FAA commercial maneuvers clarification needed please

[piperboy84]

Could someone out there confirm I am understanding the correctly:

Eights ON pylons is done at varying altitudes depending on the speed adjustment needed to maintain the "pivotal" altitude AND keep the pylon at a fixed distance and reference point out on the wing.

Eights AROUND pylons (or around a point) is done at a fixed altitude with adjustments being made by bank and no fixed distance to the pylon/point?

Much appreciate if someone can clarify

(posted on the GA form, but on reflection thought i may have more luck here)

[ifitaintboeing]

See Chapter 6 of the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook which has a description of both manoeuvres along with diagrams:

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aircraft/airplane_handbook/media/faa-h-8083-3b.pdf

ifitaint...

[glendalegoon]

piper boy


well, we use to call the first one PYLON 8s...and one had to calculate a PIVOTAL ALtitude to make them work

8s around pylons were more like turns around a point...adjusting bank angle/drift etc


pylon 8s or 8s on pylons are not required, but 8s around pylons are ...at least in my foggy memory.

I remember some guys would spin th eplane down to pivotal altitude just to show off.

[banjodrone]

8's on pylons can be a tough manoeuvre to master but once you get it you can do it all day in 30 kt winds. I don't recall doing the other one for the commercial checkride but did it for private where it was called turns around a point.

[piperboy84]

Thanks for the replies, I passed my commercial checkride 4 months ago and am half way thru my CFI academy, I did a stage check this morning which involved the 8's on pylons and basically had a mental block when it came to performing this maneuver and thought i must have interpreted the PTS ass backwards, best get back on the books and do some more practice.

[mad_jock]

Never done any of that.

Don't know what they are even.

Survived over 10 years as a commercial pilot without this knowledge or skill.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Never done any of that.

Don't know what they are even.

Survived over 10 years as a commercial pilot without this knowledge or skill.

It's just the ability to correct for wind when manoeuvring close to the ground to get your positioning right.

I'm willing to bet that you do have that skill!

I've done it a few times, and had it taught to me many years back - not required by any UK/EU syllabus, but actually not a bad exercise in developing SA and the ability to think ahead of the aeroplane.

It's simple enough, pick two points on the ground, fly a figure-of-eight around them with each point at the centre of the circles of the eight, maintaining the shape over the ground by changing heading and bank angle to continuously correct for wind. In practice, it can be quite entertaining, and I can certainly see why the USians like it as a training manoeuvre.

G

[banjodrone]

That's mostly it, except you're also constantly changing altitude to adjust to pivotal altitude which changes with groundspeed. Some instructors make it harder by insisting you pick pylons joined by a line as perpendicular to the wind as possible even if that means they're diagonally across a field from each other, which can disorient you the first few times as you have to draw that line in your head and ignore section lines.

[mad_jock]

I very much doubt i could do it.

Its rare enough I ever have to hold.

[Genghis the Engineer]

altitude to adjust to pivotal altitude which changes with groundspeed.

Despite a CPL and a PhD in flight mechanics, I had never heard of pivotal altitude until just now.

Looking it up here (http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aircraft/airplane_handbook/media/faa-h-8083-3a-3of7.pdf) (page 41-44), I frankly could only conclude that this whole thing is a class case of terminology invention and somebody deliberately trying to make themselves seem clever at the expense of a whole bunch of students.

Just why on earth is that a useful concept? And for that matter, why can't the FAA tell the difference between height and altitude? And are the FAA really advocating students flying 60 degree continuously banked turns under 1000ft?

G

[mad_jock]

Its a load of bollocksif you ask me.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Certainly those pages of that FAA manual are.

G

[banjodrone]

Genghis when I was learning that manouevre I had the same thoughts but looking into it a bit more it seems that most of these exercises were introduced to develop stick & rudder and planning skills. There's not really much of a practical application for Chandelles, Lazy 8's or 8's on pylons but they're supposed to develop basic skills even if the student isn't aware of it, in much the same way that scale and arpeggio drills do on musical instruments. I guess you could argue that the extent to which they do that is debatable, but then again you could equally apply that to certain things in the European way of doing things.

[mad_jock]

yep like screwing around in a single complex doing glide approaches pfl's and all that nonsense.

What you can do it in a twin and just do a single engine GA and miss all that pish out.

Sign me up for that please.

Never felt I missed out by avoiding that either.

