Mixtures, Masters, Mags and CAE Oxford Open Day
Thread Starter
Mixtures, Masters, Mags and CAE Oxford Open Day
Congratulations to the staff and students who were in attendance at the CAE Oxford Open Day on Sunday 10 August. I was one of many people who thoroughly enjoyed themselves strolling around the various features of this flying school from the Meet and Greet building to the flight operations area to the simulator training complex. The company even laid on a mini-bus to take people to and from the simulator complex several hundred yards down the road from the main Display area. Loved the free sausage sizzle manned by the students and full marks they still smiled even though the rain was pelting down on occasions.
Whoever organised the Open Day did a fine job and this writer would like to express his sincere appreciation. When I was there I met several fellow aviators I had not seen for years. We all looked older but once names were mentioned, recognition was instant. That alone was worth the visit.
Looking around at the youthful faces of the flying instructors and their students took me back to my learning to fly days in the RAAF. We didn’t have to pay to learn to fly in the RAAF which is probably just as well because in civvy street at age 18 and on junior clerk’s wages, I could barely afford to eat a decent meal a day let alone pay the boarding house weekly rent. That was in 1951. How on earth today’s student pilots can afford to learn to fly, I don’t know.
AT CAE Oxford I looked at the well dressed staff and students neat and tidy with their blue winter warm jackets, and liked what I saw. Back to 1951 again and 100 of we trainee aircrew at the RAAF No.1 Initial Flying Training School Archerfield in Queensland, were marched to the Clothing Store and signed for our flying kit. One leather helmet with two rubber pipes attached to be plugged to an ancient Gosport Tube situated in each cockpit of the venerable Tiger Moth we were to train on. One pair of fur lined leather flying boots (no heating in Tiger Moths and Wirraways). One set of long leather gauntlets. If the reader has never heard of a gauntlet then look it up on Google. One set of flying goggles. One heavy duty tan coloured flying suit. Most impressive of all, one Woolly Bull padded flying suit for winter wear. Being an open-cockpit aeroplane, the Tiger Moth was damnably cold in winter. Armed with all this gear I quickly got a mate to take a photo of me all dressed up with this lot (no selfies in those days) and it was then that I knew that being a pilot was going to be the life for me. All I needed to pull in the girls would be a big watch and a pair of RAAF Pilot Wings. While the former was expensive it would be the latter that would prove to be the hard part.
We marched to lectures on aerodynamics, meteorology, light signals, aerodrome signals, Air Force law, and a subject called Airmanship. Airmanship included engine handling on De Havilland Aircraft Gypsy Major engines, how to start the engine by swinging the propeller, and how gyro instruments worked. We learned how to don a parachute and to count to ten before pulling the rip-chord. Plus the vital importance of tightening the parachute straps around the groin. Loose straps were known to crush the family jewels when the parachute snapped open and the load was taken on the straps.
We attended aviation medicine lectures where we saw unspeakable photos of the private parts of victims of Venereal Disease and, almost as bad, photos of the horribly burned toes of fighter pilots who had not darned their socks leaving their toes sticking out if they baled out of a burning Spitfire and their flying boots had fallen off. We were instructed to always wear flying gloves for a similar reason.
We were so brain washed about the importance of covering our skin during flying - so much so that each night would see us inspecting our smelly socks for holes in the toes before going to bed. Out would come the wool and darning needle if a hole was spotted in a sock. In fact part of our issued kit as young airmen was the “housewife” – a cloth wallet containing darning wool, safety pins, sowing needles and patches. We kept knife edge creases on uniform trousers by the simple practice of laying out the trousers under the bed mattress where our weight flattened the daks.
