Most Poorly Taught Section of PPL?

[ChiSau]

Just posting something a second ago re talking to ATC made me think about this...

What was the most poorly taught section of your PPL?

For me, it was radio work. Not so much what to say, but who to talk to.

Somehow I suspect the reality of radio work is incredibly simple but like many low hour PPLs I slightly blunder about in a fog.

In my case, I am never certain (when I plan a cross country from x to y) to whom I should be talking on the way.

This is turning into a separate thread which I'll continue elsewhere!!

But the question still stands - what was the most poorly taught section of your PPL???

[FlyingForFun]

I suspect everyone will have a different answer. Mainly because every instructor is different. But partly because every student is different - some people are just naturally good at r/t and may have no problems with radio work, but will have problems with different bits instead.

For me, the thing I'm still no good at is PFLs. I admit I don't practice them as often as I should - but they were hit-and-miss during PPL training, and they're still hit-and-miss when I practice them now.

ChiSau - I think maybe the reason you're not sure who to talk to is because there often is no difinitive answer. But have a look in the LARS section of the Pooleys guide as a first stab, and if there's no open LARS facility near where you're flying you can try any ATC airport for a FIS. London Information will give you a service wherever you are if you can't find anyone else to talk to (or even if you can).

FFF
---------------

[AerBabe]

The 'how to pay for it' part. :(

I don't think any part of my PPL was poorly taught, but the more people I speak to about instructors, the more I realise how lucky I was with mine. He was extremely thorough, going into things in more detail than was strictly necessary and hence increasing the time taken before he'd let me do the GFT. Partly this was at my request, so instead of a 180 degree turn in cloud we'd do climbing, descending and turning in cloud, as well as recovery from unusual attitudes. On one occasion he was even giving me an approach course to steer - removing the foggles as I was nicely lined up on final. Navigation was equally well covered, going into various methods for position fixing, low level nav, map/feature translation etc. R/T was fine as I learned at a busy airport and landed away at a variety of small grass strips.

The only thing that was missing was leaning of mixture when flying at altitude. And side slipping wasn't covered much.

Editted to say: FFF, I don't think the phrase 'hit and miss' is suitable when talking about PFLs... :D

[DRJAD]

Leaning the mixture (both how to, and when to re-enrich it.)

Side-slipping.

Both the above now covered (after getting the licence, I booked some time with an instructor specifically to cover these.)

To whom to talk on RT: generally covered in CAP413, I would have thought, though often only by implication. I think a useful section of training would be ground briefing to cover some likely cross-country scenarios from this point of view.

Some early instrument panel familiarisation, and revision/more items, as training goes on would be useful. For example, I was initally unsure about how to use the intercom panel to select what I wanted - some reassurance would be useful, and I'm sure it would make a difference for early students.

In general, though, I've been very happy with the training I've received so far: and have had several different instructors: this has enhanced the experience for me, gaining some experience through their slightly different way of seeing things/explaining things.

[Monocock]

I had to teach my self how to use a transponder! My PPL instructors kept telling me just to say "Negative transponder" whenever I was givwn a sqwauk!! I did this for two years after getting my licence until I bought an a/c with a txpdr and thought i'd better use it!

R/T training wasn't great either. I used to spend hours working out how to go round the "controlled bits". I then bought a little ICOM receiver and would listen to Boscombe in the office for hours until I had heard nearly everything that could be said over the radio and now I never worry about the PTT button.

I had never fuelled an a/c when I finished my PPL and had to learn that!

In case anyone is wondering where I learned (so they can avoid it) I do know that they have improved their ways considerably!;)

[In Altissimus]

Funny - I've been thinking about this very subject as I need to do 5 hours on-type 'training' with an instructor for the syndicate I've joined. I want to get the most out of it so have been thinking about what's missing from my 'flying toolkit'.

So far my list consists of...

Spins/awareness - have only spun once (I know this is contentious..., let's not start another thread on this)

Never transitted proper controlled airspace.

Never filed a flight plan.

Cross-channel procedures.

Leaning.

That should take 5 hours - what with landing the thing as well!

p.s. No comments about my excellent (alcohol-induced) leaning abilities please :}

[Evo]

Maybe I was lucky, but I cannot think of a single part of my PPL that was badly taught.

