J_R

We often see statements that 40 sized trainers are flown in a more dangerous manner during the training of new pilots, than other types of flying. I started to wonder, with the use of buddy boxes being the norm, why this appears to be true. Back in the days when we had only 7 channels to use, when a pilot got clearance to use the frequency, it was normally for some maximum amount of time. 15 to 20 minutes seemed the norm. The newbie pilot would use every minute of his allotted time before landing and having to relinquish the frequency, since it might be an hour or more before he would get the frequency back. Today, with the 50 channels we have, we typically do not have to wait long to get the frequency again, yet, the .40 sized trainers are still equipped with large fuel tanks that allow flights approaching 30 minutes at half throttle. Instructors, and students alike, seem to embrace the long training flights.

In watching several new pilots recently, it occurred to me that part of the problem may be that the new pilot appears to lose concentration substantially before he starts to run low on fuel. How many of you, as either instructors or trainees have suggested or had it suggested to you that you land when you start to lose concentration instead of waiting for the fuel to run low? What are your observations about the “normal� time period a new student can maintain concentration? Are extended flights a major part of the reason mishaps occur more frequently to student pilots? Would a student pilot be better off to take more frequent, shorter duration flights than a few long duration flights?

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Oddly enough this really is a serious issue. When in undergraduate school I took several education courses but did not get a teacher’s certificate because the department chair and I clashed. I was doing some substitute teaching and he was telling folks to do things that would not work in the class room.

However, there are several known things about teaching that most all the people in that industry (private, public schools, commercial instructor pilots-eg the FAA, and military educators) agree on.

First is that the average student has an attention span that is inverse to the complexity of the task. Once the student gets a ‘mindful’ the attention is gone and no more learning takes place. Flying model airplanes is a very complex task. That means shorter flight times work better.

The second thing I recall is that corrected repetition works in small amounts. This tends to encourage shorter training flight times to avoid boredom and insure ‘internalization’ of what has been learned on this flight so it can be demonstrated, and corrected if need be, on the next flight.

The third thing I learned from my flight training and looking into becoming a CFI and that is to have a lesson plan especially for aviation. It is hard work to have a preflight discussion that effectively covers all that is going to be accomplished in a long lesson. This is why most commercial flight schools charge for ‘ground school’. This difficulty is one of many things that encourages me to keep my students flight times in the 10 to 15 minute range, until they are almost ready to solo.

The shorter flight times allow better post flight discussions and pointers since fewer new subjects are touched on during the flight.

JimRoss

J-R and JB,
You guys are geniuses. Thank you for the last two posts. I now have a student that is progressing at a moderate rate. Now that you bring it up I think one main reason is the long flight times. We are supposed to fly next Friday afternoon and I think I will make up a flight plan that covers only about 10 minutes. We should be able to do this several times that day so he can have the most time to reason out what he is doing wrong and try to correct it.

blw

My Feedback: (3)

I was taught in the instructor pilots course that students can only process about 8 words when at the controls. It isn't difficult to condense things down to that. Sometimes, you have to form the complex instructions to an 8 word question. Wait for the student to respond, and then give him another short burst...if he can handle it. Timing counts.

Another concept is the building block method where you teach from the known to the unknown (simple to complex), to build upon the knowledge base until you have taught it all. When you break things down, they are really just a series of maneuvers. For example, downwind is straight and level flight at a certain airspeed. Turning base is a turning maneuver that sometimes becomes a descending, decelerating maneuver. Etc, etc, etc.

BillyGoat

I try to keep training flights to 10 minutes or less. Anything beyond that the student is no longer advancing his/her skills and there is a definite decrease in performance. I feel if they continue to fight through this period of poorer flying it starts to undo any advancement they may have made earlier in the secession.

Keeping flights short allows them to take a break and gather some composure from the mounting mistakes they may have been making.

Hossfly

Since, IMO, this is better subject should be in the beginners forum, JR, I suspect that you are trolling for some on your EC buds with another mandatory Safety Rule rambling around their head.

Concentration time is a big factor for both the Student and THE INSTRUCTOR. On the other hand training-frequency is also important to maintain a significant learning curve.

As an USAF Flight Instructor in both T-33 and T-38 aircraft, designated Instructor in B-47s, plus certified Academic Instructor in several technical and administrative courses over 13 years, I have a slight familiarity with the student situation. Of course as an RC instructor, even though self-anointed, for over 30 years, I also have some ideas about that subject.

While all of these rules are definitely subject to individuals and circumstances, I offer these as results of long experience.

