PFLs before first solo?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne UK
Age: 67
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PFLs before first solo?
It has recently been suggested in some quarters, that we should be teaching PFLs prior to first solo. During circuit training we teach, EFATO and glide approaches, and we indicate how to deal with an approach should the engine fail at various points in the circuit. Presumably those who who designed the PPL course put first solo at ex 14 and PFL at 16 for a reason. There seems to me to be an increasing tendency to try and avoid any possible risk, which as we all know is not possible in any walk of life. Where will it all end? Ex 15. just in case you need to take avoiding action in the circuit, Ex 19, just in case an unforseen cloud appears?
What do other FIs and FEs think?
What do other FIs and FEs think?
I say no.
The confidence achieved in the first solo is of far greater value.
In any case, if circuits are being flown correctly, the student should be reasonably capable of handling an EFATO or other engine failure within the circuit environment. Perhaps not so if he/she's flying those huge bomber circuits and 3 deg approaches so beloved by some schools....
PFLs and Steep Turns should follow circuit consolidation, then the student should be safe enough to venture beyond the circuit on his/her own to practise solo GH. Then and only then should 'Nav Intro.' be taught.
If there's one common failing, it's FIs who rush into teaching navigation before the student has achieved an adequate level of GH consolidation!
The confidence achieved in the first solo is of far greater value.
In any case, if circuits are being flown correctly, the student should be reasonably capable of handling an EFATO or other engine failure within the circuit environment. Perhaps not so if he/she's flying those huge bomber circuits and 3 deg approaches so beloved by some schools....
PFLs and Steep Turns should follow circuit consolidation, then the student should be safe enough to venture beyond the circuit on his/her own to practise solo GH. Then and only then should 'Nav Intro.' be taught.
If there's one common failing, it's FIs who rush into teaching navigation before the student has achieved an adequate level of GH consolidation!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: finally based at home!
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as far as i'm concerned pfl's should be covered prior to first solo. If the student has engine failure at any point in the circuit they should be able to at least make a good attempt at a safe landing, on or off the airfield.
up to the instructor, but i would want to make sure i've covered all the possible problems and that the student has also.
cheers...
up to the instructor, but i would want to make sure i've covered all the possible problems and that the student has also.
cheers...
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Orlando, Florida
Age: 69
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So from what "height" do you start to teach a standard PFL then, Skyhigher?
If the standard circuit is flown at, or around, 1,000' agl (depending on the individual airfield) then the emergency would commence at "low key" in the PFL, no?
Isn't that what Martinidoc and Beagle are talking about with their glide approaches (into ANY open area, on or off airfield) and standard size circuits.
Of course there are curveballs. Friend of mine did get lost on an extended downwind leg as a student - he completely lost the airport (and a lot of confidence).....but, having said that, he was still at 1,000' agl.
Do you cover navigation for diversions before first solo, just in case the airport closes with the crash of another aircraft (which often happened at Liverpool when I was there). You CAN'T cover all possibilities.
If the standard circuit is flown at, or around, 1,000' agl (depending on the individual airfield) then the emergency would commence at "low key" in the PFL, no?
Isn't that what Martinidoc and Beagle are talking about with their glide approaches (into ANY open area, on or off airfield) and standard size circuits.
Of course there are curveballs. Friend of mine did get lost on an extended downwind leg as a student - he completely lost the airport (and a lot of confidence).....but, having said that, he was still at 1,000' agl.
Do you cover navigation for diversions before first solo, just in case the airport closes with the crash of another aircraft (which often happened at Liverpool when I was there). You CAN'T cover all possibilities.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: finally based at home!
