T&G more risky than Stop and Go?

[WannFly]

I was reading a couple of threads on a diff forum and student pilot and first few supervised solo flights and found out that a lot of CFI wont let T&G in first (and sometimes up to 3rd) solo flight since its more risky. they prefer Stop and Go.

questions to CFI's on this forum... what do you typically do and why is T&G more risky than Stop and Go? I think i have done about 2 Stop and Go, rest all are T&G

 

[jordane93]

If I didn't feel comfortable, I wouldn't have signed them off. They do whatever they want on their solo. If they want to do touch and go's, that's fine. If they want to do stop and go's or full stop taxi backs, that's fine too.

 

[SkyHog]

This one always baffled me. You'll hear answers like "landing is so strenuous already, adding clean up activities and then taking off is just asking for trouble."

Unless you're flying a complex aircraft or you're doing t&gs on a 500ft runway, I think that's rediculous. In most singles, the only clean up activity needed is to retract flaps.

Chickens for CFIs. Or "I heard this was good so I took it as gospel" CFIs.

 

[gsengle]

This one always baffled me. You'll hear answers like "landing is so strenuous already, adding clean up activities and then taking off is just asking for trouble."

Unless you're flying a complex aircraft or you're doing t&gs on a 500ft runway, I think that's rediculous. In most singles, the only clean up activity needed is to retract flaps.

Chickens for CFIs. Or "I heard this was good so I took it as gospel" CFIs.

There is a difference between saying t&gs have more risk and saying don't ever do em. Clearly they have a little more risk. And runway and conditions permitting I would do em. Hell, a DPE had me do one the other day in a Duchess. A bit more to think about there...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Skyrys62]

Runway length would (should) be a consideration.

My first T&G caught me off guard. I was cleaning up, and didn't expect the needed right rudder at full throttle. But dealt with it, and expected it next time.

Hence, my opinion that they need to be taught and practiced like most every other flight maneuver/method. There may come a time when you need to get the hell off the runway just after touching down...and if you are a newer solo student, you'll be glad you practiced.

 

[CC268]

I think your overthinking it...sure some more risk with a touch and go but I wouldn't sweat it

 

[abqtj]

I was reading a couple of threads on a diff forum and student pilot and first few supervised solo flights and found out that a lot of CFI wont let T&G in first (and sometimes up to 3rd) solo flight since its more risky. they prefer Stop and Go.

questions to CFI's on this forum... what do you typically do and why is T&G more risky than Stop and Go? I think i have done about 2 Stop and Go, rest all are T&G

I had trouble on my first solo landing, I think a big part of the trouble was it was a full stop. We did all T&G (except last landing if the lesson of course) so 90% of my practice was not to full stop.

I realize that T&G saves time, but practicing full stop too should be incorporated.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[mscard88]

There's a thread someone else on POA about this. It got pretty interesting, imagine that on POA. Betcha this one does too.

Personally I allowed my students to do T&Gs, and never had a student have any problems.

 

[Matthew]

My primary CFI didn't want me doing T&Gs - for a while.

Her feeling was that a student early in the game needs to learn how to "fly the airplane to a stop". And that the temptation to start the "go" too quickly tended to teach some bad habits.

 

[WannFly]

I think your overthinking it...sure some more risk with a touch and go but I wouldn't sweat it

No sweating, all we practiced is T&G and I feel comfortable, wondering why ist deemed risky by some people. Of course if I ate up 50% runway floating around, I could see why stop and back taxi is warranted as a safety margin

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[Skyrys62]

And that the temptation to start the "go" too quickly tended to teach some bad habits.

Well of course she taught that... (subconsciously it's all about the foreplay)

Guys are pretty much touch and go.

 

[James331]

I do touch and goes, they are plenty safe. If they are not safe it's not the maneuver it's the experience level of your CFI that's in question.

 

[RyanB]

Unless you're flying a complex aircraft or you're doing t&gs on a 500ft runway, I think that's rediculous.

