On Being Hurried...

[Sunfish]

As I gradually obtain a very little experience, I am becoming sensitive to being hurried. There are two types of being hurried - on the ground and in the air. There are two agents that instigate the rush to complete - self imposed deadlines and those imposed by other people. They are all potentially deadly.

"Get there-itis" we should all already know about. This is caused by the pressure of events - the important appointment, the party, the train to catch. It can be imposed by passengers or subtly, by yourself and it can attack you both in the air and on the ground.

However, there are other forms I wish to mention because they can trip us up when we least expect it.

The commonest on the ground form is the hurried walk around caused by a distraction like a phone call, a "late" fuel truck or passenger, etc. but the effect is the same; we concentrate on what we think matters and miss things.

The one that is biting me at the moment is getting hurried in the air. I have spent a little time getting current again and specifically on high wing light sport aircraft that I am finding difficult to land in a crosswind because of their light weight and lack of momentum compared to a C172.

However I think i have traced a good chunk of that problem down to being hurried by instructors. It must be a real pain to have to sit in the circuit day after day and coax ham fisted idiots like me to perform. I don't have the patience to do it.

However what does not help is subtle, maybe even unnoticed pressure from instructors to do everything faster. This takes the form of demands for a tighter circuit, and what is especially annoying, the request for the earliest possible turn to base, which means that if you are not very quick with throttle and flaps you are going to arrive on final high, too fast, improperly trimmed and generally mentally unready to appreciate your situation.

This is not helped by the usual flying school requirement to add five to Ten knots to approach and threshold speeds….

The result is usually a very untidy arrival, float, bounce, you name it when an additional Thirty seconds on final would make things a lot more settled.

Of course we all want to do tight and efficient circuits, precise control of airspeed and attitude, etc., but that takes time to learn.

I wish instructors could perhaps put themselves in the students shoes a little more and try not to let their impatience show.

A further problem for inexperienced pilots is when they visit unfamiliar strips on their own and unconsciously try and do everything at the same hurried pace they were taught at YMMB. Luckily for me I only bounced once or twice and went around before realising that i needed to slow down and be far more deliberate in setting up my landings. However I still caught myself unconsciously responding to instructor pressure this month.

To put that another way,, Arkaroola is not Moorabbin, if you want to make it a five minute final, Doug is not going to bite you.

[LeadSled]

This is not helped by the usual flying school requirement to add five to Ten knots to approach and threshold speeds….

Sunny,
Which is a prolific contributor to landing accidents.
Tootle pip!!

[Squawk7700]

Like it or not Sunfish, the cockpit is a fast paced environment.

Just look at the crosswind landings in this video:

https://youtu.be/yGMI5hKFJVY

[Sunfish]

I agree Squawk, but the approach should not be fast paced unless you are dealing with restrictive terrain. Nice video.

[Squawk7700]

The best part of that video is how the student is frantically "chasing" the aircraft with big control movements, then after the instructor says to lay off, the aircraft keeps flying normally as it was before hence demonstrating that it didn't need correcting.

[Atlas Shrugged]

Unless you're on fire, there is ABSOLUTELY #@!%ING NOTHING, that ever needs to be done in a hurry in or on an aircraft!

[Lead Balloon]

This is not helped by the usual flying school requirement to add five to Ten knots to approach and threshold speeds….Bad airmanship and dangerous.

If these kinds of things are happening, it just goes to show, again, the yawning chasm between the rhetoric around the regulatory "reform" program and reality. Tens of thousands of pages of regulations and Manuals of Standards, yet the blind are still leading the blind.

[Checklist Charlie]

the blind are still leading the blind

Who then go on to become instructors!

[BleedingAir]

Unless you're on fire, there is ABSOLUTELY #@!%ING NOTHING, that ever needs to be done in a hurry in or on an aircraft!

Not quite sure where to start with this statement.

[outlandishoutlanding]

A tight circuit is a good circuit; nothing more embarrassing than an engine failure on late downwind and not making it back.

I've had instructors spring engine failures on me when they thought I was drifting too far out in the circuit.