Airmanship lectures included reading the Tiger Moth Flight Manual. Except in those days it wasn’t called a flight manual. It was called RAAF Publication No. 416 dated February 1944 Pilots Notes for Tiger Moth Aircraft. On the front cover was a picture of a Tiger Moth and below it said: `By Command of the Air Ministry` and signed by the Secretary of the Air Board at Air Force Headquarters Melbourne S.C.1
During flying training in the RAAF, our flying instructors were mostly experienced former wartime fighter or bomber pilots. That was a good thing and it meant when we were ready for first solo there was no requirement for a further pre-solo check flight. The result being students were sent solo after usually 8 to 10 hours; although keeping in mind we were training full time and not weekends as most civil flying schools do in Australia. There was no such thing as written checklists. It was all in the head. Boeing and Airbus pilots call them Recall - or Memory Items.
During my visit to CAE Oxford I wondered if students were taught to fly using written checklists and asked one instructor how he taught the before landing checks in the Cessna 172. He rattled off the standard Australia wide mantra of Brakes, Undercarriage, Mixture, Masters, Mags, Fuel, Temps and Pressures and I marvelled how this BUMPFO (or similar mnemonic) had found its way into flying schools all around this vast continent of Australia. Now that's what I call standardisation!
That said, I could never understand the logic of checking that a fixed landing gear was checked down and locked before landing. I never accepted the usual explanation that it prepared the student for the time he would graduate to retractable undercarriage aircraft. To be consistent why not check undercarriage up and locked for the after take off check in a fixed gear aeroplane? Lengthy superfluous cockpit checks seem to be a characteristic of present day student flying training. Why is this so? It prompted me to drag out my cherished musty Tiger Moth Pilot’s Notes where the before landing checks were short and concise. Paragraph 31 Approach and Landing listed:
Fuel: Sufficient for another circuit.
Mixture: Fully Rich.
Slots: Unlocked.
Then I checked a Cessna 172 POH Before Landing check. It said:
1. Seats, belts, Harness…..Secure.
2. Fuel Selector Valve…….Both.
3. Mixture…………………..Rich.
4. Carburettor Heat………..On
5. Autopilot (if installed)…..Off.
6. Air Conditioner (if installed)….Off
Makes you wonder the corporate history of why flying schools from the top class CAE Oxford to the one man country flying school, burden the student with so many extra and frankly superfluous drills before landing like Undercarriage (fixed) , Magnetos, Master switch and Engine temps and pressures? I haven’t a clue – just asking.
A contributory cause of some jet transport accidents is failure of the pilot to go-around from an unstable approach. There are anecdotal reports that some operators frown on go-arounds since they cost money, can disrupt a schedule and behind the scenes the pilot may even be censured. Plus throw in an ethnic culture of real men don’t go around and it is no wonder flight safety is compromised. Fortunately in Australia that problem is rare.
At busy general aviation airports like Moorabbin I have sympathy for the poor student pilot forced to go-around either because of an ATC instruction or someone staying too long on the runway. At a cost of one hour dual in a Cessna 172 being typically $330 per hour, a go-around followed by another circuit will likely cost the student another $45. On a tight budget (who isn’t nowadays?) is it any wonder that a student might be reluctant to go-around unless forced by ATC?
My enjoyable experience at the CAE Oxford Open day was somewhat tempered when I saw the significant cost burden to present day student pilots. My 13 year old grand-daughter wants to be a pilot like her father and her grandad. When the time arrives we would like to help her financially, but unless the cost of learning to fly returns to affordable levels in the next few years she may have to choose another career. Driving home from the CAE Open day that afternoon I thought how fortunate I was all those years ago to have been given free flying training at the tax payer’s expense. And some exciting endorsements thrown in as well
Whoever organised the Open Day did a fine job and this writer would like to express his sincere appreciation. When I was there I met several fellow aviators I had not seen for years. We all looked older but once names were mentioned, recognition was instant. That alone was worth the visit.
Looking around at the youthful faces of the flying instructors and their students took me back to my learning to fly days in the RAAF. We didn’t have to pay to learn to fly in the RAAF which is probably just as well because in civvy street at age 18 and on junior clerk’s wages, I could barely afford to eat a decent meal a day let alone pay the boarding house weekly rent. That was in 1951. How on earth today’s student pilots can afford to learn to fly, I don’t know.
