Take-offs under the hood

[wjmiller3]

:yeahthat:

When I first read this post with only one reply up I was typing out how ridiculous this was but took it back to avoid flaming. However, it seems more and more talk of teaching this like it would actually or should actually ever be an option. Why teach something you would never want your student to do?

Me personally, if my student told me they were doing 0/0 takeoffs I would give them one warning. If they did it again I would red marker void every bit of instrument training I gave them. I would of course rewrite them in the back with a stipulation giving them my minimums for departure which would be at the least 135 minimums. Finally I would start a paper trail by writing a letter to the FAA regarding the situation.

I am sorry this kind of cowboy flying is just ludicrous and completely unnecessary. Maybe their life doesn't matter to them but my ticket matters to me.

I hope you never plan to get a job in a 91 corporate flight department....

I fly about 50/50 flight instructing vs corporate. If I ever told my chief pilot I wasn't going to take the flight because the vis was to low for me to takeoff I would get laughed at at first, then told to get my ass in the plane, then asked to leave (and thats prabably the case at ANY part 91 flight operation). Now if it was too low to land at the arrival airport, thats a different story.

 

[shdw]

Do you have any time outside of Flight Instructing?

Would it make a difference? Explain...

 

[shdw]

I can think of a few different things that a student can learn by doing 0/0 take-offs under the hood. I'll bet most of you can come up with a pretty good list of skills that can be picked up this way, yes?

I've never heard of an instructor teaching 0/0 take-offs for the purpose of the pilot-to-be actually performing them in the future.

I think many of you are missing the point, if you show a student how to do something such as this. Then you teach it till they are at least comfortable, the more you teach it the more you increase the chance they will try it. That is the point I was agreeing with that CrockRocket94 said:

I just feel thats teaching poor judgement. If the RVR is that low or "0"... wow.

It falls into the same category as spins, does anyone know if there are any studies out there on this. I am sure the FAA had reason to remove it from private pilot training. I have read numerous reports of spin accidents at altitude from private pilots "demonstrating" spins and I feel 0/0 takeoffs fall in the same category. They have just yet to get their nip in the butt like spins did. They already are not part of the requirement, right?

It is just a matter of time till people have the money as aviation gets cheaper to fly and some of the idiots try 0/0 takeoffs and get themselves killed. I just think it is a shame that it will take till that point for people to realize that takeoffs like that need only be taught to professional pilots. There is nothing in that type of takeoff that you cannot learn at altitude in a safe environment without making the student feel comfortable with a retarded maneuver for a non commercial/hobby or recreational pilot to perform.

There is a whole book "Pilot Error" if I remember right written about a non professional pilot that flew in low IFR conditions, this happened to be an approach and died. It is only a matter of time...

 

[minitour]

Then woulden't any takeoff under IFR, say 400' CIG be reckless? Unless the airport has a precision appraoch, your not going to be able to return.

Are we still talking about piston singles?

-mini

 

[minitour]

Me personally, if my student told me they were doing 0/0 takeoffs I would give them one warning. If they did it again I would red marker void every bit of instrument training I gave them.

How exactly are you going to do that? It's not like you can turn on the flux capacitor and un-teach them. You realize when you provide instruction, you are required to endorse a training record/logbook?

This isn't a solo endorsement you can put limitations on...this is instruction. I just don't see where you're going here.

Training in a 0/0 takeoff situation in a controlled (instructing) environment does teach a number of things.

Bingo. I enjoy teaching them one time. I've evolved from teaching them how to do it to now where I teach them how bad it can be if/when something goes wrong. Just as the wheels come off of the runway, slap a sticker over the AI and see what happens....just be ready.

If I ever told my chief pilot I wasn't going to take the flight because the vis was to low for me to takeoff I would get laughed at at first, then told to get my ass in the plane, then asked to leave (and thats prabably the case at ANY part 91 flight operation).

What does your company's operations manual say about departure minimums?

Your department does have an ops manual, right? You should. It should address t/o minimums, fuel minimums, runway lengths, yadda yadda.

Also...what are you flying in the corporate environment?

-mini

 

[mshunter]

Well,

Unless an airport in the vicinity has precision approaches or better weather, yes, it might not be the wisest thing to do if you cannot return. I mean, 91 operators can do it, but I don't know of very many people who have. (<500rvr)

But hey, what do I know. Go ahead....

