Solo Touch-n-Goes

Aren't most folks here agreeing or at least accepting of the idea of limiting it conditionally? I think it's the blind/blanket prohibition that gets the criticism.

flyingron said:
Balked landing is very different from the way most touch and goes are done.
Click to expand...

Even though I had said and I still do believe that T&G's are also some sort of practice for balked landings, I was thinking the other day when reading this conversation about balked landings, and trying to remember if even once I ever did or somehow practiced a bad bounce, a pio, etc... I can remember only one time recovering from a bad bounce by adding power mid bounce and preventing an out of control second roll on..... When seeing these accident videos of wrecks happening on bad landings makes me cringe because it's not something I've practiced...at least not very much. Kind of a hard thing to simulate or purposely practice I suppose....
 
Brad W said:
Aren't most folks here agreeing or at least accepting of the idea of limiting it conditionally? I think it's the blind/blanket prohibition that gets the criticism.



Even though I had said and I still do believe that T&G's are also some sort of practice for balked landings, I was thinking the other day when reading this conversation about balked landings, and trying to remember if even once I ever did or somehow practiced a bad bounce, a pio, etc... I can remember only one time recovering from a bad bounce by adding power mid bounce and preventing an out of control second roll on..... When seeing these accident videos of wrecks happening on bad landings makes me cringe because it's not something I've practiced...at least not very much. Kind of a hard thing to simulate or purposely practice I suppose....
Click to expand...

I did a bounce, on a windy, gusty day, in an SR 22 with about 25 hours on it. The wind was howling, I knew there were people watching me land, and I flubbed it. I had a gust factor in, flared, the bottom fell out, and I bounced, about 5 feet above the runway. It's amazing how fast thoughts go through your head in a situation like this, the last thought I had was, no way I was going to call this guy up and tell him I bent his brand new airplane, so I poured on the coals and went around. Second try I greased it on.

I regularly practice go arounds, although not from such a low altitude.
 
Half Fast said:
1-3 should have been mastered pre-solo. If so, they’re not an impediment to solo T&Gs. If not, why is the student flying solo?

5 is true, but the counterpoint is the student gets less practice per hour. It would depend upon the student, and where they are in learning, whether reflection or repetition is more important.
Click to expand...
Half Fast said:
1-3 should have been mastered pre-solo. If so, they’re not an impediment to solo T&Gs. If not, why is the student flying solo?

5 is true, but the counterpoint is the student gets less practice per hour. It would depend upon the student, and where they are in learning, whether reflection or repetition is more important.
Click to expand...

Then let me add a #6. The planes are the schools, they pay the insurance, if the planes are out of service, the school has lost revenue and how the school limits their operation is really none of your concern. If you rent a plane from the school and don’t like the rules, you are free to take your training dollars else where..
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
Then let me add a #6. The planes are the schools, they pay the insurance, if the planes are out of service, the school has lost revenue and how the school limits their operation is really none of you concern. If you rent a plane from the school and don’t like the rules, you are free to take your training dollars else where..
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree that schools can set whatever rules they want. I was more asking the why behind a school or CFI setting such a policy. We all know policies like "No T&Gs" exist. Coming from a mindset where I wouldn't have wanted to solo if I couldn't execute a simple T&G without mistake and never having run up against a "No T&Gs" policy, I was surprised at the vehemence of some people arguing against students performing them. How much more dangerous is a T&G in your opinion, and why is it so much more dangerous than a take off and full stop landing with a taxi back before the next take off?
 
dmspilot said:
And yet you've decided that it's your concern to tell people how other schools should be run.
Click to expand...

Actually I haven’t. If you are a CFI or school and want to allow your students to do TGs that’s on you. I am just advising there is unneeded risk in that decision.
 
SkyChaser said:
Yes, I agree that schools can set whatever rules they want. I was more asking the why behind a school or CFI setting such a policy. We all know policies like "No T&Gs" exist. Coming from a mindset where I wouldn't have wanted to solo if I couldn't execute a simple T&G without mistake and never having run up against a "No T&Gs" policy, I was surprised at the vehemence of some people arguing against students performing them. How much more dangerous is a T&G in your opinion, and why is it so much more dangerous than a take off and full stop landing with a taxi back before the next take off?
Click to expand...

Why does the FAA require all night landings for currency be to a full stop? Safety. And these are certificated private or greater pilots.
 
Clip4 said:
Why does the FAA require all night landings for currency be to a full stop? Safety. And these are certificated private or greater pilots.
Click to expand...