AT CAE Oxford I looked at the well dressed staff and students neat and tidy with their blue winter warm jackets, and liked what I saw. Back to 1951 again and 100 of we trainee aircrew at the RAAF No.1 Initial Flying Training School Archerfield in Queensland, were marched to the Clothing Store and signed for our flying kit. One leather helmet with two rubber pipes attached to be plugged to an ancient Gosport Tube situated in each cockpit of the venerable Tiger Moth we were to train on. One pair of fur lined leather flying boots (no heating in Tiger Moths and Wirraways). One set of long leather gauntlets. If the reader has never heard of a gauntlet then look it up on Google. One set of flying goggles. One heavy duty tan coloured flying suit. Most impressive of all, one Woolly Bull padded flying suit for winter wear. Being an open-cockpit aeroplane, the Tiger Moth was damnably cold in winter. Armed with all this gear I quickly got a mate to take a photo of me all dressed up with this lot (no selfies in those days) and it was then that I knew that being a pilot was going to be the life for me. All I needed to pull in the girls would be a big watch and a pair of RAAF Pilot Wings. While the former was expensive it would be the latter that would prove to be the hard part.
We marched to lectures on aerodynamics, meteorology, light signals, aerodrome signals, Air Force law, and a subject called Airmanship. Airmanship included engine handling on De Havilland Aircraft Gypsy Major engines, how to start the engine by swinging the propeller, and how gyro instruments worked. We learned how to don a parachute and to count to ten before pulling the rip-chord. Plus the vital importance of tightening the parachute straps around the groin. Loose straps were known to crush the family jewels when the parachute snapped open and the load was taken on the straps.
We attended aviation medicine lectures where we saw unspeakable photos of the private parts of victims of Venereal Disease and, almost as bad, photos of the horribly burned toes of fighter pilots who had not darned their socks leaving their toes sticking out if they baled out of a burning Spitfire and their flying boots had fallen off. We were instructed to always wear flying gloves for a similar reason.
We were so brain washed about the importance of covering our skin during flying - so much so that each night would see us inspecting our smelly socks for holes in the toes before going to bed. Out would come the wool and darning needle if a hole was spotted in a sock. In fact part of our issued kit as young airmen was the “housewife” – a cloth wallet containing darning wool, safety pins, sowing needles and patches. We kept knife edge creases on uniform trousers by the simple practice of laying out the trousers under the bed mattress where our weight flattened the daks.
Airmanship lectures included reading the Tiger Moth Flight Manual. Except in those days it wasn’t called a flight manual. It was called RAAF Publication No. 416 dated February 1944 Pilots Notes for Tiger Moth Aircraft. On the front cover was a picture of a Tiger Moth and below it said: `By Command of the Air Ministry` and signed by the Secretary of the Air Board at Air Force Headquarters Melbourne S.C.1
During flying training in the RAAF, our flying instructors were mostly experienced former wartime fighter or bomber pilots. That was a good thing and it meant when we were ready for first solo there was no requirement for a further pre-solo check flight. The result being students were sent solo after usually 8 to 10 hours; although keeping in mind we were training full time and not weekends as most civil flying schools do in Australia. There was no such thing as written checklists. It was all in the head. Boeing and Airbus pilots call them Recall - or Memory Items.
During my visit to CAE Oxford I wondered if students were taught to fly using written checklists and asked one instructor how he taught the before landing checks in the Cessna 172. He rattled off the standard Australia wide mantra of Brakes, Undercarriage, Mixture, Masters, Mags, Fuel, Temps and Pressures and I marvelled how this BUMPFO (or similar mnemonic) had found its way into flying schools all around this vast continent of Australia. Now that's what I call standardisation!
That said, I could never understand the logic of checking that a fixed landing gear was checked down and locked before landing. I never accepted the usual explanation that it prepared the student for the time he would graduate to retractable undercarriage aircraft. To be consistent why not check undercarriage up and locked for the after take off check in a fixed gear aeroplane? Lengthy superfluous cockpit checks seem to be a characteristic of present day student flying training. Why is this so? It prompted me to drag out my cherished musty Tiger Moth Pilot’s Notes where the before landing checks were short and concise. Paragraph 31 Approach and Landing listed:
Fuel: Sufficient for another circuit.
