Letters: The impossible turn

But I do have a minor nit to pick.

The “Impossible Turn” sidebar notes that, “A Cessna 172 that stalls at 48 knots in level flight will stall at 68 knots in a 60-degree bank.” True enough—assuming, as the sentence hints, but doesn’t explicitly state, you are in a level turn and pulling the required 2 G to maintain the 60-degree bank and altitude.

The correlation between bank and stall speed is actually based on load factor, as the notes on the familiar graphic in the Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge and other sources point out. You can, of course, roll into a bank and barely affect stall speed—as long as you refrain from pulling during the turn.

Now, I’m certainly not advocating fighter-pilot turns in the traffic pattern in a Cessna 172. But it’s important for pilots to understand that the relationship between stall speed and bank angle is based on load factor, not the bank angle itself. If a situation (say, maneuvering to land after an engine failure) requires more than a typical traffic-pattern bank angle, you can safely steepen the bank—as long as you don’t load the wing by pulling during the turn.

In my experience, many pilots don’t understand this crucial relationship and, having internalized incomplete information about stalls and turns, fly wide traffic patterns with shallow banks (I often see folks wary of going beyond standard-rate turns in the pattern), which can lead to overshoots and other situations that can then result in abrupt maneuvers that come dangerously close to accelerated stalls and resulting incipient spins.

Bruce Williams
Seattle, Washington

English proficiency

The other day, I was holding short of Runway 27R at Gillespie Field in El Cajon, California. The traffic pattern was full with flight students doing takeoffs and landings.

As I watched and listened, I found it increasing difficult to keep track of the airplanes while an overworked controller tried to understand flight students who barely spoke English. Multiple instructions had to be given—and then repeated—by the tower controller and the students, which tied up the frequency and created confusion for everyone.

It concerned me that one of these students may misunderstand important controller instructions and create a hazardous in-flight situation, or worse, an accident.

After landing, I went by the local international training flight school and found that foreign-language-speaking instructors teach the students in their native language. These instructors then give the students a minimal working knowledge of the English language and send them through the process. A foreign-language-speaking instructor/designated examiner then passes the students, and we now have non-English-speaking pilots.

I fly a corporate jet for a large FAR Part 135 operator on the West Coast, and I am finding pilots’ English language deficiency to be an increasing problem just about everywhere I fly.

The ability to read, speak, write, and understand English is a U.S. regulatory eligibility requirement and required by the International Civil Aviation Organization. I believe that all foreign flight training students should be checked by FAA examiners exclusively, and not DPEs. FAA examiners, and DPEs if used, need to be willing to fail students who they know don’t speak, read, and write the English language proficiently.

Instructors should teach their students in English, helping the students become more proficient with exposure.

Flight instructors, training facilities, and examiners have a shared responsibility to make sure that the students we train in the United States, who fly in U.S. airspace, can speak, read, and write the English language proficiently.

Edward Walsh
San Diego, California

How do you study for the written portion of a flight review, a new rating, or certification?

Traditional books or e-books 24%
Podcasts <1%
Videos 4%
Online courses 11%
A combination of the above 58%
Other 3%

Get the scoop on new testing standards in “Build a Better Pilot” on page 38.

Aviation eBrief poll