believe the flying school has undergone an element of restructure and the guys who are now heading up the operation are pretty decent guys - albeit strict and very much by-the-book but I expect the FAA have had a quiet word and this is the result.....

[Life's a Beech]

Wingo

Have a look at the schedules? I was a PPL flight instructor, I have no need to. Doubling the time for solo circuits is going to cost several hundred pounds, at no cost to the school and no increase in safety. It is a rip off.

[poss]

Wow that is really absurd! As many people have said get out of there, find another flight school. I'm currently on my solo consolidation, if my instructor/flying club restricted me to doing full stops I'd definitely take my business else where. For an instructor to hop out of that plane for the first time and say off you go means that he trusts you to be able to cope with everything that is needed within the circuit, including the touch and goes. If they can't trust a student to take up the flaps on a touch and go then really that student shouldn't be flying solo.

[Frank Furillo]

Eh thats not always the case, imagine this scenario. You are on an integrated course, your agreement states that you solo after X number of hours and that you will take your skill test after X hours. Both are minimum numbers, so if you go over you will incur a charge. Its simple economic sense.

When I did my PPL my instructor hopped out of the plane at Immokolee and let me do my touch and goes, I did 5 approaches, 4 T and G's one Go Around and I was in radio contact with him all the time.

[hollingworthp]

As I understand it; according management, this is a temporary restriction imposed by the H.O.T. for safety reasons while they investigate and remediate several recent incidences of unstabilized approaches during solo T&Gs.

[Frank Furillo]

Wingo, why would you not want to practice touch and go's. I did loads once I got my solo and even more once I was hour building.
Circuit bashing is dammed useful the more you do the eaiser it gets, sure beats just flying from A to B and back again, you might as well do some T&G's especially as it does not cost anything at most US airports. Hell I did loads of night ones with and with out my landing light. There is no skill in just flying straight and level you should try to improve your landing technique every time you fly.

I have no idea why this school have stopped T&G's but I can only imagine it is for safety reasons.

[Frank Furillo]

Wingo, just trying to help.
As to safety many many flight schools around the world allow students to do touch and go's and some even allow then to go cross country even before they have obtained their PPL's.
IF I was a student here then I would be very concerned I am sure the standard of instructing is fine, but if this is safety related, then is there a problem in the system? If so would I want to train here?

[BigGrecian]

At nearly all of the schools I've trained at touch and gos were prohibited before private test completed.

If your school has Cessnas - I believe there has been problems with the Cessna flap switches.

Trust your CFI, and always check your flaps visually. It is almost definitely safety related.

[ballyboley]

As another student in the same school at the same airport in this affair I'd like to clarify a couple of things -

1. It is not a money making scam as our integrated course times are Take Off to Landing plus 15 minutes for taxi (which often works out better for us as taxi/hold times can be long). Students who do the full-stop and taxi back can stop the clock so to speak once they've vacated the active i.e. the taxi-back time is not counted as air time. The Hobbs time is only for maintenance use and has nothing to do with this. Yes it's a pain and the days of getting 8-9 landings in a 1 hour solo are gone, but we shouldn't be any worse off financially/flight time.

2. The local German school at the airport do NOT allow touch and go's on solo's either, although they do allow landings at uncontrolled fields whereas our school do not. There's no doubt that the full stop and taxi back would be alot easier at a smaller uncontrolled field than a busy airport. Perhaps this should be raised to them as any pilot with a few brain cells should be just as capible of landing at an uncontrolled field as controlled.

3. There have been a number of instances where aircraft have ran off the runway for a number of reasons, mainly because of bad piloting.

Therefore the school have had to do something, dont you think? It is really unfortunate for the rest of us that a few individuals who are clearly incompetent have ruined it for the rest of us, but sadly thats how life works sometimes.
Perhaps WG100 should discuss their concerns with management at the next weekly senior management meeting with students rather than complaining about it on pprune?

[plugster]

Restricted solo-flying in germany is a different thing to the US since we have about 15-25000 flights a day during weekends ( and of course in summertime) in mostly in class G airspace in an area having about the size of upstate NY ( don't blame me for geography :D ) just to give you a clue.
It is still possible but you can expect to end up with your first solo a bit later compared to flying in less congested countries.