This is the reason why CMA and VNY were included in the post. OXR is less than a mile from the ocean, and frequently becomes IFR from about 8pm to 10am the next day. BUt CMA is usually VFR by 8am in the morning, and VNY usually is VFR at the same time. Plus, you have WJF that is in the desert, about 10/15 mins away. And the layer is usually less than 1000ft thick.

Single or Multi? That is a big factor!

Why should it be. Should we restrict IFR/IMC ops to only multi engine aircraft?

 

[Roger, Roger]

Why should it be. Should we restrict IFR/IMC ops to only multi engine aircraft?

I dunno...in a multi I would CONSIDER taking off in weather below landing minimums, if the rules/ops manual for the specific operation allowed it (ours doesn't).

In a piston single? I want to be able to land back where I started from if something goes wrong with my ONE engine or ONE alternator.

 

[mshunter]

I dunno...in a multi I would CONSIDER taking off in weather below landing minimums, if the rules/ops manual for the specific operation allowed it (ours doesn't).

In a piston single? I want to be able to land back where I started from if something goes wrong with my ONE engine or ONE alternator.

Then should all quit flying in VMC in a single engine airplane, because if something goes wrong with your ONE engine, you are still going to do a forced landing? What happens when your at 6000 ft, above a solid layer and the engine quits? With no airports around. Your still just as eff'ed. This goes back to the old SE vs ME thing where people say you shouldn't take off if SE climb and service ceiling are above your current altitude. In a single engine airplane, your critical engine inop altitude is the ground, just like it would be if you were to loose one of two engines in a ME. Everytime you take flight, it's at your own risk. I'm not using that as an excuse, but when its 5 mins. to a VFR airport or 12 mins to get vectored back around for the approach, why not go and fly.

 

[ppragman]

If it was really that "close to 0/0", it wasn't a non-event. We did a 700 RVR takeoff (pt 91) a few months ago and it was a pretty big deal. (In a half-glass airplane, no HUD, no EVS, bla bla bla)

At my old job we had pretty wide margins in our opspecs for the 1900. Basically, if we could maintain some sort of visual reference we could legally blast on out if we had a takeoff alternate, and frankly, that's what the company did. It's pretty crazy to takeoff in like 800RVR or less.

 

[ppragman]

I dunno...in a multi I would CONSIDER taking off in weather below landing minimums, if the rules/ops manual for the specific operation allowed it (ours doesn't).

In a piston single? I want to be able to land back where I started from if something goes wrong with my ONE engine or ONE alternator.

Buy a handheld garmin. I'll be purchasing a 296 for the winter season this year because even with a full chelton efis I worry for the days when we're VFR in 500' CX and 2 Miles of vis when the thing craps out on me.

 

[PeterPilot]

We get down to the end of the runway and into position for take-off, and he has me put on the hood. This he didn't brief me on, and it stretched my comfort zone a little bit.

I'd like to hear some feedback from some other instructors here as far as is this kind of thing something you would do with your students.

Good instructors brief what they have planned before the flight.

 

[moxiepilot]

Why teach something you would never want your student to do?

Same reason I take student pilots in the clouds. Tends to reinforce the reasons why things are set up the way they are, or the difference between legal and prudent.

 

[subpilot]

Then should all quit flying in VMC in a single engine airplane, because if something goes wrong with your ONE engine, you are still going to do a forced landing? ... Everytime you take flight, it's at your own risk.

Yes, it is true that all flight ops has some amount of risk involved. Hell, even driving to work has some risk involved. The answer is not to avoid every situation that has an element of risk. The answer is to manage, minimize and mitigate the risk that you do accept. I try to not fly single engine if I don't have an out. If there is a low ceiling then I am screwed if my engine quits because I can not see and manuever around to a good forced landing field. Now if I have a ceiling high enough to where I can break out and still have time to manuever to avoid houses, trees, etc then I have more of that warm and fuzzy feeling that I like when I fly. Same for flying over mountains Single Engine... I fly high enough so that I can always glide to a survivable landing area. I hope to become an old pilot one day so I am trying to avoid the bold and reckless type of flying.

Note: FWIW, I did perform an actual 0/0 takeoff once a few years ago in a piston single and I knew that if the engine quit on me I was screwed. I had a sinking feeling in my stomach during the entire taxi, takeoff, and departure. I did not enjoy the thought of having no out if something went wrong and I decided afterwards that I would never again put myself in that sort of situation.

