Use of radio's in flight training

[Class 1 Instructor]

I have been a lurker on this forum for awhile and thought I would jump in and contribute......silly me. I guess if you don't teach formation aerobatics, fly a pre WW2 nearly extinct flying boat or are a heavy airline Capt flying in international operations you are not worthy of posting on the "flight training" forum.

The level of hate I am getting for daring to suggest that a readback like "Direct XXXXX climb 3500 ABC" instead of just saying "ABC", might have some value in helping students get good at using the radio, not to mention proof to the instructor that the student actually understood what they where asked as well as double check of safety sensitive direction; which is just one of the many, many things they have to master to be good pilots seems a pretty good indication I am not welcome here. So I can take a hint and I will go back to just lurking.

There are hardly any actual regular working flight instructors who post on the "flight training" forum and now I truly understand why.

I do have one question to the elder brethern who rule the roost here. If you really want to improve flying instruction in Canada how does posts which drip contempt and disdain when somebody posts something you disagree with help your cause ?

Anyway have at her boys I am outa here. Over and Out

[Old Dog Flying]

Hey Ace, you forgot the "Roger, Wilco, Over and Out" which is manditory with every clearance or instruction from ATC.

The only time someone gets dumped on here is when they make blatantly silly comments such as a few seen here today. If anyone wants to listen to some really bad RT just listen in to Blunder Bay any day of the week...too many incorrect read backs followed by too many corrected instructions because the students did not understand in the first place, too many people stepping on others because they did not listen before engaging their mouthes. And too many instructors who were trained by C1I (or someone like him) who are now spreading the gosipal according to the now departed.

Keep It Simple Stupid

Barney

[CpnCrunch]

The training forum here is incredibly useful, it's just the delivery that sucks. I'm not sure how that can be improved unless you have nazi moderating and/or ban half the users.

If you do want to post here, you just need to assume that ANYTHING you say will be picked apart. This is good in a way, because it means we get lots of discussion and learn things that most of us either didn't know or have forgotten. There are lots of things discussed here that most flight instructors aren't aware of (the intricacies of the CARs in particular).

But if you're the one posting advice, you need to either have a thick skin and ignore the hot air, or else be very circumspect in what you post. If you look at the instructors who still post here, you'll see they generally follow both of these "guidelines".

[FlyGy]

[Post has been removed and I remind you that personal attacks will not be tolerated
Bandaid

[Skyhunter]

Class one, don't beat yourself up. In the military, before even getting into the airplane for the first instructional trip we have the students chair flying circuits with full rt. There expected to be able to answer perfect on the gnd. Of course that doesn't happen in the air, but we do spend a lot of time with it. We do it so that in the air they don't have to think about the RT and can concentrate on teaching the stuff the Col was talking about cause RT is instinctual. That said we were flying in controlled airspace, and this was in the old days with 120 or so movements per hour. We read back clearances, ie cleared to land (was actually responded with "callsign 3 green", cleared to take off etc. Things like "Apache 114 your number 6 behind tutor approaching the break" was just "Apache 114."

Moving on to more advanced stuff RT being learned before flights was even more important, bad RT could get the wrong guy shot in a 2v1. We would make the students practice RT for hours. Even then one of the biggest things was to get over was to have them still fly (fight) while talking. Lots of them couldn't do both without some practice. Stop turning for a 3 second radio transmission in a fight and your opponent has 50 degrees of angles on you.

Unlike the Col, I don't seen anything wrong with bringing this topic up. RT is important. Getting it clear and concise and taking up the least amount of radio time. That said if things are quite, I don't mind if someone wants to sound like an FM DJ, just if it is busy say what you need too and shut the F up. The biggest thing to teach a student is that is PTT = push to talk, not push to think. Which we have all been guilty of before, but should try not to use it that way as it leads to the dreaded "ummms."

Unlike the Col, I believe the radio is a great tool and you need to use it well, that said, I also agree that it is very important getting heads out of the cockpit just turning off the radio isn't the way I would do it.

[Cat Driver]

I guess if you don't teach formation aerobatics, fly a pre WW2 nearly extinct flying boat or are a heavy airline Capt flying in international operations you are not worthy of posting on the "flight training" forum.

Lets see how you think Class 1....you have used three different posters in the above rant and referred to what they fly with apparent contempt.

Has it occurred to you that we got to our positions in aviation by earning the chance to fly all that stuff you seem to sneer at?

I agree with you the training forum needs instructors to post here....but it should be instructors that do not generate this kind of a description.

oh, it's not any of those, it's just that you came off as an asshole.

I will admit the above opinion of your attitude is not exactly politically correct but the poster was probably at a loss to think of something more descriptive.

[trey kule]

I think Sky (if I may call you that) brought up a very good point and a major difference is military vs. civilian training.

The aircraft is not really the best place to learn the basics of RT work.. Unfortunately the civilian system for the most part is very cost conscious and students want to fly, so the thinking is that they can learn all this stuff in the air..It is maybe not the most cost effective way in the long run. My experience with FTU ground schools is limited, but I have to wonder how many of them have practice RT sessions or spend more time on it than learning the phoentic alphabet.

With so many different viewpoints it seems that there is a definite lack of standardization..A bit unsettling to hear some of the instructor comments like "ATC hates it, but I do it anyway" or that the solution is to just turn off the radios entirely..

ICC, or Radio Canada, or whoever it is that is responsable for radio licenses nowadays is maybe a bit lax. Having held a radio examiners license many years ago, I can say from personal experience that pilots tend to just make the minimum standard in so many cases..And the examination is really quite basic.

I think instructors can do alot if they do things properly and set a good example. It is easy to see where pilots got their thinking from with the cutsey stuff we sometimes hear on the radio. Or the readbacks at warp speed.

When the airwaves are busy, professionalism is the standard. When they are not, I see little wrong with some chat ...I can recall one lonely night flying over the arctic chatting about the weather in north bay with someone Three am and I dont think there was another plane flying in the north of Canada that night.. On the other had flying into Edmonton when someone it is busy and the weather is bad and having someone blabbing their one liners or enhanced readbacks is a bit annoying.

Perhaps we should be looking for solutions here rather than name calling or condescending.
It is quite obvious that no one way seems to be being implemented. Is it a good idea, for example, to suggest to the FTU where instructors work, to include RT training as part of the ground school, with the basics practiced before flying..It might start a bit of standardisation that is lacking with each instructor choosing what they think is the best method.

[Class 1 Instructor]

Hello, Hello, Cat Driver, Padre, ODF, CS etc, you guys won ! I get it !

You collectively obviously don't think I have anything to offer this forum and the level of vitriol (eg pushing chickenshit, I must be failed Class 4, reading this shit makes me get on my knees that I don't own a flight school anymore, etc etc) leads me to believe you think my ideas represent a danger to flight training. Fine what ever

I said I won't post anymore yet you still keep pilling on....move on the show is over

[Skyhunter]

Is this really the major error of your students?

They don't have any problems with forced approaches?
Navigation? Diversions? Steep turns? Crosswind landings?

There are an awful lot of things that most student pilots
seriously need work on, before I would nag them with
R/T chickensh1t.

I have doubts you would approve, but if there is one thing I
like to teach students, is to not rely upon the comm radio,
because it's a piece of sh1t by design. When you most need
it - when the traffic is heaviest - it will not function correctly.

Heck, when you get more than 10 VFR aircraft on a frequency,
it's even money that someone will have a stuck PTT and will
treat everyone to their intercom discussion.

Visit OSH sometime to learn how to use a comm radio when
it's busy. They won't even let pilots talk on the radio, which
is interesting commentary on the subject.

I like to turn the comm radio off. The student pilots panic,
then start to look outside for traffic, which suits me fine.

An even better lesson is to turn the master off completely,
and have the student complete the lesson and fly back to
the airport with no electrical power whatsoever.

Col,

Think you came across a bit harsh on this for no apparent reason. He brought up radio as a topic and some issues with, and think you went off on him unnecessarily. Not saying you have to agree with him at all, in fact believe opposite view points are good, but could at least stay on topic and treat with a bit more respect. I understand Class One's "fight back" reaction after this.

Hopefully all sides can get a bit more civilized and respectful.

[Cat Driver]

With a bit of reading your own contributions on this forum and using some objectivity maybe you will learn something.

Attacking people who are far more experienced than you has not really worked all that well.

For instance on the subject of radio use go back and read Old Dogs comments.....Old Dog has been around for a long, long time.....as far as I know he is the only one that posts regularly here that has been flying longer than me.

Maybe you should reconsider your delivery methods and start all over with another user name.

[padre12]

Well, I am sorry for C1's experience. While I (also a Class 1) have been in the business for but a mere 20 years - not nearly the length of time of my esteemed colleagues and friends like Cat and the Col, it has been long enough to know this business requires a thick skin and the ability to have comments roll off like water droplets on a duck's back. I find it hard to believe that one can make it all the way to a Class 1 rating without having learned a little bit about how touchy this business really is. I'm also with Cat, in that I no longer have the time of day to deal with FTU nonsense and instructor entitlement.

In any case, Class 1, please accept my good will, and the good will of my colleagues to invite you to continue to contribute to the conversation. I suspect that you also didn't make it to a Class 1 without having learned a few good nuggets of your own along the way that we would also be well served to learn.

pax,
padre

[Cat Driver]

I'm also with Cat, in that I no longer have the time of day to deal with FTU nonsense and instructor entitlement.

I would start a new flying school in a heart beat if I were in the USA where all the B.S. That Transport Canada demands do not exist and anyone who is a CFI can start up a flight training business and survive or fail based on how you run it.

However my parents brought me to Canada as a landed immigrant when I was only eight years old and I am a Canadian citizen who has spent most of his life paying taxes here and I am going to collect the pitance the government gives us to live on in our old age.

[trey kule]

As everyone is enjoying the school yard pile on Class 1, I went and read his posts over..
Class 1 is an avatar or stage name or whatever its called..I dont thnk it necessarily means he is a class 1. and while I am suspecting things, I dont think CS is a real colonel...And if you ask any of the young guys I work with, trey kule is not really how they would describe me. Maybe I just missed it..Which means, in this wonderful internet world he may just not be a class 1..that would explain much of his posts.

I see my suggestion that we should really be discussing how is the best way to teach R/T to new pilots, so that we dont have thread after thread moaning about the bad coms, and a more professional overall approach., has fallen on deaf ears.

Perhaps instead of the personal ancedotal stories we should look at a less personal experience approach..
1. Should students get ground training and practice before ever getting in plane the second time (first flight is still fam, I hope)?
2. If people see the merit in that, then are FTUs doing this, and how can we convince them if they are not, to start.

It definitely is a part of the training a pilot needs, and I dont think, as others have mentioned that we need to dismiss it because we think this or that is more important.

How about it? Make some constructive suggestions.

[Skyhunter]

Trey,

Think you have the right approach in addressing a subject. I have not taught in the civilian world but I do have 703/04/05 time since leaving the military. In my opinion the best place to learn RT is on the ground, including some practice (with instructor or fellow students (more experienced) playing ATC. Keep in mind it is only an opinion, but I feel anything you can take care of on the ground (procedure type stuff) means more time to focus on hands and feet stuff in the air. I think from a students pocket book point of view it would be cheaper as well, resulting in shorter overall training time as more of the flight time is being used for "pure flying skills."

Sky

[xysn]

1. Should students get ground training and practice before ever getting in plane the second time (first flight is still fam, I hope)?
2. If people see the merit in that, then are FTUs doing this, and how can we convince them if they are not, to start.

How about it? Make some constructive suggestions.

I was nervous about sounding like an idiot on the radio so I asked about it and turned out
> my FTU had a take-home printout of common radio calls so I could practice at home.
> My instructor also practiced a few radio calls in with me in the simulator.

Further suggestion
> As a student buy for yourself a cockpit audio / video recorder so you can review at home (Or if you're an FTU consider it something else you can charge for) The video recorder is of course great for reviewing the aviate piece of piloting as well.

[Shiny Side Up]

I see my suggestion that we should really be discussing how is the best way to teach R/T to new pilots, so that we dont have thread after thread moaning about the bad coms, and a more professional overall approach., has fallen on deaf ears.

1. Should students get ground training and practice before ever getting in plane the second time (first flight is still fam, I hope)?
2. If people see the merit in that, then are FTUs doing this, and how can we convince them if they are not, to start.

In all cases I have ever seen, students get extensive ground work on the subject. Usually I don't let the students talk on the radio until the fourth or fifth flights, but we do talk about what was said and what I say. They get to do a lot of monkey hear, before monkey speak. The problem I think most FTUs are doing is belabouring the point about the radio, if anything it takes a way more prominent point in the flight training that it merits. Students I find have trouble talking on the radio because their mental capacity is completely used up by flying the airplane, often which has taken a back seat to the radio work. You ever drive with an inexperienced driver and they have to turn down the radio when they get into traffic? Try to have a conversation with someone while they're trying to parallel park. The point is, people are terrible at multitasking unless they are very practiced at doing one of the skills (preferably both).

It definitely is a part of the training a pilot needs, and I dont think, as others have mentioned that we need to dismiss it because we think this or that is more important.

It shouldn't be dismissed, because yes it is important, but isn't the priority in their training. The Colonel is right in his assessment of major and minor errors. Part of the problem that I find though is that students often come to flight training with preconceptions about radio work. Part of the appeal for some reason seems to be that fantastic exchange with ATC that they imagine all the big pilots do. Since I work out of an uncontrolled airport probably the number one request of students is if we can go fly around in the controlled airspace. Blind broadcasting seems to terrify a lot of people and they really need an acknowledgement from the other end. Hence the deluge of radio calls on 126.7 when they do hear another soul out there somewhere in the aether. Few are the students who are more interested in say perfecting their landings.

[Colonel Sanders]

I see 'way too many PPL's these days - and even fresh
CPL's - that can't handle a 10 knot crosswind. They can't
control airspeed on final. They approach too fast and touch
down either all three tires at once, or even worse, land on
the nosewheel first.

But gosh, they sure sound good on the radio

I guess I am a dinosaur because I think that aircraft
control - which is really poor in today's PPL's, CPL's
and even instructors - is neglected because their
fuzzy-cheeked instructors are spending their valuable
time, teaching them to sound like late-night FM DJ's.

Keep crashing those airplanes, boys. Why would I
give a sh1t how many airframes you destroy?

[Cat Driver]

I see 'way too many PPL's these days - and even fresh
CPL's - that can't handle a 10 knot crosswind. They can't
control airspeed on final. They approach too fast and touch
down either all three tires at once, or even worse, land on
the nosewheel first.

Interesting you should mention the above.

I was at the airport two days ago to get the batteries out of the motorhome for servicing and as I was driving back to the gate I watched a C 172 landing ....sure enough he/she /they were almost supersonic in the flare and sure enough it would not land and sure enough whoever was trying to crash it put the nose down further and landed on the nose wheel at high speed...

....on the plus side it only bounced once because the second time it landed it was forced to stay on the ground by whoever was trying to crash it.

[Skyhunter]

So Col, that means it is not worth discussing radio stuff? Seems kinda of short sighted to not be able to talk about the small stuff either. Keep in mind we have flown the circuit together in Smith Falls, so not picking a fight, just saying you could lighten up a bit. Just cause a topic isn't one of your pet peeves is no reason to dis on other people bringing it up. An yeah, I have a bit of experience too, but don't need to through it in everyone's face.

Cat, relevance to topic?

Again not saying those things aren't important, but if someone wants to talk about radio stuff why HiJack the thread to your own personal pet peeves.

[Colonel Sanders]

I watched a C 172 landing

I'll wager he sounded just like an airline pilot on the radio!

not be able to talk about the small stuff either

Ok. How about we talk about parking lot protocol outside
the FBO? How far apart should cars be parked? Is angular
parking acceptable? How should door dings be dealt with?
Do you need to call the police, or just your insurance agency?

Keep crashing those airplanes, boys. Why would I
give a sh1t how many airframes you destroy?

[Cat Driver]

Cat, relevance to topic?

Relevance to topic????

O.K. let me explain it on a level that you may be able to grasp.

I was commenting on the post the colonel made and I shared what I observed at the airport a couple days ago.

Of course I should not comment on poor airplane handling when there are far more important issues to be discussed like fine tuning radio use...

[Cat Driver]

Why would I give a sh1t how many airframes you destroy?

You should because the more they crash the more you and I will have to pay for insurance coverage.

[photofly]

I'm still hoping to hear what the thread title means: the use of the radio's what, exactly, in flight training?

[Colonel Sanders]

I think the OP said it was the radio's ability to annoy ATC with
excess verbiage, in order to sound like a 70x pilot.

[Skyhunter]

Cat, relevance to topic?

Relevance to topic????

O.K. let me explain it on a level that you may be able to grasp.

I was commenting on the post the colonel made and I shared what I observed at the airport a couple days ago.

Of course I should not comment on poor airplane handling when there are far more important issues to be discussed like fine tuning radio use...

Let me explain it so you can understand Cat, although you might be too stubborn to grasp.

Topic = Use of radio's, your comment nothing to do with radio's therefore not relevant. I know you are pretty stubborn, but if people want to take about radio use in flight training, why can't you let them without being so arrogant about it being a waste of time. It won't hurt anyone for this discussing it. Why the need to attack everything you don't like?