I still can't believe I was that stupid...
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a similar incident recently.
I was at about 1000 in a LH circuit. I left the controls for a short while whilst I looked for a beer.
Unfortunately, the beers were in the fridge downstairs.
Fortunately, I was on FS2004 on my computer!
I was at about 1000 in a LH circuit. I left the controls for a short while whilst I looked for a beer.
Unfortunately, the beers were in the fridge downstairs.
Fortunately, I was on FS2004 on my computer!
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just re-read Confabulous' first post. The instructor ASKED him to get his map. By doing this, the instructor was implying that he (the instructor) had control of the aircraft, IMHO. Saying "you have control" was unnecessary under such circumstances. Or should have been, except the instructor was trying to trip up a low hours student who hadn't flown for six weeks. I take back the relatively charitable comments of my last post; the instructor's behaviour was downright appalling!!!!!!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Whirlybird
I've just re-read Confabulous' first post. The instructor ASKED him to get his map. By doing this, the instructor was implying that he (the instructor) had control of the aircraft, IMHO. Saying "you have control" was unnecessary under such circumstances. Or should have been, except the instructor was trying to trip up a low hours student who hadn't flown for six weeks. I take back the relatively charitable comments of my last post; the instructor's behaviour was downright appalling!!!!!!
Bet you won't forget next time, Confabulous
"By doing this, the instructor was implying that he (the instructor) had control of the aircraft, IMHO. Saying "you have control" was unnecessary under such circumstances."
Whirly, there is never any 'implication' concerning who has control. Particularly with a low-time student, the mantra "I have control.." - "You have control" must be followed without exception.
It was one of the absolute basics I was taught when I started instructing - and still is!
Whirly, there is never any 'implication' concerning who has control. Particularly with a low-time student, the mantra "I have control.." - "You have control" must be followed without exception.
It was one of the absolute basics I was taught when I started instructing - and still is!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Feeling shame for making a basic error is completely natural, and learning can not occur without it.
Absolute nonsense.
Feeling uncomfortable can be a part of learning, but that is quite different to feeling shame.
Positive reinforcement is a much more powerful technique than negative.
I would recommend Confabulous to seriously consider finding an instructor with a more professional approach.
And I wholeheartedly support BEagle's comments.
Absolute nonsense.
Feeling uncomfortable can be a part of learning, but that is quite different to feeling shame.
Positive reinforcement is a much more powerful technique than negative.
I would recommend Confabulous to seriously consider finding an instructor with a more professional approach.
And I wholeheartedly support BEagle's comments.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ireland
Age: 44
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, the more I look at my original post, the more I agree with BEagle.
Of course I made a mistake by whipping around to go hunting for the map - in fact I should have just stowed it in the map pocket by my leg. As much as I hate to admit it, I was struggling. Although the landing went very well, my instructor has a habit of 'guarding' the controls to make sure I don't apply very large inputs, but it makes me unsure of whether I have control or not, especially in the flare. Reconfirming 'you have control' would make it a lot easier.
Interestingly, about feeding in controls - in my first few hours he caught me out a few times - rolling on 90+ degrees of bank and telling me to recover, distracting me and slamming in a bootful of rudder (below Va). In his defence he says I'm well above average for a PPL student, but it's faint praise in those situations. Added to the fact is that he's one of my best friends (and I'm beginning to wonder about that), I think I'll finish my PPL training in Florida.
Of course I made a mistake by whipping around to go hunting for the map - in fact I should have just stowed it in the map pocket by my leg. As much as I hate to admit it, I was struggling. Although the landing went very well, my instructor has a habit of 'guarding' the controls to make sure I don't apply very large inputs, but it makes me unsure of whether I have control or not, especially in the flare. Reconfirming 'you have control' would make it a lot easier.
