Wright Brothers Character Lessons

You may think it strange that I would talk about the Wright Brothers in a column that is meant to provide safety and training tips to our SAFE members, but I believe we can all learn a lot from examining their lives and personal work ethic. The Wright Brothers did not let lack of education or lack of financial resources stop them from pursuing their dreams of flight.

The Wright Brothers did not graduate from high school (which was not uncommon in that era), but in spite of this, they were willing to do whatever it took to gain the knowledge and skills they needed to create first a glider and then a motorized flying machine. Not only did the brothers spend time reading about previous attempts at flight by other inventors, but they also experimented with kites and small gliders to better understand the principles of flight.

In spite of many setbacks, including several flying accidents and lack of money, the Wright Brothers never gave up on their goal to develop an airplane. This singlemindedness (i.e., total dedication to purpose) is likely why the Wright Brothers succeeded while Samuel P. Langley, their contemporary, failed. Langley was focused exclusively on becoming rich and famous with his invention while the Wright Brothers were focused on building “a flying machine” that would have practical application for the world. In fact, Orville and Wilbur were so dedicated to their goals that neither brother ever married.

Finally, the Wright Brothers learned from their mistakes. The fact that they had been bicycle mechanics and “tinkers” all their lives taught them how to study a mechanical problem and design a part or appropriate “fix” to solve the problem. While designing an airplane wing was certainly more challenging that repairing a bicycle, the process was the same: (1) study the problem; (2) come up with potential solutions to solve the problem; (3) apply one of the solutions; (4) evaluate the outcome. If the solution applied didn’t solve the problem, try another solution, but don’t give up. Doing these four steps over and over again to first develop their glider and then the 1903 Wright Flyer took infinite patience as well as dedication of purpose.

In the book The Wright Brothers and the Invention of the Aerial Age (2003), authors Dr. Tom D. Crouch and Dr. Peter L.Jakab concluded that the reason the Wright Brothers were successful and so many other inventors were not was because of the Wright Brothers “inventive methodology.”  Essentially, this same methodology is still the basis for aeronautical research today.

In summary, we as SAFE members (aviation educators, flight examiners, and pilots) should take the life lessons to be learned from the Wright Brothers to heart: learn what you need to know in order to succeed in whatever endeavor you set your mind to; be patient with yourself and with the process (whatever it may be); never give up on yourself or on your dreams. If you have a dream to become the best flight instructor you can be, or to fly your airplane to Alaska, or to get a seaplane rating, do at least one thing this week to bring you closer to your dream. To quote another famous aviator, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, “A goal without a plan is just a wish.” Wishes and dreams do not come true without action and determination, so it’s time to take that first step in turning your dream(s) into personal goals in the New Year.

Note: This article was previously published in the December 2018 issue of PROPWASH, the official newsletter of EAA Chapter 517, Inc., in Missoula, MT. The article is reprinted with permission of the author.


Apple or Android versions.

Join SAFE to support our safety mission of generating aviation excellence in teaching and flying. Our amazing member benefits pay back your contribution (1/3 off your ForeFlight subscription)! Lastly, use our FREE SAFE Toolkit App to access pilot endorsements and experience requirements right on your smartphone and facilitate CFI+DPE teamwork. Working together to raise professionalism makes all of us safer pilots!

Seasonal Safety: SANTA!

In keeping with the holiday spirit, I thought I’d use this specially created instrument approach procedure (IAP) chart that Jeppesen put out a couple years ago for the North Pole for this blog article. Although the chart is clearly a figment of someone’s imagination, it still can be used as a teaching aid in explaining the six basic parts of an instrument approach chart.

Click this image to open a full pdf version in a new tab!

            All IAP charts have the same basic layout.  This means that certain information always appears in the same location on the chart with a few exceptions. 

The information at the very top and at the very bottom of the chart is referred to as “marginal data.” This would include the name of the approach, the airport name, and latitude and longitude of the airport.  In the case of this fictitious approach chart, the name of the airport is Santa’s Workshop International.  The name of the approach is North Pole Village RNAV (GPS) Rwy 18.