Mixture: Fully Rich.
Slots: Unlocked.
Then I checked a Cessna 172 POH Before Landing check. It said:
1. Seats, belts, Harness…..Secure.
2. Fuel Selector Valve…….Both.
3. Mixture…………………..Rich.
4. Carburettor Heat………..On
5. Autopilot (if installed)…..Off.
6. Air Conditioner (if installed)….Off
Makes you wonder the corporate history of why flying schools from the top class CAE Oxford to the one man country flying school, burden the student with so many extra and frankly superfluous drills before landing like Undercarriage (fixed) , Magnetos, Master switch and Engine temps and pressures? I haven’t a clue – just asking.
A contributory cause of some jet transport accidents is failure of the pilot to go-around from an unstable approach. There are anecdotal reports that some operators frown on go-arounds since they cost money, can disrupt a schedule and behind the scenes the pilot may even be censured. Plus throw in an ethnic culture of real men don’t go around and it is no wonder flight safety is compromised. Fortunately in Australia that problem is rare.
At busy general aviation airports like Moorabbin I have sympathy for the poor student pilot forced to go-around either because of an ATC instruction or someone staying too long on the runway. At a cost of one hour dual in a Cessna 172 being typically $330 per hour, a go-around followed by another circuit will likely cost the student another $45. On a tight budget (who isn’t nowadays?) is it any wonder that a student might be reluctant to go-around unless forced by ATC?
My enjoyable experience at the CAE Oxford Open day was somewhat tempered when I saw the significant cost burden to present day student pilots. My 13 year old grand-daughter wants to be a pilot like her father and her grandad. When the time arrives we would like to help her financially, but unless the cost of learning to fly returns to affordable levels in the next few years she may have to choose another career. Driving home from the CAE Open day that afternoon I thought how fortunate I was all those years ago to have been given free flying training at the tax payer’s expense. And some exciting endorsements thrown in as well
Last edited by Centaurus; 11th Aug 2014 at 12:55.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: GPS Signal Lost
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centaurus I always enjoy reading your posts on here. Back when I begun my training ( 5 years ago) the mnemonic BUMFISH was widely used to teach us the before landing checklist in the Cessna 172. Compared to the POH which has only 4 items, I find it unnecessary for the other checks to be implemented. It consumes the students time and distracts them whilst flying on the downwind leg. Their mind should be more focused on handling the aircraft, maintaining straight and level, looking out for aircraft and having good airmanship!
As for the costs of flying. It's a very expensive investment, but nonetheless absolutely worth every penny in my book. Your grand daughter always has the option of going to a VET FEE-HELP funded course. I worked and saved for most of my training. I'm sure they're a few flying schools who offer reasonable priced training. Just need to shop around and find a bargain
!
As for the costs of flying. It's a very expensive investment, but nonetheless absolutely worth every penny in my book. Your grand daughter always has the option of going to a VET FEE-HELP funded course. I worked and saved for most of my training. I'm sure they're a few flying schools who offer reasonable priced training. Just need to shop around and find a bargain
!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Melbourne,Vic,Australia
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
logic of checking that a fixed landing gear was checked down and locked before landing.
Gear up at flare = loud expensive noise and in the military means that those higher in the food chain get a kick in the ****
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Long checklists.
It is often the case that each "unnecessary" item in a light a/c checklist was inserted after the manufacturer lost a lawsuit brought by the widow of a doofus, late, pilot.
As there is no shortage of doofus pilots, and no shortage of lawyered-up widows, checklists get loooonger and looooooooooonger each year. Or so it seems to me!
Ask me why Piper don't have control locks, but Cessna do...
It is often the case that each "unnecessary" item in a light a/c checklist was inserted after the manufacturer lost a lawsuit brought by the widow of a doofus, late, pilot.
As there is no shortage of doofus pilots, and no shortage of lawyered-up widows, checklists get loooonger and looooooooooonger each year. Or so it seems to me!
