My educational journey with energy management, like most of you, began with “Flight Lesson One” (more than 50 years ago) “This is how pitch and power work.” These core aerodynamic principles are deeply imprinted and hard to adapt. The result is that change and improvement in our industry are painfully slow and we often inflict any personal learning errors on our students. It is time to give up these ancient dogmas and embrace an “integrated” view of energy management for safety and efficiency.
In a rag-wing Taylrocraft, “pitch for airspeed” is pretty intuitive, because there really is no extra power available. As Bud Davisson points out in his lectures on “Mastering the Tailwheel,” the throttle in a low-powered tailwheel is only a “volume control” – it gets louder, but nothing really happens. Most primary trainers are not too far from this. Fortunately, thanks to cracks in the original (1976) AC-61-50a explanation I eventually started to question the dogma I was taught.
Ironically, either energy paradigm will actually work “most of the time,” but both will also fail in various configurations (Stricklin crash at Mt. Home)
Leveling from climb with an immediate power reduction – I still see that on flight tests – comes from a strict “power for altitude” dogma. This is chapter and verse from the “Navy Method.” The result in a trainer, is a slow and painful acceleration for the next 15 minutes (how are those checkpoints doing?) Early on, I realized I was already “pitching for altitude” in this condition myself; it’s the only way this process works efficiently (elevators for energy transfer, chemical energy for speed). The real “wake-up call” comes on the final approach where kinetic and potential energy need to be perfectly managed. Learners without a total energy picture are wildly unstabilized and can get in real trouble. Trading energy is the only method to smoothly guide a plane to a landing (and energy errors must be properly corrected) Are we teaching this in a coherent, integrated fashion?
An article by SAFE member Juan Merkt appeared in the SAFE Magazine in 2014 soon followed by another in the AOPA Magazine. This became part of the Focused Flight Review and integral in all my teaching. This was a much more comprehensive and nuanced way of visualizing (and teaching) energy control. I had been teaching much the same thing for at least 10 years, but this clearly summarized the process and presented it in a “teachable” manner. Especially valuable was “managing energy errors.” Failure to do this is what puts airplanes into the ground, and “loss of control inflight” is the #1 killer.
Both efficiency and safety require we teach a more comprehensive version of energy management, merging the “Air Force” and “Navy” methods. Yes, physics still works in a constant dependable fashion, but the pilot’s job (and technique) varies depending on the demands of the aircraft energy state.
Your student is low and fast on their final. You burned into their brain “pitch for airspeed” so the power comes in to correct (low) and the plane obediently regains the glide slope (and more). Since we are fast, (and now high too) the student pitches up to correct that; and an unstable “energy dance” of rote responses ensues.
The FAA recognized the importance of this and boldly introduced a whole new chapter on energy management in the Airplane Flying Handbook (written by Dr. Merkt). We all know airplanes hit the ground when a pilot runs out of airspeed or altitude (or ideas). As educators, we need to discard 
our original dogmas and embrace this integrated approach to energy management; it is a more efficient model that enhances aviation safety. A simple version of this integrated theory is in this Rod Machado video or if you are more technically inclined the John Denker online explanation.
A more academic contribution in this field is called “Energy Safety Management, A Training Model to Improve Flight Safety” published in the Journal of Aviation Technology and Engineering. This has much of the same material nicely presented from a “top-down” viewpoint (with few Greek letters). It is a call to action for giving up the old Air Force and Navy dogmas and teaching “Integrated” Energy Management to every new learner. This is our critical piloting task from take off to landing; gravity works always – engines only most of the time. Fly safely out there (and often)!
See “SAFE SOCIAL WALL” For more Resources
Join SAFE and get great benefits. You get 1/3 off ForeFlight and your membership supports our mission of increasing aviation safety by promoting excellence in education. Our FREE SAFE Toolkit App puts required pilot endorsements and experience requirements right on your smartphone and facilitates CFI+DPE teamwork. Our newly reformulated Mentoring Program is open to every CFI (and those working on the rating) Join our new Mentoring FaceBook Group.
It is always like you are reading my mind David. I have expanded my UPRT and spin ground school course to include a section on energy management and energy required for maneuvering to both prevent upsets and recover from an upset. I find that the terms “energy of speed” and “energy of altitude” are much more easily absorbed than “kinetic” and “potential” unless the student has had some experience with Physics.
I also introduce the Vn diagram and talk about how much energy-of-speed is needed to be able to accomplish necessary maneuvering, and how it may take a LOT of energy-of-altitude or horsepower to accomplish the maneuvering task without upset.
So, yes, this needs to be taught in an accessible manner, but there needs to be time spent on various maneuvers that actually demonstrate the concepts. “Book learning” alone is insufficient to transfer the knowledge to permanent storage or “unconscious competence”. The student has to be able to “feel it”.
Our SAFE Webinar on Sept 22nd will be on the necessity for “implicit learning” of a larger pilot maneuvering envelope! Rich Stowell will be on board to discuss UPRT: https://bit.ly/SAFE-ProLive Join in the fun!
I appreciate your comment Brian. Thanks for your positive feedback. I concur that students need the opportunity to spend time on various maneuvers that demonstrate and reinforce energy management concepts. That’s why in my energy management course I have incorporated simulated flight lessons, where students get to apply what they learn in lectures. Over the years, I have received positive feedback from students on this aspect of the course. Students really value and enjoy the hands-on learning.
I appreciate your comment, Brian. Thanks for your positive feedback. I concur that students need the opportunity to spend time on various maneuvers that demonstrate and reinforce energy management concepts. That’s why in my energy management course I have incorporated simulated flight lessons, where students get to apply what they learn in lectures. Over the years, I have received positive feedback from students on this aspect of the course. Students really value and enjoy the hands-on learning.
–Juan Merkt
“In a rag-wing Taylrocraft, “pitch for airspeed” is pretty intuitive, because there really is no extra power available. As Bud Davisson points out in his lectures on “Mastering the Tailwheel,” the throttle in a low-powered tailwheel is only a “volume control” – it gets louder, but nothing really happens. Most primary trainers are not too far from this.” This is a bit far-fetched. Even the weakest models will climb at several hundred feet a minute. If power is increased and nothing happens, it is either because the pitch is not adjusted simultaneously and/or drag not reduced.
Dr. Merkt’s chapter on energy management is a monument to obfuscation and gratuitous complexity, devoid of concern for comprehensibility. No pilot could possibly use those plots and all those made-up terms in flight. Abstractions are not necessarily effective ways to teach.
Juan Merkt comes from a different world (with a PhD from Harvard). He has worked very hard to distill this paradigm of energy management into a usable toolkit for pilots. Teaching every day at ERU, he has developed some simple analogies from everyday life that are approachable and understandable (see his new paper mentioned in the last paragraph). I too am allergic to Greek letters and formulae on the flight deck 👍🤣
Here’s my take on the current “Energy Management” craziness:
https://rodmachado.com/blogs/learning-to-fly/fantasy-based-energy-management-training
Rod Machado
And everyone on this thread should read this article by Rod: an amazing wise historical perspective.