How to know when to say enough?

[murphey]

Most training done is "academy" style training of foreign students. It's on a tight schedule, most will solo around 11-15hrs and will have a license within 5 hrs of minimums be they 91 or 141. There are people who take 70-100+. They are not typical regardless what internet cheerleaders say. Typically, there are advanced issues with them.

In this case, if the guy feels he wants to keep going after the CFI has sat down and given them a reality check that unless they manage to correct XXX issues, they will not solo much less become certificated. If they are paying the bill and decide to continue, go for it. I figure about 150hrs for a good chimp. My 9 year old nephew could fly and land a mis rigged PA-12 from the back seat in 9hrs. As long as you come at this with full disclosure, it's his money, let him spend it.

If I had followed your line of reasoning I'd never have passed my checkride, nor even made it to solo. And GA would have had a hostile, vocal critic. I now have almost 700 hours and own an airplane.

Of course in my situation I had the classic "milkman" for a CFI, and the school was very happy to encourage it. At the time, the internet (and web) was not widely used, hence I had no one to tell me I was being taken. I finally fired both the CFI and the school and quit for a few months. Different airport, different CFI, took almost no time to finish.

It depends entirely on the motivation of the student and the ability of the CFI to correctly diagnose and resolve the problems.

 

[Everskyward]

Most training done is "academy" style training of foreign students. It's on a tight schedule, most will solo around 11-15hrs and will have a license within 5 hrs of minimums be they 91 or 141. There are people who take 70-100+. They are not typical regardless what internet cheerleaders say. Typically, there are advanced issues with them.

I had 70+ but my training was probably as far from "academy style" as it could be.

 

[SkyHog]

Don, I did not solo until I had (looks at logbook) 32.7 hours in my logbook. The preceeding log entries:

3/26/04 PREP FOR SOLO
3/29/04 PREP FOR SOLO
3/30/04 PREP FOR SOLO
4/3/04 VOR PROCEDURES, TRACKING AND INTERCEPTING. LOST PROCEDURES. LOST AND FOUND PROCEDURES
4/17/04 NORMAL TAKEOFF CLIMBS AND DESCENTS
4/18/04 S-TURNS TURNS AROUND A POINT AND STALLS AND SLOW FLIGHT AND TAKEOFFS
4/30/04 T&G E80 AND TURN COORDINATION
5/02/04 SLOW FLIGHT TURNS TO STALLS AND CONT AIRSPEED CLIMBS AND DESCENTS (1E) EMERGENCY PROCEDURES
5/16/04 TOUCH AND GO KAEG AND CROSSWIND LANDINGS
5/20/04 PRE SOLO PROGRESS CHECK
5/31/04 POWER ON AND OFF STALLS AND STEEP TURNS. TOUCH AND GO KAEG
6/12/04 TOUCH AND GO KAEG. FIRST SOLO. SOFT AND SHORT FIELD LANDINGS

Basically, I was bouncing through instructors that were getting frustrated. Finally, I found an instructor that was able to step me through the proper steps to land right. Then I soloed. You can see me restarting each time with new instructors.

Don't give up, just try different techniques.

 

[Palmpilot]

From my perspective he just won't take control of the airplane. He is happy to sit there passively droning along when things are going bad. Bad trait for a pilot!

I remember my instructor always saying "Make that airplane do what YOU want it to!" I guess I must not have been applying corrections soon enough, I don't know. I do remember it taking a long time to learn how to land.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

I think you just described this guy. He is the intellegent type, a doctor actually. I feel he is has convinced himself his abilities are far better than they are. From my perspective he just won't take control of the airplane. He is happy to sit there passively droning along when things are going bad. Bad trait for a pilot!

Is he un-aware or just waiting for you to step in and fix it for him (verbally or physically)?

Silly idea time: Play "You got it" - have him close his eyes, you screw up an approach, then "how are you going to fix this?". Get him in the habit of looking and acting and fixing on his own?

