Now now you two, play nicely or you'll annoy the quality of post police :ok:

PS:
and only if you have got "Land after" clearance from an ATCO

An intersting thread and how it has developed sonce I had me lunch yesterday.

I still say (see post #2) that an orbit should be a plain simple thing to achieve safely and I have been asked to do loads for traffic separation at ATC fields. At A/G and FISO fields I have done them as well - usually because some other guy has done something unexpected like an early downwind to base turn when I am already on a longer final. I have used my Mk 1 eyeball to check it's safe and announced that I am orbitting in present position to maintain traffic separation.

AFAI can see this most unfortunate accident was because the poor lad got way out of his comfort zone. It all started when ATC told him to backtrack and that threw him. I don't think he ever recovered his nerve after that.

I was surprised that he had soloed before he did air law. As that is usually first, no doubt at all (in my mind) that he hadn't done R/T.

This is a horrble examople of a perfectly good pilot doing consitent circuits, getting the encouragment of going solo, but without (said with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight) the deeper knowledge to understand and deal with the slightly less straight forward than a text book circuit.

An interesting range of experiences on orbits. I have been asked to orbit on downwind, at the downwind to base turn and before entering the ATZ - but never on final.

I have had my share of tight approaches where the guy in front isn't going to clear - other than making sure I am at 1.3Vso making gentle S turns and being mentally geared for a go around the whole way down - I watch until it is clear the gap isn't going to happen and then am on the go. I have never thought about doing a 360 in something like landing configuration at say 400 ft and would reject the request in favour of a go around any day. A few minutes wasted but able to stay right in the mental mindset for landing (i.e. assuming you are not).

Possibly influenced by my first solo land away - I was cleared to land after the departing twin - who promptly spit clouds of black smoke and engine bits! My instructors words prior to me going off were "if there is anything you don't like about the landing then - full power, pitch up, clean up and do the pattern again" and that is exactly what I did.

D_Squadron

Now I'm really confused. Comes from having a blonde moment, I suppose.

At the airfields I fly at, there are many non-radio aircraft. Orbiting on finals is tantamount to suicide.

Going into a big airfield with ATCOs and if someone had said to me 'Hold Position' whilst on finals it would have been clear that they had misunderstood the situation. That is not an acceptable piece of RT for that stage of flight.

In my view I still think you should have gone around.

I wonder if anybody is going to have a word with the instructor? If I was teaching somebody to fly I would make sure they know that when they are off solo they don't do anything they are unhappy about; to hell with ATC.

As I've said before, I don't like the whole way the PPL is taught. You spend hours banging circuits (which most normal people really dislike, due to the intense pressure), and there is a lot of pressure to go solo but that solo circuit actually does absolutely nothing for your level of competence. If I was teaching somebody I care about to fly I would not let them go solo until they were really at home with everything. Then, going solo is a non-event and there is no need to stay in the circuit - you may as well go somewhere for real.

One reason for circuits is to teach the touch and go. In reality one almost never does that. I've had to do a few go-arounds (all of them due to previous traffic not clearing in time, or somebody entering the runway) but once the wheels are on the ground the safest objective is to STOP. A departure from the landing config is highly unsafe.

I have awaited this report with interest as the accident happened shortly after I first went solo. My first inclination was to suspect that the aircraft had stalled as it turned base leg onto final. In the end it was a similar problem I suppose. My instructor haunts me every time I fly " watch your speed!" was his most common advice in the landing configuration (Eurostar).
I am particularly disturbed by two aspects:

1. After being cleared to land (#1) the Cessna was asked to turn away when on final. I would never expect an aircraft ahead of me on approach to a runway to have to alter course to accomodate me. (Except if an emergency had been declared). I had it hammered into me that every landing is a go around unless everything is spot on. the observations regarding ATC practice seem reasonable and , hopefully, address this concern particularly with regard to overloading an inexperienced pilot.

2. hours logged in previous 28 days - 4 hours !!! I know that the weather can cause havoc to a training programme, but this seems to exemplify just how most PPL training is subject to cash flow and/or time available for the task. I strongly believe that a more concentrated series of lessons helps you keep on top of the task, that was certainly the case for me.

I went solo after about 20 hrs at the grand age of 46. I wasn't in any particular hurry to get through that loop, every moment in the air with or without my instructor from beginning to end was brilliant.

One last thought... This terrible accident seems to justify the phrase "Aviate, navigate, communicate".

Fly safe everybody.

