I got a bad feeling about this year...

[N1 Green]

You are probably right about my making light of it. Just a bit hard to take you seriously...why ?
You use a GPS to help you in the flare. Please share that with us. I , or one have no idea how you do that. A radar altimeter, yes, but a GPS.
And 25 year olds pulling five g's. maybe my memory is failing, but some poster like aux bat here I think will confirm it is closer to 9!

You want to be taken seriously? Share with us all how you use the GPS to assist in the flare...when you are fliying on instruments. VOR radials to assist in taxing to the gate. Are they on charts somewhere?
Please share.

I know you declined someone else who requested a bit about your experience level, but I have to admit, I am curious now also.

When I have read your explanations to the above, I give you my word I will treat your posts with the seriousness they deserve.

LOL!!!! the GPS and VOR thing is a JOKE !!!!!!!

I took it out beacuse I felt that its too much..

Now can you write anything real about my last post talking about flight training?

[N1 Green]

trey kule
Only for you.. Here is a brief about whets in a pilot mind 4 minutes prior to landing, just so you take me seriously..
First he check his card to make sure the Vref number match the FMC output and the laptop output – confirm with the FO. During the approach you always compare the INS wind on the display to the wind given be ATC to avoid wind shear. According to the wind gust, we adjust the Vref. 100 above we call chk, at minimum we decide. The minimums take engine spool up time into consideration. In other words, if you decide to hit the miss at the minimum, your margin is good. In case of missed – PF call NO GO, Climb the missed (whatever the standard calls/proc are in the SOP/QRH) PM confirm. PF adjust GA power setting and climbing the missed with FD kicks in accordingly on the PFD. PM let the ATC know and monitor the raw data on his display according to the chart. PF uses the magenta line.
In case it’s a go landing, disengage autopilot at the altitude agreed in the approach briefing, usually +1000 – up to the PF. Maintain Vref+5 and flare, watch for tail strike vs flare speed.
Clear the active, clean the plane and maintain “Silence Cockpit” all the time during taxi.
Does that explain better how a normal landing looks like? Or should I give a Piper Seneca example so you would take my posts seriously. Anything to make you happy

[digits_]

And 25 year olds pulling five g's. maybe my memory is failing, but some poster like aux bat here I think will confirm it is closer to 9!

Those damn 9 year old military pilots!

[trey kule]

Before I answer, let me make certain I understand the situation. You want to be taken seriously, and do not want your posts made light of. Yet you post things that make you come across as a first class (4 )instructor BS er, and then claim it was just a joke when you are challenged.
Did I get that pretty much right. How much of your other posts were just jokes?

Anyway, well I can't tell the difference between an idiot and a comedian apparently, I will give you my thoughts on your previous posts

You talk to your student before the flight and agree to go out to the practice area for the following items: Slow Flight, Steep Turns, Diversion
During taxi the student would wait for the “emmm I would like you.. too ..emm show me a short field take off” – sure, np. We line up, get the short t/o done and out to the practice area. We get to the practice area, get the steep/slow done.. give me the map for a second… take me to Orangeville (diversion) .. give me some ETA.. ok lets go back.

We all know the drill, we’ve been there..

If I need to analyze this flight for a second, only 50% of this training flight put my student under some work load. The other 50% is climb out, fly to the practice area, come back.. maybe some radio work, maybe some dead reckoning .. easy for advanced PPL or for sure – CPL student.

on first blush, this does not look like a training flight at all. It is an evaluation flight. Show me, take me, ...where is the training in this? Before you go, you discuss what is to be done , and if it is an evaluation type of flight, discuss the acceptable parameters. I don't see any real mention of training here. And it is one of the things that I think is a real problem today. Instructors are not instructing.
Now, depending on the level the student is at, the first thing I do is take a minute to check the w&b in the pre flight briefing. Should be one done prior to your preflight briefing on every flight after the second one, with some variables assigned from the last post flight briefing. The student learns not only how to calculate it, but standard pax weights, fuel reserve requirements, fuel weights, aircraft empty and gross weights..you get the idea. Quick check, any corrections, and a discussion...two minutes..
As to the "show me" mission objective. That assumes the student knows what they are to no, how to do it, and the acceptable standard
During the flight to the practice area a student can learn to hold a heading (a serious problem with new CPLs), time off , and a little flight plan enroute if the practice area is a bit away. Again depending on the student level, some dutch rolls for practice, slow flght etc. the time to and from the practice area does not have to be wasted time. Lots of things you can discuss enroute like comm failures, etc, to allow the student to both listen and fly the plane, or practice..well except for your impending hiring by one airline . If your student flys 1.3 hours they should be under a workload for all but about a 5 minute relaxation period at the midpoint. If they are not, the instructor is just lazy. And not continually tested, but allowed time to practice and perfect.
But your example is typical. No teaching involved. No demonstrations, no practice , just evaluation.
No pre flight discussion of what is expected in a steep turn, bank angle, speed control, ball in the Center etc....just a mission objective. No discussion of how to do a diversion, the reasons for it...just give me the map and take me there.
And some people wonder why it takes 100 hours to get a ppl. The poor students are teaching themselves.

How is that or a serious analysis?

I have no idea about your posts. One moment you are posting about light training aircraft, the next an sop for a crewed heavy. What is it you are trying to discuss. Do you now want to discuss 705 ops?
If so, state the plane type, and if not me, I know there are one very experienced and knowledgable people here on pretty much all types of equipment. Not sure exactly what that has to do with the op.

And yes..damn 9 year old mil pilots. I blame it on all the foreign pilot hiring,

[photofly]

How is that or a serious analysis?

It's not a very good one.

on first blush, this does not look like a training flight at all. It is an evaluation flight.

It doesn't appear that you understand that "practice" takes many forms, and that "evaluation" is is not the same as "grading", and that both evaluation and testing are an important part of training.

