C172S Landing accident

When training for spins, do you actually put the plane into one? When
training for engine out, do you actually turn off the mags? When training
for partial panel, do you actually turn off the master? When training for
failed pitot-static do you actually block the pitot tube and/or static
ports?

I'd hate to think how you train your students for an engine or wing fire!


There's plenty of flight training that goes on without actual
demonstration. You can call it whatever you want...



Greg Esres wrote in
:

Porpoising was described, including what causes it, how to avoid it,
and what to do if it is encountered.

Describing porpoising is not "training" in my book, it's merely
"describing." ;-)

Discussion of flying techniques on the ground, which is not followed
by specific maneuvers in the air, is of extremely limited value. I
can't tell you how often a student can describe in flawless detail on
the ground how something is to occur, but his execution in the air
will be radically different.

However, you might describe porpoising as aggravated bouncing; if you
can recover from a bounce, you should never porpoise.

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 23:17:44 GMT, Judah wrote:
When training for spins, do you actually put the plane into one? When

Yes.

training for engine out, do you actually turn off the mags? When training
What I've been flying lately has no mags. In fact, no engine at all.

for partial panel, do you actually turn off the master? When training for
failed pitot-static do you actually block the pitot tube and/or static
ports?

No, but I've done instrument currency work in a sim and the instructor
has done both to me.

While I haven't done 'porpoising training' per se, my tailwheel training
involved recovering from a bounce by avoiding porpoising. The rule of
thumb was, on the first bounce you could try to recover by going to
3-point attitude. On the second bounce, you go around.

Be that as it may, as a some-day-to-be instructor, I'm not sure I'd
feel comfortable exposing a pre-solo student in a tricycle gear
airplane to a porpoising situation, but I'd make sure the student
at least understood the concept. In fact, I'd probably start the
training with go-arounds as the first choice.

Morris

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 23:17:44 GMT, Judah wrote:

Judah

Let me parse your questions.


When training for spins, do you actually put the plane into one?

Unless bird is placarded against, Yes.


When training for engine out, do you actually turn off the mags?

After engine is stopped with prop feathered, Yes, it's in the check
list.


When training for partial panel, do you actually turn off the master?

No, you cover the instruments that would become inop and only leave
the partial panel instruments exposed to use to fly.

What do you mean by the "master"? Do you mean the battery master
switch (and generator switch) to kill all electrical things in
bird???? That would simulate a electrical failure.



When training for failed pitot-static do you actually block the pitot tube and/or static ports?

No, you cover the instruments that require the pitot tube or static
ports.


I'd hate to think how you train your students for an engine or wing fire!

Only way in basic GA aircraft is to ask the student to give you, by
memory, the action items for fire. This should be repeated enough
times that it becomes second nature if he/she ever has a fire.

If you have a simulator, you can give the fire symptoms and let the
student recognize and go through the fire procedures.


There's plenty of flight training that goes on without actual
demonstration. You can call it whatever you want...

I guess what you are saying is that a student can read a book about
how to fly and then go fly??? Sounds like a Laurel and Hardy Movie
after they got airborne and the book fell out the window.

On the SE which started this thread, the rudder peddle pressure and
the trimming surprises a pilot the first time he/she loses a engine.
If you have the rudder trimmed to take out the peddle pressure and
then bring the engine back in and power up, you have to make a large
trim change again.

With the bird trimmed for SE and you make a SE landing, when you cut
the good engine all the trim reverses and you have to re trim in the
flare or hold a large amount of opposite rudder to the trim to land
and not be in a bad crab.

This is similar to where the FAA did not require upset training for
anyone and then Airline Pilots crashed a few birds because they had
never been in a steep bank or over on their back. These pilots are now
required to have upset training in their simulator on a regular basis
and are safer pilots. Haven't heard of upset accident since this was
changed a few years ago.

Enough of my rant.

Big John


Greg Esres wrote in
:

Porpoising was described, including what causes it, how to avoid it,
and what to do if it is encountered.

