The Flying Turkey a CFI?

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You see, it doesn't matter whether Turk knew the answer to the question or not. What I was looking for was his response, his attitude if you will.


[/ QUOTE ]

MikeD, just looking back on all of Turkey’s posts, I don’t think his “attitude” is in question.

Two basic categories of pilots: Those who love what they do and can’t hold back the grin when talking about it, and those who hang around the pilot lounge/forum whining and complaining about everything under the sun.

You have one of the greatest jobs in the world getting to serve your country and get paid to fly awesome aircraft. Personally, I’m thankful to you and envious. Based on the fact that most of your posts bash just about all civilian flight schools, CFI’s in general, passenger airlines, and anyone who would want to be an FO, I would be more concerned about questioning your own “attitude”. I tend to agree with Tired’s opinion about your check on reality.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're reading me wrong too, and putting words in my post that aren't there. I never said Turk has any sort of attitude problem. I said I wanted to see how he'd go about with the challenge I presented. Through his posts, Turk has one of the most positive outlooks and attitude I've seen. I simply presented a challenge to the new CFI to see how he'd handle it. But before THAT could occur, certain PanAm CFIs that can't stand NOT knowing something and seemingly have something against military pilots, turned the situation into something it wasn't, and began accusing me of things due to, possibly, their own personal sense of inferiority or something. I really don't know.

Read my last paragraph from my first post (below). It sums up my intentions. BTW, my post was addressed to Turk, not to these numbsculls for their unnecessary input:
[ QUOTE ]

Turk, take the time to be the best CFI you can and challenge yourself to learn all you can. You'll provide the best training to your students that way, and build your aviation bag-o-SA at the same time. Now is the time when you're freshly minted to set this foundation. What you teach the students of today, both habit and knowlege-wise, will mold the CFIs of tomorrow. Teach them to be open-minded and willing to learn regardles of their level in aviation; make that foundation for them, don't make them believe that each rating they gain is just another chip of arrogance to wear as another gold shoulder stripe on a white pilot shirt.....

[/ QUOTE ]

I never questioned Turk's atitude, I simply was providing a little guidance to the newly-minted CFI. But the PanAm CFIs here don't appear to like to be told ANYTHING. They're the all seeing-all knowing of Pan Am; and I would venture to say, they feel that if they don't know it now, then they don't need to.

Wonder how many stripes they wear on they shoulder boards.

Again, re-read my posts. I'm not the one with the attitude problem here. And I'm not the one that requested I "leave the PanAm forum" as if it's some elitest club. Sounds like attitude to me.

And on a sidenote, your support of those in uniform is much appreciated. Thank you.
.

 

[pure_IMC]

The Janitrol, that is hilarious. I can't tell you how much they emphasize on that darn thing at pan am. We spent nearly half a day in me ground school. Its totally ridiculous.

As far as the other debate, I agree with mike d. Nobody ever is going to know it all. I am reading daily, because pan am cant give any of there graduates any students. Thats all I can do to absorb and retain info, so I can stay fresh, or what as the 50,000 for?

There is always going to be one or two ignorant folks in the bunch, always.

 

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
The Janitrol, that is hilarious. I can't tell you how much they emphasize on that darn thing at pan am. We spent nearly half a day in me ground school. Its totally ridiculous.

As far as the other debate, I agree with mike d. Nobody ever is going to know it all. I am reading daily, because pan am cant give any of there graduates any students. Thats all I can do to absorb and retain info, so I can stay fresh, or what as the 50,000 for?

There is always going to be one or two ignorant folks in the bunch, always.

[/ QUOTE ]

Riddle was the same way when I was in the PA-44 and learning the systems. For some reason, that fuel burn of the Janitrol, 1/2 gal/hr from the left tank or something like that, was seemingly important as heck to figure into your enroute fuel planning.

My contention is, if you're burning down your fuels so low inflight, as for the Janitrol's measley fuel burn to become an issue, then there's something wrong with the flight planning in the first place regards leg distances.

But on the high side, I can say that because it was given so much emphasis, I remember the Janitrol's details to this day, even though I haven't flown a PA-44 since 1992.

