Checklist Ideas?

[ScottM]

One may want to consider what activities are intelligent for consenting adults to perform whilst alone in an airplane...

Well if they had the proper check list.....

 

[dmccormack]

One may want to consider what activities are intelligent for consenting adults to perform whilst alone in an airplane...

When I read that response I knew someone would bring up that case...




Still makes me wonder why the wing failed?

 

[Ted]

Well if they had the proper check list.....

Good point, they probably weren't using it.

Had they asked any traffic in the area to advise?

 

[Ted]

I knew someone would bring up that case...

Hey, I couldn't resist.

Makes you wonder why the wing failed?

It makes me wonder a lot of things, that being one of them.

 

[SkyHog]

"OH MY GOD I'M GONNA......"

*stomps rudder and simultaneously yanks yoke and turns opposite direction

 

[TMetzinger]

You didn't answer the question. Why the "Airspeed alive" and "rotate" call?


So, you are saying you cannot fly a small single engine plane without an operating airspeed indicator? So what if the pitot tube cover is on, just fly back around, land and remove it.


Again, why? Why should they "expect" rotation? Is the pitch angle so extreme? If they realize you are going flying, then of course rotation should be expected. What you are confusing here once again is transport aircraft operation procedures.

But you are confusing your elongated procedures with "flying consistently". In aviation you have "technique" and "procedure". In professional aviation we fly "procedure" in order to establish a standard.

Then you have those who think their "technique" should become "procedure" which begins clouding up the process and breaks down standards. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.

Your "checklist" aren't usable in their format. Once again, let me see you accomplish 3 of them while the event is happening. You can't, that's why they should be noted as Phase One Memory Items. What you call "checklist" is really the Reader's Digest version of the AFM.

Look, fly your airplanes any way you want. Stop arguing with me about how I fly mine, OK? Anyone reading this thread can decide how they want to fly their airplane. Any CFI can and should decide on how he wants to teach his students.

Honestly, if you really meant your comments about not caring about how people fly their airplanes, you wouldn't use words like "your checklists aren't usable", or "stop trying to reinvent the wheel". Your message comes across as if you have THE answer, and anyone who differs is wrong. **** that.

 

[RotorAndWing]

Look, fly your airplanes any way you want. Stop arguing with me about how I fly mine, OK? Anyone reading this thread can decide how they want to fly their airplane. Any CFI can and should decide on how he wants to teach his students.

Honestly, if you really meant your comments about not caring about how people fly their airplanes, you wouldn't use words like "your checklists aren't usable", or "stop trying to reinvent the wheel". Your message comes across as if you have THE answer, and anyone who differs is wrong. **** that.

Not really. But since you are in a position to soon be an instructor perhaps you should be willing to listen and learn from others who just may have a few years and a few thousand hours more experience.

As far as the comment

Any CFI can and should decide on how he wants to teach his students.

That's what's disturbing. Too many new instructors are trying to reinvent the wheel and use their techniques as procedures and also trying to teach a Cessna 172 as if it were a Boeing 737. Airmanship and basic flying skills are being left out so the concentration can be using elaborate "checklist" and useless "call outs".

Have a nice day.

 

[dmccormack]

In the Army we differentiated between Doctrine and Technique.

• Doctrine is the expected, non-negotiable end-state.
• Technique is the means used to achieve the end-state.

I haven't studied this thread exhaustively, but I don't think anyone advocated comprehensive reference checklists as doctrinal, but rather suggested them as a technique, which may or may not have utility, given the airplane, the pilot, and the mission (we should toss in the pilot's aspirations as another factor).

I know I've been careful to state that as an instructor, I offer my more comprehensive checklist as an option.

Yet as a pilot, I place my comprehensive, self-made, reference checklist on my kneeboard every flight.

(I also sit in the airplane with my eyes closed and practice emergency procedures while its sitting in the hangar, but I'm kinda weird that way...)

 

[TMetzinger]

Not really. But since you are in a position to soon be an instructor perhaps you should be willing to listen and learn from others who just may have a few years and a few thousand hours more experience.

As far as the comment



That's what's disturbing. Too many new instructors are trying to reinvent the wheel and use their techniques as procedures and also trying to teach a Cessna 172 as if it were a Boeing 737. Airmanship and basic flying skills are being left out so the concentration can be using elaborate "checklist" and useless "call outs".

