skyeuropecapt, no criticism here, just my interest in human behaviour / operational techniques, SOPs, etc.
During takeoff, at rotate you identified a problem with the elevator with the apparent inability to raise the nose. You considered a recommendation not to fly a go-around in your decision to stop.
That was interesting logic, an odd recall of memory; I wonder where that link originated from; training, manuals, hearsay, and why apply out of context advice to a situation with an unresolved failure. The human mind is a mysterious thing, particularly if not kept under control.
I have an old copy of a 737-400 QRH (2005). The jammed elevator drill is halfway down the page titled “Jammed or restricted flight controls”.
The drill states “overpower …”, “use maximum force … both pilots …” etc. There is no mention of using trim at this stage, and even when suggested, it is only used to offload control forces, not to provide control (also given as a table in the training manual).
The training manual also warns of the hazards of trim use during a normal takeoff – tail strike.
If the above is essentially correct then the instructors advice – use trim to rotate – may be an error or misinterpretation of existing advice; the advice could be hazardous.
The drill which I have includes a requirement to review the go-around procedure before commencing an approach. I cannot find any recommendation suggesting that the manoeuvre should not be flown with a jammed elevator if required. The training manual suggests ‘avoidance if at all possible’.
If the above aspects are relevant to your questions, then I suggest some re-reading of the manuals and QRH, and a discussion with other training staff / senior Captains to establish some of the facts about this subject.
In more general terms (other aircraft), use of trim for control has many potential problems; - what part of the control system is jammed, which way to move the trim, how far / fast should the trim be moved.
Trim systems are very powerful and although in exceptional circumstances they can be used for control, they can equally result in loss of control.
Re an 80kt control check; don’t invent a new check unless recommended by the manufacturer. What might be acceptable in a nose-heavy 747, could create problems in a smaller aft-loaded aircraft if the nosewheel was inadvertently raised in slippery crosswind conditions.