On the second issue, I'm the same way. I don't know it all, but I take the time to learn as much as I can, each day. Found out something about ATC yesterday that I didn't know from a poster on this board that happens to be starting ATC class. Excellent.

Certainly if the Janitrol is so important to know, I'd think that information regarding some parts of the IFR envrionment are just as, if not more so, important to know too. PTS or not, it's part of the IFR environment, so I want to know about it, not bank on "the chances of that happening are....."; yes, the chances of a DC-10 losing all three hydraulic systems was a billion to 1, and UAL 232 just happened to draw that card (not that UALs crew could've done much different; just a comment on hedging bets on chances of things occurring or not inflight). So things can and do happen, and the more you're willing to be open minded, the fuller your bag-of aviation knowlege will be.

 

[TheFlyingTurkey]

MikeD, I would have chosen option "A".
You are right about students asking questions which you are not ready to answer (I know, I asked a few myself). So I am fully ready to admit when I dont know the answer, and ready to look it up. I will be looking that one up!

The Turk.

 

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
MikeD, I would have chosen option "A".
You are right about students asking questions which you are not ready to answer (I know, I asked a few myself). So I am fully ready to admit when I dont know the answer, and ready to look it up. I will be looking that one up!

The Turk.

[/ QUOTE ]

See Turk, as a CFI (or pilot at all) you need not feel you must know everything (no one ever will), you just need to know where to find it. And students will ask you things that they've seen, maybe read about, etc; and will come to you for an explanation. Hell, I've been asked at airshows things about some of the other aircraft (F-15, etc) and their missions which, as a pilot who works in combined packages with these other assets, I should definately know many of the specifics they do, but when the question was asked of me, I didn't know; and I told them so. I then told them what I knew to the best of my knowlege regards their question, but that was the best I could do.

Same with my civilian flying. I'd get questions from other pilots from time to time that, while I remember learning the particular subject, I hadn't used it enough or kept up enough to retain it, and had to go look the answer up again (in FAR/AIM, etc); I'd then get back to them with an answer.

Point is, the students are going to look to you for answers on many things. If you know, teach them; if you don't, tell them so and tell them you'll research it and get back to them. This will do a few things: 1. It'll show the student that you take your job seriously, and are professional enough to explain what you know, and/or research what you may be fuzzy on or not know. 2. It'll show them that you're serious about their training and put their questions/concerns first. Too many CFIs are simply "biding their time" at their present job, and really could care less about the job itself; they just want that 1.5 each sortie to log in the logbook (and 0.3 oral to add to the paycheck). These are the same instructors who don't brief much, don't debrief at all, and the ones where the student walks away from the flight with unanswered questions and unresolved worries about things they may have not done too well on in the flight. 3. It'll show the student that you're there to instruct and help them learn, NOT just there as an examiner. An instructor teaches; however, a number of CFIs I've seen go on rides and don't teach, they only evaluate; ie- only point out what the student is doing wrong, but don't give much quality positive feedback. This leaves the student frustrated and without direction on how to improve their performance. Instructing without evaluating will foster a trust between you and the student, and will make you that much more "approachable" by the student for questions. There's many times to be a quasi-evaluator if maybe the student is on a ride prior to a checkride/stage check, then you can debrief items on the spot in the air, or in debrief post-mission. By being more approachable, it'll make achieving items 1-3 that much easier.

Regards items which some people might feel are "unimportant". EVERYTHING concerning IFR is important. Like I said in previous post, a CFII should be able to explain everything on an IAP plate. My example was the holding instructions on the VOR or TACAN 30C at KIWA. There's a part of the instructions in parantheses after the hold instructions concerning TACAN equipped aircraft holding at a radial/DME versus the NAVAID itself (like the normal missed instructions). Now, you may very well never use a TACAN (military version of VOR) in your life, but if you and a student were to be reviewing that approach plate, and he asks you "what does this mean?" You can't just blow it off and say "that's unimportant" or "who cares". That would be the easy way out, and rather unprofessional. In fact, it would give the impression that you're one of those CFIs that's just there to "bide his time" and doesn't care to learn anything new. But by explaining to the student just a basic explanation of the "why" behind that particular notation, you'll give the impression of a professional who takes his job seriously as previously mentioned.