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
keygrip,
many ways to skin a cat so they say. Ok, lets make up a senario. student flying in the circuit, engine problem occurs and the student takes a few seconds to establish that there is a problem. in that time they have possibly descended 200 feet which make it pretty unlikely they are going to make the airfield. so what should they do? well if you had flown some pfls they would at least have some idea to turn into wind, get best glide speed and attempt a landing in a field. maybe they would even remember to turn of the fuel etc...
if they dont fly at least one pfl then they would (i believe) have very little chance of making a safe forced landing, on or off the airfield.
as per navigation, no i dont teach this prior to solo, but i do try to cover most things. i make sure they have at least 3 hours endurance in case the airport should have to close and i tell them where other airports are and what they should do in an emergency like airport closure.
no you cant cover all possibilities, i never said you could.
and what exactly is a standard pfl?! i teach pfl's from various heights as its unlikely they are going to occur at one height!
many ways to skin a cat so they say. Ok, lets make up a senario. student flying in the circuit, engine problem occurs and the student takes a few seconds to establish that there is a problem. in that time they have possibly descended 200 feet which make it pretty unlikely they are going to make the airfield. so what should they do? well if you had flown some pfls they would at least have some idea to turn into wind, get best glide speed and attempt a landing in a field. maybe they would even remember to turn of the fuel etc...
if they dont fly at least one pfl then they would (i believe) have very little chance of making a safe forced landing, on or off the airfield.
as per navigation, no i dont teach this prior to solo, but i do try to cover most things. i make sure they have at least 3 hours endurance in case the airport should have to close and i tell them where other airports are and what they should do in an emergency like airport closure.
no you cant cover all possibilities, i never said you could.
and what exactly is a standard pfl?! i teach pfl's from various heights as its unlikely they are going to occur at one height!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
I had an engine failure during my supervised solo hours as a student and now I am an instructor.
A month ago, a student had an engine failure in the circuit in his first flight in his own aircraft (he had never even been dual in it, we refused to fly in it as it is known as the Widowmaker). He had done two go-arounds and then the engine quit at the start of the downwind, so his first landing on a new type was with an engine out!
My experiences have led me to teach PFLs before students go solo. Engine failure has happened to me and has happened to my students while training. So I want students to be prepared. (Wise people learn from other's expereinces, any old fool can learn from their own! So covered both ways here!!)
Personally, since you don't land with a PFL, I think it a useful way of breaking up circuit training if necessary. (Can be a good idea to take a break sometimes).
It also allows you to get a feel of how the student will react when the throttle is closed. (Not a good idea to do this for the first time at 500ft!)
Now, I teach on microlights. many microlight circuits are at 500ft, so engine failure in the circuit could be 500ft, so EFATO might be just 150ft with a landing back on the runway.
So, to me, it makes a logical progression to start with PFLs at 1,000 or 1500ft, then EFIC at 1,000ft and then EFATO at 700, 500, 250 and 100ft, possibly with a land back on the runway ahead.
OK, not the order in the exercises, but it makes sense to me! And it is my butt that is on the line.
Now, as for dangerous and unusual attitudes before solo? Well, in microlighting, solo is Ex17a and all that PFL, EFATO, EFIC, dang and unusual, comes before. But I must say I have sent people solo before then if I felt it was beneficial.
However, the attitude - poss from the RAF - that aircraft don't have engine failures, the weather behaves etc, is a brave one to take. It does mean earlier solos, but does it make better pilots. I don't think so.
Very best wishes,
Colin
I had an engine failure during my supervised solo hours as a student and now I am an instructor.
A month ago, a student had an engine failure in the circuit in his first flight in his own aircraft (he had never even been dual in it, we refused to fly in it as it is known as the Widowmaker). He had done two go-arounds and then the engine quit at the start of the downwind, so his first landing on a new type was with an engine out!
My experiences have led me to teach PFLs before students go solo. Engine failure has happened to me and has happened to my students while training. So I want students to be prepared. (Wise people learn from other's expereinces, any old fool can learn from their own! So covered both ways here!!)
Personally, since you don't land with a PFL, I think it a useful way of breaking up circuit training if necessary. (Can be a good idea to take a break sometimes).
It also allows you to get a feel of how the student will react when the throttle is closed. (Not a good idea to do this for the first time at 500ft!)
Now, I teach on microlights. many microlight circuits are at 500ft, so engine failure in the circuit could be 500ft, so EFATO might be just 150ft with a landing back on the runway.
So, to me, it makes a logical progression to start with PFLs at 1,000 or 1500ft, then EFIC at 1,000ft and then EFATO at 700, 500, 250 and 100ft, possibly with a land back on the runway ahead.
