When to start students on hood work
- Thread starter Dazzler
- Start date
jrh
Well-Known Member
My thoughts exactly. I've never understood why the Jepp syllabus brings it in so early.
I usually skip that part of the training until after they solo. Most students have a hard enough time figuring out basic attitude flying using visual references by their third flight, let alone trying to do it on instruments.
Blip16
Well-Known Member
after initial solo sounds good to me. that is what i was planning with my student. makes no sense to get them under the hood when they are still working on just being able to fly the airplane VISUALLY
i guess you could see it as then they can learn to interpret the instruments quicker, but it will also give them the false idea that they can fly with the instruments IMHO
i guess you could see it as then they can learn to interpret the instruments quicker, but it will also give them the false idea that they can fly with the instruments IMHO
nosehair
Well-Known Member
Oh Boy, I am surprised to see this 40-odd year old attitude still surviving out there.
The purpose of Integrated Instrument Flight Instruction is NOT to prepare someone to fly in IMC, but to attain a more precise control of the aircraft, and to establish instrument scanning habit patterns FROM THE FIRST LESSON.
In the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook, Chapter 4, Basic Flight Maneuvers, the Introduction starts with the Integrated Flight Instruction concept.
You should reference the inside instruments along with outside visual reference as you introduce a maneuver. The FAA statistics, and myself, over many years, have found this to produce pilots (not instrument pilots - but solo and private pilots) that have more precise aircraft control.
When you demonstrate simple straight-and-level or level turns, you should have them use outside refs such as a straight road, a water tower, or some outside reference for heading control, and you should also point out the heading indicator as a tool for heading control.
This assists the new pilot in holding a heading when there is no water tower or road or any thing to line up on. Same with bank control, pitch control, etc. There is not always some outside reference to establish a fine tuned control of those axies.
additionally, it establishes a habit pattern for later when he/she completes the Private and wants to start real instrument training.
Note the wording in the regs: this is attiude control training, not instrument training, which is why you don't need a CFII to do it.
So the reference to instruments should be from day one with all maneuvers, and the reason you are putting the hood on is to give the new student time to look only at the instrument for 5-10 minutes of each flight, so that his/her eyes are better trained in making a quick look inside at heading or bank or VSI, then back outside at the visual reference.
This really makes a better pilot and quicker to gain more precise control of the airplane while learning, in the beginning, how to cross-check inside-outside appropriately.
Jeppsen suggests .2 for about 5 flights during pre-solo training.
You are doing your students a dis-service by 'waiting' until after solo.
I learned back in the day before instruments were required training for private pilots, and I can tell you from personal experience that once you have learned to use only outside references, it is much harder to 'close in' and learn to use inside only references. Much Harder.
The purpose of Integrated Instrument Flight Instruction is NOT to prepare someone to fly in IMC, but to attain a more precise control of the aircraft, and to establish instrument scanning habit patterns FROM THE FIRST LESSON.
In the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook, Chapter 4, Basic Flight Maneuvers, the Introduction starts with the Integrated Flight Instruction concept.
You should reference the inside instruments along with outside visual reference as you introduce a maneuver. The FAA statistics, and myself, over many years, have found this to produce pilots (not instrument pilots - but solo and private pilots) that have more precise aircraft control.
When you demonstrate simple straight-and-level or level turns, you should have them use outside refs such as a straight road, a water tower, or some outside reference for heading control, and you should also point out the heading indicator as a tool for heading control.
This assists the new pilot in holding a heading when there is no water tower or road or any thing to line up on. Same with bank control, pitch control, etc. There is not always some outside reference to establish a fine tuned control of those axies.
additionally, it establishes a habit pattern for later when he/she completes the Private and wants to start real instrument training.
Note the wording in the regs: this is attiude control training, not instrument training, which is why you don't need a CFII to do it.
So the reference to instruments should be from day one with all maneuvers, and the reason you are putting the hood on is to give the new student time to look only at the instrument for 5-10 minutes of each flight, so that his/her eyes are better trained in making a quick look inside at heading or bank or VSI, then back outside at the visual reference.
This really makes a better pilot and quicker to gain more precise control of the airplane while learning, in the beginning, how to cross-check inside-outside appropriately.
Jeppsen suggests .2 for about 5 flights during pre-solo training.
You are doing your students a dis-service by 'waiting' until after solo.