Here's another example. Do you know what an OLS is? It's a Navy Optical Landing System VASI. Ever seen one? Now most people would think "why do I need to know that, where will I ever see it?" Well, if you ever fly into MCAS Yuma/Yuma Intl., and land on Rwys 3L/R-21L/R, they don't have a VASI, or a PAPI, or even a Tri-color or PVASI, they have an OLS. Some things to know about the OLS is that you have a horizontal datum bar that you keep the center light (or meatball) lined up with. Seems easy enough to figure out, huh? But here's more: What's the standard VASI glidepath? About 3 degrees, right? OLS is set to 4-4.5 degrees glidepath. Also, on the sides of the datum lights, there's a set of high-intensity red lights known as "wave off" lights. These are used by tower to send the pilot around if there's any sort of NORDO or lost comm or frequency congested at the right (wrong) time. Now what would happen if you didn't know these two things? First, the approach would feel somewhat more steep than you're used too without you anticipating it; you'd also have to know to compute your VDP for a non-precision approach for the 4 degree GP in order to use the OLS, since the 3 degree will give you "below" indications at all times. Second, someone is talking on frequency on short final and tower needs to send you around. You see the cute blinking red lights and land anyway causing a conflict or accident, not knowing what they mean. Not good since, as a pilot, you're responsible for knowing the rules and regs, and basically, knowing your job. Playing the card of "well I didn't know that" or "that's not important" or "who cares" won't hold water with the FAA. Expect to be held accountable for possible "Careless and Reckless Operation" in that sense.

Now that's just one example of many I could give you. Remember what I wrote before, Turk. YOU'RE now responsible for molding the CFIs of tomorrow. Do you job to the best of your ability and don't shortchange them. Your good attitude now and desire to learn may very well make a huge difference at the right time, either for you or one of your students in the future.

Mike

 

[panampilot]

Enough is enough. MikeD you can stop tearing me apart, WHEN YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW ME! Just because I made a statement on a message board doesn't mean you know who I am, how I teach, what I know etc... Nice try though.

Second, I fully agree that as pilots we need to continue to expand our knowledge. Knowledge is power. I know that. The only comment I made is you come off as very arrogant the way you state these questions. That is the problem with the internet, you can't say something with inflection (ie. sarcasm etc...) If you are truly bringing up these questions because you are trying to help some of us pilots to learn a little more about flying, Great. It just seems everytime I read your posts they reak of arrogance and as if you're talking down to the rest of us CIVILIAN pilots.

If that's not your intent, then so be it. But don't judge me and my skills from a post on the internet and I won't do the same.

 

[MikeD]

Fair enough. I retract anything that came off as a judgement of character. And if my posts come off as somewhat arrogant in any way, well then I can surely proofread them and try to make them not sound that way.

Point is, I'm not here to be anyone's enemy. And you're absolutely right, I don't know you, I only know what you post. And I can't see you face to face, so I'm probably only getting maybe 15% accuracy of it all.

Truth be told, I am just trying to give a little $.02 of things I've seen in my time..things that are no better or worse than what you've seen in your time, just simply different experiences. And I figure I'd share those experiences with those that are interested.

In the case of my question to Turk, there was no arrogance intended and if it came off that way, then I should've proofread my post; I'll take the hit for that. My intent was to present an object lesson that Turk, and anyone else interested, could draw from if they wanted to. You guys are the ones molding the pilots and CFIs of the future, not me. So the only way I figure I can contribute is through dumping bits and pieces of knowlege to those who have this responsibility, especially the new ones.

I have no ill will towards anyone here. It seemed like I was getting attacked, so I attacked back. Water under the bridge from this point on, and I retract any personal accusations aimed at Tired or yourself.

In fact, I'll even edit them out, since they should no longer apply.

Truth be told, we'd probably get along well if we ever met.

Mike

 

[panampilot]

[ QUOTE ]
Truth be told, we'd probably get along well if we ever met.



