"your circuits are too wide"

[class-e]

How does one go about telling a fellow instructor that the circuit that they were flying was too wide????
Recently I was told to follow a company aircraft in the circuit pattern...they went way wide....forcing me to slow down.I was always of the understanding that circuit width was "gliding distance".
I did not want to say anything over the radio to them, as chastising over radio is downright rude!(IMHO)
This is not the first time that this has happened!!!and no doubt it will not be the last.

[Capt Homesick]

Try asking for a standardisation meeting- without saying anybody is doing the wrong thing, suggest that you all choose a common circuit. Don't name names, and be prepared for the meeting standardising on the other guy's point of view!

[mickg]

Depends on the character of the said colleague. A little banter as in a reference to "bomber ccts" might do the trick. If he is bigger than you the above post might be the better option!!

[class-e]

actually the person was female!(and not bigger than me!!!)
The only way I could think of was to ask " what do you use on this runway,as a general rule of thumb, as a downwind reference point?"
She then got really snotty saying that she had 7 times as many hours as me and that she was "still within gliding distance" and not to comment on her flying skills ever again!!!

I think I may have hit a nerve!

I also think that many people will "fly off the handle" if you are even a little bit untactful about this issue!

[Skycop]

Looks like you had better stick with the "Bomber" nickname then..or declare to ATC that you have lost sight of the departing aircraft on the navex..

[class-e]

SKYCOP....good one, I think that I will try it next time!!!

[BEagle]

"My dear - if you need re-education in asessing distance or length, perhaps you would like to re-calibrate your estimation by starting at 8 inches and taking it from there.......??"

or,

"We'd prefer it tighter, my dear!!"


No - of course I'm not being serious!!

[StudentInDebt]

Last time I flew at my usual airfield I followed someone round to about a 4 mile final - I called OM inbound (grass airfield, nearest ILS is LHR 09L) - his/her next circuit was almost inside the airfield boundary :)

[Hugh Jarse]

Tend to agree with Capt. Homesick. Any training organisation, or airline for that matter should have regular standards meetings in order to address issues just like this.

"Remaining within gliding distance" could be perceived as somewhat nebulous. What does your Ops Manual state?

You could possibly identify key geographical features in the circuit area that may be of use to both the student and instructor, but the problem with that is it is only applicable at that airfield. You have to start somewhere, though.

Class-e, you wrote that you were told to follow an A/C, so I assume you were in Controlled Airspace. Did the other instructor consider the implications of a wide circuit vs adjacent airspace? If one was to 'go wide' at somewhere like YSBK (Oz), they could be either in a busy CTR, an active Army firing range, or in the middle of a busy arrival route. A 105 Howitzer shell through the windscreen is not a good look. http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif

[squeakmail]

Stay within gliding range/ Hmmmm.

How do you climb away from ground level and stay within gliding range should the develish little engine fail shortly after take off (departure? [Cap 413]).

Then, let's go to the other end and prepare for a flapless landing...bit further out (blah, blah, blah) and have an engine failure just as you turn final (singular, no 's')...could you glide to the threshold from there?

------------------
LIVE in peace...or REST in it!

[Grandad Flyer]

It should be a matter for the CFI. Perhaps a word on what the "standard circuit" should be? Does your flight school not hold regular meetings of instructors with the CFI?
If not, how do you discuss ongoing problems? Does the CFI fly with the instructors regularly to ensure they are "standard"?

[Pub 45]

Sometimes ATC can get into the act and help you out, if they feel like it.

Recently, one of my colleagues was in the training circuit at Bankstown, following a cessna which was atleast 2 miles out on mid downwind.
Tower :"ABC confirm you're following the cessna" to which his response was a simple "negative!"
A few change of sequence instructions followed soon after.
All following circuits were normal - by all aircraft.


[This message has been edited by Pub 45 (edited 09 December 1999).]

[Hugh Jarse]

Not much has changed. When I was there the circuit would get progressively wider until someone (usually SY Approach) complained, then ATC would sort it out :)

Don't forget, it's usually the student flying the circuit, so we have to make allowances for their learning curve...