Describing porpoising is not "training" in my book, it's merely
"describing." ;-)

Discussion of flying techniques on the ground, which is not followed
by specific maneuvers in the air, is of extremely limited value. I
can't tell you how often a student can describe in flawless detail on
the ground how something is to occur, but his execution in the air
will be radically different.

However, you might describe porpoising as aggravated bouncing; if you
can recover from a bounce, you should never porpoise.

Morris,
That was exactly my point. Greg seems to think it's doesn't qualify as
training unless it is demonstrated. And by his definition, your approach
would not qualify either, since you never actually demonstrate a porpoise.

My point was that he's talking about semantics. Training is education,
which includes actual demonstrations, but also includes ingraining
information into the student on how to deal with certain situations that
are never demonstrated.

(journeyman) wrote in
u.com:

snip
While I haven't done 'porpoising training' per se, my tailwheel
training involved recovering from a bounce by avoiding porpoising. The
rule of thumb was, on the first bounce you could try to recover by
going to 3-point attitude. On the second bounce, you go around.

Be that as it may, as a some-day-to-be instructor, I'm not sure I'd
feel comfortable exposing a pre-solo student in a tricycle gear
airplane to a porpoising situation, but I'd make sure the student
at least understood the concept. In fact, I'd probably start the
training with go-arounds as the first choice.

Morris

Big John wrote in
:

snip

There's plenty of flight training that goes on without actual
demonstration. You can call it whatever you want...

I guess what you are saying is that a student can read a book about
how to fly and then go fly??? Sounds like a Laurel and Hardy Movie
after they got airborne and the book fell out the window.

Not at all. I was simply responding to Greg's opinion that it doesn't
qualify as training unless it is demonstrated. And by his definition, some
of your approach would not seem to qualify by his definition either, since
you never actually demonstrated, for example, the actual behavior of the
instruments during a vacuum failure (gyro get's "lazy" before falling over
- which can be confusing and disorienting as compared to a black stick-on
cover appearing), or a pitot-tube ram-pressure block (where the airspeed
increases as you raise the nose so you keep raising it and reducing power
until you stall out at a higher altitude), etc.

My point was that he's talking about semantics. Training is education,
which includes actual demonstrations, but also includes ingraining
information into the student on how to deal with certain situations that
are never demonstrated.

snip
Enough of my rant.

Yeah, me too.


Greg Esres wrote in
m:

Porpoising was described, including what causes it, how to avoid
it, and what to do if it is encountered.

Describing porpoising is not "training" in my book, it's merely
"describing." ;-)

Discussion of flying techniques on the ground, which is not followed
by specific maneuvers in the air, is of extremely limited value. I
can't tell you how often a student can describe in flawless detail on
the ground how something is to occur, but his execution in the air
will be radically different.

However, you might describe porpoising as aggravated bouncing; if you
can recover from a bounce, you should never porpoise.

Big John wrote:

When training for engine out, do you actually turn off the mags?

After engine is stopped with prop feathered, Yes, it's in the check
list.

*blink* in a SE trainer? *blink*

Not in civilian life, anyhow. I think a CFI who simulated engine
failure by actually stopping the engine (with mixture, say) and
THEN shut off the mags, would get bar-b-qued for sure if something
went wrong.

I know a CFI who tried that on me (in my SE fixed-pitch-prop plane)
would be lucky to bring his intact hand back to the right side after
he tried to reach across me and shut off my mags, unless this was
a procedure he'd clearly discussed with me on the ground and I approved.
I know who is paying my insurance premiums, and it ain't my instructor!

I'd hate to think how you train your students for an engine or wing fire!

Only way in basic GA aircraft is to ask the student to give you, by
memory, the action items for fire. This should be repeated enough
times that it becomes second nature if he/she ever has a fire.

I could be mistaken, but I think what you're saying here is exactly
Judah's point.

