take off briefing

[767]

How about a full breifing before engine start and a shorter take-off review holding at the line. You don't lose any time with the engines on sitting in the plane, and the review would be there if case anything changed and serves as a small reminder.

My breifings:
It will be a normal take-off off of runway 32 with a crosswind from the right, rotate at 55 climb out at 74. Right hand circuit is in effect at 1500ft (or depart the circuit to the south-west with enroute climb at 85 to 2400ft (or w/e)). In the event of a problem affecting flight safety while on the runway, I will retard the throttle, apply max brake and reject. In the case of an engine failure on t/o I will establish best glide and choose a suitable landing site ahead.

Think that covers everything. The review would be the first part all over again except this time you re-evaluate the situation and state any changes to your original plan.

My $0.02

Once again, that is why I like the briefing before starting the engine.

I like your briefing for the normal procedures. However, my opinion is a little different with regards to emergency procedures. If the pilot is experienced, the breifing for emergency procedures should be as short as " standard calls, standard procedures". However, if its a student pilot, then I think that the student should be prepared to deal with any kind of emergency ever imagined. In order to be prepared, they should review most of the emergencies as stated in my takeoff breifing in the previous post.

[MichaelP]

I grew up without any takeoff safety briefings at all. Just: "Don't turn back!".

I agree to prime the rabbit brain against the turning back and so a short pretakeoff brief is an asset to safety.

A looooonnnnnggg pretakeoff safety brief is not an aid to safety at all!
In fact I'd argue that you can create so much confusion in the brain of a student pilot that he/she forgets to fly the aeroplane!

In the end the takeoff safety brief is there to remind us to fly the aeroplane and FLYING THE AEROPLANE should not be confused by a load of gobbledeegoop!

Why do people want to make life so complicated??????

For all this, I see bad airmanship, and lack of care for the aeroplane.... Are you teaching long pretakeoff briefs at the expense of good piloting skills?
There's only so much a student can absorb.

Reading some of the above, is it instructors preparing for what they think they might have to do when they get the airline jobs?
I doubt any airline has as complicated a set of procedures as what has been implied on this thread.
In any case the airlines use simulators to practice their emergencies and tone the responses.

One former 747 pilot I know is shocked by what he sees student pilots do in this regard.
He has an excellent suggestion, stall practice at low level among other things, engine failures on takeoff and after takeoff, all the things we prepare for... We can do this at our school with the level 5 FTD (simulator).
With the new sims these scary moments can be practiced for 'real'.

[Shiny Side Up]

For all this, I see bad airmanship, and lack of care for the aeroplane.... Are you teaching long pretakeoff briefs at the expense of good piloting skills?
There's only so much a student can absorb.

I would say that this is probably the root source of a lot of "bad airmanship" mistakes made by a lot of students. Many new instructors I find drill into their students tons of lengthy procedures to follow which only serve to pull the student pilot away from their main job - flying the airplane. These procedures have the bad effect of taking up a chunk of the student's attention and drawing it inside the plane. As a result the student pilot has a poor picture of their situational awareness.

When you see that guy doing his run up in the way, chances are he doesn't even know you're there - he's too wound up in going through whatever procedures have been ingrained in him. Often procedures taught leave no room for flexibility as well in the student's mind - the thought never occurs to them that they could move and then continue their checklist.

It should be noted too here that people willingly submit to lengthy procedures if they believe that there is some sort of mystical security that the procedure provides. Many of the uninitiated as well believe that lengthy and complicated procedure is just something necessary in the pilot world. You'd be suprised on what one can get people to believe as necessary in their procedure - there are places out there where part of the checklist includes a prayer - all part of procedure.

Of note, my favorite take off briefing I ever heard was when a fellow's mike had stuck and he was unaware that others were listening in on him going through his checklist with his passenger. He got to the part where it says "take off briefing" and says: "hmm, take off briefing... Well I guess if the engine fails in the roll I'm going to throttle off and stop, and if it quits just after we get into the air we're both going to bend over and kiss our asses goodbye!"

[767]

There's only so much a student can absorb.

I always wonder, which category has a higer rate of accidents when you compare private pilots to commercial pilots..?

[MichaelP]

You make the point about a briefing before you start the engine.
This is a requirement for every training flight and should be done every time, in the school, prior to walking out to the aeroplane.