 

[Henning]

The part that really bothers me about this guy, He can be coming in on final extremely low and getting slow and I can ask him "so what's wrong with this approach?"
Him: "looks fine to me"
Me:"no, it isn't fine, look at your airspeed, what should it be and why are we getting cactus thorns in the tires?
Him: "it should be 75 and I guess we are a little low"
Me:"then why are we going 60 and why aren't you doing something about it? power on, go around"

I have a question, what are you training him in that has you at 75 on short final? That is far above 1.3 VSo for most every certified light single out there, much less light trainer at training weights. I find a lot of peoples problems with landings is that they carry far to much energy into them, far too much. I find teaching energy management to be a very aural type of thing, "Close your eyes for a minute as I fly, this is what the plane should sound like, listen to the airflow on the windshield... mezzo piano fading to ppp just before the stall warning, listen to the note of the engine... pianissimo..." teach them to zero thrust by the whistle-hum of the prop. For some reason he's probably also not catching the perspective shift cues. Might have to demonstrate them again to him from scratch and really point everything out well in as many ways as you can and hope that something hits a switch for him. He may have perception acuity problems. Has anyone suggested a thorough eye exam? There may be physiological issues involved that will give you a better clue as to what will or won't help that student.

 

[Don Jones]

Is he un-aware or just waiting for you to step in and fix it for him (verbally or physically)?

Well, verbally doesn't always get the problem resolved until prompted a couple of times. When quizzed, he knows what he should have been doing.

Silly idea time: Play "You got it" - have him close his eyes, you screw up an approach, then "how are you going to fix this?". Get him in the habit of looking and acting and fixing on his own?

Hmm, I will have to think about that one. Might work well in the practice area doing simulated patterns, maybe in the airport traffic pattern if traffic is light.

 

[Trapper John]

Well, verbally doesn't always get the problem resolved until prompted a couple of times. When quizzed, he knows what he should have been doing.



Hmm, I will have to think about that one. Might work well in the practice area doing simulated patterns, maybe in the airport traffic pattern if traffic is light.

It sounds like he's not picking up the feedback that the plane gives. I think you said he's a doctor, they have to palpate lots of things. Maybe you can draw a parallel between the feel of examining a joint or an abdomen and the feel of what the controls tell you...


Trapper John

 

[Don Jones]

I have a question, what are you training him in that has you at 75 on short final? That is far above 1.3 VSo for most every certified light single out there, much less light trainer at training weights. I find a lot of peoples problems with landings is that they carry far to much energy into them, far too much. I find teaching energy management to be a very aural type of thing, "Close your eyes for a minute as I fly, this is what the plane should sound like, listen to the airflow on the windshield... mezzo piano fading to ppp just before the stall warning, listen to the note of the engine... pianissimo..." teach them to zero thrust by the whistle-hum of the prop. For some reason he's probably also not catching the perspective shift cues. Might have to demonstrate them again to him from scratch and really point everything out well in as many ways as you can and hope that something hits a switch for him. He may have perception acuity problems. Has anyone suggested a thorough eye exam? There may be physiological issues involved that will give you a better clue as to what will or won't help that student.

I totally agree about the energy management thing. I have him using 75 turning on final, which is in MPH, going to 70 mph on short final. 1.3Vso is 65 mph and all these landings have not been full flaps. He is simply unable to manage the drag from 40 degrees of flaps (BTDT). I have had to resort to baby steps for him. 60 while still 1/2 mile or more out (which he has a bad habit of doing), with partial flaps, is just too slow for my taste (particularly with this student).

 

[dmccormack]

Hmm, I will have to think about that one. Might work well in the practice area doing simulated patterns, maybe in the airport traffic pattern if traffic is light.

That particular exercise worked very well for my Professor student.

We climbed to about 4500' and then flew continuous patterns, maintaining proper crab for wind drift using a line of trees as the "runway."

(Worked out well as the last circuit started about 1000' AGL and I made that a power-off event...)

 

[N801BH]

Ok, so more info. My boss is extremely experienced and has been teaching for a long time. He is almost always successful in working through this stuff with his students. I have sat in for him lately on a few that were not making the progress he felt they should and I helped them greatly. Just hearing it from someone else often helps. I am virtually a clone of this instructor since he has been my instructor from my private all the way through all my ratings. We teach a lot alike.

I look at these situations as a challenge. My primary focus is to help them through their learning plateau's and often find myself going back to basics to correct a problem causing them difficulty.

First issue with this student was total lack of airspeed control on approach from downwind on he was all over the map where speed is concerned. I hammered on his trim technique and he has improved there somewhat, as long as I continually prompt him.
The part that really bothers me about this guy, He can be coming in on final extremely low and getting slow and I can ask him "so what's wrong with this approach?"
Him: "looks fine to me"
Me:"no, it isn't fine, look at your airspeed, what should it be and why are we getting cactus thorns in the tires?
Him: "it should be 75 and I guess we are a little low"
Me:"then why are we going 60 and why aren't you doing something about it? power on, go around"

It's just weird that he knows what he should be doing and still doesn't recognize he isn't getting it done. Hmmm

He does understand it's going to take him a long time and seems ok with that. I am going to try my best to work him through it, it's just this one has me a bit puzzled.