Okay, I got that the FAA thinks it's safer for some reason. What is that reason? I am legitimately confused as to why it's "safer" and I prefer to understand things rather than just take the FAA's word for something.
 
SkyChaser said:
Yes, I agree that schools can set whatever rules they want. I was more asking the why behind a school or CFI setting such a policy. We all know policies like "No T&Gs" exist. Coming from a mindset where I wouldn't have wanted to solo if I couldn't execute a simple T&G without mistake and never having run up against a "No T&Gs" policy, I was surprised at the vehemence of some people arguing against students performing them. How much more dangerous is a T&G in your opinion, and why is it so much more dangerous than a take off and full stop landing with a taxi back before the next take off?
Click to expand...

Here is how it happens, in a hurry the student is multi tasking. The reality is he probably selected full throttle, failed to maintain directional control while cleaning up the aircraft.

“The student pilot was conducting solo touch-and-go landings and takeoffs at the airport in Lancaster, Pennsylvania.

During the landing roll of the eighth touch-and-go landing, he retracted the flaps to 0° and applied full engine power for takeoff.

The Cessna 152 began drifting “hard” to the left and he applied right rudder, however, the plane departed the left side of the runway, hit a runway marker, and came to rest in a nose down attitude.

The airplane sustained substantial damage to the firewall.

The student pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

Probable Cause: The student pilot’s failure to maintain directional control during takeoff, which resulted in a runway excursion and impact with a runway marker.”
 
Clip4 said:
Then let me add a #6. The planes are the schools, they pay the insurance, if the planes are out of service, the school has lost revenue and how the school limits their operation is really none of your concern. If you rent a plane from the school and don’t like the rules, you are free to take your training dollars else where..
Click to expand...


And #6 has nothing to do with the discussion. Non sequitur. Certainly the school can make whatever rules they want. But does a rule banning solo T&Gs seem necessary? What’s the real risk?
 
Half Fast said:
And #6 has nothing to do with the discussion. Non sequitur. Certainly the school can make whatever rules they want. But does a rule banning solo T&Gs seem necessary? What’s the real risk?
Click to expand...
Risks don’t need to be real. Perceived risks cause plenty of rules and restrictions.
 
Clip4 said:
Here is how it happens, in a hurry the student is multi tasking. The reality is he probably selected full throttle, failed to maintain directional control while cleaning up the aircraft.

“The student pilot was conducting solo touch-and-go landings and takeoffs at the airport in Lancaster, Pennsylvania.

During the landing roll of the eighth touch-and-go landing, he retracted the flaps to 0° and applied full engine power for takeoff.

The Cessna 152 began drifting “hard” to the left and he applied right rudder, however, the plane departed the left side of the runway, hit a runway marker, and came to rest in a nose down attitude.

The airplane sustained substantial damage to the firewall.

The student pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

Probable Cause: The student pilot’s failure to maintain directional control during takeoff, which resulted in a runway excursion and impact with a runway marker.”
Click to expand...
When I was first soloing, I needed to look away for a moment to grab and manipulate the flap controls. Now I adjust flaps while barely needing to look away at all. Not coincidentally, I'm more comfortable with touch and goes now than I was then. Depending on the airplane, I think one of the most significant factors (student, private, whoever) for if you should be comfortable to do touch and goes is whether or not you can make correct flap adjustments without risking losing directional control momentarily on the runway.
 
Half Fast said:
And #6 has nothing to do with the discussion. Non sequitur. Certainly the school can make whatever rules they want. But does a rule banning solo T&Gs seem necessary? What’s the real risk?
Click to expand...

The real risks are a loss of directional control or having the nose jump up too quickly on a student. There’s also the risk of not getting the flaps up at all or shoving them all up at once.

People can argue about how much risk that adds up to overall, or that students should be so proficient that those things never happen. But if you asking why some schools limit or prohibit them, that’s why. The added risk of a mistake bending an airplane isn’t non-zero.

Not at all saying you or anyone has to agree with that calculation being worth it, but that’s what it is.
 
SkyChaser said:
Okay, I got that the FAA thinks it's safer for some reason. What is that reason? I am legitimately confused as to why it's "safer" and I prefer to understand things rather than just take the FAA's word for something.
Click to expand...

I'm with you totally. Seems like a task that a solo student should be able to handle before solo....