Then there is the checklist.
The checklist exists as a means of avoiding a confused brain missing a vital action.
We are supposed to use the checklist.

Immediately before we commit any action in an aeroplane we must anticipate the result of that action.
The pre takeoff briefing applies to what we need to do in case the engine fails at certain points in the takeoff. It is a way to prime for that instance.
Considering anything beyond the immediate takeoff is a distraction from the immediate task.

Anticipation of the whole flight is primed through proper flight planning procedures on the ground.
But we must not have anything in our brains other than the immediate task during the takeoff.

Once in cruising flight we can consider the progress of the flight from A to B.
We can anticipate the approach and landing at the destination, or any deviation from the plan during this relatively relaxed portion of a flight.

Arriving to land, once again anything superfluous should go out the window and the concentration be wholey on the task at hand; landing the aeroplane.

I disagree that a long pretakeoff briefing in the aeroplane is positive towards safety. I think you put an overload of information into the student's brain that reduces his/her ability to concentrate on the takeoff and is therefore a distraction that is counter to safety.

[Old Dog Flying]

In keeping with the more experienced instructors here...
Keep
It
Simple
Stupid
And fly the bloody aircraft until it stops moving.

The looooooong do nothing for flight safety pre-takeoff briefing seems to fit in with 767s other posts...bullshit.

Some years ago at Blunder Bay, one school insisted on flying the circuit pattern as depicted in the CFS...very wide and a 2 mile final. We tried all types of things to get them to fly a more normal circuit but the response was always the same..."We have to teach it like this because they might fly for the airlines some day!"...

[polar one]

Well , old dog, you pretty much beat me to it.
Seems that our instructors dont emphasize that different aircraft require different briefings, if that is in fact, what they are called. In a single pilot airplane, exactly who are you briefing?
It also seems that some of the instructor types here want to fly a simple training plane as if it was a heavy ...
There has been some good advice. KISS, and make it appropriate...."rotate speed...in a 152.????..give your head a shake and go get a better paying job at Tims...your students will benefit from your choice.
I see the results of instructors like this....one of the biggest problems we see with new pilots is that they are so busy yelling out calls, setting power and what not on the take off roll that they are not flying the plane...but darned if they dont have all their briefings and SOP's down pat.

[Doc]

I find this entire thread frightening. Little wonder pilots have lost their ability to think on their feet. Most of what I've read is nothing more than training monkeys to regurgitate copious amounts of bull shit. These "briefings" are little more than ritualistic chants.
If 767 had his way, he'd have a student recite the pages of "From the Ground Up" in it's entirety as a precursor to every flight.
Rotate speed in a 152/172? Are you people for real?

[Ray-Ban]

767, may I ask how many hours you have, plus instructing hours??

I can't sit back and read what your teaching your students. Your teachings are a recipe for disaster. Just teach your students to fly the plane if something happens.

Who taught you this way of briefing/teaching a student? Go play on a computer simulator for awhile and give yourself and engine failure on take off. Give yourself an honest debrief and ask yourself what exactly went on in your mind. I could bet my next pay check that all that BS you teach, you never made reference too.

Engine failure immediately after takeoff

“I will do the following”:

1. AIRSPEED – 65 KIAS (FLAPS UP), 60 KIAS (FLAPS DOWN)
2. LAND STRAIGHT AHEAD- NO TURNS MORE THAN 30 DEG IN DIRECTION TO AVOID OBSTACLES. WILL NOT TURN BACK.
3. IF TIME PERMITS, OPEN THE CHECKLIST. (WON’T HAPPEN THOUGH!!)

Why commit #3 to memory then. Land the F#@kin' plane!!!

Re-evaluate you teaching ways.

[AuxBatOn]

Well , old dog, you pretty much beat me to it.
There has been some good advice. KISS, and make it appropriate...."rotate speed...in a 152.????..give your head a shake and go get a better paying job at Tims...your students will benefit from your choice.

It's not necessarely for the airplane they fly now, however it is a good habbit to take, since not too far down the road, CPLs will fly aircraft that have different rotation speed depending on the weight. Maybe you don't brief your rotate speed, but I calculate mine before every take off (and calculate my landing speed before every landing), depending on what's hanging off the wingtips and belly, just so I don't get into assumptions for things I don't have to.

Little wonder pilots have lost their ability to think on their feet. Most of what I've read is nothing more than training monkeys to regurgitate copious amounts of bull shit. These "briefings" are little more than ritualistic chants.

