SRA on pre skill test flight

[pilgrim flyer]

I was recently charged with the task of taking another instructor’s student on a pre skills test flight. The instructor (A) and student particularly wanted me to go through stalling as the student had done very little on type. On the day in question the cloud was base 1700 tops 2500 broken to 8/8 locally. The base airfield does not have an instrument approach.

The student was briefed and asked it he would like to do an SRA into another relatively local airfield. I like to do this with my own students in order that they might have some idea what to do if things turn nasty weather wise. We duly climbed through the cloud carried out some stalls well clear of cloud and practised position fixing using VOR/DME and some VOR tracking and ADF awareness training. This was followed by the pre arranged and briefed SRA which was carried out successfully.

We duly landed, debriefed, rebriefed the following sortie covering diversions, precautionary landings, short field landings and low-level nav. The student acquitted himself well and I recommended that he take the skills test.

Subsequently the student was taken aside by the CFI and questioned as another instructor (B) from the same school had complained that I was teaching an exercise outside the PPL syllabus.

I am an unrestricted instructor with the applied instrument flying restriction removed.

Was instructor B correct in both his objection and his action?

Your views would be appreciated.

PF

[Whopity]

The PPL syllabus is a minimum required to obtain a licence. You can't do less than the minimum, but anything in addition has to be added value. If the opportunity arises, then take advantage of it and don't bother about those who wear blinkers!

[foxmoth]

I agree with Whopity, as long as it is not unsafe the only person who has any real right to object to doing extra stuff is the student, as long as he is happy what is the problem?:ugh:

[High Wing Drifter]

Sounds like office politics to me. Worthy only of dismissal with a disdainful look and hand waved in a superior fashion.

[the dean]

given the fact that you could not do the planned lesson...and you asked the student if he wanted the other...i would say at least you did not disappoint and send him/her home. most are happy to get flying at any cost and the fact that the purpose of the lesson was a little advanced for the student is neither here nor there....

i am in JAAland but as an examiner i would say that not alone is instrument appreciation a part of the course, but on a flight test i expect a candidate to be able to use any / all equipment in the plane including determining position using vor/dme/adf and vor tracking.

whether the sra was required or simply of benefit is perhaps the question but as you say ..anything that may help to get a student out of a jam is still experience .

has instructor B any reason for his/her complaint...such as you are seen to do things like this that he/she may feel suits your desire to teach such things rather than stick to basics..the fact that you are qualified to teach instrument flying is not the point if such flying does not form part of the course at your school. if it is instructor B should also be teaching it is he/she is suitably qualified...if not and it is on the course then somebody suitably qualified has to do it.if it is not required and therefore not part of your schools course then you should not be teaching it unless your cfi agrees.

over the years at a school i taught at we had something similar...where an instructor was at times SHOWING people how to do an ils and vor/dme as often as he could. now i draw the line there...he was practicing for his own cpl no doubt.ils and vor/dme other than a brief demonstration for the purpose of instrument appreciation is definately not on the ppl course.

as long as what you are doing is part of the course and being taught with the knowledge and approval of your cfi i would have thought that you are in the right.

if you are just suiting yourself then no.

if in doubt ask your cfi.:ok:

the dean.

[pilgrim flyer]

Thanks all for those replies.

I had indeed discussed it with the student, along with the other excercses carried out. I most certainly was only doing it for his benefit.

There was definately more than a whiff of office politics to this incident and the instructor concerned has been debriefed in no uncertain terms.

The student passed his skills test last Wednesday, and when he informed me by telephone expressed his desire to train for an IMC rating with me.

SRA practice vindicated, methinks.

Thanks again

PF

[BEagle]

Personally I think that the SRA was a good confidence builder for the student to consolidate some basic IF skills. But it mustn't give him the feeling that it's something he could do solo without further training.

Curiously, I've found with IMC rating testing that the playstation generation who play with computer toys like MS FlightSim can fly the needles tolerably well, but find listening to ATC directions whilst flying IF far more taxing. Hence they can play about flying 'procedural approaches' on a PC, but real radar vectored ILS approaches, SRAs or PARs are often poorly flown as the student misses RT calls or wanders off datums whilst trying to work out what to say.

In 1968, my one hour of PPL IF training concluded with the instructor pattering me through a SRA - flying headings, speeds and rates of descent until he took control, told me to take off that horrible hood and then to land on the RW directly ahead!

As for the demo ILS brigade, I agree entirely with The Dean. I noticed some wannabee airliner-driver FIs doing that at the student's expense, so now require that no-one teaches IF before the student has completed circuit consolidation and has demonstrated that he/she can take-off, depart the CTR via the standard VFR departure route, reposition for a standard VFR arrival and complete a couple of circuits - all without FI assistance.