Dumbing down in flying schools
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dumbing down in flying schools
Saw this briefing taught in a Victorian flying school on a flying instructor course:
Steep Turns: Objective. The student at the completion of this lesson will from memory show an understanding of the principles and considerations involved in carrying out steep turns of between 45 and 60 degrees angle of bank in a safe and accurate manner on any aircraft with diagrams and a model.
Ye Gods - is that for real?
Contrast this with the rather more concise (thank goodness) example from the old DCA Flight Instructor's Manual:
Exercise 8 - Turning: Aim: To teach the student to cary out various types of turn and how to turn accurately onto specified headings.
What with reams of paper that make up the various competency based syllabi (which few instructors can spare the time to read even if they wanted to), we now hear of flying schools that have deleted practice solo stall recoveries from the flying school Ops Manual because they are "too dangerous". This for Warriors, and Tomahawks!!
And now at Point Cook - once the mecca of all training airfields in Australia, we find that one flying school has directed its instructors to use not less than 1500 rpm when "gliding" during practice engine failures after take off. This is to "save" the engine. It's all about money, isn't it?
Never mind that this will give a student an entirely erroneous impression of the true glide angle with a failed engine.
Point Cook has flat good fields surrounding it except to the south, yet we now hear that simulated engine failures after take off are restricted to runway 17 out to sea. All because the local authority that runs the airfield are running scared stiff of the occasional local nutters who complain of noise from Cessna 150's.
The Chicken Little syndrome is with us - the sky will fall on us -repeat 100 times. Meanwhile, CASA who I presumed was the guardian of flight standards in GA flying schools, simply pile on more paper work and look the other way as the dumbing down sets in.
Steep Turns: Objective. The student at the completion of this lesson will from memory show an understanding of the principles and considerations involved in carrying out steep turns of between 45 and 60 degrees angle of bank in a safe and accurate manner on any aircraft with diagrams and a model.
Ye Gods - is that for real?
Contrast this with the rather more concise (thank goodness) example from the old DCA Flight Instructor's Manual:
Exercise 8 - Turning: Aim: To teach the student to cary out various types of turn and how to turn accurately onto specified headings.
What with reams of paper that make up the various competency based syllabi (which few instructors can spare the time to read even if they wanted to), we now hear of flying schools that have deleted practice solo stall recoveries from the flying school Ops Manual because they are "too dangerous". This for Warriors, and Tomahawks!!
And now at Point Cook - once the mecca of all training airfields in Australia, we find that one flying school has directed its instructors to use not less than 1500 rpm when "gliding" during practice engine failures after take off. This is to "save" the engine. It's all about money, isn't it?
Never mind that this will give a student an entirely erroneous impression of the true glide angle with a failed engine.
Point Cook has flat good fields surrounding it except to the south, yet we now hear that simulated engine failures after take off are restricted to runway 17 out to sea. All because the local authority that runs the airfield are running scared stiff of the occasional local nutters who complain of noise from Cessna 150's.
The Chicken Little syndrome is with us - the sky will fall on us -repeat 100 times. Meanwhile, CASA who I presumed was the guardian of flight standards in GA flying schools, simply pile on more paper work and look the other way as the dumbing down sets in.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hudson
Truth, honesty, and reality are very often casualities in the aviation world. The air force many years ago dceided that tomahawks were too dangerous for them to use. Just like the Nomad. Which is too dangerous for the military, but ok for civilians. Too many people live in fairyland.
Truth, honesty, and reality are very often casualities in the aviation world. The air force many years ago dceided that tomahawks were too dangerous for them to use. Just like the Nomad. Which is too dangerous for the military, but ok for civilians. Too many people live in fairyland.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Antipodes & ....
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notwithstanding Hudson's original comments about briefings, it may be worth noting that the ADF has for years simulated Practice Forced Landings Without Power (PFLWOP) in the CT4-B using approx 11" Hg MAP and half-flap (marked "take-off" on the CT4-B flap selector).
This effectively simulated a power-off glide in the clean configuaration and when the student (aka "Bloggs") wished to lower half-flap they simply closed the throttle and when they wished to apply full-flap "Bloggs" then used the flap lever to select full-flap.
This procedure had the advantage of mitigating (to a degree) the engine cooling effect of idle power (at a glide speed of 75-80 KIAS) and any plug fouling issues that may also arise from prolonged idle power settings.
All in all it was a very well thought out procedure and avoided the rapid cooling of CHTs and the coughing and spluttering that took place during initial power application for the go-around. It also reduced the temperature extremes that the engine was subjected to, and resulted in far fewer cracked cylinders than may otherwise have been experienced during the long term service of the aircraft.
Conduct of PFLWOPs in this way was Standard Procedure at Point Cook and now at Tamworth, where I was introduced to it. Perhaps other members of the Flight Training Industry could learn from this procedure.
