Sense Training

[loopa]

I'm just curious to know, for you instructors out there, at what point do you guys start sense training? Where you get students to try and put two and two together based on what their non visual senses are telling them about aircraft state?

I like to start incorporating this early on in the training, and I've found that it pays off. I've never tried doing this in later stages of training. Have any of you? And why later than earlier?

Thanks!

[aviator2010]

like common sense?

[FlaplessDork]

like common sense?

Good one!

[Big Pistons Forever]

I'm just curious to know, for you instructors out there, at what point do you guys start sense training? Where you get students to try and put two and two together based on what their non visual senses are telling them about aircraft state?

I like to start incorporating this early on in the training, and I've found that it pays off. I've never tried doing this in later stages of training. Have any of you? And why later than earlier?

Thanks!

From your post it si not clear what you mean by "sense training". I would suggest you provide some examples to help readers understand.

[FlaplessDork]

From your post it si not clear what you mean by "sense training". I would suggest you provide some examples to help readers understand.

I think he means using your other senses other than the visual to know what is going on with the airplane. "Flying by the seat of your pants" stuff. The stuff once you're in IMC, you shouldn't rely on.

reminds me of this:

[Pirate Pilot]

+1 to flap.....I was totally comfortable in the copilot seat coming out of 11,000 ft. waiting to break-out while the "captain" was fooling around with the yoke mounted VFR 496 paged to the artifical horizon which looked perfectly fine but the "steam gauge" in the dash had us @ 90 degrees left bank. I quickly corrected the attitude just as we broke out at the same time and made a few comments. The "senses" are quite difficult to feel. I can only assume that extreme aerobatic pilots, military pilots in jets, or gymnasts can feel these "senses" much better than the average guy.
I dunno.....

[aviator2010]

pirate WTF are you talking about

[Beefitarian]

pirate WTF are you talking about

Arrrr, she be vertigo matey. The captain didn't even know they were leaning 90 degrees to the left.

[loopa]

Hey guys, sorry I wasn't clear with what I meant. Flapless summarized what I was talking about. Do you guys use the good old "VPI (Visual cues, Physical cues, Instrument cues)" when introducing exercises? Specifically speaking Ex 5-9 ? Or do you do them later? I've found that incorporating instruments or so called "integrated" in the FIG is both very good and very bad. I've found this to be very dependent on student ability to pick things up and being able to do things effectively such as the straight and level scan, or turning scan, etc. What are your opinions?

Very good point Flapless about IMC flying.

Thanks!

[FlaplessDork]

Hey guys, sorry I wasn't clear with what I meant. Flapless summarized what I was talking about. Do you guys use the good old "VPI (Visual cues, Physical cues, Instrument cues)" when introducing exercises? Specifically speaking Ex 5-9 ? Or do you do them later? I've found that incorporating instruments or so called "integrated" in the FIG is both very good and very bad. I've found this to be very dependent on student ability to pick things up and being able to do things effectively such as the straight and level scan, or turning scan, etc. What are your opinions?

Very good point Flapless about IMC flying.

Thanks!

I've never heard of Sense Training, and I don't teach people to rely on their other senses other than visual. I will say its a waste of time to do it as a separate exercise. Takes less than 5 seconds to tell someone what they will feel during an exercise when first teaching new exercises. Don't over emphasize it and sacrifice the more important visual aspects.

Doing a familiarization on a new exercise I give the student something to look at, something to feel, or sometimes something to hear so they have something to relate to when I teach the exercise in a PGI the next day. It all depends on the exercise.

i.e. When Fam/Demo'ing Steep Turns I will have the student look at the horizon and ask them to memorize the attitude, then I will have them lift their leg and hold it up during my demonstration. The next day during the PGI I can relate those experiences on how to fly a steep turn, and using the leg exercise I lead into that experience to help explain Load Factor.

[loopa]

Doing a familiarization on a new exercise I give the student something to look at, something to feel, or sometimes something to hear so they have something to relate to when I teach the exercise in a PGI the next day. It all depends on the exercise.

Thanks for the response. I think you and I are kind of saying the same thing maybe?

Something to look at - Visual
Something they feel - Physical
Something they hear - Physical

At what point do you incorporate the instrument on the steep turn? Or do you at all?

Sense training is just what one of the class 1 instructor's calls it at work.

[FlaplessDork]

Thanks for the response. I think you and I are kind of saying the same thing maybe?