Interestingly, about feeding in controls - in my first few hours he caught me out a few times - rolling on 90+ degrees of bank and telling me to recover, distracting me and slamming in a bootful of rudder (below Va). In his defence he says I'm well above average for a PPL student, but it's faint praise in those situations. Added to the fact is that he's one of my best friends (and I'm beginning to wonder about that), I think I'll finish my PPL training in Florida.
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whirly, there is never any 'implication' concerning who has control. Particularly with a low-time student, the mantra "I have control.." - "You have control" must be followed without exception.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having given this instructor the benefit of the doubt, especially after the initial post where it sounded like this had actually worked this instructor is now sounding a bit dodgy! When I talked about feeding in rudder that would only have been enough to reproduce what a slightly out of balance aircraft would do if left alone - not
and any instructor that
undermines the student and I would say probably does not have enough confidence in his own abilities.
slamming in a bootful of rudder (below Va).
has a habit of 'guarding' the controls to make sure I don't apply very large inputs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ireland
Age: 44
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The facts are still the same, I initially didn't mention everything becuase it simply didn't occur to me. The reason I started the thread was to warn people about my specific mistake and hope that someone else might benefit.
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with whirly and F3G on this one.
When I was learning to fly I made really good progress until I had to swap instructors. My new instructor was fairly young and very arrogant. He had a strange sense of humor that I didn't understand and I never knew when he was being serious. He always gave me the impression that proving his own ability was far more important than passing his knowledge on to me.
Most of the conversation comprised of sarcastic comments, and when things weren't going great, there was this tone in his voice as though he was about to give-up and I was never going to be able to fly an aircraft. Things went rapidly down-hill to the point where I was unable to perform simple tasks. Maintaining straight and level was impossible, I was so nervous, and eventually I gave up.
Finally I decided to give it one last shot with another flying school, and thank god I did. My 3rd instructor was fantastic. It's hard to describe his approach, but I certainly never felt ashamed. Sure, I made silly mistakes, but he was able to point out the seriousness of them without making it seem as if it was the end of the world, and I very rarely made the same mistake twice. He always gave the impression that he had all the time in the world and that nothing was impossible.
Maybe the "treat em mean" tactic works for some people. We all have different personalities, but for me, constructive criticism is far more helpful than a bollocking!
When I was learning to fly I made really good progress until I had to swap instructors. My new instructor was fairly young and very arrogant. He had a strange sense of humor that I didn't understand and I never knew when he was being serious. He always gave me the impression that proving his own ability was far more important than passing his knowledge on to me.
Most of the conversation comprised of sarcastic comments, and when things weren't going great, there was this tone in his voice as though he was about to give-up and I was never going to be able to fly an aircraft. Things went rapidly down-hill to the point where I was unable to perform simple tasks. Maintaining straight and level was impossible, I was so nervous, and eventually I gave up.
Finally I decided to give it one last shot with another flying school, and thank god I did. My 3rd instructor was fantastic. It's hard to describe his approach, but I certainly never felt ashamed. Sure, I made silly mistakes, but he was able to point out the seriousness of them without making it seem as if it was the end of the world, and I very rarely made the same mistake twice. He always gave the impression that he had all the time in the world and that nothing was impossible.
Maybe the "treat em mean" tactic works for some people. We all have different personalities, but for me, constructive criticism is far more helpful than a bollocking!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instructors are human beings and make as many mistakes in their daily lives as anyone else, trying to judge an individual's competence based on an internet bulletin board and some very sketchy facts is deeply unsound.
Whilst I wouldn't have acted in exactly the same way, I don't see the original actions as being particularily serious. The student learnt a lesson and won't make the same mistake again. Is it imporant how this was achieved?
Not really.
Each student I have taught has required a different teaching technique, some need to be nagged, others need me to be sweetness and light personified (a very difficult proposition for me sometimes!!) whilst the occasional one has only responded when I've given them both barrels. The key is to be aware of how your student is doing and modify your approach.
