Holy Spin training batman...

:yup:

C172--->Seminole---->RJ

300hrs...

The 300 hr SIC Jet pilot is not something to be stereotyped to the younger generation, this has been going on periodically since the 60's. Nowadays it is even less of a factor having a green FO in the right seat with all of the automation technology equipped in the newer jets. It's unlikely a captain would be able to differentiate between a 300 hr new hire FO and a 1500 hr ex-CFI new hire FO, both lack relevant experience.
 
It's unlikely a captain would be able to differentiate between a 300 hr new hire FO and a 1500 hr ex-CFI new hire FO, both lack relevant experience.

I'm going to hazard a guess that you're not the captain in question. I've flown as C/A with guys who have 1000ish hours and guys who have 5000ish hours. I can for damn sure tell the difference. And what they flew prior has little or nothing to do with it, at least in the things that actually matter when the flight gets pear-shaped-looking.

Edit: No longer guessing! God bless the internet!

About Troy
LocationOrlando
RatingsCommercial Multi InstrumentFlight Time350Industry SectorN/AAircraft TypeBeechcraft DuchessInterestsFlying

Teehee.

"Interests: Flying". That one in particular slays me. You laugh so you don't cry.
 
I'm going to hazard a guess that you're not the captain in question. I've flown as C/A with guys who have 1000ish hours and guys who have 5000ish hours. I can for damn sure tell the difference. And what they flew prior has little or nothing to do with it, at least in the things that actually matter when the flight gets pear-shaped-looking.

Edit: No longer guessing! God bless the internet!

About Troy

LocationOrlando
RatingsCommercial Multi InstrumentFlight Time350Industry SectorN/AAircraft TypeBeechcraft DuchessInterestsFlying

Teehee.

WIN!! :D

This post MADE MY DAY.
 
I'm going to hazard a guess that you're not the captain in question. I've flown as C/A with guys who have 1000ish hours and guys who have 5000ish hours. I can for damn sure tell the difference. And what they flew prior has little or nothing to do with it, at least in the things that actually matter when the flight gets pear-shaped-looking.

Edit: No longer guessing! God bless the internet!



Teehee.

"Interests: Flying". That one in particular slays me. You laugh so you don't cry.

I'm not sure how you're able to conclude that I said a captain couldn't tell the difference between a 5000 hour pilot and a 1000 hour. :laff: You might want to reread my post. Just saying that a CFI who has spent another 1000 hours within 20 miles of the airport doing stalls and steep turns isn't going to make a much better 121 FO vs the low time non CFI guy who everybody likes to hate on. But what do I know...I'm just a low time nobody. I guess I'll have to wait till i'm a 20 year captain to make educated conclusions.
 
I'll have to wait till i'm a 20 year captain to make educated conclusions.

You don't have to wait that long, and your conclusions aren't educated. That's ok. We're all here to learn. I'm maybe 10 or 15 years older than you are (guessing). Those years go by like a match-flame, but my thoughts and opinions about, well, forget about flying, but just about everything, have changed radically. I'm not going to change your mind about anything, and neither is anyone else. But it is possible for you to listen with an open mind and change your own opinions. This is what we work for, here (or so I claim).
 
Just saying that a CFI who has spent another 1000 hours within 20 miles of the airport doing stalls and steep turns isn't going to make a much better 121 FO vs the low time non CFI guy who everybody likes to hate on. But what do I know...I'm just a low time nobody. I guess I'll have to wait till i'm a 20 year captain to make educated conclusions.

Guess so...

I am the low time guy everyone likes to hate on - it ain't that bad! Really!
 
You don't have to wait that long, and your conclusions aren't educated. That's ok. We're all here to learn. I'm maybe 10 or 15 years older than you are (guessing), and my thoughts and opinions about, well, forget about flying, but just about everything, have changed radically. I'm not going to change your mind about anything, and neither is anyone else. But it is possible for you to listen with an open mind and change your own opinions. This is what we work for, here (or so I claim).

You probably made an honest mistake by reading my first post to fast and putting words in my mouth that I didn't say. No big deal, just accept that and move on. This reply with an attempt to give a generalized life lesson to somebody you think is a young 24 year old know it all oblivious kid is not necessary. But I will say that since I'm so uneducated and you are educated it is very interesting to learn that according to you, prior flight experience has little or nothing to do with total flight hours. You should probably inform all of the regional airlines that they are doing everything wrong because last time I checked they will hire a 1500 TT pilot who has 1000 hours as a RJ FO for a 121 carrier over the 5000 TT CFI with 4,900 hours of C172 time.
 
You should probably inform all of the regional airlines that they are doing everything wrong because last time I checked they will hire a 1500 TT pilot who has 1000 hours as a RJ FO for a 121 carrier over the 5000 TT CFI with 4,900 hours of C172 time.

