FOI mnemonics!

[Blackhawk]

I had a student. When he went over the logbooks the morning of the checkride, he caught something that no one else had for months - an annual that had not been signed off by an IA. Apparently, with all the 100 hours, noone, from shop on, caught that this one was an annual.

My student showed it to me, switched airplanes for the ride, and told the DPE what had happened.

Great, right? Student applicant reads the logs better than anyone else and understands what it means. Best indication of airworthiness knowledge in a private oral ever!

Yes he passed with flying colors. But the DPE's comment to me afterward? "I couldn't believe he didn't know TOMATO FLAMES."

NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

 

[Blackhawk]

IMO, the two biggest problems with mnemonics (other than ridiculous overuse bordering on the absurd) are:

• The mnemonic tends to become more important than what it represents (no radio license needed? Just mis-spell ARROW as AROW; we have to protect the acronym after all!)
• (Somewhat related to the first) The object of the mnemonic rises in significance. Non-scientific sample, but I've noticed that a simple airworthiness question is more likely to elicit an incorrect answer from someone who learned about burning red fruit than someone who didn't. I actually did that one online periodically and the number of "it's not covered by TOMATO FLAMES so you're good to go" from pilots and even CFIs was surprising, even though I expected it.

My favorite overused one is the 5 or 6 or 7 or 12 T's. There's one of more useful mnemonic mental checklists ruined by trying to fit everything conceivable into it. And I've actually seen arguments about whether "turn" or "time" should come first - not in flight given the siutaion, but in terms of the "proper" mnemonic!

I told Mark this one already. I had a PA-34-200T owner and 141 chief instructor tell me that the turbocharger was not required to be operational for the airplane to be airworthy- not part of TOMATOFLAMES you know.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

I told Mark this one already. I had a PA-34-200T owner and 141 chief instructor tell me that the turbocharger was not required to be operational for the airplane to be airworthy- not part of TOMATOFLAMES you know.

That chief instructor needs to be taken out back and given a set of lumps, obviously.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

That chief instructor needs to be taken out back and given a set of lumps, obviously.

You'd be surprised how many CFIs, trained in burning fruit or doing nasty things to a feline think that way.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

You'd be surprised how many CFIs, trained in burning fruit or doing nasty things to a feline think that way.

-laughing- You just made my morning.

 

[durind]

I think the point is slightly missed here. Mnemonics have their place in helping a student to remember critical information and then use it as a list to explain each item on the mnemonic. Merely reciting it and saying "DONE! DID I DO WELL?" Is not really the point. I make it a point when I have a student learn a mnemonic to then go through each item and explain it to me in a larger context. For example you start with ATOMATOFLAMERS, then you introduce the required items listed in the POH, then you talk about MEL's & Airworthiness Directives, then combine it all in to a flow chart to figure out if something broken on an aircraft does not make it airworthy. As long as the student sees that ATOMATOFLAMERS is the start to the conversation, not the end of it.

 

[Blackhawk]

I think the point is slightly missed here. Mnemonics have their place in helping a student to remember critical information and then use it as a list to explain each item on the mnemonic. Merely reciting it and saying "DONE! DID I DO WELL?" Is not really the point. I make it a point when I have a student learn a mnemonic to then go through each item and explain it to me in a larger context. For example you start with ATOMATOFLAMERS, then you introduce the required items listed in the POH, then you talk about MEL's & Airworthiness Directives, then combine it all in to a flow chart to figure out if something broken on an aircraft does not make it airworthy. As long as the student sees that ATOMATOFLAMERS is the start to the conversation, not the end of it.

Why even begin with ATOMATOFLAMERS? Is there a necessity to memorize something there? Pilots trying to use such a mnemonic have gotten in trouble in the past (see FAA v. Nielson). Learning should be purposeful- a mnemonic just for the sake of memorizing something is pointless, not purposeful.
The place to start is not with 91.205, but 91.213 and AC 91-67; to open up the regulation if some instrument or equipment is broken on the aircraft and go through the flow chart.
When I was an airline pilot we had a flow chart in our flight manual similar to the flow chart in AC 91-67 that we were to follow if something was broken. Not opening up the flight manual and using the flow chart was grounds for a bust on a type ride.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

As long as the student sees that ATOMATOFLAMERS is the start to the conversation, not the end of it.

