question on student taxi practice

I'm still waiting for my first lesson to start, but know from my
instructor that I will be taxiing until I get that under control. I
will be flying from a rural uncontrolled airport. It'll be in my own
aircraft, a Luscombe 8A. It's apparently very important to have the
brakes and ground steering under control and since it's my aircraft,
not very expensive.

Linda

That was a long time ago, when the King Air lost its tail.
They did rebuild it, it is probably still flying. That was
back in the days when a Bonanza was about $40,000 and 90
King Air was about $400,000.

Lots of things that are legal are not safe, lots of safe
things are not legal and good judgment can be taught by
example. Some people will not learn, some instructor don't
teach, when those two types get together bad things happen.

We've all seen pilots do stupid tricks and get away with
most of them. I've also seen other things they didn't get
away with, the AeroCommander salesman, demo'd a Turbo 690
[?] to a university. He wanted to show the customer, not a
pilot, how safe the airplane was. He decided that putting
the gear lever UP while taxiing would be a good idea, to
show that the gear would not retract on the ground. He
didn't could on the struts being over-inflated. The gear
did retract but the plane just settled on the flat belly and
the props did not hit the ground. Actually sold that same
model to the customer. The damage was to the skin and
antennas.
Saw a Tulsa police officer and owner of a nice Citabra taxi
in after a few beers and a short flight at the Tulsa
Downtown Airpark. Everything would have been fine if he'd
stopped before the prop louvered the trunk lid on his car.
One winter, back in the 60s, I saw a Beech 18 mail plane
operated by an outfit called SEMO, land and take-off at SPI
with a 30 knot headwind on a sub-freezing night. They took
off on rwy 30 and used 3,000 feet to get the tail up and
about 4,000 feet to lift off. I don't know how many pounds
over gross the plane was, but I saw them load two trucks of
mail bags and boxes.
Too many CFIs are just trying to earn a living and get the
hours needed for a "real" job, too many students are
interested in the quickest time from first flight to the
license. JFK Jr. should be alive, so should John Denver, so
should Buddy Holly, so should a lot of people. As far as I
know all my students are alive and well.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Dudley Henriques" wrote in
message
nk.net...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| news:PtlZf.9845$t22.1756@dukeread08...
| Along these lines, of responsible actions, when I was
| learning to fly, the FBO hired a farm boy with lots of
| trailer and tractor experience as a lineboy. After an
hour
| of training they sent him to put the Illinois governor's
| King Air 90 in the hanger by himself. He did a good job
| except for the bi-fold door which stalled half way up.
He
| did put the fuselage in the hanger but removed the
entire
| vertical stabilizer and rudder.
|
| Ouch!! I see a mighty tax increase in there somewhere I
think :-)
|
| My issue with all this is of course the responsibility
transition issue
| between the instructor and a student as that addresses the
pilot in command
| issue. I've always stressed this to instructors whenever I
could. It
| pertains to the use of the FAR terms definition for "pilot
in command", and
| actually, the use of anything in the FAR's for that
matter, as being
| anything but a bare minimum definition for the
competence/responsibility
| issue.
| I like to see instructors teaching new pilots to view the
FAR's as minimum
| requirements; then take the student above that level of
understanding in how
| the student views himself/herself in relation to the
regulations.
| It's this line of thinking that causes me to find fault
with an instructor
| who would allow a 2 hour student to go out un supervised
and taxi an
| airplane.
| Doing this in my opinion fogs the issue of pilot
responsibility for the
| student, who can now easily start to believe that
responsibility for the
| safety of an airplane can be assumed in steps....or
gradually, as the case
| may be.
| I like to see instructors work up to a definite dividing
line for the
| transition of responsibility for the aircraft to the
student. The student
| should realize that there is a moment in time when he/she
has been
| determined to be competent enough to assume total
responsibility for an
| airplane and it's operation. This operation should be
considered as the
| TOTAL operation of the aircraft, and the moment the
student assumes this
| responsibility from the instructor, if the instructor has
done a credible
| job of teaching, the student will make that all important
TOTAL transition
| to accepting responsibility and thinking as "pilot in
command".
| For me, this moment should occur at solo and not before.
In fact, I believe
| every action taken by an instructor during the pre-solo
stage should be
| designed to bring the student to this all important mental
transition to
| thinking as pilot in command, and that moment occurs with
the responsibility
| transition made from the instructor to the student as solo
is accomplished.
| Dudley Henriques
|
|
|

