Touch and Go's

[Hank]

N51 is a little shorter than I like for doing touch and goes. I prefer 5000' or more.

[John Pleisse]

N51 -Love it!!

 

And on the subject of task saturation....here's a heavy Go-Around at Kennedy. Notice the first thing the first officer does is flaps to 28. This is a non-event.

 

[Andy95W]

Task saturation?

 

Here's a great Pan Am training video on how to experience task saturation:  

 

That's an example of a captain that everyone hates flying with.

[Mooneymite]

That's an example of a captain that everyone hates flying with.

 

 

Bill?

 

Is that you?

 

 

I think that video is an great example of "Autocratic Crew Coordination".

[WardHolbrook]

Ward,

How do we define task saturation?

I have easily experienced it during training.

It was easier to experience it after the first hour of flight training in the day.

I would suspect that a flight instructor will recognize a student suffering from it.

Like hypoxia, does the student not recognize he is task saturation challenged while it is going on?

Best regards,

-a-

You're right, it's pretty obvious to an instructor when the student starts giving delayed or inappropriate responses or just stops responding at all. At that point learning has stopped. What's not quite so obvious is when you're up there by yourself (or as a crew) and you start to get overwhelmed. A student or low-time pilot may not always recognize what is happening.  It may be difficult for an experienced pilot to recognize it. T&Gs are one thing if you're with a CFI and he's doing all of the reconfiguring or if you happen to have 500+ hours in type. They are something else if you are new to your Mooney and don't have much total time - say less than 500 hours. Like I said, when it comes to T&Gs, it totally depends upon the situation - for every set of circumstances that you give me where it's appropriate I can give you one where it's not and vise-versa. Would I recommend that a 400 hr TT guy with 8 hours M&M go out and practice T&Gs by himself on a 3500' runway? Probably not.  If he's got 6500' to play with perhaps. Would I likely have different opinions if the guy had a couple of thousand hours TT and 1000+ M&M? No doubt. There is no such thing as "one size fits all" when it comes to flying.   

[Mooneymite]

.... There is no such thing as "one size fits all" when it comes to flying.   

 

"Zactly!"  

 

Happily we don't have to find the answer that's right for everyone, we just need to find the answer that's right for us individually.

[WardHolbrook]

I suspect the choreography is pretty much like a Mooney....flaps to takeoff, elevator trim back into the takeoff range, add power and go.  It's a maneuver....and not a very difficult one.

All while the end of the runway is coming up at you at 120+ KIAS. Also, most Mooneys do not have two pilots, a flight engineer and an instructor pilot up in the cockpit. There's a reason why touch and goes are seldom performed in transport aircraft. It's really unusual when you see them being performed in something like a B-747

[Releew]

Thanks everyone for the detailed replies.  My take away is.... it is up to the individual, not a limitation of the equipment.  I'm sure we all understand the additional risk, but like someone mentioned above, I did not know their was such an opinion NOT to practice this maneuver in the Mooney Community.  I personally limit my flaps to take off position to ease the coordination back into flight.  Even with several hundreds of hours in complex and high performance complex aircraft I believe staying proficient in this maneuver under various conditions is critical to remaining a competent pilot.

 

Zero Flap T&G's are another great practice configuration.  Really makes you focus on Airspeed control.......

 

Thanks!

 

Great Forum!

 

Rick

[Jakl]

Any thought to low approaches instead? All the practice of getting on speed but none of the ground contact or tire wear. Just give it the gas and clean up.

[Hank]

I've only done a very few intentional low approaches, including a PAR at an Army Air Field. Interesting, very different from a surveillance approach, much more accurate. Tower said "go as low as you want, just don't let the wheels touch" so I pulled off foggles a minimums and descended until over the numbers when I fed in throttle,nests blushed positive rate, raised gear and did the miss, then went home and did an ILS to full stop and received my IPC signoff.

Low approaches are useful learning tools when briefed in advance, and so are touch and goes, the difference is only no ground contact, and the low approach went full throttle with the flaps still down for higher yoke forces.

[Danb]

The low approaches are a great learning tool in learning the forces necessary to keep your plane flying, especially when in actual conditions which just got below minimums this may be the busiest and potentially deadliest area we encounter, it is most likely not practiced enough. I just recently had my instructor pull the breakers on my G-1000 at about 200 ft. above decision height..pucker power at its highest..