I had my first solo after the 6th flight and my FTO is doing the practical training in Croatia where you sometimes end up being the only one on the frequency and I don't believe this would have been the case if I conducted that training in a german based practical training.

[ballyboley]

I think there's a bit of confusion, we're not talking about training in Germany, we're talking about Lufthansa and the GAF's training school which is located on the same airport.

[plugster]

I'm sorry! It's just getting late...

I just know about a student pilot of LFT crashing(fatal) during a solo flight max. two years or so ago. Was it always the case that no solos were allowed at all by LFT at GY? Not flying solo at least once and doing training on shiny new citation jets sounds a bit paradox to me?!

Doing t/g's solo helped me a lot during my vfr flight training and if the FTO provides strict minima and procedures to be sticked to it's no big deal. Proper qualification has to be insured before by an internal check flight with instructor anyway, dont you think?

just my 2 cents...

[ballyboley]

Solo's were and still are allowed! This post is about allowing solo students to carry out touch and go's, not about allowing students to solo.
You are quite correct about the solo fatality. I believe she crashed shortly after an F-16 passed quite close to her.

[Flying Wild]

Perhaps WG100 should discuss their concerns with management at the next weekly senior management meeting with students rather than complaining about it on pprune?

Perhaps if management hadn't cancelled the meeting this week then concerns would have been raised by the significant number of students who had indicated they would be attending.
As it is, I was simply enquiring if banning T&Gs was an accepted and commonplace practise, or something that was OTT.

[portsharbourflyer]

Big Grecian,

The flap problem you refer to is the fact that the selctor lever often disconnects/ jams from the electric switch. So while the lever is moved to the up position the flaps remain down, as a result a student can get airborne with full flaps at a low airpseed, the switch suddenly un-jams on the climb out the flaps retract and the aircraft stalls.

However Grecian this is not a reason to not do touch and go's, it is possible to visually inspect the flaps during a touch and go, I always train student to select flaps before applying full power to prevent the above occuring.

[plugster]

Very intersting! Is there any solution brought up by cessna or the manufacturer of these switches?

Stalling would be possible as well during a go around with the flaps not set correctly, don't you agree? Anyway, don't the lufty guys fly beech 33 at gy?

[Final 3 Greens]

In answer to the OP, I have seen this rule applied at Air Desert Pacific at LaVerne, CA.

[Adios]

To clear up the confusion, the school that has temporarily halted solo Touch and Gos appears to be OAT at their Goodyear, AZ training base. They use Piper Warriors for the solo flights. Lufthansa also train cadets at Goodyear, where they use Beechcraft singles.

The posts regarding Cessna's are relevant in the context of the discussion started by wg100 about whether this no solo T&G practice is common or not, but neither of the schools at Goodyear use Cessnas, so a bit of confusion has crept in.

I'm not sure why everyone is so reluctant to name the school, as this is not a slander issue, except maybe for the few who have jumped to the conclusion that greed is behind this rather than safety.

[A and C]

I am very pleased that this is not a money making scam and students are not being ripped off.

It would appear that it is OAT who have imposed this rule and they are one of the more reputable schools.

I think that untill more is known about the reasoning I shall not make further comment apart from saying that first posts on the subject hinted that it was another school who's business practices are not quite as ethical as OAT.

[Life's a Beech]

WingoWango

I don't usually correct spelling, but you are repeating your error like a mantra, and it is irritating. The word is "integrated". Only one R.

Why are you assuming that everyone must be on an integrated course and assuming that those students on an integrated course don't ever have to pay for extra lessons? I really can't understand your obsession with integrated courses, as far as I can see wg100 has not said the students are only on integrated courses. Any students on an integrated course who spend longer in the circuit so need to extend the course at the end will still have to pay. You don't think the schools give them free extra hours out of the goodness of their hearts, do you?

Why would one school ban the touch and go on safety grounds? There is nothing unsafe about a touch and go on a runway of reasonable length.

wg100

This is not a normal, sensible or justifiable restriction. Pure profiteering, and you should go elsewhere!

