Bad habits developed by civilian pilots

[trampbike]

Hi,
I'm an aspiring RCAF pilot, currently at a civilian university, finishing my degree through the ROTP program. I have a PPL with a night rating and spend most of my money (every penny that's left once rent and food is paid...) on flying. I mostly fly an old tailwheel (Aeronca Champ) and a Grumman AA1 out of a small strip on the south shore of Montreal. Most of my flying time involves XC flying with only a compass and VNC charts for navigation and a lot of practise maneuvers (slow flights, steep turns, short field landings, stalls, engine failures, tight circuits).

I know civilian flying is very different from military flying. What are the things I should really be aware of? What kind of habits should I try to break down and what kind of skills should I try to developp?

Thanks!

 

[Strike]

One of the first things to work on is being exact on the numbers.  If you want to fly at 1300 ASL, for example, then fly at 1300.  Not 1400, not 1250. Try to be as exact as possible.  If you are cruising at 90, challenge yourself to hold 90, not 95 or even 87.

This is one of the biggest things the instructors harped on throughout training.  The benefit of being able to fly the numbers so well is that, when it comes time to do nav and IF, then your timings will make calculating things like fuel burn and time on target that much easier.

 

[Loachman]

Firstly, want it enough. Motivation is a huge factor.

Want it enough that you will work harder than you ever have before, and harder than you thought possible. There is a lot of work involved, and a very high standard is expected by your instructors.

As high as the standard expected of you by your instructors is, the standard that you expect of yourself should be higher, and you should drive yourself to exceed both.

Keep an open mind, listen to what your instructors tell you, and do things their (our) way, and not your own way. Our ways may not be any better than the ways that you were previously taught, but you will not be evaluated on how well you do things your old way. You will be evaluated on how well you do things our way.

No matter how much effort you put in, you should enjoy it. If you don't like what you are doing, your motivation will slip. Find balance between stress and pleasure.

These are simple concepts, yet they escape many.

As Strike said, be precise. Make the aircraft do what you want it to.

Know your numbers, and know your checks.

 

[trampbike]

Thank you for your replies.
Do you think it is a good idea to spend some time flying by instruments (I have a couple of friends that could act as check pilot) or should I continue doing what I described in my first post?

 

[Loachman]

You may just pick up more habits that need to be broken later.

Most of us who made it through the training system did so with no prior instrument experience - or any flying experience at all.

The programme is designed to work that way.

 

[Zoomie]

Do you think it is a good idea to spend some time flying by instruments

Please don't bother.  If anything - spend time in the circuit flying precise airspeeds and accurate 3 degree glidepaths to smooth landings.  Everything else will be taught and covered in detail - the way we want it.

I tell every aspiring CF pilot this little tidbit of advice - don't get a PPL whatever you do.  Spend some money getting "hands and feet" flying and a basic familiarity with how a plane is supposed to "feel" at different stages of flight.  Anything else is a waste of money.  If you make it through the complete pilot training program - Transport Canada will give you a Commercial, IFR pilots license, all for the low cost of writing a few written tests.

 

[Journeyman]

Looking in from the outside, you may or may not find this advice useful.


If you have sufficient free time before heading off to flying school, you may want to develop a personality. Now some, mostly army aviators, seem to have little difficulty with this PO check. Others, such as VIP Transport pilots have recurring difficulties -- this appears to be sparked by flying aircraft with supposedly important people (making them feel important by proximity) -- yet not being a fighter pilot able to claim having played beach volleyball with Tom Cruise.

Again, flying circuits could prove useful, but try to keep in mind that for every hour spent in the air, you may have to spend up to 48 hours on the ground with  ~shudder~   mere humans. Eventually, you may even want to talk with one who isn't blonde, then trust me....you'll wish you had a personality.  :nod:



For those readers who are Maritime Air.....it's a joke; ask your AES Op to explain      ;D

 

[justbud]

I tell every aspiring CF pilot this little tidbit of advice - don't get a PPL whatever you do.  Spend some money getting "hands and feet" flying and a basic familiarity with how a plane is supposed to "feel" at different stages of flight.  Anything else is a waste of money.  If you make it through the complete pilot training program - Transport Canada will give you a Commercial, IFR pilots license, all for the low cost of writing a few written tests.

I'm sorry, but I have seen a few people mention this same "suggestion" on these boards and it really irks me.

I know it may make sense coming from the other side. Every time I rotate and the rubber leaves contact with the ground is my ecstasy. Are you trying to rob us of this pleasure, because you think it will make us worse candidates? I may be a bit far stretched here, but I liken that to hazing.

I'm not giving up my right.

 

[aesop081]

I'm not giving up my right.

It was good advice based on long experience as a CF pilot and, in Zoomie's case, a former CF flight instructor.