I learned back in the day before instruments were required training for private pilots, and I can tell you from personal experience that once you have learned to use only outside references, it is much harder to 'close in' and learn to use inside only references. Much Harder.
nosehair
Well-Known Member
Copied from a flight instructor refresher course:
INTEGRATED FLIGHT INSTRUCTION
"Integrated flight instruction" is flight instruction during which students are taught to perform flight maneuvers both by outside visual references and by reference to flight instruments, FROM THE FIRST TIME EACH MANEUVER IS INTRODUCED. No distinction in the pilot’s operation of the flight controls is permitted, regardless of whether outside references or instrument indications are used for the performance of the maneuver. When this training technique is used, instruction in the control of an airplane by outside visual references is "integrated" with instruction in the use of flight instrument indications for the same operations.
Integrated flight instruction was introduced on a national scale in 1959, when an amendment to the Civil Air Regulations established certain instruction and competency in the use of flight instruments as prerequisites for the issuance of private pilot certificates. The objective of this training was, and still is, the formation of firm habit patterns for the observance of and reliance on flight instruments from the student’s first piloting experience. Such habits have been proved to produce more capable and safer pilots for the efficient operation of today’s airplanes. The ability to fly in instrument weather is not the objective of this type of primary training, although it does greatly facilitate later instrument flight training.
DEVELOPMENT OF HABIT PATTERNS
General aviation accident reports provide ample support for the belief that habitual reference to flight instruments is important to safety. The safety record of pilots who hold instrument ratings is significantly better than that of pilots with comparable flight time who have never received formal instrument flight training. Student pilots who have been required to perform all normal flight maneuvers by reference to instruments, as well as by outside references, will develop from the start the habit of continuously monitoring their own and the airplane’s performance.
This habit would be much more difficult for a student to develop after intense piloting experience without it, as veteran pilots who begin formal training for an instrument rating can readily testify.
ACCURACY OF FLIGHT CONTROL
The greatest benefit of using the integrated method of fight instruction during pilot training is that students are more precise in their performance of maneuvers by visual references. This applies to all flight operations, not just when flight by reference to instruments is required. Notable among students achievements are better monitoring of power settings and more accurate maintenance of desired headings, altitudes, and airspeeds. As the habit of monitoring their own performance by reference to instruments is developed, students will begin to make corrections without prompting. The habitual attention to instrument indications leads to superior cross-country navigation, better coordination, improved landings because of more accurate airspeed control, and a generally better overall pilot competency.
And here is why some instructors consider it bad to introduce instruments in pre-solo:
It is important to note that integrated instruction is not without it's critics. There are pilots both within and outside the FAA that worry that students will develop poor collision avoidance techniques by spending too much time referring to the instrument panel and not enough time looking for traffic. Also of concern is the possibility that the student may conclude that he (or she) has developed sufficient instrument flight skills to tackle limited visual conditions or even instrument weather. This is a valid concern and can not be ignored by the instructor.
Students quickly learn that it is easier to control aircraft performance by concentrating on the instrument panel. Not only does this validate the concerns mentioned above, but it also makes ground reference maneuvers more difficult for the student to perform. The instructor should carefully observe the student’s performance of maneuvers during the early stages of integrated flight instruction to assure that this habit does not develop. If it is detected, the instructor should make the student concentrate on maneuvering by outside references with the gyroscopic instruments caged or covered.
Of course, collision avoidance too, must be continually stressed. We all know that most mid air collisions occur in VFR weather conditions. The pilots involved in these collisions may not have been searching for other traffic. Teach your student to always ask for radar traffic advisories but to keep in mind that collision avoidance is always the responsibility of the pilot, as stated above.
During the conduct of integrated flight instruction the instructor should make it clear that the use of instruments is being taught to prepare students to accurately monitor their own and their airplane’s performance, not to qualify them for IFR operations. The instructor must avoid any indication, by word or action, that the proficiency sought is intended solely for use in difficult weather situations.
INTEGRATED FLIGHT INSTRUCTION
"Integrated flight instruction" is flight instruction during which students are taught to perform flight maneuvers both by outside visual references and by reference to flight instruments, FROM THE FIRST TIME EACH MANEUVER IS INTRODUCED. No distinction in the pilot’s operation of the flight controls is permitted, regardless of whether outside references or instrument indications are used for the performance of the maneuver. When this training technique is used, instruction in the control of an airplane by outside visual references is "integrated" with instruction in the use of flight instrument indications for the same operations.