It is certainly not "A dumbing down in flying schools" - instead it acknowledges a major issue during the operation of any piston engine aircraft (engine handling/cooling) and provides a sound procedure to deal with it.
Fark!
This effectively simulated a power-off glide in the clean configuaration and when the student (aka "Bloggs") wished to lower half-flap they simply closed the throttle and when they wished to apply full-flap "Bloggs" then used the flap lever to select full-flap.
This procedure had the advantage of mitigating (to a degree) the engine cooling effect of idle power (at a glide speed of 75-80 KIAS) and any plug fouling issues that may also arise from prolonged idle power settings.
All in all it was a very well thought out procedure and avoided the rapid cooling of CHTs and the coughing and spluttering that took place during initial power application for the go-around. It also reduced the temperature extremes that the engine was subjected to, and resulted in far fewer cracked cylinders than may otherwise have been experienced during the long term service of the aircraft.
Conduct of PFLWOPs in this way was Standard Procedure at Point Cook and now at Tamworth, where I was introduced to it. Perhaps other members of the Flight Training Industry could learn from this procedure.
It is certainly not "A dumbing down in flying schools" - instead it acknowledges a major issue during the operation of any piston engine aircraft (engine handling/cooling) and provides a sound procedure to deal with it.
Fark!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Over 250 posts so far. Perhaps I support Pprune by posting regularly.
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Farknel, I thought the RAAF in the old days at Point Cook practiced "EFATO"s in CT-4As at idle power?
Are you talking about the school at Tamworth with "new" model CT-4s? Are they CT-4Bs?
Geez things have changed since my day.
They call it a PFLWOP now? Hard to pronounce...
Hard to surprise a student with a "practice" as you're setting TO flap and 11"......
Are you talking about the school at Tamworth with "new" model CT-4s? Are they CT-4Bs?
Geez things have changed since my day.
They call it a PFLWOP now? Hard to pronounce...
Hard to surprise a student with a "practice" as you're setting TO flap and 11"......
Arse*ole real estate agents selling homes in estates around Point Cook are apparently telling prospective buyers "Don't worry about the noise, the airfield will be closed down in a year or two".
As for EFATO/PFL training, I'm taught to use idle power plus carb heat and warm the engine every 1000 ft by bringing it to 1500 rpm for about ten seconds. Go around by 500 feet and don't use people's homes as aiming points.
I looked at Pt Cook flying schools and opted for Moorabbin instead even though I'm only ten minutes from pt Cook.
As for EFATO/PFL training, I'm taught to use idle power plus carb heat and warm the engine every 1000 ft by bringing it to 1500 rpm for about ten seconds. Go around by 500 feet and don't use people's homes as aiming points.
I looked at Pt Cook flying schools and opted for Moorabbin instead even though I'm only ten minutes from pt Cook.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Antipodes & ....
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Itchybum, my comments have nothing to do with EFATO training - only with PFLs in the training area or elsewhere during nav training.
As part of the student's training at Tamworth (and I presume, at Point Cook before the move since we initially used the RAAF training manuals), the student was required to set the flap and power to simulate the clean glide configuration and subsequently monitor CHT during the conduct of the PFL. If the CHT was seen to be approaching the lower limit during a PFL (a frequent occurance during winter) they were required to suspend the approach and carry out a "warming" orbit all the while maintaining the same physical position over the ground. It was the instructors duty at this time to keep "bloggs" honest in not gaining any advantage during the orbit.
The QFI would initially do these tasks for the student, however the tasks was rapidly handed over to the student in order for them to be able to do it competently for their military GFPT.
At first, all the civvy instructors at TW thought this would be too difficult for the student (me included), however once it was demonstrated a few times and subsequently handed over to the student it became an action which was handled without any difficulty (by most students).
The attitude of the ADF to those very few who had difficulty doing more than one action at a time, was they were most likely not going to make it as a future military pilot. I thought this a very fair point.
Fark.
As part of the student's training at Tamworth (and I presume, at Point Cook before the move since we initially used the RAAF training manuals), the student was required to set the flap and power to simulate the clean glide configuration and subsequently monitor CHT during the conduct of the PFL. If the CHT was seen to be approaching the lower limit during a PFL (a frequent occurance during winter) they were required to suspend the approach and carry out a "warming" orbit all the while maintaining the same physical position over the ground. It was the instructors duty at this time to keep "bloggs" honest in not gaining any advantage during the orbit.
The QFI would initially do these tasks for the student, however the tasks was rapidly handed over to the student in order for them to be able to do it competently for their military GFPT.
At first, all the civvy instructors at TW thought this would be too difficult for the student (me included), however once it was demonstrated a few times and subsequently handed over to the student it became an action which was handled without any difficulty (by most students).