My only guess is that it's
  • adjusting flaps &/or re-trimming while still rolling at a high-ish speed
  • The issue of raising gear instead of flaps
  • potential for asymmetric flap retraction
  • some airplanes the flaps require the switch to be held up for the entire time of transit...so all that time it's harder or perhaps even impossible to hold the throttle and mixture controls
  • some airplanes have flap &/or trim control that nearly requires a pilot to look down, or stoop down to reach, or look up, etc... taking the eyes off the runway while still in motion.
In my thinking some of these are arguably legit, especially for a student with the ink still wet on their solo sign-off...but not something that should be a blanket restriction in every case. In the end, whatever.....it's their equipment, their rules...true enough.
 
As I learn how near full proficiency a student should be in the modern world, I see why so many have amazing high numbers of hours in their log books before first solo.

My solo was at 12 h0urs, only 9 hours recent. I had been taught to recognize whether the plane was going to be flared and on the runway before the mid point, and go missed if in doubt.

The instructor announced MISSED on perfectly good approaches, to see that I did the clean up and go properly. With a Cessna 150, full gross, and 40 degrees of flaps, the sequence is important, as the pilot in Wisconsin found out fatally. Our decisions were made at 50 or more feet in the air. The consequences of missing one of the steps was not immediate, and corrections were readily made.

RANT ON

7 bodies hauled to the nearest hospital from just one end of our runway does cause local pilots to be more concerned about the safety of touch and goes, pre planed, or spur of the moment. I helped pull 4 of them out of the burning wreckage. All 4 had serious burns.

SHOUTING HERE.....THE LAST SUCH INCIDENT NEARLY ENDED OUR AIRPORT.

The Cessna had a high, fast approach, went to full flaps to try to get down, and after half the runway was behind him, and hardly touched the wheels to the pavement, attempted to go around. full power produced little climb, with the stall horn blaring. He finally eased some flaps off, and was clearly going to clear the railroad tracks.

The sudden appearance of the Metro train full of commuters spoiled that view, and he was now headed straight for the window line, a woman saw him and screamed, causing all the passengers in that car to look out at a spinning propeller less than 100 feet away, and headed exactly at them.

The pilot pulled back on the yoke, the plane did not stall, and he just barely cleared the train.

The passengers on that train complained, and demanded that that dangerous airport be shut down. We did survive that event, but would we if he had NOT cleared the train, but crashed into those windows? At least half a dozen people would have had contact with the engine and propeller, gasoline would have been dumped into the car, and who knows how much more would have occurred?

The train would not have had ready access to emergency equipment unless the engineer wisely continued to the next station, as there are no parallel public roads in that portion of the rails.

That is how close College Park airport came to ending its claim to being the oldest continuously operated airport in the world. It would now be a commemorative park, with swings, slides, and teeter totters. Just another park with an historic sign.

Poor pilot training that does not teach students to recognize a bad approach until they are on the runway is a continuing danger to not only the students, but all the rest of the pilot community.

I achieved my PPL at 41 hours, and in my first 100 hours, I never used more than 1,000 feet of runway, and never did a go around from less than 50 feet AGL. My instructor taught that standard, and I followed his teaching. That has never caused me any trouble, and little expense. The club put about 4,000 hours on that well worn 150, and at least 15 guys and gals earned their PPL in it, and there was zero, no, sheet metal damage

Rant over.

People here complain about high insurance rates, but flying closer to the limits sometimes find us over the other side, and the total fleet rates go up. Our club had discounts for accident free years many times, so our stricter than Federal limits paid off, both in our training and personal flying. Our rates were lower than some of the other clubs in our vicinity, and lower repair costs and cheaper insurance rates were part of the difference. We also invited a couple of pilots to resign for using their discretion, instead of the club rules. At least one of them crashed someone else's plane.
 
I was taught to land in the first 1000' (and always did) and to make my go-around decision before or at around 50 feet as well. But a T&G is not a go-around, and I definitely didn't execute them the same way. On a go-around, I would input full throttle with appropriate rudder, establish a pitch attitude that allowed for a climb and then begin "easing" the flaps out. In a T&G, once my wheels were on the runway, all flaps were dumped before advancing to full throttle plus right rudder for the "go" part.

At an airport like College Park, I can totally understand the no T&Gs rule from a club based there, but I don't think all students are so dangerous when doing T&Gs. If I flew in there, I would more than likely go around much more because I would want a perfect approach and execute go-arounds for a lot less than I felt comfortable with at my training field. But my training field was in the middle of nowhere and I could have flown for miles at 500' without busting any regulations, so I wasn't going to potentially kill myself or others if I didn't get it perfect right away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top