Lots of good input here, keep it coming!!!

First. I am not an instructor, didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night or have a PHD.<G> I have just been flying for 30 years. My take on this is, the guy is passive, gets fixated on something trivial and loses focus on the big picture. I know this is gonna sound morbid but you did say he was a doctor.. Back when alot of us were kids we were shown movies in drivers ed that, at least to me shocked me into reality. Remember, Mechanizied Death, or Signal 7. They showed the wrong way to drive and what the consequences were. Being low and slow on final and him saying " it should be 75 and I guess we are a little low" and NOT correcting the situation is the lead story on the evening news waiting to happen. Aircraft can and will kill humans if not flown properly. Maybe showing a pic or two of fatal crashes to him might jog his senses.

With all that said I really respect all of you CFI's out there and reading about all of the different teaching styles is fascinating... Maybe you should let the Doc read this thread and diaganose his shortcomings? I hope you can get him over this obstacle but some people are just not cut out for piloting and if that's the case here someone needs to stop him before he hurts himself,,, or worse. IMHO.

Ben.

 

[dmccormack]

Do you have access to a 150/152/172 (and an owner that doesn't mind spinning the airplane)?

All it would take is one base to final too slow, cross controlled at altitude to demonstrate why this is a Bad Idea.

 

[Don Jones]

Do you have access to a 150/152/172 (and an owner that doesn't mind spinning the airplane)?

All it would take is one base to final too slow, cross controlled at altitude to demonstrate why this is a Bad Idea.

Ha, Ha, probably scare him off, either way, problem solved:smile:

 

[slinger]

One thing some people have a hard time understanding is that the craft they're in weighs about a ton. It doesn't feel like it, with few outside sensations of weight, and the wings can't impart the feeling of lift to the student. Dragging in on final and getting behind the power curve can be shown at altitude.........and is, with stall practice. Sometimes people don't make the connection. Airspeed, airspeed, airspeed. My take. Oh, and there sure are milkers. Outta be shot. A student barely knows what he's doing anyway and is easily confused by a milker. Good luck!

 

[Henning]

Do you have access to a 150/152/172 (and an owner that doesn't mind spinning the airplane)?

All it would take is one base to final too slow, cross controlled at altitude to demonstrate why this is a Bad Idea.

Not cross controlled, skidding.

 

[Henning]

Ha, Ha, probably scare him off, either way, problem solved:smile:

Why would it scare him off? You explain to him "Ok, since you fly so close to the bottom of the envelope so often, today we are going to really explore the bottom of the envelope, and we will spin the airplane along the line." and cover spin recovery technique and advise him "if you can't, just let go". Take him to 4000' and do full power Minimum Airspeed flying with turns to the right first and left second and if he's trimmed up (make sure he trims for every change in airspeed until he runs out, trimming is more than likely a problem here) with the stall horn blaring, when he turns to the left, he'll break into a spin. Now you have given the student tools rather than a scare (which I'm not sure you'll achieve anyway, doesn't seem the panicky sort).

I guess my biggest question to you is, "Why do you want to get rid of him?" So far you haven't told me anything that makes me worry about him too much. Now if you don't think you're up to the student and can't get him through regardless how much time you spend with him, then yeah, you should probably send him on. Is there someone in the area that does aerobatic instruction? Might refer him there, or at least to an instructor that is not a "clone" of the only other instructor he had. There's many ways to skin a cat, perhaps he just needs a different technique. If it's the money thing (I'm assuming his money is as good as anyones) if you just explain the situation honestly, it's his money to do with as he pleases. It sounds like you are a reasonably fresh instructor, so you could choose to take this student to learn from and develop yourself as an instructor. If you think it might be unfair to him to take his money when you aren't fully confident you're doing the best that can be done, maybe reduce your fee for him some so that you make the same off him in the end that you make off the average PPL student. You could even set a cap amount and then when that is worked out, you can give him the option to go elsewhere or renegotiate and stay with you.