I've already informed them (via JC), along with many others. They're still hiring toolwagons because they think the paint is shiny and JEEEETTTTTSSSSSS are COOL (and, more to the point, are willing to work for peanuts). And the fruit of this strategy haven't gotten any less worthless for the effort. Cliches are cliches for a reason. As always, the hardest things to know, accept, and understand, are the things you don't already know, accept, and understand. I can't help you any more than that. And neither can anyone else. The problem is that it's cold, cold comfort to know that should you make the mistake of running through these 5-year old threads when you're at a regional still waiting to upgrade...alone, barely able to eat, wondering wtf happened, you'll be making simliar replies to other threads, whilst feeling as though you were dealt with unfairly. Round and round we go...
 
I think it would be beneficial.

Statistically beneficial, I have no idea, but I'm sure glad the first spin I saw was with an experienced flight instructor.
 
You should probably inform all of the regional airlines that they are doing everything wrong because last time I checked they will hire a 1500 TT pilot who has 1000 hours as a RJ FO for a 121 carrier over the 5000 TT CFI with 4,900 hours of C172 time.

And exactly how many CFIs with 5000TT are in a bust to get to the regionals?
 
During my CFI training, my instructor showed me a Chief Counsel opinion written to the famous Bill Kershner. It was consistent with what you said and allowed any applicant to practice spin training with a flight instructor. Is this what you're referencing? I'll have to see if I can dig up a copy of the letter.

Here it is:

==============================
July 28, 1977

Mr. E. Ritch, Jr.

Dear Mr. Ritch:

This is in response to your March 29, 1977 letter asking whether the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) require instructors and students to wear parachutes during the teaching of acrobatics.

The applicable regulations involved are section 91.15(c) and (d) (14 CFR 91.15(c) and (d)) which provide:

(c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute, no pilot of a civil aircraft, carrying any person (other than a crewmember) may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds -

(1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon; or
(2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude of 30 degrees relative to the horizon.

(d) Paragraph 9(c) of this section does not apply to -

(1) Flight tests for pilot certification or rating; or

(2) Spins and other flight maneuvers required by the regulations for any certificate or rating when given by -
(i) A certificated flight instructor; or
(iii) An airline transport pilot instructing in accordance with Section 61.169 of this chapter.

The FAA did consider the problems caused by wearing a parachute during acrobatic flight instruction when it adopted the regulations which contain the parachute requirements. Amendment 91-6, published in the Federal Register on July 22, 1964 (29 FR 9823), adopted former section 91.71(b) and (c) (current section 91.15(c) and (d)). As stated in the preamble to that amendment, for the purpose of this requirement, a student pilot has been interpreted not to be a crewmember, as defined in section 1.1 of the FARs. Nevertheless, the preamble stated:

Regardless of what certificate or rating the applicant is seeking, an acrobatic maneuver required for any pilot certificate or rating (even one not presently sought by the applicant) may be performed without parachutes when done by, or at the direction of, a certificated flight instructor.

However, it should be noted that a certificated flight instructor (CFI) and his student pilot are excepted from the parachute requirement for only those maneuvers which are required by the regulations for any certificate or rating. Any maneuver which is not required by the regulations for any certificate or rating must be taught employing parachutes pursuant to Section 91.15(c).

In answer to your second question, "[C]an instructors require students to be proficient in acrobatics to meet his standards for a certificate or rating?", the Federal Aviation Regulations establish what maneuvers must be taught in order to qualify for each certificate or rating. An instructor may suggest to a student that learning a particular maneuver would be helpful to the student so that he may become more proficient in his flying skills. However, the instructor may not establish his own requirements, independent of the FARs, which he decides a student must meet to qualify for a certificate. If the student and the instructor agree to engage in acrobatic maneuvers which are not required for any certificate or rating, that maneuver must be preformed in accordance with Section 91.15(c) of the FARs.

We hope that this statement of FAA parachute requirements in the teaching of acrobatic flight to a student is helpful to your particular situation.

Sincerely,
NEIL R. EISNER
NEIL R. EISNER
Acting Assistant Chief Counsel
Regulations and Enforcement Division
Office of the Chief Counsel
==============================
 
Was I the only person who spent most of the video screaming "SPIN IT YOU SISSY" at the screen?

Nope, I was doing that also! This is one of the many VERY good reasons why I opted to do spin training in the Decathlon instead of the Cessna. You can actually put the Decathlon into a spin! (And the instructor showed a number of other maneuvers I didn't get to do in the Cessna)
 
That decision predates the removal from spin demonstrations by 25 years...
There are legal decisions made today that are based on interpretation of identical language made hundreds of years ago. Precedence. Some degree of consistency.

Notice from my post of the letter that the language of the Part 91 reg is virtually identical at the time it was interpreted. The only difference is the change in whether spin training was required for anything under Part 61.

Actually, I re-read the reg and the flaw I thought was in the reasoning isn't there. I thought there was some reference to "any pilot certificate or rating" in the current reg. There isn't.