[Life's a Beech]

WingoWango

As far as I can see wg100 never said that the student doesn't pay for this time, which would be very unusual. In fact he said in his first post "2. We are paying a not insignificant amount for our course, only to loose out on time in the air in order to taxi on the ground."

balleyboley now says he is not going to pay more, but according to his description of the charging structure he might well be! Either he will pay for taxi on each flight, or he pays fist T/O to last landing plus 15 minutes. If the scheme is going to run completely differently, as he seems to believe, then the school should have briefed the students as such, which according to wg100 has not happened. Is balleyboley just assuming that the school will run a bizarre and complex charging system, or has he been told and wg100 not?

Notice that the runway at Goodyear is 8,500 feet long (http://worldaerodata.com/wad.cgi?id=US27763). That is more than adequate for a student to do safe touch and goes. It is considerably longer than the runway I used to teach from, although that was not so hot or quite as high high. I allowed students to perform touch and goes, and know of no school that doesn't, although I imagine some with short runways might. I can see no safety case for banning touch and go circuits at Goodyear.

I suggest you read all the posts yourself. You were assuming that no-one would lose out well before there was any suggestion of bizarre charging schemes.

balleyboley

If students are running off the runway then yes, the school should do something. It should look be retraining the instructors who who signed off those students' first solos (and banning them from signing off students in the meantime). I never saw such an incident either during my own training or in several years as an instructor at a busy field. I can't even remember hearing about one on a decent-width tarmac runway with a serviceable aircraft.

I cannot see why the competent students should be penalised, and even if somehow the school manages a very complicated new charging structure then training is being delayed unnecessarily, which is unfair on competent students.

[ballyboley]

Yet more rubbish about costs. It's already been clarified that none of this will cost any of us more. Its airtime + 15 mins, therefore time taxing back will not be counted. Yes its a pain having to keep some sort of a log of how much time was spent, I've seen a few people mange it quite well so far. We dont get charged on Hobbs time and therefore the concept is quite flexible. I have no concerns that any of us will be screwed over from a monetary position and quite frankly, there would be a revolt if they tried to. We dont get "charged" as such, we have an allocation of solo hours in the Integrated syllabus, of which our flights get taken out of. Likewise, I believe there are no more than 4 solo circuit lessons, after the basic training stage no one does touch and goes anyway.
I'm not saying the arrangement is ideal by any means, but there has been safety issues for one reason or another, which steps have been taken to make safer until the issue is resolved. Its not costing the students any more - what's the big deal?!

[theflyingbishop]

This training centre has gone about solving the problem the wrong way. The pilot who can not control an aircraft once landed, or whilst retracting the flaps for a t+go, should be sent home. If you shoot off the 6500 feet runway (due to a displaced threshold) or an 8500 foot runway, you should not be flying... apart from back to the UK with BA...
However this new set up is far from perfect but has been introduced as safety measure, and as far as people dislike these fools who cant keep a warrior on a runway big enough to land a 747, if someone died from losing control, the training school would be responsible, and that would be awful in both a business terms and in personal terms...
Also PPRUNE is not really the place to get the answers everyone is after, as other people have said before, maybe the senior management could answer questions and issues better...and should the answers be unacceptable, there are other ways to approach it than moan on a forum which will have misinformed or misled people, inaccurate gossip, and other silage redistribution machines!!...
Just my 50p's worth

[portsharbourflyer]

PA28, good mechanical flaps so even less of an issue on touch and go's.

[A and C]

Please can some one please tell me what is the OAT stabilized approach criteria ?

[Life's a Beech]

Wingo

The cost issue had not been clarified. There had been one post about it, that did not seem to make sense considering how any company I have ever heard of charges for its aircraft! If it is not financial then I can't see what the issue is. You have still not explained how one company can have problems sending students for solo circuit training on a 2500m runway, when others do so perfectly successfully on less than half that with the same aircraft types.

I think we should be more worried if it really is a safety issue. If the instructors are sending students solo who are not capable of this basic exercise then the issue goes beyond touch and go. If there have been incidents then the students involved were sent solo before they were ready. Banning touch and go circuits does not solve the problem, it simply conceals it.

ballyboley

So why did they not brief the students about this? wg100 made it very clear in the first post on the thread that he expected to be paying more.

What is the safety issue?

[theflyingbishop]

A stabilized approach is an approach that maintains a course in along an extended centre line, and maintains a steady controlled decent along the slide slope. The only exception i know to this is when performing a forward slip to land when the decent rate will be faster. However this again is all being done as an effect to increase safety, which can not be a bad thing.

