How "hands-on" should an instructor be?
Beags - try 'I have control, what you did was....., you have control' during the final stage of an EOL! If you did that every time, the stude would never do an engine off. They usually need a bit of help at the bottom to avoid bending the aircraft (which is normally pre-briefed along the lines of 'don't worry if you feel a nudge on the controls close to the ground'
OB, crossed with a PM! Tends to confirm what you've just said though!
Sorry Kevmusic for stealing your thread!
Sorry Kevmusic for stealing your thread!
At the end of the day, the instructor always has control: whether it's through the student or by direct action.
"IHC" is too coarse a method in some situations, from the perspective of student learning.
"IHC" is too coarse a method in some situations, from the perspective of student learning.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who needs hands?
Never, never snatch the controls off any student at any time!
If at the hold off stage you decide that you must take control then this should have been agreed with the student before the approach was commenced. i.e. "I will allow you to continue the approach and the landing for as long as possible - should it be necessary for me to take control at a any moment I will do so and say I have control, but if I should take control in this manner please understand that I have left it as late as possible for you to correct any error yourself". However, doing this should always be a last resort but the student will now be aware from the onset of the possibilty and therefore maintain confidence.
Restricting the controls or nudging can only confuse. The student must always know that the feel and response to control inputs is theirs and theirs alone, if they are ever to learn. With regard to the approach and landing the student should be encouraged to identify errors and make their own decision to go around. Continously allowing the student to continue beyond their ability is not good and unwittingly will encourage a blinkered attitude such as continueing to a landing at any cost.
If at the hold off stage you decide that you must take control then this should have been agreed with the student before the approach was commenced. i.e. "I will allow you to continue the approach and the landing for as long as possible - should it be necessary for me to take control at a any moment I will do so and say I have control, but if I should take control in this manner please understand that I have left it as late as possible for you to correct any error yourself". However, doing this should always be a last resort but the student will now be aware from the onset of the possibilty and therefore maintain confidence.
Restricting the controls or nudging can only confuse. The student must always know that the feel and response to control inputs is theirs and theirs alone, if they are ever to learn. With regard to the approach and landing the student should be encouraged to identify errors and make their own decision to go around. Continously allowing the student to continue beyond their ability is not good and unwittingly will encourage a blinkered attitude such as continueing to a landing at any cost.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Walmington on Sea
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if its an experienced instructor then there is no excuse not to be taking control in the correct manner
XO
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kent UK
Age: 70
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
212man wrote:
That's okay - I'm getting used to instructors taking over! 
Seriously, this is how it feels on the receiving end. I'm in control. I think I'm doing ok, when suddenly the stick is moved, with accompanying words of advice and plummeting of self confidence. That happened at 2,500' the other day and after a minute or so with my hands and feet now off the controls I had to ask him if I had control. At the beginning of the same flight he'd briefed me on a crosswind take off, including full right (into wind) stick at the beginning of the roll. As I was about to apply full power for the roll the stick apparently wasn't over far enough because it was pushed an extra couple of inches with the words, "Full right aileron". This was before we'd begun to move. Stick and rudder were moved by him at some time during all phases of flight. I have about 12 hours solo including about 3 on the Cub, including crosswinds, and he's making me feel like a complete tyro. I'm really beginning to feel like I did at the beginning, years ago.
Sorry Kevmusic for stealing your thread!
Seriously, this is how it feels on the receiving end. I'm in control. I think I'm doing ok, when suddenly the stick is moved, with accompanying words of advice and plummeting of self confidence. That happened at 2,500' the other day and after a minute or so with my hands and feet now off the controls I had to ask him if I had control. At the beginning of the same flight he'd briefed me on a crosswind take off, including full right (into wind) stick at the beginning of the roll. As I was about to apply full power for the roll the stick apparently wasn't over far enough because it was pushed an extra couple of inches with the words, "Full right aileron". This was before we'd begun to move. Stick and rudder were moved by him at some time during all phases of flight. I have about 12 hours solo including about 3 on the Cub, including crosswinds, and he's making me feel like a complete tyro. I'm really beginning to feel like I did at the beginning, years ago.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,609
Received 469 Likes
on
248 Posts
Old beefer,
There was once a certain Shawbury Whirwind QHI who was so "hands-on" after having given the student control he would do his own EOLs and then debrief the student.
There was once a certain Shawbury Whirwind QHI who was so "hands-on" after having given the student control he would do his own EOLs and then debrief the student.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: perth scotland
Age: 80
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How "hand on" should an instructor be?"
The posting I am replying to reminds me of a relatively recent incident that involved me in renewing my Altiport rating for a well known French alpine ski resort. This was my 10th year of annual renewal. Let me say that I am a professional pilot with extensive experience on type and on many other types. I say this to emphasise that I am not an ab-initio student.
This particular check instructor had a habit of 'nudging' the controls either forward, or back, and also in roll mode without any prior warning, or clear intention. There was no standaer convention. Whilst mildly acceptable at a safe altitude, it became a serious matter on short finals where there was a real danger of a "who has control" question. Worse still, there was an even greater danger of an unintentional and potentially lethal wrestling match ensuing between me and the instructor taking place very, very close to the ground.