RC Student:
Minimum of 3 flights per session, Maximum of four flights. 3 flights usually runs into the down side.
Maximum flight time 15 minutes with 12 min. being better. Time less than 5 minutes not counted.

Minimum of 2 flight sessions per week. Maximum of five. Only once per week will increase total time to solo by an estimated 50%. Less than once per week, no estimate other than a looong time.
More than four sessions per week will place the student into a position where the motor skills may be very good, however IMO the mental skills of situational-awareness will become seriously deficient.

One thing that is well being displayed in the present is that if a student practices what the Instructor defines, on a simulator between sessions, the RC learning curve is extremely enhanced. OTOH my experience -- a couple exceptions -- evidences that the use of the simulator without previous instruction can develop bad habits or as we called bad things way back in my days, "Dangerous Tendencies". In RC I think of this as problems reference needed experience relative the flight line and other pilots on that line.

scottrc

My instructor would fall asleep after 10 minutes of watching me do figure 8s in the sky. Now that I'm an instructor, I have inherited his trait. To remedy this problem, I use my own trainer. I'm amazed how much more alert I am when its my 2 bits kicking around the sky. Like Jim pointed out. I'm a firm beliver in lesson and flight plans. Give the student some homework and let them know what they will be doing the next flight and for how long. An instuctor can show a lot in 1/2 hour such as stall recovery, spins, how to maintain wings level and altitude. Very important skills for a new person to aquire. My tank only lasts 15 minutes and every flight has me trading off with the student every couple of minutes. Me showing the technique and then handing off to the student and talking them through it.

Where I see "dangerous Tendencies" appearing is when the student gets enough lessons to barely control the plane, then starts practicing aerobatic manouvers and moves into a 33% aerobatic plane. Kinda why I see a pilots who can spin, snap, and hover to their hearts content, but cannot takeoff, maintain and hold a pattern, and do touch and go's worth a penny.

Scar

My Feedback: (3)

I think an instructor's forum would be a good idea.

I think the beginner's forum would be a BAD place for instructor debate. Certain posters who frequent that forum jump into any discussion of instruction, as if one of their constitutional rights are threatened.

Last winter, I wrote up a little feedback sheet, a one-pager with a dozen or so instruction points, each followed by a dozen or so spaces. Above each space is a place for the date and my initials. After each instruction session I'll put a 'G' or an 'N' in the column (for 'good' or 'needs work') if the student attempted that item. Items include frequency control and safety procedures, so they always get a couple 'G's. Other items are for holding altitude, smooth turns, and level flight for the first few rows on the sheet, and the next few rows deal with approaches & landing, stall recovery, trimming an out-of-trim plane, etc. If the student doesn't attempt an approach, that column is blank. And so on.

I give the student feedback after each flight, and he can review his progress any time (he keeps the page.) I keep hearing how feedback is important, so I thought I'd provide it in this fashion. So far, I think it's a worthwhile addition.

Yesterday a retired student explained that he gets weary of standing, after about 10 minutes, and then he gets a little nervous and shaky. I had noticed that his skills deteriorate after about 8 minutes and mentioned it before, so I was glad he told me this. I suggested he bring a folding chair next time. We'll see if he likes that idea.

Just thought I'd contribute these thoughts for other instructors, and look for any comments.
Good luck,
Dave Olson.

Mike in DC

You seem to be taking the position that today's beginners, despite never living in a time where there were only 7 channels, purposely buy huge fuel tanks on their trainers to extend their flight time, because in their reptilian memory, despite all evidence to the contrary, they think that if they land they won't be able to fly again for an hour or more. As a result, they are becoming dangerously unfocused, and are too unethical or dumb to stop flying after they can no longer concentrate.

All I can say is that my experience reinforces nothing you state. Ten to 15 minute flight times seems the norm for pros and beginners alike where I fly. Folks vary widely in their ability to concentrate, but most seem to have the ability to say, "Let's take a break," when they need a breather.

wyldman

My Feedback: (1)

I will only keep a student up for 10 to 15 minutes. not only do they need a break but so does my finger from hold the the trainer switch. the other thing my club does is to switch students and trainers. so that the trainees don't get bored and they get a change in teaching styles and this works well if you have a student that is having troubles with a certain area. A different instructor may have a better way of communicating the lesson.
This also helps the students to not be dependent on only one instructor, we have a few students that have turned down flight instruction because their regular instructor is absent.

we also don't stop teaching the newly soloed pilots. because they always go for that second plane and it is always something that is out of their league, so we help them make a better choice and teach them how to handle their new planes.

