"Greg Esres" wrote in message
news
Had the student been trained specifically about porpoising?

Not likely. Who is, unless it's encountered accidentally during
pre-solo training?

Well, it's something that could be discussed a lot, even if it's not
actually demonstrated (the same way "spin awareness" is taught to primary
students without actually demonstrating a spin).

My feeling is that porpoising is unlikely with a student who is
trained to give a near-stall landing.

Spinning is unlikely too, but both are worth being prepared for.

A student who isn't ready to risk a $170,000 plane isn't ready to
risk her or his life.

In that past 6 years that I've been flying at this club, we've lost 5
airplanes due to landing accidents, 3 of which were solo students.
Another 172R was badly damaged during a solo student touch and go,
which ended touch and go's for students.

No one was ever hurt duing these accidents, so clearly there are many
more bent airplanes than bent pilots.

Point taken. Overall, only 1% of landing accidents are fatal, according to
the Nall Report. But presumably the fatality rate is higher among accidents
serious enough to total the plane, and the rate of serious injury or death
is higher still. Crashing any vehicle at 50 or 60 MPH is dangerous, and
older airplane cabins have nothing like the crashworthy design of modern
automobiles.

A loss rate of one plane per year (out of 20 planes) is quite high, isn't
it? I wonder if your club is being lax in its training and proficiency
standards. My FBO has about the same number of planes, and I don't think
we've lost any in the three years I've been around (although we did have a
prop strike this year when someone forgot to extend the landing gear).

--Gary