Have a nice day.

Oh, I'm willing to listen. That doesn't mean I agree. And I don't.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Well if they had the proper check list.....

ALTITUDE..................More than 5280 AGL
AUTOPILOT................Activated in pitch and roll axes
...

 

[Everskyward]

In the Army we differentiated between Doctrine and Technique.

• Doctrine is the expected, non-negotiable end-state.
• Technique is the means used to achieve the end-state.

I've heard is as Procedure vs. Technique, but it's the same idea. I think the problem arises because students don't know the difference between procedure and technique, and they think their CFI's way is the only way. This becomes very confusing when they fly with other CFIs, especially if it's not within a standardized program.

I guess the best thing we can say to students out there is that you are going to encounter many different opinions about various subjects. Listen to what people say, but in the end you need to make up your own mind.

 

[Everskyward]

Too many new instructors are trying to reinvent the wheel and use their techniques as procedures and also trying to teach a Cessna 172 as if it were a Boeing 737. Airmanship and basic flying skills are being left out so the concentration can be using elaborate "checklist" and useless "call outs".

The other part of it is that many pilots have no aspirations to fly a 737. They are doing it for fun, presumably. Although some may find it fun to pretend their 172 is a 737, I can't imagine many do. If in the end they decide they want to go on to bigger things they can learn at that time.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

If you are out flying VFR would you actually abort a takeoff for a failed airspeed indicator on a small piston airplane?

Yes, if there's enough room to do so on the runway.

I know this seems kinda harsh, but why are people trying to make this much more difficult than it should be? Trying to impose procedures intended for complex transport aircraft into small general aviation aircraft is just plain silly. It would be me trying to run my 45 foot boat like an aircraft carrier.

Look, I'm a terrible checklist user - I hate printed checklists. I use mnemonics for some things (such as the good ol' "Climb it, clean it, cool it, and call it" for go-around/missed approach), and some checklists I just have memorized as a patter in my head (For example, startup: master, beacon, mixture, tank pump, prime, clear start, oil pressure, lean; or cruise: trim, time, lights, pump, power, mixture, compass, cowl flaps). But I still call out "airspeed alive" and "gauges green" on the roll. It's just how I fly. What's wrong with callouts?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

You didn't answer the question. Why the "Airspeed alive" and "rotate" call?

Why not? I don't call "rotate" but I do call "airspeed alive" and "gauges green" on the roll. Just got into the habit to force me to actually look.

So, you are saying you cannot fly a small single engine plane without an operating airspeed indicator? So what if the pitot tube cover is on, just fly back around, land and remove it.

I'm sure anyone with a reasonable amount of (recent) experience could probably get around the patch without an airspeed indicator. However, it's safer to not leave the ground, provided you have enough room to abort on the runway. So, why not abort on the runway???

Again, why? Why should they "expect" rotation? Is the pitch angle so extreme?

Everything is extreme to a first-time flyer. They may not have any clue what to expect.

 

[RotorAndWing]

I've heard is as Procedure vs. Technique, but it's the same idea. I think the problem arises because students don't know the difference between procedure and technique, and they think their CFI's way is the only way. This becomes very confusing when they fly with other CFIs, especially if it's not within a standardized program.

I guess the best thing we can say to students out there is that you are going to encounter many different opinions about various subjects. Listen to what people say, but in the end you need to make up your own mind.

Exactly!

 

[RotorAndWing]

What's wrong with callouts?

Nothing if they make sense. When I was teaching helicopters we would check "gauges green" before the takeoff, but that had a purpose.

FWIW, the "airspeed alive" originates from aircraft with 2 airspeed indicators and alerts the FP to cross check his airspeed indicator. Also the "rotate" call is made by the NFP along with the V1 and V2 callout, again procedures for multi-pilot mulit-engine aircraft.

As far as the failed airspeed indicator, I use to have my students fly several patterns with take off and landings with the airspeed indicator covered up. This taught flying by attitude and feel, and in most GA planes is not an issue. During a certain phase in the pattern I would ask them what their airspeed was, then remove the cover to show them how close they were. Most of the time they were within 5 knots of what they felt. I also used the same technique in helicopters.