The attitude of the ADF to those very few who had difficulty doing more than one action at a time, was they were most likely not going to make it as a future military pilot. I thought this a very fair point.
Fark.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Farknell. The discussion was about simulated engine failure after take off in a light single. Typically the throttle is closed to idle at 500 feet and the glide commenced. At 200 ft a go-around is made.
The total time in the glide is around 30 seconds. Hardly time for the engine tempertaure to drop 10 degrees C - not exactly "shock cooling" stuff. In any case there have been many earlier Pprune discussions on the subject of "Is shock cooling a Myth".
You don't see much evidence of aircraft falling out of the sky when heavy rain cools the cylinders in a most effective fashion.
But let's not go into that until another day.
As one who spent time at Point Cook a long time ago, I can assure readers that the skies were full of Wirraways and Tiger Moths with countless practice engine failures after take off. We coped very well considering that the Tiger Moths did not have radios. All done by the simple expedient of gently closing the throttle, lowering the nose to best glide speed, selecting a likely landing area (ground or sea) and then a normal go-around at 200 ft without throttle bashing. I do not recall significant engineering problems when engines came up for inspection. And hopefully no one will come back at this post with the hoary old point of all that happened a long time ago and is not relevant to modern aero-engines. Airmanship principles do not change with the years.
Let's keep things in perspective. Aero-engines go through stringent certification testing before acceptance This includes a day running at full power, then lots of deliberate mis-handling. There is no need to have heart flutter over a closed throttle 30 second glide, believe me.
Sunfish. "Warming" the engine by opening up to 1500 rpm for 10 seconds will make no measurable difference to the engine temperature. The purpose of the exercise as you describe is to ensure that spark plug fouling is minimised in a prolonged glide over several thousand feet and in any case the power should be increased to full throttle to ensure this power is available when needed. Leave the carb heat on while so doing - this minimises carb ice build up.
The total time in the glide is around 30 seconds. Hardly time for the engine tempertaure to drop 10 degrees C - not exactly "shock cooling" stuff. In any case there have been many earlier Pprune discussions on the subject of "Is shock cooling a Myth".
You don't see much evidence of aircraft falling out of the sky when heavy rain cools the cylinders in a most effective fashion.
But let's not go into that until another day.
As one who spent time at Point Cook a long time ago, I can assure readers that the skies were full of Wirraways and Tiger Moths with countless practice engine failures after take off. We coped very well considering that the Tiger Moths did not have radios. All done by the simple expedient of gently closing the throttle, lowering the nose to best glide speed, selecting a likely landing area (ground or sea) and then a normal go-around at 200 ft without throttle bashing. I do not recall significant engineering problems when engines came up for inspection. And hopefully no one will come back at this post with the hoary old point of all that happened a long time ago and is not relevant to modern aero-engines. Airmanship principles do not change with the years.
Let's keep things in perspective. Aero-engines go through stringent certification testing before acceptance This includes a day running at full power, then lots of deliberate mis-handling. There is no need to have heart flutter over a closed throttle 30 second glide, believe me.
Sunfish. "Warming" the engine by opening up to 1500 rpm for 10 seconds will make no measurable difference to the engine temperature. The purpose of the exercise as you describe is to ensure that spark plug fouling is minimised in a prolonged glide over several thousand feet and in any case the power should be increased to full throttle to ensure this power is available when needed. Leave the carb heat on while so doing - this minimises carb ice build up.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Over 250 posts so far. Perhaps I support Pprune by posting regularly.
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
farknell... oh yeah I forgot about those orbits. Came in handy now and then to sort out an incipient cluster-****.
Pretty sure we were told the orbit was for engine-warming.
So what about the EFATO then. Same old closed throttle technique, I presume...
Pretty sure we were told the orbit was for engine-warming.
So what about the EFATO then. Same old closed throttle technique, I presume...
Thank you Hudson, I'll instruct my instructor
I'm amazed at how much "by guess and by God" stuff there still is in flying. I thought that this was all science.
However after last weeks stuff, I guess there still is a certain art to it - sitting on the piano keys with a dead engine because you opened the throttle too fast makes you feel a right pratt.
I'm amazed at how much "by guess and by God" stuff there still is in flying. I thought that this was all science.
However after last weeks stuff, I guess there still is a certain art to it - sitting on the piano keys with a dead engine because you opened the throttle too fast makes you feel a right pratt.
Lycoming recommends that CHT cooling rate not exceed 50 deg F per minute.