People always say I'm quick to run people off aviation, and when I see Resignation, especially when combined with incapacitation level panic, they are most correct. You have to actively fly the plane all the way through the crash till she stops. That's how you survive. This guy is the antithesis of that, and he's a curious person who has learned through exploration. He's comfortable slow, and he'll get lower and lower energy until he finds the edge of the envelope. Show it to him, all of it and see how he does. Some people when you are teaching them energy management, you have to show them all the edges first, then they figure out where they need to be. Always remember, the more intelligent the student, the more difficult they will be.

 

[Don Jones]

Why would it scare him off? You explain to him "Ok, since you fly so close to the bottom of the envelope so often, today we are going to really explore the bottom of the envelope, and we will spin the airplane along the line." and cover spin recovery technique and advise him "if you can't, just let go". Take him to 4000' and do full power Minimum Airspeed flying with turns to the right first and left second and if he's trimmed up (make sure he trims for every change in airspeed until he runs out, trimming is more than likely a problem here) with the stall horn blaring, when he turns to the left, he'll break into a spin. Now you have given the student tools rather than a scare (which I'm not sure you'll achieve anyway, doesn't seem the panicky sort).

I guess my biggest question to you is, "Why do you want to get rid of him?" So far you haven't told me anything that makes me worry about him too much. Now if you don't think you're up to the student and can't get him through regardless how much time you spend with him, then yeah, you should probably send him on. Is there someone in the area that does aerobatic instruction? Might refer him there, or at least to an instructor that is not a "clone" of the only other instructor he had. There's many ways to skin a cat, perhaps he just needs a different technique. If it's the money thing (I'm assuming his money is as good as anyones) if you just explain the situation honestly, it's his money to do with as he pleases. It sounds like you are a reasonably fresh instructor, so you could choose to take this student to learn from and develop yourself as an instructor. If you think it might be unfair to him to take his money when you aren't fully confident you're doing the best that can be done, maybe reduce your fee for him some so that you make the same off him in the end that you make off the average PPL student. You could even set a cap amount and then when that is worked out, you can give him the option to go elsewhere or renegotiate and stay with you.

People always say I'm quick to run people off aviation, and when I see Resignation, especially when combined with incapacitation level panic, they are most correct. You have to actively fly the plane all the way through the crash till she stops. That's how you survive. This guy is the antithesis of that, and he's a curious person who has learned through exploration. He's comfortable slow, and he'll get lower and lower energy until he finds the edge of the envelope. Show it to him, all of it and see how he does. Some people when you are teaching them energy management, you have to show them all the edges first, then they figure out where they need to be. Always remember, the more intelligent the student, the more difficult they will be.

I never said I wanted to get rid of him. I am here looking for ideas to help him, plain and simple. I have heard lots of good advice and will be applying some or all of it to get this guy through this. He is not my first
difficult student, just the worst of them. I currently have another learning plateau student I inherited at the same time. That one is showing great promise and was managing some pretty difficult x-wind landings this morning.
I actually consider it a real compliment that I am being handed these types of students by my boss. I have worked other students of his through it, so now he gives them all to me when they are having problems. Even though I call myself his clone, we still differ, or so I have been told, in that I give lots more feedback.

 

[Henning]

Even though I call myself his clone, we still differ, or so I have been told, in that I give lots more feedback.

So you have a more highly developed series of grunts?

 

[Areeda]

So you have a more highly developed series of grunts?

or better jokes?

 

[dmccormack]

Not cross controlled, skidding.

From Airplane Flying Handbook (Chapter 4)

CROSS-CONTROL STALL
The objective of a cross-control stall demonstration
maneuver is to show the effect of improper control
technique and to emphasize the importance of using
coordinated control pressures whenever making turns.
This type of stall occurs with the controls crossed—
aileron pressure applied in one direction and rudder
pressure in the opposite direction.
In addition, when excessive back-elevator pressure is
applied, a cross-control stall may result. This is a stall
that is most apt to occur during a poorly planned and
executed base-to-final approach turn, and often is the
result of overshooting the centerline of the runway
during that turn. Normally, the proper action to correct
for overshooting the runway is to increase the rate of
turn by using coordinated aileron and rudder. At the
relatively low altitude of a base-to-final approach turn,
improperly trained pilots may be apprehensive of
steepening the bank to increase the rate of turn, and
rather than steepening the bank, they hold the bank
constant and attempt to increase the rate of turn by
adding more rudder pressure in an effort to align it​

with the runway.