As to the rumours of barrel rolling a warrior, i'm sure the said school would take swift action if this were true, not only as its not a responsible action for a future airline pilot, but because unless i'm much mistaken, the warrior is not certified for barrel rolling and one could be taking there life into there hands by over stressing the airframe, not to mention other pilots in the vicinity!

I also totally agree with the said above. If this issue is continuing to happen, the instructors must be sending students up solo to early. This matter has also been addressed (or at least they have attempted to fix) by having a pre solo check ride with an in house examiner. What affect this will have is yet to be seen. But again it is all down to safety, and people should not forget that!

[A and C]

I think that we has all worked out what a stabilized approach is, what I wanted to know is what are the numbers that OAT use to define it.

The reason that I ask is that I reguarly fly a turning speed stable approach to about a mile from the threshold.

[Antonio Montana]

Wingo wango, NO the cost benefit or deficit has not been clearly addressed. What we have had is some differing views on what happens. Interesting regarding the time issue, do students carry a stopwatch with them?
I don't think this is a cost issue, there are far more eaiser ways to fleece a student.
It therfore must be safety related and with that in mind I, as a professional, am interested why students are not allowed to go and fly touch and goes. Are they allowed to fly cross country? It seems to me that there could well be a falling down in training standards that need to be dealt with and fast.
Aviation is a pretty safe industry and flying is great fun, but you must always give it 100% of your attention or you will get bitten rather hard.

[Life's a Beech]

What has been clarified is that two different students of the school have different impressions of the charging arrangements. One of the arrangements would be very unusual (unique I think) and also complicated to charge, the other financially detrimental to the student. The rest of us are unable to judge which is right, but have suspicion of poor communication from company to customer.

Beyond that we have personal comments you are making, and no idea of why this very unusual decision has been made.

[Antonio Montana]

Oh yeah, ADF's are really useful for telling the time, and every school has a transponder timer situated in the building.

Anyway Goodyear does NOT have a NDB the nearest is 29.9 miles away and just incase you are not aware, NDB's do not measure distance.

Sorry ww but thats just madness. How far are you into training?

And just for the record, I don't believe that the costing has been resolved.

[Antonio Montana]

Wingo, I could copy and paste a copy of my Licence but whats the point. However if you are serious PM me and I will gladly email a copy of my rating and log book.

In a Boeing 737-300and 800's we do not have a nice new shiny bendex etc transponder or even an ADF have a look on here: http://www.b737.org.uk/flightinsts.htm
Thats a 300 flight deck.
I suggest you calm down sonny this is a grown up area.

I have never flown an aircraft which had nice new NDB and Transponder and as such have no knowledge of these new toy's, I like steam powered ones.

You assumed that everyone reading this thread would know instantly that you can buy transponders's ADF's with timers etc well I don't and all the light aircraft I fly for pleasure do not have anything that new on board.

This was an imformative and thought out thread, you feel that you are right as shown on your previous posts and the rest of us are wrong, well maybe. I am not interested in debating the Cost Issue any further as I do believe that there are easier ways to fleece students.

However you are right that students should always carry their stopwatch.
T

[Antonio Montana]

Wingo, Please do not take this the wrong way, If I have rubbed you up then sorry. However you made nasty comments about me personally, I had to reply and did so in a calm manner, I aggreed re the stopwatch issue as I had got it wrong.

You do need how ever to calm down ,your last few posts have been rather heated, not just the ones aimed at me, I know that you are frustrated by people not seeing your side of the coin but that is life. CRM matters, you will learn about this when you come to do your MCC and indeed throughout your career.

This thread is about two things one Money and two Safety.
I think that it would be best to get back to both of those subjects rather than taking potshots at each other.

Just to add nice pic of an ADF, yep I have used those, although it was a long time ago. The classic 300-500 does not have such equipment and I had forgotten their use so appologies, but why did you not elaborate your post regarding using an ADF and transponder for those of us who are not used to such stuff?

Best of luck (and I mean it)
Tony

Edited to say, I see you are also a Red, at least I hope you are not from the Blue part of our great city! Shanks is God.