The second section is called the Pilot Briefing Section.  It is imperative that the pilot review this section of the approach chart prior to flying the approach.  It is especially important that the pilot review and understand the prescribed missed approach procedure.  This section also can contain notes to pilots such as “Reindeer and Elves in vicinity of the runway.”  This section also contains the frequencies the pilot will be using in the order of use.  For example, on the North Pole Village approach chart, Center frequency is shown as 122.8.

The third section on an instrument approach chart is called the Plan View.  This section contains a diagram of the entire approach procedure as viewed from overhead (i.e., top down).  The Plan View can also contain special information such as “Temporary Procedure.”

The fourth section is the Profile View.  This section contains important information about altitude and distance.  For example, on this approach chart, the distance from the outer maker to the missed approach point is 5.0 statute miles and the glide path angle is 7%.

The fifth section is called the Minimums Section.  This section looks like a table with the information broken down by aircraft category and type of approach to be flown.  On the North Pole Village approach, if two or more reindeer are out of service, the pilot can only fly a straight in localizer (LOC) approach down to a minimum decision height (MDA) of 500 feet MSL.  Also, if Rudolph and radar are available, the pilot could make a circle-to-land approach with four different minimums shown.

The last section on most instrument approach procedure charts is an airport diagram that normally appears adjacent to the Minimums Section.  However, since nobody actually knows the real location of Santa’s Workshop International, no airport diagram is shown on this chart, which was created by Jeppesen in 2013.

When I was working on my own instrument rating 40+ years ago, I can remember being very intimidated by the approach charts because they contained so much information.  However, once I became an instrument instructor and had to teach my students how to use these charts, it became much easier to understand and properly use the information provided. 

My best advice to any instrument-rated pilot is to spend as much time on the ground as possible going over your IAP charts because trying to figure out something you don’t understand in the air could become problematic.  Also, there is actual value in sitting in an armchair with your approach chart in front of you and simply imagining yourself flying the approach.  Our mind does not discriminate between things we actually do and things we “simulate” or rehearse.  I used this technique when I was in Army flight school working on my helicopter instrument rating and it really paid off for me. When the flight examiner took me to two airports the day of my check ride that I had never flown instrument approaches to except in my mind, I totally nailed the approach.   From that day forward, I’ve used “armchair simulation” with all of my instrument students to help them learn to accurately read charts and cement the procedures in their mind.  Please give this learning technique a try!

Apple or Android versions.

Join SAFE to support our safety mission of generating aviation excellence in teaching and flying. Our amazing member benefits pay back your contribution (1/3 off your ForeFlight subscription)! Lastly, use our FREE SAFE Toolkit App to access pilot endorsements and experience requirements right on your smartphone and facilitate CFI+DPE teamwork. Working together to raise professionalism makes all of us safer pilots!

The Importance of Lifelong Learning

It turns out the best educators are the best learners!

You have heard this before, but it bears repeating because it is TRUE: A great teacher is committed to lifelong learning. I was reminded again of the truth of this statement on July 12 as I watched the SAFE webinar on flight instructor professionalism. Even though I’ve kept my flight instructor certificate “current” for the last 40 years, I still ended up with several pages of notes as I listened to four well-respected and highly experienced flight instructors discuss the finer points of marketing their flight training services to potential clients.

One of the things these four “seasoned” aviation educators — Greg Brown, Rod Machado, David St. George, and Russ Still – have in common is that they are continually learning and refining their teaching skills. They like to talk with other educators about teaching techniques – what works and what doesn’t work. By reading and attending aviation webinars and seminars, these professional educators stay abreast of current technology, engage in creative solutions to real world flight training problems, and learn more every day about how students learn.

Think what would have happened if Albert Einstein or Helen Keller had said, “I know everything there is to know and I don’t have to study any longer.” Yikes! Einstein would likely have never developed his formula for the theory of relativity and Helen Keller would not have gone on to author as many articles and books as she did. While Einstein and Keller are not really known for their teaching skills, they are well known for their learning skills. The point I’m making is that the best learners do not give up when the going gets tough. They keep trying to gain greater understanding of a problem or challenge they are facing.