OK, not the order in the exercises, but it makes sense to me! And it is my butt that is on the line.
Now, as for dangerous and unusual attitudes before solo? Well, in microlighting, solo is Ex17a and all that PFL, EFATO, EFIC, dang and unusual, comes before. But I must say I have sent people solo before then if I felt it was beneficial.
However, the attitude - poss from the RAF - that aircraft don't have engine failures, the weather behaves etc, is a brave one to take. It does mean earlier solos, but does it make better pilots. I don't think so.
Very best wishes,
Colin
Well, perhaps if you are talking about flying machines with such unreliable engines, then you might have a point.
I'm not quite sure how a student can be permitted to fly his own aeroplane without holding a licence...?
Statistically, aircraft approved for SEP Class training are maintained to a high sufficiently high standard to make engine failure a very, very unlikely event. So to cover every possible contingency might take hours and hours of training before the student would be permitted to fly solo.
Nope, I'm still of the firm view that PFLs and steep turns should wait until after circuit consolidation has been completed.
I'm not quite sure how a student can be permitted to fly his own aeroplane without holding a licence...?
Statistically, aircraft approved for SEP Class training are maintained to a high sufficiently high standard to make engine failure a very, very unlikely event. So to cover every possible contingency might take hours and hours of training before the student would be permitted to fly solo.
Nope, I'm still of the firm view that PFLs and steep turns should wait until after circuit consolidation has been completed.
I am totally with Beagle on this one - cannot see the point.
To me PFL means above 1,500 ft, anything below this sort of height then adopt the EFATO procedure. However I do make sure they have at least seen a demo of engine failure downwind and/or base leg.
To me PFL means above 1,500 ft, anything below this sort of height then adopt the EFATO procedure. However I do make sure they have at least seen a demo of engine failure downwind and/or base leg.
Personally I make sure the stude has had a few simulated failures downwind (as well as EFATO) before going solo, but wouldn't go through a full PFL trip. All I expect them to do is to hold a safe speed while setting-up a glide to the best available field and turning into wind if possible - I pre-brief the basics so that they understand the relevant issues but leave the PFL brief until it's rightful place in the syllabus.
HFD
HFD
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not that experienced as an FI(R) but PFL's before first solo - yes. Once the landings and cicuits are starting to come along OK I take them out of the circuit for a detail and go and do PFL's.
Then in the next circuit detail we look at flapless and glide approaches. On the day of first solo I make them do an EFATO and glide.
I always brief a solo circuit student on diversion if airfield closed. I tell them which airfield to go to, give them the relevant airfield plates and ensure navaids are tuned to get them there before I get it. I tell them should they have to divert to declare a Pan. Only an airfield with a tarmac runway and full ATC facilities will do.
Having done first solo if we get a day where it is flyable but not suitable for student solo circuits then I will do exercise 15 or exercise 19 instead.
Then in the next circuit detail we look at flapless and glide approaches. On the day of first solo I make them do an EFATO and glide.
I always brief a solo circuit student on diversion if airfield closed. I tell them which airfield to go to, give them the relevant airfield plates and ensure navaids are tuned to get them there before I get it. I tell them should they have to divert to declare a Pan. Only an airfield with a tarmac runway and full ATC facilities will do.
Having done first solo if we get a day where it is flyable but not suitable for student solo circuits then I will do exercise 15 or exercise 19 instead.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Britain
Age: 74
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We should always remember that circuits present an astonishingly high perceived workload to the average student. Once circuit training has begun, he/she needs to plug away at the exercise to benefit from the continuity of the landing phases. In my view, it's not a good idea to stick in other exercises at this point. Sufficient, perhaps, to point out that, if the motor does stop at circuit height, pointing into the field offers the best chance of walking away (usually).
I know what BEagle means about 'bomber' circuits but we also have to remember that schools operating at airfields with mixed traffic are constrained in this respect. The trick is to ensure that Bloggs knows that one size fits all is not the case and the instructor should ensure he/she has experience of busy airports and whizzy GA fields,wherever possible.
