SOP to land with 10 degrees of flaps in 172?

[Cat Driver]

Have them read this thread.

I am truly gobsmacked that any group of pilots could possibly be flying tail wheel airplanes and not have a clue how to fly them.

Like I previously said it is unsafe not to allow wheel landings how is it even possible a whole group could be so ignorant about tail wheel flying??

Tell whoever made that rule to read this and maybe we can help them out.

Jeses I can't believe this.

[Big Pistons Forever]

This thread is about FTU's landing C 172's with 10 deg of flap. Why are we discussing an operation that is not an FTU, not doing wheel landings

[Adam Oke]

This thread is about FTU's landing C 172's with 10 deg of flap. Why are we discussing an operation that is not an FTU, not doing wheel landings

I made the comparison that it is just as silly to ban wheel landings as to bar students from operating the flaps to their full capacity. These silly rules go hand in hand. Introducing a rule simply due to the fact that they can not safely land the aircraft in that particular configuration, under normal circumstances, is an unacceptable practice.

I wholeheartedly feel that if one believes that their student can not safely land under normal configurations, then they are not safe for solo. IMO, the training should continue until the student can safely operate the aircraft in all configurations, not only for competency sake, but also in the event of failures. I have had flap motor failures, run-away flaps to full flap, a flap handle snap off in my hand with full flaps deployed, and I have also had a tail wheel snap off at the leaf spring. These are all very real scenarios that require a pilot to be able to land "normally" with these types of failures.

Creating SOP's to only use 10 degrees of flaps and SOPs for wheel landings only is nonsense.

[photofly]

I made the comparison that it is just as silly to ban wheel landings as to bar students from operating the flaps to their full capacity.

...

Creating SOP's to only use 10 degrees of flaps ... is nonsense.

There is nowhere in this thread a statement that any flying students, anywhere in Canada, are barred or in any way restricted from operating their flaps to their full extension. A few people need to take a chill pill and read what was actually written, rather than what they think (hope?) was written so they can rail against it.

[Adam Oke]

I made the comparison that it is just as silly to ban wheel landings as to bar students from operating the flaps to their full capacity.

...

Creating SOP's to only use 10 degrees of flaps ... is nonsense.

There is nowhere in this thread a statement that any flying students, anywhere in Canada, are barred or in any way restricted from operating their flaps to their full extension. A few people need to take a chill pill and read what was actually written, rather than what they think (hope?) was written so they can rail against it.

Sorry for my incorrect phraseology; using the term bar vs creating a band-aid SOP solution (as explained by other posters, not me). My message still stands and has merit after reading why FTU's are implementing the "SOP". Don't create SOP's as band-aid solutions in lieu of training to operate the aircraft under all configuration. I would hope that FTU's aren't recommending students do normal landings at 10 degrees....I would hope they are recommending students practice in every configuration possible to practice what they have learned.

This 10 degree thing is news to me. I'm not sure who came up with that idea, but I have never run into anyone, let alone an FTU, tell me that putting out more flap risks smacking the nose wheel.

[crazyaviator]

One of the easiest aircraft to fly in the history of mankind and we cannot agree on flap settings ! Hmmm, Do the students who snap the NW off and flip her on its back get a passing "satisfactory" for their "attempt" in this snowflake, blameless, safe space, PC, leftist, no-fault new-age society?

[Adam Oke]

One of the easiest aircraft to fly in the history of mankind and we cannot agree on flap settings ! Hmmm, Do the students who snap the NW off and flip her on its back get a passing "satisfactory" for their "attempt" in this snowflake, blameless, safe space, PC, leftist, no-fault new-age society?

I think they are entitled to their "safe room" prior to de-brief at the very least!

[photofly]

creating a band-aid SOP solution (as explained by other posters, not me)

I don't think most of those other posters have any more accurate information about what or why, than you do.

Maybe CpnCrunch ("I see a number of flight schools here have an SOP that says to land their 172s with 10 degrees of flaps unless doing a short field landing. I'm curious what the reason is.") could elaborate on how many counts as a "number" of flight schools out of a total of 229 in Canada. One is also a number, after all - and maybe he or we could ask directly at that flight school or schools why, instead of guessing.

In other news today, two people gave their opinions on the inside leg measurement of the Emperor of China, and forty four others piled in to say that the first two were both entirely wrong, and things were better back in the days when the Emperor stuck to wearing a dress and pantyhose.