[SOAPBOX ON] You've succinctly identified the problem with this particular mnemonic, the worst of all of them out there because it includes both the major things bad about them I listed earlier:

1. The mnemonic is more important than what it represents. You've added letters to it. That at least suggests you acknowledge that the "original" is inadequate even with respect to what it's supposed to represent, but feel the need to save it by making changes to it.
2. The mnemonic raises what it's supposed to represent to a more important level than it deserves. Burning fruit (and the 91.205(b) list it represents) is not the start of the conversation on airworthiness requirements. The starting point is 91.213(d)'s discussion of required and missing equipment in the absence of a MEL. The hot red fruit 91.205(b) is only 1/4 (actually less than that; more like 1/12) of the 91.213(d) analysis but in fact gets more (usually all of the) attention and, as @Blackhawk's example describes, often ends the conversation with an incorrect answer.

[/SOAPBOX Off]

 

[Cloud Surfer]

Guys & gals, there are some good points being brought up about the limitations of memory aids/mnemonics, but what does "TOMATOFLAMES" have to do with the FOI? Are some here suggesting that mnemonics never be trusted because of their limits?

 

[Blackhawk]

Guys & gals, there are some good points being brought up about the limitations of memory aids/mnemonics, but what does "TOMATOFLAMES" have to do with the FOI? Are some here suggesting that mnemonics never be trusted because of their limits?

What is the purpose of the mnemonic? Is it to assist with rote memorization while one grasps the concept of applying the knowledge and correlating it to other subjects, or is it becoming an end unto itself? For example in FOI, on a check ride does an examiner ask what the levels of learning are (as was done with me ions ago in the military), and the response is prompted with a mnemonic, or does the examiner give a scenario that forces the applicant to truly apply the FOI?
I find mnemonics and other memorization items helpful when a pilot must respond to certain situations, even under stress. For example, as Mark pointed out I don't care the order of the 5 Ts, but when a pilot is tired and the rain is pounding the aircraft I want them to remember the items as they pass the FAF and hear my voice asking them "What next?" if a pilot experiences an engine failure I don't care if they remember ABC, but I care that they remember the items it stands for.
Too often we apply the R in RUAC but forget the other items; or as Mark poninted out more succinctly than I (I guess three years of law school is good for SOMETHING), we are more concerned with the mnemonic than with the actual knowledge upon which it is based.

 

[Ian_J]

What is the purpose of the mnemonic? Is it to assist with rote memorization while one grasps the concept of applying the knowledge and correlating it to other subjects, or is it becoming an end unto itself? For example in FOI, on a check ride does an examiner ask what the levels of learning are (as was done with me ions ago in the military), and the response is prompted with a mnemonic, or does the examiner give a scenario that forces the applicant to truly apply the FOI?
I find mnemonics and other memorization items helpful when a pilot must respond to certain situations, even under stress. For example, as Mark pointed out I don't care the order of the 5 Ts, but when a pilot is tired and the rain is pounding the aircraft I want them to remember the items as they pass the FAF and hear my voice asking them "What next?" if a pilot experiences an engine failure I don't care if they remember ABC, but I care that they remember the items it stands for.
Too often we apply the R in RUAC but forget the other items; or as Mark poninted out more succinctly than I (I guess three years of law school is good for SOMETHING), we are more concerned with the mnemonic than with the actual knowledge upon which it is based.

Things may be changing for the better in the Army - using RUAC as an example, the levels of learning are trained and evaluated in a scenario-based format. Not only do we have to show practical examples of the process, we have to identify and correct levels of learning problems during role reversal. In fact, the entire FOI is taught the same way.

 

[n57flyguy]

IMO, the two biggest problems with mnemonics (other than ridiculous overuse bordering on the absurd) are:

• The mnemonic tends to become more important than what it represents (no radio license needed? Just mis-spell ARROW as AROW; we have to protect the acronym after all!)
• (Somewhat related to the first) The object of the mnemonic rises in significance. Non-scientific sample, but I've noticed that a simple airworthiness question is more likely to elicit an incorrect answer from someone who learned about burning red fruit than someone who didn't. I actually did that one online periodically and the number of "it's not covered by TOMATO FLAMES so you're good to go" from pilots and even CFIs was surprising, even though I expected it.

My favorite overused one is the 5 or 6 or 7 or 12 T's. There's one of more useful mnemonic mental checklists ruined by trying to fit everything conceivable into it. And I've actually seen arguments about whether "turn" or "time" should come first - not in flight given the siutaion, but in terms of the "proper" mnemonic!