[CellPh2]

That's why I stopped...he's talking about five different things.

[trey kule]

I actually think I have a very good understanding.
1. Theory
2. Pre flight practical
3. Demonstrate
4. Allow to practice and aid in correcting errors
And then, and only then play show me, or make up test scenarios.

How would you do it? I would like you to share, as most instructors seem to pretty much ignore step 4

[photofly]

I actually think I have a very good understanding.
1. Theory
2. Pre flight
3. Demonstrate
4. Allow to practice and aid in correcting errors
And then, and only then play how me, or make up test scenarios.

How would you do it?

In your rush to disagree and prove you know better you ignored this part of N1G's post:

First, what KIND of a flight is it? Are we going to Learn? Or Practice? let’s assume Practice, let’s assume it’s a CPL student or advance PPL student.

We're already past item 4, in this scenario.

The student can fly a steep turn, when asked. But can he sequence a steep turn into the flight and get it right while keeping track of time, position, fuel, and keeping on top of other "background" tasks?

Flying a "mission" gets the student to work on flying without relying on the words or gestures (or eyebrows) of the instructor in the right seat coaching him through everything he does. Just like he has to with the examiner beside him, and just like he has to when he plans his own trips as a licensed pilot.

Clearly it works for the military.

There's a horrible tendency on this thread to micro-examine every response for something to disagree with and then slam someone's entire post (and themselves, personally: vide, "Are you a pilot?" - really, what did asking that contribute to the thread?) without actually asking, is there something worth reading here?

I thought a lot of what N1G said made some sense; the latter few hours of my flight training would have been more valuable if it had been more structured than simply flying out the practice area time and again to fly the same series of manoeuvres. A bit more forethought from my instructor than just asking me to show him where we are on a sectional would have helped, and he could have done that by making it more of a mission scenario.

Putting the student under a workload is more than just giving instructions every two minutes from the right seat. I see the value in getting the student to put themselves under a workload, and that seems a sensible way to do it. Barking instructions from the right seat whenever things get quiet doesn't bear much similarity to the workload of real life flight, does it?

You don't need to sign up for jumpsuits, helmets and afterburners to see that he's got a point, surely?

[N1 Green]

Before I answer, let me make certain I understand the situation. You want to be taken seriously, and do not want your posts made light of. Yet you post things that make you come across as a first class (4 )instructor BS er, and then claim it was just a joke when you are challenged.
Did I get that pretty much right. How much of your other posts were just jokes?

No Sir, I am being taken seriously, it is just you that use cynicism comments to express yourself.
I am writing about advanced cockpit management areas in one of my post, and 10 minutes later I am writing about using a VOR Radial for taxing as a joke.

Few options:

1.You understand that I am joking with you, and you decide to take cheap advantage and present it to our readers as a fact.
You are doing it because you are unable to professionally deal with the input that I put into this post before.

2.You do not think it’s a joke, and you take it seriously.

I would go with number 1.

I started to talk about flying glass cockpit in early stages, then we moved on to IFR flying and later on this page3/4 I decided to write about the
differences between the military platform and the civilian one.

So for those of you who cannot track this post, understand that this is a dynamic post, yes I jump from one thing to another, but with some connection in between.
If it’s killing you that on my first sentence I am writing about maintain Vref+5 on a 767 and on my second sentence about flying VFR with a 172, it’s only because I am trying to write “outside of the dam box” and give different perspectives to the same platform.

You are trying to downgrade my comments only because it says “16 messages” on my profile and you still don’t know who N1Green is.
You are micro-examining every word of my posts instead of focusing on the big picture.
Briefing and Debriefing is a big thing. Read my page 3 post again and try to understand what I am aiming for.

[trey kule]

Perhaps you are right, and I was in a rush to disagree. I am thankful that your posts show none of that tendency. Of course I believe an instructor should be barking at a student every minute like clockwork. Though I just can't seem to recall suggesting that. In fact, I thought I was suggesting to let the student practice rather than play " show me"

You see, part of my job is having to deal with the products of flight schools. And unfortunately I do get CPLs arriving with crackpot notions of things like using the GPS in the flare because their instructor told them ( actually I have never heard that one before), but I do get pilots who like to play 705 in a 172....and unfortunately with the Internet it is easy to talk the talk.

Anyway, it is time for me to venture forth to the airport to spend six hours actually flying a plane...two crew. Thank Buddha that we only have to do one landing as neither of us as any idea how to do a GPS assisted flare.

I will leave it to the rest of you to share the wisdom.

[trey kule]

Previous post was in reply to photo fly.

To n1. A quick reply as I have to go

You are trying to downgrade my comments only because it says “16 messages” on my profile and you still don’t know who N1Green is.

Nothing to do with your post count, and everything thing to do with one of your more bizarre claims...which were only referred to as a joke when they were challenged. You re right though, it was a bit hard to try and figure out what your intention was with all the bouncing around.

Cheers.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

For Christ sake Trey K. don't run him off, he has offered to take me flying over the flat land of Holland in Rotterdam.

[photofly]

I am thankful that your posts show none of that tendency.

Well, nobody's perfect.

[N1 Green]

...which were only referred to as a joke when they were challenged.

1.You understand that I am joking with you, and you decide to take cheap advantage and present it to our readers as a fact.
You are doing it because you are unable to professionally deal with the input that I put into this post before.

let it go man.. I am sure that if you fly multi crew acft you are smart enough to understand that using the GPS during flare is a joke used to "pay you back" for your low atitude writing from before.
I wish you would write some advanced comments about the areas I talked before.

I wanted to create a real discussion here about how to create better IFR oriented pilots.
All of your last irrelevant personal comments caused ditch drifting – we lost the point.

Fly Safe !