Narrative:

During a routine training flight, my student and I were engaged in touch and go, takeoff and landing proficiency maneuvers. After the completion of touch and goes, and after exiting runway 19, ground control informed me that under the directive of the local FSDO (located on the field), I was to taxi to the terminal. I complied with the instructions. After arriving at the terminal we were greeted by a gentleman who asked for our certificates and aircraft documents, although he did not identify himself as an aviation inspector. I challenged his identity. He went to his office, asking me to stay, and returned with an official FAA identify and picture. He proceeded with a routine ramp check and informed me that the reason we were called over was because we were taking off with not enough runway remaining. I disputed the fact that although I did not know the exact runway remaining when takeoff power was applied during the touch and go maneuver, based on my perceptions, experience, and judgement, safety was never compromised. He told me that I did not have enough runway based on performance calculations in the aircraft manual. I rebutted by stating that there is no accurate way to calculate takeoff distance with the aircraft engaged in a touch and go maneuver and the only way to ensure safety in such a manner was with sound judgement. The inspector questioned my judgement. I believe that the situation could be used to show that utmost safety is priority, and although there may have been enough runway to takeoff, the procedure itself is not something to be shown to a student with the perception that it is normal. I will from now on adhere to strict guidelines during touch and goes, and emphasize the importance of landing within the first 1/3 of the runway, and going around if the outcome of a normal landing is in question.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TOUCH AND GO TRAINING IN PROGRESS IN A PA28-181 WHEN AFTER FINAL LNDG FLC SUMMONED TO TERMINAL FOR FAA INSPECTOR RAMP CHK. THE INSPECTOR SAID THE FLC WAS TAKING OFF WITH INADEQUATE RWY REMAINING DURING TOUCH AND GOES.

Narrative: DURING A ROUTINE TRAINING FLT, MY STUDENT AND I WERE ENGAGED IN TOUCH AND GO, TKOF AND LNDG PROFICIENCY MANEUVERS. AFTER THE COMPLETION OF TOUCH AND GOES, AND AFTER EXITING RWY 19, GND CTL INFORMED ME THAT UNDER THE DIRECTIVE OF THE LCL FSDO (LOCATED ON THE FIELD), I WAS TO TAXI TO THE TERMINAL. I COMPLIED WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS. AFTER ARRIVING AT THE TERMINAL WE WERE GREETED BY A GENTLEMAN WHO ASKED FOR OUR CERTIFICATES AND ACFT DOCUMENTS, ALTHOUGH HE DID NOT IDENT HIMSELF AS AN AVIATION INSPECTOR. I CHALLENGED HIS IDENTITY. HE WENT TO HIS OFFICE, ASKING ME TO STAY, AND RETURNED WITH AN OFFICIAL FAA IDENT AND PICTURE. HE PROCEEDED WITH A ROUTINE RAMP CHK AND INFORMED ME THAT THE REASON WE WERE CALLED OVER WAS BECAUSE WE WERE TAKING OFF WITH NOT ENOUGH RWY REMAINING. I DISPUTED THE FACT THAT ALTHOUGH I DID NOT KNOW THE EXACT RWY REMAINING WHEN TKOF PWR WAS APPLIED DURING THE TOUCH AND GO MANEUVER, BASED ON MY PERCEPTIONS, EXPERIENCE, AND JUDGEMENT, SAFETY WAS NEVER COMPROMISED. HE TOLD ME THAT I DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH RWY BASED ON PERFORMANCE CALCULATIONS IN THE ACFT MANUAL. I REBUTTED BY STATING THAT THERE IS NO ACCURATE WAY TO CALCULATE TKOF DISTANCE WITH THE ACFT ENGAGED IN A TOUCH AND GO MANEUVER AND THE ONLY WAY TO ENSURE SAFETY IN SUCH A MANNER WAS WITH SOUND JUDGEMENT. THE INSPECTOR QUESTIONED MY JUDGEMENT. I BELIEVE THAT THE SIT COULD BE USED TO SHOW THAT UTMOST SAFETY IS PRIORITY, AND ALTHOUGH THERE MAY HAVE BEEN ENOUGH RWY TO TKOF, THE PROC ITSELF IS NOT SOMETHING TO BE SHOWN TO A STUDENT WITH THE PERCEPTION THAT IT IS NORMAL. I WILL FROM NOW ON ADHERE TO STRICT GUIDELINES DURING TOUCH AND GOES, AND EMPHASIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF LNDG WITHIN THE FIRST 1/3 OF THE RWY, AND GOING AROUND IF THE OUTCOME OF A NORMAL LNDG IS IN QUESTION.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.