I think calling it Sense Training puts too much emphasis on it. VPI: Visual, Physical, Instruments in order of priority. Always start off with the visual. Avoid describing an exercise by the physical aspect first. Too often I hear phrases like, "Pull back on the control column" when describing the flare for example. If thats all you're saying to the student where do you think their mind is focusing on? They are thinking about forces control column, when they should have their eyes and mind outside to analyze their speed and the rate of descent. They need to determine the rate of pitch and power to reach the proper attitude so the wing is no longer flying at touchdown at minimal descent rate. When someone tells you to pull on the control column, it raises another question. How hard do I pull back, and how far? You can see how the visual aspect of this exercise is the priority.

It goes back to the foundation of all flight exercises, Attitudes & Movements. When training new instructors I would spend hours with them to properly phrase how they describe Attitudes & Movements. Its all about getting to student to see what you want them to see.

At what point do you incorporate the instrument on the steep turn? Or do you at all?

They are covered until they get the entry, attitude, and exit down pat. Then they find they don't need them anyway, and they are just for confirmation of the picture they see outside.

[Hedley]

I find it helps if you have a gerbil running around somewhere loose in the cockpit. It heightens your physical senses.

[loopa]

Thanks Flapless !

Lol Hedley, merry christmas to you too

[Big Pistons Forever]

Presolo the only thing that matters is the view over the nose of the aircraft. If the student can not appreciate the attitude of the aircraft by reference to the horizon then they will never be able to properly control the aircraft. I do not even mention any of the instruments when I PGI and teach Attitudes and Movements. The first time I talk about instruments is Straight and Level and the Attitude Indicator does not exist in my universe untill ex 24. The only "feel" part I talk about is the feeling of Yaw.

As for "Sense Training" as it was explained in earlier posts, is I think another example of concepts which needlessly complicates flight instruction. IMO Canadian flight training does not need more fancy pedagogy, it needs more instructors who work really hard at instilling the foundation skills fundamental to being able to exercise control of an aircraft.

[KK7]

I'm with everyone saying to rely solely on visual references for presolo, with the exception of "feel" for the yaw. Too often I was thrown students who were told by their instructors at other schools that they would just never ever go solo, they didn't have what it takes. It took me one flight to see they are staring at the instruments most of the time, and indeed while doing such their flying is quite terrible. The next several lessons involve covering each and every flight instrument ("six pack") from beginning to end. It is quite possible to go from take off to landing quite safely with nothing but what you see outside, and engine instruments to monitor the health of your airplane.

I remember some of the students thought this was exciting, and they were no problem. Others thought I was crazy for covering up all the instruments. At the end of the first lesson they were amazed that not only did the airplane fly without instruments, but they managed to fly the entire flight from take off to landing themselves without much help from me (and often finished off with a beautiful smooth landing). It proved that they knew what they were looking for and what the outside was supposed to look like, but they were so bogged down with things they learned about the instruments, and we all know these instruments look really cool, so they spent the whole time trying to fly off of them.

[FlaplessDork]

As for "Sense Training" as it was explained in earlier posts, is I think another example of concepts which needlessly complicates flight instruction. IMO Canadian flight training does not need more fancy pedagogy, it needs more instructors who work really hard at instilling the foundation skills fundamental to being able to exercise control of an aircraft.

It could be another needless exercise that someone has created to milk the student out of their money. I just didn't want to sound like a jerk with my earlier replies. I'm a dork, not a jerk.

[Beefitarian]

When Hedley's gerbil scurries across the ceiling, you know you're inverted.

[loopa]

As for "Sense Training" as it was explained in earlier posts, is I think another example of concepts which needlessly complicates flight instruction. IMO Canadian flight training does not need more fancy pedagogy, it needs more instructors who work really hard at instilling the foundation skills fundamental to being able to exercise control of an aircraft.

It could be another needless exercise that someone has created to milk the student out of their money. I just didn't want to sound like a jerk with my earlier replies. I'm a dork, not a jerk.

I was introduced to VPI or sense training early on in my instructor rating. I don't think doing this as a separate exercise is valuable, but like you said, incorporated into your fam/demo's.

[cgzro]

When Hedley's gerbil scurries across the ceiling, you know you're inverted.

Ah yes .. from the high brow Schrödinger's cat to explain Quantum mecahnics paradoxes to a lower brow Hedley's Gerbil to explain G.

