Piper Seminole down near Fredericton

[Ogee]

Trey Kule,

Couple of real good posts there.

[Big Pistons Forever]

As a flying instructor I have done PPL,CPL,night,SEIFR,ME,MEIFR,aerobatic,tailwheel,float,and warbird instructing. The only truely scary moments I ever had occured while I was conducting training for the Multi Engine rating. At my first job as an instructor, my school turned me loose on the Seneca when I was still a pretty junior instructor and more importantly did not have very much multi time and virtually none as a commercial line pilot. Of course as a then young and stupid pilot I thought I was a pretty hot stick so I jumped at the chance to teach the ME course. So there I was with my first ME student. The exercise was the engine cut right after the go around. The only smart thing I did that day was to start the exrecise at 4000' AGL.
The airplane was dirty and at 5 kn below final Vref when I called for the go around and as soon as the student applied full power I briskly retarded one throttle. The student then froze momentarily which was really bad because he had already rotated to the climb attitude. Instead of immediately taking control I tried to talk to the student. At that point the airplane stalled, and snapped inverted. I slapped both throttles to idle and took over control with the airplane inverted and about 45 deg nose low. The only thing that saved me at that point was the fact that I had just finished my Class 4 aerobatic rating so I was instantly able to orient myself. Since the nose was well down and still dropping and the airspeed was very low I recovered by pulling through. A 2.5 G pull brought me to level flight comfortably below redline but with a huge altitude loss. Looking back at this sorry event it is hard to know where to start with an explanation of all the dumb things I did, but over laying everything was a lethal combination of over confidence and lack of experience and knowledge. A light twin on one engine is the most dangerous flying machine virtually all pilots will ever experience especially if it is flying at low airspeeds and heaven forbid close to the ground. Unfortunately the training for the ME rating often does not get the respect it deserves fron either the student or the instructor....

[. ._]

Good posts guys.

Too bad sometimes it takes an accident to keep us on our toes.

[Cat Driver]

I also have done a couple of hours of teaching on multi engine airplanes, thus my comment earlier in this thread.

Interesting.

There is no mention of what the power setting was, such as both throttles closed, both engines at xx percent of full power or if only one engine was producing xx percent of full power.

The flight training industry needs a complete overhaul because far to many instructors get into critical situations such as the above poster found himself in due to not enough experience for the subject they are teaching.

[Tim]

., how do we get experienced pilots to sign on as instructors?

the only thing i can come up with is pay more - a lot more - which would likely make the cost of flight training shoot through the roof.

any thoughts?

[Cat Driver]

., how do we get experienced pilots to sign on as instructors?

the only thing i can come up with is pay more - a lot more - which would likely make the cost of flight training shoot through the roof.

any thoughts?

Raise the experience limits for giving specific training, still allowing for entry level instructors. However even the entry level instructor should have more experience as a working pilot than the present zero.

Costs will not increase that much as the time to reach a standard will be less than learning from an instructor who is still a student.

[Tim]

Raise the experience limits for giving specific training, still allowing for entry level instructors.

so that then begs the question, how much time is enough to teach multi engine ratings or ifr ratings?

and how much is enough to become a ppl instructor?

[Beacon Final]

I wanna say 2 things.....


1. What was the instructor thinking.... if he knew he/she the lesson was going to be stalls, why have another student riding along in the back? MFC has never allowed that. May not be the cause but I know damn well TC will be asking the same thing.

2. Now you can call me a racist but this is a totally true statement. Since the Chinese have showed up, MFC has had many problems they never had before. No I am not saying its b/c they make lesser student pilots. But all the accidents and incidents involve a student from China. Example: 1. Jazz on final, told YQM twr to have a student taxi back to the school b/c the engine cover was still on the plane. 2. A few incidents involving cutting other aircraft off in the circuit and communicating problems with Twr 3. The past 2 accidents

My guess is cultural attitudes, pressure on the students and most of all LANGUAGE BARRIERS.

These guys will leave MFC and go f/o on a 747 or whatever. Scary.

You can get mad about my post if you like but I just tell it like it is. MFC was top notch before the Chinese showed up and noone can argue with facts.

[iflyforpie]

Raise the experience limits for giving specific training, still allowing for entry level instructors.

so that then begs the question, how much time is enough to teach multi engine ratings or ifr ratings?

and how much is enough to become a ppl instructor?

+1

My grandfather learned multi on an Apache back in '68 and sure wasn't being taught by a guy with 1000 hrs of multi time.

It doesn't take 1000s of hours to draw a lesson from this episode. It doesn't even take someone with 1000s of hours telling me what I should and shouldn't do. It just takes some common sense that I guess ain't so common.

