What do you teach for the Forced Approach

[Colonel Sanders]

eh? No, I was just hoping that Beef didn't take offense at a teenager correcting him - my point was that he's not exactly a normal teenager.

About a decade ago, I remember teaching Eric to ski. He promptly tucked in like a little 9 yr old bowling ball, and went down the hill "en schuss" at incredible speed, blowing by startled packs of people, whom I apologized to - "sorry, sorry" - as I skiied by them afterwards.

Had a feeling of deja vu there.

[trampbike]

9 years old is pretty old to start skiing.
I hope you taught him to fly well before that.

[fleet16b]

eh? No, I was just hoping that Beef didn't take offense at a teenager correcting him - my point was that he's not exactly a normal teenager.

About a decade ago, I remember teaching Eric to ski. He promptly tucked in like a little 9 yr old bowling ball, and went down the hill "en schuss" at incredible speed, blowing by startled packs of people, whom I apologized to - "sorry, sorry" - as I skiied by them afterwards.

Had a feeling of deja vu there.

LOL....A geat story .......I agree Eric is not the usual teen one encounters at your local Airport.
Unless you pry it out of him, one would never know his background or that his flying abilities are miles ahead of most people his age.
The way he conducts himself says much about who he is and how he was raised.

Sorry for straying off topic

[Beefitarian]

Offended, no. I wouldn't have asked if I didn't want to know.

Eric seems like a good guy. He's in chat quite a bit.

[B-rad]

your tangential velocity vector never points to the field in a 360

I think some people might find Eric somewhat intimidating (see twitter posts of his compsci-tutored students).

I was nowhere near as good a pilot when I was his age, and I didn't get 99% in my University courses, either.

I'm still not as good as a pilot as he is but I'll still teach the figure 8's

[Beefitarian]

I thought his whole post was in favour of the figure eight.

[C-GGGQ]

Can someone explain the figure 8 method to me as I don't think I ever learned it (if I did it was under another name). I've taught both the Circuit and the 360 and prefer the circuit method.

[Beefitarian]

Here's a basic rundown 3G.
http://selair.selkirk.ca/Training/fligh ... ure-8.html

[lownslow]

Can someone explain the figure 8 method to me as I don't think I ever learned it (if I did it was under another name). I've taught both the Circuit and the 360 and prefer the circuit method.

For the figure eight method (I learned it under a different name), you just pick out the spot where you would turn a left base for the field and pick out a spot where you'd turn right base. Once you have them just fly back and forth between them until you've burned off enough altitude to complete the circuit from whichever side you're on. By always making turns towards the field you end up flying descending figure eights.

LnS.

[Beefitarian]

I just read the paragraph on the link I posted. I was looking for a pickshur and that was the only one I found. I don't agree with the eggs being in one basket doing that but I guess that's why it's gone out of fasion and most places are promoting that 360 one. Until this thread where the kernel was worried I might be offended no one really explained where the center of the circle was. I thought you flew it a half mile out like the figure eights waiting to loose enough altitude to start your circut. So yeah instead I'm happy to have learned something for free here, again.

[LousyFisherman]

So turning away from the field is unacceptable but flying away from it ( the back leg of the figure 8 ) is OK.
No wonder flight training is such a mess.

My opinion, rather than waste altitude if you have it, do not choose your field so early, look for a better one. Or spend the time
flying from different directions to analyze your potential choice.

My experience on my flight test was very different from what others have said. First the school failed my on my pre flight test test because I slipped a 172 with full flaps. "I wasn't sure which field you were going to" My response "The one that looks like it was coming through the windshield". "You shouldn't slip a 172 with full flaps". My response "That's advisory not prohibited". Since they refused to recommend me based on that they took another 7 hours out of my pocket..

On the flight test itself, the only field was a gravel road (by Lost Lake for the Calgarians). Since there was a truck about 2 miles away heading to us. I put the aircraft into the forward slip with flaps. Not more than 10 seconds later the engine recovered and the examiner complimented me on my situational awareness and choice of actions.