With all the instructor I had, touch and gos were always performed like this:
- Bring aircraft in the landing configuration (L/D flaps, carb heat on)
- Land the aircraft
- With idle power, bring aircraft back to centerline, and bring aircraft in the take-off configuration (T/O flaps, carb heat off)
- Once stable on the centerline and in the take-off config
- Full power
- Rotate at Vr

Obviously, if you forget to retract flaps or select carb heat off, you're in for a lot of surprise.

The most difficult manoeuvre is actually the go-around, where you've got to do this in the air without losing altitude.

At no point was the Cessna cleared to land.

I agree with BackPacker.

If I have 3 airliners on the ILS, and 3 airliners taxing out, I would definitely not extend downwind leg for a light aircraft to come in behind the last one on the ILS. It is so much easier to keep circuit traffic close to the airport. Right hand orbits (when left hand circuit) abeam threshold is perfect in my opinion. The circuit aircraft would probably be overtaken by the next batch of arrivals if extending it's downwind to 10 NM. Extending downwind works better if all aircraft are doing equal speeds.

We have had a few TCAS problems with light aircraft on extended downwind. Airliner pilots don't seem to like "opposite" traffic at same level on 3 miles final...

Funnily enough if I had 3 on the approach and 3 taxying out I'd do exactly the same - but that wasn't what I said the traffic situation was in my example ;)

Every scenario is different, you work the traffic accordingly. Do it properly you don't even get TCAS alerts :)

I would now. But on second solo?? The student had quite likely had exactly no training or experience of refusing an ATC instruction and wouldn't have had a clue as to how to go about it or even whether it was "allowed".

G-EMMA

As a low hours student PPL having just read the report, if someone told me to turn left and fly north during finals I would most likely reply WTF you on about, can not comply, going around.

I'm sure that you would, then again you are 40 and the lad was 16 - a big difference in how you react to authority figures.

Having read the whole report, it is so sad - just a lot of holes in the cheese lining up.

I still think that all ATCOs should do PPL training, so that they can be more aware of the issues that arise.

I have not idea if the ATCs involved here did or didn't, I am just thinking as a general principle.

FINAL 3 if you read the report you will find that both ATCOs held PPLs...

What has not been discussed here so far, is the situation London Center (LTCC) put the Southend ATCOs in by handing them the Meridian with 8 miles (or about 2 minutes) to run. Frankly, this isn't great and put both Southend controllers in a tight spot.:ugh:

It's a sad story and - alas - one where really all the holes in the cheese lined up :(

I would have thought that it in the heat of the moment, if you're trying to deconflict traffic one's ability to empathise with the pilot in question and give due consideration to experience goes out the window, no matter how much PPL training as an ATCO you've had.

But on second solo?? The student had quite likely had exactly no training or experience of refusing an ATC instruction and wouldn't have had a clue as to how to go about it or even whether it was "allowed".

That's the point I was hoping to make in the rest of my post, about the stupidity in which PPL training is done.

However, I don't see that it is smart to send somebody on a solo flight with "exactly no training or experience of refusing an ATC instruction". These (flying the plane and to hell with doing stuff you can't do) are pretty basic things.

G-EMMA, herein exactly lies the problem many, many pilots have in real world flying. If dealing with ATC doesn't become second nature - and it only will if you start with it early - then you will probably always have problems with it. Might be one of the reasons also, why so many people give up shortly after having attained their PPL - unless you really enjoy local bimbles (or aeros), you will have to deal with ATC if you want to do any meaningful flying, i.e. touring. Now, being afraid of doing so doesn't really help matters along....

Whenever I send early solos I am standing in the tower next to the controller!

I know rules may be different elsewhere but if I cannot be in the tower watching I would not send him/her!

All my sympathies go out to all concerned in the Southend tragedy especially the instructor who authorised.

I have not read the full report yet but students should be fit and trained in every respect for the task on the day. This is a huge responsibility for the instructor but this is, in my opinion, exactly what the job is all about. You can go on as long as you like about external circumstances such as ATC instructions, the weather, traffic conditions etc but before you send early solos the one thing you are looking for is that the student has enough spare capacity to make a decision and extricate himself from a situation which may require a go around or recovery from incipient stall/spin, for example. Rather than being able to fly a good approach and landing every time I am looking to the student being able to recognise an approach which is going wrong and make a decision to go around.

Just scanned the report - whichever way you look at it this was accident was primarily a stall/spin near the ground. I find the report quite disappointing with lots of referral to the ATC rules and little comment on the flying training aspects. S##t sometimes happens but I also was quite shocked to see this student's lack of recency in the last 28 days. For one reason or another the student failed to recognise the signs of an approaching stall, the symptoms of the full stall and failed to recover! I know I may have to take the brickbats for this but sometimes the truth hurts - this points to a lack of training in stall/spin awareness etc and I feel the ATC aspect is just al oad of hot air!