The addition of inside rudder pressure will cause the
speed of the outer wing to increase, therefore, creating
greater lift on that wing. To keep that wing from rising
and to maintain a constant angle of bank, opposite
aileron pressure needs to be applied. The added inside
rudder pressure will also cause the nose to lower in
relation to the horizon. Consequently, additional
back-elevator pressure would be required to maintain a
constant-pitch attitude. The resulting condition is a
turn with rudder applied in one direction, aileron in the
opposite direction, and excessive back-elevator
pressure—a pronounced cross-control condition.
Since the airplane is in a skidding turn during the
cross-control condition, the wing on the outside of the
turn speeds up and produces more lift than the inside
wing; thus, the airplane starts to increase its bank. The
down aileron on the inside of the turn helps drag that
wing back, slowing it up and decreasing its lift, which
requires more aileron application. This further causes
the airplane to roll. The roll may be so fast that it is
possible the bank will be vertical or past vertical before​

it can be stopped.

A skid results from the cross controlled condition.

 

[Marfa Gliders]

The one student that I had that didn't "get it" was a retired college professor
(smart) that I took after no one else could make any progress. Many heart to heart talks later we came to the understanding that he liked talking about flying and had a real interest, just not the skills. We agreed that I wasn't taking advantage of him or his money and we just went out and flew for a hour a week for a year or so. He enjoyed it immensely, and I could deal with the frustration knowing his motives.
Dave

An Alternative: I offer my Copilot Program. Works well for older pilots or anyone who should not fly solo. We simply agree that flying is fun, so we go fly. No "hammering" and only minimal instruction. I'm there just to assure the safe outcome of the flight, protect my aircraft and enjoy the hour. They love it, as they get aloft (handling the controls 90% of the time) and there's no pressure to solo or pass a checkride. I'm really their safety pilot, but "Copilot" sounds better to my clients, especially the older retired airline Captains.

I get income, they get to fly. Easy solution to those customers who don't get it, or are too old to go solo anymore (as we all we be someday.) My Copilot Program is an alternative to "forget about flying -- learn golf."

Try it! Then line up some younger pilots to fly with YOU someday when you get too old to solo. That's one reason I bought my two-seat high performance DG-1000 sailplane!

Burt
Marfa, west Texas
www.flygliders.com

 

[Don Jones]

So you have a more highly developed series of grunts?

Yea, or I spend more time screaming in fear

 

[Everskyward]

An Alternative: I offer my Copilot Program. Works well for older pilots or anyone who should not fly solo. We simply agree that flying is fun, so we go fly. No "hammering" and only minimal instruction. I'm there just to assure the safe outcome of the flight, protect my aircraft and enjoy the hour. They love it, as they get aloft (handling the controls 90% of the time) and there's no pressure to solo or pass a checkride. I'm really their safety pilot, but "Copilot" sounds better to my clients, especially the older retired airline Captains.

I get income, they get to fly. Easy solution to those customers who don't get it, or are too old to go solo anymore (as we all we be someday.) My Copilot Program is an alternative to "forget about flying -- learn golf."

Try it! Then line up some younger pilots to fly with YOU someday when you get too old to solo. That's one reason I bought my two-seat high performance DG-1000 sailplane!

Burt
Marfa, west Texas
www.flygliders.com

I think that's a great idea, Burt. I think some people get discouraged by the pressure to succeed when all they want to do is to go up and have some fun.

 

[Henning]

From Airplane Flying Handbook (Chapter 4)




A skid results from the cross controlled condition.

No, the label of cross controlled is an error:

At the
relatively low altitude of a base-to-final approach turn,
improperly trained pilots may be apprehensive of
steepening the bank to increase the rate of turn, and
rather than steepening the bank, they hold the bank
constant and attempt to increase the rate of turn by
adding more rudder pressure in an effort to align it
with the runway.

Are the describing a slip or a skid? Is a skid cross controlled? No, a skid is an over control, left aileron, disproportionately too much left rudder, same for right, not cross. They improperly applied the term "Cross Controlled" where they should have used "Uncoordinated". The only time you're going to spin cross controlled is on a departure stall influenced by prop and engine factors.

Take a 152 or 172 up and try to make it spin from a cross controlled position, it doesn't work well because the low wing has to climb over the plane, but with that aileron up and the opposite down, the low wing stalls as it tries to climb and advance and the plane does a burbling, oscillating falling leaf, but it won't develop rotation well. From a skidding condition the low wing again stalls first, but now the rudder is working to accelerate the rotation in that direction rather than counter it, and away we go looking at earth/sky/earth/sky....