I terminated the flight myself by positively handing over to the instrctor accompanied by a very emphatic "you have control", and resolved never to fly with that individual ever again. As far as I know he never took the hint, as I found out some time later that I was not alone in my experiences
He was killed alng with his student in 'unexplained conditions', a few weeks later.
This particular check instructor had a habit of 'nudging' the controls either forward, or back, and also in roll mode without any prior warning, or clear intention. There was no standaer convention. Whilst mildly acceptable at a safe altitude, it became a serious matter on short finals where there was a real danger of a "who has control" question. Worse still, there was an even greater danger of an unintentional and potentially lethal wrestling match ensuing between me and the instructor taking place very, very close to the ground.
I terminated the flight myself by positively handing over to the instrctor accompanied by a very emphatic "you have control", and resolved never to fly with that individual ever again. As far as I know he never took the hint, as I found out some time later that I was not alone in my experiences
He was killed alng with his student in 'unexplained conditions', a few weeks later.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SA
Age: 40
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a relatively inexperienced instructor with only just over 1k instruction hours... but one thing I am so careful about doing is doing and flying to much for a student. Firstly it's there cash, secondly it defeats the point of learning. LET the student screw up... let it snow ball and let them see what the end result will be i.e. while teaching climbing at 2000ft, student climbs at an excessively high nose attitude and gets into a stall! I guarantee if you let the student see the end result it will stick in their head!
As far as mentioning who has control... that is so so so important, ESPECIALLY in a cub where you cannot see eachother. It really sounds like you should perhaps think of changing instructors. You are obviously not enjoying the flying as much as before, and THAT is the most important thing. I've always said instructing is 40% flying and 60% a combo of psychology, teaching, patience, etc.
To me, there's nothing better than being able to patter a student (who has never flown before), to take off the aircraft all by him/herself!
As far as mentioning who has control... that is so so so important, ESPECIALLY in a cub where you cannot see eachother. It really sounds like you should perhaps think of changing instructors. You are obviously not enjoying the flying as much as before, and THAT is the most important thing. I've always said instructing is 40% flying and 60% a combo of psychology, teaching, patience, etc.
To me, there's nothing better than being able to patter a student (who has never flown before), to take off the aircraft all by him/herself!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,609
Received 469 Likes
on
248 Posts
Shytorque -----------------------------------
Not me, I hope!
Not me, I hope!
Nor me; I let my student go all the way to the frange..... oops.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kent UK
Age: 70
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop press
I have taken the matter up with the senior instructor at the FTO (my old instructor) and I am changing my schedule so that my day off coincides with a time available with him. He has 'had a word' with my last FI and we have parted on amicable terms. I am officially back with my favoured FI. 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good for you Kev. Instructor should only interfere if not to do so would endanger aircraft/occupants. IE - no flare and about to land on nosewheel and possibly going around from low height from a PFL where the large power change and nose up trim can catch out an unwary student leading to high nose, high power, low speed.....
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Vigo-Spain
Age: 40
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi!
well... my humble opinion as both student and wannabe instructor is that Mr. J.S. Denker couldn't be more right:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/decision...nstructor-comm
Honestly I think, unless you screw up yourself, you never know what you are doing wrong.
And then... what about the "always ahead of you" guy? Yeah... that kind of instructor that over-coaches you all the way from block to block? It's really frustrating for me.
Regards / Pablo
well... my humble opinion as both student and wannabe instructor is that Mr. J.S. Denker couldn't be more right:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/decision...nstructor-comm
* Ideally, I don’t need to say anything. If we are facing an energy-management challenge, you can notice it (the sooner the better) and deal with it.
* If you don’t deal with it on your own, I’ll start asking questions, such as: “How’s your energy? Are we high and fast, or low and slow?”
* Then come more-explicit statements: “It looks like the angle from the horizon to the aim point is growing. If you don’t do something we’re going to overshoot the runway.”
* Then it escalates to an instruction: “Go around.”
* Then the instructions become more detailed: “Add power. Raise the nose. Start retracting the flaps.”
* Finally: “I’ve got it.”
* If you don’t deal with it on your own, I’ll start asking questions, such as: “How’s your energy? Are we high and fast, or low and slow?”
* Then come more-explicit statements: “It looks like the angle from the horizon to the aim point is growing. If you don’t do something we’re going to overshoot the runway.”
* Then it escalates to an instruction: “Go around.”
* Then the instructions become more detailed: “Add power. Raise the nose. Start retracting the flaps.”
* Finally: “I’ve got it.”
And then... what about the "always ahead of you" guy? Yeah... that kind of instructor that over-coaches you all the way from block to block? It's really frustrating for me.
Regards / Pablo
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 52
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The phrase "I have control" is not optional.
"I have control...."
KC
The engine of the Auster I was Pu/t in, on my pre-solo check by the CFI, stopped at about 350ft on take-off....Aha! I knew what to do, nose down sharpish, trim, switches off, fuel off, land ahead.........
