ACS and high altitude orientation are constricting to progress on safety in the pattern, but consider hours above 1,000 AGL and hours below 1,000. My total discomfort with less than cruise at 200 AGL comes from a lifetime there. I can teach safe maneuvering flight techniques, but I can't expect them to be innate. We have to take students from where they are to where they want to be once we have infused them with low altitude orientation.

Dog is my Copilot wrote:I agree go-arounds need to be practiced - especially in airplanes with big bore engines. My airplane like many Cessnas has a very forward cg and during an approach with full flaps and little to no power the trim is set in the max up position. Application of full power will result in an abrupt nose up pitch requiring a serious workout nose down exercise. I have heard some people suggest using a less power during the go around but there are situations where this is not safe or practical. My practice is to apply full power, muscle the nose down (to safe pitch attitude), retract flaps to 20, adjust trim, and the slowly retract the flaps. Right rudder is required but pushing the nose down immediately is what will prevent the stall. I have to admit this procedure caught me off guard a few years ago because it had been a long time that I actually had to do a legitimate go around. The amount of nose down pressure was scary - I think mostly because it was unexpected. It is something I practice and teach now. It might make sense to use less nose up trim during landing in case there is a need for a go around.Josh

When I was flying Cessna 185s pretty much full time, and instructing in them a good bit, I developed the habit of NEVER selecting full nose up trim during a landing approach. I'd always keep a couple of rolls of nose down trim fed in, and just held the back pressure necessary to keep the nose on target.

The good news there is that, if you're planning a tail low wheel landing, keeping that bit of nose down trim rolled in makes the transition from tail low to tail up right after the touch easy. Touch, relax that back pressure on the yoke, then continue the yoke forward gradually. By releasing that back pressure you've been holding, the tail comes up naturally, and you just continue that.

In checking out 180/185 pilots, I NEVER brief them on this phenomenon.....I set them up to experience the REALLY, REALLY hard push on the yoke that full nose up trim will require in a go around with full power. As Josh noted, I don't consider partial power in a go around an acceptable risk. Might work today, but I don't want them developing that habit. With the trim rolled partially nose down on the approach and holding back pressure, a go around is much less of a shoving match. Certainly doesn't take both hands anyway.

I've checked out a couple of very petite women in the 185, and after the first "surprise" with full nose up trim and full flaps, with me backing them up fully, we landed, then briefed the use of partial nose down trim on approach (ie: flying off trim), and these ladies were quite capable of flying the plane through a nice go around, even with full flaps and full power.

Of course, this is mostly an issue with very far forward CG, and less of an issue with a good load and further aft CG, but realistically, not every flight is fully loaded.

MTV

I fuss about what personal limitations do to confidence, Josh, but I have always cheated. Most pilots don't believe me until they I have rode with and talked at them an hour, but these techniques I teach are sooo much easier than the school solution fare. I think Doug Lumgair cheated and studied "Safe Maneuvering Flight Techniques" first, but he made better apparent brisk walk rate of closure approaches to touchdown slowly and softly on the numbers every time in his 170 better than me on the first few tries. And after a short flight with me, he taught CFOT my stuff like he had been teaching it all his life. Which, of course, is possible. I am not the only pilot who just doesn't get some of the stuff taught in flight school. It wasn't always that way. Yes, we had more incidents and accidents back then. No, in all those incidents and accidents we didn't have more fatalities. We flew artfully and without enough prior planning which prevents pitifully poor performance. But we used more logical techniques.

I fuss about what personal limitations do to confidence, Josh, but I have always cheated. Most pilots don't believe me until I have rode with and talked at them an hour, but these techniques I teach are sooo much easier than the school solution fare. I think Doug Lumgair cheated and studied "Safe Maneuvering Flight Techniques" first, but he made better apparent brisk walk rate of closure approaches to touchdown slowly and softly on the numbers every time in his 170 better than me on the first few tries. And after a short flight with me, he taught CFOT my stuff like he had been teaching it all his life. Which, of course, is possible. I am not the only pilot who just doesn't get some of the stuff taught in flight school. It wasn't always that way. Yes, we had more incidents and accidents back then. No, in all those incidents and accidents we didn't have more fatalities. We flew artfully and without enough prior planning which prevents pitifully poor performance. But we used more logical techniques.