I don't believe that thinking on your feet, as you put it, is ideal in that busy phase of the flight. You can't really count on your experience eighter... How many engine failures (on a single engine it is) after take off did you get in your flying career?

Having a plan ahead of time will buy you time when somethings happens. Why not have one done on the ground, where you're not busy thinking about 1000 times when you can? In my experience, having a great flight starts on the ground, during the planning phase. Granted your longer term plan will change, it still brings up considerations that you may not think of in flight. However, the pre-take off brief should stand, as it is done right before take off, with all the information you need and this information is not likely to change. Do everything you can on the ground at 1G, while your brain is not thinking about flying the plane.

Who are you briefing in a single pilot airplane? Yourself. I talk at least, if not more when there is no one in my backseat, talking myself through everything I do. It doesn't cost anything and, for me anyways, helps me remember what's next as it keeps my brain thinking about what's happenning, instead of focusing on only 1 task. When do you know if someone becomes overtasked? He stops talking.

Now, should you take 1 hour to brief your take off? Absolutely not. Keep it to the essentials: until the point you can actually turn back and land with the engine out.

Edit: Everything in italic added

[scopiton]

Rotate speed in a 152/172? Are you people for real?

recently I've been asked about V2...

[albertdesalvo]

Rotate speed in a 152/172? Are you people for real?

They forgot "phasers on stun".

[Doc]

Rotate speed in a 152/172? Are you people for real?

recently I've been asked about V2...

Not by anyone with half a brain.

[iflyforpie]

I don't believe that thinking on your feet, as you put it, is ideal in that busy phase of the flight. You can't really count on your experience eighter... How many engine failures (on a single engine it is) after take off did you get in your flying career?

I had one. Turned around and landed the thing. Not my brightest point because I couldn't remember my altitude when I turned around; I suppose all's well that ends well.

From this experience I set a conservative hard altitude from where I stay straight ahead regardless if I think I could make it or not. I don't brief myself, just make a mental note. Same for accelerate go or accelerate stop. Your actions in case of engine failure on takeoff (single or multi) should be automatic since there is no time for checklists or looking in the cockpit. Better to crash under control and do nothing than to stall or crash into less desirable terrain trying to keep the thing airborne or securing the engine.

[MichaelP]

If cable breaks count, I've had several!
A cable break is an occasional problem, and then there are 'simulated' cable breaks when the instructor pulls the yellow knob and you'd better get the nose down right now!
I'm writing about winch launches for gliders.

I've had two engine failures after takeoff, fortunately at a height I could spend some time to sort them out.
One was when a crankshaft broke and so the mags went off immediately, the nose pointed up higher and then pushed over with the prop stopping at around 40 knots and much less than a G.
I wanted the engine to stay on the front of the aeroplane.

The second one was in a Cherokee out of Langley when a valve cam follower broke up doing damage inside the O-320...
I still had partial power and returned I was at 2,500 feet when it went bang.

Neither was a big deal at all... All in a days work.

[Hedley]

The so-called "impossible turn" back to the runway in a
single, after engine failure after takeoff, is quite aerodynamically
possible to perform. I have demonstrated it, for real, from 400
feet, many times.

However, since most people have no clue how to perform
it, even though the airframe is capable of the maneuver,
it is probably not a good idea to try to teach yourself
how to do it, in the heat of the moment.

Would you teach yourself IFR flying, first time you
encounter a cloud? I hope not.

[iflyforpie]

I was demonstrated and required to perform the maneuver from 400 feet as well during my EMT. It's what probably saved my bacon, but also encouraged me to do it in the first place. According to the glider pilots that witnessed it, I was at rope break height when the engine quit (I think I was a bit higher).

[MichaelP]

is quite aerodynamically possible to perform.

Agreed, and a steep turn turn around loses less height than a shallow banked turn.

But, as far as student pilots are concerned this is one exercise to be avoided, and for them it should not be suggested. It takes a level of skill not yet acquired.

Most times the pilot is in a turn at 400 to 500 feet AGL unless a straight out departure is required.
So a 180 degree turn around is less necessary than perhaps a 120 degree turn.

There also the surprise factor.

With CPL students, especially doing a pre CPL flight test flight, I will sometimes give them an engine failure after takeoff.
For most people this comes as a shock 'isn't that reserved for PPL training?'.
So there we are with the airspeed falling with the nose still in the climb attitude and the student does not react... Many say: "What did you do that for?" as precious speed falls.

