X/Wind corrections.

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Shiny Side Up »

medEvac wrote: i find it funny this has stemed from a post on the flight training section of avcanada.
i have flown with many instructors and i would never let any of my kids learn from 99% of these "instructors"
I personally find it funny that apparently all the experts somehow have overcome the dearth of terrible instructors out there to still become awesome pilots. There is a lot of amazing self taught pilots out there. Someone should really tell TC, we could revolutionize flight training and just dispose with the whole training scheme as it stands. More mysterious is how this thread - or any thread that actually talks about flying technique unfailingly becomes an "Instructors are all bad thread".
btw i dont think ive sidesliped in almost a decade, never had the need.
Actually technically you have been sideslipping, maybe even only for a brief second on every crosswind landing you've done. Sort of the whole point of this thread. Or are you just admitting you land airplanes in crabs and let the rubber straighten you out?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Cat Driver »

Can someone explain why in the 1950's we could get our PPL on tail wheel airplanes on paved runways with a tower and sometimes about ten airplanes in the control zone in thirty hours.....and today the average is about seventy hours for the PPL?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
FlowPack
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:06 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by FlowPack »

Catdriver is correct. My back is too worn out to hang 190lbs off a crooked ass during a slipped final.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Siddley Hawker
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3353
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:56 pm
Location: 50.13N 66.17W

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Siddley Hawker »

I'm surprised no-one has made a comment about me dropping the 3rd line, I wrote it down but considering my nick, I thought it inappropriate and removed it.
I was wondering if you wuz th' b'y dat caught da feesh. :D
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Colonel Sanders »

There is a lot of amazing self taught pilots out there
Once the dripping sarcasm is wiped off that statement ... actually, there are.

I know that I taught myself:

- the instrument rating (seriously)
- aerobatics
- low altitude aerobatics (very different than vanilla acro)
- formation
- negative G formation
- formation aerobatics
- negative G formation aerobatics
- turbine engines
- TCA ATPL
- FAA ATP

and checked myself out on many funky types. And to tell the truth,
I am merely an average pilot, that just probably works harder at it
and maybe reads a bit more about it than you do.

I have spent thousands of hours over decades instructing, and I
honestly think that the primary job of an instructor is to stop
the student from killing himself (ok, and damaging the aircraft)
while he teaches himself how to fly.

The cockpit is a truly horrible classroom. If you want to, you
can talk about what you're going to do before you go flying,
in a quiet classroom, and maybe afterwards, you can talk a
little about what happened, also in a quiet classroom. But in
the airplane, the student's brain is probably at 100% and isn't
really receptive to much more information.

It is a humbling lesson for an instructor to learn that:

- sometimes no learning takes place during instruction
- learning often takes place without any instruction

Crap away.

PS Anyone remember the Barefoot Bandit? He did pretty
well, without a single minute of dual instruction, as far as
I know.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Shiny Side Up »

Colonel Sanders wrote:
There is a lot of amazing self taught pilots out there
Once the dripping sarcasm is wiped off that statement ... actually, there are.
You know what I'm after here. Statistically 99% of the instructors can't all be below average. Do you not at least for a bit of your skill give some credit to some sort of influence? You repeatedly tell us of you're father's "If you don't do someting we're going to die" bit which seems to have stuck with you for a long time. Shy of maybe a legend like Glenn Curtiss, I'd wager there are few guys out there who one would consider excellent pilots who've also figured every bit out by themselves. If say, you yourself were genetically created/ destined/ god gifted, you would be an exception, rather than say the entire Avcanada population as it nearly all of the time presents itself. Something to think about: When someone spouts off that 99% of instructors are bad, likely they're lumping you in that group. If we say for example there are at most a hundred posting instructors here, including Cat and yourself, it means that poster has just insulted at least one of you, if possibly both.
PS Anyone remember the Barefoot Bandit? He did pretty
well, without a single minute of dual instruction, as far as
I know.
Depends on what you consider "did well" AFAIK he's never left an airplane in useable order after a flight, which would put him on less of a level than say some Piper Cubs which have made trips pilotless. To give one an idea of really how challenging the job is. In other words his skill level is equivelent to no pilot on board or "zero level". Free advice, I wouldn't let him go try to figure out acro in your Pitts by himself, he might be clever, but he's still not skilled.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Colonel Sanders »