"Guarding" the controls is something that we have all needed to do at some point, having had numerous people decide without warning to try and destroy the nose wheel, having your hand somewhere near isn't a bad idea, though I do it serruptiously by resting my hand on my knee just under the control column so as not to undermine the student.
Whilst I wouldn't have acted in exactly the same way, I don't see the original actions as being particularily serious. The student learnt a lesson and won't make the same mistake again. Is it imporant how this was achieved?
Not really.
Each student I have taught has required a different teaching technique, some need to be nagged, others need me to be sweetness and light personified (a very difficult proposition for me sometimes!!) whilst the occasional one has only responded when I've given them both barrels. The key is to be aware of how your student is doing and modify your approach.
"Guarding" the controls is something that we have all needed to do at some point, having had numerous people decide without warning to try and destroy the nose wheel, having your hand somewhere near isn't a bad idea, though I do it serruptiously by resting my hand on my knee just under the control column so as not to undermine the student.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ireland
Age: 44
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to be clear - I had no intention of insulting or denigrating my instructor, just wanted to point out my own mistakes. I have certainly learned from them, and will be more careful in future. That said, I'll be changing instructors, because it may be that being very good friends with my instructor detracts from the learning experience.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Guarding" the controls is something that we have all needed to do at some point,
Guest
Posts: n/a
Instructors are human beings and make as many mistakes in their daily lives as anyone else, trying to judge an individual's competence based on an internet bulletin board and some very sketchy facts is deeply unsound.
Agree that it is inappropriate to judge competence, but the approach to the "learning exercise" was unprofessional on the data presented.
What was the learning objective? - that aeroplanes drift off course if not controlled, the importance of the "I/you have control handover", that the chart should always be in easy reach?
It may be one or all of these or something different, but how can learning be effective when the objectives are not totally clear.
I am not a flight instructor, but I am well qualified academically and practically to design learning interventions.
If the learning objective was to show that a map should be kept within reach, then a simple question of "explain to me how would you reach your chart if I wasn't here to take control" would have been equally effective, faster and less traumatic. Confab would hope fully have thought about that and realised that (a) solo would have been very risky, (b) with a pax post PPL, perhaps the pax could have assisted for a few moments - not without risk and (c) the only sensible stategy is to have the chart close to hand.
However, we have a confused student who may have missed the point of the exercise, because it was poorly setup up, executed and debriefed - any professional instructor knows that the most hard hitting criticism is self criticism - in fact many people will not truly accept a bollocking as it makes them defensive, which is a learning barrier.
So the instructor may have been competent, but displayed an unprofessional approach.
Agree that it is inappropriate to judge competence, but the approach to the "learning exercise" was unprofessional on the data presented.
What was the learning objective? - that aeroplanes drift off course if not controlled, the importance of the "I/you have control handover", that the chart should always be in easy reach?
It may be one or all of these or something different, but how can learning be effective when the objectives are not totally clear.
I am not a flight instructor, but I am well qualified academically and practically to design learning interventions.
If the learning objective was to show that a map should be kept within reach, then a simple question of "explain to me how would you reach your chart if I wasn't here to take control" would have been equally effective, faster and less traumatic. Confab would hope fully have thought about that and realised that (a) solo would have been very risky, (b) with a pax post PPL, perhaps the pax could have assisted for a few moments - not without risk and (c) the only sensible stategy is to have the chart close to hand.
However, we have a confused student who may have missed the point of the exercise, because it was poorly setup up, executed and debriefed - any professional instructor knows that the most hard hitting criticism is self criticism - in fact many people will not truly accept a bollocking as it makes them defensive, which is a learning barrier.
So the instructor may have been competent, but displayed an unprofessional approach.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't agree with some of your statements. Occasionally in flying it is required that you do scare the living hell out of someone especially if they are cocky so and so's.