[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't doubt that. Sorry for any misunderstanding and I will try to not read so much into your posts in the future. AAahhh now I feel much better.

 

[derg]

[ QUOTE ]
Q. How much fuel does the PA-44 Janitrol heater burn and from where does it draw it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oooh!

Oooh!

I know this!

Crap, at least I did... Is it .5 gph from the right wing tank?

 

[TheFlyingTurkey]

Sorry Doug!.. it's .5 gal from the left tank. But you can burn fuel from the right tank if you put the left engine in cross feed.

Nice try though! I know, it's been a while.

The Turk.

 

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Truth be told, we'd probably get along well if we ever met.



[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't doubt that. Sorry for any misunderstanding and I will try to not read so much into your posts in the future. AAahhh now I feel much better.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice being on good terms with you, and feel likewise.

Now let's get back to our regularly scheduled aviation talk!

 

[TheFlyingTurkey]

Back to the subject of my posts...
MEI ground school ended today with us giving a brief on a topic assigned by the ground instructor. I had to do one on the Seminole electrical system. Systems are always easy for me with my mechanical background, so it was a breeze. The final exam is on Monday.
The flights are going well. I was a little rusty on the single-engine stuff, mainly my flow when the engine quits. But it is coming back, and I have 2 flights left. Everything else is great, Vmc & drag demo, steep turns, slow flight, stalls, short field and single-engine landings are pretty good.
Almost done!!!

The Turk.

 

[ananoman]

MikeD, I find your post interesting, but alot of the stuff you ask isn't covered in normal publications. So some of your IFR math stuff is neat, and knowing that TACAN doesn't have a To/From flag is neat too, but we have no good way to find this stuff out. I don't know if you have looked at such publications as the FAA Instrument Flying Handbook, but THEY SUCK. The new version has alot of color pics, but they paid for it by removing alot of information. You will not find much about computing lead radials, etc. in that book. You will also not see anything about the deck landing mirror, and I may be wrong on this, but I do not think there is much about GCA approaches in the AIM either.

I just got a copy of the old Flight Training Handbook and it is almost twice as thick as the new Airplane Flying Handbook. The FAA is slowly dumbing down all it's publications. I usually spend about $30-$50 a month on books, and I have alot of them. They tend to pile up after a while... It is really frustrating to try to find out something relatively simple and have no good source to go to. Just because posters on here don't know this stuff doesn't mean that we are lazy CFI's.

So I am going to ask a question. You have said that you like the Air Force Instrument Manual. Where can I get one? Where else can I look for this stuff?

 

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
MikeD, I find your post interesting, but alot of the stuff you ask isn't covered in normal publications. So some of your IFR math stuff is neat, and knowing that TACAN doesn't have a To/From flag is neat too, but we have no good way to find this stuff out. I don't know if you have looked at such publications as the FAA Instrument Flying Handbook, but THEY SUCK. The new version has alot of color pics, but they paid for it by removing alot of information. You will not find much about computing lead radials, etc. in that book. You will also not see anything about the deck landing mirror, and I may be wrong on this, but I do not think there is much about GCA approaches in the AIM either.

I just got a copy of the old Flight Training Handbook and it is almost twice as thick as the new Airplane Flying Handbook. The FAA is slowly dumbing down all it's publications. I usually spend about $30-$50 a month on books, and I have alot of them. They tend to pile up after a while... It is really frustrating to try to find out something relatively simple and have no good source to go to. Just because posters on here don't know this stuff doesn't mean that we are lazy CFI's.

So I am going to ask a question. You have said that you like the Air Force Instrument Manual. Where can I get one? Where else can I look for this stuff?


[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know the FAA manual has color now. The Air Force Instrument Manual used to be available in various pilot catalogs such as Sporty's, still think they are, but am not sure.

Regards GCAs, check in AIM 5-4-10 on Radar Approaches. In that, the GCA approaches, ASR/PAR, are explained, as they still apply in civil operations, though not as much as they once did. But, it's still in the AIM, along with notes and information on no-gyro approaches.

Other areas I've discussed are also covered in the AIM, such as 5-4-24 Overhead Approach Maneuver; 5-4-5f Visual Descent Points; 2-3-14 Aircraft Arresting Devices.