You repeatedly tell us of you're father's "If you don't do someting we're going to die" bit which seems to have stuck with you for a long time.
Yes, because he was a horrible instructor. That is NOT what you tell a 10 year old who is trying to wrestle a 210hp tailwheel Maule into submission.

A little background: military pilots hate instructing. No military pilot wants to be a good instructor, otherwise you'll get stuck doing it for a career, instead of being out on a squadron having fun. That may sound weird, but that's the RCAF.
When someone spouts off that 99% of instructors are bad, likely they're lumping you in that group.
Could be. I've instructed now for 20 years, and I'm probably good for another 30. And I freely admit that I am not a very good instructor. I am not a master of the learning factor of effect. I do not "stuff butter up people's *sses", to quote my fanged father.

However, I am a master of the technical aspects of aviation. You want to know how an airplane works, or how to operate it, well, I can break it down into little bite-size chunks for you, and you will master it, if you wish to spend the time and effort. Some people have the drive to do this, and some don't. This isn't something that is in my control, though - it's in the student's. See "stuffing butter up *sses" above. I wrote an article about this very subject:

http://www.pittspecials.com/articles/Confidence.htm


I won't claim that my way is the only way to maintain and operate an airplane. Anyone who says that is a fool or a liar. However, if you do what I tell you to do, at the end of it you will be a very good pilot indeed:

http://www.pittspecials.com/images/eric_form1.jpg

PS The kid hates to fly in the same airplane as me. I never stop carping at him. I don't think he enjoys it, but enjoying the flight isn't the point. Flying superbly is, and it's not going to always come easy. It's going to take some work.

In summary, if someone defines a "good instructor" as someone that is their buddy and always makes them feel good, well, I guess that isn't me.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Shiny Side Up »

No, arguably a "good instructor" is one who can:

a) Transmit a skill accurately.
b) Motivate their student, and
c) Help their student remember.

Yourself and your father both qualify. Note that there is nothing about being someone's buddy involved, or fuzzy happy feelings. Its all about monkey see, monkey do. Any of the chatter in between is to make the monkey pay attention when they're suposed to be "monkey see", and keep them on task when its "monkey do". Note that this doesn't necessarily exclude any butter being shoved up asses, you do whatever you have to do to keep the monkey watching and doing. Contrary to what the FiG says, some people do respond better to the lash better than the butter, you're probably one.

That one utterance probably kept you on task for the rest of your days. Good job old man.
---------- ADS -----------
 
chu me
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by chu me »

Hey Cat;

What flies are you tying on for this mornings hatch? Are they up and biting yet. AAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :smt040
P.S. 4 pages that must be some kind of a record!!!!!!!!!!!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
chu me
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by chu me »

By the way Cat;
The best I could ever manage was when I was flying at my old airline and I made a PA saying that we were doing 750 miles an hour because I didn't think any of the pax were listening. That generated a 1 page discussion about whether a Q400 could go 750 mph and only one person caught on. So hats off to you!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :smt040

Sincerely

chu me
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Cat Driver »

Hey hows things in your world Chu Me.

There are a couple of ways to gain entertainment using flies.

One method is to cast them here on line......cheaper than using fishing line.

The other way is to tear one wing off a fly and sit in your bath tub, place the fly on the head of your member that is sticking just above the water and get buzzed off. :mrgreen: :smt040 :rolleyes:

Liquid Charlie got his handle that way. :mrgreen: :mrgreen:






.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Doc
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 9241
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 6:28 am

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Doc »

Cat Driver wrote:Hey hows things in your world Chu Me.