[Ftlausa]

In reading this thread, I was frankly surprised at the strong opinions against touch and goes.  I do them so regularly that I never suspected so many viewed them a problematic.  I am based at a heavy training airport (FXE), and touch and goes occur all day long in a fairly wide range of aircraft.     

[midlifeflyer]

In reading this thread, I was frankly surprised at the strong opinions against touch and goes.  I do them so regularly that I never suspected so many viewed them a problematic.  I am based at a heavy training airport (FXE), and touch and goes occur all day long in a fairly wide range of aircraft.     

Even without the retractable gear issue, the desirability and value of touch & goes has been the subject of disagreement for a long time. There was an AOPA Instructor forum/survey done a few years ago on the subject with the range of opinions similar to those expressed here. (I'm mostly surprised at the consistency of my own opinion on the subject. I was looking for a link to the AOPA instructor forum but instead found a usenet post I made 13 years ago that said pretty much the same thing I said here. Don't know if that's good or bad )

[ArtVandelay]

If doing T&Gs, I always ask for the option, that way I have any easy out if I'm not in a good position for the G part.

[jetdriven]

What a short memory we have about touch and goes in complex aircraft. There are 4 or 5 threads right here on MS  in the past couple years, that resulted in 40-50K damage, in some cases totaling out the airplane, directly from the maneuver and grabbing the wrong switch. Remember if you unlatch the switch its going to collapse.

 

I wish they had two rates for insurance.  Touch and go, and no coverage for the maneuver. I  could save a lot of money in premiums.

 

For those of you who use touch and goes in a 747 for comparison, its  faulty comparison. For one thing, the airplane costs 15 grand per circuit, so if no sim is available, the airplane is the only other option and its only because theres no other choice.  One pilot flies, one monitors, and in the case of the -100/-200/-300 the FE monitors both of them. In the -400 the IRO or observer monitors both of them.  Either way, its an abnormal procedure (same as an engine failure or single hydraulic failure), its thoroughly briefed, specially signed off in the sim beforehand, one pilot touches nothing but the yoke and thrust levers, the other pilot waits until touchdown, resets the flaps to 20 while the flying pilot sets 75% N1, calls "go" then the flying pilot sets takeoff thrust and engages the autothrottles while the NPF monitors along with the 3rd pilot.  at liftoff (same bug speeds for landing as takeoff, the NFP calls "positive rate"  the FP commands "gear up and away they go.

 

If you Mooney guys are willing to go through all that, your only slightly more likely to gear up your plane on the go.

 

Until then, its a hazardous maneuver. BPPP and the MSF agree.  The Cirrus group dissents.

[midlifeflyer]

What a short memory we have about touch and goes in complex aircraft. There are 4 or 5 threads right here on MS  in the past couple years, that resulted in 40-50K damage, in some cases totaling out the airplane, directly from the maneuver and grabbing the wrong switch. Remember if you unlatch the switch its going to collapse.

 

I'm sure those threads did not involve super pilots who never make such simple mistakes. 

[Hank]

Just like flaps on takeoff and landing, we just need to agree to disagree.

[rockydoc]

When I purchased my M20B in NC, I had over 600 hours in multi-engine and turbines, but knew nothing about a Mooney other than I wanted one.  I bought it in NC.  The seller spend an hour with me doing some TOs and Landings and then I  entered the bird and proceeded to fly her to Denver.  I stopped in the early evening (before dark) at a unattended airport.  Because of the information that I had gotten from reading this form for months before my purchase, when I started porpoising, I knew that the third bounce was going to result in prop strike so after the second one, I did what we've all been trained to do.  i.e.  I cleaned up the bird, pushed the throttle all the way forward and did a go-around.  No big deal really.  The second approach went uneventfully.  I only relate this experience to this group to serve as a reminder that go arounds are a part of flying and the only realistic way to keep the procedure fresh in your mind is to practice Touch and Goes.  In my simple mind, there is no reason to fear them.  They are a part of flying.

Fly safely,

Rocky

[WardHolbrook]

Just like flaps on takeoff and landing, we just need to agree to disagree.

I will never agree with those guys, no point in all of us being wrong. 