[apache]

Hugh Jarse, whilst I agree with you in that in most cases the student is flying the aircraft, surely it is up to the instructor(when onboard) to ensure correct distances etc.
If there is no instructor onboard, then,IMHO, he has failed in his teachings of circuits/circuit emergencies, because the student is not performing the circuit correctly.A student cannot be blamed for the instructors failings....at some point in his/her professional career, the instructor must stand up and say..."do it properly"

[Tinstaafl]

Apache,

I can think of lots of times where good instructional technique is to let the student fly a larger than normal circuit - at least until the students capacity has caught up with what's happening in 'real-time'. eg. upgrading to a faster or more complicated type / at times during early circuit training.

And, no, I'm not saying that the student should be allowed to stay there through out his/her training, but that the extra time given can provide enormous advantages to the learning process. It can allow the poor sod operating at 110% in a foreign, noisy, cramped, often uncomfortable environment, the time to 'catch up' & match his or her mental processes to workload.

Of course the instructor must ensure that the student learns to fly a 'correct' circuit (whatever that might be). But to push a student into a smaller circuit before he or she has the capacity to cope with the workload in the compressed timeframe can, & does, overload him or her and reduce learning effectiveness.

I'm not discounting off-loading some of the workload onto the instructor either. Both methods are part of an instructor's tools-of-trade


------------------
Fascinating how scientists & research engineers have managed to make aircraft that all use the same laws of aerodynamics all over the world.........Has anyone thought to tell the CAA?

[apache]

Tinstaafl.....I'm sorry,but I must disagree with you on this issue.
When upgrading to a faster machine, the pilot should be taught from day one to respect the speed of his/her new equipment and to be "ahead" of the aircraft.Under no circumstances should you let the aircraft dictate to you.If this means that for the first 3 or 4 circuits you have to "go-around" then why not? surely you will practice go-arounds anyway?and this will ensure that the new pilot thinks a lot more about what he/she is doing.
If they still can't handle the speed of it, then straight away you will know that although they can fly it in cruise pretty well, they do need to practice circuits a lot more!
If they are learning to fly a new aircraft,to me it would indicate that they are wishing to fly this type from now on and should be taught the correct sequence right from the start!---Don't make allowances for the pilot---if they think that they are ready for a new toy, then make them prove that they are!

[DB6]

I'm with Tinstaafl (OK, where's the name from?) on this one. It's the same thing as letting learner drivers **** around at roundabouts etc. It annoys everyone but when you think about it, it has to be done. Not everyone is an ace so people have to be allowed time to catch up with it all. Flying training, at whatever stage, is all about having sufficient spare mental capacity to handle the situation so if it means flying a few wider, slower circuits then so be it. Pushing people too far at that stage will more than likely discourage them which is not the aim in flight training. Besides which, when I have a student who is finding it all too much in the circuit and I get them to widen it out a bit it always seems to help. I rest my case.

[Jatz]

Instructing should be all about getting the best possible outcome for the student and if this requires making life a little easier for a few ccts by either taking some of the load yourself (ie radio calls, perhaps) or allowing the circuit to widen a LITTLE, then within the bounds of good airmanship, this should be done. What is the most important thing though is that good AIRMANSHIP be maintained - no infringing adjoining airspace, no 747 ccts in a Grob with a C310 up your clacker and no stuffing around when there are 6 other aircraft in the pattern. And of course if the student is finding the cct, whether pre-solo or on conversion to a quicker a/c, too much to handle give them a break and avoid rush hour! If all else fails and you're at a controlled field a polite call to the tower along the lines of 'Tower, ABC, confirm I am number 2 to the a/c on a WIDE downwind 23?' Then you have alerted the controller to the developing situation and if they deem it necessary can intervene. If they think it's still okay either live with it or request an early turn after take off to get ahead of the preceding a/c. Happy Landings J.
PS. class-e, I'm sure you would have done so anyway, but always make sure that if you are questioning a colleague that it is done in the right place ie. in private - NO STUDENTS in the area or at a standardisation meeting. And learn from your friends mistake and when a sprog with 1/7th your experience questions your actions keep off the defensive and be gracious!(It will happen! :))

[This message has been edited by Jatz (edited 12 December 1999).]