[gerry111]

Thread drift warning..
Has anyone here not enjoyed the joys of visiting Arkaroola?
If not, then why not? :)

[AU-501]

More haste, the result is less speed.

Situational awareness is king, it takes time to develop. When you get it, hang on to it.
Fly safe all.
��

[Duck Pilot]

Same stupid mentatality that some people have when they get behind the wheel of their car. Driving around over the speed limit in built up areas to save a minute or maybe two. They don't think about the increased risk of having an accident or running over a child.

Sunny, just operate at a pace that you are happy with. If not just do what I do, loose my mind, get out of the cockpit and say, right your the expert get in here and you fly this thing and I'll go home. Old age has made me very intolerant of fast pace people.

[Sunfish]

Duck and others, I have no problems doing things fast and efficiently when it is called for, we all have to do that. What I was noticing perhaps for the first time in the air, how hurrying stuff, for whatever reason, sets you up for failure.

I see this a lot in on the water docking situations with boats - people charge at the dock without briefing their crew, setting up their dock lines and fenders for instant use and mentally rehearsing their escape plan. The usual result is screams of 'fend off!" in a high pitched voice from the skipper often followed by the sound of an expensive crash arrival.

What I've realised is that some authority figures invite inexperienced drivers to hurry and too many take the bait.

[thorn bird]

Whatever happened to the concept of a "Stabilised" approach?

Lead ballon hits the nail on the head. So many times we see on these threads pilots expressing their frustration of trying to interpret what the myriad volumes of what passes as regulation in this country actually means or intends.

The same basic principles are no less important or different today as they were 50 years ago, so why is it these principles have been corrupted in the modern era?

When one looks at the experience and qualifications of those that regulate and those that teach the art of committing aviation, there maybe lies the answer.

The impatience of youth leads to this frantic desire to "Get there", the old joke of the old bull and the young bull is so poignant.

Aircraft manufacturers go to a whole heap of trouble and expense to produce figures and procedures for safe operation of the aircraft they make, why the hell do these people think they know better?

[Ixixly]

Thorn bird, I don't believe that they all mean to come across as thinking they know better, often it feels like they take the figures from the book as being safe and like to add a little extra on for "Extra Safety". You have to admit it's not that foolish an idea, but perhaps often just not thought through all the way? It doesn't help when there are things in the POH/POMs etc.. that don't make sense or are just plain wrong, often it erodes peoples trust in the rest of what is printed, rightly or wrongly that is a part of human behaviour, people do things that they "Feel" work better or give better results but lack any actual evidence and forget to consider the penalties their new procedures incur.

Oh the original subject I couldn't agree more with you Sunfish, it can be a problem these days that Instructors feel bored and frustrated, some are just there to get their hours and get the hell out again, some have been there for too long and are only looking ahead now. This is not to say they're all like that, there are of course brilliant instructors who actually enjoy what they're doing but our own industry creates the problem of guiding people into Instructor roles with the promise of a first quick job without having to leave the comfort of the School they learnt in or the uncertainty of when they'll get a job elsewhere and they bend themselves to fit the idea of what they think they need to be whether they're actually that way or not.

[weloveseaplanes]

An interesting post.

The other day I flew some elderly people to a small airstrip on a charter. Some of them were nervous. We took everything slowly. The flight was explained to them on the ground before we took off. It took about 10 minutes. Having been raised by my Grandparents I tried very hard to be respectful to them. They asked good questions and we all entered the aircraft like a team or family with a common purpose.

I flew better for having verbalized the flight before we took off. Afterwards the people complemented the flight. They said they had never had such a professional flight, but what perhaps they meant is they hadn't really been respected before being flown. It would be nice if todays instructors can appreciate how fortunate they are to be able to fly.

10 minutes of slowly talking about what we will do, and visualizing it, before we even step in the aircraft, leads to better performance.

It is an absolute honor to be able to fly and a blessing to be able to share that with others.

Keep the Faith.

[wishiwasupthere]

Is that you Compylot? :E:E

[Shagpile]

OK I'll defend Ye Olde instructor! I did 2 years training ab-initio at BFTS, and 2 years teaching instructors course at CFS in the RAAF. The concepts are the same.

