A thick coating of dust.
That’s what I found on log book #1. Can’t think when I last looked at it. It is a thick, old fashioned ‘issue’ with many things not included in todays audit friendly model. Nevertheless, I note the handwriting immaculate, and each entry carefully made and stamped as ‘kosher’ by who ever was conducting my training at the time. Lovely thing, carefully kept and lest I run into some unscheduled bother, an artefact. So much for history……
I went looking for the thing because this current ‘state of 61 confusion’ and the words of Pilkington and the aircraft being used to train future commercial pilots and the instructors who are training them; set off a chain reaction. Pub 45 had a lot to do with it. I still have a copy. It is, to my mind, an almost ‘perfect’ guide to training pilots – BUT - it depended on the ‘instructor’ pilot being fully competent and correctly trained. It was written by pilots who actually trained instructors – practically, thoroughly and competently.
The perennial problem instructor pilots face (apart from poverty and building hours) is the ‘unexpected’. The ‘unexpected’ is a rarity (or was) – but it can and does happen. For example a routine approach to stall and recovery (wing drop included) was not considered a ‘complex’ – pre first solo manoeuvre. It was mandatory. But, if things got a little out of shape, from the right seat, the instructor could, would and did simply take over, sort out the mess and – importantly – readdress the ‘stuff up’ - there and then – in flight – with a debrief to follow. Would the lesson be repeated?– Oh, you betcha as often as required – until it was understood and could be competently demonstrated.
From #1 book I note that I spent an enjoyable couple of hours (as notated) in steep turns, both on instruments and off; followed by approach to stall, followed by stalls – power off/ on – flap and clean – followed by incipient spins. I noted then, not for me. Chandelles, wing over, Cuban eights etc. were not for me. Fighter pilots do aerobatics – me; I like to deliver a load and the complexity of multi engine aircraft. You know since my first love affair with a twin Comm (PA 30)– I’ve never flown a single engine aircraft, nor had the desire to do so. Now I too digress (old age etc.)
That which kicked off this ramble is a three pronged (trident?) which needs to be delivered, with as much force as can be mustered into the heart of the of the CASA ‘safety beast’. Why? Well ‘safe flying’ has almost been written out of the script. ‘Things’ like Foxbats and Bristells may well suit the amateur happy to toddle about for an hour or so, every second Sunday arvo. No quarrel. They may be perfect for a Cocky to nip into town or fly over the property – No quarrel. They may even be, to those so minded, a handy runabout for a weekend sojourn – no quarrel (provided patience against a 10 knot wind is within ambit). But how can an ‘aircraft type’ with a seriously touchy Centre of Gravity’ (CoG) and somewhat whimsical Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC) and almost zero flight envelope ‘testing’ for certification be considered as ‘acceptable’ for training future ‘commercial’ quality pilots. Sure they tick all the Part 61 boxes –
I shall tell you a tale. One dark and stormy (it was a bugger) it was the ‘other chap’s’ sector. We had managed, despite my subtle hints (MCO waffle), to accumulate a fairly impressive amount of ice – the real thing. Even so, the gods nodded and we became visual -- field and lights – at a very handy level. Good enough for an easy visual, downwind leg – to landing - nearly. (Speed and height not conducive to tis luxury). Shoud be a walk in the park right? Wrong. Old mate had the thing going too fast, too steep (and just a little high) – so; modification indicated. No. It was, I must say, ‘difficult’ to sit through this; but then, you know how it is. There was some fairly serious power setting changes, speed came off a lot quicker than it would normally (hint) then, on the ragged edge of a stable approach, the bank angle went to around the 30˚ mark, showing signs of increasing to make the base turn. Small bleep from the stall warning - “Taking over” damn right. I pedalled the thing around, stabilised speed and height and built enough distance in to ensure no more than the Rate 1 turns which were needed to fly a sedate, stabilised, ‘book’ visual approach were a reality…
We landed, nothing was said as we watched 2” (50 mm) of clear ice sliding slowly off the wings etc. Later, (after beer #3) I answered the questions; with questions. (i) By how much did the ice increase our gross weight? (ii) By how much does a 30˚ bank turn increase our stall speed; (iii) By how much does a 40˚ bank turn increase our stall speed? Blank look was the stern reply. “Ok” says I (iv) had we stalled turning final, had we enough height to regain control?
I spent about six hours the next day explaining ‘basic’ aerodynamics to a fully qualified, CASA approved, commercial pilot, graduate of an approved course. In the end, and this kid is no dunce; we spent two days on the backboard, while I walked him through that which should have taught – and was not. He bought dinner a little later (and drink) – he looked at me, raised his glass and uttered the immortal words – “Fark me”. My response – “Cheers mate”.
No more needed saying.
There’s nothing wrong with our young folk – but the system for training ‘em – with ticks in boxes? Thank the gods for automation and computer skills is all I will say further. But one day – one time – etc…..
I agree ‘K’ – ‘tis a most excellent keyboard; and yes please – thurst’y wurk this writing lark. (Bless it).