Integrated flight instruction was introduced on a national scale in 1959, when an amendment to the Civil Air Regulations established certain instruction and competency in the use of flight instruments as prerequisites for the issuance of private pilot certificates. The objective of this training was, and still is, the formation of firm habit patterns for the observance of and reliance on flight instruments from the student’s first piloting experience. Such habits have been proved to produce more capable and safer pilots for the efficient operation of today’s airplanes. The ability to fly in instrument weather is not the objective of this type of primary training, although it does greatly facilitate later instrument flight training.
DEVELOPMENT OF HABIT PATTERNS
General aviation accident reports provide ample support for the belief that habitual reference to flight instruments is important to safety. The safety record of pilots who hold instrument ratings is significantly better than that of pilots with comparable flight time who have never received formal instrument flight training. Student pilots who have been required to perform all normal flight maneuvers by reference to instruments, as well as by outside references, will develop from the start the habit of continuously monitoring their own and the airplane’s performance.
This habit would be much more difficult for a student to develop after intense piloting experience without it, as veteran pilots who begin formal training for an instrument rating can readily testify.
ACCURACY OF FLIGHT CONTROL
The greatest benefit of using the integrated method of fight instruction during pilot training is that students are more precise in their performance of maneuvers by visual references. This applies to all flight operations, not just when flight by reference to instruments is required. Notable among students achievements are better monitoring of power settings and more accurate maintenance of desired headings, altitudes, and airspeeds. As the habit of monitoring their own performance by reference to instruments is developed, students will begin to make corrections without prompting. The habitual attention to instrument indications leads to superior cross-country navigation, better coordination, improved landings because of more accurate airspeed control, and a generally better overall pilot competency.
And here is why some instructors consider it bad to introduce instruments in pre-solo:
It is important to note that integrated instruction is not without it's critics. There are pilots both within and outside the FAA that worry that students will develop poor collision avoidance techniques by spending too much time referring to the instrument panel and not enough time looking for traffic. Also of concern is the possibility that the student may conclude that he (or she) has developed sufficient instrument flight skills to tackle limited visual conditions or even instrument weather. This is a valid concern and can not be ignored by the instructor.
Students quickly learn that it is easier to control aircraft performance by concentrating on the instrument panel. Not only does this validate the concerns mentioned above, but it also makes ground reference maneuvers more difficult for the student to perform. The instructor should carefully observe the student’s performance of maneuvers during the early stages of integrated flight instruction to assure that this habit does not develop. If it is detected, the instructor should make the student concentrate on maneuvering by outside references with the gyroscopic instruments caged or covered.
Of course, collision avoidance too, must be continually stressed. We all know that most mid air collisions occur in VFR weather conditions. The pilots involved in these collisions may not have been searching for other traffic. Teach your student to always ask for radar traffic advisories but to keep in mind that collision avoidance is always the responsibility of the pilot, as stated above.
During the conduct of integrated flight instruction the instructor should make it clear that the use of instruments is being taught to prepare students to accurately monitor their own and their airplane’s performance, not to qualify them for IFR operations. The instructor must avoid any indication, by word or action, that the proficiency sought is intended solely for use in difficult weather situations.
he hasn't soloed yet and isn't even close, only 2 flights under the belt
Dazzler
Well-Known Member
Thanks nosehair for your input - you have some good points.
My student has the same amount of flight time as brschmid's student (just 2 flights into training), and he has already told me that he is having difficulty looking "outside" and not concentrating too much on the panel, so I am hesitant of introducting hood work just yet, but I understand what you are saying concerning the integration method not being there for instrument training, but for attitude awareness.
My student has the same amount of flight time as brschmid's student (just 2 flights into training), and he has already told me that he is having difficulty looking "outside" and not concentrating too much on the panel, so I am hesitant of introducting hood work just yet, but I understand what you are saying concerning the integration method not being there for instrument training, but for attitude awareness.
jrh
Well-Known Member
This one statement fits perfectly with what I originally suggested of waiting until after soloing to learn instruments.
You can have great integrated instruction without any hood work. After all, integrated instruction involves both inside and outside reference. Where is the outside reference during hood work?
nosehair said:
I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. I know numerous pilots who breezed through their instrument rating, are sharp instrument pilots, and never had any pre-solo instrument training.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
I tend to agree with you partially.
