NASA form

[Beech driver]

Well, I guess there is a first time for everything.
So here I am coming in to land as my student is flying. He decides to flare way to high which brings the gentle reminder to let the aircraft descend a bit more. Apparently, his way to descend was to pull the power out to idle between 15-20 feet AGL while also keeping the nose high. By the time I was able to apply full power, we were a couple feet off the ground. I thought I had seen the end of that situation. He, however, had other plans. When I had recovered and climbed to no more than 10 feet and made plans to land on my own (we were still going straight down the runway centerline and had regained some of the lost speed) he decided to pull the throttle back to idle and pitch toward the sky again. Dual throttles in case you are wondering. Again, I firewall the throttle. Only to accomplish this at the same time we fell from the sky. After we bounce a large bounce, I realize we are dragging something on the right side and bring the throttle out to idle. After we turned onto a taxiway, (not that I had an option, that is where the plane wanted to go) I noticed my right wheel pant was now between the asphalt and tire. Don't know how that broke free and ended up there. Pretty soon tower is calling my boss to see if there is any damage to the aircraft. He says yes a wheel pant. Then I get to speak to tower on my own. What do I do you may ask? Get back on the horse. 1 hour later I am back in the air on my way to St. Cloud and back. Course, now I get to sit and chat with FSDO tomorrow morning. Thus I am updating my logbook tonight over a few drinks.
Any similar stories out there?

[RightSeatGirl]

Cost of CFI rating.....$3000
Cost of one wheel pant......$1100
Cost of having to put up with suicidal students.....The cost of heart medication
Cost of getting an airline job without ever having to teach........Priceless

Glad everyone is okay....I wouldn't worry about it, doesn't sound like you violated any FAR's. Just had a bad student....Won't be your last I'm sure...

[Beech driver]

Yup, and I thought I was joking when I told friends this student tried to kill me on another occasion. Maybe he actually was.

Worried about it-not at all. FAR violated-nope. Just though I would cover my butt since FSDO got involved. However, that is mainly due to the fact the aircraft is certified for Light Sport and they are wondering how this type holds up compared to fully certified aircraft.

[RightSeatGirl]

Interesting situation, please share the results of your sitdown...

[jrh]

Might want to get ready for a discussion on the "positive exchange of controls" method of communication, too...



Not saying you were negligent, but if I were a FSDO guy it would probably be a talking point.

[Beech driver]

I fully expect it him to bring it up today. If I was in his shoes I know I would. But with that being said, what can I do. I tell him I have the controls immediately after I get us climbing again only because I was focused on not slamming in to the ground before speaking. Did he reply as to me having the controls? Cannot remember. But I would have to say no he did not. At that point things were happening rather quickly. All I can say now is that I really wish I would have gone around.

[Hacker15e]

What's that all have to do with an ASRS form?

[Dan208B]

My biggest suggestion would be to stay calm. Feds have a sneaky, almost magical way of turning a conversation into an "accusation session" sort of thing instead. No matter what he says, asks, or even accuses, stay calm...

[meritflyer]

Originally Posted by RightSeatGirl

Cost of getting an airline job without ever having to teach........Priceless

Well, it's obvious which route you went.

Signed,

CFI, CFII, MEI and proud of it.

[sixoneseven]

Originally Posted by Hacker15e

What's that all have to do with an ASRS form?

My thoughts also.

[RightSeatGirl]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

Well, it's obvious which route you went.

Signed,

CFI, CFII, MEI and proud of it.

My comment to Hawker Driver was in jest. And I think that's how he took them...I have nothing but respect for CFI's and he sounds like one who cares.


So, are you of the school of thought that a person , who hates to teach, that would have just gone that route to build time vs. actually taking an active interest in a student's development and flight education should do so anyway? So they might somehow..."pay their dues" as that was the route you went? That a pilot just can never be as good as a pilot unless they endure a kind of flying that they absolutely would hate to do?

I scoff at this mentality if that indeed is what you are preaching. It's why we have so many lousy pilots. The CFI, CFII, MEI ratings should be the elite ratings. They should have an ATP or at least 1200hrs tt as pre-requisite as I believe that only those who truly enjoy teaching and have a respectable level of experience should do so.

I've had many instructors and the ones who were doing it just to build time till they could go onto something else were obvious. And I rarely learned anything from them.

I chose not to take this route because I had no desire to inflict my disinterest in being an instructor to any student as I worked in a flight school as an office manager. I saw the frustration on some of our students and felt it myself when they wound up with one of our "time builders" vs an instructor that enjoyed what they did.

One should not go the CFI route unless it's something they really want to do. And though the respectful amount of aviation academic knowledge that comes with becoming an instructor gives one an edge in the area of aerodynamics, FAR's, etc...What does it do for you during an engine failure in a transport category aircraft? I've had two and did just fine....