Which one of those 2 things are you ?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I'm sorry, but I have seen a few people mention this same "suggestion" on these boards and it really irks me.

I know it may make sense coming from the other side. Every time I rotate and the rubber leaves contact with the ground is my ecstasy. Are you trying to rob us of this pleasure, because you think it will make us worse candidates? I may be a bit far stretched here, but I liken that to hazing.

I'm not giving up my right.

Fly. don't fly. The choice is yours.  But you did ask for advice and got advice from an RCAF flight instructor.  Which you then argued with.

Yes- that is type of attitude we like to see in our flying schools.  :

 

[HItorMiss]

SKT,

Small point the poster of the that little tidbit wasn't the OP. Still you have a point about his attitude...


As for him... It is far far from hazing what it is; is solid advice based on experience teaching flying to pilot candidates of the RCAF. If you told me you wanted to be in the Infantry so you wanted to buy a Civi assault rifle and learn to shoot with techniques you have seen on the internet or through some quasi military training course. I would would tell you the same thing, don't waste your time it will simply cause me to spend hours trying to break you of bad habits learned that could potentially impact your chances of being successful.

 

[Zoomie]

but I liken that to hazing.

Let's just call it the best advice you could ever get.

I've spelled it out before, but I don't mind repeating myself when it comes giving candidates the best chance to getting Wings.

Step 1 - Aircrew Selection - if you pass, go to step 2; if you fail - education upgrade.

Step 2 - Primary Flight Training - if you pass, go to step 3; if you fail - education upgrade.

Step 3 - Basic Flight Training - if you pass, go to step 4; if you fail - visit the WPSO (ie time to get another job).

Step 4 - Advance Flight Training - if you pass, Wings; if you fail - visit the WPSO.

Education Upgrade = advancing yourself in the pilot trade on the civilian side.  First step of upgrading is getting your Privates Pilot License (approx 65 hours), second step is Commercial Pilots License (200 hrs), third and final step is Airline Transport Pilots License (1500hrs minimum).

Here's where the good advice comes in.  If you start off with no licenses under your belt (highly recommended), then if you fail Aircrew Selection or PFT, all you need to do is get your PPL.  If you already have a PPL and fail any of those first two steps, you must get your CPL at a much greater expense.  If you already have a CPL, getting your ATPL is not a feasible option that could include a future in the CF as a pilot.

Just some simple advice - take it for what it's worth.

 

[trampbike]

Good advice Zoomie! I didn't do my CPL flight test before ASC for that exact reason (had the hours and the written test done). I knew that if I failed, I only had to pass my flight test and apply next year. Now since I was selected, there's no point anymore getting my CPL.

SKT,

Small point the poster of the that little tidbit wasn't the OP.

Good point 

I would would tell you the same thing, don't waste your time it will simply cause me to spend hours trying to break you of bad habits learned that could potentially impact your chances of being successful.

In your experience, what kind of bad habits do you most often have had to break down (my bet would be the "I already know how to fly" kind of attitude)?

Thanks to everyone for the replies. I do realise one should not spend the money in order to prepare himself for the RCAF training. I personally do it because I love to fly, and since I got use to live on my own with less than what an officer cadets makes, I now find myself in a situation where flying is kind of affordable. I'm  relieved that nobody suggested doing instruments. Flying an old taildragger on skis in the wild is much more fun than flying an ILS approach again and again!

 

[Strike]

Flying an old taildragger on skis in the wild is much more fun than flying an ILS approach again and again!

You may have to relearn how to take off and land then.  ;D

Seriously, if that's what you're flying, go out and keep having fun!  Don't stress about IF so much.  If you really feel it would help, hit the books then so it's not as much of a shock when you hit Moose Jaw.  You won't do much (Any? Not sure if the PFT has started doing any IF) IF in Portage.

 

[Good2Golf]

I'm sorry, but I have seen a few people mention this same "suggestion" on these boards and it really irks me.

I know it may make sense coming from the other side. Every time I rotate and the rubber leaves contact with the ground is my ecstasy. Are you trying to rob us of this pleasure, because you think it will make us worse candidates? I may be a bit far stretched here, but I liken that to hazing.

I'm not giving up my right.

Here's a 'smiley' you might like.    :Tin-Foil-Hat: 

If you look closely, or check image properties, you'll see it's a tinfoil hat.  I think you're the only one in this thread who sees it as hazing.

As others have said, fly....or don't fly...you can do as you wish.  The feedback provided to trampbike was related in general to how some previous flying exposure may or may not help one's chances at being successful as a pilot in the RCAF.  In particular, Zoomie (a very experienced flight instructor) has pointed out some very real implications of completing certain civilian qualifications and how they may constrain your ability to deal with issues of slower progress within the RCAF's training system.  Again, none of use are telling you not to fly, and certainly not to do something that keeps you from achieving ecstasy -- that kind of stuff is between you and....well, you, and certainly best left that way.