 

[Trapper John]

As far as the failed airspeed indicator, I use to have my students fly several patterns with take off and landings with the airspeed indicator covered up. This taught flying by attitude and feel, and in most GA planes is not an issue. During a certain phase in the pattern I would ask them what their airspeed was, then remove the cover to show them how close they were. Most of the time they were within 5 knots of what they felt. I also used the same technique in helicopters.

I would hope all CFIs do this. Stick and rudder, stick and rudder...not button pushing...


Trapper John

 

[midlifeflyer]

You didn't answer the question. Why the "Airspeed alive" and "rotate" call?

For a lot of people, saying something out loud, even to oneself, acts as a check on performance. It is one way to avoid the "I expect to see it and therefore it's there whether it's there or not" syndrome.

Technique - not every one's is the same.

 

[dmccormack]

I would hope all CFIs do this. Stick and rudder, stick and rudder...not button pushing...


Trapper John

A few things each student must experience/demonstrate (not in the PTS, but I tell them at the outset the objective is to produce a safe aviator, not a test passer), in no particular order:

• No panel pattern flight
• Flight into IMC (I file, they fly)
• Use of A/P (if equipped) while under the hood to recover from inadvertant flight into clouds
• Grass and actual short field (with trees, displaced threshold -- the works)
• Fly in rain
• Turning stalls
• Loss of power on T/O drill (I pull power before we reach pattern altitude -- all I want is them looking forward and picking the landing site -- no fancy manuevers)
• Fly at night with no interior lights
• Land at night with no landing light
• X-wind at least 12 knots
• Gusty day flight
• Class B flight
• Meet with A&P/IA
• Review A/C Airframe, Engine, and Prop logs
• At least one cancelled flight due to maintenance or weather (I haven't had to plan this one)
• Barely legal VFR (go out with 1000' and 1 or two and fly to nearby airport)
• Run one tank dry in flight (if system supports -- some POHs recommend not doing this)
• I will do spins if asked and I have a spin-cert a/c available. It is not a requirement for PPL and I don't insist.

That's all I can think of -- any other suggestions for "Beyond the PTS?"

 

[Trapper John]

That is a terrific list!

Just curious, when you do spin training, do you demonstrate a spin entry via the "skidding turn, trying to tighten a turn to base or final and see what happens"? I've long thought that is a really valuable demonstration...

Trapper John

 

[dmccormack]

That is a terrific list!

Just curious, when you do spin training, do you demonstrate a spin entry via the "skidding turn, trying to tighten a turn to base or final and see what happens"? I've long thought that is a really valuable demonstration...

Trapper John

That's a great demonstration -- because it happens so fast the reaction is, "What happened?"

I was introduced to it after I asked my CFI instructor to show me "All the ways a student might try to kill me."

I explain it to each student during a ground session. I haven't yet had student ask for that demonstration.

 

[Lance F]

That is a terrific list!

Just curious, when you do spin training, do you demonstrate a spin entry via the "skidding turn, trying to tighten a turn to base or final and see what happens"? I've long thought that is a really valuable demonstration...

Trapper John

I did this (at altitude) when I was instructing in gliders. I never felt that the normal spin entries show what happens in real situations.

Very good list, Dan. However, I hope you teach the barely legal VFR to show what not to do. Barely legal VFR quickly and easily turns into no way legal VFR.

 

[dmccormack]

However, I hope you teach the barely legal VFR to show what not to do. Barely legal VFR quickly and easily turns into no way legal VFR.

Oh absolutely! All this takes is a one way to a nearby airport (along a route that I know where the towers are).

Without setting off a weather thread, around here low VFR conditions are usually stable enough to permit the 15 minute flight along the route.

And 15 min is all it takes for the PPL candidate to decide, "This ain't for me!"

 

[ScottM]

A few things each student must experience/demonstrate (not in the PTS, but I tell them at the outset the objective is to produce a safe aviator, not a test passer), in no particular order:

• X-wind at least 12 knots

Wow that is really pretty easy on them. My CFI took me out in Xwinds of 20 knots to practice. I got real good at go arounds and Xwind landings. So good in fact that I remember having a hard time landing in calm winds or winds straight on the nose!