We all work with a combination of actual demonstrations and physical
practice, vs verbal instruction/readback which we hope will (through
drill) become second nature.

To me, both are "training". Greg wants to call only the former
"training" and the latter "education" or some other word.

To me, something you drill in the plane is still training, whether
it involves actual physical practice, or some degree of simulation
(be it slapping instrument covers over the gyros rather than actually
disabling the vacuum, or saying "your engine is on fire, what do you
do?" and expecting the student to go through a checklist while touching
the relevant items.

YMMV

Of course, the more realistic and physical the training, the better,
but we all have to strike a balance between what's realistic and what's
reasonably safe (and legal). I'd love to put a little valvie in my
plane so that our CFI could fail our vacuum gyros realistically for
partial panel practice, and that might be a 'safer' way to train
overall, but the FAA says I'd have to jump through a head-high set
of hoops to do it

There's plenty of flight training that goes on without actual
demonstration. You can call it whatever you want...

I guess what you are saying is that a student can read a book about
how to fly and then go fly???

No, I don't think that's what he's saying, see above.

Sydney Hoeltzli ) wrote:

Big John wrote:

When training for engine out, do you actually turn off the mags?

After engine is stopped with prop feathered, Yes, it's in the check
list.

*blink* in a SE trainer? *blink*

Not in civilian life, anyhow. I think a CFI who simulated engine
failure by actually stopping the engine (with mixture, say) and
THEN shut off the mags, would get bar-b-qued for sure if something
went wrong.

I interpreted his comments to imply after he is safely on the ground
performing the shut-down/tie-down portion of the checklist.


--
Peter












----== Posted via Usenet.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.Usenet.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 16:16:28 GMT, Judah wrote:

Not an unreasonable positions, but the post to which I responded did
not support the position. You listed a bunch of things not to do that
are, in fact, done in the context of training.

You rhretorically asked whether one does actually does A, B, C, D, or
do they just simulate/study it. I said that I have actually done A,
made a facetious comment about B, said C was done in a simulator, and
made a comment about training for D-avoidance (actually having done
more than my fair share of "bounce, Bounce, GO AROUND!" on tailwheel).

IOW, you chose some less-than-optimal examples to support your position.


Absolutely. I don't think we're disagreeing at all. Quite the contrary. I

*shrug* The larger issue is there are things one should "train for"
that one can't actually do. On that, we agree. I don't have an
issue with what we call that "training".


Incidentally, have you ever seen a gyro fail? Or had a pitot tube blocked?

One of the benefits of IFR training in a sim, the instructor can fail an
instrument in a way closer to how it would likely to fail IRL. He
nailed me for not turning on pitot heat, and I didn't notice it had
iced over until he started giving me climbs and descents.


It's very different in reality than having an instructor put a black cover
on the instrument... When it happened to me, I had a blocked pitot tube and

Agreed.


Yet no one ever actually demonstrated it to me.

Was it luck? Or was it adequate training?

I believe that people can learn things without ever actually seeing them
demonstrated...

Clearly, it was training or education or study or something. Call it what
you will.


Morris

journeyman ) wrote:

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 10:47:38 -0400, Peter R.
wrote:

When training for engine out, do you actually turn off the mags?

After engine is stopped with prop feathered, Yes, it's in the check
list.

*blink* in a SE trainer? *blink*

I interpreted his comments to imply after he is safely on the ground
performing the shut-down/tie-down portion of the checklist.

Educate me. What fixed-pitch piston trainers have featherable props?

Huh? Where was that either directly written or indirectly implied in the
above quoted text?

Or did you mistakenly reply to the wrong post?

--
Peter












----== Posted via Usenet.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.Usenet.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Sydney Hoeltzli wrote:

Big John wrote:

When training for engine out, do you actually turn off the mags?

After engine is stopped with prop feathered, Yes, it's in the check
list.

*blink* in a SE trainer? *blink*

Are there *any* single-engine trainers that have the ability to feather
the prop?

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel