Class 2 Instructor Ride

[capthank]

Just wondering if anyone has done the class 2 ride recently. Have one coming as an upgrade and was looking for any words of wisdom.
Thanks

[C-GPFG]

Not a heck of a lot different than a 3 renewal if you've done one.

They're looking more at your supervisory skills...how you debrief a junior instructor on a flight you did with one of their students and make suggestions for improvement. It's pretty much the same thing you'd say to the student, but to their instructor now.

In the PGI, they want you to ask things likes...has your instructor shown you this? how has your instructor taught you to do...

Taught the lesson in the air that I PGI'd on the ground,
Demo'd two items (not teaching), one airwork, plus one landing.
Examiner played student flying two exercises in the air for which I had to debrief that student's instructor.

I had helpful supervisors as a 3 and 4, and followed their lead on my ride.

[whitey3205]

Did a class II ride about 2 weeks ago and the same comment as above. Not much different than a class III ride. The major difference was the standard and quality of teaching. The guy that did my ride was big on teaching techniques and ability to teach what ever he wanted. The PGI was a combination of a few exercise and the student was a commercial student that didn't fly for a few years. A little different but it is something that we are after experiencing. In flight was 360 degree force approach and circuits.
Good luck with your ride and remember get as much from the ride as you can.

[capthank]

Thanks for the feedback....I really appreciate it!
I've got a few class 3 renewals under my belt over the years and they have all gone well....nice to know the 2 ride isn't much different other than calibre of instruction.

[TC Guy]

Thanks for the feedback....I really appreciate it!
I've got a few class 3 renewals under my belt over the years and they have all gone well....nice to know the 2 ride isn't much different other than calibre of instruction.

The main content of the Preparatory Ground Instruction is exactly the same, the standard is just a bit higher (see the flight test guide for the details on that).

The main difference is that you are going to be grilled on two areas that weren't applicable before:

a) Supervision of Class 4 Instructors
b) Being the CFI of a flight school (yes, I am well aware of the fact that a Class 3 can be a CFI of a one-Instructor operation)

Be well versed in CARS 405/425 and 406/426... talk to the CFI of the school you are at... they will give you some great insight.

Good luck, and relax-- just do your best.

-Guy

[Lurch]

Did a class II ride about 2 weeks ago and the same comment as above. Not much different than a class III ride. The major difference was the standard and quality of teaching. The guy that did my ride was big on teaching techniques and ability to teach what ever he wanted. The PGI was a combination of a few exercise and the student was a commercial student that didn't fly for a few years. A little different but it is something that we are after experiencing. In flight was 360 degree force approach and circuits.
Good luck with your ride and remember get as much from the ride as you can.

Whitey I have to ask, What is a 360 degree forced approach?

Lurch

[TC Guy]

Whitey I have to ask, What is a 360 degree forced approach?

It is a variant of the forced approach procedure consisting of (amongst other things) flying over the selected landing area and conducting a 360 degree turn onto final.

See the latest (4th edition - revised) of the FTM for details.

-Guy

[looproll]

What is a 360 degree forced approach?

it's the standard forced approach for fixed wing Canadian Forces Pilots and referred to affectionately as a PFL.

[bob sacamano]

On the 360 subject, you mean you had to execute a forced approach using that technique, or was it your choice to do so?

[Lurch]

Wow look at me I'm on the same page as Bob

I thought that was what you were talking about I just didn't think they could force you to use a specific procedure. I have never used the 360 forced tech and will never teach it. It might work nicely for fighters but small A/C, what were they thinking?

[chipmunk]

I did a Class 2 upgrade ride recently, after being out of the Instructor "scene" for a couple of years. I passed, but there were one or two things that caught me off guard. Here's the summary of my ride:

My scenario was a CPL student, and it was the standard brief one lesson on the ground, teach it in the air, then teach a "surprise" lesson in the air, then a skill demo. Regarding the latter two, I wasn't told what this would be until we came to that point in the air on the flight test - I was only told that I didn't need to bring foggles, etc. At the end of the flight test, the Inspector played "Class IV instructor who was having problems teaching his students an exercise" and he showed me how he taught/demoed to his students that particular exercise and I had to critique his instructing ability.

Be ready to think "out of the box" if you get a CPL scenario - try to relate possible real life CPL scenarios - i.e. you're on a charter flight, you get to an airport and the snow hasn't been cleared, etc... when teaching Precautionaries.