My hallucination is that a lot of flying training now suffers from the "tick in the box mentality". It's become a list of things to do etc. When I reflect on my father who was a veteran instructor/examiner the one thing he taught more than anything else was an "attitude" rather than conforming to a set of "rules".

G-EMMA

Thanks for your response - as someone who has a psychology background, I still believe that your view of ATC would be influenced by rather more life experience, even though you may not realise this ;-)

Good luck with the rest of your PPL and I hope that Stebbing is not too saturated after all the rain I see the BBC reporting.

Fireflybob

Interesting point about spare capacity - didn't an Avianca 707 run out of gas at NYC?

How did 3 commercial flight deck get into that position?

I do understand why you feel the need to stand next to the controller, so that you can intervene if necessary. I would have appreciated that when flying solo for the first few times :ok:

I guess that the bottom line is that we all take a risk when we fly and if the holes line up, we pay the piper.

Sad when it happens at 16 though.

G-EMMA your comment underscores what I've said earlier re ATC. The exchanges in the report are perfectly normal in real world flying and the earlier in your training you get exposed to that, the better it is. To me it appears that the backtrack instruction totally threw the poor soul and he never really recovered his composure after that.

You are, of course, absolutely correct in saying 'whatever happens, fly the bl**dy airplane'.

For the benefit of any prospective students reading, I disagree with G-EMMA's downside view of learning to fly under ATC and with the very greatest of respect, do not think that a student pilot has enough experience to have a really considered opinion on the relative merits of learning in an ATC environment versus an A/G..

From a PPL with a few hundred hours (relatively inexperienced as these things go), I believe that there are pros and cons in an ATC, AFIS and A/G environment.

Out of the these, I find A/G to be potentially the most challenging at times, with non radio traffic, pilots discretion and a number of other factors that make it (at least for me) potentially volatile and thus requiring higher levels of situational awareness, e.g. aircraft joining by run and breaks.

Under ATC, there is generally more order and the r/t traffic is generally more predictable.

I learned at an ATC field, but my instructor made sure that I got lots of A/G experience and I found this a good balance.

Whichever environment you learn to fly in, you will need to be up to speed with the others and they all have their foibles.

I'm with F3G here.

I trained at an ATC airfield. A nice controlled environment where nothing unexpected was supposed to happen (people turning up in the wrong part of the circuit unexpected, people cutting in front of you on final etc), and when something unexpected did happen ATC sorted it out and told you what to do.

And, at one point (I think it was my "first" solo on retraining after not flying for 13 years) when ATC wanted me to orbit on downwind, they first asked my instructor whether I could cope with this, and if he'd said "no" they would have dealt with their problem in some other way (eg by sending the heavy or whatever it was around).

The downside of training at an ATC airfield is of course that I still get a bit concerned when entering the wild wild west of a busy circuit at an uncontrolled field.

G-EMMA

Just continue with your training wherever it is. The most important thing is to keep consistency, and moving between airfield types only adds to confusion.

When you start your cross-country flights you will see major differences in RT between airfields. Just concentrate on being clear and never be afraid to ask for clarification.

I'm not happy about some of the posts where they say that they like to have ATC sort things out for them. In the terms expressed, and for low-hour pilots it does have a lot to commend it.

But it can also lead to difficulties further down the line, as, as pilots, we have to learn to think for ourselves and reject clearances that we consider unsafe.

G-EMMA.

Don't even think about it !

This report shows that even experienced, professional people (A.T.C. in this case) can find it demanding trying to juggle a multitude of different aircraft types at once. They react in the same way as pilots when their workload starts to rise. Hence the criticisms that you read here regarding their instructions to the Cessna.

I learnt to fly at Thruxton and believe it to be ideal for P.P.L. training. It has only A/G but they are very good at their job. One very rarely sees situations developing that could be dangerous unlike the circus of a busy A.T.C. airfield that has P.P.L. training taking place along side commercial operations. My view is that you have made the right decision about your training base. I'm sure that you are perfectly capable of making an orbit at low level, but let's not tempt the devil for a while, at least.

If you find yourself on final in a situation that you don't like, forget whether you are at an A.T.C. airfield or not. Take control of the situation and TELL THEM you are going around. Concentrate on flying the aeroplane until you have created some spare capacity for yourself and then worry about fitting into the traffic pattern.