Beginning students have a lot of difficulty with looking outside. Those instruments are so strange they attract attention; and they are difficult to understand at first which leads to fixation. "Integration" does not have to mean hoodwork - it means learning instrument indications in the context of how they are reflected in the real world.
But I do not wait until post solo to get into hoodwork itself. Even though it is not a required pre-solo task, I think some hoodwork, with it's emphasis on instrument interpretation, is still valuable early on (just as valuable as when I cover the instruments to emphasize flying visually) as part of the process of a greater form of integration - learning how to use all of the equipment in the airplane.
nosehair
Well-Known Member
I am speaking genarically; in the usual case.
Integrated does not necessarily mean actually putting on the hood.
Each student is different, and needs different methods of training. There is no "one size fits all" approach to flight training.
If the student is truly capable of integrating his/her instrument references to his/her outside references, then there is no real 'need' to put the hood on...but why not? You hafta do it for 3 hours anyway. Why not get a couple tenths before solo?
But that's not my point. The need for putting the hood on in soon after a maneuver is introduced with visual outside and inside references is to give the student 5-10 minutes of time devoted to purely looking and studying the instrument indications as they occur. If he is only glancing at the instrument 20% of the time, he/she will not (usually) see the subtle changes that occur and learn to apply smooth control pressures as they change.
Looking inside after the change and reacting too late is not good training.
As Midlife said, some students tend to look inside too much, and this is handled by covering up the panel for a while to force looking outside.
This tendency to look inside too much might be cured by giving the student sufficient time inside, so that he will see what he needs to see, then force the looking strictly outside until he/she learns the proper balance. But the balance will never be attained if you initially force outside looking only.
It is a delicate balance that the flight instructor must find for that particular student.
Like rudder/aileron coordination. The goal is to teach the student proper coordination of both, but I know from experience that most students will try to 'drive' the wheel, just like their car, so I tell them this in the beginning, and tell them to lead with the rudder. At first that produces a skidding turn, but eventually becomes well coordinated, as the new student learns rudder pressure feel and aileron feel.
The same principle applies to learning the subtle movements of heading, altimeter, and VSI. You focus specifically on each one with it's own characteristics and control pressures to bring it under control. You are simplfying it for the student. One thing at a time until he/she is able to correlate and apply them in concert.
I like to introduce emergency procedures before solo, because they might just need them when flying on their own. Hood work for the private certificate is for emergency purposes only. Therefore, I think doing some hood work, along with the other emergency procedures, before solo is a good idea.
nosehair
Well-Known Member
Well, that is the generally accepted misunderstanding - it's not really for emergency IMC, it's to teach better, more precise control of the aircraft.
It does, however, have the added benefit of emergency IMC and that is also a good reason to do it. But it should be emphasized that the purpose is not for IMC flight, but only for better more precise control.
I used to think that was the reason, and that is why I did it. Some days in the practice area, you just don't have a horizon and vis can be so bad that it could be possible to go inadvertant IMC, but the primary reason, fom my personal experience, and from the FAA's viewpoint, is to increase the beginning student's ability to interpret and contol instrument indications in visual handling of the airplane.
From the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook in the section "Inadvertent flight into IMC" is the following:
The way I read this is that it is for emergency purposes only. I'm referring to hood work, not integrated flight instruction, which is something else.
jrh
Well-Known Member
:yeahthat:
nosehair
Well-Known Member
Carlos quotes the FAA Flying Handbook:
"From the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook in the section "Inadvertent flight into IMC" is the following:
Quote:
The purpose of this section is to provide guidance on practical emergency measures to maintain airplane control for a limited period of time in the event a VFR pilot encounters IMC conditions. The main goal is not precision instrument flying; rather, it is to help the VFR pilot keep the airplane under adequate control until suitable visual references are regained.
The way I read this is that it is for emergency purposes only. I'm referring to hood work, not integrated flight instruction, which is something else."
I can't seem to find this exact quote, nor an section called "Inadvertant flight into IMC". However, if I could, the purpose of that section would be as you have stated.
What I have found close to your reference is in Chapter 9 under "Flight by Reference to Instruments".
"Introduction: This chapter provides guidance in developing the ability to maneuver the airplane for limited periods by reference to flight instruments and following ATC instructions when outside visual references are lost due to flight into IMC."
That's back in Chapter 9 and does addres the emergency IMC procedures we are supposed to teach on the way to the Private Pilot certificate.
