TRAINING STANDARDS !!

[Chaz]

Heya Folks

What has prompted this, is once again we have a "tragic accident" in van der bijl park. I will probably get crucified here but nonetheless i am saddened and upset as well by this tragic incident. Once again a public outcry about how unsafe it is. My question/s here is what standard or level of training did the deceased person recieve.

What sort of pre-flight was carried out(was he taught how to do a proper pre-flight at all times) and shoot me down but to not be able to re-act quick enough to hit the mag switches i find a bit absurd(was he ever taught this). It's not like we are sitting on 11000 pounds of thrust that rockets us to 300 kmh in seconds. I have met some friends who have never heard of a side slip or were shown it at any time during there training. This tells me STANDARDS OF TRAINING DO VARY FROM SCHOOL TO SCHOOL.

What i would like to know is does the CAA go and check up where the deceased recieved his training, how long for, what was covered, etc etc.
All ive ever heard or seen here is the CAA are at the scene, were at the scene or are returning to the scene. I am starting to understand maybe in some cases as to why indemnity forms are so important. They also protect the flight training centre from incompetency perhaps. WE ALL KNOW AVIATION IS A RISK. RISKS ARE MINIMIZED THROUGH GOOD COMPETENT TRAINING.

Last but not least some people are just not cut out to be "AVIATORS" no matter how much we would like to convince ourselves. I speak for myself here and it's one of the reasons why i stopped flying. I was too nervous and i could never shake it when caught in turbulance. I was honest and realistic with myself.

Maybe David Daniels can pass comment on the standards. At this rate maybe MPLS must qualify after 50 hours!!

Your's in Walking
CHAZ

[skybound®]

Chaz - I think part of the problem is that we all try not to talk about these types of issues so close on the heels of an accident. Tend to get shot down in flames for being insensitive.

To make it a bigger issue, is that there has almost not been a long enuff 'quiet' time between accidents/incidents for the discussion to take place and perhaps does need some addressing.

Think also do need to ensure that actions do not become knee jerk actions/remedies.

I agree about your statement about not all being born to fly. Being on the committee of our tin can club, has made this evident, and we do 'wash' students from time to time and in extreme circumstances do suggest that they find a new carreer or hobby. Sometimes, as you can imagine this is not met with glee by the wanabee pilot.

I applaud you for having recognised this yourself and did something about it. (But under the caveat that in a trike there are a many pilots who don't enjoy the turbulence. I feel better in a 3 axis and that was my switch - but really miss the trike of calm coastal days.)

[Junkie]

You can be sure there is a wide variation in standards to found out there and that CAA will begin to look at these accidents with a finer toothcomb & backtrack to where, what and who did the training, inspect the records and ... probably lead to a shakeup, greater degree of controls and limitation of privelages

[Tailspin]

Hi All

Just my 2 zim c.

So because i make a bad decision while driving and get killed the public then go and crucify the driving instructor ?? Lets watch where the blame is placed, maybe there are some remedies needed in the training standard, but also maybe the pilot made an error in judgement and was too busy trying to fly the plane and ..... happens. I understand where you are coming from Chaz but think carefully because your experiance with terbulance is a discomfort for you do you need to say your instruction was not good enough ? ? The Instructor did not put that fear in you ! I have no training school neither am i trying to protect anybody but be careful to point a finger as there are many things we do not know. Only the PILOT knows what was going through his mind at the time so cool the jets guys. Think about the alligations before shooting somebody down !

Sorry if i am missing the point just remember that at the end of the day, it is the PILOT who makes the decisions and be it good or bad it is his decision to fly or to try to take his chances, the instructor cannot make that decision at the time of the incident only the person in the situation can !

[Chaz]

Heya Tailspin

Sorry if you construe my discussion as targeting the instructors. I was talking in a broad spectrum as in all instructors and instruction. I personally had of the best training in the country and had flown in many a turbulant condition. I did not enjoy it and hence have stopped flying trikes. If you notice i mentioned "mag switches". Was the person ever shown or told this in the event of a "runaway" trike cause as you know and i know if it was the case "we not talking mind blowing accelaration".

I am not attacking manufacturers, instructors etc etc. Skybound you are right i am not being insensitive. Demon i was just reacting to all the reply's in the accident forum of which some were pointing out "mag switches" "pre-flights". Microlighting is regarded as a extreme hobby by most people yet we have people who have only been flying microlights for the past 20 years and the worst you hear from them is a engine out they had. Yes we are all PILOTS who have to make decisions correctly when called upon to do so and surely good training will assist majorly. YES YOU ARE RIGHT TAILSPIN MAYBE SOME REMEDIES ARE REQUIRED IN THE TRAINING CURRICULUM.