Even in a complex, T&G's are still not very complex. Prop and Mix are already taken care of (or should've been prior to landing) and the other tasks are not much more strenuous than in a non-complex.

 

[Z06_Mir]

I tell my students "finish your landing before You start your takeoff" even on touch and gos you're done with landing, cleaned up and stable well before you're stopped. If they feel the need to come to a stop that's fine but I don't make them and they don't normally. Short runways get taxi backs and the 310 only gets taxi backs unless I'm at home with my 8,700 feet of runway.

 

[orange]

T&G's are pretty harmless, but I heard that sometimes pilots forget to retract flaps and take off with full flaps. That must suck!

 

[Clip4]

I don't allow students to do either touch/go or stop/go.

1. The proper completion of after landing and takeoff check lists is more likely.
2. The risk of taking off without the aircraft properly configured is reduced.
3. The chances of taking off without enough runway is eliminated.
4. The chances of a student running off the side of a runway while configuring the plane and/or applying power without having the plane under control is eliminated.
5. Situational awareness is increased because they have to stop, look for traffic and listen to the radio.

 

[wrbix]

So the overall consensus here is:
- Touch and Go is (marginally) more challenging and less safe, and
- we still allow/encourage our students and ourselves to do them.

OK - I agree we all need to be comfortable with Go Arounds, but if out just doing some TOLs, why add risk for the sake of a little time and a little 100LL?

 

[Velocity173]

I'd say a T&G is higher risk than a full stop but a stop and go can be higher risk than the other two if you don't have the runway for it. Either way, as long as the aircraft has the performance to do the maneuver, go out and do it. The added risk is negligible.

Just don't leave your gear hanging down in the pattern. You should always retract it after each approach.

 

[Harold Rutila]

A full stop with a taxi back to the beginning of the runway is safer than a stop-and-go for the primary reason of recovering 800-1200 feet of usable runway for your next takeoff roll (in most trainers). A stop and go requires you to depart having lost 800-1,200 feet with none of the momentum of a touch-and-go. At most airports, excepting those with airliner-size runways, this is more risky because the pilot is left with fewer options should the engine quit immediately after takeoff. There is no runway remaining to land again, and there is not as much altitude to glide somewhere safe.

There are other considerations, too. All of the runway excursions I've witnessed (around 4) occurred during touch-and-go landings, usually in aircraft with hydraulic landing gear struts. In Piper Warriors specifically, a hard landing can cause one strut to get stuck in the compressed position, resulting in a yaw towards the compressed strut. This can result in a student needing to apply more rudder during takeoff than normal, which they don't expect to have to do. This type of issue is more easily recognized and corrected at slow speeds, below those speeds experienced during most touch-and-gos. The struts usually expand to their normal position during the taxi back to the full length of the runway.

The other argument against touch-and-gos is for the simple reason of building time. In four-season climates where flying weather is not a year-round phenomenon, that extra couple of tenths of taxi time may be beneficial to accrue while the weather is still good. While this is not a safety consideration, it's still something instructors in those climates think about.

In the end, though, the instructor can prohibit a student from conducting touch-and-gos or stop-and-gos by stating so in the student's solo endorsement. The only way a student could break that restriction would be invoking emergency authority under §91.3. It is not my role as a CFI to criticize what other CFIs have their students doing except if they are causing students to break regulations or to not be trained in accordance with the ACS. In the case where a student is concerned about making a stop-and-go, but has been prohibited from making a touch-and-go by his instructor, he can always exit the runway and taxi back for a full-length departure. There can be no prohibition on full-stop landings in a student's solo endorsement for obvious reasons.

 

[SkyHog]

So the overall consensus here is:
- Touch and Go is (marginally) more challenging and less safe, and
- we still allow/encourage our students and ourselves to do them.

OK - I agree we all need to be comfortable with Go Arounds, but if out just doing some TOLs, why add risk for the sake of a little time and a little 100LL?