[CpnCrunch]

Maybe CpnCrunch ("I see a number of flight schools here have an SOP that says to land their 172s with 10 degrees of flaps unless doing a short field landing. I'm curious what the reason is.") could elaborate on how many counts as a "number" of flight schools out of a total of 229 in Canada.

2 schools (100% of the schools in a large city). Let's leave it at that. I'd hazard a guess that the SOP came from one school and was introduced from there to the other one, presumably to try to prevent broken nosewheels.

I know there are many annoying rules at FTUs, I just thought this one was more counterproductive than useful (albeit not a rule, just a "normal way we do things, but you can do a 20 degree flap landing after you show me a 10 degree one"). I don't see it written down anywhere at this school, but it is written down at the other school (again, not a rule, just in their written SOPs).

[Cat Driver]

This thread is about FTU's landing C 172's with 10 deg of flap. Why are we discussing an operation that is not an FTU, not doing wheel landings

If the FTU's trained their students properly then there would be less pilots not knowing how to fly properly.

You are now in a position to help correct this appalling situation, however seeing as you failed to connect the dots I do not have much hope anything will change through your efforts.

However I have done my best by trying to answer your question.

[photofly]

I will guess that it was introduced to the other school by a TC inspector who "suggested" it to the CFI.

[Cat Driver]

Big Pistons Forever




Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Last active: Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:17 pm

Looks like he is not going to respond to my post.

I really wanted him to explain why he made those comments.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Not sure where people are getting the idea that I am advocating 10 deg flaps as the norm for landing. I thought I was pretty clear with my post on page one of this thread.

Re teaching landings, my 02 cents

When I instructed in C 172's I taught new pilots to use 10 deg of flap for crosswind, 20 deg for normal landings and 30 deg for short field. The only time 40 deg was used ( if available) was for forced approaches.

20 flap Approach speed was 65 kts, + 0 and - 5. I found that an on speed approach required a proper flare, resulted in enough float so that the student could learn to manage the aircraft in the flare, yet the time in the flare wasn't so excessive that the student was likely to over control, so that in my mind maximum learning occurred.

[trey kule]

So, if I understand this in depth discussion on how to teach students to properly land about the easiest plane they will ever fly, the problem started when they were not taught properly, so nose wheels were being damaged at a higher rate than would be expected from students.

The solution was not to do remedial training of instructors to teach students better, but to do a work around by using a specific flap setting, because apparently higher flap settings were just to challanging. You have to wonder why Cessna even bothered with higher flap settings. Obviously a dangerous design flaw.

How about this....we add another, say 10 or 15 hours of dual to the ppl to teach real world, highly student motivated,training scenarios regarding the use of no to full flap landings. Make sure to say " good job". If the student doesn't damage a nose wheel.

They can learn about wing flaps after they get thrir CPL and are learning about cowl flaps, proper leaning, and how to use a GPS.

[Cat Driver]

How about this....we add another, say 10 or 15 hours of dual to the ppl to teach real worlld, highly student motivated,training scenarios regarding the use of no to full flap landings. Make sure to say " good job". If the student doesn't damage a nose wheel.

How about ensuring the instructors are competent to properly teach flying?

Adding more time to the course will only mean that flight training will remain sub standard.

[CpnCrunch]

Not sure where people are getting the idea that I am advocating 10 deg flaps as the norm for landing. I thought I was pretty clear with my post on page one of this thread.

I think . just expects you to be able to fix all the problems in flight training.

Anyway, I doubt this came from TC. I'm not sure how ab initio PPLs are trained at either of these schools, but I'd hope that they make sure they can recover properly from a bounce. If you know how to do that, it should be a non-event.

[Cat Driver]

but I'd hope that they make sure they can recover properly from a bounce. If you know how to do that, it should be a non-event.

It is even more simple than that.

It boggles the mind that so many instructors can't even teach their students something as basic as flairing at the correct height above the surface and as speed decays assuming the landing attitude ( Which will insure the nose wheel can not contact the ground before the mains. (how much flaps are being used does not prevent you from selecting and maintaining the proper attitude).

One thing T.C. understands is inertia.

They have been stuck in the no change mode for decades, but they sure know how to cash their paychecks.....which are nothing more than a form of welfare for doing nothing.