Ask me why Piper don't have control locks, but Cessna do...
Thread Starter
It is often the case that each "unnecessary" item in a light a/c checklist was inserted after the manufacturer lost a lawsuit brought by the widow of a doofus, late, pilot.
If an aircraft fitted with cowl flaps has to go around and rejoin a circuit there is no need to open the cowl flaps for what is a one minute climb to circuit altitude where you close them again. There is usually plenty of time to adjust cowl flaps to open if needed during initial climb.
There is so much superfluous and often plainly dodgy "advice" shoved down the throats of impressionable students and this nonsense stays with them for years. In turn they may become flying instructors and pass on this "good gen" to their own students who may eventually become flying instructors and the circle commences. I had one private pilot tell me that during stalling practice at altitude the direction of the upper air wind influences which wing will drop at the point of stall. Facing south with a westerly wind it will be the right wing that drops.
His instructor told him that. Yet another well known flying school in the Melbourne area teaches pilots flying its Baron to pull back the propeller pitch controls by 50 RPM at 200 feet after take off for "noise abatement." Get your head around that one!Thread drift threatens so I'll stop there
Last edited by Centaurus; 12th Aug 2014 at 01:47.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Skipton
Age: 19
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing wrong with a bit of thread drift if it keeps the thread worth reading.
Centaurus, your last post pretty much hits the nail on the head. My rule is cowl flaps must always be open on the ground and in the climb. Its more about preventing overheating than 'shock' cooling. I open them on final.
I've been flying long enough to to eliminate a lot flying school cancer from my routine and all in all I think I operate while a great deal of 'common' sense and intuition. There has been a bit of desire for me to teach but already know that I'd be too tempted to teach my way of doing things rather than the schools way of doing things. I'd pretty much be shot on site when student x says "But blatantliar told me to do it this way"
Centaurus, your last post pretty much hits the nail on the head. My rule is cowl flaps must always be open on the ground and in the climb. Its more about preventing overheating than 'shock' cooling. I open them on final.
I've been flying long enough to to eliminate a lot flying school cancer from my routine and all in all I think I operate while a great deal of 'common' sense and intuition. There has been a bit of desire for me to teach but already know that I'd be too tempted to teach my way of doing things rather than the schools way of doing things. I'd pretty much be shot on site when student x says "But blatantliar told me to do it this way"
I teach that cowl flaps are never opened on final. This is contrary to every POH I have and serves no purpose while increasing the risk of shock cooling especially on very cold days.
However I also insist that, as you also noted, that cowl flaps are always opened when the aircraft is on the ground. Unfortunately there is a flight school generated urban myth that leaving the cowl flaps closed will aid engine warm up.
All it will do is heat stress the back cylinders due to the lack of air flow through through the baffles.
However I also insist that, as you also noted, that cowl flaps are always opened when the aircraft is on the ground. Unfortunately there is a flight school generated urban myth that leaving the cowl flaps closed will aid engine warm up.
All it will do is heat stress the back cylinders due to the lack of air flow through through the baffles.
I open cowl flaps when I change the flap position, either leaving the runway if we land or on climb out when everything is stable if we go around. Final approach is no time to be reaching (usually down) for no real purpose.
With regards to "M" always checking mixture, mags, masters. I have surmised it's a one size fits all, so every pneumonic, M always is the same. Sometimes you need to check all three, other times once, but so it's easier to teach a student M is always those three.
I personally disagree with this theory but I'd say that's where it comes from.
With regards to "M" always checking mixture, mags, masters. I have surmised it's a one size fits all, so every pneumonic, M always is the same. Sometimes you need to check all three, other times once, but so it's easier to teach a student M is always those three.
I personally disagree with this theory but I'd say that's where it comes from.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Skipton
Age: 19
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is contrary to every POH
serves no purpose
while increasing the risk of shock cooling especially on very cold days.
I am a bit mystified as to why you would check master and mags on landing? Presumably you have been in cruise configuration beforehand and I cant for the life of me see any reason why the master would be off (and not be noticed) or indeed, the mags would not be on both. 