Learning to fly gliders on a winch launch certainly tones up your 'engine failure on takeoff' reactions!

[767]

is quite aerodynamically possible to perform.

With CPL students, especially doing a pre CPL flight test flight, I will sometimes give them an engine failure after takeoff.
For most people this comes as a shock 'isn't that reserved for PPL training?'.

I would love you to try that out with my ppl students.

[MichaelP]

I would love you to try that out with my ppl students.

You're supposed to do practice EFATOs with your PPL students before they solo!

If you are implying that I was implying that I teach CPLs to turn back on an EFATO then you misinterpret my post.
How did you pass your exams if this is so?

No.

I simply give the CPL student a practice EFATO to see whether the PPL lessons have stuck.
Most often they sit there with the speed bleeding off and usually they ask me why I closed the throttle even though I usually shout "engine failure"..
What I want to see is the nose go down to the glide attitude to preserve the energy we have, and then the student make a decision as to where we go from there.

[767]

I would love you to try that out with my ppl students.

You're supposed to do practice EFATOs with your PPL students before they solo!

If you are implying that I was implying that I teach CPLs to turn back on an EFATO then you misinterpret my post.
How did you pass your exams if this is so?

No.

I simply give the CPL student a practice EFATO to see whether the PPL lessons have stuck.
Most often they sit there with the speed bleeding off and usually they ask me why I closed the throttle even though I usually shout "engine failure"..
What I want to see is the nose go down to the glide attitude to preserve the energy we have, and then the student make a decision as to where we go from there.

Umm.. What else have i been doing all this time? If you go back to the t/o briefing i posted, you will see in the emergency procedures that the student has to breif themselves about EFATO. The procedure you mentioned is not any different from what i expect from the student. For some reason people here think that i overload the student beyond whats required.

[AuxBatOn]

767, a lot of information in your take off brief could easily be included in the pre-flight briefing, before you step out of the school. The take off brief should be limited to the take off (as the name implies). For me, take off stops when I can come back to the field for a landing should my engine quit. In any other case, I can climb and I have sufficient time to asses the situation. Too much info for the Pre-Take Off brief does just the opposite. It overloads the brain with information and you don't remember 1/2 of it when you actually need it. You need to have some obvious mental points where different different actions will be done in the case of an emergency.

In mine, I remember 3 numbers : 75 kts, rotation speed and 300 kts. All 3 are significant in the sense that my actions will differ depending on the type of emergency (ie: below 75 kts abort for everything but avionics and skid failure, anything above 75 kts but below rotation I will abort only for major emergencies (Thrust, Fire, Electrical, Hydraulics), above rotation speed but below 300 kts, I will eject for any loss of thrust to the point I can't maintain level flight and anything higher than 300 kts, I'll do a 180 to come back or climb and asses if it's not engine related).

[Shiny Side Up]

The so-called "impossible turn" back to the runway in a
single, after engine failure after takeoff, is quite aerodynamically
possible to perform. I have demonstrated it, for real, from 400
feet, many times.

Agreed, and a steep turn turn around loses less height than a shallow banked turn.

But, as far as student pilots are concerned this is one exercise to be avoided, and for them it should not be suggested. It takes a level of skill not yet acquired.

Most times the pilot is in a turn at 400 to 500 feet AGL unless a straight out departure is required.
So a 180 degree turn around is less necessary than perhaps a 120 degree turn.

I have to add the caveat to this before I get the rash of fools comming to tell me that I'm wrong from what they read on avcanada...

Is the turn back to the runway possible? Yes. In all circumstances? No. The turn back while not impossible, for most people's skill level its extrordinairily improbable - somewhere probably around the odds of six-hundred and fifty-three million to one.

Here's a list of circumstances which might preclude a turn back. While airplanes are aerodynamically capable, your initial climb performance might deter you as its what determines how far away your 400' is away from the end of the runway. Load up the Cessna and give this a go - or don't, you'll scare the hell out of those poor souls in the back seat. runway length and field elevation comes into play too, as does wind. Remember if you got a fair bit of cross wind, that shortens your glide distance - mind you it can be a help if you have a lot of headwind. Some airplanes glide somewhere between anvils and pianos too - try this with the Arrow - try to remember to get your gear down and locked too. Now your average pilot is going to have all this running through their mind in that bit of stunned silence they'll have which of course eats up a bit of crucial time and space decreasing their odds with each microsecond.