Flying is by definition a dangerous activity and incredibly unforgiving of error or poor judgement so using "classroom" techniques are sometimes not appropriate. If you tell someone that something is dangerous and that they shouldn't do it you may reach most people, but if you show them why a certain activity is daft, then you are more likely to get the point across.
With an FI onboard all manner of problems can be demonstrated safely, a far better scenario than having a student or PPL finding out what a bad idea something maybe for the first time when solo.
For example, we could just talk and explain about stalling or spinning rather than actually completing the excercise, but no-one in their right minds would think that that is acceptable.
Whilst we don't want to scare people, a certain level of respect for the situation they find themselves in is appropriate and in this situation Confabulous is highly unlikely to make a similar mistake in the future.
The point of the excercise was clearly made, don't keep things out of reach, don't put your head down and make sure you are always absolutely clear who's in charge of flying the machine.
Flying training is a very dynamic thing, no two lessons are ever the same and we are not just dealing with passing on information, but we are also trying to build confidence, allay fears and trying to keep the a/c in one piece. Compared to teaching in a classroom it is a totally different activity. So the same bench marks cannot be used.
Flying is by definition a dangerous activity and incredibly unforgiving of error or poor judgement so using "classroom" techniques are sometimes not appropriate. If you tell someone that something is dangerous and that they shouldn't do it you may reach most people, but if you show them why a certain activity is daft, then you are more likely to get the point across.
With an FI onboard all manner of problems can be demonstrated safely, a far better scenario than having a student or PPL finding out what a bad idea something maybe for the first time when solo.
For example, we could just talk and explain about stalling or spinning rather than actually completing the excercise, but no-one in their right minds would think that that is acceptable.
Whilst we don't want to scare people, a certain level of respect for the situation they find themselves in is appropriate and in this situation Confabulous is highly unlikely to make a similar mistake in the future.
The point of the excercise was clearly made, don't keep things out of reach, don't put your head down and make sure you are always absolutely clear who's in charge of flying the machine.
Flying training is a very dynamic thing, no two lessons are ever the same and we are not just dealing with passing on information, but we are also trying to build confidence, allay fears and trying to keep the a/c in one piece. Compared to teaching in a classroom it is a totally different activity. So the same bench marks cannot be used.
Guest
Posts: n/a
SAS
I don't think that we disagree so much as you might imagine, but I think you are being a little defensive about the FI here.
By the way, where did I compare teaching in a classroom to airwork in flight training? Although I would have expected an element of classroom briefing for the training flight in question, frankly.
I said that I was qualified to design learning interventions - that includes experiential activities (the airwork in flight training is such an experience) and simulations, as well as classroom and other activities.
For example, we could just talk and explain about stalling or spinning rather than actually completing the excercise,
AFAIK spinning per se is not on the PPL syllabus, but it is discussed and the incipient spin and how to prevent further development is included - but the instructor briefs it first - you don't just blast off and do it and then try to make sense of the experience afterwards.
So if the instructor really wanted to show confabulous what might have happened, he should have asked the question in my last post and then explained that he was going to ask Confabulous to get the chart, guard the controls (I have control) and let the aircraft wander (safely.) The debrief would have been to ask Confabulous about the risks of letting this happen for real, e.g. losing control. All done professionally and using positive reinforcement in a safe learning environment, not the negative reinforcement described, which as I said before is more likly to lead to a learning blockage due to a normal defensive reaction (the teachers behaviour overrides the learning.)
That would have been a far better course of action than tricking a guy on his first lesson for 6 weeks. What's smart about that? The "bollocking" is more likely to inhibit focus on the rest of the lesson.
A good summary for hands on experiential technical learning is "tell them what they are going to see, let them see it, let them tell you about what they saw, talk about what they saw, and let them show it to you."
Of course, every 121 learning session will vary (we are talking human factors here, not pilot factors!), but there should be a clear structure that the participant (student pilot in this case) is aware of, so that they can maximise their learning experience.
I see certain elements of that missing in Confabulous' experience.