On a different subject - I once was involved in debate with some-one on when to apply carb heat prior to landing approach. He was firmly of the opinion that "carb heat should be selected at the start of downwind to give more time with the heated air, put it cold after throttling back on base as there was not much heating effect from then on". Not long afterwards I had my hands on a fully instrumented aeroplane. (Did some CHT cooling tests as well on the way to developing a cowl flap specifically for glider tugs - was easy to exceed the recommended limit on a standard aeroplane - throttle closed and at cruise airspeed). That method of carb heat gave a carb air temp of 34 deg C! Selecting carb heat at the time of throttle reduction on base resulted in a minimum 41 deg C at the threshold. Tests were done at 7000 ft and an OAT of 7 deg C.
Hudson - with that steep turn briefing objective. I'm not sure that you're comparing "apples with apples". Overall aim of Exercise 8 is not the same as telling the instructor student the specific objectives of that briefing session. I certainly share your concern over the deletion of solo stall practice. (I won't start another debate over Tomahawk stall/spin issues)
(deleted a comment - brain out of gear last night)
On a different subject - I once was involved in debate with some-one on when to apply carb heat prior to landing approach. He was firmly of the opinion that "carb heat should be selected at the start of downwind to give more time with the heated air, put it cold after throttling back on base as there was not much heating effect from then on". Not long afterwards I had my hands on a fully instrumented aeroplane. (Did some CHT cooling tests as well on the way to developing a cowl flap specifically for glider tugs - was easy to exceed the recommended limit on a standard aeroplane - throttle closed and at cruise airspeed). That method of carb heat gave a carb air temp of 34 deg C! Selecting carb heat at the time of throttle reduction on base resulted in a minimum 41 deg C at the threshold. Tests were done at 7000 ft and an OAT of 7 deg C.
Hudson - with that steep turn briefing objective. I'm not sure that you're comparing "apples with apples". Overall aim of Exercise 8 is not the same as telling the instructor student the specific objectives of that briefing session. I certainly share your concern over the deletion of solo stall practice. (I won't start another debate over Tomahawk stall/spin issues)
(deleted a comment - brain out of gear last night)
Last edited by djpil; 26th Sep 2004 at 20:25.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I danced with a man who danced with a girl, who danced with the Prince of Wales. 
But it's not the same as the real thing is it.
Sunfish keep doing it and thanks Hudson.
Tomahawk stall/spin just don't even think about going there.
But it's not the same as the real thing is it.
Sunfish keep doing it and thanks Hudson.
Tomahawk stall/spin just don't even think about going there.
Hudson there are AIMS and there are OBJECTIVES when it comes to ground briefings associated with an airborne lesson.
I certainly agree with you that
Is not an effective way of writing the AIM of the lesson on the board.
I certainly agree with you that
Steep Turns: Objective. The student at the completion of this lesson will from memory show an understanding of the principles and considerations involved in carrying out steep turns of between 45 and 60 degrees angle of bank in a safe and accurate manner on any aircraft with diagrams and a model.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hudson
They hold a recognised FAR23 type certification and comply with the certification parameters. CASA are obliged to accept it.
How much more "friendly" they or any aircraft may be beyond the certification requirements is up to how far the manufacturer and skill of the designer want to take it.
They hold a recognised FAR23 type certification and comply with the certification parameters. CASA are obliged to accept it.
How much more "friendly" they or any aircraft may be beyond the certification requirements is up to how far the manufacturer and skill of the designer want to take it.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Antipodes & ....
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Itchybum,
Yes, EFATO and Glide Approaches all done with Idle Power.
My point in detailing the procedures the ADF and BAe followed for FLWOP was to illustrate that sometimes there are alternatives to the methods that many intructors have used in the past, and that still achieve very good training value, while effectively managing the risks (or at the very least reducing the risks) involved in such training.
With respect to the "engine warming" orbits, yes bloggs frequently used them to buy some time and avoid everything falling to sh*t.
Fark
Yes, EFATO and Glide Approaches all done with Idle Power.
My point in detailing the procedures the ADF and BAe followed for FLWOP was to illustrate that sometimes there are alternatives to the methods that many intructors have used in the past, and that still achieve very good training value, while effectively managing the risks (or at the very least reducing the risks) involved in such training.
With respect to the "engine warming" orbits, yes bloggs frequently used them to buy some time and avoid everything falling to sh*t.
Fark
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dude65. Don't know about the Tomahawk but for go-arounds in the Cessna 150/172, their Pilot's Information Manuals state that the throttle should be opened to full open first then carb heat pushed in to off. Few people realise this especially on touch and go landings. Ensures hot air melts any ice that could prevent full power being available.
Regarding practice stall recoveries in Tomahawks. If there is a placard on the instrument panel, is it a CASA approved placard or the owners personal placard, or the CFI personal placard? I doubt if the placard is a manufacturer's requirement.
Regarding practice stall recoveries in Tomahawks. If there is a placard on the instrument panel, is it a CASA approved placard or the owners personal placard, or the CFI personal placard? I doubt if the placard is a manufacturer's requirement.