 

[dmccormack]

Wow that is really pretty easy on them. My CFI took me out in Xwinds of 20 knots to practice. I got real good at go arounds and Xwind landings. So good in fact that I remember having a hard time landing in calm winds or winds straight on the nose!

Depends on the airplane, but every GA airplane can handle a Direct crosswind (90 degrees) at 12 knots. Most can handle more, but some run out of rudder authority early.

Around here it's hard to find a day were winds are exactly 90 degrees at 15 that aren't accompanied by strong gusts (though this Sunday came close)

My CFI took me out in a Cherokee Warrior on a really gusty day. After I said something smart he asked for 31 (winds were 040@26).

I got it down. The tower then asked if I would get credit for "all three landings."

But, for me that's not a requirement for the aspiring PP, though if the plane, the pilot, and the situation come together, I'm more than happy to oblige.

 

[RotorAndWing]

But, for me that's not a requirement for the aspiring PP, though if the plane, the pilot, and the situation come together, I'm more than happy to oblige.

This is unfortunately what's missing in most training today. Most new CFI's would rather spend time training radio procedures and how to program the GPS, or following some inane complicated overdone checklist rather than teach stick and rudder skills. And quite frankly it's because they were never taught basic flying skills.

Does anyone teach cross country flying without GPS or navaids anymore? How about using section lines for navigation? Or just plain pilotage using a map and a watch?

Talking about winds, in helicopters when a windy gusty day came up, I would take my students out to hover practice and make them put the tail into the wind and hold it there, then do pick ups and set downs with a tailwind, then do 90 degree turns doing the same thing. It would be a real workout, but it was also a confidence builder.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I like the list, for the most part, but...

[*]Flight into IMC (I file, they fly)

IMHO, this one ought to be required.

[*]Grass and actual short field (with trees, displaced threshold -- the works)

And this one too!

[*]Fly in rain

And... Okay, several of these should be required.

[*]Turning stalls

Minor nit: This one *IS* in the PTS:

B. TASK: POWER-OFF STALLS (ASEL and ASES)
5. Maintains a specified heading, ±10°, in straight flight; maintains a
specified angle of bank not to exceed 20°, ±10°; in turning flight,
while inducing the stall.

C. TASK: POWER-ON STALLS (ASEL and ASES)
5. Maintains a specified heading, ±10°, in straight flight; maintains a
specified angle of bank not to exceed 20°, ±10°, in turning flight,
while inducing the stall.

I remember this because I had to do one on my private checkride. "Show me a stall at 2000 RPM and 20 degrees of bank." That was a combo I'd never done before, though my CFI did have me do a turning power-off stall once right before my checkride.

[*]Land at night with no landing light

I sure hope every CFI covers this one!

[*]Barely legal VFR (go out with 1000' and 1 or two and fly to nearby airport)

Now this one, while I like the intent, I've got some issues with. I think that flying a cross country with 3-4 miles vis will also get the point across and is much safer. Since you're saying 1-2 miles vis, you must be staying in class G and thus less than 1200 AGL. That's not a flight I would ever make, even to make a point, and it sets a VERY bad example for you to do it. In fact, I would suggest flying a cross country at 3-4 miles vis with you having filed IFR would be the best. That way they get to see what MVFR is like and why they don't want to fly in it, and you don't set a bad example by doing something you're telling them not to do.

That's all I can think of -- any other suggestions for "Beyond the PTS?"

I'm actually coming up with a list like this that includes some non-flying stuff as well. Here's a few of the things on the list:

* How to fuel an airplane
* How to get into FBO's after hours (combo locks are usually CTAF, 121.5, or a squawk code like 1200 or 7700)
* Courtesy car etiquette
* Courteous flying (be mindful of prop blast, noise abatement, etc.)
* How to fly non-pilot pax and have them enjoy it and become friends of GA

There's a lot more detail... Maybe a topic for another thread?

 

[ScottM]

I like the list, for the most part,

I'm actually coming up with a list like this that includes some non-flying stuff as well. Here's a few of the things on the list:

* How to fuel an airplane
* How to get into FBO's after hours (combo locks are usually CTAF, 121.5, or a squawk code like 1200 or 7700)
* Courtesy car etiquette
* Courteous flying (be mindful of prop blast, noise abatement, etc.)
* How to fly non-pilot pax and have them enjoy it and become friends of GA

There's a lot more detail... Maybe a topic for another thread?