YMMV
LF

[Colonel Sanders]

First the school failed my on my pre flight test test because I slipped a 172 with full flaps

Sigh. You aren't going to get top marks in that situation
because you severely crowded the field, requiring a slip
with flaps, but ...

If you made the field, you should have passed.

PS Flight training nonsense aside, if you must land on a road,
always land AHEAD of traffic going your direction. If you land
BEHIND them, they will hit the brakes and you will rear end
them.

[Shiny Side Up]

So turning away from the field is unacceptable but flying away from it ( the back leg of the figure 8 ) is OK.
No wonder flight training is such a mess.

You do it a discredit and make it sound worse than it is. Flying away and turning away are two different things though they deserve clarification. By turning away one usually is referring to losing sight of the spot one is intending to land. It would be better said to not put yourself in such a position which usually happens when one turns directly away from the landing spot. On the other hand you can fly away from the field in a manner to give yourself room from the field with out turning (directly) away.

My opinion, rather than waste altitude if you have it, do not choose your field so early, look for a better one. Or spend the time
flying from different directions to analyze your potential choice.

If I might say, you hold that opinion from flying over the praries, and share it with many others in the same position. The ability to accomplish the forced approach excersise should be practiced at a higher level of competentcy where one can pull it off in a worser case scenario - few or one choice of landing spots rather than many. Often the choice of field is significantly less important than the ability to precisely glide from engine fail point A to landing spot B. When I first start with this excersise, I always do the choosing of the landing spot, the student then has to figure out how to get there ( the three methods: the figure-eight, the 360 and the circuit method are all tools to figure out this problem) Discussion of what field to pick comes later. In that though I stress that having a plan before a problem is more desireable then having a problem and figuring out a plan after. Fortune favours the prepared mind. A frequent topic of discussion when flying after this is "if the engine failed now, where would you land?" followed by "what's your plan to get to that spot?"

[Beefitarian]

Don't tell TC or worse yet the College of pilots this because I'm sure it's wrong and punishable by a punch in the stomach but...

In a 172 I trim the plane, select mixture full rich and move my hand to the carb heat lever. The moment I touch that lever I pick a field. Then I do cause checks while flying the plane and keeping a scan going so I continue to glance at the field and keep the plane gliding toward it. In practice after I explain and lightly touch all the controls, fuel selector on both, mixture full rich, carb heat on, circut breakers on, primer in and locked, mags cycled both on. I announce I would use the starter motor if the engine was stopped, I have no restart. Mayday mayday mayday etc.

Now if I'm in the praries which I allways have been so far, I look around to see if there's other fields I can easily make.

Some might think that's a bad idea because you could choose a field that's too far away then not make it there. Not me, I'm not done flying the plane even though in this case it's gliding to land and that limits the options of where. I choose fields below me where I know I can glide to, and sometimes have a problem of being too high still so I need more pratice in these methods of using up the extra hieght before I commit to final approach.

[Big Pistons Forever]

. In practice after I explain and lightly touch all the controls, fuel selector on both, mixture full rich, carb heat on, circut breakers on, primer in and locked, mags cycled both on. I announce I would use the starter motor if the engine was stopped, I have no restart. Mayday mayday mayday etc.

.

Why do you check the circuit breakers ? Did your isntructor tell you to do this ?

[Beefitarian]

Hmm, I didn't notice until you mentioned it but that is kind of strange because it's pretty unlikely there would be a problem with them. I guess it seemed like the next thing as my brain was going that way to from the carb heat to the primer and mags switch.

I was mostly trying to say, as I get closer and can see better details yet I can still make several it has to be way better but I can't help but think if that's the case I'm switching. I can't remember noticing a field so good it compelled me to do that but I did notice once last year a field I picked was horrible and there was a perfectly good one a mile or two over so I switched and made that one. I didn't want to hit the junk yard covered in weeds.

[C-GGGQ]

I understand the concept of the flow checks I've seen some schools use but the above is one problem I have with them. One standard check for everything while simplifying things somewhat, also means you check things you didn't really need to.