There are a couple of ways to gain entertainment using flies.

One method is to cast them here on line......cheaper than using fishing line.

The other way is to tear one wing off a fly and sit in your bath tub, place the fly on the head of your member that is sticking just above the water and get buzzed off. :mrgreen: :smt040 :rolleyes:

Liquid Charlie got his handle that way. :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Like the head of your member still makes it above the water line! :smt046 :smt046






.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5923
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

Cat Driver wrote:Can someone explain why in the 1950's we could get our PPL on tail wheel airplanes on paved runways with a tower and sometimes about ten airplanes in the control zone in thirty hours.....and today the average is about seventy hours for the PPL?
Can somebody explain why the light aircraft fatal accident rate was four times higher in the 1950's then it is today ?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Beefitarian
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6610
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:53 am
Location: A couple of meters away from others.

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Beefitarian »

Big Pistons Forever wrote:
Cat Driver wrote:Can someone explain why in the 1950's we could get our PPL on tail wheel airplanes on paved runways with a tower and sometimes about ten airplanes in the control zone in thirty hours.....and today the average is about seventy hours for the PPL?
Can somebody explain why the light aircraft fatal accident rate was four times higher in the 1950's then it is today ?
Never mind that junk. Can someone explain why they keep changing the formula for Cocacola and KFC? It used to be so much better back in the (insert decade here).
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
RenegadeAV8R
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by RenegadeAV8R »

Colonel Sanders wrote: PS Anyone remember the Barefoot Bandit? He did pretty
well, without a single minute of dual instruction, as far as
I know.

It seems that Barefoot Bandit needs some dual instruction.

Maybe he doesn't know how to land with a cross-wind :wink:
On July 4, 2010, a Cessna 400 single-engine plane was reported stolen from the Bloomington, Indiana, airport – it was later found crashed in the shoreline waters of Great Abaco Island in the Bahamas, again leading to speculation that Harris-Moore was responsible.

On July 6, 2010, an indictment was released from a federal judge of the U.S. District Court of Western Washington, which was originally filed in December 2009. This indictment cites Harris-Moore for interstate transport of stolen property/airplane theft, related to a plane stolen from Bonners Ferry, Idaho that crashed outside of Granite Falls, Washington.

In Fall 2009, police found footprints at an airport hangar in Bonners Ferry, Idaho; a Cessna 182 stolen from there crash-landed approximately 260 miles (420 km) to the west near Granite Falls, Washington, after a few unsuccessful attempts to land at the small airport there.
---------- ADS -----------
 
erics2b
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 7:42 am

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by erics2b »

Beefitarian wrote:
Big Pistons Forever wrote:
Cat Driver wrote:Can someone explain why in the 1950's we could get our PPL on tail wheel airplanes on paved runways with a tower and sometimes about ten airplanes in the control zone in thirty hours.....and today the average is about seventy hours for the PPL?
Can somebody explain why the light aircraft fatal accident rate was four times higher in the 1950's then it is today ?
Never mind that junk. Can someone explain why they keep changing the formula for Cocacola and KFC? It used to be so much better back in the (insert decade here).
A lot of it has to do with the recipe using corn syrup and not sugar in the recent decades. This stuff uses sugar, and is awesome if you can find it:

Image
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Cat Driver »

Can somebody explain why the light aircraft fatal accident rate was four times higher in the 1950's then it is today ?
Statistics can be deceiving what data was used to determine there was four times the fatal rate in the fifties....

...was it due to poor training or some other reason?

Thinking back on those years I can only remember one accident that resulted from loss of control at the Island Airport and that was a student ground looped a Luscombe, the student was not injured let alone killed.

I learned to fly at Central Airways in 1953 and received my instructors rating there in I believe 1957 or thereabout and last instructed there in 1959 almost all of which was in Cessna 140's and Fleet Canuck's.......I do not recall any fatal accidents in that group during that period.


.....so could you link the data to support the four times rate?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Colonel Sanders »

Light plane flying was much different, 'way back when.