That’s what I found on log book #1. Can’t think when I last looked at it. It is a thick, old fashioned ‘issue’ with many things not included in todays audit friendly model. Nevertheless, I note the handwriting immaculate, and each entry carefully made and stamped as ‘kosher’ by who ever was conducting my training at the time. Lovely thing, carefully kept and lest I run into some unscheduled bother, an artefact. So much for history……
I went looking for the thing because this current ‘state of 61 confusion’ and the words of Pilkington and the aircraft being used to train future commercial pilots and the instructors who are training them; set off a chain reaction. Pub 45 had a lot to do with it. I still have a copy. It is, to my mind, an almost ‘perfect’ guide to training pilots – BUT - it depended on the ‘instructor’ pilot being fully competent and correctly trained. It was written by pilots who actually trained instructors – practically, thoroughly and competently.
The perennial problem instructor pilots face (apart from poverty and building hours) is the ‘unexpected’. The ‘unexpected’ is a rarity (or was) – but it can and does happen. For example a routine approach to stall and recovery (wing drop included) was not considered a ‘complex’ – pre first solo manoeuvre. It was mandatory. But, if things got a little out of shape, from the right seat, the instructor could, would and did simply take over, sort out the mess and – importantly – readdress the ‘stuff up’ - there and then – in flight – with a debrief to follow. Would the lesson be repeated?– Oh, you betcha as often as required – until it was understood and could be competently demonstrated.
From #1 book I note that I spent an enjoyable couple of hours (as notated) in steep turns, both on instruments and off; followed by approach to stall, followed by stalls – power off/ on – flap and clean – followed by incipient spins. I noted then, not for me. Chandelles, wing over, Cuban eights etc. were not for me. Fighter pilots do aerobatics – me; I like to deliver a load and the complexity of multi engine aircraft. You know since my first love affair with a twin Comm (PA 30)– I’ve never flown a single engine aircraft, nor had the desire to do so. Now I too digress (old age etc.)
That which kicked off this ramble is a three pronged (trident?) which needs to be delivered, with as much force as can be mustered into the heart of the of the CASA ‘safety beast’. Why? Well ‘safe flying’ has almost been written out of the script. ‘Things’ like Foxbats and Bristells may well suit the amateur happy to toddle about for an hour or so, every second Sunday arvo. No quarrel. They may be perfect for a Cocky to nip into town or fly over the property – No quarrel. They may even be, to those so minded, a handy runabout for a weekend sojourn – no quarrel (provided patience against a 10 knot wind is within ambit). But how can an ‘aircraft type’ with a seriously touchy Centre of Gravity’ (CoG) and somewhat whimsical Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC) and almost zero flight envelope ‘testing’ for certification be considered as ‘acceptable’ for training future ‘commercial’ quality pilots. Sure they tick all the Part 61 boxes –
I shall tell you a tale. One dark and stormy (it was a bugger) it was the ‘other chap’s’ sector. We had managed, despite my subtle hints (MCO waffle), to accumulate a fairly impressive amount of ice – the real thing. Even so, the gods nodded and we became visual -- field and lights – at a very handy level. Good enough for an easy visual, downwind leg – to landing - nearly. (Speed and height not conducive to tis luxury). Shoud be a walk in the park right? Wrong. Old mate had the thing going too fast, too steep (and just a little high) – so; modification indicated. No. It was, I must say, ‘difficult’ to sit through this; but then, you know how it is. There was some fairly serious power setting changes, speed came off a lot quicker than it would normally (hint) then, on the ragged edge of a stable approach, the bank angle went to around the 30˚ mark, showing signs of increasing to make the base turn. Small bleep from the stall warning - “Taking over” damn right. I pedalled the thing around, stabilised speed and height and built enough distance in to ensure no more than the Rate 1 turns which were needed to fly a sedate, stabilised, ‘book’ visual approach were a reality…
We landed, nothing was said as we watched 2” (50 mm) of clear ice sliding slowly off the wings etc. Later, (after beer #3) I answered the questions; with questions. (i) By how much did the ice increase our gross weight? (ii) By how much does a 30˚ bank turn increase our stall speed; (iii) By how much does a 40˚ bank turn increase our stall speed? Blank look was the stern reply. “Ok” says I (iv) had we stalled turning final, had we enough height to regain control?
I spent about six hours the next day explaining ‘basic’ aerodynamics to a fully qualified, CASA approved, commercial pilot, graduate of an approved course. In the end, and this kid is no dunce; we spent two days on the backboard, while I walked him through that which should have taught – and was not. He bought dinner a little later (and drink) – he looked at me, raised his glass and uttered the immortal words – “Fark me”. My response – “Cheers mate”.
No more needed saying.
There’s nothing wrong with our young folk – but the system for training ‘em – with ticks in boxes? Thank the gods for automation and computer skills is all I will say further. But one day – one time – etc…..
I agree ‘K’ – ‘tis a most excellent keyboard; and yes please – thurst’y wurk this writing lark. (Bless it).