Both flight reviews & teaching a syllabus have certain things to cover and time is a factor. If your instructor has actually thought about the lesson, she has broken it up into maybe 4 different things to teach and allocated time, with 5-10 minutes flex to fix any problem areas before moving along. If the instructor is any good, they will have briefed the key concepts on the ground and introduced any phrases or words they will use airborne; this will save a lot of time airborne. They will also have picked a couple of common errors and showed you how to fix them *on the ground* so you know what they're talking about.

Then airborne, you're in the circuit and having some problems with maintaining an accurate aim point on final. I want to re-demo what a nice fixed aim point looks like, then have enough time to talk you through one and see 1-2 more.

If you're doing 747 circuits, we'll do 2 circuits and run out of time. There's less learning opportunity and we're still burning dollars.

If you're with the instructor, there is an inherent safety net (assuming they know what they're doing and it's not blind freddy with 50 hrs!!!), so what they SHOULD be doing is offloading tasks such as radio, engine management & situational awareness (as required) to allow you to concentrate on the bit that needs work.

So if you want to use your time efficiently, allow them to push you outside your comfort zone, do tight circuits to get 6x instead of 3x in. However if they see you breaking down, they should be offloading tasks and doing some good demo's so you can mimic the core concepts.

Then when you're on your own, fill your boots and take all the time you need and use some of the new skills you just learned.

P.S. Please don't fly wide circuits anyway; you should always be able to glide it in from downwind :)

[MikeJulietHotel]

Shagpile is on the money. The issue is not whether you are being pushed and going faster. The issue is whether the person doing the pushing is doing it in an intelligent way. Do they have the skills and capacity to determine whether you are ahead of or behind the aircraft? Do they know how to manage your workload so you get the maximum value for your hours?

I get far more out of flight reviews when I'm sweating and on the edge of my capability than when I'm loafing along. I get far more out of circuits on a bush strip at 300 feet than I do out of trundling around a wide circuit - 5 or 6 an hour.

I'm all for a bit of intelligent speed. I'm not much interested in clowns who can't understand where the mug (me) in the left hand seat is up to.

[Gligg]

Flying 5 knots fast on a 3 mile final could save you 8 seconds. So 45 fast circuits could save you a whole 0.1 on the tacho!

[thorn bird]

Flying five knots fast on a three mile final on a limiting strip could also put you through the fence at the other end.
Have a look at accident statistics you'll see what I mean.

[Lead Balloon]

Flying five knots fast on a three mile final on a limiting strip could also put you through the fence at the other end.
This ^^^^^

Brumby, C-210, B-777 or whatever.

[Shagpile]

Yeah the best speed is the exact, accurate one.

A good rule of thumb is to increase final speed half the gust factor.

e.g. your final speed is 70 KIAS. ATIS says "Wind 180 degrees 15 gusting 22 knots". Make your final/threshold speed 73 KIAS. It gives you a bit more control authority to deal with gusts, and your extra landing roll is taken care of because your ground speed is 10-15 kts slower from the headwind component.

And an addendum to my last post, flying faster (in speed) does not get you anywhere faster. You save time on the ground, or by cutting out track miles airborne. That's it.

I had a guy who used to say in an emergency, in cloud, do the RNAV approach at full speed. Noooooooope. That's a good way to turn yourself into a smoking wreckage. I timed it once; saves 35 seconds for about 10-15 nautical miles going 120 vs 95, but significantly increases workload in a non-autopilot, non-anything old junker (CT4!)

Summary:
- Push yourself in training if you have a safety net (VMC, Instructor)
- They should be offloading workload, even if you're highly competent at the bits they are offloading (e.g. engine, radios, schedule/timings, fuel management).
- Never fly faster on final "just because".
- If you want to get there 5 minutes faster, leave 5 minutes earlier!

[Sunfish]

Shagpile, you make one assumption in your earlier post that invalidates your argument, at least as applied to me' I have plenty of time and money (God willing!) to achieve the required performance. I am not trying to keep up with the tempo of a structured military or civil flying course.