They cannot teach you everything during the 45 hours, so you're always going to find stuff you don't know/forgot/don't understand/haven't done, but that's not really a reflection on the school (unless it's something in the syllabus or something real important like what to do if there's no oil pressure after startup). It's not bad PPL teaching if they haven't sent me SVFR through the London TMA or given me a cross-channel checkout. Post-PPL all I need to do is find someone and ask. I guess sometimes I have to buy some tea to get them talking, but... :)

[Fly Stimulator]

I covered all the basics in my various training courses (microlight, then NPPL, then JAR PPL), but some things which I use in my flying now weren't really addressed in training in any depth: mainly things which become relevant when you leave the local area - flight plans; controlled airspace transits; use of flight levels and the quadrantal rules (and the differences with neighbouring countries) etc.

The microlight training doesn't really cover long-distance travel stuff much, and by the time I did the A Group courses I'd taught myself anyway, so maybe it would have been explained in more depth if I'd done them ab initio.

I did do some full spin training though, and some lessons in mountain flying while on holiday in New Zealand which I've sadly not been able to put to use around London yet, though the soaring craggy peaks of the Chilterns hold less fear for me now than they once did. :)

[KCDW]

Leaning !!!!

You know it’s funny, after my recent thread on this subject, I must admit to coming away thinking that everybody got trained in it for the PPL, that I was the odd one out, and that my instructor may have been remiss. A few people were advising me that I should get a better instructor.

But it strikes me from this thread that an awful lot of PPLs don’t get trained in it. Does anyone know whether it is part of the training sylabus or not?

After thought, my considered opinion is that PPLs should get training in it - wherever they are based, if only to instill good engine management disciplines from day one. It’s a bit like learning BUMFFICHH, most learner PPLs don’t fly retractables, but it must be a good thing to instill the U into the psyche awaiting that glorious day when we use it in vengence...:)

[Tall_guy_in_a_152]

The whole concept of crosswind landings never came up during my training. I would consider that a fairly major ommission.

My home airfield has multiple runways and I guess I was lucky with 'away' landings so I never had to do one with a crosswind component of more than a few (maybe 6?) knots.

I have telephoned ATC a couple of times since then to ask for a crosswind circuit but both times it was 'not convenient'.

Being something of a fair-weather pilot it has not been a problem so far, but one of these days ....

Similarly to previous posters in this thread I was not trained on leaning techniques. I found my cross-channel checkout (with a different instructor) useful for that.

One thing I regret is the number of post PPL hours I wasted by avoiding the unknown. e.g. my first MATZ penetration - a trivial operation once you've done one, but for some reason I found the whole idea daunting beforehand.

Luckily I realised what was happening and then made a conscious effort to try something knew on every flight (no sniggering please). Flipping through various books (mostly Thom) it was amazing how many things I had learned and answered questions about but never actually done in the air. It worked wonders for my confidence and I recommend it to all recent PPLs.

Cheers,

TG.

[PhilD]

Leaning and flight plans. I managed to get a PPL without once touching the red lever or filing a proper (i.e. written) flight plan. As soon as I wanted to fly somewhere any distance I realised that I had to learn how to do both of these for myself.

[mad_jock]

I think the main reason for not teaching Leaning and getting the student to do it, is that it shags the engine if not done properly.

When i brought the subject up in standarsation meeting I was told quite firmly NO. Been done before and maitanence bills went through the roof, cracked spark plugs every check, cyclinders losing compression etc.

The school will factor in the fuel costs into the price along with engine life. Much prefer to waste fuel than risk killing a engine before its time is up.

MJ

[No. 2]

"Been done before and maitanence bills went through the roof"

Maybe the school should have done a better job teaching them?

"The school will factor in the fuel costs"

So now, in addition to not being taught correctly, they're paying more for their flying than they ought to?

Leaning the engine is an important part of flying and engine management. So instead of treating students like they're idiots perhaps they should be educated? This may then reduce the amount of half-truths and rumours which only serve to make the situation worse.

Jeremy Pratt has a fairly extensive section on this in one of his books. So he seems to think it's worth teaching.

[HelenD]

I think the poorest part of my PPL was how to understand NOTAMs. I know how to get them taught myself that but I still dont really understand enough to know if they affect me or not. Its one subject the books dont seem to cover except for the fact you need to look at them.
I have coverd flight plans but will be revising that soon on a x channel trip, as for spinning it is planned that I give it a go with an instructor I trust of course. I was taught leaning the mixture on last years x channel trip havent tried it since as I rarely fly high enough.

[RichyRich]

Im still a student, but so far what I can say is it depends on the instructor more than anything else. I started a couple of years ago (don't run away... yet.. - the flying school went bust and hogged down some of my hard-earned cash while they were at it), and my then-instructor enjoyed the fact we were in C152 aerobats. Sprial dives were his thing, without bothering to tell me what the hell he was up to. Hated it, and it seems to have rubbed off a bit on stalls. Hate them. Been once with my new(er) instructor, wasn't too bad. Need to repeat soonish, as the rust has already set in.