Because the increased risk is so tiny it's practically immeasurable.

 

[Z06_Mir]

The other argument against touch-and-gos is for the simple reason of building time. In four-season climates where flying weather is not a year-round phenomenon, that extra couple of tenths of taxi time may be beneficial to accrue while the weather is still good. While this is not a safety consideration, it's still something instructors in those climates think about.

I prefer touch and go's because of the time savings. I can do 7 landings in an hour (including taxi/runup) if there is minimal other traffic (class D with an 8,700 foot runway so long downwinds). If I did taxi backs I bet I wouldn't get 5 in. Maybe even less. Students usually need repetition on landings, not more hours in the logbook.

 

[wrbix]

Because the increased risk is so tiny it's practically immeasurable.

So you agree there is increased risk, that is really what the OP asked.

 

[exncsurfer]

I was reading a couple of threads on a diff forum and student pilot and first few supervised solo flights and found out that a lot of CFI wont let T&G in first (and sometimes up to 3rd) solo flight since its more risky. they prefer Stop and Go.

questions to CFI's on this forum... what do you typically do and why is T&G more risky than Stop and Go? I think i have done about 2 Stop and Go, rest all are T&G

Same, I've done a couple stop and taxi backs, rest T&G. Unless I'm done for the day, haha.

 

[Wheels]

I prefer touch and go's because of the time savings. I can do 7 landings in an hour (including taxi/runup) if there is minimal other traffic (class D with an 8,700 foot runway so long downwinds). If I did taxi backs I bet I wouldn't get 5 in. Maybe even less. Students usually need repetition on landings, not more hours in the logbook.

Last night with a student I did three stop and goes (class D with 12,500 foot runway), three taxi backs at a nearby uncontrolled airport, and then a full stop at the class D. Total time on the Hobbs from start up to shutdown was 1.1. I just don't see that much time saved doing touch and goes.

 

[gsengle]

Because the increased risk is so tiny it's practically immeasurable.

It's very measurable. Many loss of control runway accidents can be attributed historically to botched touch and goes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bobmrg]

In primary training, touch-and-goes do not reflect reality. In the world we are preparing student pilots to enter, airplanes take off, go somewhere (even if it is the pattern) and return to land. The goal of getting a pilot certificate is to be able to travel by air rather than on the ground. Accordingly, for primary students the takeoff and climb to pattern altitude and the approach to land are different things and should not be conflated. After I got my CFI head screwed on properly I had students land to a full stop, at which time I took over the controls to taxi back to the departure end. During that time I could discuss the most recent landing and the student could assimilate what I was saying without having to divide his/her attention between listening to me and taxiing. The human brain can assimilate a limited number of simultaneous inputs, so why push it??

Bob

 

[Clip4]

Because the increased risk is so tiny it's practically immeasurable.

Really?

Half of 2012’s take off and climb accidents resulted from losses of aircraft control, including 5 of the 22 fatal accidents (Figure 29). Losses of directional control during the takeo roll were most common, but the category also includes pitch and roll excursions after lift-off . Departure stalls accounted for nearly one-third of the fatal accidents; settling back onto the runway due to premature rotation was usually survivable, while stalls after the airplane had climbed out of ground e ect were frequently lethal. Errors in setting flaps, fuel mixtures, and other details of aircraft configuration led to 17 accidents, about 50% more than in either of the two preceding years.

 

[SkyHog]

In primary training, touch-and-goes do not reflect reality. In the world we are preparing student pilots to enter, airplanes take off, go somewhere (even if it is the pattern) and return to land. The goal of getting a pilot certificate is to be able to travel by air rather than on the ground. Accordingly, for primary students the takeoff and climb to pattern altitude and the approach to land are different things and should not be conflated. After I got my CFI head screwed on properly I had students land to a full stop, at which time I took over the controls to taxi back to the departure end. During that time I could discuss the most recent landing and the student could assimilate what I was saying without having to divide his/her attention between listening to me and taxiing. The human brain can assimilate a limited number of simultaneous inputs, so why push it??

