Is a "Go Around" an unfamiliar manoeuvre to a student pilot?

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

A "go- around" is NOT an unfamiliar maneuver; at least it shouldn't be to
any student who has been checked out for solo.

Someone I know was badly injured in what appears to be a botched
go-around. This was a very experienced pilot (ie. multiple hundreds of
hours, ME rated, etc.). But how often had he performed that maneuver in
the past few years? I don't know.

Do biennials typically cover this? And what about those that "place out"
of biennials via WINGS program. Do the CFIs doing the flight time hours
for WINGS include such things (ie. in that hour of t/o and landing work)?

My club membership involves an annual flight review. At least one CFI
with whom I take these loves to throw these at me (and, I suspect, his
other victims {8^): aborted landings, aborted takeoffs, etc. Last time
with him I was doing a touch-and-go and he aborted the "go" after the
"touch".

- Andrew

P.S. That last flight review also included dueling gear breaker
work. I noticed that the CFI (not he I mentioned above) had pulled the
gear breaker well before I needed the gear. So while his attention was
elsewhere, I pushed it back in. But then when I did try to drop the
gear, I found that he'd managed to get it out again.

I know some fun CFIs grin.

Andrew Gideon wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

A "go- around" is NOT an unfamiliar maneuver; at least it shouldn't be to
any student who has been checked out for solo.

Someone I know was badly injured in what appears to be a botched
go-around. This was a very experienced pilot (ie. multiple hundreds of
hours, ME rated, etc.). But how often had he performed that maneuver in
the past few years? I don't know.

A go around isn't really a maneuver, it's a transition. It should be
taught along with landings as an integral part of the landing scenario
and a possibility to occur on every landing.
This is why I have always objected to the "compartmentalized" method of
teaching people to fly airplanes; ie; landing, crosswind landings, go
arounds etc. Every landing has the potential for both a crosswind and/or
a go around. I prefer to teach landings as a single event that can
encompass any and all circumstances found in a landing. The result of
this approach (no pun intended :-) is that a pilot starts considering
all landings from the first one on as an event that can, and often does
mean, deviation from a rock solid and rigid and most importantly
EXPECTED sequence of events.
The good instructor wants the student to be fluid, flexible, with the
goal of landing the airplane in mind at all times, but ready in an
instant to deviate from what the airplane is doing NOW to what the
airplane now HAS TO DO!




Do biennials typically cover this? And what about those that "place out"
of biennials via WINGS program. Do the CFIs doing the flight time hours
for WINGS include such things (ie. in that hour of t/o and landing work)?
A good bi-annual given by a good instructor will be relaxed and informal
with the instructor observing what you are doing and how you are doing
it. It would and should be quite common for an instructor giving a
bi-annual to ask for a go-around from any point in the approach,
(conditions permitting) including the flare.

My club membership involves an annual flight review. At least one CFI
with whom I take these loves to throw these at me (and, I suspect, his
other victims {8^): aborted landings, aborted takeoffs, etc. Last time
with him I was doing a touch-and-go and he aborted the "go" after the
"touch".


I've done this as well conditions permitting. The entire purpose of a
review is to see the pilot act and react in both a normal and abnormal
environment; then to make a decision on the skill levels shown.
I usually knew by the time we reached the runway just what to expect
from a pilot I was reviewing. It's amazing how accurate the period
involving preflight to pre-takeoff is as a prediction tool for a sharp CFI.
Dudley Henriques

On 2007-07-12 16:49:32 -0700, Dudley Henriques said:

Andrew Gideon wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

A "go- around" is NOT an unfamiliar maneuver; at least it shouldn't be to
any student who has been checked out for solo.

Someone I know was badly injured in what appears to be a botched
go-around. This was a very experienced pilot (ie. multiple hundreds of
hours, ME rated, etc.). But how often had he performed that maneuver in
the past few years? I don't know.

A go around isn't really a maneuver, it's a transition. It should be
taught along with landings as an integral part of the landing scenario
and a possibility to occur on every landing.
This is why I have always objected to the "compartmentalized" method of
teaching people to fly airplanes; ie; landing, crosswind landings, go
arounds etc. Every landing has the potential for both a crosswind
and/or a go around. I prefer to teach landings as a single event that
can encompass any and all circumstances found in a landing. The result
of this approach (no pun intended :-) is that a pilot starts
considering all landings from the first one on as an event that can,
and often does mean, deviation from a rock solid and rigid and most
importantly EXPECTED sequence of events.
The good instructor wants the student to be fluid, flexible, with the
goal of landing the airplane in mind at all times, but ready in an
instant to deviate from what the airplane is doing NOW to what the
airplane now HAS TO DO!




Do biennials typically cover this? And what about those that "place out"
of biennials via WINGS program. Do the CFIs doing the flight time hours
for WINGS include such things (ie. in that hour of t/o and landing work)?
A good bi-annual given by a good instructor will be relaxed and
informal with the instructor observing what you are doing and how you
are doing it. It would and should be quite common for an instructor
giving a bi-annual to ask for a go-around from any point in the
approach, (conditions permitting) including the flare.