And I would like to see a forum on pilot instruction.
WYLDMAN

JimRoss

ME 2 on the Instructors forum.

BillyGoat

Instructors forum [&:]

Good idea[sm=thumbup.gif] to help improve our effectiveness as teachers. More efficient and effective teachers could help in retaining newbies to the sport.

J_R

Let me expand on the original post somewhat. Claims made on the AMA coverage fall largely into two categories. The first is sticking body parts into spinning props, and is not the topic of this thread. The second is hitting parked cars. Unfortunately, I know very little about the circumstances of the claims. I am making some assumptions that may be unwarranted. One being that it is the newer pilots that are hitting cars. During the training process, if, as part of training, a pilot learns to ignore his concentration span, is he likely to make errors when he is flying solo, shortly after the initial training period? What are your observations as to the times a pilot appears to be out of control? Are most out of control flights not related to newer pilots at all? Are they the result of dead batteries, failed linkages, failed airframes, or radio interference? What are the most common causes of out of control flights? How can we reduce the number of cars hit by models? Of course, out of control flights near the flightline, or behind it are the major concern, but, it may be true that information about out of control flights in normal flying space are just as important in determing the reasons that cars are hit.

Horrace
Quit reading between the lines, this has nothing to do with anyone suggesting I post anything. Your other input is appreciated.

Mike in DC
New pilots, as a general rule, are flying ARFs, and make no decision about the tank size. That decision was made for them by the manufacturer of the craft. I very much doubt that any meaningful number of students make any modification to tank size.

headshot

While not an instructor, I have a few observations.

Most trainers are currently coming with 8-10 oz. tanks installed. As a pilot, I know that the average for the fuel consumption (with throttle management) for a .40 will drain this tank in approx 20 min, 25 max. Concurrently, if I was instructing, I would rather see the pilot land within the "safe" window of the tank. So an approx. 15 min. windoow would make perfect sense. Now, as a student (thinking back 8 years here) I was VERY nervous my first few flights. This is understandable, but the nervousness might lead to a reduction in reflexes/accuity after an extended period of time (10-15 min.) My instructor kept our flights nice and short, so we wouldn't run into the problems created by my nervousness. I eventually learned to fly in a month or so and have been happily flying/landing/crashing airplanes eversince. (Before everyone gets in a tizzy about the crashing, remember that I am a combat pilot)

A quick side note. I have assisted with the AMA Intro Pilot program for the last couple of years. In our experiences, we have found that a pilot assisting the "student"/introductory candidate with the operations of the transmitter/control movements while the intro pilot talks them through the manuvers really seems to help in the retention. Also allows the assisting pilot to see what the student is doing on the sticks, thus making correctional instruction more specific. ANy thoughts here?

Jay L.

JimRoss

From my observation, there are fewer "NEW" pilots crashing while under instruction and shortly thereafter, due to their airplane being gone over by more than one person. this being the "Norm" to try to teach the newbie that it should be done each time it is flown. Many of the older pilots tend to take for grnated that all is ok and they may or may not do a range check and just go fly. I have seen at least five older pilots crash in the past two months and NO students. Most of the accidents were caused by Dumb Thumbs, while one was a total wing failure in flight.

wyldman

My Feedback: (1)

J_R, I'll have to agree with JimRoss, I have not seen or even heard of a student in our area hitting a car and I have been instructing for several years, most of crashes I have seen outside of the normal flying area were caused by pilot error or some kind of failure on board the aircraft.
Battery failure airframe failure, flutter and so on but the majority of crashes are pilots trying to out fly their equipment or poorly maintianed equipment or getting disorentited or a lack of experience. Too many times I have seen newly soloed pilots going from a trainer to a warbird or a 3D aircraft for their second plane. this is where or club has helped alot of students make the right choice for second plane. I have seen 4 of these types of crashes in the past six weeks and not one of them involved a student and instructor. I'm not saying that we have not had students crash learning to land and takeoff but they are always on the runway.
As for my obeservation asto when a pilot is out of control, well that's hard to say if we are talking about a student on a buddy box anything out of the normal flight training path that is not corrected for would be reason for me to take back control and teach the student what went wrong and how to correct it.
As for the experienced pilots well about half look like their out of control most of the time they are flying ,but they just call it 3D me included. most of the time it's pretty obvious when someone has lost control and there's not a whole lot you can do but watch.
I know that's not much of an answer but I would like to know a little more about the car hits you are talking about ,to see if they could of been avoided.
WYLDMAN

BillyGoat

JR in the history of our club I believe one car has been hit, but that was at our old field and let me just say with that set up it’s amazing more didn’t get hit. At most fields for an auto to get hit or even have a crash happen in that vicinity one must have entered in the no fly zone behind the flight line. Most pilots I see that found themselves behind flight line got there because of mistake in flying and not because of equipment problems. To analyze my observations a little further it’s typically a relatively new pilot pushing the boundaries of their skills and getting disoriented.