The OLS used to be in the AIM, if I remember correctly. Don't knwo why it'd be removed if the system is still something civil pilots could still encounter.

 

[TheFlyingTurkey]

I was reading that section myself (5-4-10) and I was familiar with ASR/PAR approaches, I just never read about GCA approaches. I flew the ASR (in actual) into KEYW a few months ago, and it was really cool.

The Turk.

 

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
I was reading that section myself (5-4-10) and I was familiar with ASR/PAR approaches, I just never read about GCA approaches. I flew the ASR (in actual) into KEYW a few months ago, and it was really cool.

The Turk.

[/ QUOTE ]

Turk,

Guess I should've clarified that the term "GCA" (Ground Controlled Approach) is the general term for Radar Approaches. There are two types of GCAs, ASR and PAR. When talking Radar Approaches in general, many people refer to them as "GCAs". However, when you request or get assigned one from ATC, you must/they will always specify which one you want/will be given; ASR or PAR depending on which is available at the airport, or which is in operation.

I'm so used to using the terms interchangebly, that I forget that it can be confusing to those not familiar with the approaches.

They are interesting to fly, if only to see how accurate the final controllers can be. For example, as the controller is talking you down (on a PAR) with azimuth/elevation corrections, they also call out each mile from the runway until one mile. At one mile they continue talking until they call out DH for you (to where you respond with continuing or executing missed) and then can call out even more posits for you. One controller continued with his calls as I was landing even being able to tell me when I was crossing the field boundary fence and over the ALS lights.

There's some procedural stuff to know about these approaches (how their run, "rules of the approach", etc) that, unfortunately isn't covered in the AIM section that talks about Radar Approaches. Which is odd since the AIM covers such items as "on ASR approaches terminating in a circling maneuver, the pilot must pass the aircraft approach category to the final controller". That's unfortunate, since the AIM seemingly short-changes the pilot in that sense. If you're interested in knowing these Turk, I'll be happy to post them.

MD

 

[EatSleepFly]

[ QUOTE ]
There's some procedural stuff to know about these approaches (how their run, "rules of the approach", etc) that, unfortunately isn't covered in the AIM section that talks about Radar Approaches. Which is odd since the AIM covers such items as "on ASR approaches terminating in a circling maneuver, the pilot must pass the aircraft approach category to the final controller". That's unfortunate, since the AIM seemingly short-changes the pilot in that sense. If you're interested in knowing these Turk, I'll be happy to post them.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm interested...if you dont mind, and whenever you have the time. I frequently do practice ASR approaches, with both instrument and private students. And I'd like to learn a little more about them, since, as you said, the AIM is a little vague on the topic.

 

[TheFlyingTurkey]

MikeD, it would be great if you wanted to post that info. or you could tell us where to find it, since it's not in the AIM.

We had the MEI ground school final exam today. Kind of long, mostly essay type questions, so there was a lot of writing involved, and my hand was hurtin. I think I did pretty well, but it will be a day or two before we get our score's. I filled out the 8710 today and got it turned in, shooting for the checkride on Wednesday. I have another flight tomorrow in preparation for the checkride. Can't wait to get done...

The Turk.

 

[MikeD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's some procedural stuff to know about these approaches (how their run, "rules of the approach", etc) that, unfortunately isn't covered in the AIM section that talks about Radar Approaches. Which is odd since the AIM covers such items as "on ASR approaches terminating in a circling maneuver, the pilot must pass the aircraft approach category to the final controller". That's unfortunate, since the AIM seemingly short-changes the pilot in that sense. If you're interested in knowing these Turk, I'll be happy to post them.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well since you guys are interested, I'll start posting some instructional stuff in the tech talk section.

Don't want to hijack Turk's CFI thread here.

Tired, come on over and participate too.

 

[TheFlyingTurkey]

Today I hit 300 hours.

Seems like only yesterday I had my first lesson.
I had a really good flight, and I feel ready for the checkride. Looks like it might happen Thursday or Friday. The waiting is killing me... I want to get this last checkride over with already.

The Turk.