My club membership involves an annual flight review. At least one CFI
with whom I take these loves to throw these at me (and, I suspect, his
other victims {8^): aborted landings, aborted takeoffs, etc. Last time
with him I was doing a touch-and-go and he aborted the "go" after the
"touch".


I've done this as well conditions permitting. The entire purpose of a
review is to see the pilot act and react in both a normal and abnormal
environment; then to make a decision on the skill levels shown.
I usually knew by the time we reached the runway just what to expect
from a pilot I was reviewing. It's amazing how accurate the period
involving preflight to pre-takeoff is as a prediction tool for a sharp
CFI.
Dudley Henriques

You never know. Around here a bear could run out onto the runway.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2007-07-12 16:49:32 -0700, Dudley Henriques said:

Andrew Gideon wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:13:16 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

A "go- around" is NOT an unfamiliar maneuver; at least it shouldn't
be to
any student who has been checked out for solo.

Someone I know was badly injured in what appears to be a botched
go-around. This was a very experienced pilot (ie. multiple hundreds of
hours, ME rated, etc.). But how often had he performed that maneuver in
the past few years? I don't know.

A go around isn't really a maneuver, it's a transition. It should be
taught along with landings as an integral part of the landing scenario
and a possibility to occur on every landing.
This is why I have always objected to the "compartmentalized" method
of teaching people to fly airplanes; ie; landing, crosswind landings,
go arounds etc. Every landing has the potential for both a crosswind
and/or a go around. I prefer to teach landings as a single event that
can encompass any and all circumstances found in a landing. The result
of this approach (no pun intended :-) is that a pilot starts
considering all landings from the first one on as an event that can,
and often does mean, deviation from a rock solid and rigid and most
importantly EXPECTED sequence of events.
The good instructor wants the student to be fluid, flexible, with the
goal of landing the airplane in mind at all times, but ready in an
instant to deviate from what the airplane is doing NOW to what the
airplane now HAS TO DO!




Do biennials typically cover this? And what about those that "place
out"
of biennials via WINGS program. Do the CFIs doing the flight time hours
for WINGS include such things (ie. in that hour of t/o and landing
work)?
A good bi-annual given by a good instructor will be relaxed and
informal with the instructor observing what you are doing and how you
are doing it. It would and should be quite common for an instructor
giving a bi-annual to ask for a go-around from any point in the
approach, (conditions permitting) including the flare.

My club membership involves an annual flight review. At least one CFI
with whom I take these loves to throw these at me (and, I suspect, his
other victims {8^): aborted landings, aborted takeoffs, etc. Last time
with him I was doing a touch-and-go and he aborted the "go" after the
"touch".


I've done this as well conditions permitting. The entire purpose of a
review is to see the pilot act and react in both a normal and abnormal
environment; then to make a decision on the skill levels shown.
I usually knew by the time we reached the runway just what to expect
from a pilot I was reviewing. It's amazing how accurate the period
involving preflight to pre-takeoff is as a prediction tool for a sharp
CFI.
Dudley Henriques

You never know. Around here a bear could run out onto the runway.

Controller to United 262 Heavy after touchdown ;
" 262, bear left at the next taxiway"

United 262, " Roger, we have him in sight"

You never know. Around here a bear could run out onto the runway.

Controller to United 262 Heavy after touchdown ;
" 262, bear left at the next taxiway"

United 262, " Roger, we have him in sight"

I HAVE to agree, now. You and I *Really* need to get a life! g
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:

You never know. Around here a bear could run out onto the runway.

Controller to United 262 Heavy after touchdown ;
" 262, bear left at the next taxiway"

United 262, " Roger, we have him in sight"

I HAVE to agree, now. You and I *Really* need to get a life! g

You and I AND CJ :-))

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:43:50 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2007-07-12 16:49:32 -0700, Dudley Henriques said:


You never know. Around here a bear could run out onto the runway.

Controller to United 262 Heavy after touchdown ;
" 262, bear left at the next taxiway"

United 262, " Roger, we have him in sight"

Uhhh..I don't see him.

Roger

Roger (K8RI) wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:43:50 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2007-07-12 16:49:32 -0700, Dudley Henriques said:


You never know. Around here a bear could run out onto the runway.
Controller to United 262 Heavy after touchdown ;
" 262, bear left at the next taxiway"

United 262, " Roger, we have him in sight"

Uhhh..I don't see him.

Roger
Big furry guy, over there.....by the ILS shack.....see um?
D

On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 07:56:59 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Roger (K8RI) wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:43:50 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2007-07-12 16:49:32 -0700, Dudley Henriques said:


You never know. Around here a bear could run out onto the runway.
Controller to United 262 Heavy after touchdown ;
" 262, bear left at the next taxiway"

United 262, " Roger, we have him in sight"

Uhhh..I don't see him.

Roger
Big furry guy, over there.....by the ILS shack.....see um?

That's the FBO without a shirt!

D

You never know. Around here a bear could run out onto the runway.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

After landing at Mt Pocono (MPO) two weekends ago, the fuel guy told
me a bear had run across the runway while I was on downwind...
Alas, that wasn't the kind of traffic I was looking for at that
moment.