When I think of how pathetic the T.C. flight training department is I always remember the top bureaucrat in Ottawa, I found him to be the most stupid individual I ever had the misfortune to have to deal with, but he was the final push I needed to sell my school and get out of flight training in Canada.

[CpnCrunch]

It boggles the mind that so many instructors can't even teach their students something as basic as flairing at the correct height above the surface and as speed decays assuming the landing attitude ( Which will insure the nose wheel can not contact the ground before the mains. (how much flaps are being used does not prevent you from selecting and maintaining the proper attitude).

I'm not sure it's that simple. Different loading (weight and CofG will affect the flare required. The only time I've bounced in recent years was when landing a 172 with a big guy in the back, as I wasn't used to it. (Easily recovered from).

[photofly]

It boggles the mind that so many instructors can't even teach their students something as basic as..

But how many is "so many"?

And how do you know?

[Cat Driver]

But how many is "so many"?

And how do you know?

Over the decades I have been involved in flight training I have observed many, many pilots at many airports performing controlled crashes they call landings.

Over the many decades I have been involved in flight training I have questioned many, many pilots I have been giving training to and asked them who taught them to land.....their answer was their instructor.

There you go I answered your question.

P.S.

Of course not all instructors are inept, the problem is how do the inept ones get licensed and how do they keep instructing?

[JasonE]

And I thought they landed themselves
"You drive it up!"
"You drive it down!"

[trey kule]

cat:

I was being facetious suggesting 10-15 hours more training to learn to land with flaps...i expect it should not take more than 8 extra hours

[Cat Driver]

Flight training will never improve until the quality of instruction is improved and that is determined by the regulator.

If the instructor is lacking in skills, experience and motivation adding more hours will only cost the students more money.

And speaking of money how can anyone expect quality instruction when the instructor is paid so poorly they can not live above the poverty line?

[PilotDAR]

Exactly.

Instructor skills and qualifications may be regulated by Transport Canada standard and oversight, but those are the minimums. It's up to the consumer (the student pilot) to demand more than the minimum. Who goes into a nice restaurant and expects the least - and we still tip the server. Why should learning to fly be any different? It is the student's responsibility, while arranging the training for such a life critical skill, to determine what (hopefully exceeding the TC minimums) they want to learn, and make sure it happens. Go and find the instructor with the skill and experience to guide you in making the most of the learning opportunity. And, pay them what they are worth! What's your life worth? Piloting is a life preservation skill, better to pay for the best training!

Read the flight manual, does it tell you that the 172 can be landed anywhere zero to 30/40 flaps? Yup! Then you want to be trained in those skills, and when to use them. Limiting ops in a 172 to 10 flap is akin to saying that the back seat may never be occupied. Yeah, loading up the back seat of a 172 introduces new factors the pilot must be aware of, and account for, but that is a trained skill. If your training and judgement of conditions tell you that 10 flap is suitable for the landing you intend, then do that. But, (strong crosswinds accepted) never be afraid of a full flap landing in a 172! If doing that causes concern (about banging the nosewheel) you need to unlearn a couple of bad habits with some advanced training. I worry that an aircraft provider with an SOP for 10 flap is not the right source of the needed training - they're just thinking about things wrong.....

[5x5]

This place makes me laugh sometimes - but only because I'm too socially insecure to cry.

Someone makes an anonymous comment about something they've heard related to training somewhere and suddenly any number of posters (including a group of frequent offenders) start forming a virtual lynch mob and the comment morphs to a condemnation of all flight training, all schools and all instructors. It seems that it has become de rigueur to bitch about the lack of quality in flight training in Canada.

As for SOPs - any business is entitled to implement any SOP they want for whatever reason they want. And in their minds, based on actual experience operating an FTU with all the nuances of maintenance, staffing, regulation, etc, what they are doing is completely reasonable. SOPs don't negate the delivery of training but simply reflect the recommendations/requirements of the owner/operator for normal operations. Anyone who gets all twisted out of shape and feels they know exactly how a school should operate and train pilots should open their own magnificent school that would provide their version of excellent flight training. Then, when everyone realizes how obviously great they are compared to the current crop of useless FTUs, they won't be able to beat the potential students off with sticks, they'll make oodles and oodles of $$$ and bask in the glow of admiration that will be expressed by all the previously negative posters here since finally, proper training will be available in Canada.