 

[dmccormack]

No, the label of cross controlled is an error:



Are the describing a slip or a skid? Is a skid cross controlled? No, a skid is an over control, left aileron, disproportionately too much left rudder, same for right, not cross. They improperly applied the term "Cross Controlled" where they should have used "Uncoordinated". The only time you're going to spin cross controlled is on a departure stall influenced by prop and engine factors.

Take a 152 or 172 up and try to make it spin from a cross controlled position, it doesn't work well because the low wing has to climb over the plane, but with that aileron up and the opposite down, the low wing stalls as it tries to climb and advance and the plane does a burbling, oscillating falling leaf, but it won't develop rotation well. From a skidding condition the low wing again stalls first, but now the rudder is working to accelerate the rotation in that direction rather than counter it, and away we go looking at earth/sky/earth/sky....

The FAA Airplane Flying Handbook describes it as a "Cross Control Stall."

Even though a "cross controlled" situation exists in a slip, a stall in this condition is ordinarily benign.

I agree that it's more clearly described as a "Skidding" stall, but I used the standard nomenclature, and every CFI and pilot who's read the AFH would know exactly what is meant.

We call them Airplanes. There is some "planing" effect, but the low pressure above the wing adds more then mere "planing."

Should we join the French and call them Avion to be more precise?

 

[docmirror]

I'm not a CFI either, and didn't stay at H.I. last night. But, I've taught college engineering prep for many years, and on rare occasions, I've had to sit down with a student in a quiet place:

"My friend, this field is somewhat complex. It's not that you can't make mistakes here, it's just that the result of a series of small errors, or one fairly big error is death. Maybe not for you, but for others who rely on your ability in this field. Sometimes, it's best for you to re-evaluate your goal set, and maybe consider a challenging field that doesn't put people at risk. Sales can be very challenging, so is management in some cases. I know you'd like to continue, but based on your progress to date, I will advise you that maybe engineering(flying) isn't your best opportunity."


Sadly, not everyone is cut out to fly a plane. I know people that struggle with driving a car, and would be completely lost in an aircraft. Getting behind the curve on procedures will eventually cause a complete breakdown. Time to cut the cord?

 

[Henning]

The FAA Airplane Flying Handbook describes it as a "Cross Control Stall."

Even though a "cross controlled" situation exists in a slip, a stall in this condition is ordinarily benign.

I agree that it's more clearly described as a "Skidding" stall, but I used the standard nomenclature, and every CFI and pilot who's read the AFH would know exactly what is meant.

We call them Airplanes. There is some "planing" effect, but the low pressure above the wing adds more then mere "planing."

Should we join the French and call them Avion to be more precise?

There's a difference between a linguistic inadequacy and a technical inaccuracy in a technical issue. That an entire generation of CFIs just accepts this and and teaches it's inaccuracy as a given truth is quite frightening for the next generation of pilots and their passengers.

 

[tapioca]

I had a hard time learning to land the plane. At this point I can see that I was either holding too much energy or not saving enough.

Part of the problem was that the instructor was used to being able to talk a student down all the way to the ground. Not being able to verbally communicate in the plane forced him to change his MO.

It seems to me I spent the better part of 3 months getting the airplane down but how I did it was focusing on each leg of the pattern position then speed. Once I got consistent with the transition from downwind to base worked out, then started to focus on base once I got consistent that started working of final.

The last 100 feet or so took the longest getting the timing worked out, getting the feel for when the airplane was actually starting to stall an when to initiate the flair. At this point we both figured out that he was there mostly to keep me safe than instruct, he always wrote out pointers for me to read once we were back up on downwind.

It seemed to take forever, but I didn't want to stop as I was getting closer and closer to the runway each time. There was a time when I thought it would take a miracle for me to actually make it all the way down to the runway, when it actually happen, it didn't seem so miraculous it was just a long time in coming.

I still kind of think we all have taught ourselves to land and the instructor is just there to keep the plane in flyable condition while we do our level best to prematurely age them.

 

[dmccormack]

There's a difference between a linguistic inadequacy and a technical inaccuracy in a technical issue. That an entire generation of CFIs just accepts this and and teaches it's inaccuracy as a given truth is quite frightening for the next generation of pilots and their passengers.

Oh! The humanity!



Anyway, on demonstration stalls (to include "cross controlled stalls"), I demonstrate the stall from a slip (while "cross controlled") and then the skid.

