![]() |
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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Michael" wrote in message om... illspam (Jim Vincent) wrote Mainly because the quality of power instruction is, on the whole, dramatically worse than the quality of glider instruction. The majority of power instructors are low time, inexperienced pilots who have completed a training program that takes them from zero time to instructor (single, multi, and instrument) in less than 300 hours. They have been taught to fly wide, power-on patterns with stabilized power-on approaches because this is what they will be doing in the airlines (their eventual goal) and that's what they teach their students because they don't know anything else. Actually there are many reasons, some of them may be found in the SEL PTS. Another is that airports with lots of light aircraft training end up with huge "follow the leader" patterns. Steep turns, especially at low speed, simply scare them. Therefore, many of them tell students not to exceed 30 degrees of bank in the pattern. After several years of soaring, I recently decided to transition to power. I have had that poor guy squirming in his seat and grabbing for the controls more than once doing things that I considered perfectly normal, including tight turns in the pattern. The power-off pattern, where you bring the power to idle at about 800-1000 ft AGL and abeam the touchdown point and continue to a landing, was once the normal pattern in general aviation for all light trainers. Of course in such a pattern your turns will be 30-45 degrees of bank, depending on wind and how many mistakes you make. The trainers have not changed; in fact we're mostly flying the same ones. However, today's instructors see this as an emergency procedure, not a normal one, because it pushes their skill level. Come to think of it, the FAA has changed landings since our trainers were designed. Vaguely 20 years ago, there was a sea change in the way landing technique was taught because someone in the FAA decided that normal landings would be accomplished with full flaps. The normal technique that is taught these days (at least in a Cezzna) is the first notch on downwind, second notch on base and full flaps on final. This adds so much drag that you either do a high (and or tight) pattern or you must drag the thing around the pattern with power. Guess which one they usually teach? Vaughn Michael |
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 |
Glider power systems | Bill Daniels | Soaring | 13 | May 6th 04 10:53 PM |
Winch Experts wanted | Ulrich Neumann | Soaring | 117 | April 5th 04 06:52 AM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |
Restricting Glider Ops at Public Arpt. | rjciii | Soaring | 36 | August 25th 03 04:50 PM |