Military Instructors - New FAA Proposal
- Thread starter mjg407
- Start date
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
I think it makes sense. Though not too sure teaching in a Jayhawk or T-45 is the same as teaching a civilain slow flight in a C150. But I am for it. I know that guys that work in an OPS job can just take the test for dispatcher cert, and that is good too.
What irritates me was when I was a Jet Mech enlisted guy (Navy AD) equivalent, there was no military proficiency for an A or P or A/P certificate. Has this changed? Neither was there one for the Flight Navigator cert (although UNT was exactly what the PTS called for), which granted is an "obsolete" cert, but still on the books.
If they are going to do this which I am for, they should also do something for the enlisted Mechs as well. Really burns me up!
What irritates me was when I was a Jet Mech enlisted guy (Navy AD) equivalent, there was no military proficiency for an A or P or A/P certificate. Has this changed? Neither was there one for the Flight Navigator cert (although UNT was exactly what the PTS called for), which granted is an "obsolete" cert, but still on the books.
If they are going to do this which I am for, they should also do something for the enlisted Mechs as well. Really burns me up!
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
That's a valid point and one that bears discussing -- but not a reason to *not* have this rule.
You're right that teaching someone to fly *some* military aircraft is different than teaching someone to fly a 152 (I would not go so far as to say "a completely different world"). A military IP won't have the muscle memory skills to really fly a GA airplane well.
That being said, they'll have tons of basic airmanship, be very experienced, and will understand the fundamentals of instructing well. And, let's face it...it's not that tough to learn how to fly a GA airplane if you are all ready and experienced aviator.
To put it in perspective, anyone with an ASEL and high performance and taildragger signoffs can go jump into a P-51. Would they be smart to do it without some other instruction? Nope.
Same goes for a guy who has only learned/instructed in turbojet aircraft. Would he be smart to go grab a 172 and start instructing in it without some other experience and help? Nope.
Where the REAL issue is going to sit is with (the lack of) a thorough understanding of the CFR and all the ins-and-outs of endorsements, sending students to checkrides, etc. That's where military-trained "CFIs" can -- and will -- get themselves into trouble if they don't do some serious bookwork before trying it out.
I'm hoping that places like American Flyers will begin to produce "military CFI" courses or materials that can focus on these differences during the renewal process.
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
I always thought you had to have that endorsement or training letter for a P-51? Cool. (Not doubting you, as I recall you have some flight time in WWII airplanes)
I agree with your post's sentiments, and as a general remark I think that can be said of about all aircraft. If you are not proficient and recent in a C152, you should get up to speed before giving lessons in it, no matter who you are and what you fly. I think most reputable schools have some standardization program even if it the chief FI going up with a new CFI and making sure it is done the way he wants it.
As stated, no reason not to allow the proficiency program.
I wouldn't think so. I don't think many ex-military or even current military guys will be going around to FBOs or Academy's looking for jobs, IMHO many of them will want to instruct on their own or on to people they know. I'm sure some would, but I can see the CFI market all of a sudden being "flooded" by military guys wanting to take the jobs out there.
Were you an ADJ, ADR? What'd you work on?
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
I was actually neither, as I was an Air Guard enlistee (jet and turboprop mech)and later Navy NFO... but it woulda been AD jet flavor. Worked on F-4 J79s, F-16 PW F100s and C-130 T56s.
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
Did you mean can't? I would think an experienced military aviator would balk at a CFI job at an FBO or acadamey quite easily.
Good catch. Yes, I meant to say "can't". I don't see the market being flooded by ex-military CFIs taking up a bunch of entry level CFI gigs.
PA44-LUV
Well-Known Member
My dad (retired USAF IP, went and got FAA CFI on own), told me when we were discussing this very topic a few months ago, a lot of military guys probably wouldn't subject themselves to the ridiculous work schedules and relatively low pay of FBO/flight schools compared to other work they could get. He walked into a few flight schools looking at full-time CFI work, looked at the pay/benefits, laughed, walked right back out and went to work for Lockheed Martin.
I know this probably isn't what the topic thread was for, but seemed to fit with post above. All I know is if they do, I won't be able to compete with any of them for a job.
And this isn't really an FAA proposal any more. It's a Final Rule and takes effect October 20.
I know this probably isn't what the topic thread was for, but seemed to fit with post above. All I know is if they do, I won't be able to compete with any of them for a job.
And this isn't really an FAA proposal any more. It's a Final Rule and takes effect October 20.
Douglas
Old School KSUX
I don't see the problem with this at all.
I dunno, but isn't this a lot like how the pilot certificates work between the military and the FAA.
As in:
After training military pilot goes to FSDO and applies for FAA commercial.
or do you have to do a commercial ride with the FSDO?
Either way, if you are an IP in the military I don't think it is important to require a second ride.
I dunno, but isn't this a lot like how the pilot certificates work between the military and the FAA.
As in:
After training military pilot goes to FSDO and applies for FAA commercial.
or do you have to do a commercial ride with the FSDO?
Either way, if you are an IP in the military I don't think it is important to require a second ride.
germb747
Well-Known Member
Having been a product of both worlds, I do think the military IPs should at least have to take the oral. They're sharp guys, and their experience should be appreciated, buy many of them don't have a CLUE what VFR is. And they probably couldn't tell you what Class C airspace is, much less what's required to enter it.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
You probably weren't taught anything else in your flying training per the commercial PTS, either, but that didn't keep you from being qualified to get your Commercial ticket after basic undergraduate flying. The USAF, probably like the USN, teaches to standards that are different than the FAA -- in some areas tolerances are tighter, and in some areas they're looser. Either way, the FAA has accepted that the training is equivalent.
Looking over the Commercial PTS, nearly all of the individual maneuvers are taught to students in USAF SUPT. The grading standards are very similar, but modified for aircraft that are flying much faster and thus have different tolerances.
I don't see how teaching someone to perform a steep turn to +/- 100 feet in an airplane going 100 knots (FAA standards) is any different than teaching someone to perform a steep turn +/- 200 feet in an aircraft going 300 knots (USAF UPT T-38 standards). It wouldn't exactly be mind-bending to pick up the PTS and learn new standards before jumping in a different aircraft and teaching it.
Again, nobody is suggesting that it's perfectly fine to go out there and get a CFI job right from the military without some other kind of familiarization training, study, or instruction. As has been mentioned...who *would* do that? I know I certainly am not going to be out there looking for a job as one. For me, it will simply be another qualification to enhance my resume, as well as give me the opportunity to give instruction to family, friends, and acquaintances when situations arise.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
That's true for operational fighter instructors (I'm guessing that's also true for operational heavy IPs also based on your post), but anyone who is an SUPT IP knows very well how to operate in the airspace system VFR.