Shock cooling at approach speeds is one of those furphies that some still believe in. So, the position of cowl flaps on final probably does not matter either way. Or for the short duration of a missed approach. Whatever the POH says is OK by me.
As for checklists on bugsmashers, these days schools and clubs need to cover the lowest common denominator, whereas in times gone by it was left to Charles Darwin to sort out those unfit for the task of flying. But the idea of writing a checklist with non pertinent stuff like gear and prop pitch when the aircraft is not fitted with these items seems counterproductive in that we will then have certain pilots who will regard the checklist as a bit of overkill.
I was looking at a very nice early Piper Cherokee recently. It is on the N register, so has FAA mandated placards in the cockpit. The placard for takeoff has 8 items and that for landing 4 only. Sensible stuff like fuel on most appropriate tank, mixture rich and boost pumps on. Incredibly, in over 40 years of flying under several owners, this aeroplane has never crashed.
Good enough in its day and still good enough.
As for checklists on bugsmashers, these days schools and clubs need to cover the lowest common denominator, whereas in times gone by it was left to Charles Darwin to sort out those unfit for the task of flying. But the idea of writing a checklist with non pertinent stuff like gear and prop pitch when the aircraft is not fitted with these items seems counterproductive in that we will then have certain pilots who will regard the checklist as a bit of overkill.
I was looking at a very nice early Piper Cherokee recently. It is on the N register, so has FAA mandated placards in the cockpit. The placard for takeoff has 8 items and that for landing 4 only. Sensible stuff like fuel on most appropriate tank, mixture rich and boost pumps on. Incredibly, in over 40 years of flying under several owners, this aeroplane has never crashed.
Good enough in its day and still good enough.
Oh so you just ignore all that stuff that is in the amplified procedure of the normal operating section of the POH
I mean sure what could the manufacturer have to say about operating the airplane that could be of any interest to you
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Skipton
Age: 19
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh so you just ignore all that stuff that is in the amplified procedure of the normal operating section of the POH
I mean sure what could the manufacturer have to say about operating the airplane that could be of any interest to you
I mean sure what could the manufacturer have to say about operating the airplane that could be of any interest to you
Dammit, of the three items I quoted you on and responded to you only replied to the most trivial of the 3.
I wanted you to rationalize shock cooling on final in front of the interwebs. Ah well, I guess things dont turn out to be as entertaining as you sometimes plan.
the aircraft is being configured for one of two highly likely outcomes. A) ground operation or B) a go-around.
Personally I don't really see a problem other than minor philosophical differences.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Skipton
Age: 19
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I don't really see a problem other than minor philosophical differences.
Undercart
Brakes
Mixture
Pitch
Fuel
Fuel Pump
Hatches & Harnesses
Lookout
Has served me well for 40 yrs - from C150 to C402!
Haven't bent one yet!
Dr
Brakes
Mixture
Pitch
Fuel
Fuel Pump
Hatches & Harnesses
Lookout
Has served me well for 40 yrs - from C150 to C402!
Haven't bent one yet!
Dr
Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 12th Aug 2014 at 07:49.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Control locks - lack thereof on Piper aircraft (of more recent vintage).
Ok, so an old Piper with lockable controls, takes off without doing a full & free check. The surviving relatives lawyer up and manage to win the case, because the judge holds Piper responsible for making an aircraft that could physically depart in the state.
(Presumably this is before the USA weakened their product liability laws in the 80's. Situation with respect to lawyers is better now.)
Mr Piper says "Fine, be that way. Our aircraft will no longer have control locks."
And they don't.
Ok, so an old Piper with lockable controls, takes off without doing a full & free check. The surviving relatives lawyer up and manage to win the case, because the judge holds Piper responsible for making an aircraft that could physically depart in the state.
(Presumably this is before the USA weakened their product liability laws in the 80's. Situation with respect to lawyers is better now.)
Mr Piper says "Fine, be that way. Our aircraft will no longer have control locks."
And they don't.