Insights

Every flight instructor has an internal alarm, and mine rings loud and clear when a student learns something contrary to standard operating procedures (SOPs). Two examples are touch-and-go landings and multiengine VMC demonstrations.

I tolerate the touch-and-go landing because it saves time and money, and pilots use it for as long as they fly. This repetition keeps the related procedural conflicts alive in pilots' minds. Instructors teach students (1) to set takeoff power before they retract flaps during a go-around; (2) never to look in the cockpit while rolling at high speed on a runway; (3) always to look at the switch or control in question before they move it; and (4) never to activate cockpit controls while on a runway after landing. A touch-and-go landing violates these four SOPs.

I cannot, however, tolerate the current procedure for multiengine VMC demonstrations. This task, now called the "Engine inoperative - loss of directional control demonstration" in the practical test standards (PTS), consists of seven elements.

The pilot must "(1) establish a single-engine climb attitude with the airspeed at approximately 10 knots above the single-engine stall speed - VSSE; (2) establish a bank toward the operating engine, as required for best performance and controllability; (3) increase the pitch attitude slowly to reduce the airspeed at approximately one knot per second while applying rudder pressure to maintain directional control until full rudder is applied; (4) recognize and announce the first indication of loss of directional control, stall warning, or buffet; (5) recover promptly by simultaneously reducing power sufficiently on the operating engine while decreasing the angle of attack as necessary to regain airspeed and directional control with a minimum loss of altitude; (6) recover within 20 degrees of the entry heading; and (7) advance power smoothly on operating engine and accelerate to VXSE/VYSE [single-engine best-angle or best-rate of climb speed] as appropriate, plus or minus five knots, during the recovery."

Element five is the problem. I never reduce power on the operating engine unless I can't maintain heading after decreasing the pitch attitude and applying full rudder and enough aileron - no more, no less - to maintain the desired bank attitude. In this situation an instructor should never mention or teach a simultaneous pitch and power reduction, and a multiengine student should never perform it.

Element five should state "Recover promptly by decreasing the angle of attack to regain airspeed and directional control with a minimum loss of altitude. Reduce engine power to regain heading control only if the attitude change, full rudder, and appropriate aileron inputs don't restore heading control."

The worst time for a multiengine pilot to have an engine failure is immediately after takeoff while flying at maximum gross weight. If the remaining runway is insufficient for a safe landing, the pilot must decrease the angle of attack to maintain VXSE or VYSE, and initiate the engine failure emergency procedure. Survival depends on maximum power, minimum drag, and proper airspeed. If speed gets too low and the pilot cannot maintain directional control, the last option is to reduce power.

When pitch decreases from a climb attitude to a near-level attitude, VMC changes slightly because the operating engine's thrust moment arm increases or decreases, depending on which engine fails. If either engine fails in an airplane with counter-rotating props, VMC increases when pitch is lowered. If the right engine fails in an airplane with conventionally rotating props, VMC increases with decreasing pitch attitude, and if the left engine fails (the critical engine) and pitch attitude decreases, VMC decreases.

FAA Administrator Jane Garvey has stated, "Let me tell you why focusing on aviation safety is so important. We've heard all the numbers, in one version or another, that with the projected increase in aviation activity, tomorrow's number of accidents will be devastatingly high - unless we lower today's already low accident rates. That is an unmistakable clarion call, and we must respond and respond decisively."

Her intent is no different than her predecessors, but all of them have concentrated on expensive, high-level technology. She should look at the basics and correct and rename this multiengine training requirement. It was called the "VMC demonstration" maneuver for more than 40 years.