The original poster, however, was curious about hood work prior to solo, and that is about the integrated method of introducing reference to instruments during each maneuver to increse pilot control of the airplane by using both inside and outside references, which is all I am talking about: the basic introduction of what and where to look to get cues as to how much pressure to put on what control to effect a precision straight-and-level or turn or climb or descent. Basics. Those are up front in Chapter 4 which is where I am quoting from.
As I have said, the hood is a tecnique that I have found to be a good tool for doing this, and that is all I'm saying, guys...
jr, you mention that your student is having a hard enough time "doing it visual", so you think it is too much to put the hood on.
Try it. You will be surprised how much a student's visual performance cranks up when he has been given these extra tools to work with.
Of course, again I say each student is unique; maybe he/she won't see the improvement. I had one student who could not keep the hood on. Claustrophobia. A great visual pilot, but could not stay under the hood long enough to get the required hours. Everybody is different.
But I think you all owe each student the opportunity to try it a little and see how it goes. If you just operate on a blanket statement, ie, "I never do hood until after solo...", you are not growing as an instructor.
"From the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook in the section "Inadvertent flight into IMC" is the following:
Quote:
The purpose of this section is to provide guidance on practical emergency measures to maintain airplane control for a limited period of time in the event a VFR pilot encounters IMC conditions. The main goal is not precision instrument flying; rather, it is to help the VFR pilot keep the airplane under adequate control until suitable visual references are regained.
The way I read this is that it is for emergency purposes only. I'm referring to hood work, not integrated flight instruction, which is something else."
I can't seem to find this exact quote, nor an section called "Inadvertant flight into IMC". However, if I could, the purpose of that section would be as you have stated.
What I have found close to your reference is in Chapter 9 under "Flight by Reference to Instruments".
"Introduction: This chapter provides guidance in developing the ability to maneuver the airplane for limited periods by reference to flight instruments and following ATC instructions when outside visual references are lost due to flight into IMC."
That's back in Chapter 9 and does addres the emergency IMC procedures we are supposed to teach on the way to the Private Pilot certificate.
The original poster, however, was curious about hood work prior to solo, and that is about the integrated method of introducing reference to instruments during each maneuver to increse pilot control of the airplane by using both inside and outside references, which is all I am talking about: the basic introduction of what and where to look to get cues as to how much pressure to put on what control to effect a precision straight-and-level or turn or climb or descent. Basics. Those are up front in Chapter 4 which is where I am quoting from.
As I have said, the hood is a tecnique that I have found to be a good tool for doing this, and that is all I'm saying, guys...
jr, you mention that your student is having a hard enough time "doing it visual", so you think it is too much to put the hood on.
Try it. You will be surprised how much a student's visual performance cranks up when he has been given these extra tools to work with.
Of course, again I say each student is unique; maybe he/she won't see the improvement. I had one student who could not keep the hood on. Claustrophobia. A great visual pilot, but could not stay under the hood long enough to get the required hours. Everybody is different.
But I think you all owe each student the opportunity to try it a little and see how it goes. If you just operate on a blanket statement, ie, "I never do hood until after solo...", you are not growing as an instructor.
The current (2004) AFH is available online. Look at http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aircraft/airplane_handbook/media/faa-h-8083-3a-7of7.pdf on page 16-12 to find the section "Inadvertent VFR flight into IMC". I left the "VFR" out of my original citation. The text I quoted is on page 16-13.
jrh
Well-Known Member
Fair enough, I'm open to trying it...but I must admit, I'm still skeptical.
I guess this is a case of teaching the way I was taught, and also my fear of screwing up a good thing. I've had a lot of success without doing pre-solo hood work, so I'm reluctant to confuse the student, or waste their time, or whatever, by doing something out of the ordinary...but ok, I'll try it.
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
That's understandable!
That's a natural thing, but it's also healthy to try new things. Some things will work on every student, and some things will only work on some students. Part of being a flexible CFI is remembering that it's ok to go "outside of the box", so to speak. Take baby steps, and try a little bit at a time. If you see that the new technique is slowing the progrees, back off just a bit. If the new technique is working well, then take another step. Great things can happen!
jrh
Well-Known Member
So true. Even though I'm 10 times better of an instructor now than when I first started, I'm also a lot more like a cranky old man when it comes to flying. I'm set in my ways, I like the way I do things, I have reasons for the way I do things, and the thought of changing makes me grumpy!
Gotta step back and relax sometimes...