Know the Flight Test Standards for all the exercises and the differences between CPL/PPL, etc.

Be familiar with the DFTE manual (or as it is apparently called now, according to the Inspector, the PE manual) - I had a question regarding the minimum altitude to I could "fail" a students' engine on a CPL pre-flight test.

During the ground portion of the ride, the Inspector also had me print out the Instructor Flight Test Guide, as well as a section of the CPL Flight Test Guide.

My restrained 1.5 cents...

[chipmunk]

I thought that was what you were talking about I just didn't think they could force you to use a specific procedure. I have never used the 360 forced tech and will never teach it. It might work nicely for fighters but small A/C, what were they thinking?

I think they are talking about exercise 18A in the CPL Flight Test STandards, rather than Ex. 22. It is a Flight Test Item.

From the Flight Test Guide:

Flight Test Exercises - Ex. 18 - Approach and Landing
The candidate will demonstrate:
a. a power-off 180° accuracy approach and landing from circuit height; and
b. a short field landing over an actual or simulated obstacle; or a soft field landing; and
c. an overshoot.
Assessment of approaches and landings will be based on the candidate’s ability to select the proper approach profile for the actual or simulated conditions. Where practicable, at least one of the landings will be based on the previously calculated performance. If possible, at least one of the landings should be completed under crosswind conditions.
The candidate will be expected to use the correct procedure and technique for the actual wind conditions, landing surface and length or those specified by the examiner, to assess the possibility of further conditions such as wind shear and wake turbulence, and to execute overshoot procedures.
Note: The candidate must be able to explain the necessity for any variation from recommended speeds, e.g. gusty or crosswind conditions.
A. Power-off 180° Accuracy Approach and Landing
Aim
To determine the candidate’s ability to execute a gliding approach, without power, from circuit height and land safely on a specified touchdown point with a degree of accuracy.
Description
The power-off 180° accuracy approach and landing will be initiated from normal circuit height or at the height assigned by ATC. Ideally, the candidate would close the throttle and initiate the glide on the downwind leg abeam the specified touchdown point but, if traffic does not permit, the gliding descent from circuit height may be delayed until later in the circuit. The candidate will close the throttle and establish a gliding approach from circuit height that results in an accurate touchdown and landing.
Performance Criteria
Assessment will be based on the candidate’s ability to:
a. consider wind conditions, landing surface and obstacles;
b. specify an appropriate touchdown point;
c. close the throttle from normal circuit height;
d. establish a gliding approach at the recommended speed
(+10/-5 knots);
e. complete cockpit checks;
f. extend landing flap and lower landing gear, if retractable, when landing is assured;
g. touch down in a normal landing attitude at the specified touchdown point (+400/-50 feet);
Note: One (1) engine clearing will be allowed before descending through 500 feet AGL. In very cold conditions, the use of some power and flaps while maintaining the same airspeed and a normal gliding rate of descent is acceptable.

Just your typical engine failure in the circuit. I heard it was something they inserted to make the CPL more difficult (??!) than the PPL.

Aside from that I just wanted to mention: outside the circuit, I've taught the 360 degree forced approach technique to some students who had trouble with the "circuit" technique, as well as introduced it to all my CPL students so they had a choice of which technique to use depending on the circumstances. Although it works, I personally don't really like the 360 approach, and for PPL students it's often trickier (less straight and level time) but just because I don't like it, doesn't mean other pilots won't - keep an open mind!

[Jimmy Mack]

The only time I have ever used the 360 degree forced approach was in a Cherokee 140 because when you pulled the power, you dropped like a rock.

It seemed to work fairly well that you look out the window, start a turn and whatever was underneath you was where you would end up...

I'm of the train of thought that getting it on the ground safely is the most important thing in a real world situation. When it comes to training however, a set procedure should exist if only so you can apply standards.

JM

[groundpilot]

Having done both civie and military forced patterns, I found the PFL (360 degree forced ldg) quite ingenious.

First of all it standardizes the forced pattern so that you can quickly assess your energy state for making a runway. Also, you don't have to do the full 360 degree, by knowing what the proper altitude for the different segments of the approach, high key(overhead), low key (downwind) and final key(base) you can figure out what the best entry point is.

I have done the procedure in a 2000lbs Firefly to a 13000lbs Hawk and the same basic principals apply. It is nice to learn a procedure that would probably work on any airplane with wings.