The Piper Seminole has a very low Vmc due to the counter rotating props (56KIAS if I remember correctly). The fully loaded front C of G stall speed is 57KIAS. So even if one engine was producing full power and one windmilling with the aircraft at the stall, there should have been enough rudder authority to keep the aircraft straight.

Of course the rudder is only effective if you use it...

[Tim]

alright bf, after reading your post heres my response.

point 1:

there is absolutely nothing in the SOPs, POH or TC docs that say pax cannot be in the back of seminole during stalls, nor is there any kind of c of g envelope that the a/c must fall in to be stalled. in fact i have been in seminoles WITH TC and people in the backseat while doing stalls. so, before you point fingers, at the very least know what the hell you're talking about.

as for point 2:

canadian students have taken off with cowl covers on before

the pic of the accident in yfc was canadian, not chinese

canadian students misread communications all the time at every airport in the country - perhaps to a lesser extent, but even still language is not the issue at hand...and the chinese students know to say 'i dont understand' if they are told something that is not standard. many canadian students would not do that. there are litterally hundreds of student pilots or brand new ppl's - canadian, chinese and lots of other nationalities too - between the 2 bases.

language issues do come up, but they are given extensive english training - specifc to aviation, as well as local phraseology (such as non-std communications phrases that twr/radio may use, local landmark names [which can be english, french, or native american]) and procedures - both before they arrive and while they are here.

yesterday a french jazz pilot crossed entered a runway without clearence in yqm. language barrier? hardly, she made a mistake.

youre argument holds no water. i am not implying you are racist, just ignorant and uninformed.

[C-GGGQ]

the chinese students know to say 'i dont understand' if they are told something that is not standard.

This has not been my experience as an instructor that taught mostly chinese students. They blindly followed instructions to the letter, even if it wasn't what you meant. You had to be 100% specific with these students or they'd bite you.

[Tim]

GGGQ, it's true that was a problem at the start. but now, almost 2 years into the contract, lessons were learned and it is something that is stressed during language and flight training.

[Cat Driver]

so that then begs the question, how much time is enough to teach multi engine ratings or ifr ratings?

The question is difficult to give a definitive answer to Tim, so I will ask you a question.

You have the choice of two instructors to teach you your multi engine and IRF ratings.

1: A class 4 instructor with 50 hours on multi engine airplanes.

2: Xsbank who has been in aviation forever and is presently teaching on Jets.

Who would you choose?

and how much is enough to become a ppl instructor?

A PPL instructor can be a class 4 who is closely supervised until they can move up the chain of difficulty in teaching.

[Tim]

The question is difficult to give a definitive answer to Tim, so I will ask you a question.

You have the choice of two instructors to teach you your multi engine and IRF ratings.

1: A class 4 instructor with 50 hours on multi engine airplanes.

2: Xsbank who has been in aviation forever and is presently teaching on Jets.

Who would you choose?

well thats a no brainer, but a bit of a simplistic question. i figured since it was your suggestion, you should be the one answering.

but, how about this: 500 hrs TT and a class 3 rating or better is required before an instructor can move onto the twin. they then do a sim checkout as well as an aircraft checkout with a senior instructor. after that they spend a few weeks doing sim work only, with senior instructors doing the last few trips to evaluate both the student and the instructor (almost like a class 4). the new instructor then moves into the plane with VFR-only limits. as they gain experience their limits are lowered. once theyve gained some experience flying the twin, they then begin instructing multi ratings. with this typically taking place well after the 50 hr mark.

[Cat Driver]

well thats a no brainer, but a bit of a simplistic question. i figured since it was your suggestion, you should be the one answering.

Sure no problem I will give you my personal opinion as to what time would be a reasonable minimum for teaching multi engine stuff.

1000 hours on multi engine airplanes flying commercially outside of flight instruction.

but, how about this: 500 hrs TT and a class 3 rating or better is required before an instructor can move onto the twin.

Read the comment above and you will note that having an instructors rating be it class 4 or class 1 is not a good indicator of a persons ability to teach flying, far to many are firmly stuck in the same mold they started in.

The ideal person to teach multi engine is someone with an extensive background in flying them and an ability to teach others...they are sometimes hard to find.

they then do a sim checkout as well as an aircraft checkout with a senior instructor. after that they spend a few weeks doing sim work only, with senior instructors doing the last few trips to evaluate both the student and the instructor (almost like a class 4). the new instructor then moves into the plane with VFR-only limits. as they gain experience their limits are lowered. once theyve gained some experience flying the twin, they then begin instructing multi ratings. with this typically taking place well after the 50 hr mark.

I see nothing wrong with your above scenario providing the senior instructors are are of high quality.....they can also be hard to find sometimes.

By the way what level of sim are you referring to?

Not all sims give a realistic feel.

Lets not hijack this thread with this stuff.

[TAWS]

Have names been released?....I have friends that work there.