R/T so far is ok-ish, except I do find I get a bit flustered when ATC say anything I'm not expecting in, say, a clearance to enter the Solent airspace. One day I'll get the hang of it. I think the current problem is I've been stuck doing circuits during winter, mostly thanks to too high cross wind.

[mad_jock]

Under the PPL course leaning is a demonstration in the effects of controls. Ex 1-5

Lycombing advise only to lean the engine above 5000ft I think.

The problem I think you will find is that most instructors at PPL level will have about as much training in leaning the engine as you have after reading Jeremy Pratt. Its not covered in any detail In the Instructor course, just the standard demo of pull it back until it starts grumbeling then push it up a bit until it runs clean again then watch your T&P's for over heating.

During my training up to starting work as an Instructor I leaned the engine once and that was in effects of controls on the FIC. So I suspect that on the subject of leaning both student and instructors are idiots.

Since then apart from the standard demo given in lessons. I only lean it when I am above Fl 65 and as yet I have never had a student that has felt the urge to do a xc at that level.

My boss tells me not to encourage the students to do it, the engineers tell me its a bad idea and shags the engine.

And as for it would save the students money in fuel costs. Well maybe, but i doudt it. There are alot of very tight school owners out there and if they thought they could make more money by getting everyone to lean the engine I am sure every instructor would be made to do it.

MJ

[dmjw01]

Lycoming are very clear in the advice on their website:

"First we must know that cruise power for Lycoming normally aspirated engines is generally considered to be 55% to 75% of the maximum power for which the engine is rated. At these power settings, the engine may be leaned at any altitude. There has been confusion about the reference to not leaning below 5000-feet density altitude. Remember that this reference only applies to those power settings above the cruise range — those normally used for takeoff and climb. Once cruise power has been set, leaning to best economy should be standard procedure as damage to the engine will not occur from leaning at cruise power settings."

(The bold is in the original document - I didn't add it.)

So there you have it - it's not leaning that damages the engine, it's leaning at high power that does it.

Here's the document (http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main.jsp?bodyPage=support/publications/keyReprints/operation/properLeaning.html) on the Lycoming website that explains this. If you go up a level to the "Operation" section there's plenty of other useful documents too.

I personally think there's no excuse for flying schools not teaching this - I myself was never taught, and have had to educate myself by looking for reliable sources of information such as this document. I quickly realised that there's so much myth around this subject that it's almost useless asking an instructor because they're just as likely to give completely wrong advice. This thread has just confirmed my suspicions!

Sure, if done badly it can damage the engine - but all the other controls can cause problems if mishandled as well. Think about it: misusing the elevators can break an aircraft... so better not move the control column back or forth. Too much rudder during a stall will cause a spin, so we'd better leave the rudder neutral all the time as well. Come to think of it, the ailerons can put you into a spiral dive - best not tamper with those while you're flying either ;)

"the engineers tell me its a bad idea and shags the engine"

I suspect there's some distorted logic here. What happens (I suspect) is this:
1) An engineer discovers a shagged engine.
2) Engineer asks the owner "do you lean your engine?"
3) Owner says "yes".
4) Engineer concludes that leaning damages the engine.

But the engineer doesn't consider the large number of pilots who lean their engine correctly and don't suffer damage (they also don't suffer stuck valves, oily plugs, etc. etc). All the engineer really remembers is this one pilot who leans aggressively at high power and knackers the engine.

I'm certainly not saying all engineers are wrong - just that it only takes one owner to misinterpret what the engineer says and pass on the misinformation, and thus a myth is born.

[Pilotage]

I don't think I can comment about my own PPL, because I flew with so many instructors in so many types that pretty much everything got covered well by somebody.

But to generalise..

- If you want to learn PFLs VERY well, fly with a microlight instructor.
- If you want to learn RT and systems operation, fly with a military instructor
- If you want to learn to fly by feel and without instruments, fly with a gliding instructor
- If you want to learn to fly procedurally, fly with a young GA instructor.

But the thing I'd say is universally least well taught, and is far too much left to be learned by osmosis, is airmanship.

P

[IO540-C4D5D]

I agree with most people here; lots of different bits could be taught better. Radio is a particularly difficult one; one school I know of teaches a "listening watch" (en-route) which greatly reduces pilot workload but most others get you to talk to everybody on the map which I don't think is right either.