As for how many minutes they had been flying at that time????? You do have a valid hypothesis with time and maximum concentration.

50+AirYears

At our field, we only once came close to having a parked car hit, actually a large 38' motor home, but that was from a long term experienced pilot who had a personal problem with "Too many stupid rules". The rest of the members, including the MH owner, were more concerned about the group of young kids who were playing about the same distance from the impact point on the other side. About 200' from the flight line.
Our instructors do a very good job of keeping their students away from the pits and flight line, and if a recently soloed pilot gets into a problem, somebody is usually quickly moving to help him.

ScRamjet75

Greetings. At our field I recall only 2 pilots losing planes into the No-fly zone. Neither was close to persons or cars thankfully.
One is believed to be a battery failure, and it was a relatively new battery, in a plane less than 1 season old.
I would rate the pilot an Expert, He can fly most anything very well. The battery had been charged prior to flight.
The other was a "pilot" who had one throttle position (wide open) and a serious attitude "I fly REAL planes, this is no big deal"
He had more money than brains and proved it. He bought RTF trainers complete with radios and smashed them.
He soloed eventually... Then went straight to the aforementioned warbird (built for him by someone else)
Then He promptly smashed that. Haven't seen him around this year, perhaps he gave it up.

blw

My Feedback: (3)

4 or 5 times that I've seen this year. 3 times almost hitting cars due to disorientation. Once when main gear ripped off and hung on the elevator- the guy saved it but almost hit my truck (there were only 3 people at the field that day). A couple of times because the flyers simply lost control. These are the ones that I saw. I've heard of a couple of others when I wasn't there.

jedi

My Feedback: (7)

I find it suprising that non of you have made reference to the fantastic flight simulators out there. I have been training for about the last four years and I highly recommend that each of my students practice on the sim.

Those who practice on a regular basis solo faster and are more confident and much smoother pilots.

Those who do not practice on a sim, take longer to solo and are usually not as smooth nor do they seem to have as much confidence.

The only crashes at our field are the ones caused by mechanical faults or building problems. The buddy box has all but eliminated the problem of lost or crashed planes.

Hossfly

You may not be so surprised if you read all of all the previous posts. There is a mention there.

While that which you don't know may be a problem, Knowing for sure that which ain't so usually does bring one a real surprise at the most inopportune times.


Edited to add smilies above and: Don't ask me how I come by that wisdom unless you have a looong time to listen.[]

50+AirYears

While I have seen buddy boxes prevent a lot of accidents that would have happened in the old pass the transmitter days, I still see a lot of close calls and rekitting from people from recent solo to over 50 years of flying. The people who have the most accidents seem to be the people who have the attitude "Stuff happens, why worry about it". The people with the fewest incidents are the ones with the attitude that most accidents can be avoided by thinking about what you're doing.
Our local steel plant has a safety manager who gives this briefing. 'Nearly all accidents happen because of what someone did wrong or didn't do right. 99 times out of a hundred, the accident is directly someone's fault who may not have even been directly involved or even present. My job is to find out whose fault it was. I take pride in my job and I'm VERY VERY good at it. It's a very easy job.'
This attitude has been in place for over 20 years there. In that time the accident rate went from over 20 'accidents' a week to maybe 2 a month. Until a fatal this year, nobody had a fatal in over 4 years. Used to be several fatals every year.

JimRoss

So far this week at my club, I have seen three planes crash, very spectacular I might add, but nonetheless regrettable. Without exception, all were due to pilot error. These were pilots who supposedly know how to fly. I personally crashed my Pizazz some time back but it was due to showing off and pushing the envelope beyond my capabilities. Can't pull out of a flat spin five feet AGL.
I believe the problem, in part, is the fact that once a person learns to fly the plane, he/she gets a little cocky and tries to do things beyond their abilities resulting in loss of orientation and the
plane.
This may all be part of the Balsa Gods way of instilling humility in those of us who would pursue the flying of R/C planes. I don't really know but maybe it's just part of the learning curve. Kind of like the expiration date of the airplanes. Each plane has one, it just ain't printed anywhere.

SoCal GliderGuider

Use ARF 2 meter sailplanes and hi-starts. Flights last a couple of minutes each. Teaches landings real quick.

Better than getting slimed all the time!