[Beefitarian]

I can't promise I'll check the breakers in the actual exercise but it sure is possible. I was working out what I'd check while I typed it, starting at the fuel selector and ending with what I've heard is really unlikely, trying the starter because the prop has stopped. Everyone I can recall talking about engine failures says the prop will most likely be windmilling.

I don't think it takes long even if I do something extra like the breaker check and I did not actually count but I think I can do it in five hundred feet. If I somehow have an engine failure under 1000' I hate to say but I'm probably doing cause checks after touch down. That's going to be a busy intense time.

I personally know a guy who had the crankshaft break, the prop stopped with a "chunk" noise. I don't know if I'd try the starter then, but yeah the flow check might become too habitual, occasionally replacing, "Let's think about what happened here."

Edit: with an instructor I'm going for full blabber mouth to make sure I don't miss anything.

[Beefitarian]

Oh man, I was trying to not come in this one because I don't teach.

I really went Del Griffith this week. Sorry guys.

[Shiny Side Up]

I understand the concept of the flow checks I've seen some schools use but the above is one problem I have with them. One standard check for everything while simplifying things somewhat, also means you check things you didn't really need to.

In some cases it might be true, but really with a cost/benefit analysis (the time cost of checking the breakers is almost nil) Its not like one is paying a big penalty for it. On the other hand its not like it won't possibly benefit you.

Somethng to think about: The forced approach excersise in its entirety comes at a specific point in a pilot's training. At that point there is really nothing new that the pilot is going to do (and the precautionary is much the same). The pilot is going to glide the airplane. The pilot is going to check the airplane is ready for landing. The pilot is going to communicate on the radio, and if carried through to the full conclusion the pilot is going to land the airplane. The only possible new principle that is going to be added to this lesson is how to pick a good place to land at, everything else is essentially review. Using the KISS rule to teach this excersise, our check to see if the airplane is ready for landing is the same as it is normally. I personally check the breakers before landing - though I should say that I can check them without having to dip my head inside the cockpit or divert an obscene ammount of my attention from flying the plane. It takes no more effort than does keying the mike or an assortment of other multi tasks I might have to do as a pilot. I'm aware that it does require the supreme effort of some, the same people I see who have trouble chewing gum and driving their cars. Twice I will say that said check has yielded a very nice to know item for landing the airplane. Once it was considerably more critical than the other.

[LousyFisherman]

Sigh. You aren't going to get top marks in that situation
because you severely crowded the field, requiring a slip
with flaps, but ...

If you made the field, you should have passed.

PS Flight training nonsense aside, if you must land on a road,
always land AHEAD of traffic going your direction. If you land
BEHIND them, they will hit the brakes and you will rear end
them.

Well, The instructor pulled the engine on me at 1000 AGL, not 3000 as it would be on the real test. There was no time to do anything properly other that rattle off all the other stuff that is required for the exam, radio calls, passenger briefing etc. My regular instructor was quite choked when he heard as it reflected badly on his teaching.

Thanks for the PS, I had not thought about it but it makes sense.

If I might say, you hold that opinion from flying over the praries, and share it with many others in the same position. The ability to accomplish the forced approach excersise should be practiced at a higher level of competentcy where one can pull it off in a worser case scenario - few or one choice of landing spots rather than many. Often the choice of field is significantly less important than the ability to precisely glide from engine fail point A to landing spot B. Snip ......

Actually Shiny, I fly mostly on the Eastern Slopes and based on my discussions with you (and IFP viewtopic.php?f=3&t=62898 ) I follow your advice above when I practice. First question: Do I have enough I have enough altitude to glide back to the last semi-reasonable landing spot I saw. The actual practice is to see if my decision is correct.

As to the turning away vs flying away. You lose sight of the landing spot no matter which you do.
If I am ever in a forced landing situation the absolute least of my worries will be how to lose excess altitude.

And yes I am still trying to visit you and IFP, it's just life gets in the way

LF

[Beefitarian]

I follow your advice above when I practice. First question: Do I have enough altitude to glide back to the last semi-reasonable landing spot I saw. The actual practice is to see if my decision is correct.