If you can fit it in and it makes sense then sure. But this is why the PP is a license (sorry Ed) to learn. As much as we would like to know everything to do so would be to make the PP course last for years or decades. At some point you got say enough and cut the umbilical with the hope that the student had enough knowledge to know that they still had lots to learn. A good CFI stays a mentor after the certificate is earned and keeps teaching all that other stuff.

 

[dmccormack]

Minor nit: This one *IS* in the PTS:

Not really. The applicant is not required to demonstrate a turning stall -- only that he/she must be able to do so within the angle of bank.

Now this one, while I like the intent, I've got some issues with. I think that flying a cross country with 3-4 miles vis will also get the point across and is much safer. Since you're saying 1-2 miles vis, you must be staying in class G and thus less than 1200 AGL. That's not a flight I would ever make, even to make a point, and it sets a VERY bad example for you to do it. In fact, I would suggest flying a cross country at 3-4 miles vis with you having filed IFR would be the best. That way they get to see what MVFR is like and why they don't want to fly in it, and you don't set a bad example by doing something you're telling them not to do.

I should have specified Class G, but given the minimum ceiling...

The problem with filing is you have to get up above 1500' to even talk to approach or center around here, which defeats the purpose (that coupled with MSA/MEA requirements).

I'm actually coming up with a list like this that includes some non-flying stuff as well. Here's a few of the things on the list:

* How to fuel an airplane
* How to get into FBO's after hours (combo locks are usually CTAF, 121.5, or a squawk code like 1200 or 7700)
* Courtesy car etiquette
* Courteous flying (be mindful of prop blast, noise abatement, etc.)
* How to fly non-pilot pax and have them enjoy it and become friends of GA

There's a lot more detail... Maybe a topic for another thread?

Yep

 

[dmccormack]

If you can fit it in and it makes sense then sure. But this is why the PP is a license (sorry Ed) to learn. As much as we would like to know everything to do so would be to make the PP course last for years or decades. At some point you got say enough and cut the umbilical with the hope that the student had enough knowledge to know that they still had lots to learn. A good CFI stays a mentor after the certificate is earned and keeps teaching all that other stuff.

Agree that this is much for the 40 hour types... but given the amount of dual even in that case, there's probably time to do most of these...

 

[Trapper John]

INow this one, while I like the intent, I've got some issues with. I think that flying a cross country with 3-4 miles vis will also get the point across and is much safer. Since you're saying 1-2 miles vis, you must be staying in class G and thus less than 1200 AGL. That's not a flight I would ever make, even to make a point, and it sets a VERY bad example for you to do it. In fact, I would suggest flying a cross country at 3-4 miles vis with you having filed IFR would be the best. That way they get to see what MVFR is like and why they don't want to fly in it, and you don't set a bad example by doing something you're telling them not to do.

3 to 4 mile visibility? There's places where that's about as good as it gets in the summer...

I guess I see your point about intentionally launching into 1-2 nm vis, though. Maybe the ideal learning situation would be launching into 3 nm vis, and flying into slowly deteriorating vis from there...


Trapper John

 

[dmccormack]

3 to 4 mile visibility? There's places where that's about as good as it gets in the summer...

I guess I see your point about intentionally launching into 1-2 nm vis, though. Maybe the ideal learning situation would be launching into 3 nm vis, and flying into slowly deteriorating vis from there...


Trapper John

One thing that many new pilots find is that "Visibility: 10 miles" on the AWOS doesn't mean much on a summer day.

I took off from Shannon (EZF) last summer on a clear day with Vis reported as "7 miles in haze."

No kidding. I was IMC until level off. I could only see straight down (well, sorta back and down) with no horizon, no sense of up or down other than what the guages indicated.

 

[Ted]

This is unfortunately what's missing in most training today. Most new CFI's would rather spend time training radio procedures and how to program the GPS, or following some inane complicated overdone checklist rather than teach stick and rudder skills. And quite frankly it's because they were never taught basic flying skills.