I know what BEagle means about 'bomber' circuits but we also have to remember that schools operating at airfields with mixed traffic are constrained in this respect. The trick is to ensure that Bloggs knows that one size fits all is not the case and the instructor should ensure he/she has experience of busy airports and whizzy GA fields,wherever possible.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two points:
- The PFL starts at a cruising altitude. It ends (from what is often called the low-key point) with a glide approach. The glide approach - the last part of the PFL - should be taught in the circuit. The early part of the PFL is absolutely not necessary, since the student will not be high enough to put it into action.
- In response to skyhigher's scenario, I'm not convinced that, from a height of 800', flying downwind, the best course of action would be to make a 180 degree turn then try to land in a field. Far better to turn towards the airport and land anywhere on it, with the fire service in attendance. Mind you, if you did decide to do a 180 degree turn, then you certainly wouldn't have much room left for anything that I'd recognise as a PFL - it would look more like an EFATO.
FFF
---------------
- The PFL starts at a cruising altitude. It ends (from what is often called the low-key point) with a glide approach. The glide approach - the last part of the PFL - should be taught in the circuit. The early part of the PFL is absolutely not necessary, since the student will not be high enough to put it into action.
- In response to skyhigher's scenario, I'm not convinced that, from a height of 800', flying downwind, the best course of action would be to make a 180 degree turn then try to land in a field. Far better to turn towards the airport and land anywhere on it, with the fire service in attendance. Mind you, if you did decide to do a 180 degree turn, then you certainly wouldn't have much room left for anything that I'd recognise as a PFL - it would look more like an EFATO.
FFF
---------------
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taking the student out of the circuit for one detail can sometimes be a welcome brake for "bloggs" I feel, particularly if they have been struggling with some aspect of the circuit/landing.
PFL's I think are a nice way of leading into the glide approach/EFATO. It will not be so much of a struggle for the student to get the aircraft quickly and accurately into the glide having previously done 4 or 5 PFL's away from the airfield.
Do any of your schools/clubs have a "pre first solo" checklist that student and instructor must sign before he/she undertakes their first solo?
PFL's I think are a nice way of leading into the glide approach/EFATO. It will not be so much of a struggle for the student to get the aircraft quickly and accurately into the glide having previously done 4 or 5 PFL's away from the airfield.
Do any of your schools/clubs have a "pre first solo" checklist that student and instructor must sign before he/she undertakes their first solo?
timzsta - where on Earth were you taught to instruct? Please advise, so that others might avoid the place!
The glide circuit is the last element of the PFL - not the other way round! Teach glide circuits first, PFLs once the glide approach has been mastered.
As for 'approach plates' and 'navaids' for an early student to find an alternative aerodrome, you must be barking mad. They'd probably kill themselves trying. If a student on an early solo comes back to find the aerodrome unexpectedly closed, then that's an emergency diversion requiring positive, gentle guidance all the way elsewhere.
The glide circuit is the last element of the PFL - not the other way round! Teach glide circuits first, PFLs once the glide approach has been mastered.
As for 'approach plates' and 'navaids' for an early student to find an alternative aerodrome, you must be barking mad. They'd probably kill themselves trying. If a student on an early solo comes back to find the aerodrome unexpectedly closed, then that's an emergency diversion requiring positive, gentle guidance all the way elsewhere.
FFF: I don't agree that they should go for the airfield unless it's, say, the size of Bournemouth 
Going for the average small strip from downwind, even if flying a sensibly-sized circuit, is likely to lead to a low/slow "stretching the glide" type of approach and either stalling or bumping into obstacles around the boundary. Getting the nose down and (assuming there's height) turning into wind and making the best of what they see is probably best.