Bob

In primary training the most difficult thing to learn is how to land properly. Touch and goes allow many more practice landings in a shorter amount of time, maximizing the value of a training flight.

Ultimately, in a Cessna 172, what does the clean up look like? Flip the flaps up and apply full power. It's not rocket science.

 

[SkyHog]

It's very measurable. Many loss of control runway accidents can be attributed historically to botched touch and goes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Many loss of control accidents happing during landing with a crosswind as well. Ground loops come to mind. Should CFIs only allow landings with a direct headwind?

 

[\__[Ô]__/]

This one always baffled me. You'll hear answers like "landing is so strenuous already, adding clean up activities and then taking off is just asking for trouble."

Unless you're flying a complex aircraft or you're doing t&gs on a 500ft runway, I think that's rediculous. In most singles, the only clean up activity needed is to retract flaps.

Chickens for CFIs. Or "I heard this was good so I took it as gospel" CFIs.

I'm not going to take a position either way in this thread.
But I am going guess based on this post that you're not a CFI?

 

[SkyHog]

Really?

Half of 2012’s take off and climb accidents resulted from losses of aircraft control, including 5 of the 22 fatal accidents (Figure 29). Losses of directional control during the takeo roll were most common, but the category also includes pitch and roll excursions after lift-off . Departure stalls accounted for nearly one-third of the fatal accidents; settling back onto the runway due to premature rotation was usually survivable, while stalls after the airplane had climbed out of ground e ect were frequently lethal. Errors in setting flaps, fuel mixtures, and other details of aircraft configuration led to 17 accidents, about 50% more than in either of the two preceding years.

How many of those are attributed solely to touch and goes vs a normal takeoff? You can stall an airplane doing a soft field takeoff pretty easily - maybe CFIs should disallow those also.

 

[SkyHog]

I'm not going to take a position either way in this thread.
But I am going guess based on this post that you're not a CFI?

No - I'm not. But I do hire and fire CFIs based on their willingness to make smart decisions and I don't take kindly to wasting money because of something insane like banning a maneuver that has been safely done for decades.

This smacks like banning full flap slips in a 172. Someone once said it was bad so the CFI believes is must be true despite there not being one iota of evidence or logic that would justify the danger

 

[\__[Ô]__/]

Have you ever had a CFI tell you not to do touch and gos or not to do full flap slips in a 172? Did you ask them why?

 

[Sinistar]

I can see a couple less common places where a full stop might be more safe.

Lately I've been doing several touch and go's then fly to the practice area then come back to practice another 3 or 4. In a way, that's my way to simulate returning from a normal flight and being somewhat fatigued while doing landings. I usually do a full stop on the first one back. The first time I did this after I had stopped I noticed the mixture wasn't full rich because I had come in from a cruise and was slightly leaned..AND DIDN'T DO MY BEFORE LANDING CHECKLIST. I really thought about that one. When all you do is pattern work, the mixture never gets changed and thus it was becoming irrelevant. Bad!!!

Another case for me is that I need to get rid of carb heat, 40deg of flaps and get the cowl flaps open again before rolling on the power again. If I find myself running off centerline while reaching way down for the cowl flap knob I do a full stop. The glare shield is so high on the 182 and reaching down for the cowl flaps knob takes my vision away from the runway for a second...but still enough for a newbie to get off center. I have the position memorized, but its just low enough to effect visibility.

 

[SkyHog]

Have you ever had a CFI tell you not to do touch and gos or not to do full flap slips in a 172? Did you ask them why?

Yes. and invariably the answer is some variation on "I don't feel comfortable with it because my CFI told me it was a bad practice."