I have to agree here. The number of pilots I come across who are deathly afraid of crosswind landings astounds me. These include pilots with a bunch of hours, far more than me. Meanwhile, when I was practicing power-off spot landings in the Mooney prior to my Commercial check ride, I was doing them on runway 35 with winds 270 @ 15G24, and not thinking anything of it. I've done stiffer (and gustier) direct crosswinds.

I wanted an instructor who was going to teach me how to fly the plane first and do it well. Obviously I want to know all the other bits - use of GPS, proper radio technique, appropriate regulations, etc. But no amount of knowing the FARs will save me when some bad situation comes up unexpectedly that I then have to get out of. The one and only thing that will get me on the ground safely is knowing how to fly the plane. We always talk about that being first priority when you're flying, it would seem to me it should also be first priority in instruction.

That said, Dan, I like your list overall.

Does anyone teach cross country flying without GPS or navaids anymore? How about using section lines for navigation? Or just plain pilotage using a map and a watch?

Yes, my instructor did. I do use them sometimes (although admittedly not all that often). I'm glad I've had to do them, though and can do them.

 

[dmccormack]

Yes, my instructor did. I do use them sometimes (although admittedly not all that often). I'm glad I've had to do them, though and can do them.

Yep.

Last week the data chip was missing in the 430. Back to the airways with VORs!

Man was I rusty -- at first!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

If you can fit it in and it makes sense then sure. But this is why the PP is a license (sorry Ed) to learn. As much as we would like to know everything to do so would be to make the PP course last for years or decades.

Note that so far, my entire list could be covered in an hour of ground, and zero flight. I also have a list like Dan's that would ideally be covered in the course of regular training. As in, rather than cancel on this mucky day, let's go fly in it.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Not really. The applicant is not required to demonstrate a turning stall -- only that he/she must be able to do so within the angle of bank.

So, every CFI should already be teaching their students how to do it, because it's in the PTS, right?

I should have specified Class G, but given the minimum ceiling...

The problem with filing is you have to get up above 1500' to even talk to approach or center around here, which defeats the purpose (that coupled with MSA/MEA requirements).

Whoops, I didn't see the 1000' ceiling the first time. So you're flying at 500' AGL in 1-2 mile vis? IMHO, even more nuts! And I still think the lesson can be accomplished on a cross country in 3-mile vis (high or no ceiling) up in class E, and be much safer at the same time, especially if IFR.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Whoops, I didn't see the 1000' ceiling the first time. So you're flying at 500' AGL in 1-2 mile vis? IMHO, even more nuts!

In Class G it is one mile and CLEAR OF CLOUDS. He could go clear up to the ceiling if he wishes. I wouldn't get out of the pattern though, if it were me.

 

[ScottM]

Note that so far, my entire list could be covered in an hour of ground, and zero flight. .

Perhaps. But just covering it would be useless unless you were also sure that the student UNDERSTOOD it. For them to gain mastery of the subject material you would have to spend more than an hour. Learning theory states that it takes repetition before the knowledge is set into long term memory. Even the most basic of lessons repeat the knowledge objective three times and the hope is that a student will get several more shots at absorbing the material through study, quizes, and other performance measuring techniques. I know you know this as you were an driving instructor. I also know that you know that people learn at different rates. So what may take you an hour to present once may not do much unless there is follow through. I am not saying do nto bother but I am also saying that the PP course cannot become the Complete Course on all Thing Aeronatutical either. There is a happy medium.

 

[gprellwitz]

In Class E it is one mile and CLEAR OF CLOUDS. He could go clear up to the ceiling if he wishes. I wouldn't get out of the pattern though, if it were me.

I agree about not getting out of the pattern, but could you please provide a cite for these ceiling limits in Class E (other than for helicopters)? I don't recall having seen them before.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I agree about not getting out of the pattern, but could you please provide a cite for these ceiling limits in Class E (other than for helicopters)? I don't recall having seen them before.

Greg means Class G. And he's right, once that's corrected. ;-)

Of course, in 1-mi vis it gets very hard to tell when you're starting to enter a cloud. Usually the first clue that you have that you're borderline is the horizon starts to disappear, and in 1-mi vis you won't have that horizon in the first place.