You might have also heard more than once that “good teachers are good learners.” I believe that is also a true statement. A really good teacher wants to understand the subject matter in order to properly convey that understanding to their students. A good teacher isn’t afraid of doing research to ferret out the information he or she needs to foster understanding and mastery of a subject.

As modern day aviation educators, we have an incredible amount of information available to us almost instantly over the Internet. Just type a topic or even a question into your browser and a page of resources will pop up. If you are looking for some new lesson plans or an interesting article on stall /spin, check out SAFE’s online Resource Center [here]. There is a public side as well as a private side just for SAFE members.

An excellent article providing a good history of learning theory and a description of how people learn can be found at https://web.stanford.edu/class/ed269/inplintrochapter.pdf This article was written in 2001 by faculty from Stanford University’s School of Education.   Another article on the importance of lifelong learning for educators of all stripes can be found at www.edudemic.com/lifelong-learning-educational-mindset/ A great online book (FREE) every educator can benefit from is How People Learn. This is available either as a downloadable PDF or in html on the website.

If you are finding yourself in a funk lately or just less excited about instructing than you used to be, you might be suffering from burnout rather than lack of interest. There is nothing like learning something new about a topic you are interested in to renew your energy, motivation, and passion for teaching. If you will be at AirVenture 2017 the end of July, there are literally hundreds of workshops and presentations you can choose from on a wide range of aviation topics. Many of those workshops will be presented by SAFE members (See this page for a growing list).

Finally, set a new goal for yourself to read a few pages a day of something either aviation-related or teaching-related for the next 30 days. At the end of that time, ask yourself if you feel more energized and excited about being an aviation educator. If the answer is yes, then you know what you need to do to become a lifelong learner *AND* a great instructor.


Please “follow” our SAFE blog to receive notification of new articles. Write us a comment if you see a problem or want to contribute an article. We are always seeking more input on aviation improvements and flight safety. There are many highly qualified aviation educators out there! If you are not yet a SAFE member, please Join SAFE and support our mission of generating aviation excellence in teaching and flying. Our amazing member benefits alone make this commitment worthwhile and fun. Lastly, use our FREE SAFE Toolkit App to put pilot endorsements and experience requirements right on your smart phone and facilitate CFI+DPE teamwork. Working together we make safer pilots!

What We *Do Not* Teach…”Null Curriculum”

Educational Excellence; Board member Dr. Sherry Rossiter on Curriculum.

With the recent FAA change in how “slow flight” is to be taught and demonstrated, flight instructors have had to make some changes in their training curricula. A few weeks ago I began ground training with a new flight instructor applicant and that caused me to think about changes I needed to make in my own course syllabi due to the FAA replacing the Practical Test Standards (PTS) with the Airmen Certification Standards (ACS).

For many flight and ground instructors, the first and last time they thought seriously about curriculum development and delivery was when they were studying to pass the FAA’s Fundamentals of Instruction (FOI) knowledge exam. This is unfortunate because a well-designed curriculum is the basis for an effective transfer of knowledge. And unfortunately, the Aviation Instructor’s Handbook (FAA-H-8083-9A) really doesn’t say much about curriculum development.

Former Stanford University professor Elliot Eisner (1985) believed that there are actually three curricula being taught simultaneously during every lesson. These curricula are called the explicit, the implicit, and the null.

All educators are familiar with the explicit curriculum. This is the authorized or official course syllabus that, if properly constructed, clearly states the course objectives, elements of study, and learning evaluation criteria. The implicit curriculum is what is actually taught by the educator and consists of the particular information presented, examples provided, stories told, and answers given to student’s questions. But, as Eisner theorized, there is a third curriculum that isn’t talked about and often not even considered. Eisner called this the null curriculum, wherein “null” refers to what has been left out of the explicit and implicit curricula.

By now you may be wondering where this discussion is going because you pride yourself on being an excellent instructor who doesn’t leave anything important out of a lesson plan or presentation. However, we are imperfect human beings with different biases, opinions, and life experiences. Generally, we do not consciously leave important information out of the curriculum or lesson, but Eisner postulates that all educators, consciously or unconsciously, may leave out certain bits of information or values discussion when teaching.

An example of null curriculum at work would be a flight lesson focused on learning to fly the traffic pattern without the flight instructor mentioning the importance of being vigilant in watching for other traffic. I’m sure you can think of many other examples, but the big question is, “Why would any professional educator leave important information out of a lesson?”

I would like to believe that when important safety information is left out of a lesson, it is done so unconsciously and likely due to the inexperience of the instructor. However, some instructors and teachers intentionally leave out certain bits of information or avoid certain discussions because they don’t want to appear negative or controversial.” Unfortunately, this leaves students with potentially false impressions that could jeopardize their safety or inhibit their decision making process in the future.

When I think back to various aviation instructors I’ve learned from over the years, the ones who stand out as truly remarkable were not the ones who only taught the explicit (i.e., written) curriculum. The ones I learned the most from were instructors who supplemented the explicit curriculum with “cautionary tales” from their own aviation experience. They had a talent for breaking down complex information into easily digested bites. They weren’t afraid to give their opinion about which airplane they liked better – high wing or low wing. They were willing to explain, and then explain again and again, if I didn’t understand the first explanation. Whether in the classroom or in the cockpit, they gave their full attention to the teaching process. These aviation educators not only provided useful information to their students, but they also explained why that information or bit of knowledge was important. In short, these instructors were very conscious of the implicit curriculum – what was actually taught through words and actions.

But what about the null curriculum? How can we as aviation educators be sure we aren’t leaving out important bits of knowledge or safety-related information in our teaching efforts? The answer is that we can’t be absolutely sure, but we definitely should spend some time thinking about each lesson we deliver and ask ourselves if there is any other information our student can benefit from knowing.

We flight instructors sometimes take for granted what would be useful information for a student or inexperienced pilot to know. For example, knowing that the engine of an airplane with a gravity fed fuel system (like a Cessna 152 or 172) may sputter and even quit in an extreme side slip in a low fuel condition could be important information for a student to know, but I don’t recall ever being told this when I was learning to fly. If I had not experienced this for myself and then talked to another pilot about that experience, I would not have learned this useful bit of information.

Sometimes instructors are not as careful with giving directions to student pilots as they should be because they assume a certain level of knowledge and/or “common sense.” I’ll never forget a scene I watched unfold at the first flight school I worked at. Another flight instructor told his new student to “crawl on up that wing and check the fuel.” Then he went back into the office for some reason, but when he returned, the student was literally up on the wing peering into the fuel tank. While it is an amusing story to tell now, it could have been a story with a very unhappy ending if she had fallen off the wing. What this flight instructor learned was that words do matter and to never assume a student understands what you said.

While it is virtually impossible to insure that each flight lesson or classroom presentation includes every possible bit of information a student is going to need to stay safe in the air, aviation educators should be aware that what they say – or don’t say – has an impact on their student’s flight safety. For this reason, careful attention should be paid to all three curricula– explicit, implicit, and null.

There are many curriculum resources in our public area for everyone (and much more for SAFE members. Please “follow” our SAFE blog to receive notification of new articles. Write us a comment if you see a problem or want to contribute an article. We are always seeking more input on aviation improvements and flight safety. There are many highly qualified aviation educators out there! If you are not yet a SAFE member, please Join SAFE and support our mission of generating aviation excellence in teaching and flying. Our amazing member benefits alone make this commitment worthwhile and fun. Lastly, use our FREE SAFE Toolkit App to put pilot endorsements and experience requirements right on your smart phone and facilitate CFI+DPE teamwork. Working together we make safer pilots!

Experience “Slow Flight” for Safety!

By Sherry Knight Rossitor. Flying since 1973, Sherry holds Airline Transport Pilot and Flight Instructor Certificates for both fixed and rotary wing aircraft. She owned and operated an aviation training business for 18 years prior to making a midlife career change to become a licensed mental health counselor. Sherry holds a master’s degree in counseling and a doctorate in psychology.