ANYWAY MY INTENTION IS NOT TO OFFEND OR PI#$ ANYONE OFF HERE !!

Your's in Walking
CHAZ

[Smiley]

Hello Chaz my mate!!

I also tend to agree with you, but will first like to see what's the outcome of the investigation.....?

____________________________

Cutting maggs, and then pulling choke if needs be, was trained into me. Instinctively I set my mind to cutting the maggs should something happen on startup..

That's my 2C, and not targeted on the Van der Bijl accident!!

[Tailspin]

Hey Chaz

No worries mate, i can fully understand what you are saying, and yes from time to time i think it is necessary to just go through your emergancy procedures just so it is clear in your mind WHAT IF ..... i personally have my hand on the mags for a couple of seconds just after startup as you never know when a kid / dog whatever may get spooked and run in the wrong direction ? Same when i have landed and i am taxi-ing hand on the mags you never know what is at the unknown airfield. We all have our ways of doing things what i suggest is that every Six months or less there is a one day get together just for a run over safety issues like a what if descussion and what would the best solution be to a certain senario. Then when you are out there at the airfield you have better knowledge to what if's that DAMN I SHOULD HAVE"S

[skybound®]

As has been suggested so many times - wait for the accident report.

Accidents have been reported on AvCom for the last 3 years and also here on this forum since inception.

I challenge any one of you to find an official report on any one of the accidents on either forum.

The point is that when these reports do eventually come out (in excess of 3 - 5 years later), they are so sanitised, and to be quite honest, as the impact of the accident has largely left our minds, fail to really be of much use.

The one that always comes to mind is the accident where a trike flew into the lee side of the Magaliesberg and broke up. The official report was that it was over stressed in the lee side turbulence causing wing failure.

Has it had much impact on us. With the amount of trike pilots that still fly onto the lee side of mountains, and the fact that this level of meterology (micro met) has not made it into the trike training sylabus - tells me not.

[Tumbleweed]

Are we able to rate our training recieved? I mean, most of us get trained by one instructor. How do you compare?

Of course, passing theory,solo and final flight is a prerequsite. Our bunch seemed to solo at around 8 to 10 hours, but in quiet airspace, were doing serious 'crabbing' crosswind landings in all sorts of safe conditions.

One instructor can never cover all possible occurrances, but learned just as much shooting the breeze whilst being grounded by weather conditions than actually being in the air.

Joining others for a fly-away and monitoring your level of comfort and responses to new experiences and conditions gives an idea.

But, learning in the hangar, clubhouse, 'dop n' chop', mingling with (some) high milers gives you the exposure to their experiences.

Reading up on the mags gains insight to other's experiences. Surfing the internet; I nearly made myself paranoid reading into almost all USA, Aussie and local incidents, but I made myself aware of seemingly insignificant occurances that turned into serious balls- ups.

Were you a better driver once you got your driving licence or do you consider yourself more able now.

Flying is like Golf, its a constant state of learning, and ongoing training is more a state of mind and awareness.

So with apologies and respect to Alanmack for not responding any comment to his most impressive MISASA submission, I would rather spend the day flying and then shooting the breeeze over a 'chop n' dop' with the top 20 microlight pilots available.

Now that would a jol and be money well spent

[Morph]

As with all these things we can generally determine the technological reason behind the accident i.e. the hand throttle was full open and the control bar was tied to the profile tube. CAA can look at his record and find out where he was trained, whether he was licenced, medically fit etc etc. We could even trace back to the instructor who trained him and the AP who signed the plane out.

What we can't do in the case of a fatal accident is answer for the human factors. We will never know the shock, panic, bewilderment, confusion, thought process of the pilot during the last few seconds. We will never know whether he tried to reach the mag swtiches, or just froze up. Now to hold an instructor responsible for that would be shocking. Besides, how would you ever be able to prove that the instructor never taught him about methods of cutting an engine in the case of a sticking throttle.

What I do know is CAA are looking at the AP, especially if there was an accident due to structural failure and this following very closely on an annual inspection. I know of one AP who signed out a plane without even seeing it, and it crashed. Now CAA are rightfully wanting to know what happened.

My final thoughts. One of the functions of a forum is to create dialogue about all these things. This is one of the best ways to learn. Chaz's thoughts and concerns are valid and it is important that we discuss them soberly and without unneccessary emotion

BTW, Chaz, nice to see you hanging around, even tho' your not flying at the moment.

[Chaz]

Heya Morph

Thanx for the welcome. Okay i will probably open a hornets nest here but what the hell !!