As to the turning away vs flying away. You lose sight of the landing spot no matter which you do.
If I am ever in a forced landing situation the absolute least of my worries will be how to lose excess altitude.

And yes I am still trying to visit you and IFP, it's just life gets in the way

LF

Excellent comments sir.

What he meant by flying away is the figure 8 is going to consist of long legs nearly perpendicular to what would be centerline of the field you're going to land in. You will be able to keep it in sight as you fly away because you are flying a base leg, except the angle will be like perhaps 94 degrees instead of a regular 90 to add distance from the field so you are doing a modified figure 8, then at each end you will make a turn toward the field that continues until you are angled the same amount in another base leg going back and forth.

That makes the pattern "fly away, turn towards, repeat until you have the right height to turn final toward landing in the field."

If you did not add the small angle to "fly away" you would instead do s turns toward the field.

[MIQ]

I am at the exercise for Forced Approach right now in my flight training. Had one lesson already flying a couple forced approaches. I noticed that reaching the field and estimating the glide path isn't a big problem for me, always worked out pretty well. But as soon as I need to come up with the procedures I get distracted and struggle with my flight path. So for that reason I want to improve my procedure, know it by heart, so that the mayday call or the passenger briefing doesn't take up a lot of time and thinking. Therefore I wrote down my 'procedure' down so that I can study it a bit better. I'm sure I forgot something / there could be a better sequence or parts that are not necessary. It would be great if someone would like to look over it and give me some tips for improvement. Especially the cockpit check and passenger briefing is something that I'm not quite sure about yet.

Forced Landing Procedure

1. Set Airspeed 65 Knots

2. Pick a field

3. Cockpit Check:

- Fuel Gauge Quantity
- Engine Instruments / Oil Temperature and Pressure
- Magnetos on ‘Both’
- Master On
- Fuel Pump On
- Mixture Rich
- Fuel Selector on ‘Both’
- Fuel Shutoff Valve On

4. Transponder to 7700

5. ‘MAYDAY’ Emergency Call on 121.5 - ELT On

6. Passgener Briefing:

- Move your Seat all the way to the back
- Seatbelt / Harness Secure
- Fire Extinguisher in the middle & First Aid Kit in the back
- If possible cover your face with a jacket or some kind of cushion
- Shortly before Touch Down unlatch cabin door - don’t open it!
- After Touch Down meet at the back of the aircraft

7. Forced Landing Checklist on final approach:

- Mixture Idle Cut Off
- Fuel Shutoff Valve Off
- Ignition Switch Off
- Flaps as required
- Master Off
- Doors unlatch
- Tail low Touchdown

[trey kule]

I was going to leave this alone, but, unless you are very very much to high and close to your selected field you dont really turn away from the field using the so called figure eight. Almost perpendicular to it.
The idea, I believe, is to never lose sight of your landing point, so you can angle a bit backwards.


besides, after all these years, I now know what I was taught actually had a name.

As to all the checks....If you have time...Please, new pilots, get that through your heads. If you really do have a failure without the nose bleed altitude they give you on the flight test, you job is to get the plane as safely as possible on the ground. Dont get distracted by all the procedural stuff you learned for the flight test.

I am not going to go into the PDM stuff, but suffice it to say, if your engine stops and the IA's dont get you a restart, mentally prepare yourself for the forced landing.
There are some good FAA studies about this where pilots got partial power back......just long enough to make them miss the field and hit something hard. Where pilots spun in because in their desire to troubleshoot they got a bit far from the field, and did a steep turn at low speed and low altitude., And none of this kind of thinking amounts to a row of beans during a flight test

[Beefitarian]

I wasn't allways married. I at one time planned to buy a C-310 and fly across the straight to Russia or pull a digits.

So for that reason I started practicing looking for fields under the plane because I might not be in a C-172 with a long glide capability. Therefore I tend to end up way high when I'm out with these hour builders. Like you said they're pulling the trottle to challenge your typical 172 jock who then looks 15 miles away and tries to glide to some field just out of reach.