TopCat wrote:
> Sounds like a thoroughly excellent trip, well done. Just a couple of things, if I
> may:
Thank you, and of course you may - I expect nothing else
> > Benson call was a bit odd. Had to prompt for a clearance which came back a
> > little later than comfortable but all OK in the end.
>
> Did you go through the ATZ - which would need a clearance - or just the MATZ?
> Outside the ATZ, a standard MATZ is not controlled airspace. So you get - somewhat
> confusingly - 'MATZ penetration approved', not a 'cleared to cross etc'. It's a
> subtle but important difference.
Just the MATZ pen and this was as expected. I think that it just felt a bit strange as Brize had been so nice and helpful and complimentary about us accepting the pass to tower and back without fuss. Benson was just less helpful and left a lot of pauses despite there being no traffic (on VHF anyway). In fairness, I butchered the call a bit worse than the Brize one so he probably treated me deservedly as a bit of an ****. Not a big problem and he was helpful to pass us on to Brize so didn’t need to ask for the full permission on the way back through.
> > Discussed the 70kt approach and lack of stall warner with the instructor.
> > He gave a credible explanation and I put my faith in him.
>
> I won't (necessarily!!) argue further, but I'd be interested to hear what he said
I’m honestly in two minds how to respond and will not be getting into a big diatribe on this. I really appreciate your input on all posts and I’m in no position to say whether you or my instructor is right or wrong (or both right or both wrong or neither). But I am putting my faith in my instructor for now as he’s not let me down so far.
Principally, 70kt approach is because Glos is a busy airport often with a lot of traffic and 70kts until over the hedge helps avoid slowing others up and has no real downside. Ideally 65kts after the hedge. Gives a bit of margin for new students if conditions are a bit gusty. He’s not a fan of teaching land with the stall warner and feels it teaches bad practice. Has examples of other students taught that way who fixated on it, then stalled at 10ft from the runway and wrote the aircraft off. Also commented that many aircraft don’t have stall warners so what then. Also, stall warners on old Cessnas (and I suspect others) are not exactly calibrated. They’re principally party blowers and he was pretty sure that if you took the three school 152’s out, the stall warners would all go at different speeds. He commented that a good landing is where you are at the lowest descent rate and horizontal speed but feels that teaching correct setup and attitude is better than fixating on the stall warner. Agreed that for shorter runways, a different setup is needed and understanding of what to do which is also not just reliant on the stall warner. As I said, I’m in no position to argue with either of you so I’m going to leave it at that. He was happy with todays landing without it and so was I.
As with my most recent post, my epiphany is that I’m learning and don’t need to be perfect. I need to be good enough to not kill myself, others or aircraft. Next step is be good enough to pass a skills test. After that, learning and finessing starts.
If any of that reads offensive at all, it’s not meant to. We all have our thoughts and opinions and I respect everyone’s right to theirs. I’m saying until I need to consider another viewpoint, I’m putting my faith in the guy that has got me this far with all pieces still intact (mine and his).
> Anyway, great progress, all sounding good.
Thanks. As mentioned, I appreciate yours and all others support.