I maintain very little tolerance for CFIs that don't do their own research before regurgitating bad info. If I ever get my CFI I will never say something unless I can prove to be true with reference. The great thing about aviation is that EVERYTHING has a factual basis if you're not too lazy to look it up yourself

 

[\__[Ô]__/]

Yes. and invariably the answer is some variation on "I don't feel comfortable with it because my CFI told me it was a bad practice."

I maintain very little tolerance for CFIs that don't do their own research before regurgitating bad info.

That may not be a great answer on their part. But you appear to be taking their lack of explaination as proof that their position is wrong. That logic is as flawed as theirs.

If I ever get my CFI I will never say something unless I can prove to be true with reference. The great thing about aviation is that EVERYTHING has a factual basis if you're not too lazy to look it up yourself

That sounds great to say. If you get your CFI, suspect you'll learn a lot from your first students.

 

[dmspilot]

Why is a touch and go more risky? Because the student might run off the side of the runway? Shouldn't they be skilled enough to not do that before they solo?

I worked at a couple flight schools that did not allow student pilots to do touch and goes, and it made the first solo kind of anti-climactic.

 

[Zeldman]

I did taxi back with my students at the home airport. It was 3150 feet long and 40 feet wide, with noise abatements for departures and hills. So the traffic pattern was not normal.

 

[denverpilot]

I don't mind T&G when conditions warrant.

10,000' runway and a Skyhawk? Yes. Sheesh. Student can take a short nap, wake up, reconfigure, confirm, and still be fine.

Same runway, light twin, 9000' DA today? Nope. We're going to taxi back. The remaining runway is all we've got if we trash a mill during takeoff. The Skyhawk will land in the golf course, the twin, won't fare as well, and it's going to hurt.

Plus, if your CFI won't let you do T&G, just ask them to teach you "Circuits and Bumps". The British version is more fun anyway.

A botched T&G can also be a teachable moment for learning to determine when a takeoff hasn't happened by a point on the runway where it really should have by now, and aborting the takeoff. Highlighting to someone that takeoff aborts don't always happen slow and near the beginning of the takeoff roll, and letting them see it, isn't a bad thing.

Our pattern is sometimes so full, even attempting full-stops will make a mess of it. Tower won't ever say no to those, but with six in the pattern, expect to sit for a long time at the hold-short line for them to re-launch you if you ask for them constantly. And "unable stop-and-go, cleared touch and go..." is a regular thing on busy days.

If you really have a student who needs full stops, and yeah, some do.... you'll be working on those cross country skills right off the top of the bat, since you won't get anything done at my home 'drome on any nice weather day with low winds when the pattern is full of students.

Closest uncontrolled paved field is also going to be either a hike over terrain to the south, or you get to start teaching about Bravos and transitioning them or going under and around the shelf, to get to one.

 

[WannFly]

I can see a couple less common places where a full stop might be more safe.

Lately I've been doing several touch and go's then fly to the practice area then come back to practice another 3 or 4. In a way, that's my way to simulate returning from a normal flight and being somewhat fatigued while doing landings. I usually do a full stop on the first one back. The first time I did this after I had stopped I noticed the mixture wasn't full rich because I had come in from a cruise and was slightly leaned..AND DIDN'T DO MY BEFORE LANDING CHECKLIST. I really thought about that one. When all you do is pattern work, the mixture never gets changed and thus it was becoming irrelevant. Bad!!!

Another case for me is that I need to get rid of carb heat, 40deg of flaps and get the cowl flaps open again before rolling on the power again. If I find myself running off centerline while reaching way down for the cowl flap knob I do a full stop. The glare shield is so high on the 182 and reaching down for the cowl flaps knob takes my vision away from the runway for a second...but still enough for a newbie to get off center. I have the position memorized, but its just low enough to effect visibility.

That's an excellent point, when all u do is pattern work, climb and descent checklist gets forgotten. I myself is having trouble with fuel pump, I have gotten in a habit of leaving it on while in pattern....

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk