Question about PAX endorsement and T&Gs

[Suitman]

For the purposes of maintaining the PAX endorsement, do Touch and Goes count as landings? (Or do they have to be "Flights"?)

 

 

[shags_j]

I believe touch and go's are ok. I have heard from around a couple of flight schools that if your pax is not up to date, just do a few circuits, then take your pax up. Though I'm no guru on this topic (so why am I posting this???)

 

 

[Tomo]

Three landings (the take off's are inclusive... ) - the way I see it touch-n-go's are just that.

 

 

[Guest rocketdriver]

For the purposes of maintaining the PAX endorsement, do Touch and Goes count as landings? (Or do they have to be "Flights"?)

RAA ops manual section 2.07 - 6, para 11 "Passenger Carrying limitation" applies ...

I read this as a touch and go, properly carried out, either with or without an instructor, counts as 1 landing and 1 take off .... as long as it is in an a/c "similar" to that in which you are to take your passengers ...... so, I guess, if you are going to fly them in a Jab, you need to have done the landings and take offs in a HP nosewheel a/c. If you are Thrustering, then it would need to be a LP tailwheel a/c ......

 

But if in doubt, have a chat to your local CFI, especially if you are going to fly one of their a/c ....

 

cheers

 

RD

 

 

[facthunter]

It's probably OK BUT...

 

Three take-offs and three landings it ain't.

 

A take-off properly performed would be from a roll on from an entry point or a stationary point on the runway. where ALL of the necessary actions are done.

 

A landing should be to a full stop because braking and low speed directional control are a critical part of the operation particularly with a tailwheel aircraft in crosswind conditions.

 

Intent of the requirement:-

 

Recency and the need to achieve competency prior to exposing somebody else to the risk of flying wih you if you haven't done much for a while.

 

A cautious pilot would do this with an instructor if he/she had any doubts, and in conditions that would be at least as demanding as when the actual flight is performed.

 

The ability to safely conduct a touch and go or go-around should not be in doubt either as you never know when you will HAVE to do one.

 

I don't think we should be considering the absolute minimum in other than an academic sense. Nev

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Nev is right here... This is an attempt to mandate common sence..If your rusty, go for a good fly and get skills up again...

 

cheers

 

 

[David Isaac]

Same requirement for GA. I used to to do three full stop landings, that is what my CFI recommended.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Hmm I dunno fellas, If a pilot can do 3 touch and goes with in 90 days.Thats good enough for me.If a pilot is that bad that they have to do 3 full stop landings and take offs to remain current with 90 days to carry a pax.I reckon they should hang up the head set. Its not rocket science is it.It is not that hard to fly a plane.I flew yesterday I had not been solo for seven weeks.It was the same as if I had flown the day before.NO different. If people struggle after a month or 2 off, they should seriously be thinking of another hobbie.

 

 

[David Isaac]

Dazz, its got nothing to do with how good or bad you are it is a legal requirement to do three takeoffs and landings if you haven't flown with PAX in the last 90 days. The discussion is around what is better ... 3 T and Gs or three full stops. Clearly 3 fullstops is better practice than 3 T and Gs. In my case It was suggested I do 3 full stops. Not sure what the actual reg requirement is on the definition.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

Sometimes it is just ticking the box. The other day I was to take some pax for a fly in a Tundra trike with an SST wing, whereas mine is a Tourer with Streak-3, which is flown most weeks more than once. The Tundra is 4" higher, pod a little wider and longer and the SST wing handles differently as well as being faster. Landing it ok wasn't in question, but checking my log, I needed two more landings to meet the 3 in 90 days, so put the CFI in the back and took it for fly with one T&G and a full stop we had a nice chat anyway. It was the middle of the hot day, so the thermals kicked us about somewhat, but no issue. Box ticked, and the paxes enjoyed the flights.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Dazz, its got nothing to do with how good or bad you are it is a legal requirement to do three takeoffs and landings if you haven't flown with PAX in the last 90 days. The discussion is around what is better ... 3 T and Gs or three full stops. Clearly 3 fullstops is better practice than 3 T and Gs. In my case It was suggested I do 3 full stops. Not sure what the actual reg requirement is on the definition.

Its all good mate.Just stirring the pot. But having said that, if people cant fly a plane safely with a little break between flights.Peeps should look for another sport.

Added this- I understand the rules David.What im trying to get at, is that.If a pilot has to do 3 Full stop landings and take offs instead of 3 T & G,s within 90 days to be competent. They are lacking in something.Skills probably and experience.If a pilot can land, set up for take off on the move, ie flaps away, keep straight whilst adding full power.etc. I dont see it as being different.If you have landed, power is off.All they have to do is brake and keep straight whilst slowing down.Back track then take off by feeding power and keeping straight.Again, they do all that on the move transitioning from landing to taking off in a T & G senario. HMM this thread has nothing to do with Prof Avius does it.LOL

 

 

[Tomo]

I need to be more on top of things to do a touch-n-go. Particularly rudder in a tailwheel aircraft.

 

 

[shags_j]

Hmmmm. Is David Isaac Prof Avius??? (Just stirring). We all know what he would recommend.

 

 

[David Isaac]

Agree Tomo, especially tail wheel aircraft where you go around from a fully stalled 3 pointer. Some T and Gs I have seen over the years are more like Skip and Gos ...