However Hedley's Gerbil would scurry accross the ceiling in many more attitudes than just inverted.... but any Gerbil stuck in Hedley's cockpit would either get run over backwards by the prop in a tail slide or sanctioned by TC on landing for acro without a seat belt... or both.

On a more serious note I think that the feel of the stick/column in your hands is a sense worth understanding as you can get a good feel for your angle of attack by the amount of deflection you've applied and your airspeed by how much the stick/column resists you. Combine those with engine noise in a fixed pitch prop and you have a lot of information to fly by.

[FlaplessDork]

As for "Sense Training" as it was explained in earlier posts, is I think another example of concepts which needlessly complicates flight instruction. IMO Canadian flight training does not need more fancy pedagogy, it needs more instructors who work really hard at instilling the foundation skills fundamental to being able to exercise control of an aircraft.

It could be another needless exercise that someone has created to milk the student out of their money. I just didn't want to sound like a jerk with my earlier replies. I'm a dork, not a jerk.

I was introduced to VPI or sense training early on in my instructor rating. I don't think doing this as a separate exercise is valuable, but like you said, incorporated into your fam/demo's.

Just remember that VPI is a method for describing a new exercise to a student, and not training the senses as the title implies.

i.e. You will see the gerbil scurry across the cockpit floor from right to left, you will feel your heart rate increase as you get frightened from the gerbil, and will see an elevated heart rate on your heart monitor. VPI, no training of the senses involved. Its just a way to create a mental image of something new in the students mind.

[loopa]

Couldn't agree anymore Flapless. Which is why in the initial post I was wondering how you guys do it.

Merry Christmas!

[MichaelP]

I once started a thread about the wasp that was flying in the Decathlon's cockpit while I was doing aerobatics.
Did the wasp complete a slow roll or perhaps an outside loop in order to stay level and oriented?

Sense training... You have me confused somewhat...

But if I read into this that you incorporate the flying instruments early in the training I might have an objection and I might not.
Incorporation of instrument flying into a student's training early on has been suggested recently and I'm still thinking about it.
We were supposed to do 1.6 hours instrument before a student went solo in China... Part 141 stuff! I objected to that!
But I suppose we should consider all things new, for many of which the original reasons against have been forgotten and need to be relearned today.

I'm so used to doing things the old way that sometimes I forget why we do them that way.
So sometimes one doesn't have an argument as to why we shouldn't do whatever differently.
Then when that thing is done differently the reason makes itself clear.

I was taught to keep the stick back taxying in all but a significant tailwind, and always when doing a runup. The reasons are forgotten by many CFI's and their instructors taxy around willy nilly with the elevator sagging and so the wear and tear on the nose strut, and the erosion of the propeller (or even damage), is now an acceptable maintenance cost.

When it comes to the steep turn, I am worried, really worried, as instructor after instructor is coming out of the system with the idea that the Attitude Indicator is incorporated to establish the 45 degree angle... They know nothing about gyro precession it seems, nor of what a good lookout is I suppose!

Developing a skill

Where there are round instruments there are often four screws set in a square, why don't we use these to establish angle?
Screws don't precess, and they are often about an instrument close to the combing allowing an easier lookout and reference.
Airspeed I don't worry about (in the cruise range), add a little power and she'll be within a few knots.
The altimeter is more important...
I see people looking to the side while rolling into the turn, no reference to the nose for pitch...
Check clear, then roll on a point without allowing the nose to pitch, add a little power (don't look at the RPM or MP, just give it a little more, not a lot!), get the angle with the 'screw reference', check back a little and around you go.
Once established confirm your speed if you must, make small adjustments with the pitch attitude and it's easy, very easy.

There's the problem of teaching too much. Keep it simple!

The steep turn, simply done, without adding power to start with, and using outside reference without looking at any of the instruments usually results in an exam passing steep turn!
Concentrate on rolling the aeroplane on a point on the horizon or the side of a mountain!
Ensure the nose is not allowed to rise or fall.
The student will have to check back to hold the nose position, and this is usually not a problem.

Once the student has done a couple of these turns he/she will have developed time available to incorporate first the altimeter, and later the airspeed indicator and in this way the accurate steep turn is developed.

We over complicate the whole thing when we ask a student to refer to the altimeter and the airspeed indicator the first time that student does a steep turn.