I think the real problem area is navigation. PPL-style visual navigation is inadequate for much UK flight. Unless you have so many hours you can fly the plane with your eyes shut, it is hard work at best and impossible at worst (e.g. vis below 8k).

Perhaps an interesting approach would be to dig up some of the 90%+ of PPLs who pack it in permanently before the first renewal, and ask them why they packed it in. The flight training industry pretends the reason is money. It is in some cases for sure, but lots of people I have met have said they just did not have the confidence to fly anywhere too far.

Incorporation of GPS in the PPL is the only real solution... controversial as hell.

[Fly Stimulator]

...the 90%+ of PPLs who pack it in ...

Does anybody know what the actual figures are for new PPLs and how many do stop flying relatively soon after getting the licence? How many make 100, 200, 300 hours etc?

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I think the only bit of the syllabus we skimped was 'low flying', on the basis that 'too many guys around here do that anyway'.

Actually, I think it was a serious omission. As I subsequently discovered (!) flying low is very different. You have no usable horizon reference, and in strong winds drift over the ground becomes very apparent and can lead the unwary into stall/spin situations when turning downwind.

SSD

[KCDW]

Fly Stimulator

Drop Out rates - This was an interesting thread.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=81480

No conclusive evidence, but the figures suggested that grabbed my attention was;

“>75% of all student pilots quit before completing the private license, and that >75% of all PPLs quit flying within five years of becoming licensed.”

SSD

Low-level flying – agreed. It is amazing just how more difficult it is to navigate VFR at 500’. I recollect about 1 hour devoted to it in my PPL, which was an eye-opener. You get to do about another hour in the IMC rating on bad weather circuits (500’) - which are loads of fun - and another good reason to do the IMC.

[Hersham Boy]

I think I'm quite lucky... my first (and longest duration) instructor insisted I was near-perfect on the radio, showed me a few spins and let me recover from one, positively LOVED me having to do wing-down on-the-limit crosswind landing (so lots of sideslip practice) and showed me what the mixture knob was for other than starting and stopping the air-conditioning fan on the front.

That said, when I passed my GFT I realised that I was really nervous about flying solo! So I guess he left the confidence bit out :D

Hersh

[BlueRobin]

For me:
Spins (exercise 11?)
Precautionary landings (ex 17)

There's the quality/quantity argument.

Do you teach all the syllabus, but not very well?
Do you teach most of the syllabus and do it really well?
Or should you teach all the syllabus and give the the student pilot a good grounding, before going off to the flight test?

Luckily, due to wx in part, I did the latter with experienced instructors. Pays to ask if you can do x/y/z exercise in the book too.

There's the old RAF ATC saying: "don't ask, don't get" :ok:

[IO540-C4D5D]

Fly Stimulator

One can see various figures on the CAA website showing the number of PPLs etc awarded each year, and the percentage that go on to do IMC or IR afterwards, and certain conclusions can perhaps be drawn from that. I once wrote to the CAA asking for dropout rates (because figures attributed to the CAA come up in the press from time to time) but they declined.

"CAA" figures I have seen were 75% of PPLs lapsing with an average of 10 hours flown, and 93% lapsing within 2 years. These certainly tally with what I have seen myself hanging around the training scene for a few years, and the latter was confirmed to me by a busy school which has been at it for many years.

My view is that large chunks of the absolutely ancient syllabus do need a rewrite if people are to come out trained to fly with confidence. However an equally desperate need is modern aircraft and that is just not going to happen because most of the training industry is virtually bankrupt. You could do it in rare situations e.g. a well funded and well managed school in a good catchment area and with no competition.

[flower]

I note a number of you have raised the issue of R/T and how some of you feel thats badly taught or you feel ill prepared.
Most ATC units will welcome a visit from PPLs and those learning to fly , if you are uncertain about arranging the visit yourself I am sure your flying club could probably arrange something for you.
To talk to ATC face to face may take away some of the fear of talking on the R/T. They may also be able to give you some guidance on various phrases you may feel uncomfortable with.
R/T to us is a second language we use it day in day out and are very comfortable with it , but we are very aware that when you do not use it very often it can be a struggle.

If in doubt ask , we only bite sometimes :)

[mad_jock]

dmjw01


I think you have put my thoughts better into words than my last post.

On the subject of leaning its the blind leading the blind if you ask most instructors, which is why it isn't taught.

Apart from the first effects of controls lesson they had for there PPL they will not have had to cover the subject until a 30sec demo in the FIC.

So I wouldn't say its the instructors fault for not teaching it. Its more the powers that be not deeming it worthy enough to include it any other training apart from the second lesson in his/her career.