I could not agree more. I use TOMATO FLAMES for a rough outline of what I need to be legal, but that is not the whole concept. I don't understand the point of knowing that I need a Temperature gauge when I am not flying an airplane with a liquid cooled engine, not worth spending the time memorizing when I can worry about what is applicable to the legality and airworthiness of the aircraft I am flying.

There are a few mental 'checklists' and 'flows' to use. In the event of a go around: Cram, Climb, Clean, Cool, Communicate. Still, Doesn't apply to Cub as much as it does to an Arrow. However in a Cub I am going to use CFIT: Controls/Carb Heat, Fuel, Ignition/Instruments, Traffic.

One can guilty of using them, and they can help to understand concepts, but as training and understanding has progresses, realize they are not the end all be all. They provided an outline, but you do need the knowledge behind the principle to know the aspects of the reference. This is where due diligence of the pilot is required.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

There are a few mental 'checklists' and 'flows' to use. In the event of a go around: Cram, Climb, Clean, Cool, Communicate. Still, Doesn't apply to Cub as much as it does to an Arrow. However in a Cub I am going to use CFIT: Controls/Carb Heat, Fuel, Ignition/Instruments, Traffic.

One can guilty of using them, and they can help to understand concepts, but as training and understanding has progresses, realize they are not the end all be all. They provided an outline, but you do need the knowledge behind the principle to know the aspects of the reference. This is where due diligence of the pilot is required.

FWIW, at the airlines, the flow is the flow, and remembering it is up to you. I don't think I've heard a single mnemonic beyond a shorthand notation that everyone knows for some of our anti-icing equipment. Muscle memory and practice is a much better deal than rattling off an acronym that doesn't fit the situation. Our procedure, simulator training and IOE is designed to give you enough doing that you don't need a mental crutch to get it right.

(For instance, "Ice, ice, radar, flaps, trim, trim, trim, manual feather, flight controls, manual feather, fuel, HMU, autofeather..." - there's no way to really memorize that beyond just repeating it—might as well get it right through doing, and really commit it to memory.)

 

[n57flyguy]

FWIW, at the airlines, the flow is the flow, and remembering it is up to you. I don't think I've heard a single mnemonic beyond a shorthand notation that everyone knows for some of our anti-icing equipment. Muscle memory and practice is a much better deal than rattling off an acronym that doesn't fit the situation. Our procedure, simulator training and IOE is designed to give you enough doing that you don't need a mental crutch to get it right.

(For instance, "Ice, ice, radar, flaps, trim, trim, trim, manual feather, flight controls, manual feather, fuel, HMU, autofeather..." - there's no way to really memorize that beyond just repeating it—might as well get it right through doing, and really commit it to memory.)

I agree, and more so aircraft specific. Developing your own flows on certain category airplanes, where that flexibility is afforded to do so, can prove beneficial. Lights, Camera, Action can be enhanced by widening your flow, giving attention to aspects crucial before the flight begins. The only caution would be to make sure it does not become a hindrance to situational awareness. Little things like that have made me better, more acute, and more aware of what is going on in the big picture and the small one.

And yes, doing, translated practice for my purposes is key. The reality is preparing for when things go wrong, the more your practice and see things right, the more apparent things will show if they go wrong.

[SOAPBOX ON] You've succinctly identified the problem with this particular mnemonic, the worst of all of them out there because it includes both the major things bad about them I listed earlier:

1. The mnemonic is more important than what it represents. You've added letters to it. That at least suggests you acknowledge that the "original" is inadequate even with respect to what it's supposed to represent, but feel the need to save it by making changes to it.
2. The mnemonic raises what it's supposed to represent to a more important level than it deserves. Burning fruit (and the 91.205(b) list it represents) is not the start of the conversation on airworthiness requirements. The starting point is 91.213(d)'s discussion of required and missing equipment in the absence of a MEL. The hot red fruit 91.205(b) is only 1/4 (actually less than that; more like 1/12) of the 91.213(d) analysis but in fact gets more (usually all of the) attention and, as @Blackhawk's example describes, often ends the conversation with an incorrect answer.

[/SOAPBOX Off]

Could you provide a sample break down of a situation where this could go wrong. I saw this post after my initial reactions, which has gaps to fill.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

I'm not sure what you are asking.