Scenario-based training for everyone
I'm an airline pilot for a major airline. Our training has a scenario base to it, and usually involves some in-depth execution of FAR 121 regulations. I am also teaching private students and would like to include scenario-based training in my instruction, but I am unable to create/understand what I, as a CFI, should emphasize in creating these scenarios. I was hoping to get your opinion on how to create meaningful in-flight scenarios.
Thanks,
Mr. Cory
Greetings Mr. Cory:
Here's a definition of scenario-based training from FAA Order 8700.1: "Scenario-based Training (SBT) is a training system that uses highly structured scripts of 'real-world' experiences to address flight-training objectives in an operational environment." Based on this definition, SBT can be taught on the micro as well as the macro level.
For instance, when using SBT on the macro level, you might create a scenario in which the student must use many different skills to solve a complex aviation problem. One example would be informing a noninstrument-rated student that all his electronic navigation equipment has failed, and he must now use only pilotage to find a safe place to land, while simultaneously dealing with a lowering overcast condition. You can accomplish this beginning with the airplane at 3,000 feet agl, then having the student descend 500 feet every three minutes. This gives the student approximately 18 minutes before his wheels make contact with a solid surface.
Consider building scenarios that help train students to avoid specific accidents you've read about in NTSB reports. For instance, partial power failure is a problem that can be a challenge for pilots. Perhaps you'll build a scenario in which a student has a partial power failure during climbout (simulated by reducing the throttle to perhaps 50-percent power). Now the student must use all his decision-making and airmanship skills to find a safe place to land. Sure, you have to use your noggin a bit and think these situations through carefully, but a capable CFI should be able to do this without much difficulty.
In my opinion, it's on the micro level where using SBT can do the most good for your primary students. Micro-level SBT consists of explaining the reasons for and demonstrating the value of every single maneuver required by the practical test standards.
Slow flight is a good example. If we teach slow flight as nothing more than a maneuver that allows a pilot to fly slowly, then our students are not likely to see any value associated with learning it. Suppose, however, you teach it to show your students how the controls are less responsive, or to show how the degree of bank is now limited because of the airplane's proximity to stall speed. Both of these are micro scenarios that show the value of a particular maneuver, especially when operating in the traffic pattern. You can teach slow flight to show how to raise the flaps and gear during a go-around, or show the student the clues he or she might experience before encountering a stall, or even to allow him to better sequence himself when operating in the pattern. These are all micro scenarios in my book.
What about steep turns? Their value doesn't lie in being able to avoid solid objects (other airplanes, mountains, UFOs, etc.) encountered in flight. Practically speaking, they can and should be taught based on some micro scenarios that show the relationship between stall speed, bank angle, and load factor. When a pilot is turning steeply to align himself with the runway to prevent an overshoot, knowledge of steep turns will help him associate the increasing load factor he experiences with the increase in stall speed. This knowledge is essential when operating at low altitudes. The moment you point out these relationships to a student, you are engaged in scenario-based training.
There's nothing in the PTS that can't be taught based on some basic micro scenario that shows the value and utility of the specific knowledge being taught. Your job is to teach your students in such a way that they see the relevance of each and every basic maneuver they're required to learn. Doing so helps make the training you provide scenario-based.
Full-flaps faux pas
Dear Rod:
I was on a takeoff roll in a Cessna 172 and noticed that the airspeed indicator was at or near zero. I thought that it was malfunctioning and decided to abort the takeoff. The airplane suddenly lifted up in the air, and I had to make a quick decision to hold the nose off the ground, otherwise the nose would have crashed on the runaway. With the airspeed indicator now moving a little, I continued the takeoff, deciding to land back at the airport.
The airspeed indicator did not move beyond 40 knots and then started to go back toward zero at around 700 feet. The stall warning horn started to blare. I lowered the nose but the stall warning sound continued.
Although the power was in full, I could not figure out why this was happening. I quickly did a scan of all instruments and realized that the flaps were fully lowered. I removed all the flaps and the airspeed picked up.
Did I get lucky in being able to do a takeoff with full flaps? If I had not figured out that the flaps were down, would the airplane have stalled and crashed at 700 feet?
Thanks!
No Name Please
Greetings No Name Man:
A lightly loaded Cessna 172 on a low-density-altitude day can indeed take off with full flaps (even if those flaps extend to 40 degrees, as they do in the older model Cessnas). It's not likely that your airplane would have stalled and crashed under these conditions if you maintained an attitude sufficient to keep the airspeed from deteriorating. In fact, I used to make my students go around and climb to a safe altitude in the Cessna 150 and 172 with full flaps, on the assumption that the flaps were stuck in the full-down position.
Then again, increase the density altitude and now you have bad juju in terms of climb performance. Under higher density altitude conditions, a Cessna can't climb, and no go-around is possible with stuck flaps. You are definitely stuck.
On the other hand, I wouldn't call it "lucky" to have taken off with full flaps. Yes, you were fortunate that the airplane could climb under those conditions. Perhaps you were lucky in the sense that you had an instructor who taught you the basic principles of attitude flying sufficiently well to have you lower the nose and maintain a safe airspeed. You also gained a bit more experience, which is just like saying that you made a mistake and learned from it.
So consider this a good lesson. If and when the airplane doesn't climb as expected, there are four things you need to look at immediately. Either the flaps are down, the gear is down, the throttle lever has vibrated out of its full forward position, or you have carb ice and need to apply full carb heat.
Stick these four items in your psyche and remember them. The next time your airplane doesn't climb as well as you expect, run through them and you'll probably find the reason.
Help for a short student
Dear Rod:
I am teaching a very short female student in a Cessna 172. She has a cushion behind her and underneath her, and we've got the seat forward as much as possible. She can't effectively operate the pedals, especially the brakes. Is there a product out there that is meant to bolt onto or otherwise "extend" the pedals or the student's reach?
Thank you,
Z.K.
Greetings Z.K.:
That's a good question. Type the words "rudder pedal extensions" into Google.com and you'll find information on several varieties of extensions for rudder pedals. On the other hand, there might be a less expensive solution to your problem.
I once inherited a female student who was so short that she also couldn't reach the rudder pedals or see clearly over the 1973 Cessna 150 Commuter dashboard (which may explain why she was good at instrument flying). Fortunately, the fashion of the time had women wearing shoes called, I believe, clogs (although they're probably best referred to as platform shoes). These were large-heeled shoes with nearly two inches of toe padding that added several inches to a person's height. I've seen women wearing similar types of shoes recently. The fact that these women appear to be eight or nine feet tall means that these shoes might work well for flight training purposes. Just keep in mind that a large heel won't work without a reasonably thick pad under the ball of the foot.
After my student learned to land with the shoes on, I had her practice landing with them off just in case one fell off during an approach (meaning that she had to demonstrate landing the airplane without the effective use of the rudder pedals...not impossible to do, of course). New shoes are probably the easiest and least expensive way to solve this problem.
Rod Machado is a flight instructor, author, educator, and speaker. A pilot since 1970 and a CFI since 1973, he has flown more than 8,000 hours and owns a Beech A36 Bonanza. Visit his Web site.
Related Articles