A nice airplane. As the owner, you will have more freedom
and lots of responsibilities. The mechanic you hire is
responsible for the work he does, but you as the owner are
legally responsible for making [or having made] all the
required entries in the logbooks for the engine, propeller,
airframe and appliances. You're responsible for ADs under
FAR 39 and as the owner, your CFI has less control over what
you do with your airplane. Once you are endorsed for solo,
you can fly whenever you want, whether the CFI approves.
You will need a solo entry in your logbook every 90 days,
but the CFI can not lock up your airplane. He can place
limitations on his solo endorsement in your logbook for
weather conditions and areas/airports you can use, but you
must follow those ethically. Many years ago, pilots would
get soled and 40 hours and then fly for years all over the
country as solo students, without any more contact with any
instructor. That changed in FAR 61 back in the late 60s and
has been modified and made more restrictive. FAR 61.31
requires a tailwheel endorsement as well as the solo
endorsement before you take the practical test and get your
PPL certificate.

Have your instructor and mechanic instruct you on the
requirements of FAR43 and 61/91, as owner you're the
responsible party.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


wrote in message
ups.com...
| I'm still waiting for my first lesson to start, but know
from my
| instructor that I will be taxiing until I get that under
control. I
| will be flying from a rural uncontrolled airport. It'll be
in my own
| aircraft, a Luscombe 8A. It's apparently very important to
have the
| brakes and ground steering under control and since it's my
aircraft,
| not very expensive.
|
| Linda
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:vfmZf.9862$t22.8921@dukeread08...
That was a long time ago, when the King Air lost its tail.
They did rebuild it, it is probably still flying. That was
back in the days when a Bonanza was about $40,000 and 90
King Air was about $400,000.

Lots of things that are legal are not safe, lots of safe
things are not legal and good judgment can be taught by
example. Some people will not learn, some instructor don't
teach, when those two types get together bad things happen.

We've all seen pilots do stupid tricks and get away with
most of them. I've also seen other things they didn't get
away with, the AeroCommander salesman, demo'd a Turbo 690
[?] to a university. He wanted to show the customer, not a
pilot, how safe the airplane was. He decided that putting
the gear lever UP while taxiing would be a good idea, to
show that the gear would not retract on the ground. He
didn't could on the struts being over-inflated. The gear
did retract but the plane just settled on the flat belly and
the props did not hit the ground. Actually sold that same
model to the customer. The damage was to the skin and
antennas.
Saw a Tulsa police officer and owner of a nice Citabra taxi
in after a few beers and a short flight at the Tulsa
Downtown Airpark. Everything would have been fine if he'd
stopped before the prop louvered the trunk lid on his car.
One winter, back in the 60s, I saw a Beech 18 mail plane
operated by an outfit called SEMO, land and take-off at SPI
with a 30 knot headwind on a sub-freezing night. They took
off on rwy 30 and used 3,000 feet to get the tail up and
about 4,000 feet to lift off. I don't know how many pounds
over gross the plane was, but I saw them load two trucks of
mail bags and boxes.
Too many CFIs are just trying to earn a living and get the
hours needed for a "real" job, too many students are
interested in the quickest time from first flight to the
license. JFK Jr. should be alive, so should John Denver, so
should Buddy Holly, so should a lot of people. As far as I
know all my students are alive and well.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

So true! When it's all been said and done, all we can expect to leave with
is the knowledge we did the best we could with what we had to work with.
God only knows I've been given a second chance more than once by something a
lot more powerful than me :-)
I remember one day coming out of a loop as the trailer in a two ship P51
formation where the lead had taken us in way too fast at the high apex. On
the bottom, he had me pinned between the ground and his airplane. I was
cutting grass at 300 plus and looking up the butt crack of a cow. My prop
probably shaved his antlers a bit as I went over him and with no place to
go, I hollered "give me some room...NOW!!" Lead pitched up to the right and
I went between two buildings in knife edge, standing on the right rudder
with forward stick. Think I had about 4 feet of tip clearance, but I'm
here!!! :-)
Yup...we've ALL had our moments
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )
Dudley Henriques

"Jose" wrote in message
om...
Taildragger?

As far as I'm concerned, the type of airplane is irrelevant to the question.

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:fqmZf.9863$t22.8410@dukeread08...
[...] you as the owner are
legally responsible for making [or having made] all the
required entries in the logbooks for the engine, propeller,
airframe and appliances.

The FAA has held that the PIC, whether the owner or not, is responsible for
ensuring that the airplane is airworthy (eg, "required entries in the
logbooks for the engine, propeller, airframe and appliances").

You're responsible for ADs under
FAR 39 and as the owner, your CFI has less control over what
you do with your airplane. Once you are endorsed for solo,
you can fly whenever you want, whether the CFI approves.
You will need a solo entry in your logbook every 90 days,
but the CFI can not lock up your airplane. [...]