:2c: (available to be taken or left as desired...)

Regards
G2G

 

[trampbike]

As a pilot with no military experience, there are a couple of things I was wondering about:

1.

If anything - spend time in the circuit flying precise airspeeds and accurate 3 degree glidepaths to smooth landings. 

Is that 3 degrees glidepath something essential that is always done in training (even in the Grob)?
The airplane I fly most often has a glide ratio of about 9 to 1, so with the engine out in a no wind condition, the gliding angle is about 6 degrees. I suppose the Grob has a much better glide ratio, but still most light SE airplanes glide steeper than 3 degrees. Following a 3 degrees glidepath ensures you won't make it to the runway if you have an engine failure.

2. Cheklists. Are every items memorized (for sure the emergency procedures are) or do you use a written checklist?

3. Negative G. It seems to me that the Western air forces want to do everything under positive G's. I know high negative G's have very bad effects on the pilot and are hard to train for. What about low negative G's? Let's say a fighter does a strafing pass, wouldn't it be easier to push to the appropriate nose down attitude rather than roll inverted, getting into the nose down attitude, rolling back? What about nose high recoveries? Why roll to the nearest horizon and pull instead of pushing (if the nose is below vertical)? I just ordered a book about John Boyd, I might get some answers there.

I do not mean to imply that theses procedures are weird or not appropriate. I have a couple of ideas as to why it is done so in the military, but I don't know much and would love to hear from the experienced guys out here.

Thanks
Olivier

 

[aesop081]

2. Cheklists. Are every items memorized (for sure the emergency procedures are) or do you use a written checklist?

My pilots have always had the checklist out and read from the checklist for the challenge & reply stuff (pre/post T/O, climb/decent check, taxi check, that kind of stuff). On the emergency side, some items have to be memorized but that is not for all emergencies. Some "red page" emergencies require you to memorize only certain items (usually the first items) but even then, the checklist comes out as soon as the memory items are done. Good luck trying to memorize all the checklist on some aircraft.

 

[MAJONES]

Is that 3 degrees glidepath something essential that is always done in training (even in the Grob)?

The 3 degree glide slope is pretty standard in both the military and the airlines (except when you're doing a forced landing).  It's not a big deal to get used to doing it.

2. Cheklists. Are every items memorized (for sure the emergency procedures are) or do you use a written checklist?

That depends on what you are flying.  In training, (Grob and Harvard) you memorize everything.  I believe that fighters are the same.  In multi engine you memorize immediate actions and use checklists for everything else.

Negative G.

Positive G works much better in many cases.  The +G limit is almost always higher than the -G limit; this means that you can manouver much more aggressively using +G (it is often faster to roll and pull than it is to straight up push).  Also, aircraft fuel and oil systems usually like +G better than 0 or -G (most aircraft are time limited as to the amount of time they can spend at 0 or -G) 

 

[trampbike]

Also, aircraft fuel and oil systems usually like +G better than 0 or -G (most aircraft are time limited as to the amount of time they can spend at 0 or -G)

Isn't this fact simply a consequence of the way the airplanes (especially fighters) were designed in the West? Why was it choosen in the first place to build aircraft that can't sustain 0 or negative G?

Thanks again for the responses.

 

[Loachman]

3. Negative G. It seems to me that the Western air forces want to do everything under positive G's. I know high negative G's have very bad effects on the pilot and are hard to train for. What about low negative G's? Let's say a fighter does a strafing pass, wouldn't it be easier to push to the appropriate nose down attitude rather than roll inverted, getting into the nose down attitude, rolling back?

Visibility forward and down is severely limited in a fighter. The old high threat attack was done at low-level with a pop-up climb and simultaneous thirty-degree offset at a calculated distance back from the target, followed by a roll to the inverted attitude (or nearly so) and sixty-degree turn to aim back at the target. That was the only time during which the fighter pilot would have the chance to see his target, and gave the FAC a few seconds to talk his eyes onto it. Everything was visual during the Cold War days; there was no GPS and laser designators were just coming in for ground FACs.

"Low level" was just that. I would be snugged back into a depression in a treeline on a hill where I could see the target and have sufficient stand-off and concealment/backdrop (hopefully) to avoid being engaged by an enemy, and a good view of the fighter's run-in. That view was not necessarily uninterrupted in hilly terrain, as the CF5s were generally lower than I was at that point. Flat open areas like Wainwright were a little easier in that regard, but concealment was next to impossible - carefully-timed pop-ups into a high hover for five seconds followed by repositioning was the only useable technique.

What about nose high recoveries? Why roll to the nearest horizon and pull instead of pushing (if the nose is below vertical)?

Pushing increases the angle of attack, which, if the aircraft is already at or near the stall speed, could easily cause it to stall.