CFIIs: How Do You Teach Task Management

Agree. Also, differences in how autopilots behave, such as GFC700 vs. KAP-140. Also, differences in how autopilots behave during failures of certain systems. During a vacuum system failure the KAP-140 will still work in many modes.
An example from a war story. During jet training I was given a scenario in the sim where I was given the maintenance can indicated the airplane was just washed. Just after taking off into 200-1/2 everything went crazy. I was the flying pilot and I recognized what was happening- the static ports were taped during the "airplane wash", a scenario that I had read about and had brought down two airliners. Transport category airplanes have an alternate static port- but it was also taped. The FO (actually another captain), was befuddled and wanted to run the emergency procedure for AHRS failure. I knew this was not what was happening and tried to tell him otherwise. He was confused. I was in a difficult position- trying to fly an airplane without airspeed, VSI or altitude while trying to tell the FO what I wanted him to do with lights flashing at us. So I engaged the autopilot. The instructor insisted the autopilot would not work- but I knew the autopilot and knew I would have heading mode and pitch mode. Sure enough, the autopilot worked with these modes. So I told the FO it was his airplane, to continue using the pitch and heading modes as we climbed using the GPS altitude, requested radar vectors for an ILS. I was pretty sure the autopilot would work in the approach mode- sure enough, it did. During the debrief we were told that about 50% of the crews "crashed" when this emergency was introduced and we were the first crew to try the autopilot and that it would become standard to suggest its use to the crew during the failure. About a year later I ran into the instructor again and he told me that of those who used the autopilot during this failure 100% survived. The failure rate of those hand flying it was still about 50%.

Finally I would add that if an airplane has an autopilot IMC is not the time to learn how it works. The time to learn this is in VFR conditions.

Excellent story. How did you control airspeed? Known thrust settings? Perhaps assisted by GPS groundspeed readout?

Yep. Known thrust settings along with GPS ground speed.

What has been said so far is good for task management however one thing everyone seems to forget is time. Knowing you have time is huge in how accurate you perform your tasks. If you are trying to hurry because of a lack of time everything starts going crazy. Charts fly around the cockpit, altitude, and heading go way off and any type of navigation is lost. Knowing when to tell ATC "I need a delay vector" can be a huge benefit.

When my instrument students had gotten some experience with a flight I hit them hard with two approaches that make them really need to hustle to get things done. I have them do the GPS 28 into KLNN followed by the ILS 24 into KCGF. 9 out of 10 times my student will get "turn left heading XXX and intercept the localizer" as soon as he calls up on the missed. The localizer is about 1.5 miles (if that) south of the MAP for the GPS approach. All of a sudden you see the student go from calm to extremely stressed. I would say 95% of the time I did this to my students they would not ask for delay vectors or successfully complete the approach.

Good point I have noticed that as well. Goes in hand with, never be in the airplane where your head wasn't 10 minutes ago.

With some experience at this you can notice when you are briefing the approach, your flying it in your head, and that allows me to stay ahead at least.

What would that hold request to ATC sound like?

I have my mental picture of it, curious what yours is.

Machado terms it this way: 'Where Am I?, Where Am I Going ", What Comes Next ", What Comes After That?"

Those 4 questions are an awesome tool to both the IFR and VFR student.

I

Best/ funniest thing I have done so far to an instrument student of mine is; during a partial panel approach tell him his GPS failed (we dont have a DME other then the GPS). All of my students who are close to their check ride know that I am ATC and that I know nothing of what is happening in the airplane.

So when I failed his AI/DG he never reported it to me (ATC). Then his GPS failed; once again he didn't notify me (lol). So as a CFII I asked him what he would do and he responded that he would request vectors for an approach, which is a good idea. But he requested the ILS/DME approach, so I (ATC) cleared him for the approach. Once he hit the briefing stage, after getting all the navs set, he said "crap I dont have DME so I cant shoot this approach" so he then requested the VOR approach via a DME arc. So once again I cleared him for the approach. And one again when we are out bound from the VOR he says "crap I cant to the arc since I dont have DME"; so I ask him what would he do? He then said they we cant land at this airport (all but one of the approaches into KPRC either require DME or GPS). So I then said how about the VOR via the procedure turn. To which he said "O that will work". So I vectored him to the VOR and he shot the approach. To this day he remembers that day.