We live in an age where we are told on a daily basis that more laws, stricter regulations, and the latest technology will keep us safe from harm.  In regard to general aviation, we have more regulations and enhanced technology than ever before, but we still have a certain number of accidents every year attributed to human error.  The FAA and NTSB are asking why.  Pilots and flight instructors are asking why.  The list of possible reasons why grows longer each year, and yet, accidents still occur.
It seems that nobody wants to actually consider the possibility that “a zero accident rate” is impossible to achieve.  But that might be the case simply because of how the human mind works.  Each of us perceives safety (and conversely, danger) in our own particular way.  Some pilots have no perception of danger because they lack the knowledge and experience necessary to understand the inherent risks associated with flying.  Other pilots are aware of certain flight hazards, but believe those hazards are no threat because their airplane has the latest and greatest instruments and avionics.  Many pilots do understand the hazards of flight, but have somehow convinced themselves nothing calamitous will ever happen to them.
In 2016, pilots have a wide range of useful instrumentation and technology available to them in the cockpit, but we still have accidents.  Again, we must ask why.  I still believe it goes back to human factors, which include inadequate risk assessment skills and false feelings of competency and/or proficiency.

Basic stall avoidance and stall recovery procedures must be demonstrated, not just talked about, to improve flight safety.  Too many pilots are overly reliant on instruments and technology to keep them safe rather than a basic understanding of aerodynamics.  An angle of attack indicator may be nice to have, but it should not be the only way a pilot can detect an impending stall.  All the technology in the world can’t save a pilot from stalling the airplane if he/she doesn’t (a) recognize the wing(s) is no longer producing lift (hence, stalled) and (b) know the most basic fix, which is to reduce the wing’s angle of attack.

SherryAOAPic     As a seasoned aviation educator and licensed mental health professional, I believe our efforts to enhance flight safety need to focus on teaching risk assessment skills and “best practices” in maintaining aircraft control.  The laws of physics do not change with the installation of an angle of attack indicator or the latest Garmin.  It still takes x-number of air molecules moving over the wings (or blades) to produce lift.  Airplanes can still stall at any airspeed and any attitude.  These are proven facts, not conjecture.
I’m a strong advocate for teaching pilots about aircraft control pressures and what they mean.  How does the airplane control yoke “feel” in your hand?  Is it heavy, stable, mushy?   What is causing the controls to feel that way?  While using a trim tab to adjust control pressure is necessary for larger aircraft, a pilot still should know the conditions under which the airplane controls feel heavy or mushy and what that may mean for safety of flight.
I also believe basic stall avoidance and stall recovery procedures must be demonstrated, not just talked about, to improve flight safety.  Too many pilots are overly reliant on instruments and technology to keep them safe rather than a basic understanding of aerodynamics.  An angle of attack indicator may be nice to have, but it should not be the only way a pilot can detect an impending stall.  All the technology in the world can’t save a pilot from stalling the airplane if he/she doesn’t (a) recognize the wing(s) is no longer producing lift (hence, stalled) and (b) know the most basic fix, which is to reduce the wing’s angle of attack.  Even with all the technology available in the Airbus 330, Air France Flight 447 crashed into the Atlantic Ocean on June 1, 2009, killing 228 people because the pilot did not recognize the airplane was in a stall.

SherrySlowFlight     While we can certainly teach safety concepts and risk assessment procedures in a classroom setting, the only way a pilot will learn how to truly recognize potential loss of control situations (requiring the implementation of those concepts and procedures) is by flying the aircraft.  This is one reason why the current debate about the FAA changing the definition of “slow flight” is so important.  The FAA’s new definition of slow flight does not allow a pilot to actually experience how the airplane reacts when flying in a potentially dangerous region of the airspeed envelope.
I believe a prudent flight instructor should not allow a student to solo who hasn’t experienced what the stall warning horn sounds like, how the airplane controls “feel” when the wings are stalled, and what the proper stall recovery procedures are. In my opinion, there is no substitution for the student actually practicing stall recovery and experiencing other simulated flight emergencies.  Reading about it or watching a video are not the same thing as actual experience.  I urge each of you to think about how you as an instructor can help ensure the safe flight of your students once you exit the cockpit.

Please “follow” our SAFE blog to receive notification of new articles and please write us a comment if you see a problem or want to contribute an article. We always need more input on aviation excellence or flight safety. There are many highly qualified SAFE members out there! If you are not yet a member, please Join SAFE and support our mission of generating aviation excellence in teaching and flying. Our amazing member benefits alone make this commitment worthwhile fun