I am not gonna give names, areas or airfields but here for instance is a perfect example of slack training standards and i do beleive they are taking place all over the country. I personally know of a student who failed his flight test miserabley after being asked, on take off to do a engine out. He panicked and admitted he did. So he is booked for a flight test the following week. He does not fly again untill his flight test. Test day arrives again and he is not subjected to the same scenario as the first test but YEEEHAAA he passes.

WHY What changed in the week and why was he not tested on the same situation that caused him to panic. He admitted on his second flight test taking off feeling nervous but "luckily he was not subjected to the same thing" Instructor being kind, lenient, feeling sorry ?? perhaps. Or is it a case of "DO or DIE" now on the students part. I know it would be difficult for a instructor to detect a "Do or Die" attitude but hammer the student on what he failed then at least. It's ridiculous if you ask me. My point is we now have a "NERVOUS QUALIFIED MPL" out there that when he really hit the bad stuff, would not know his arse from his elbow because a instructor was kind, lenient etc etc.

I beleive(and this is my personal opnion) any aspiring MPL must be subjected to the most radical "intro flight" possible and then decide if it is what he really wants to do. AS I MENTIONED EARLIER WE ARE NOT ALL AVIATORS NO MATTER HOW BIG A DREAM IT IS. AS SKYBOUND SAID DO A WASH EVERY NOW AND THEN. Alternatively make under 100 hour MPLS do a "COMPULSORY SAFETY FLIGHT TEST" every 25 hours with a competent instructor.

Another cause for concern is "chasing hours" A student goes out on a solo nav for 1 hour. On returning he is told book higher i.e. 1.5 or 1.8. Ive noticed solo's always done on lovely weather days because it's felt the student wont handle the turbulance I think then maybe 25 hours is perhaps too little. For those who love avaition would it matter how long you trained for especially if you doing what you love best i.e. FLYING

Your's in Walking
CHAZ

[t-bird]

I have to agree with Morph that there were a lot of human factors involved.

1) The guys have been there for a long time preparing for a air show –lots of stress
2) There was a crowd around them looking at the airplane – I always get nervous when people are looking at my plane -stress
3) It happened at 17h00 running out of daylight -Stress
4) They tried to start the airplane – getting stressed about time
5) His friend helped –they are in a hurry -stress

You can’t blame training if a stressed out pilot is making an error.
The pilot should have passed human performance as one of the ground subjects where the effects of stress are mentioned.

[C205]

Has it had much impact on us. With the amount of trike pilots that still fly onto the lee side of mountains, and the fact that this level of meterology (micro met) has not made it into the trike training sylabus - tells me not.

Actually this was covered quite extensively at my flying school.

Nevertheless, let me add to the hornet's nest. Should a low time pilot be flying at a display/show, crowds of people? I don't know about the conditions/runway or whatever was used to take-off and land on but is sounds like it was confined since the pilot crashed into the building soon after take-off.
Why I am asking is because in skydiving you have to be the holder of a PRO rating to be able to do show jumps. The jumper has to have at least a B-licence (100+ jumps) and pass a number of competency testing jumps.

Ok, stirring - hat, coat, door. Taking evasive action

[Smiley]

I have to agree with Morph that there were a lot of human factors involved.

1) The guys have been there for a long time preparing for a air show –lots of stress
2) There was a crowd around them looking at the airplane – I always get nervous when people are looking at my plane -stress
3) It happened at 17h00 running out of daylight -Stress
4) They tried to start the airplane – getting stressed about time
5) His friend helped –they are in a hurry -stress

You can’t blame training if a stressed out pilot is making an error.
The pilot should have passed human performance as one of the ground subjects where the effects of stress are mentioned.

The above mentioned are not good enough for me, sorry

You don't become an "airshow" or "display" pilot or do any type of precision flying over people if you have recently qualified as a pilot.

You need atleast 200 hours or so behind your name, and be comfortable flying in stressful situations.

The display must be approved by CAA and all pilots involved will be tested and the display needs to be reviewed by an appointed person, only then you will get authority to do the display!

Sorry to say this, but qualifying as a pilot, does not make you a competant display pilot!!!!

Again, I'm not targeting the accident, but maybe if this was followed, the accident would have been avoided???

My 2c, please don't attack

[Splitter]

Guys Guys keep your pants on.

I think we should wait for the official report before we make conclusions. I heard that the pilot had a heart attack on the ground while taxing behind another trike, bumped into it and kept on going at full speed as his foot was on the accellerator. As the bar was still fastened to the post, the aircraft took of.

This makes sence to me. We can not start blaming if we have no idea what we are talking about.