[iflyforpie]

Sure no problem I will give you my personal opinion as to what time would be a reasonable minimum for teaching multi engine stuff.

1000 hours on multi engine airplanes flying commercially outside of flight instruction.

Beyond the annual proficiency checks what does 1000 hours of multi-time teach you? You know the aircraft and the systems well. You know the normal procedures inside and out. You have good hands and feet to fly the plane with all engines operating. But what else really? You aren't doing or supervising anywhere near the number of takeoffs and landings. And you aren't dealing with anywhere near the number of in flight emergencies unless you have really poor airmanship or poor maintenance.

On the other hand, working your way through to being a Class 3 or 2 (you don't typically see Class 4s doing multi training) proves that the individual has some qualification to teach. Maybe the standards are too low, I don't know. It's not like aircraft just all of a sudden started getting smashed in the last ten years or so. Really, we aren't talking about a B-17 we are trying to teach students to fly. A Seminole is just a Warrior with two engines and retractable gear. I went to a Turbo Seminole straight from a 172 and got to fly it solo.

What we need is to draw from other's experience and teach outside the box. The few who have seen it all (or most of it) aren't interested in a job at the local FTU. Nobody is going to bother slaving away right seat in a 'ho, finally moving up to left seat, and then going back to an FTU for minimum wage when better opportunities are knocking.

[Cat Driver]

What we need is to draw from other's experience and teach outside the box.

Exactly, that is how I built up my teaching career, having tens of thousands of landings flying multi engine airplanes has helped me to be a better teacher.

The few who have seen it all (or most of it) aren't interested in a job at the local FTU. Nobody is going to bother slaving away right seat in a 'ho, finally moving up to left seat, and then going back to an FTU for minimum wage when better opportunities are knocking.

No argument there, but one does not need to work for a flight school to teach on multi engine aircraft.

All you need is to build up a reputation for being worth what you charge and you will eventually have all the work you desire.

I generally aim for $1000.00 a day plus all expenses when I accept a new client. Some days I make it some days I don't and some days I make more.....depends on a lot of factors.

[Tim]

Cat, the scenario i mentioned is what MFC does when brining new instructors online in the twin. in addition, if there are more applications than positions there is a competition, involving both presenting a PGI and writing an exam.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Do MFC FI's get any upset training ?

[Cat Driver]

but, how about this: 500 hrs TT and a class 3 rating or better is required before an instructor can move onto the twin. they then do a sim checkout as well as an aircraft checkout with a senior instructor. after that they spend a few weeks doing sim work only, with senior instructors doing the last few trips to evaluate both the student and the instructor (almost like a class 4). the new instructor then moves into the plane with VFR-only limits. as they gain experience their limits are lowered. once theyve gained some experience flying the twin, they then begin instructing multi ratings. with this typically taking place well after the 50 hr mark.

Tim, I misunderstood your post above and thought you were referring to 500 hours on multi engine airplanes.

As you will note I gave my opinion that 1000 hours on multi engine airplanes outside of the structured environment of a FTU should be the minimum hours requirement for teaching.

How do the MFC instructors build up the 50 hours on twins before they teach? Or can they teach multi engine with less than 50 hours because they are licensed flight instructors?

Anyhow this discussion will not really change anything and there will always be two camps here, the new no experience group desperate to learn and get experience paid for by their students and the experienced multi engine pilots who will not work for peanuts.

[Straight or level]

How do the MFC instructors build up the 50 hours on twins before they teach? Or can they teach multi engine with less than 50 hours because they are licensed flight instructors?

They start by teaching IFR in the twin then move to multi ratings once they have 50hrs on type.

[Cat Driver]

They start by teaching IFR in the twin then move to multi ratings once they have 50hrs on type.

I feel better now.

And here I was thinking these instructors were teaching with no real experience.

Do they ever have problems keeping the things under control?

[Big Pistons Forever]

How do the MFC instructors build up the 50 hours on twins before they teach? Or can they teach multi engine with less than 50 hours because they are licensed flight instructors?

They start by teaching IFR in the twin then move to multi ratings once they have 50hrs on type.

Sigh.....

[C-GGGQ]

How do the MFC instructors build up the 50 hours on twins before they teach? Or can they teach multi engine with less than 50 hours because they are licensed flight instructors?

They start by teaching IFR in the twin then move to multi ratings once they have 50hrs on type.

Sigh.....

you do realize this is how EVERY FTU in canada does this. Since you are not teaching a multi engine rating (as the person getting their group 1 IFR already HAS a multi engine rating) tc does not require the 50 on class or 10 on type for the IFR portion as you are not "teaching" engine failures. Its a lousy loophole but a loophole none the less that everyone has used. How else does a class 4 fresh out of flight training ever upgrade?