Problem with this debate is that it's all subjective.

VFE.

The "stick forward - apply power" bit comes after the prompts made to the student about "do you think your high or low on the approach?" "so how are you going to correct this" and "check your airspeed".

Unfortunately with some students despite them showing understanding in the briefing room and having seen demonstrations of the correct and incorrect approach angle, and demonstrating an understanding in the classroom of how to correct it if it is wrong, when they have to do it for real in the aircraft, they cannot grasp it.

If you think they is an issue with my Instructional Technique your welcome to come down and fly with me. If you still think there is an issue you can take it up with my CFI and if you still think there is an issue you can take it up with the CAA.

Over to you....

Hey Timzsta, you're (not "your"!) showing evidence of being a little thin-skinned and prickly, old chap. With time you'll find that maturity brings the ability to recognise and accept or reject constructive criticism in the same spirit that it was intended.

You may possibly be more experienced than me, and you may be the best FI to ever walk on this Earth (or to fly above it), but I humbly suggest that, if a stude does not react correctly when prompted they need another demo rather than being told what to do with the controls. I'd also suggest that the correct speed should be a higher priority than the correct approach angle.

Bottom line: everyone learns at different rates and it's the duty of the teacher to use their experience to apply a technique that works for the particular student that you happen to be dealing with at the time. When teaching people to fly it's imperative to teach judgement, and this can not be taught by telling the stude how and when to move the controls.

HFD

Of the students I have taught thus far, only this one poor unfortunate young lad has failed to come up to the standard required for me to get out of the aeroplane and authorise him to fly solo. I was his fourth and final Instructor, all three other Instructors were immensly more experienced then I and had come to the conclusion he would never achieve it (one has over 12000 hours as an FI).

I like many feel increasing this site is not what it once was.

Sadly too many people come on here and jump on a few words typed by individuals in a post and automatically assume that because of what is typed they are not up to the grade and need to refine their technique.

I teach my students the three things they must pay overriding attention to once on final approach are speed, (speed again and speed), glide path, centreline. In that order.

My offer still stands. Perhaps you could teach me a thing or too, I still consider my experience minimal.

Nah, it's always been like this. We were misunderstanding each other and saying these sorts of things several years ago. It's the nature of the internet and the written word.

Flying instruction isn't rocket science, and IMHO is far more about personal relationships than flying anyway. We all do it differently, and our students learn in different ways. That's what this thread is about...I think.

Absolutely spot on Mr. Semel....the key to being a good instructor is being able to figure out what motivates your student. Some need just a kind word...some a sidewards look and a comment along the line of ..."well if that is as good as you can do....then ok!"....some need the fire extinguisher banged on their noggin. Find what gets them going...and teaching gets easy.

The same ol' drill does not work for every student....it takes some variation to get to them all.

If you teach on your "off" days....what do you do on your "good" days?;)

I think this might just qualify as a hopeless case:

AAIB report

"Summary:

The flight was planned as a trial lesson and was the student’s first flight in a microlight. The Pegasus Quantum is a flex-wing microlight with a tandem seating arrangement in which the student occupied the front seat. Durng the flight the instructor progressively allowed the student to take control and he flew a circuit follwed by an approach to land. The instructor described the student as flying ‘very well’.

At around 100 ft the microlight began to drift to the right of the centreline and the instructor said ‘I have control’. The student pulled the control bar fully back and froze. The instructor immediately applied full power and attempted to push the bar forward. Despite repeated vocal commands the student did not release the control bar and the microlight struck the ground at around 80 mph. It bounced back into the air before touching down again and coming to rest around 40 m from the intial impact point. There were no injuries."

Amazing :eek:

That's one of the drawbacks of tandem seating - you can't wack a frozen student/passenger in the face if they freeze or grab the controls. The human reflex to protect the face if wacked is so strong that even the most determined/petrified hijacker/student will let go of the controls if hit in the face. Worth bearing in mind as an emergency SOP.

Well one must confess to having experienced the compulsion to smack a student in the face for arriving late and ill-equipped for a lesson but seldom whilst airbourne! But their legs? Now that's another issue all together - how many clam up on the rudder pedals making it practically impossible for instructor input if neccesary?! Other than placing my hand on their knee in a quasi-molesting feel-up kinda action (to distract attention!) there's not much else left in the bag for that one is there?! :}

VFE.

How about a wack in the b*ll*cks?

What if they haven't got any?

Pen in the leg or elbow to the noggin work well. Don't ask me how I learnt that.................

Yup, totally agree! It's amazing how a sharp jab with a pen tends to refocus the mind!