G-Emma,

Just my personal opinion, but FWIW I disagree with F3G's disagreement, precisely because he considers A/G fields to be the most challenging ...

I learned at a busy, regional airport, with full ATC and huge hard runways.

If I had to do it all over again, I would without a second's hesitation learn from the shortest grass field legally available, with an A/G.

You're learning to fly : you've already had a considerable amount of experience in talking ...

I know there are those who have learned to fly at small fields who are terrified of having to enter ATC domains, and I've never understood why. Your training will provide enough of the basic "patter" to allow you to enter and transit ATC zones, and in my experience, most ATC is extremely helpful to those who sound a little "new" to the game (OK, there are exceptions, but not that many).

You, on the other hand, will never have to worry about joining a busy circuit at an uncontrolled field, which scared me positively witless (that's a spelling mistake :eek:) the first time I had to do it.

I reckon you've got it the right way around - good luck with your PPL ! :)

FF :ok:

A sweeping statement that has very little basis in truth - would you like to back that up with some facts apart from the accident in question?

G-EMMA

Consistency in school and instructors is a far better reason for school selection than what type of airfield it's situated on. Stick with it, there's plenty of time to go to the bigger places later. Keep enjoying it - that's the main thing :)

Quote:

---

One very rarely sees situations developing that could be dangerous unlike the circus of a busy A.T.C. airfield that has P.P.L. training taking place along side commercial operations.

---

I have to say that in my experience A/G airfields are much more challenging; on a busy Sunday afternoon dozens of planes from ultralights to twins wizz round and round all at different speeds, some trying to do glide approaches, some at 600ft, some at 800ft, all trying to land on the same 800m strip of grass, half don't even have radios. Occasionally military aircraft invade the ATZ, there are a mix of crosswind, base and overhead joins, sometimes it does seem like death on every corner. Having been cut up on finals on several occasions by non-radio cubs and the like I rather suspect that A/G airfields are much more dangerous from a traffic spacing point of view.

Much depends on how busy the place is.

I think most people would prefer a quiet field without any "controllers" for both learning and normal operations.

In reality there are few always-quiet fields (in the UK) where ab initio training can be done legally.

Flight training (circuit banging specifically) is a core money making activity for any GA field and this is why they tend to go overboard. The eight (yes 8) fixed wing schools that once existed at Shoreham is a great example. Of course they went bust regularly, often amid rather amusing (not amusing for the students who lost money) circumstances.

I still dread having to fly into say Stapleford on a nice Sunday, because it is such a total free for all, with a lot of crazy flying done by planes with instructors in them. At such times, ATC would be IMHO great. The rest of the time, you probably don't want ATC. OTOH if the field has gone overboard with flying schools then it will be hellishly busy the whole time.

However, if you learn at a quiet field without ATC (say, by having lessons only on weekdays) then you are likely to dread going to fields that have ATC. I see this in so many pilots. In turn, this wipes out a huge chunk of your mission capability because just about any flight abroad will involve going to a field with ATC, and quite often a big one.

Chilli Monster.



You ask for proof but accept (by using the word "apart") that my point may have had a bearing on this incident. Surely only one accident is enough proof?


To clarify, I should have said "some" busy A.T.C. airfields. I certainly didn't want to imply that all airfields with full A.T.C. are circus-like, they are not. I would prefer not to name specific airfields/airports but some of the worst horrors seem to happen at places where there is a large disparity of aircraft types. These places have good controllers trying to do a difficult job.

It is straying from the point, but is it really necessary to put controllers under the sort of pressure that this chap was under? 737s, turboprops, goodness knows what else don't mix with student pilots with 1 solo under their belt ( my view, of course).

Contacttower.

Valid point but most aircraft at an A/G airfield can fly at similar speeds, spacing becomes much more difficult when jets and props. mix. That's without the consideration of wake seperation.

G-EMMA

Maybe as a student I had a better capacity for making the right choice for me than F3G credited me for

I never commented on your particular personal choice, if you read your post #67 , you talk in the 3rd person in a way that reads, at least to me, as if you are generalizing, thus my response.

No doubt intuitively you made a good choice and there are upsides for learning on a short grass field, e.g. you will be good on speed control on final and not intimidated by a shortish grass strip, because you can put the aeroplane down accurately.

However, I really don't think you have the necessary knowledge to say which is the best choice - I know I certainly don't, as I see pros and cons both ways.

I switched half way through my course (due to relocation) and did my first 20 hours on a busy short rough strip, finishing off a a mile of tarmac/ATC airport, where I shared the circuit with everything from a C150 to a BAe 146 or 1-11.

