Sea plane rating question.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I see the mods moved this and deleted some of my comments regarding BPF's posts.

So I will turn it over to BPF the Avcanada training expert and the PC mods.

[Duffman]

I only do ratings once in a while when I have time but 100% of my students get trained on glassy water. It doesn't matter if they need to come back in a few weeks to get it.

If there are schools doing glassy training without real glassy water the student is going to be in a bad situation the first time he does a real glassy on his own.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I schedule one of the training trips for first thing in the morning. Most days you can find a patch of real glassy water off a lee shore.

[SuperchargedRS]

I've never heard of, or not seen in a curriculum, where a school DIDNT teach glassy water.

It's kinda a common thing to encounter and doesn't take thst much time to teach.

I know that the FAA requires it.

Says if you can't find actual conditions you can simulate it, but honestly it's not that tuff to find glassy water without too much Hobbs time.

[North Shore]

Well, after having done 14(?) float ratings over the last two winters, I was always careful to find actual glassy water when GWLs came up.
I see my responsibilities as a basic (7 hour rating) seaplane instructor as teaching a student to be safe with a 10-15 knot breeze straight down the pipe, and with light and steady crosswinds, and docking/taxiing under the same. I'll also teach them glassy water to competence under my direct supervision. Beyond that, and once I've sent them solo, I'm very careful to explain that there are limits to their ability, and to proceed very carefully as they expand their envelope into more challenging conditions.

If a new sea plane pilot's first experience with glassy water is after the rating does that not put the new sea plane pilot in a possibly unsafe situation.....for instance if the body of water is very large and there are no clouds in the sky?

That's where PDM comes into the equation - a pilot recognising the limits of their skill with only a 7 hour rating.
And, to be fair, even with 3500 ish hours of float/boat time, your scenario above would cause me to proceed with a little more caution than normal.

Fire away!

[Big Pistons Forever]

If a seven hour float pilot with a brand new float rating does not know that

a body of water is very large and there are no clouds in the sky

is not the place he wants to operate from, then either his instructor has failed him or he chose to disregard the instruction he was given.

Float instruction is like every other kind of flying instruction. It can be
-Terrible
-OK
-Good
-Really good

A bit of research will tell you what kind of instructor you are getting and you as the student get to chose.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Since the subject is glassy water landings how about you tell us how you teach glassy water landings on the initial float rating course...................

[CLguy]

I cannot even guess how many float endorsements I have done over the years but I do know that I have never signed off anyone who has not had at least a couple of hours dedicated to glassy water operations. It is not only glassy water landings that will kill you but take off's as well.

[Bede]

ClGuy,

Sorry I'm a low time float guy, how can a glassy water takeoff kill you?

[digits_]

ClGuy,

Sorry I'm a low time float guy, how can a glassy water takeoff kill you?

Similar to taking off at night: desorientation during/after rotation and on initial climb out

[esp803]

I did my initial seaplane training in two days with a fantastic instructor, we did "simulated glassy water" because of my time restrictions, I've yet to run into trouble with glassy water, including landing on both very large bodies of water and small high density altitude lakes in the mountains.

I'm not even close to being as experienced of a float driver as many posters on this thread, but I can't recall anytime in the last 1500hrs of float flying when landing on actual glassy water wasn't accomplished by the skills practiced on simulated glassy water. I've also done "simulated RVR1200" take off training... on 40sm days... Given a good instructor, I think you get out what you put in as a student.

As for the original question, I'd guess under 50% do training on true mirror like glassy water.

E

[phillyfan]

This is a cut and paste from TP12668 Instructor Guide - Seaplane Rating

"Every effort should be made to do glassy water training in real glassy water conditions, otherwise the exercise will have to be simulated. Real glassy water conditions are most often found in the early morning or late evening."

it also says;

"There is no flight test for the seaplane rating. Instead, the instructor is expected to certify that the student is competent to hold the rating."

The Completion Standard for the Landing portion is clear;

"The applicant for the rating must be able to safely approach and land using the correct procedures for the actual conditions of water surface and depth, debris, wind, and terrain."

If a guy thinks he can accomplish the student is competent with simulated conditions then they are more then welcome.