[Flying Wild]

Let me attempt to clarify things on the money side, as I see them.
We pay a fixed amount for our course and within that we are supposed to have 135 hours of flight time plus a CPL by the time we finish in the USA.
The time allocated is T/O to Landing plus 15 mins taxi.
As previously stated by another poster, we are able to stop the clock when taxying over the 15 mins allowed so that we get the appropriate time in the air. Hobbs time is used purely for maintenance purposes.

My original post wasn't intended to spark up so much debate! I mainly wanted to find out if it was a commonplace practise to ban T&Gs.
What I do find strange, and which is something I will be bringing up at a student-staff meeting, is that T&Gs cannot be made as an endorsement on our solo flight cards. It is good practise, in my limited opinion, to be able to conduct T&Gs as part of basic piloting skills.

[Tootles the Taxi]

The time allocated is T/O to Landing plus 15 mins taxi.


Agreed, but there seems to be some confusion here; you don't stop the clock between landings - surely this would be very difficult to schedule as each lesson could potentially take hours.

nice new Garmin Transponders

Do you mean the GNS430? That's not a txpdr.


Solo operations at uncontrolled airfields are not permitted under the UK CAA approval.

[cosworth211]

Big Grecian,
The flap problem you refer to is the fact that the selctor lever often disconnects/ jams from the electric switch. So while the lever is moved to the up position the flaps remain down, as a result a student can get airborne with full flaps at a low airpseed, the switch suddenly un-jams on the climb out the flaps retract and the aircraft stalls.
However Grecian this is not a reason to not do touch and go's, it is possible to visually inspect the flaps during a touch and go, I always train student to select flaps before applying full power to prevent the above occuring.
I have to say i'm with BG on this. You can train PPL students this method until you are blue in the face, but human nature dictates that under pressure with a lack of experience sooner or later someone will become unstuck.
Picture this, T&G at an airfield much shorter then you are used to, you touch down and realise that there isn't much runway remaining, you select flaps up (on a h/wing cessna) and apply full power, in the high stress situation you are in due to lack of experience, you decide to continue the T&G instead of stopping and taxiing back, you forget to visually check the flaps and the flap switch has failed and you climb out with full drag flap...
Happened to a student I knew in 2005 who was pre-PPL solo, a/c entered a stall/spin at approx. 300ft and the accident was fatal.
I don't think that T&G's should be banned for students, but regulated far more by the schools. I can understand a school's perspective, a law suit from the deceased's family could put them out of business.
Like anything in aviation it is a calculated risk of safety vs saving money, a certain amount of hull loses/fatalities will be accepted per xxxxx if there is a chance of saving money, but try telling that to the deceased's family.

[Adios]

I hear the barrel role was done by a student on AP264 who got an award for it at the recent class awards ceremony. Why would someone be publicly given an award for performing an illegal maneuover in a non-aerobatically certified aircraft? To embarrass them for humorous gain of course since it happened in a flight simulator as a result of performing a procedure incorrectly.

Frasca was brought in to dismantle the simulator bit by bit and make sure all over stressed parts were replaced!:)

[asuweb]

All sounds very bizzare. If the issue if with unstable approaches (as has been suggested), how does banning touch and go's help?

[Artie Fufkin]

The barrel roll out in Phoenix isn't new. When I was going through one person;

1. Barrel rolled the PA28
2. Did solo touch and goes out on desert roads
3. Exceeded (regularly) Vne.
4. When solo, got into the back seats of the aircraft and took a picture of the aircraft flying without a pilot.
5. Without any related training, did close formation flying with his mates.

I'm sure there was more and all passing through will remember him. He got a **** report and when I last heard was, thankfully, still looking for work.

[Tootles the Taxi]

swkvfr,

Thanks for that; but the majority of the Warriors are not so equipped.

My oversight & I apologise. I was merely seeking clarification.

xx

[Flying Wild]

The barrel roll out in Phoenix isn't new. When I was going through one person;

1. Barrel rolled the PA28
2. Did solo touch and goes out on desert roads
3. Exceeded (regularly) Vne.
4. When solo, got into the back seats of the aircraft and took a picture of the aircraft flying without a pilot.
5. Without any related training, did close formation flying with his mates.



Careful, you're starting to give me ideas now...

[Life's a Beech]

The clock starts when cleared for takeoff and stops at the end of lesson. It is not to be stopped while on the ground. I don't expect an apology for all the snide comments, Wingo. However this is exactly what I originally took to be the case. Has everything been clarified now?