It doesn't take much for the student to understand that the skid is the bad one.

 

[AdamZ]

Don, nothing near a CFI but when I had difficulty in remembering things I'd verbalized what I was doing. Make him say what he is doing and what his airspeed should be. ie downwind , Airspeed blow X, apply one notch flaps. Turning left base airspeed X-1 so on and so forth. Its tough to say what you should be doing out loud and then ignore it.

 

[Don Jones]

Don, nothing near a CFI but when I had difficulty in remembering things I'd verbalized what I was doing. Make him say what he is doing and what his airspeed should be. ie downwind , Airspeed blow X, apply one notch flaps. Turning left base airspeed X-1 so on and so forth. Its tough to say what you should be doing out loud and then ignore it.

That does sound like a good idea Adam. I remember talking my way through a lot of stuff working on the ratings, never really put together the connection. When demonstrating maneuvers to students I talk my way through them as part of the demonstration, I am going to work on getting them to talk their way through them when they do them.

I did get yelled at once by a 19 y/o female student once. We had been making laps working on her landings and after the third or fourth time she didn't acknowledge my critique of her performance on the landing, or whatever, I quizzed her; "You alright? How come you are not talking?" she just yelled, "Shut up, I am concentrating" Me: (with a surprised grin) "Ok, we will talk on the ground"

Good Idea! Thanks!

 

[Henning]

Oh! The humanity!



Anyway, on demonstration stalls (to include "cross controlled stalls"), I demonstrate the stall from a slip (while "cross controlled") and then the skid.

It doesn't take much for the student to understand that the skid is the bad one.

Right, but do you think it's okay to teach the skid as a cross controlled situation?

 

[dmccormack]

Right, but do you think it's okay to teach the skid as a cross controlled situation?

Good question....

I don't think I use the words "Cross controlled" in those discussions or demonstrations...

Typically it's "Here's what can happen when you try to increase the rate of turn with rudder while countering the increasing bank with aileron...."

A discussion on the ground includes the rudder's effect on bank, the angle of attack of each wing in the turn, and why the low wing 'breaks' first in a skidding situation.

(I define 'skid' as a situation where the nose of the airplane is pointed inside the turn, and is usually the result of slewing the airplane around with rudder)

I understand your concern with "cross controlled" as the term -- it may give the impression that any time the controls are "crossed" we are set up for a spin.

Of course this isn't the case.

But if we can explain "cross controlled" as also meaning "at cross purposes" -- rudder increasing bank, ailerons used to counter that -- I can see why it's described as such in the AFH.

Maybe "Crossed-Purpose Controls" would be a more descriptive and technically adequate term?

 

[AuntPeggy]

I was one of those problem students who would "never" learn how to land an airplane properly. There are two techniques that helped.

My CFI recognized that nearly every landing was pretty scary with me. He also recognized that I could save a bad landing better than he could. I had just come from a CFI who insisted on everything being done perfectly - his way. So, this CFI sat back and told me to do it my own way. He wanted me to take command of the plane, so if I asked should I do this or do that, he said OK no matter how insane the idea was. I spent some time teaching myself to understand and command the plane.

The other technique is to brief ahead of time. The most frustrating thing when I'm sweating out a situation is the guy sitting next to me asking stupid questions like "What's wrong with this approach?" This simply doubles the task at hand because I have to deal with the problem approach AND talk to this accusing jerk. So, the proper technique is to go over what you should be thinking about at each part of the procedure. It may take 30 to 45 minutes on the ground to just go over all the stuff in a single pattern. Do it. Then instead of waiting for s**t to happen, YOU get ahead of the situation. As you are leaving the ground ask, "What are the next things to do?" As the time for crosswind turn comes ask, "What are the next numbers to think about?" As you turn to downwind ask, "What should you be looking at? What will you be doing next?" Keep up these thinking ahead questions. Resist the temptation to say he is wrong. Instead you can prompt with reminders such as, "What airspeed next?" Start making your student think ahead instead of thinking behind.

So, today if my flying is good, there is a continuous conversation between me and the plane where I tell it what I will be doing next and what I expect it to do. Nice partnership.

 

[dmccormack]

The most frustrating thing when I'm sweating out a situation is the guy sitting next to me asking stupid questions like "What's wrong with this approach?" This simply doubles the task at hand because I have to deal with the problem approach AND talk to this accusing jerk.

Peggy,

Excellent synopsis of the term "Stay ahead of the airplane."