MJ

[dmjw01]

MJ... I hope it didn't seem like I was attacking instructors. For some peculiar reason I have a bee in my bonnet about leaning :)
__
David

[Chuck Ellsworth]

mad-jock has a point.

Engine leaning "must" be taught properly. In most light aircraft there is very little information to give you correct leaning information, EGT temps. have to be probed for each cylinder or it is pure guess work.

On engines with carbs such as C150's the carb heat is the best leaning check to ensure you are not to lean.

When I owned a flight school I had to put very strict rules on leaning because my cylinder repair costs were just out of hand.

Chuck E.

[IO540-C4D5D]

It is probably correct to say that one cannot damage an engine by excessive leaning so long as one is below say 65% power.

While one must go by the POH in all cases as the #1 reference, Lycoming have a general recommendation to not lean above 75% power.

So a simple rule like: never lean during climb and never cruise above [some power setting, an RPM figure on a fixed pitch prop plane] might do.

But I think not teaching leaning is the least of the shortcomings of the PPL syllabus
:O

[GroundBound]

Well, I had to stop and think a bit about this one. On reflection, I realise I've had hardly any formal teaching, apart from practical flying!

When I got my PPL, 35 years ago, I was training in ATC, and it was assumed that the legal side, navigation, plotting, and Met. were covered there. We received probably about an hour of aerodynamics, and had a 10 question multi-choice written test (I think). We had to pass a separate R/T "airborne" exam, but that was pretty simple.

The rest was practical flying, including spins and cross country. I missed out on crosswind landing for some reason (still evident now! :O ). There was no instrument training at all. Minimum qualifying time was then 30 hours - that's exactly what we got - 30 hours and a PPL!

When I regained my PPL some 35 years laer, it was all self study with Trevor T. , the Confuser and MS2002 for instrument training. Regaining the licence was about 25 hours of flying and no ground school (averaged 95% in the exams though :) ). I had 30 minutes of instrument flying ground school and about 90 minutes of instrument flying before the skill test. Here's to MS2002 :ok: .

So its kinda difficult to say which was the worst, since whatever it was it must have been me. :D

[NickGreen]

Having been trained in South Africa I suppose I was both lucky in that they seem to teach a sylabus based on the old model - ie: pretty strict and very thorough. The only thing that seemed to be missing was familiarity to web site based Met Briefing - we just called a forcaster and asked for todays lies. On my return to the UK the Royal Flight info was the other issue.

I'd recommend Irv Lee's seminars as they explode all the myths of the PPL. Anything missed is soon revealed.

[bletchleytugie]

Helen D if your confused by NOTAMs and Flight Planning then perhaps you see the thread under the NOTAM section about a proposed visit to AIS at Heathrow.

Leaning engines is a mystry to me and I avoid it where possible - being mechanically challenged I'm convinced that the engine will stop (and I have sufficient history not to be able to mount a suitable defence against the prodding finger of an engineer, his case being based on prejudice, ie if I was near anything it would break regardless of my particpation in the event)

[mad_jock]

dm :) these sort of threads are what pprune is about.

MJ

[Irv]

Leaning engines is a mystry to me and I avoid it where possible - being mechanically challenged I'm convinced that the engine will stop

I've had 2 pilots in 4 days pull the mixture when they thought they were pulling the carb heat - one on the ground during powerchecks, one running into a practice stall. I've only ever had it done to me once before, about 8 years ago, now twice in the same week.

On the general subject of PPL knowledge - I meet many new PPLs and they don't know the exactly same things I didn't know (but needed to) when I was at their stage! I think many instructors say they wished they'd known (whatever) when they were merely PPLs, and then the instructor-instructors will say they wish they had known something else when they were only instructors, and so it goes on.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

On the general subject of PPL knowledge - I meet many new PPLs and they don't know the exactly same things I didn't know (but needed to) when I was at their stage!

What were those things, Irv?

SSD

[Irv]

What were those things, Irv?

Ah, you mean you want commercially sensitive information? ;) :D

I think it's safer for me to just say that when I got my licence I couldn't believe it - I thought I'd somehow slipped through the system - I knew there was so much I didn't know that I needed to know, but didn't actually know exactly what it was or I might have been able to read up about it or 'something'. I remember thinking: "hey, they've actually given me a pilot's licence - I wonder what will happen if they ever discover how much I don't know or understand about this". The learning experience after the PPL for fun flyers seemed to be years of 'learning by mistakes' or deliberately staying in limited known territory and getting bored
Today I still meet some new ppls like I was and they think (like I did) that they are the only ones.