[WardHolbrook]

...One pilot flies, one monitors, and in the case of the -100/-200/-300 the FE monitors both of them. In the -400 the IRO or observer monitors both of them.  Either way, its an abnormal procedure (same as an engine failure or single hydraulic failure), its thoroughly briefed, specially signed off in the sim beforehand, one pilot touches nothing but the yoke and thrust levers, the other pilot waits until touchdown, resets the flaps to 20 while the flying pilot sets 75% N1, calls "go" then the flying pilot sets takeoff thrust and engages the autothrottles while the NPF monitors along with the 3rd pilot.  at liftoff (same bug speeds for landing as takeoff, the NFP calls "positive rate"  the FP commands "gear up and away they go...

That what I was referring to when I mentioned the "choreography" that was going on the the B-747 cockpit. A lot of general aviation pilots have never seen or experienced the interactions of a well-trained professional flight crew. It's nothing at all like what you usually get when you simply put two private pilots in the front seats of your Mooney.  

[Andy95W]

I wish they had two rates for insurance.  Touch and go, and no coverage for the maneuver. I  could save a lot of money in premiums.

 

Until then, its a hazardous maneuver. BPPP and the MSF agree.  The Cirrus group dissents.

So, you're flying into your local towered airport. Just after you touchdown, the tower says, "Mooney, go around, disabled aircraft on the runway!"

I have to assume your response will be, "Unable, that's a hazardous maneuver, and the guys on Mooneyspace agree with me."

I completely agree with NOT doing 10 Touch-and-Goes an hour in a Mooney as though it were a C-152. Practicing one or two a month is a completely different matter, and could be beneficial for that day when you start to porpoise or when the tower tells you to.

[WardHolbrook]

What a short memory we have about touch and goes in complex aircraft. There are 4 or 5 threads right here on MS  in the past couple years, that resulted in 40-50K damage, in some cases totaling out the airplane, directly from the maneuver and grabbing the wrong switch. Remember if you unlatch the switch its going to collapse...

You mean like this?...

 

 

Just how cost effective do you think that training session was? 

 

 

[midlifeflyer]

When I purchased my M20B in NC, I had over 600 hours in multi-engine and turbines, but knew nothing about a Mooney other than I wanted one.  I bought it in NC.  The seller spend an hour with me doing some TOs and Landings and then I  entered the bird and proceeded to fly her to Denver.  I stopped in the early evening (before dark) at a unattended airport.  Because of the information that I had gotten from reading this form for months before my purchase, when I started porpoising, I knew that the third bounce was going to result in prop strike so after the second one, I did what we've all been trained to do.  i.e.  I cleaned up the bird, pushed the throttle all the way forward and did a go-around.  No big deal really.  The second approach went uneventfully.  I only relate this experience to this group to serve as a reminder that go arounds are a part of flying and the only realistic way to keep the procedure fresh in your mind is to practice Touch and Goes.  In my simple mind, there is no reason to fear them.  They are a part of flying.

Fly safely,

Rocky

Others will simply respond that a touch and go is not a go-around. Yes, definitely. Go-arounds should be practiced. I doubt anyone disagrees with that.

[midlifeflyer]

So, you're flying into your local towered airport. Just after you touchdown, the tower says, "Mooney, go around, disabled aircraft on the runway!"

I have to assume your response will be, "Unable, that's a hazardous maneuver, and the guys on Mooneyspace agree with me."

No. The response will be to go-around. And I will guarantee that not one person on MooneySpace who is against touch and goes would agree with the unable statement.

Is the issue in this thread semantics? You and some others seem to equate TnGs with go-arounds. They are not the same. Making a normal landing, stabilizing the rollout, reconfiguring the airplane for takeoff, and then making a normal takeoff, is not the quasi-emergency procedure described in the POH, the PTS, the FAR, and a variety of other FAA publications as a go-around.

I do TnGs and I practice go-arounds (I am not part of the religious dispute here). Even in the post-touchdown go-around scenario, they are different. I can actually turn around your example and make it even sillier. After ATC instructs the go-around due to the disabled aircraft, will your response be to leisurely continue the rollout, reconfigure the aircraft for takeoff, and crash into the other aircraft, because the "guys on MooneySpace" think that's how to do a go-around? Of course not.

[aaronk25]

That what I was referring to when I mentioned the "choreography" that was going on the the B-747 cockpit. A lot of general aviation pilots have never seen or experienced the interactions of a well-trained professional flight crew. It's nothing at all like what you usually get when you simply put two private pilots in the front seats of your Mooney.

Totally agree.....turns into amateur hour