I usually discuss the relative energies of into-wind, downwind and vertical arrivals at this point. With a touchdown speed of 40kts in a 10kt wind an into-wind landing gives a landing "energy" of 9M to be dissipated, whereas it's 25M with a down-wind landing and around 150M in a vertical arrival following a low-level stall/spin. It follows that the first is to be preferred and the last is to be avoided
HFD
(edited to remove a typo)
Going for the average small strip from downwind, even if flying a sensibly-sized circuit, is likely to lead to a low/slow "stretching the glide" type of approach and either stalling or bumping into obstacles around the boundary. Getting the nose down and (assuming there's height) turning into wind and making the best of what they see is probably best.I usually discuss the relative energies of into-wind, downwind and vertical arrivals at this point. With a touchdown speed of 40kts in a 10kt wind an into-wind landing gives a landing "energy" of 9M to be dissipated, whereas it's 25M with a down-wind landing and around 150M in a vertical arrival following a low-level stall/spin. It follows that the first is to be preferred and the last is to be avoided
HFD
(edited to remove a typo)
Last edited by hugh flung_dung; 20th Aug 2007 at 22:59.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before first solo i try do as many emergencies as possible and sign it off in the students log book and records.
Example, Steering/brake fail, Efato straight ahead and crosswind due local limitations, go arounds, balloon, bounce, Engine fail from downwind to a cross runway, airspeed indicator, altimeter, rpm gauge failure. Flapless/Stuck flap on go around, radio failure, stuck throttle procedure(good way to introduce glide app), orbit, extend downwind.
Students usually start to 'Buck up' a bit and switch on when they start to get a bit of variation from simply flogging around the basic circuit, they always say they enjoy the sessions, gives them some confidence that they could possibly cope with these unusual events.
Pilots always say that years ago training was better, rubbish, i was never shown any of the above other than the odd Efato during the 1970's when i trained. Having flown with 10 different instructors over 18 months!
Example, Steering/brake fail, Efato straight ahead and crosswind due local limitations, go arounds, balloon, bounce, Engine fail from downwind to a cross runway, airspeed indicator, altimeter, rpm gauge failure. Flapless/Stuck flap on go around, radio failure, stuck throttle procedure(good way to introduce glide app), orbit, extend downwind.
Students usually start to 'Buck up' a bit and switch on when they start to get a bit of variation from simply flogging around the basic circuit, they always say they enjoy the sessions, gives them some confidence that they could possibly cope with these unusual events.
Pilots always say that years ago training was better, rubbish, i was never shown any of the above other than the odd Efato during the 1970's when i trained. Having flown with 10 different instructors over 18 months!
Some interesting approaches posted,and merit to most too.
What I believe this points to is the need for the student to be well and truly competent in setting up an immediate glide after power is pulled, and in executing turns in this best L/D configuration. So, this, plus some 'awareness' of where the suitable 'forced landing areas' are in the home circuit area, should give the student a fighting chance on early solo flying.
happy days,
What I believe this points to is the need for the student to be well and truly competent in setting up an immediate glide after power is pulled, and in executing turns in this best L/D configuration. So, this, plus some 'awareness' of where the suitable 'forced landing areas' are in the home circuit area, should give the student a fighting chance on early solo flying.
happy days,
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Southern Turkey
Age: 82
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with BEagle 100% on this one.
Looking back at my old RAF logbook I see that I first soloed the JP3 in just under 9 hours and I had never even passengered in any aircraft prior to my RAF training. The confidence boost from this event was enormous and much needed - I didn't think I was ready but my wise instructor did. During solo circuit consolidation (prior to PFL training) I experienced a flameout on the downwind leg which, due to good circuit positioning, was not a major problem - I was almost embarrased by the 'hot' relight I achieved having (instinctively?) turned to the runway the instant it started to go quiet.
I remember struggling a little initially with PFLs, and I'm grateful that this challenge came later - I might have been demoralised and not made the first solo 'gate'.
As for 'covering all eventualities before the student goes solo' - how stupid can you get? As others have said, modern training aircraft are designed to be reliable and forgiving. This allows students the great 'priviledge' of becoming experienced pilots before they have to become 'heros'.
Military and civil training syllabi have been well tried and tested over the years. Why can't some people accept that some 'wheels' don't need re-inventing?
Looking back at my old RAF logbook I see that I first soloed the JP3 in just under 9 hours and I had never even passengered in any aircraft prior to my RAF training. The confidence boost from this event was enormous and much needed - I didn't think I was ready but my wise instructor did. During solo circuit consolidation (prior to PFL training) I experienced a flameout on the downwind leg which, due to good circuit positioning, was not a major problem - I was almost embarrased by the 'hot' relight I achieved having (instinctively?) turned to the runway the instant it started to go quiet.