If I ever do fly a complex single commercially I will have to go through the company training and LPC to prove I can do it anyway.

[piperboy84]

Discussing this in class right now (minus the instructor off course :ok:) and the consensus is its BS, nobody did the calculations (ground speed squared, divided by 11.3 X1000) during the check flight, all just eyeballed the pylon then moved on to the next maneuver.

[sapperkenno]

Jock, I see what you're saying... The training is an extension of the FAA syllabus from private pilot, where GRM (Gound Reference Maneuvers) are used to show the effect of wind on the aircraft, in relation to it's position over the ground. It's used at the basic level to fly a rectangular pattern, and account for the wind.

The sort of thing you probably do without thinking about it nowadays, as it's hard wired in there due to experience. It's good for giving students an appreciation of how the wind affects position, and all seems pretty basic, but is actually quite a decent excercise. Compared to the EASA PPL syllabus which doesn't cover any of it, so you get students flying wonky circuits when there's a decent amount of drift, and pulling the power back and getting stupidly slow before they turn base if they're rocketing along downwind with 20kts up the chuff in their C150. Sure they figure it out eventually, but a couple of hours prior practicing turns around a point, and rectangular patterns does help as the building blocks are there and there is some appreciation of being able to fly along and position themselves in relation to ground features.

[ahwalk01]

Yes teaching it the FAA way is different to performing it. Knowing the wind and elevation of the area, with spaced points, you'll come out pretty much the same every time.

Lazy 8s seem less useful though it's all about finesse and precision. Whereabouts are you training?

What sapperkenno said.

[banjodrone]

AOPA kind of break it down a bit here.

Air Safety Institute Instructor Reports (http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/inst_reports2.cfm?article=226)

[piperboy84]

Give you all a laugh, this afternoons lesson was on Fundamentals Of Instruction where the instructor explained that students motivation and feelings will be impaired if he/she realizes the instructor is teaching erroneous data. So not missing a chance to mess with the instructor I told here I was feeling unmotivated, lacking in confidence and completely devoid of self worth (as per the FOI) as I believed she was teaching me false information as the Pivotal "altitude" is actually a height ! we had a laugh and she dragged some poor schmuck who is sitting in the back of our class who just failed his checkride up to the white board to "teach" why we do 8 around plyons and pivotal altitude. He went into to a long explanation about how to shoot a 50 caliber out of a chopper on a fixed target during the Vietnam war (with the need to hold the pivotal altitude for aiming the gun) then said it was an "absolute" altitude which is AGL.

Right,, breaks over, back to touchy feely school ,,, i mean FOI

[mad_jock]

To be fair the phyco babble is about 50% of the job. But i think either you have it instinctively or you don't.

I have never had a problem with a student wonky circuits or other wise with adjusting for wind. Certainly not after constant aspect glides.

Fair enough they can be used as an exersise if someone doesn't seem to get it. But as a test item worthless.

[Genghis the Engineer]

You're not up for adding ground attack manoeuvres with a 50cal MG Into the syllabus then Jock?

G

[mad_jock]

Nah

Couple of circuits with all the instrument's covered I would be in favour of though.

[ahwalk01]

FOI is straightforward though alien to most unless you've been teaching previously. A common weak area for CFI initials so be sure to have it down.

[piperboy84]

A common weak area for CFI initials so be sure to have it down.

Yes I have to understand it thoroughly, especially for the oral, the issue I have with it is that even though it is an outline on how people learn and teaching methods there is ironically not a roadmap or logical way to study the subject, or at least i have not found one, in other areas of study for the CFII there is logical introductions and a flow to learning the subject with FOI I find myself all over the place.

Nothing else for it than re-reading it for the umpteenth time and see if a light bulb goes on.

[ahwalk01]

Agreed, usually a list of acronyms, have you looked at the ASA Oral Exam Guide, usually the phrasing the questions helps link the alphabet soup together

[banjodrone]

My own view is that no one has any business being an instructor unless it's something they really want to do. That doesn't mean it should be their ultimate goal or anything but they have to have that mindset where's there's nothing that gives them a buzz more than seeing their student pull off their first 3 solo circuits. I'd hazard a guess that maybe at most, 3 in 10 people actually have the desire and maybe 1 in 10 have all the qualities that make a really good instructor. Of course you can teach people how to do it and with enough experience they'll get there but natural instructors are like gold.

[mad_jock]

I fully agree with that mate.

To be honest i don't think the fic teaches them anything either.