Have you never done random holding? We did it all the time, just get a few turns at your next fix, or at radial/dme.

Alternatively, you can ask for a delay vector, which would probably buy you even more of a workload reduction. Headings are easy. Holding is still easy, but less easy than "Fly heading so and so and let us know when you've unscrewed it."

ASR approach in the WX with a comm radio, compass, tach, VSI, OAT, sweephand clock and a hobbs meter? Luxury. My students would be LUCKY to have that. I take away everything, make them use a cat on the dash to figure out which way is up, they have to use their last known position and ground speed, count to themselves to figure out the time (while I am yelling random numbers at them), use a mini compass from a Cracker Jacks to get their headings, and give themselves a GCA, all while I am flicking a lighter inches from their face.

There's a magnetic compass in the Blackhawk??? Where???
Just kidding. Never noticed the sticker. I know I used it at least twice for primary navigation when our HSI's went out on the DMZ and also in Kuwait. Don't know about the Air Force -60... but look at the circuit breaker for the HSI. In the Army -60s both HSI's are on one CB. Good plan.

If you keep that train of thought you'll have students using SimLogic Flight Simulator while being waterboarded to induce "stressing scenarios in thunderstorms with leaky windows."

I can talk big, but I always give my students every tool they can use. I know they'll frack it up. I still have 1000 hr CFI's screw up on IPC's, so I never really understood the intentionally making flying hard for people. So long as they can think through new problems in the air and ground, I have no need to keep making flying harder until they crack.

For reference, I know you were joking, but I had to put this out there before someone takes something too seriously.

See I still think that if you ever have an accident report it will involve all of that plus "clothing was separated from the pilots with no distress found to the zippers or buttons." If you've got to go out, go out in style.

Oh, and sectional covering all windows while operating in a canyon. Investigators believe they were attempting pure dead reckoning as kayakers saw the aircraft making quick turns and then flying straight for periods of time. Unfortunetly maps found on board were 4 years old and a landslide had filled a canyon.

Additionally, the aircraft made several transmissions on Air Traffic Control frequencies in the area, including Guard, EFAS, and discreet frequencies, many of them garbled and unreadable, however words "Dead Reckoning is suitable RNAV" and "Every time they say the word 'Report' you take another pull" were taken from the recordings.

While the simulator scenario I presented sounds extreme (taped up static ports), it was based upon some actual accidents. All the simulator scenarios at my airline were based upon either accidents or, in some cases, events that occurred at my airline. I do find looking over accidents and the ASRS database is a good place to start, especially accidents in the specific model in which you are instructing. Also I like to find accidents that are examples of dangerous attitudes so if I see the attitude in a pilot we can discuss it.
I then try to safely recreate the scenarios in the aircraft, in the simulator, or if this is not possible discuss the scenarios during ground.
I will try to find the study, but there was one done a while ago on situational awareness in crews during emergencies. The emergencies were grouped into two classes- "Class A" emergencies such as a V1 cut and "Class B" emergencies such as a burned out light. It was found that a loss of SA during Class A emergencies was normally not an issue no matter who was flying. Class B emergencies, however, were a different story. It was found that if the captain was the FP (Flying Pilot), there was often a loss of SA in the cockpit during Class B emergencies. Essentially the captain was trying to pay attention to the airplane while also supervising the cockpit and most human brains are not capable of doing this. In such scenarios if the airplane is operated single pilot the use of the autopilot can greatly assist in maintaining SA while managing the incident (obviously if dual pilot also helps).
It is for this reason that I also like to have students take up friends at some point during cross country training as it introduces the passenger element into flying- another distraction.