I don't think that we disagree so much as you might imagine, but I think you are being a little defensive about the FI here.
By the way, where did I compare teaching in a classroom to airwork in flight training? Although I would have expected an element of classroom briefing for the training flight in question, frankly.
I said that I was qualified to design learning interventions - that includes experiential activities (the airwork in flight training is such an experience) and simulations, as well as classroom and other activities.
For example, we could just talk and explain about stalling or spinning rather than actually completing the excercise,
AFAIK spinning per se is not on the PPL syllabus, but it is discussed and the incipient spin and how to prevent further development is included - but the instructor briefs it first - you don't just blast off and do it and then try to make sense of the experience afterwards.
So if the instructor really wanted to show confabulous what might have happened, he should have asked the question in my last post and then explained that he was going to ask Confabulous to get the chart, guard the controls (I have control) and let the aircraft wander (safely.) The debrief would have been to ask Confabulous about the risks of letting this happen for real, e.g. losing control. All done professionally and using positive reinforcement in a safe learning environment, not the negative reinforcement described, which as I said before is more likly to lead to a learning blockage due to a normal defensive reaction (the teachers behaviour overrides the learning.)
That would have been a far better course of action than tricking a guy on his first lesson for 6 weeks. What's smart about that? The "bollocking" is more likely to inhibit focus on the rest of the lesson.
A good summary for hands on experiential technical learning is "tell them what they are going to see, let them see it, let them tell you about what they saw, talk about what they saw, and let them show it to you."
Of course, every 121 learning session will vary (we are talking human factors here, not pilot factors!), but there should be a clear structure that the participant (student pilot in this case) is aware of, so that they can maximise their learning experience.
I see certain elements of that missing in Confabulous' experience.
Last edited by Final 3 Greens; 16th Jun 2006 at 11:42.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Northampton
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My instructor - with me at least - was as many of you may describe as 'young and arrogant', which, at the time of my training, could sometimes be slightly disconcerting. However, when I had that PPL in my hand after passing first time with no fails, I couldn't thank him enough, because his approach to teaching made me a stronger, more adept pilot. Indeed, a long time ago landing at Cambridge, I almost mistaked the tall grass for the centerline of the grass runway before making a late correction - after telling him this, his reaction was to stare at the instrument panel followed by a look outside with no comment. In my opinion, because he didn't need to make a comment. At the end of the day, everybody will respond differently to varied methods of instruction, but for me, Confab's instructor sounds like he applies methods which will ultimately result in his student being a better pilot for it. I am a kinesthetic learner, which means I learn from making practical mistakes, as opposed to seeing or hearing about them and learning from that. This is rather unfortunate seeing as I am planning on a career in aviation, however maybe my instructor picked up on this and decided that I needed a greater kick in the backside than some...
Just my opinion,
Cheers, Jack.
Just my opinion,
Cheers, Jack.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jack
I am a kinesthetic learner, which means I learn from making practical mistakes, as opposed to seeing or hearing about them and learning from that.
mmmm - bit more to it than that, its more about learning by associating physical experience with events, so perhaps recalling the sloppy feeling associated with the controls and the buffet just before the stall and then learning to recover at that stage, whereas the visual learning style will see the angle of the earth against a reference point and an aural will hear the different slipstream noise etc.
You might be interested in the following website http://www.learning-styles-online.com/
It might help you to take full advantage of your preference.
I am a kinesthetic learner, which means I learn from making practical mistakes, as opposed to seeing or hearing about them and learning from that.
mmmm - bit more to it than that, its more about learning by associating physical experience with events, so perhaps recalling the sloppy feeling associated with the controls and the buffet just before the stall and then learning to recover at that stage, whereas the visual learning style will see the angle of the earth against a reference point and an aural will hear the different slipstream noise etc.
You might be interested in the following website http://www.learning-styles-online.com/
It might help you to take full advantage of your preference.