We were headed for a wood. Even as I moved the stick forward I felt the CFI shove it much, much harder as he said, very calmly "I have control". He was an ex-RAF Spitfire pilot and post-war RAF Instructor, retired. He carried out a very steep, diving 180, levelled and put it downwind on the grass. His next words were the other FI staple; "Don't do as I do, do as I say. If the engine fails on take off, get the nose down fast and land straight ahead."
We would almost certainly have been killed by the trees but for his actions. There are occasions when "Hands-on" is good. But I cannot abide FI's whose hands hover 2 inches from the controls during the approach and landing, especially on check rides. Either take control and explain why you're so nervous, or sit on them.
We were headed for a wood. Even as I moved the stick forward I felt the CFI shove it much, much harder as he said, very calmly "I have control". He was an ex-RAF Spitfire pilot and post-war RAF Instructor, retired. He carried out a very steep, diving 180, levelled and put it downwind on the grass. His next words were the other FI staple; "Don't do as I do, do as I say. If the engine fails on take off, get the nose down fast and land straight ahead."
We would almost certainly have been killed by the trees but for his actions. There are occasions when "Hands-on" is good. But I cannot abide FI's whose hands hover 2 inches from the controls during the approach and landing, especially on check rides. Either take control and explain why you're so nervous, or sit on them.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Hovering hands?
But I cannot abide FI's whose hands hover 2 inches from the controls during the approach and landing, especially on check rides. Either take control and explain why you're so nervous, or sit on them.
I believe the RAF spend quite some time and effort in determining exactly where the turn-back point is for each aircraft type; there obviously is such a point but we don't teach it. I had a couple of friends in a Jodel a few years ago that suffered an engine failure at around 500' AGL and they successfully turned back, but they were both very experienced instructors. You're generally better off with the 'land ahead' deal as an SOP. Pushing is still the single most important thing to do to save your life in an EFATO.
TheOddOne
Drift alert!
I got myself into hot water expounding in Flight, eons ago, that every pilot, PPL and upward, of a single-engine aircraft should be taught how to calculate, for each take-off with weight, wind, temp etc factored in, the point at which it is safe to turn back after an EFATO.
Practising the steep diving turn and downwind landing should also be an essential feature of the basic SEP syllabus, once pilots understand when to use it and when not to.
Pilots should be taught to calculate whether they can safely land ahead after an EFATO at any point up to that height. If they cannot, they must positively change things so that they can, by reducing weight, start the roll from futher back if that's possible, or waiting for a stronger headwind.
If they do not do all that, all they are doing is hoping like hell that an EFATO won't happen, because if it does and they haven't reached the point where a turn can be done, their straight-ahead landing will probably be into a housing estate. And if they try the turn and have not been taught to do it properly, they'll almost certainly stall and spin in the turn and kill themselves that way.
Every time I hear ATC instructing a usually willing single-engine pilot to "use the intersection" I cringe, because neither seems to understand the danger. Multi's are fine, so long as the reduced TORA, TODA and ASDA are OK for them, but many PPLs appear to think that what's long enough for a B737 must also be long enough for their little SEP with 4 up, bags and a full tank. It isn't, if they have an EFATO and have to land ahead from 400 ft.
Alan Bramson called it "The Impossible Turn", and that's what I wrote against all those years ago. But it isn't impossible; it just needs to be properly taught; ie, when and how. The straight ahead mantra was fine when most airfields had fields all around them instead of housing. It's time now to stop pretending that it's OK to teach a procedure that will probably kill anyone who actually follows it assiduously.
Reliability is now so good that the probability of mechanical failure is very low. But what about human error?
Sorry about the drift!
there obviously is such a point but we don't teach it.
Practising the steep diving turn and downwind landing should also be an essential feature of the basic SEP syllabus, once pilots understand when to use it and when not to.
Pilots should be taught to calculate whether they can safely land ahead after an EFATO at any point up to that height. If they cannot, they must positively change things so that they can, by reducing weight, start the roll from futher back if that's possible, or waiting for a stronger headwind.
If they do not do all that, all they are doing is hoping like hell that an EFATO won't happen, because if it does and they haven't reached the point where a turn can be done, their straight-ahead landing will probably be into a housing estate. And if they try the turn and have not been taught to do it properly, they'll almost certainly stall and spin in the turn and kill themselves that way.
Every time I hear ATC instructing a usually willing single-engine pilot to "use the intersection" I cringe, because neither seems to understand the danger. Multi's are fine, so long as the reduced TORA, TODA and ASDA are OK for them, but many PPLs appear to think that what's long enough for a B737 must also be long enough for their little SEP with 4 up, bags and a full tank. It isn't, if they have an EFATO and have to land ahead from 400 ft.
Alan Bramson called it "The Impossible Turn", and that's what I wrote against all those years ago. But it isn't impossible; it just needs to be properly taught; ie, when and how. The straight ahead mantra was fine when most airfields had fields all around them instead of housing. It's time now to stop pretending that it's OK to teach a procedure that will probably kill anyone who actually follows it assiduously.
Reliability is now so good that the probability of mechanical failure is very low. But what about human error?
Sorry about the drift!