[meritflyer]

My school of thought is not the see all, be all! My school of thought comes from wanting to know the correct explanations, reasons, and motives for all that entails flying. In my humble opinion, an instructor is an elite rating. One that I saw many attempt and only few really finish and/or succeed. Most earn their instructor certificates around 300 hours or so. I find that plenty as a platform to build on. If you've been flying in a flight school on a full or even part time basis, it's the idea of immersion flying and seems to be plentiful to produce quality instructor candidates.

I was at my sharpest point of my flying career the second I finished my commercial certificates. I had been knee deep in books, study, and flying the airplane at my best. My CFI/II/MEI came easy because I wanted to be the person that knew the answer or knew exactly where to find the answer. Teaching makes you study what you don't know, refine what you do know, and practice what you should be able to do. In fact, the airlines made me lazy. No more teaching IFR procedures, approaches, and regulations. No more teaching weather, VFR, aerodynamics, the AIM, the FAR's, or performance maneuvers.

To me not teaching allowed a ton of information that I spend years gathering and studying to evaporate. It essentially took the "aviator" out of me. Not to dig on you at all, but the folks I found unwilling to teach or at least try it before they despised it (as in your case), were usually the ones who struggled with their ratings from PPL-CP. They knew they couldn't hack the CFI certificates, for lack of a better term, and always had some justification for excluding them from their training as a pilot. I experienced this as a CFI training commercial pilots time and time again.

Teaching solidifies what you've learned and makes you be the authority on flying. It teaches you CRM, personal skills, flying skills, communication skills, and decision making that I found, can't be experienced on the same level as a "time builder" trying to rack up hours to get in a jet.

[RightSeatGirl]

Not debating it's value home cheese. Just debunking the point of view that it automatically makes you somehow better or more prepared. I didn't struggle with any ratings. I failed no check-rides, writtens or sim lessons and did pretty damn good initial training. I aced S.O.E. and finished in the minimum cycles while a couple guys in my class, former CFII, MEII's went 20 cycles over minimum.

And you assume a lot. I'm not "racking up hours to get in a jet". I'm 38, I could care less about what I fly. It's just getting paid to do it for a living that satisfies me.

I've done well in 121 thus far because the real-world passenger flying I did before I went prepared me personally then teaching ever would have. As for CRM, personal skills, flying skills, communication skills, and decision making...if you have those skills goin in then you have them...some do some don't. I carried those skill sets in with me from having more different kinds of jobs then years most new-hires have been alive. Others may need to learn them on the go, in the industry, but sorry...I'd hire the guy that flew checks single engine, single pilot IFR over the guy that taught anytime.

You are not better then me or anyone else that did not teach because you taught. You just took a different route, and what worked well for you does not mean it's universal law. To believe so comes off as arrogant. And that's how you are presenting your position if you meant to or not.

[SteveC]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

Not to dig on you at all, but the folks I found unwilling to teach or at least try it before they despised it (as in your case), were usually the ones who struggled with their ratings from PPL-CP. They knew they couldn't hack the CFI certificates, for lack of a better term, and always had some justification for excluding them from their training as a pilot. I experienced this as a CFI training commercial pilots time and time again.

I don't have any instructor ratings.

I think I'll crawl back in my corner now. I know when I've been bested.

[meritflyer]

Originally Posted by RightSeatGirl

You are not better then me or anyone else that did not teach because you taught. You just took a different route, and what worked well for you does not mean it's universal law. To believe so comes off as arrogant. And that's how you are presenting your position if you meant to or not.

The proper way to say it would be "You are not better than me or anyone else who did not teach because you taught".

Different routes are perfectly acceptable from my point of view. People flying single engine IFR carrying cargo had to have part 135 minimums. Bet most of them got there by doing something other than "time building".

I am an advocate of teaching. Thanks for listening.

[meritflyer]

Originally Posted by RightSeatGirl

Not debating it's value home cheese. Just debunking the point of view that it automatically makes you somehow better or more prepared. I didn't struggle with any ratings. I failed no check-rides, writtens or sim lessons and did pretty damn good initial training. I aced S.O.E. and finished in the minimum cycles while a couple guys in my class, former CFII, MEII's went 20 cycles over minimum.

It doesn't make you a better pilot if you decide to not apply yourself.

Originally Posted by RightSeatGirl

And you assume a lot. I'm not "racking up hours to get in a jet". I'm 38, I could care less about what I fly. It's just getting paid to do it for a living that satisfies me.

38? By the "tone" of our last discussion about your parents assisting you with a lawsuit, I would've never guess it.

Originally Posted by RightSeatGirl

I've done well in 121 thus far because the real-world passenger flying I did before I went prepared me personally then teaching ever would have. As for CRM, personal skills, flying skills, communication skills, and decision making...if you have those skills goin in then you have them...some do some don't. I carried those skill sets in with me from having more different kinds of jobs then years most new-hires have been alive. Others may need to learn them on the go, in the industry, but sorry...I'd hire the guy that flew checks single engine, single pilot IFR over the guy that taught anytime.