Most airplanes didn't have:

- standard "six pack" gyros w/vacuum pump
- whacking great alternator (all little generators, back then)
- ADF, VOR, DME, LOC, GS, LORAN, GPS
- mode C transponders (for assistance from ATC)
- intercoms, headsets, boom mikes, ANR
- XM satellite weather, stormscope
- autopilots
- smart phones, ipads, maxipads

The list goes on and on, of equipment that everyone
takes for granted today.

You had a map, maybe a comm radio (and maybe not)
and you were lost most of the time.

At least, I was :wink:
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
RenegadeAV8R
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by RenegadeAV8R »

Cat Driver wrote:
Can somebody explain why the light aircraft fatal accident rate was four times higher in the 1950's then it is today ?
.....so could you link the data to support the four times rate?

Since 1970, the number of aicraft in operation has been multiplied by 4:

http://www.1001crash.com/index-page-sta ... age-1.html


While the total number of fatalities remained constant:

http://www.1001crash.com/index-page-sta ... age-2.html


Therefore; the fatalities rate is now lower by a factor of 4 when compared to 1970.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Colonel Sanders »

We didn't have the internet back in 1970, though I'm sure
that Al Gore was hard at work on it.

That means that we had no weather information, except
what you could get over a rotary-dial telephone. Nada,
zip unless you were lucky enough to be near an FSS which
you could wander into and look at the maps and talk to
a specialist.

No radar. Nothing. Compare that to what we have today!
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Shiny Side Up »

Cat Driver wrote:
Can somebody explain why the light aircraft fatal accident rate was four times higher in the 1950's then it is today ?
Statistics can be deceiving what data was used to determine there was four times the fatal rate in the fifties....

...was it due to poor training or some other reason?
If I remember rightly from some of the Cessna research one of the prime reasons was a lack of shoulder harnesses, that were options that oddly enough a lot of GA flyers went without, much similar to automobiles (whch of course spawned the invention of the airbag - pilots aside, the older generation of the general public was just as dumb as they are now) which of course turned a lot of survivable incidents into more serious or fatal ones. Incidentally I know of two fellows who still don't have shoulder harnesses in their airplanes citing freedom and cost as their primary reasons not to have them installed.

last instructed there in 1959 almost all of which was in Cessna 140's and Fleet Canuck's..
Off topic, but since I'm looking to bring back some old times, I see there are a few 140s and 120s based out of the meadows there, you wouldn't know if any of them are for sale?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Cat Driver »

No I don't know if any are for sale there but I can find out if you wish.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Colonel Sanders »

who still don't have shoulder harnesses in their airplanes
um, it's not quite that simple. Without an STC, the installation of shoulder
harnesses is quite illegal. Not all older aircraft have the paper to do this.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Cat Driver »

O.K. thanks for the info regarding the fatal accident rate.

Now here is another question that is more directed at training and flight instructors.


When I received my flight instructors rating in the fifties every new flight instructor was competent flying tail wheel airplanes the moment they received their instructors rating because that was all we had to teach on. And for a few instructors here about half our fleet at Central Airways had no brakes on the right hand side. :mrgreen:

So that statistic would seem to indicate that 100% of the flight instructors from that era were competent on tail wheel airplanes.

What percentage of today's instructors are competent to teach on tail wheel airplanes......remember we are talking about basic light single engine airplanes...... not complex airplanes.

Anyone want to take a stab at answering that question?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: X/Wind corrections.

Post by Colonel Sanders »

What percentage of today's instructors are competent to teach on tail wheel airplanes
I suspect (but don't know for sure) that it's less than 10%. It might even be less than 1%.

Tube & fabric, tailwheel, biplane, aerobatic, radial engine is all museum stuff now, .. When was the last time you saw a Stearman doing surface acro at your airport?

No one cares. Everyone wants a plastic nosewheel trainer with a square yard of coloured glass on both sides. White shirts, gold bars, and who needs to look outside any more?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”