Even if I adopted a super healthy military fitness lifestyle and lost 20 kg., I am not going to learn fast enough to benefit from a "like this - do that" instruction pace and style and I cannot invest all my waking hours in planning and study prior to instruction.

The intended outcome is to be able to perform under pressure and if I thought I couldn't I would ground myself. what I was referring to was being hurried in a learning framework where the hurrying takes away from the purpose of the exercise and introduces additional risks.

what's the old saw? A superlative pilot uses his superior judgement so as never having to demonstrate his superior skills?

Agree with you about speeds on final in gusty conditions, I've also now found instructors who are quite wary about using full flaps in such conditions as well. especially with LSA this appears to be a wise move.

[Shagpile]

I have plenty of time and money (God willing!) to achieve the required performance.

Yeah that's a good point - probably needs to be explained to the instructor so they can vary the pace accordingly. Maybe cover 2 things instead of 3 for example.

The efficiency of the lesson still has a positive learning outcome on the student though. When teaching instructors course, we used to try and eliminate anything airborne that could be said on the ground (so that ground + air makes up the entire package. In my opinion, the instructor makes their money on the ground). For example if we're teaching a sequence, a good instructor offloading the student might be able to allow the student to fly 4 of that sequence in the same time as a verbose instructor does 2. That's potentially double the hands-on-stick experience the student receives and most of the time it's because the instructor does *nothing* !! I.e. speaking less and moving those concepts to the ground actually increase the effectiveness.

For things like flight reviews, they may need to see X number of items (couple of stalls, some steep turns, one of each circuit, etc...) so there may be some kind of time imperative on those flights if we don't want to be sitting there after 1.5hrs. Remember concentration and retention drop off dramatically after about 40 minutes of high workload, so a 1.6 may not be twice the effectiveness of a 0.8.

[Gligg]

Flying five knots fast on a three mile final on a limiting strip could also put you through the fence at the other end.
Have a look at accident statistics you'll see what I mean.

Thorn Bird, I think my attempt at sarcasm didn't translate to the keyboard. The idea of flying 45 circuits to gain 0.1 is plain silly, and yes a good way to wind up in a fence!

[outlandishoutlanding]

Does anyone have opinions about the Constant-Angle Variable-Speed technique (as in Noel Kruse's books) vs the constant-speed variable angle technique on final?

[Atlas Shrugged]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas Shrugged View Post
Unless you're on fire, there is ABSOLUTELY #@!%ING NOTHING, that ever needs to be done in a hurry in or on an aircraft!

Apologies, BleedingAir. Perhaps I could have put it a little less crudely;

Hasten slowly is generally a good plan.

:ok:

[Shagpile]

Does anyone have opinions about the Constant-Angle Variable-Speed technique (as in Noel Kruse's books) vs the constant-speed variable angle technique on final?

OK lets reverse engineer the problem.

The aim of final is to get you to the correct spot on the runway, at the correct speed.

It would therefore make sense to maintain a constant aimpoint (where you want to crash, absent of a flare) and adjust speed to get there at the correct airspeed.

Constant speed / variable angle technique: never heard of it, but doesn't make much sense to arrive at the exact aimpoint you desire. You'll be pushing & pulling to maintain airspeed, presumably with a few large power changes to adjust for overshoot & undershoot. I suspect it would be more comfortable making lots of power changes in challenging conditions than lots of attitude changes.

[outlandishoutlanding]

Constant speed / variable angle == attitude for airspeed, power for rate of descent. ie you keep your airspeed constant using the attitude, and change your power to move the aimpoint up or down the windscreen.

Constant angle / variable speed == keep the aimpoint at a constant point in the windscreen, and use the power lever to keep your airspeed correct

The former is what is taught in most GA schools. Once I discovered the latter technique (and you know if you've been a school that uses that technique - the windscreen is covered in dots) I found it much easier to change between aircraft.

[Sunfish]

....and you mutter to yourself "aim point, airspeed" all the way on final.

[DraggieDriver]

It can't possibly be that simple, there must be some other aspect missing.

[josephfeatherweight]

Nice, Draggie, nice...

[Sunfish]

Very simple Draggie, unless you have a stutter…..