I remember struggling a little initially with PFLs, and I'm grateful that this challenge came later - I might have been demoralised and not made the first solo 'gate'.
As for 'covering all eventualities before the student goes solo' - how stupid can you get? As others have said, modern training aircraft are designed to be reliable and forgiving. This allows students the great 'priviledge' of becoming experienced pilots before they have to become 'heros'.
Military and civil training syllabi have been well tried and tested over the years. Why can't some people accept that some 'wheels' don't need re-inventing?
Dancing with the devil, going with the flow... it's all a game to me.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
, I'm not convinced that, from a height of 800', flying downwind, the best course of action would be to make a 180 degree turn then try to land in a field
To be honest, some of the practices mentioned here alarm me and demonstrate the tendancy for *some* (often newly qualified) instructors to make things up as they go along. The syllabus has been honed and tweaked over the years and therefore should be adhered to. All those years of experience in getting the order right count for far more than one instructors belief that the programme ought to be rejiggled at their discretion.
What would be of more value than PFL before first solo would be spending a bit more time on the orbit and, go around's from final approach (Southend anyone?) if these are practices sometimes employed at your airfield. Personally, I think extending downwind far safer than orbitting (does not take you back into on coming circuit traffic) but I digress....
After Ex.14 there is some scope to rearrange things due to wx issues but not before.
VFE.
Once upon a time the idea was that you could glide back onto the airfield from any point in the circuit; it is not a bad principal to adhere to now. If you can't reach the airfield your circuit is too big! At around the same time the current PPL syllabus was put together and consists of a series of building blocks which ideally should be conducted in the order designated.
The student is progressively taught up to Ex 12/13 where they pound the circuit until they can demonstrate 3 consecutive safe circuits before you let them go solo. The solo is therefore a repeat of what they have already demonstrated they can handle. As a precaution we demonstrate glide and flapless approaches so they can see what to do if the unlikely happened. They also have to see and demonstrate EFATO so they are fairly well prepared when they embark on their first solo.
The PFL is probably the most demanding exercise on the PPL syllabus and usually takes several goes to get close to doing even a reasonable one. It demands more skill and poses its own dangers for a low houred student. There is absolutely no point in introducing this until the student has mastered landing correctly and consolidated those skills especially as they will only be operating at circuit height. The PFL is taught prior to out of circuit solo so that the student can demonstrate the ability to deal with an out of circuit emergency and is another reason why a FI has to be unrestricted to authorise the first out of circuit solo.
On the microlight syllabus they teach PFLs pre-solo for a very different reason; the aircraft all began with notoriously unreliable engines and their glide performance means they have little chance of getting back to the airfield. Therefore with a high probability of a field landing it was introduced early but that really is not applicable to a certified SEP aeroplane.
The student is progressively taught up to Ex 12/13 where they pound the circuit until they can demonstrate 3 consecutive safe circuits before you let them go solo. The solo is therefore a repeat of what they have already demonstrated they can handle. As a precaution we demonstrate glide and flapless approaches so they can see what to do if the unlikely happened. They also have to see and demonstrate EFATO so they are fairly well prepared when they embark on their first solo.
The PFL is probably the most demanding exercise on the PPL syllabus and usually takes several goes to get close to doing even a reasonable one. It demands more skill and poses its own dangers for a low houred student. There is absolutely no point in introducing this until the student has mastered landing correctly and consolidated those skills especially as they will only be operating at circuit height. The PFL is taught prior to out of circuit solo so that the student can demonstrate the ability to deal with an out of circuit emergency and is another reason why a FI has to be unrestricted to authorise the first out of circuit solo.
On the microlight syllabus they teach PFLs pre-solo for a very different reason; the aircraft all began with notoriously unreliable engines and their glide performance means they have little chance of getting back to the airfield. Therefore with a high probability of a field landing it was introduced early but that really is not applicable to a certified SEP aeroplane.