![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bob,
You're absoloutly correct, except that I disagree with your specific example. :-) Setting your power precisely one downwind (or, at the level-off just prior to the FAF if you're flying an instrument approach) allows you to trim the airplane properly for approach, and is the one time I want to see precision from my students. This makes the correct airspeed much easier to control, and gives you much more time "heads up" during the rest of the approach to land. You'd be amazed at what a difference a hundred RPM can make. Here's an experiment that seems to work on most light singles (and some light twins). From a reasonable altitude, put in "approach flaps", and trim the airplane for "approach speed". Then, retract the flaps, and notice the indicated airspeed. (Usually this is right around the top of the white arc, but not always. If it's above the top of the white arc, disregard everything I've said... you'll need to fly the plane :-).) Now, at pattern altitude, trim the airplane to fly this airspeed while level, and note the required power setting. Now, bring the power back a bit to start your descent to land, and put in your approach flaps. Shazam, you'll slow to approach speed within a couple of knots without much effort, giving you more "look out the window" time in that part of the pattern where a lot of accidents happen. In a Warrior-II, 152 or 172P with just an instructor and a student, setting 2100 RPM on downwind, and trimming for hands off flight seems to set the airplane up for a normal approach speed when using 20-deg of flaps, and the short-field approach speed with 30-deg of flaps. If you have more people, add 100 RPM per person. If it's gusty, add about 100 or 200 RPM for the appropriate speed boost. In an Arrow-II, about 21-inches of manifold pressure (regardless of RPM) does the same thing. (What is it with "21"?). Just my opinion. :-) -Rob "Bob Gardner" wrote in message ... If your student mistakenly sets the power at 1700 instead of 1800, I hope you don't get on his case and develop in him a case of head-in-the-cockpit-itis. I'd rather have the student remember the position of the tach needle relative to straight up (one o'clock, two o'clock, etc) and let it go at that. Precise power setting ain't all that important, yet some students will devote ten long seconds to massaging the tach to get an exact number because that's what their instructor told them (if you think ten seconds is a short time, I will gladly stick my finger in your eye and hold it there for....heck, two seconds be enough to make my point?). Bob Gardner wrote in message oups.com... As a CFI, I think that this can work for advanced instruction (Instrument, Commercial, and above), but I think it is generally quite a bad idea for primary students. The very thing you seem to like about it ("The result is that I've been able to choose the methods which work best...") can be a major problem with primary students. By the time you get to the Commercial-student level, you are a fairly accomplished aviator. You likely feel quite at home in an airplane, and definionally have hundreds of hours in an airplane. Try to think back to when you were a 15-hour primary student. The stuff that we take for granted is often a major difficulty. It was for me. I remember being a 15-hour students and trying to remember all the stuff you had to do before landing, and sometimes looking up and feeling completely baffled. I know I'm not alone in this. When I work with primary students, I generally try to teach them one coherent way of doing things. "Downwind- power to 2000 RPM, abeam the touchdown point, power to 1500 RPM, pitch for 80 knots. When TD point is 45 degrees behind, turn base, one notch flaps...pitch for 80....". I have had students who have flown with different CFIs while I was working with them. These other CFIs (one was a CFI in training) are certainly very competent pilots and likely skilled instructors. However,they do things differently...they teach things differently. And what seems to often happen is that instead of focusing on the task at hand and using a technique they know and have learned to trust, noow the student is thinking "Was it 1500 RPM? No....that was Dave. Jeff likes power all the way out...wait...." When I start work with a primary student, I structure my syllabus and training program to lead from one concept and maneuver naturally to another...I envision the entire training process that I expect to perform with that student. I know what each student I have knows...and what he doesn. I know what he is good at, and what he isn't. And I can use these things to help him become a better pilot. I think that continuity is very important...and having multiple CFIs gets in the way of that. By the time you are working on your CFI or your commercial, you pretty much already know how to fly...you are perfecting and advancing your technique...but you already know how to do all the basics. I think that it is probably reasonable to work with different CFIs at that level. but not when you're starting out. Cheers, Cap gatt wrote: Chief flight instructor and my primary instructor are both gone for the week, so I've been flying with whatever low-time, newly-minted Cessna-jockey greenhorn flight instructor that answers the phone when I call to schedule. I've flown with four different instructors in the last two weeks. I wholeheartedly recommend this. Each instructor has his own way of explaining and demonstrating things, (working on complex rating and commercial, part 141) as well as slight variations of technique and procedure. The result is that I've been able to choose the methods which work best and with which I'm most comfortable, AND check these things against other instructors to make sure it's right. The newer guys have a great sense of enthusiasm, and since the boss is out of the shop, they've got great information about what it's REALLY like flying as a CFI out of that FBO and things like, how many hours one might expect to accumulate over the summer flying season. I've had one instructor who's a Major in the Air Force and learned at the academy, one who is a retired Marine and learned in the '60s, one who is an Embry Riddle graduate and one who earned his CFI wings from two of the others and has only been instructing for a year. The four different perspectives have made every flight not just practice, but a new learning experience. My primary instructor is excellent, but I wish I'd have been doing this to some degree all along! -c |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Routine Aviation Career | Guy Alcala | Military Aviation | 0 | September 26th 04 12:33 AM |
Flight instructors as Charter Pilots | C J Campbell | Piloting | 6 | January 24th 04 07:51 AM |
Announcing THE book on airshow flying | Dudley Henriques | Piloting | 11 | January 9th 04 07:33 PM |
U.S. NAVY TO TEST FLYING SAUCER | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 0 | December 22nd 03 07:36 PM |