De La Valette raises a good point. Whilst I've never been inclined to teach my students to do a glide approach for every approach (especially in a C152 which can create a bit of havoc when the poor buggar sitting behind you on approach in his Chieftain is struggling to maintain separation), I do however advocate use of the Aircraft Handbook. With the exception of the above-mentioned traffic separation issues, provided no-one behind will be unnecessarily delayed - I sometimes find it hard to fathom why schools insist on teaching their students to come screaming over the fence as if they were trying to set a new speed record, when the handbook says a lower speed is apropriate. I would have thought that nobody knows the aeroplane better than the company who builds it, yet there are plenty of us out there who think they know better.

Sorry, I know this is detracting slightly from the original question, but I just want reiterate that Aircraft Handbooks are printed to be read, not just stuffed in the back seat pocket to satisfy regs.

Ahhh. Are these the self same POH's that we are advised to factor because they're flown by test pilots on new aircraft in ideal conditions as opposed to low hour PPL's in clapped out aircraft in average conditions. Hmmmm. You've obviously never read the Beagle Pup POH which looks as though it was written by the sales department given some of the speeds to be used on approaches, which were 5-10 kts slower than we were teaching (and still running out of elevator if the student wasn't with the plot).

------------------
0 to 2000ft in 10 minutes

Billy the Kid

I think you may have confused my comments for someone elses.

If you have a re read of my post you will see that I do NOT advocate the use of Glide Approaches for approaches. I advocate that powered approaches should be taught and used right from the beginning and once that has been achieved, the solo hours completed, the glide approach can be taught as a forerunner to the Practice Forced Landing Air Ex.

Some arguement has been used that the student can learn how to land of a powered approach when he gets into something bigger but shouldn't a responsible instructor teach this from the beginning because the powered approached is the norm rather than the exception. Why should the student has to pay for further lessons at subsequent type checks.

I would also be interested to know as to how the short field technique is achieved of a glide approach.

I know this has digressed from the original thread but to put an opinion in on that, I thank my stars I was never saddled with an instructor who taught that technique.

Regards

Going back to the first question...

If you teach "touch and go" out of trim so that the trim will be correct for an EFATO, how do you teach trim setting for initial departure?

Does the out of trim configuration assume that the aircraft will not have an engine failure during the first departure...and if so, what trim setting should be adopted for a single departure - one that is planned to leave the circuit pattern - when the student has finished the circuit training?

------------------
LIVE in peace...or REST in it!

Quite so. To be fair, the chap only advocated this for the touch and go, normal departures are trimmed normally. It seemed a bit odd to me though.

[This message has been edited by DB6 (edited 23 November 1999).]

If you want to be a good pilot or want to teach people to be good pilots there is one golen rule KEEP THE A/C IN TRIM.
In my airline I recently heard a scary story from one of the turbo prop fleets - A 250hr first officer departed XXX, The captain noticed the new FO (who had finished his line training) had both feet firmly on the floor! Ok on the big jets the rudder may be to rest your feet on but on a regional turbo prop you still should still use your rudder to turn. And the more scary part is what would happen if he had an engine failure!!!
WHO TRAINED THIS MAN?????

[This message has been edited by Airprox (edited 25 November 1999).]