But sometimes the "accusing jerk" needs to prompt the student out of the "whadda I do next?!" coma.

Instead of grasping the controls, it's better to prompt.

Very often the voice I hear when I'm letting the airplane get off the needle in IMC is my Russian CFII asking repeatedly -- "Vye are you turn-ingg?! Vye are you turn-ingg?! Vye are you turn-ingg?!"

 

[Henning]

Good question....

I don't think I use the words "Cross controlled" in those discussions or demonstrations...

Typically it's "Here's what can happen when you try to increase the rate of turn with rudder while countering the increasing bank with aileron...."

A discussion on the ground includes the rudder's effect on bank, the angle of attack of each wing in the turn, and why the low wing 'breaks' first in a skidding situation.

(I define 'skid' as a situation where the nose of the airplane is pointed inside the turn, and is usually the result of slewing the airplane around with rudder)

I understand your concern with "cross controlled" as the term -- it may give the impression that any time the controls are "crossed" we are set up for a spin.

Of course this isn't the case.

But if we can explain "cross controlled" as also meaning "at cross purposes" -- rudder increasing bank, ailerons used to counter that -- I can see why it's described as such in the AFH.

Maybe "Crossed-Purpose Controls" would be a more descriptive and technically adequate term?

EXACTLY, and this gets them afraid to slip to lose potential energy, so when they do need to slip, they put the nose so far down they actually increase kinetic energy and have to get low... and there is never a stable state of energy for the landing. Accurate terminology leads to accurate learning.

 

[MauleSkinner]

One thought...have you taken the student up flying and just "looked at the scenery" for a couple of hours? Bet him a cold, carbonated beverage that you can spot more traffic while flying from here to there and back than he can? Has he seen his house from the air?

Sometimes students focus so hard on the details that they can't see the big picture, but if you take away the need to see the details for a bit, the big picture suddenly makes itself apparent.

Then, sneak up on him..."Hey, check that out! Turn left...there ya go...now fly straight. Pull the power back a little bit, and trim it out while we look at this...hey, pull the power back a little more, and let's get a little lower for a better look...there ya go...hey, guess what? You just made a perfect, stabilized, on-speed approach!"

As several people have said, a little creativity goes a long way.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I also used to fly with a guy who claimed pretty good success with "trim for your airspeed, point the airplane, and power the pressure off the yoke".

In other words, you trim for your target airspeed of, say, 60 knots. You point the airplane at your aiming point. If you have to hold forward pressure on the yoke, you're flying faster than your trimmed speed, so you gradually reduce power until the need to hold pressure on the yoke goes away.

On the other hand, if you're holding back pressure on the yoke, you're slower than your trimmed speed, so you add power gradually until the need to hold pressure on the yoke goes away.

I know, it's "power for airspeed, pitch for altitude", which 75% of pilots think is wrong (the other 75% thinks the opposite is wrong ), but it presents it in a different format, and you're trying to find something that this guy can grasp, and you can work from there.

Good luck!

David

 

[Tom-Flying]

I was thinking the same as Adam but not just a one time announcement. Make him announce each change ie turning base, flaps 20 speed 70, and on final announce speed and position every 15 or 20 seconds.

speed 70 high
speed 70 low
speed 65 on glide

My instructor always taught me to continually evaluate where I was and what I wanted to be. He'd often ask me to evaluate it at a random time. It wasn't because I was off. Usually I was on target but he wanted me to decide if I was on target and tell him I was on speed and on glide path. High, low, fast or slow was a mantra.


Tom

 

[Jim Burns]

I'll agree with the verbalization method.... create a dialog of where the airplane should be during each part of the pattern.... this should elicit an ongoing self test from the student and allow him to immediately determine if and when he's in the right or wrong position, configuration, airspeed ect. Develop it so it flows with the checklist, have your student say it with you as you fly the pattern, help him verbalize the proper corrections, then have him talk through it himself while you listen and correct.

He may be simply frozen and waiting for you to suggest or tell him what to do. Students can become dependant on their instructors for even the most obvious and easiest decisions. A flowing mantra of dialog that the student can repeat to himself each and every pattern will help him determine when a decision and a corrective action must be made.

After the flowing dialogue has been created and practiced it can be tested and adjusted. Then you can periodically ask him questions such as "Where should the airplane be and how should it be configured as you turn from downwind to base?"

You could also ask him to teach you. This would give you some insight into his level of understanding.