 

 

[Bandit12]

I would suggest that touch and gos require more from the pilot than stop and gos....I was always taught that T&G is fine for counting for recency requirements.

 

 

[David Isaac]

...I was always taught that T&G is fine for counting for recency requirements.

I am sure that is correct Shane, it is just that at one time I was told to do full stops by my CFI (maybe he wanted to charge me more because of the extra clock time ... just joking).

[Guest rocketdriver]

I need to be more on top of things to do a touch-n-go. Particularly rudder in a tailwheel aircraft.

Agreed ...for me a touch and go in a tailwheel a/c means tailwheel on the ground and the a/c directionally stable before adding throttle ....

and with a tricycle, its a/c settled with all three on the ground and directionally stable ....

 

I would also add that this requirement might in some cases make a T&G unsafe due runway length (like runway 27 at YWGT for instance), in which case a full stop landing becomes mandatory!

 

cheers

 

RD

 

 

[dazza 38]

I need to be more on top of things to do a touch-n-go. Particularly rudder in a tailwheel aircraft.

I agree as well, Tomo.When I did my TW endo.I first was taught Stop and(backtrack) and Go.Then moved on to T & G.As you have mentioned mate.(RD and DI as well in there posts).It was another skill level higher again.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

Can't find an explicit definition of "Landing", "Take-off" or "Touch and Go", but here's a clue from CAR Part 1 Regulation 2 in definition of flight time.

 

"in the case of a heavier-than-air aircraft — the total time from the moment at which the aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of taking-off

 

until the moment at which it comes to rest after landing

 

;"

 

Clearly, "landing" does not involve "coming to rest", so Touch & Go does involve a "landing" and a "take-off".

 

Further, in Part 1, Regulation 2 (3), it says "In Division 2 of Part 11 and in Parts 12 and 13, unless the

 

contrary intention appears: landing includes alighting on the water and to land has a

 

corresponding meaning."

 

Unless there's something somewhere else that specifically overrides this interpretation, I think it is definitive.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Hmmmm. Is David Isaac Prof Avius??? (Just stirring). We all know what he would recommend.

Funny you should say that Shags................

 

 

[facthunter]

The carrying out of a touch and go may involve a greater degree of skill, but there are also skills that are not demomstrated on a touch and go such as applying power and raising the tail at the beginning of the T/O run and braking after landing. and as I said ESPECIALLY with CROSSWIND conditions.Often the difficulty with the go around is reconfiguring and retrimming the aircraft while maintaining attitude and control at minimum airspeeds. This can be extremely critical on some aircraft types, and IF done welll would be a good measure of whether a pilot was on top of the aircraft type. No matter how I try to conceptualise it I can't see that running the wheels along the runway for a while is a LANDING and that applying power and lifting the wheels off the runway is a take-off. Whether someone who needs this should take up another hobby is drawing a long bow.. Individuals have varying reactions to lack of experience (recent) If they don't feel comfortable then that is a bad start. A pilot should have no doubt that he is capable of doing the job. Not talking of the bravado style of things, either. A non-recent pilot should spend some time in the cockpit making sure that he knows where all the switches/controls are. Sometimes they are in different positions on similar aircraft types. A non recent pilot should also familiarise him/herself with the aerodrome and surrounding areas, heights runway directions/ lengths noise sensitive areas etc I don't think 3 landings and take-offs in 90 days, is too much to ask before taking a passenger up with you. The RAAus would be expected to rule on recent experience and it has made a decision that is not too unreasonable. Whether some individuals find that restrictive/punitive, I would think that to make a case for a lesser requirement would be difficult. You've got to cover the whole group. How are you going to have exceptions? Nev

 

 

[David Isaac]

Hey Tubz ... I love your sense of humour ...

 

 

[shags_j]

Perhaps this is a question for the Ops Manager? Just to get an official clarification of what is required. We need to make sure that we keep seperate what is required to what we each believe should be done.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Hi Guys, My interpretation of a Touch and Go. Is to land, have all wheels on the deck, reconfigure the aircaft back to T/O configuration.Ie- Trim back to T/O setting(eg -trim neutral or close to that depending on the aircraft) and flaps back to T/O setting. Doing all of this whilst tracking straight down the runway.Then power up.

 

Flying a aircraft down to the deck, and touching the main wheels is to me Not a touch and go.Its more like a Bump and go.Or crash and dash

 

Also -I would not expect a student pilot to be able have a few months off and then hop in a go flying. I have said what i have, because we are talking about a pilot who has had at least Qty 2 aircraft handling tests. Pilot certificate test as well as PAX test. I am talking also about currency within 90 days as this is what the thread is all about. Each to there own I guess.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

I would have thought the requirement was plain enough (no pun intended). What has also been discussed is the adequacy of T&G versus full stop landings and it is clear that may vary between people and types of aircraft.

 

The objective is for a pilot to not to hurt his / her passengers, even if s/he wouldn't have the common sense to ensure that s/he can handle the aircraft safely during take-off and landing which ordinarily are the most risky phases of flight. So there has been a simple rule made that mandates a minimum level of currency. Any PIC should also apply common sense and if out of practise, do some and / or use the services of an instructor, and be confident in handling the aircraft before taking a Pax.