[BEagle]

Sorry - but I disagree with screwing up everyone else's circuit just because one student can't cope. Go and practise 'circuits at height' elsewhere if you must, but don't let the student get away with flying wide circuits just because he/she can't cope with trying to do too much too soon. Build them up slowly at a pace with which they can cope, but within a standard circuit. That's how the military do it - and they invented flying training methodology!!

[de La Valette]

Dead right, Beagle. Wide circuits are the curse of them all. Air rage has its beginnings with wide circuits I reckon!
The standard Boeing 737 circuit width is 1.5 miles wide. I have seen C150,s dual and solo, that wide. Keep ab initio circuits to half a mile at the most.That may mean turning downwind at 800 ft instead of climbing cross-wind to 1000ft. The fault lies primarily with the instructors concerned for not insisting on a standard circuit. It is also bad form to allow your student to do a wide circuit with its commensurate long final. It is not only wasting his hard earned dollars, but worse still costs the unfortunates trailing behind him their dollars too. Mind you, dare I say that some instructors make more money with wide dual circuits and log more hours in the long run. Why do you think that some instructors students take 20 hours to go solo, with 15 hours of that being on circuits?

[Diesel8]

DLV,

Maybe because the are not all as smart as you. Apache, try acting a little more humble and a lot more forgiving.

[BEagle]

There is a limit to the nanny society approach to life in aviation. Trainee pilots must understand that aviation requires discipline - and an example of that is accurate circuit flying!! Although we don't push civilian trainee pilots as hard as the military do, they MUST DO THINGS PROPERLY!! The whining "it's doin' me 'ead in" teenager has to be told "Do it right, or not at all. Your choice, pure and simple". I get totally fed up with some of the ridiculous nannying that goes on nowadays - I once heard an instructor telling his student that it was vital to carry a bottle of water in the cockpit of a PA28 to avoid dehydration.....in the UK in April on a 1 hour navex!??!!

[Capt Homesick]

I have to adnit, I'm with Apache and BEagle on this one- maybe it's because I taught for years at an airfield where you go into the nearest MATZ if you too wide downwind!
:)

[apache]

Diesel8.....do you want someone in your circuit who has been taught properly....or someone who thinks that they can do what they like because "it's a little bit harder today than yesterday....and mummy isn't with me"?
I say..."teach them properly or not at all!"
I know I never felt guilty about taking home a paypacket after teaching students properly....how about you?

[class-e]

Jatz...thank you for your concern.As a matter of fact I am aware of "proper procedures" for questions, and I did make sure that the student had left and there were only instructors about.Two reasons for this....1- NEVER EVER chastise an instructor in front of his/her student...
2- I may be wrong!and I don't want to be corrected in front of students!

I was very polite and sincere and got a very rude response from this instructor...which upset me a little.

A smile costs nothing....rudeness may cost you your career!

[Islander Jock]

class-e

I had a similar situation where a superior undermined my authority in front of a group of subordinates.

I took said person away from view, shirt fronted him and said "Don't you ever embarrass me in front of the others like that again".

After he cleaned his strides, I never had another problem with him again.

May not work or be appropriate in all circumstances but it certainly shows the other person you will not be walked over.

[apache]

DB-6...what is your aim in instructing?To let the students' abilities(or lack of) dictate the whole circuit pattern?To make the feel like Kings so they will come back and spend more money...when in fact they are not learning anything because you are "babying" them?

And at what stage do you stop letting them do wider circuits?.....CPL????ATPL???

In a busy circuit they will stuff it up for everyone.At remote airports...if they call "tuning base" 5 mile out...then they could cost a Regional Airline hundreds of dollars in extra flying...just because you(and others like you) can not teach proper circuits!!!

And how will the poor student feel later on when he is failed on a test because his circuits were too wide!!!

If you are not going to teach it properly....don't teach at all!!!

[BEagle]

Apache - 100% agree with you!!

