flying with different instructors

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

I have to try your method. Maybe I can get my pattern flying without
'thinking' at all. Right now it is semi-smooth but completely not
mindless.

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.

Are you sure about the RPM? The method I've been taught is
drop the RPM to 1600-1700 (weight depending) when abeam the
numbers and throw in one notch flaps and pitch for 90 KIAS.
On base, 2 notches of flaps and pitch for 80 KIAS
and on final 3 notches and pitch for 70 KIAS. At 2100 RPM,
I'd still a few hundred feet off the ground.

Gerald

2100 is for when you're level (i.e. before you're abeam the numbers) and
trimming the airplane. Once you're abeam the numbers, you bring the power
back to something that gives you the rate of descent you'd like (and where
the previous posters point holds true... do get too fussy, look out thte
window at the airplane entering the pattern on an extended base or a long
final), put in your flaps, and slow to approach speed. Also keep in mind
that the actual power setting may vary from airplane to airplane.

Good luck,

-Rob

"G. Sylvester" wrote in message
news
I have to try your method. Maybe I can get my pattern flying without
'thinking' at all. Right now it is semi-smooth but completely not
mindless.

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.

Are you sure about the RPM? The method I've been taught is
drop the RPM to 1600-1700 (weight depending) when abeam the
numbers and throw in one notch flaps and pitch for 90 KIAS.
On base, 2 notches of flaps and pitch for 80 KIAS
and on final 3 notches and pitch for 70 KIAS. At 2100 RPM,
I'd still a few hundred feet off the ground.

Gerald

In article ,
"Rob Montgomery" wrote:

2100 is for when you're level (i.e. before you're abeam the numbers) and
trimming the airplane. Once you're abeam the numbers, you bring the power
back to something that gives you the rate of descent you'd like (and where
the previous posters point holds true... do get too fussy, look out thte
window at the airplane entering the pattern on an extended base or a long
final), put in your flaps, and slow to approach speed. Also keep in mind
that the actual power setting may vary from airplane to airplane.

The way I look at the pattern, what's really important is airspeeds, not
power settings. Power settings are just a way to get the airspeed you
want.

The most critical airspeed in the pattern is your final approach speed.
Everything else is just executing a controlled transition from cruise
speed to final approach speed. For most light planes, if you fly base
10 kts faster than final, and downwind 10 kts faster than base, you
should be doing OK. This should give you a good target speed for
downwind.

The problem is, you can't set airspeed directly, you can only set power.
So, it's a good idea to have a target power setting for downwind. For
most typical trainers, somewhere in the 1900-2100 RPM range is about
right, but ask your instructor for a good number to use for whatever
you're flying. You set that when entering the pattern (along with
whatever other configuration changes you're going to make, like gear and
flaps), and give the plane a little time to settle into a stable
airspeed. Then you can adjust the power if needed if you didn't get the
airspeed you wanted.

Keep in mind that you need to fit in with the existing traffic flow.
You may normally fly downwind at 90 kts, but if you're following
somebody going slower, you need to do something to avoid crawling up his
exhaust pipe. This can get really interesting as the mix of types gets
extreme (Bonanza following a Cub, for example).

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
The most critical airspeed in the pattern is your final approach speed.
Everything else is just executing a controlled transition from cruise
speed to final approach speed. For most light planes, if you fly base
10 kts faster than final, and downwind 10 kts faster than base, you
should be doing OK. This should give you a good target speed for
downwind.

Means and ends are in the eye of the beholder. The way I look at the
pattern, what's really important are airspeed and altitude. Power settings
allow me to adjust either, but once I've begun my descent (usually from
abeam the numbers, but not always depending on traffic concerns) power
settings are just a way to get the *altitude* I want, and the descent angle
I want. I use my pitch controls (elevator and elevator trim) to adjust
airspeed at that point.

Of course, they all interact. It's like asking "Bernoulli or Newton". But
don't discount someone else's mental paradigm just because it's different
from yours.

The point that started this whole subthread was simply that students (and
even full-fledged pilots for that matter) can fixate on setting a particular
RPM, when that's not really all that important. A particular RPM setting is
only going to work on a "standard pattern day" (i.e. no wind, no traffic,
exactly 800' or 1000' or whatever feet AGL you pick as standard, turns at
precisely 45 degrees and final, etc.).

Any variation from this standard is going to require adjustments to throttle
to maintain the desired performance for the conditions. So why waste time
and concentration getting the throttle at exactly some particular setting,
when getting it in the ballpark using muscle memory (i.e. general knowledge
of the "correct" position) and audible feedback (sound of the engine)?

I believe that Bob was saying just that, and I think his comment was right
on the mark. It's funny the turns this thread has taken, but I disagree
with Rob's attachment to precision in this case (even though I do generally
believe that precise control of the aircraft is very important), and I don't
understand what debating the *actual* specific RPM settings does to address
the original point.

The problem is, you can't set airspeed directly, you can only set power.

I beg to differ. I set the airspeed all the time. I can manipulate the
elevator directly to obtain the desired airspeed, and I can then set the
trim to allow the airspeed to remain at that desired.

So, it's a good idea to have a target power setting for downwind. For
most typical trainers, somewhere in the 1900-2100 RPM range is about
right, but ask your instructor for a good number to use for whatever
you're flying. You set that when entering the pattern (along with
whatever other configuration changes you're going to make, like gear and
flaps), and give the plane a little time to settle into a stable
airspeed. Then you can adjust the power if needed if you didn't get the
airspeed you wanted.

If you simply adjust power, you won't get the airspeed you want, ever (well,
not counting a sudden decelleration at the end of a descent induced by a
power reduction). You have to change your pitch in order to get a new
airspeed that will produce the performance you want at the new power
setting.

More relevant to where this subthread started, yes it's good to have a
target power setting for downwind, and for the descent as well. But there's
no need to spend 30 seconds (or whatever) fiddling with the throttle to get
the power setting "just so". You smoothly, calmly, and quickly set the
throttle to the general vicinity of the correct spot, and then make
adjustments as necessary during the approach. Adjustments you would have to
even if you managed to hit the exact throttle setting you had targeted.

Pete