I would suggest that before you comment you also find out a bit more about aviation. Why do you expect a real 737 pilot to know the capabilities of a GTX330 txponder? I first saw one this year when we had them installed, and until then I would never have connected a transponder to a timing function, so your comment would have confused me too. Antonio sure as hell isn't going to have one in his jet!

I think you should chill out and find some facts before you go making personal comments about others. You don't know enough to make them correctly, let alone the fact that you should be slower to make them at all.

[Tootles the Taxi]

WW / L a B

This nonsense about the ADF & Txpdr has now surpassed the point of sensible discussion; L a B are you honestly a real 737 pilot?

OAT are not trying to fleece anyone; you don't get any less hours for your money; fuel savings would be marginal when you consider the somewhat benevolent logging system used (max 15min taxy for the purpose of training) i.e. how much fuel is consumed whilst early students run through checklists, learn how to taxy, pre-takeoff checks etc over 150hrs. This would easily negate any savings made by reduced fuel consumption over the relatively few solo full-stop/taxy back lessons during a typical course.
To my knowledge, no other FTO works like this i.e in the students favour.

The other advantage of full-stops vs touch & go's is that rather than learning how to touch wheels at 65kts & go (relatively little time spent on runway & little chance of deviation) you actually learn the correct landing process of approach, roundout, flare, touchdown, deceleration, rollout & taxyoff (just like proper 737 pilots :}) which requires greater skill & discipline - in my humble opinion.

The reason for the adoption of this practice is safety, pure & simple.

Happy, stable approaches...& landings.

[Life's a Beech]

Tootles

No. Neither have I ever claimed to be. Look in my profile - it says that I am a GA pilot.

My point is that WingoWango only has to see something he disagrees with, and he goes off on one, making personal comments and attacking the other poster, even if the actual problem is that his own comments need clarification or his own assumptions are wrong. I understand that Antonio is a 737 pilot, and WingoWango was doubting this due to his lack of knowledge of instruments found on the light pistons I do fly. I actually knew what WingoWango meant, although I thought at the time he had not expressed it clearly.

The student will not get any fewer hours logged for the money. That is clear, and I have always acknowledged that. It is also not relevant to the points I have been making. The student will get less flying experience during that time, so might well have to buy more hours. Either way the school is paying less money while receiving the same money from the student.

Fuel savings are considerable. I don't know about the school in question, but fuel costs on a piston can be a very high proportion of direct operating costs, probably around 30%. Profit is a very small proportion of the charged price at most schools. Taxi fuel flows are a small fraction of those in the circuit (where full mixture would be used, and maximum power for a high proportion of the flight), probably around 20 or 30%. The saving in fuel alone, ignoring unplanned maintenance (planned maintenance costs would not be reduced of course) would have a major impact on the profitability of circuit trips.

Oh, and some FTOs only charge 10 minutes' taxi time, so the charges are not especially benevolent.

You are quite clearly in disagreement with not only me and all those who have expressed an opinion here, but the management of the school in question and even yourself!

If a full-stop landing required more skill, then it would not be used as a safer alternative which the school claims, and which you support. I think a touch and go is more difficult, however I believe that the skill and control needed is an essential pre-solo requirement, and I was taught such in my FI course, so would not send a student solo unless I would be happy for that student to perform touch and go circuits on a suitably long runway (2500 m being more than twice what I would define as suitable!).

[Life's a Beech]

Wingo

Don't worry, I have no personal issues with you. I have answered some of the personal issues you seem to have with me, but I don't take them to heart. That's why I didn't think the comprehensible parts of your last post were worth replying to.

[Antonio Montana]

Without wishing to cause a riot, Tootles, when you do your first 6 Take off and Landings in a 737, or for that matter any jet (unless you can get Zero Flight Time, but I digress) on your first type rating, you actually do Touch and Go's.
For the most part, you would normally have two crew when you are flying the Line, the FO normally gets to hit the TOGA (Take Off, Go Around) Buttons on the Thrust Levers after standing them up, then lets go to hold the Control Column, the Capt is in charge of them on the T/O run. On landing you do your own Thrust and then Reverse, Reverse Idle normally for me anyway, then at 60Kts the Capt will call 'I have control' and you relinquish control to him for the taxi in.
Hope that helps
Tony