As long as I'm nitpicking, the CFI has no more or less control over your
airplane when you are the owner. It's the FBO that controls access to the
airplane itself. I admit that this distinction is subtle, and it's true
that an airplane owner doesn't have to deal with the FBO which is always
nice. But still, if the FBO lets the student take the airplane out, the
fact that the CFI didn't want that to happen won't matter.

Pete

wrote in message
ups.com...
I'm still waiting for my first lesson to start, but know from my
instructor that I will be taxiing until I get that under control. I
will be flying from a rural uncontrolled airport. It'll be in my own
aircraft, a Luscombe 8A. It's apparently very important to have the
brakes and ground steering under control and since it's my aircraft,
not very expensive.

Linda


Once you are airborne taildraggers are no more difficult to fly than
tricycle gear. Things don't get interesting until the wheels touch down and
then you get busy! Like all aircraft the secret is a good stable approach.
'It is easier to maintain control than to regain it'.

Taildragger ground handling and maneuvering is more complicated and
difficult than a tricycle and you should get lots of training in crosswind
taxi and the crosswind to downwind turn. IIRC the Luscombe has a fairly
narrow track which can cause them to be tippy.

IMHO you should expect the learning to take longer and you will want to fly
with GREAT RESPECT for the strength and direction of the wind, but IMHO you
will become a better pilot and will know what to do with your feet. There
will be days when others are flying and you should stay tied down.

Women pilots are not common and women taildragger pilots are VERY special.
You will intimidate many men.

Happy landings,

Peter Duniho wrote:
Your incredulity is irrelevant.

Pete



Fortunatley you are irrelevent or I would probably be angered by your tendency to be an
a$$hole.

ktbr wrote in :

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
No, it's not very common. It's entirely legal, however. If
there is no intent to take off, there is no requirement to
have a pilot's license of any kind.

Questions of intent (to take-off or otherwise) are an open
invitation for a litigation problems involving cuplability
if some accident or incident ocurred. It won;t really matter
if what happened was "legal' or not, if someone sues its up
to a judge or jury to decide.

The FARs state that you can log time (PIC or otherwise) whenever
you are the sole manipulator of the controls and the airplane
is moving under its own power. Personally, I would never allow
a student to go out an operate an airplane alone (taxiing or
otherwise until he was signed off for solo. I wouldn't want to
have to explain such a situation in court if anything happened.


And the instructor, who wasn't even in the plane, may arguably be equally
or even MORE liable than the student himself if an accident were to occur!

Quite frankly, these days, anybody and everybody could be sued (even if not
very successfully) if the student were to have an accident and get killed
while taxiing, regardless of his intent to fly the plane: The manufacturer
of the aircraft, the owner of the plane, the owner of the property where
the accident occurred, the controller who cleared him to taxi, the airport
management for being airport management, and all the people on this
newsgroup for discussing it without contacting the proper authorities to
report it!

Liability is probably not the driving issue here... If it was, none of us
would ever taxi an airplane, let alone fly it.

I'm no expert, but I believe that in a part 61 flight school no specific
structure is enforced upon instructors in their training of the Practical
Test Standards. However, the Private Pilot Practical Test Standards do
specifically require, in "Area II: Preflight Procedures, Task D: Taxiing",
that a private pilot be able to

1. Exhibit knowledge of the elements related to safe taxi procedures.
2. Perform a brake check immediately after the airplane begins
moving.
3. Position the flight controls properly for the existing wind conditions.
4. Control direction and speed without excessive use of brakes.
5. Comply with airport/taxiway markings, signals, ATC clearances,
and instructions.
6. Taxi so as to avoid other aircraft and hazards.

Personally, my instructors never had me taxi solo before flying solo - we
had 10 hours of flight time during which some percentage of that involved
taxiing and we covered taxiing enough in that process, that I was able to
eventually meet the PTS standards. And quite frankly, based on the rates
for taxiing a plane on a hobbs meter, I probably would not have been eager
to spend time taxiing separately anyway.

But all we know here is that a CFI asked a 2-hour time student to go taxi
an airplane. We don't know anything else about the circumstances around
this or the reasons that the CFI asked him to do this - or perhaps if the
student, in his eagerness to spend time learning to fly, wanted to get some
plane time while his CFI was with another student or otherwise
unavailable...

It wasn't me, and I don't care what the FAA thinks. I'll rephrase my
question. Is it a usual and accepted practice for a CFI to let a 2
hour time, pre solo student taxi around unsupervised solo ?