No Touch & Gos allowed
 

Just wondering whether anyone has come across a flying school banning solo student pilots from conducting touch & gos?
My flying school (one of the main ones in the UK which happens to have a fairweather base in the US) has this week done just that, much to the surprise of many, students and instructors alike.
Touch & gos are allowed when dual, however the instructor must be the one to lower the flaps whilst the student maintains directional control and manages the throttle.
It strikes me as slightly absurd that students will not be able to get experience of touch and gos whilst solo, but instead must conduct full stop landings before taxiing back to the active.
1. It is a waste of precious training time.
2. We are paying a not insignificant amount for our course, only to loose out on time in the air in order to taxi on the ground.

Interested to see views on this.

Mmmm ... very strange - not a good environment for learning in. Sounds like you're wasting your money there mate - I suggest going elsewhere.

It's a ripp off!
 

It's a way of getting more money from you because you are no doubt paying on "chock to chock" time or the dredded Hobbs metre and so the clock is running all the time.

The aircraft/engine time is flying time only so you are paying for the flying and the only cost that "school" is incuring when you are taxing is the fuel that you are burning.

I think that I can guess who would pull a stunt like this!

Get out of there as quickly as you can mate. Just explain how they want you to do your solo circuit consolidation? :ugh:

Sounds absurd to me. We were encouraged to stick to fullstops until we had done an hour or two in the circuit post first solo because it is a little frantic when you're a newbie, but a blanket ban?! :confused:

FWIW, I would say that it would not be an easy decision for wg100 to go against the perceived wisdom of sticking to one training provider. If he/she is at one of the bigger FTOs, in the dewy eyes of a prospective employer the genuine silliness of this blanket ban might be outweighed by the FTO's overall reputation.

I've not heard of any accident, let alone incident, of a student losing directional control while raising the flaps on a touch and go. The most common incident I have heard of is PIO, which should of course be briefed to go-around, and would occur regardless if unstable. Certainly not a directional control loss on ground or incident due to takeoff with full flap on solo flight.

Perhaps someone who made this absurd decision could point people towards one - not to mention one without mitigating factors.

Most of the real world permits touch and go at second solo, leaving the only justification appearing to be financial...

As an instructor once I have authorised someone to fly solo then I have to be happy that they are competent to manage all the workload on a touch and go; if you haven't got the spare capacity to raise flaps on a touch and go and maintain directional control then you are not ready to fly solo. So this does seem rediculous.

A few years back there were problems with the electric selector switches on the C152/150, which often meant that the flaps were sometimes not in the postion selected, which could cause problems on a touch and go, but even with regard to this touch and go's are part of the solo consolidation.

I would like to put across a point here. I'm a PPL holder with a night rating. For the night rating one of the criteria is to do 5 touch-and-go's solo before you can obtain your night rating. As this is the case how would anybody be able to obtain this rating at that airfiled????????

I think you'll find that it is 5 take offs, and 5 full stop landings for the night rating.

Only time I've heard of this is complex aircraft to stop someone accidentally raising the gear instead of the flaps.

Have you thought to ask why they have done this?

Steggers
 

I think you will find that it is Five full stop landings that you require for the night qualification.


Please some one name the outfit that has imposed this rule.

A&C... err, the CAA? has always been so..

YYZ

Sounds a bit silly. The only time I could see that being even remotely valid would be in a retractable where the gear and flap levers could be confused. We don't recommend solo circuits for low-time retractable pilots but can't understand how that would be an acceptable rule most basic trainers with fixed u/c.

I preffered to restrict my students to full stop landings for the first 2 hours of circuit consolodation. Hour 3 would involve touch and go's.

A T&G is not that much extra pressure and not more than that involved in doing a go around which is obviously a madatory competency.

Nonetheless your first solo hours are full of adrenalin, elation, fear and fun. It often makes best practice to have your student slow things down by full stops, backtracks and takeoffs. At worst it costs him some time in the air but at best it lets him sharpen his ground handling and checklist skills and allows time for the adrenalin to ebb.

PIO is the biggest hazard on first solo sessions.

At the end of the day its a decision taken by the CFI and your instructor. Trust them.

WWW

YYZ
 

The name of outfit that applied the no touch & go rule not the night flying requirments.............. I think that we had all worked out who mandates the reqirements for the night qualification.

Just a thought - could this be related to the "student" paranoia that has sprung up in some quarters in the UK since the sad accident to the young lad at Southend ?

Funnily enough, no reason was given initially, but further questioning seems to link it to a couple of incidents earlier in the year, at least one of which involved a collision with a taxiway sign due to exiting the rwy too fast. The other reason was due to people not being stabilised on approach by 200ft.
Now I had thought that both these things had been countered, firstly by banning use of the first exit off the rwy which is makeable, but if you are too fast you could spin off. Secondly instructors were briefed to ensure students knew what stabilised appoaches were, were able to do them, and if not, were comfortable with go arounds. No incidents have been heard of since, so there is an overwhelming sense of bafflement at why this rule was brought in.
Senior management is due out here shortly, so I imagine he will be approached about this PDQ.

Just a thought. My FIRST ever solo was two touch and go then a full stop to collect the instructor. This was in a C152 that needed the electric flap leaver holding until the flaps were in position.

This was FAA training in winter windswept Texas - where the men are men and the women are grateful:)

Sounds like a rip off to me and any school that will do things like that are also likely to "add some extras" in elsewhere making your PPL expensive. Also add in factors like you will have more hours in your log book, but NOT P1 for extra ratings etc.

All the very best with your flying mate.

YYZ - JAR-FCL 1.125 states

Night qualification. If the privileges of
the licence are to be exercised at night, at least
five additional hours flight time in aeroplanes
shall be completed at night comprising 3 hours
of dual instruction including at least 1 hour of
cross-country navigation and five solo take-offs
and five solo full-stop landings. This qualification
will be endorsed on the licence.

Touch and go landings do not fulfil the JAA requirements.

I think you will find that the other matter is a knee-jerk reaction to a rising accident rate.

Oh Dear!
 

I find it so sad that I guessed correctly at the perpitrators of this nonsense and feel so sorry for the young hopefulls who have entrusted large amounts of hard won cash to them.

I have been in the business for nearly thirty years and little has changed, the new guys get suckered in by the gold bars and potted plants and swiftly have there cash removed before they know any better.

By the time you get to first solo and beyond you should be able to cope with this level of multi-tasking, if not then you are being pushed before ready or have not got enough multi-tasking capacity and surely that should have been found during aptitude testing.
This worryingly sounds like a knee jerk reaction to trying to get people through the system too quickly rather than safely.
If anything, this could cause confidence problems, as students might not feel trusted.