I know that this unusual mixture suited me and improved my airmanship, but I wouldn't put it forward as a general approach to training.

The controller in question wasn't under that much pressure, the plane behind the C150 was a Piper Malibu, not 747. To get PPL training and airliners together just requires some thought on the part of the clubs and airport operations department, its not impossible and it is safe if done properly. Some airports (like EGHI :E) seem to feel the need to kick out flying training, but others like Exter, Bournemouth which both handle a lot more traffic than Southend seem to manage.

>>>>Some airports (like EGHI ) seem to feel the need to kick out flying training, but others like Exter, Bournemouth which both handle a lot more traffic than Southend seem to manage.<<<<<

I'm not sure that Exeter really manage. They send a lot of stuff elsewhere these days, and it's only going to get worse as the commercial movements grow

It's a shame, I remember thinking last year how reasonable the landing fees were...

Me too
 

Happened to m once many years ago on a fly in to Lakenheath one sat' morning, it was ok as not at short final & actually quite fun but I wouldn't recommend it & wouldn't be happy to do the same nowadays being older & hopefully a tad wiser,

>>>>It's a shame, I remember thinking last year how reasonable the landing fees were...<<<<<

You are joking! Try landing after 19.00hrs local on a nice summers day!!!
They are also one of the few airports who haven't signed up to the Strasser campaign (ie waiving landing fees in the event of a genuine weather diversion)

Coming in late on this thread but, yes, I have had an orbit request on final at Jersey. Due to a hang-up with a departing commercial. Other aircraft in circuit who were also orbiting and go-around not really feasible as I would then have been in conflict with either said commercial or one of the other GA's in the circuit.

No real issue - bit bumpy off 27 at 500' odd - rate 1 turn & no big deal, just pretty unusual. But orbits at Jersey (Corbiere, Noirmont or even mid-downwind) are not at all unusual - even when doing your NR training - you just concentrate & sweat more :}

Doing it on 2nd solo - hmmm, probably not a good move if you aren't used to performing tidy orbits, especially below circuit height.

I have read the report and most of the comments on this thread.

I am unable to express the sadness I feel that the young man should have lost his life in this accident.

I was interested to read that the investigators tested a similiar aircraft.

"As is stalled the example aircraft rolled quickly to the left adopting a bank angle of 60 degress within one second, simultaneously the nose dropped approx. 45 degrees below the horizon and a high rate of descent developed .. .. .." They go on to discuss the recovery.

Some training aircraft are benign in the stall. They mush down and must be really forced into dropping a wing.

This aircraft did not fall into that category.

The events before may have contributed to the reasons why the pilot stalled the aircraft, but the accident did not become unavoidable until the pilot found he did not have the skills to recover.

Given the characteristics of this aircraft, I wonder whether in the training enviroment more time needs to be spent on stalls and recovery in this type than in other types. Recovering from a pronounced wing drop at this point in your training has to be completely automatic. It is surprising when you do aeros with pilots who havent flown them before how poor their recovery skills from a wing drop and incipient spin are, and yet they will do just fine in anything benign that nods a nose down and dips a wing gently - and they may have several hundred hours or more.

I appreciate the aircraft would seem to have been at only around 300 feet when it stalled so recovery would always have been a challenge. However another pilot on another day might find himself with more height on his side and yet still not have the skills to recover.

I can't actually remember how much it was for the Warrior last time but all I do recall thinking how much cheaper it was than Bournemouth. Southampton's just silly although obviously like most light GA I tend to stick to what I would deem proper airfields (like Kemble for example)and the like.

I was a bit suprised to hear the C150 behaved like this, certainly the C152 has always had pretty good stall behaviour, and its a safe aircraft to teach spinning in.

Is this still true under full power with full flap? Does it still exhibit a benign stall?

That's the job, that's what you get paid for, that's why you get checked every year. In all fairness you're talking rot as cjboy and contacttower have already implied. There was nothing in that scenario which involved "pressure" as far as traffic loading. Apart from the late transfer to APR from London there was nothing there out of the ordinary.

The student wouldn't have been sent solo unless he'd proved he could integrate with other traffic. It's no different to where I work, where we have an even greater mix of traffic - the instructors know that and we trust their judgement. It's up to us, as ATCO's to keep things standard for pilots no matter what their experience levels - it didn't happen here. THAT was the problem - nothing else.

Roll to 85 degrees, pull to the buffet at 8g - sorry, are you not flying an Extra? ;)