I'm not using that as an excuse, but when its 5 mins. to a VFR airport or 12 mins to get vectored back around for the approach, why not go and fly.

What good does that VFR airport or the option to get vectored back do for you if you lose your engine on departure SE? You are not going to glide to either one of those options and if you have 0/0 then you have zero control in what the plane goes into when it hits the ground. Good Night!

 

[minitour]

Why should it be. Should we restrict IFR/IMC ops to only multi engine aircraft?

Yes. Singles into IFR is dumb. Yeah, I did it. No, I didn't like it. If I wanted to keep my job, I'd launch.

Singles into IFR is dumb.

For those that will pick nits, IFR/IMC...whatever you want to call it today.

-mini

 

[MikeD]

Note: FWIW, I did perform an actual 0/0 takeoff once a few years ago in a piston single and I knew that if the engine quit on me I was screwed. I had a sinking feeling in my stomach during the entire taxi, takeoff, and departure. I did not enjoy the thought of having no out if something went wrong and I decided afterwards that I would never again put myself in that sort of situation.


What good does that VFR airport or the option to get vectored back do for you if you lose your engine on departure SE? You are not going to glide to either one of those options and if you have 0/0 then you have zero control in what the plane goes into when it hits the ground. Good Night!

Nothing like some "edge of the seat" flying to keep one alert and the flight interesting!

 

[Roger, Roger]

Then should all quit flying in VMC in a single engine airplane, because if something goes wrong with your ONE engine, you are still going to do a forced landing? What happens when your at 6000 ft, above a solid layer and the engine quits? With no airports around. Your still just as eff'ed. This goes back to the old SE vs ME thing where people say you shouldn't take off if SE climb and service ceiling are above your current altitude. In a single engine airplane, your critical engine inop altitude is the ground, just like it would be if you were to loose one of two engines in a ME. Everytime you take flight, it's at your own risk. I'm not using that as an excuse, but when its 5 mins. to a VFR airport or 12 mins to get vectored back around for the approach, why not go and fly.

See, you're speaking from a slightly different perspective than I am. Where I fly in Eastern Texas, if the weather is low IMC it is low IMC over a large area. The nearest ILS airports (other than my home airport, where the ILS has been OTS for over a year now) are 40 NM away. If I launch in my glass 172 without landing minimums at the home 'drome, I've got probably 30 minutes MINIMUM before I can be on the ground at an ILS airport. That's plenty of time for a problem with my engine or electrical system to kill me. Heck, the Twinstar even makes me a bit nervous because if the electrical system craps out, you only have ~30 minutes before the engines quit (assuming the FADEC batteries work right).

 

[mikecweb]

Would it make a difference? Explain...

You'd realize the world not according to Martha and John King. I'm sure you're one of those CFIs that teaches his students exactly like you were taught. They probably rarely see anything beyond what is required. You are more worried about following your syllabus then their experience level once they get a certificate. Some instructors teach the PTS, some teach flying....
Maybe you and Jhugz could get together and share notes on mediocre instructing techniques....

 

[Tld]

We get down to the end of the runway and into position for take-off, and he has me put on the hood. This he didn't brief me on, and it stretched my comfort zone a little bit. I guess he wanted to show me a 0/0 take-off and assured me that he wouldn't let me kill us on the runway.

The first 0/0 takeoff I did was on my IR checkride...took me a little by surpise, not in pts, but DPE just wanted to make sure I had done one before he signed my ticket. I thought it was fun, knew it wasn't a failing item, had 10,000ft of rwy, and was down to learn. good stuff

 

[shdw]

You'd realize the world not according to Martha and John King. I'm sure you're one of those CFIs that teaches his students exactly like you were taught. They probably rarely see anything beyond what is required. You are more worried about following your syllabus then their experience level once they get a certificate. Some instructors teach the PTS, some teach flying....
Maybe you and Jhugz could get together and share notes on mediocre instructing techniques....

You couldn't be more wrong, I am writing my own from scratch for the last 6 months. Still in the planning phase 140 or so pages of outlines and information from 10 or so sources. But sure, you can go on thinking I am just following the syllabus like everybody else. Maybe this will teach you that being judgmental only makes you look like an ass.

 

[OldTownPilot]

All I have to say, is that by demonstrating these "marginal yet legal" activities you WILL save lives and prevent accidents, by either the student realizing that it's a dumb thing to do, and not attempting it in the first place, or by giving them a little experience to go back on, when they attempt to do it, because "hey, it's legal".