I am glad to hear you're doing well in the 121 world. I also saw CFI's get burned in 121 training. As for the hiring of CFI v. freight guys? See my above response.

Originally Posted by RightSeatGirl

You are not better then me or anyone else that did not teach because you taught. You just took a different route, and what worked well for you does not mean it's universal law. To believe so comes off as arrogant. And that's how you are presenting your position if you meant to or not.

I never said what you're implying. Nice try though.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by Beech driver

What do I do you may ask? Get back on the horse. 1 hour later I am back in the air on my way to St. Cloud and back. Course, now I get to sit and chat with FSDO tomorrow morning.

Not in the damaged airplane, right?

[RightSeatGirl]

@ meritflyer..



Well does she?

[Beech driver]

Originally Posted by Berkut

Not in the damaged airplane, right?

Nope, got into another aircraft.


Had the sit down with the fed today. Basically what I expected. What is your time in type, total time, time last 90 days? Are you current? That kind of stuff. Nothing too serious. I was actually surprised he wanted to meet on a Sunday. He did tell me this more than likely will not even be considered an incident. Just an occurance. Since the damage was only limited to the wheel pants and nothing else. Yet he also told me to expect a certified letter for a 709 ride. This could be an issue. Since the minny FSDO has no one which is certified in a this type aircraft, they may need to bring someone else in to do the flight. He was unsure if I could do the flight in a fully certified aircraft. Not sure how that is going to work out yet. My question was if my boss had not told tower about the busted wheel pant what would have happened. His reply: we would not be talking right now.

And to those wondering why I filed the report. Did I really need to? Maybe not. But once I found out FSDO was getting involved I felt I needed to cover my bases. I knew they would be checking into every detail of the flight they could find. Thus, I felt the need for the report. I long ago told myself if I thought the need for a report was there for any reason, it would be filed. The need arose.

[meritflyer]

709 ride?

Run!!!!!!!!!!

[mojo6911]

You shouldn't get a 709 ride for that. Sounds like BS to me. Sometimes you just make a bad choice or the student makes it impossible to recover.

A couple of weeks ago, I was teaching my Commercial Multi student short field landings in a Duchess, and he bounced it (which was fine), but while we were airborne, he locked up the brakes. As soon as we touched down, it squared off the tires and wore them down to the cords. I was yelling at him to release the brakes, but he just held them down as he panicked.

[Mavmb]

Originally Posted by Beech driver

Nope, got into another aircraft.


Had the sit down with the fed today. Basically what I expected. What is your time in type, total time, time last 90 days? Are you current? That kind of stuff. Nothing too serious. I was actually surprised he wanted to meet on a Sunday. He did tell me this more than likely will not even be considered an incident. Just an occurance. Since the damage was only limited to the wheel pants and nothing else. Yet he also told me to expect a certified letter for a 709 ride. This could be an issue. Since the minny FSDO has no one which is certified in a this type aircraft, they may need to bring someone else in to do the flight. He was unsure if I could do the flight in a fully certified aircraft. Not sure how that is going to work out yet. My question was if my boss had not told tower about the busted wheel pant what would have happened. His reply: we would not be talking right now.

And to those wondering why I filed the report. Did I really need to? Maybe not. But once I found out FSDO was getting involved I felt I needed to cover my bases. I knew they would be checking into every detail of the flight they could find. Thus, I felt the need for the report. I long ago told myself if I thought the need for a report was there for any reason, it would be filed. The need arose.

709 ride, that is really bad stuff. You could lose your certificates or get a permanent mark on your record if the 709 ride doesn't go well. If you are doing this for a career, you need to get an aviation attorney to help you. The sooner the better.

[USMCmech]

Originally Posted by Mavmb

709 ride, that is really bad stuff. You could lose your certificates or get a permanent mark on your record if the 709 ride doesn't go well. If you are doing this for a career, you need to get an aviation attorney to help you. The sooner the better.

Deffinately contact an aviation attorney for any meeting with the feds. Even if they assure "it's no big deal". Filling out a NASA form was a good first step, but now that you know things are going farther, you need some advice that has experiance with the FAA.

Most Feds are good guys who mearly want to keep things safe, however there are a several bad apples out there that would like hang your head on their wall. I know, I met one and it did not end well.

The attorney can't make things magicly OK, but they can make the FSDO inspectors actually adhere to their own rules (which they often don't). He can help you avoid putting your foot in your mouth. If you are a good law abiding pilot and instructor, then you should be OK. However you need an atorney to watch your back if a FSDO inspector paints a target on it.

[montanapilot]

all this for a freakin wheel pant. this is ridiculous. the faa can go *&$ themselves.

[Wing_96]

What is a 709 ride?