So to sum up, unless your certain of the odds - which means your skill and reaction time are close to Hedleys (which probably 95% of you aren't), or maybe MichaelP's (sorry MP, Hed's probably got an edge on you) the conditions are right with all of the above, then don't give it a try. Unless of course straight ahead means ditching or hitting a granite face.

[polar one]

aux bat wrote

Maybe you don't brief your rotate speed, but I calculate mine before every take off (and calculate my landing speed before every landing), depending on what's hanging off the wingtips and belly, just so I don't get into assumptions for things I don't have to

The sense I get is you are not flying a 152. Am I right? The point I was trying to make was that a rotate speed for a 152 is inappropriate, and the student who understands how they actually lift off would understand that. On many aircraft, a rotation speed is critical as the aircraft will rotate behind the curve if done early, and wont fly if it is not done..that is appropriate. It is not about assumptions. It is about the different characteristics of the aircraft and teaching a 152 as a aircraft that requires this instills in the students mind anumber that does not make sense and ultimately leads them to ignore the importance of calculating a number when it is necessary.

767, in is own words, is a wannabe airline pilot, and he seems to think that the way to achieve that is to teach all is students as if they too, would aspire in the same direction.

As a check pilot over the last few years, I have had to deal with some of this type of "product". Ultimately good pilots just completely trained wrong...lacking in the basic flying skills but super proficeint in drills, SOPs, etc..

Lastly you had mentioned it is a good idea for the future. What the student should know is that there may be a time when they will need to calculate reference speeds, and to be aware of it in the future, but that it does not apply to a 152.

To bloody much fantasy on instructors parts, to , how did 767 put it, make their job more fun.

[MichaelP]

I'm not into any sort of urinating contest with anyone
I've made more than a few mistakes in my life!
I think I am fortunate for the training I got, my instructors were the same ilk as Barney's, ex RAF Spitfire through Vampire pilots.
The Empire Training Scheme as mentioned on another thread was one in which immature instructors taught a mass of unknowing pilots to fly. Some were washed out, some got hurt, some died, and the survivors went to war.
But the results of all this experience were the attitudes and checks I learned which have enabled me to survive my mistakes to this day... plus a bit of luck of course

None of us start very experienced.
But those of us who survive to this day after many years of flying have learned a thing or two.
We still fly the same little aeroplanes that respond to the same treatment as any training aeroplane you can name throughout history.
The WW1 Sopwith Pup had non-differential ailerons and an uncertain engine. I usually turned it off and deadsticked the aeroplane, with only a 40 hour TBO you had to preserve it! But the Pup behaved like a Cessna 152, nose up nose down, roll left, roll right...
The Harvard is a lumbering aeroplane, give me a Chipmunk any day! It's owner was surprised when I whizzed it around in a steep turn! Why? A steep turn is a steep turn, an aeroplane is an aeroplane.

Am I bragging, No. What I am writing here is that anyone trained in a Cessna 150 like I was is able to attain a level of skill to enable them to fly any of these aircraft.
I learned in the Cessna 150, but I was taught to fly aeroplanes.

The short of it, there are old rules that when adhered to keep people safe. I call them AVIATOR skills.
The aviator knows his/her aeroplane, can do some maintenance on it, looks after it, never stresses anything by inattention (such as a Cesssna 172 noseleg), flies it to the best ability he/she can develop, and aims towards perfection in flight.
The aviator flies the aeroplane as it should be flown and never treats it as something different.
Despite its similarity a Tomahawk is not the same as a Boeing 727.

Here's what I wrote and drew with respect to the forced landing in the circuit (2004):

Engine Failure In The Circuit

When you are operating from any airfield, always have a plan for the departure, where will I go if the engine stops at….? Look at the departure path and see which way you might go.

When you fly into a strange aerodrome, look at its surroundings and note possible landing places.

From the crosswind leg, it might be practical to land downwind on the runway.

On downwind you should be able to make the runway.

Control your height on base and finals, aim 1/3 the way into the runway and you won’t be embarrassed by an engine failure here.

If traffic means you have to extend your circuit, keep your height until you know you can get in.

If the engine fails during takeoff and the cause is not found but it suddenly picks up again, it may be safer to land straight ahead in any case.