[Diesel8]

My dear friend Apache,

I do not feel guilty taking home my paycheck, since I take what I do very serious, although I am far below your esteemed standards, I have had nothing but succes teaching students. Spent 3000 hours teaching all levels and still teach on occasion, since I enjoy it.

Not all people learn equally fast, we all know that, some allowances has to be made. The question should be, will this person make a good, safe pilot in the end? Does the person enjoy it? If the answer to both questions is yes, then we should procede.

Some people do require more room in the circuit, most often in the beginning or when moving up to a faster, more complex aircraft. I would certainly think that prudent, however, if there are more people in the cct, then perhaps one could relocate to a less used field or assist by making the calls. This is of course a short term solution, however, one that should not be required for long, since the student will become adept and learn a normal cct size.

As a Flight Instructor, our job is to teach people how to fly safely and "properly. We are the eyes, ears and brains and as such must use judgement.

Someone spoke of Military training. Military training is very hard and the washout rate very high, is that what we want? If you do not solo after 10 hrs, you are out? I have flown with military aviators, some were great, some were not. I have flown with people that got "washed out", same thing there.

To sum this up, I think you have to make reasonable allowances in teaching, while still requiring skill and aspiring for perfection. We are here to teach people to become safe pilots, not to create an elitist fraternity. IMHO:-)

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

A mix of sentiments here...if you allow the stude to fly erratic circuits (several reasonable ones followed by a wide "breather") how can you possibly say you're teaching him/her properly?
Wide circuits in whatever capacity demonstrate a willingness to accept errors and that isn't good enough. Now how you go about telling the perpetrator is up to you - in this case it sounds like a one to one chat backed up by a standards meeting. D8, I accept that in the commercial world, people who fly for fun want to enjoy it - but isn't that going to shaft everyone else in the cct? And the point you made about not going solo after 10 hours isn't strictly true either, but I won't go into that as it's beyond the scope of the topic.

[Swamp]

Diesel8,

I also agree with apache. I was in a 250 knot machine only a couple of hours ago and we followed a Tomahawk and 152 around the circuit very successfully. If you had of run a piece of string to illustrate the aircraft's flight path then we all would have flown through it!

You seem to think that you can widen a circuit to give your students time to think! Crazy! Aircraft manufacturers were very mindful of the fact that students would need to move into bigger aircraft and they built aeroplanes with that type of progression in mind.

PA38 -> PA28 -> PA28R -> Saratoga etc...
C152 -> C172 -> C182 -> C182RG -> C210 etc

It's your responsibility to ensure that they aren't flying aeroplanes that they aren't really up to flying. Make them take baby steps until they find themselves in an aircraft that they are comfortable with.

Circumstances often dictate that you fly a Shonky circuit (such as wind on base? or a fellow flying a crazy wide or slow circuit) so it's not like they are never going to see a non-standard circuit - it's pretty obvious that they will see many of them during their training. It seems to me that YOU are one of those shonks that has the rest of us working hard to follow you. It's up to you to teach a consistent circuit that is nothing but perfect so they can recognise those patterns that are not.

It's all part of being a professional.



[This message has been edited by Swamp (edited 14 December 1999).]

[Diesel8]

I will just crawl back into my hole and let my esteemed colleagues teach proper cct's.

[dreamer99]

This is one of my favorite topics. I'm a US CFI (please don't flog me!) Most US pilots fly HUGE circuits. I taught at a field where noise abatement dictated close in circuits. I found that when properly trained from the beginning all students are capable of flying a tight circuit. There is another skill I haven't seen mentioned: the ability to plan and keep a tight circuit even when following a c152 flying a 747 circuit. Teach them to slow down (not VMC) this gives them real world reasons for all that speed changing training we give them initially. If the one you are following goes really far out, suggest to the tower that you could turn base now and procede direct to the runway to "tighten up the pattern." This serves 3 purposes: 1) you get to land first 2) your student gets another lesson in flexibility 3) controlling the aircraft rafther than following a rote pattern of power reductions, flap settings etc.is good training. I'd also like to mention that I have 10 years as ATC also and I always appreciated pilots who volunteered to help out in this manner.

------------------
eX-Chief CFI, X-ATC,AVN map maker,F