[CLguy]

Bebe most of the focus is on the landing on glassy water and many instructors focus very little on the take off. On glassy water you have no depth perception and if one gets a little quick with lifting the flaps or not focusing on the positive climb rate it is very easy to settle and hit the water again. The proper technique is to not touch anything, just get a nice positive rate of climb and get yourself well above the surface before you start dumping flaps or reducing power. Also because there is no wind and on glassy water your floats can build up a suction between the float bottoms and water your take off run could be considerably longer. If it is not recognized in time you could find yourself hitting the shoreline or worse yet trying to get over the trees low and slow and possibly end up a stall/spin statistic. A good technique to break the suction is get used to picking up a float on the take off run.

Remember glassy water is nothing to be afraid of but you had better recognize it and respect it because it is truly the one thing in float flying that will for sure kill you.

[iflyforpie]

I did real glassy water training at Air Hart over ten years ago. Pretty easy to find water like glass somewhere on Okanagan Lake in the morning.

But I don't think it was 100% effective. We were always very close to shore with the trees and hills beside us to judge height and reflecting on a good portion of of the water. I figured it was a concern, but not something huge to get worked up about. I found the same thing with the night rating.. just like day with less light.. I still felt I could easily control the aircraft with the visual references provided.

In each case the instructors were low time... less than a thousand hours each. Reading accident reports--including the one that claimed the Lake Buccaneer I rebuilt ten years ago--sure is an eye opener for how glassy water can bite you.

[phillyfan]

The real question should be, How many people actually do the "solo" time during a float endorsement?

[North Shore]

I did. And, I let my students go solo..

[iflyforpie]

The real question should be, How many people actually do the "solo" time during a float endorsement?

It should be everyone.

I'm not going to look it up and post it now... but the CARs are not ambiguous on the five takeoff and landing requirement. It says they must be done with the candidate "as the sole occupant of the aircraft."

[phillyfan]

It's in CAR 421.38.
I am not saying it's not in the regulations. I am asking how many are actually doing it? I don't expect anybody to admit it. That would be foolish.

TC knows it happens. I think we even had an incident back a few years where a BC operation was caught turning out students without the solo circuits. TC has also added new measures to find out when the requirement is being fudged.

The requirement is stupid anyway. Applicants for the Endorsement have already flown an airplane solo. Perhaps the requirement should be that the student does 5 Glassy Water Landings with the Instructors family in the airplane?

[Duffman]

The real question should be, How many people actually do the "solo" time during a float endorsement?

I had one student that I couldn't let go solo without extra training, it wasn't in his budget so he didn't get his rating. He was really pissed off and I felt bad for him but what could I do...

[Big Pistons Forever]

But I don't think it was 100% effective. We were always very close to shore with the trees and hills beside us to judge height and reflecting on a good portion of of the water.

I would suggest the opposite. You should plan to use shoreline features whenever possible as a way to make glassy water landings easier and safer, especially as a low time new float pilot.

[iflyforpie]

Oh.... I know it was effective in making things easier and safer.... I just don't know if it really exposed me to a worse case scenario.

I'd imagine going into a large lake with no trees or hills (like in NWT) might be a bit more challenging.

[North Shore]

I'd imagine going into a large lake with no trees or hills (like in NWT) might be a bit more challenging.

Not related to glassy water, but you cant always rely on trees to judge things...Did a trip a few years back to a lake ~ 300 miles north of where I'd been flying all summer. Checking out the lake, it seemed a little smallish, but not un-doable. Landed across the lake, and !!holy sh!t!! was it short..(Thank jebus, and P&W, for reverse!) Turns out the 50' trees Id been using all summer to help judge things were only 10 feet tall, and so the lake was correspondingly shorter! Live and learn

[Big Pistons Forever]

Oh.... I know it was effective in making things easier and safer.... I just don't know if it really exposed me to a worse case scenario.

.

All of the 7 + hours in the initial float rating, in my experience, is required to teach somebody the foundation skills required to safely fly a float plane in relatively ideal conditions. There is IMO no way you can, or should even be trying, to teach them how to deal with "worst case scenarios"; other than the obvious recognize and avoid strategy.

[iflyforpie]

Yes... I wouldn't expect a student with a basic seaplane rating be able to execute a perfect glassy water landing with little to no references.

However.. demoing a glassy water landing in such conditions might instill greater respect in those conditions (intensity). Much like the spin demo for the PPL.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

However.. demoing a glassy water landing in such conditions might instill greater respect in those conditions (intensity). Much like the spin demo for the PPL.

When possible such a demonstration is priceless in the teaching process.