Of course, the fact that a local FSDO makes up its own rules doesn't mean you don't follow them if you know about them. It tends to be less of a hassle to keep off a street when a police officer says to, even if the police officer is in the wrong..
 
I've already informed them (via JC), along with many others. They're still hiring toolwagons because they think the paint is shiny and JEEEETTTTTSSSSSS are COOL (and, more to the point, are willing to work for peanuts). And the fruit of this strategy haven't gotten any less worthless for the effort. Cliches are cliches for a reason. As always, the hardest things to know, accept, and understand, are the things you don't already know, accept, and understand. I can't help you any more than that. And neither can anyone else. The problem is that it's cold, cold comfort to know that should you make the mistake of running through these 5-year old threads when you're at a regional still waiting to upgrade...alone, barely able to eat, wondering wtf happened, you'll be making simliar replies to other threads, whilst feeling as though you were dealt with unfairly. Round and round we go...

I appreciate the advice, maybe you're actually trying to help by telling me that when the recruiters at the 141 pilot factories who let you know that you will be making six figures in no time flying jets might actually be lying? How can you fly these nice shiny cool sounding jets for a living and be disgruntled? You're preaching to the wrong kid but maybe another might read your post and take it to heart instead of finding out the reality for himself. I just happened to have to grow up with a parental unit who had the perfect job working for the largest airline in the world, until one day he came home with a picket sign in hand, no paycheck and the shock of watching this mega airline disappear. Losing close to 20 years of seniority will create a little bit of negativity in even the best of us. So what did I do, I took the advice and grinded it out for a decade, rat racing with the best of em, living my life in a cubicle. I understand the instability of the airlines but I also have seen the grass on both sides and have learned that there is no perfect job out there. I don't expect much if anything out of the airlines, only less than a 60 hour work week and a job I don't have to take home with me. Hell, I'll consider myself blessed if I'm able to top my corporate paycheck in 15 years. You have to stay positive in life with the cards you're given and the path you choose. Now back to the spin topic we go... :insane:
 
You can talk about spin awareness and recovery procedures on the ground till you're blue in the face. With most pilots, all that talk seems to go out the window once confronted with the realistic distraction of the spin.

"The first few times you do it they all seem violent- mostly because you expect it to be little more than just another stall. After you do a few spins, you get to know what to expect and it doesn't seem as violent."

Go and find a school that offers a true upset recovery/aerobatics course. Tell them you want some spin training, they will see you right and you'll most likely enjoy the crap out of it.......I did!

I want to thank you guys for starting this post, all the legal research, history and advice. You're a great resource. Another student and I snuck off quietly for some unauthorized spin training with an aerobatics pilot this morning. We're going back for more upset/recovery training next week. You were right about everything. Now that we've done some, we can't imagine considering ourselves "adequately trained pilots" without proficiency in this area. In fact, the experience raised more questions.

- After doing a few spins, we both realized that it wasn't that violent at all. In fact, it was fun, smooth and eventually, relaxing in the hands of a practiced instructor. Didn't detect that much stress on either the pilot or aircraft. So if the FAA thought this was so potentially dangerous, why not just create a separate CFI endorsement for it, and specify "spin ready" aircraft. Why create a climate of student fear that even has our CFI's scared of spins? Now I understand why "all that talk seems to go out the window once confronted" with a real emergency. With no muscle memory or instincts to fall back on, and the climate of fear created by restricting spins to "talk only", I can see where a pilot could panic faced with his first unintentional spin or upset.

- As we progress further into our training, we have to wonder how many other misconceptions, fears and incomplete training our newly minted state-of-the-art CFI's might have been subjected to by the era we're being trained in. Although we're stoked with the upset/recovery training advice we got here, it's also dented our confidence in our syllabus and school. Reliance on computer technology for everything is another area of concern for us. What else aren't we being told? The best solution we came up with is to return to the forums and ask for advice on supplemental training, training to fill the possible voids left in our current syllabus.

After we're in better standing and further into our training we plan to come clean and offer spin instruction to our CFIs, or at least persuade them to go get some training after we demo a few smooth spins for them.

Thanks.
 
Many of the comments in this thread are exactly the reason why I continue to think acro (including spins) should be part of pilot training from the beginning.
 
Many of the comments in this thread are exactly the reason why I continue to think acro (including spins) should be part of pilot training from the beginning.

It is a shame that the majority of civvie pilots, at least the ones from traditional training backgrounds, have never been upside down in an airplane. Such a basic thing that builds so much confidence quickly....it is astounding to me that this isn't part of every syllabus
 
Although we're stoked with the upset/recovery training advice we got here, it's also dented our confidence in our syllabus and school. Reliance on computer technology for everything is another area of concern for us. What else aren't we being told? The best solution we came up with is to return to the forums and ask for advice on supplemental training, training to fill the possible voids left in our current syllabus.
Thank you thank you thank you for re-storing my confidence in the newer generation. There must be more of you out there.
I had become slightly depressed that no one was getting it anymore.
Seriously.
 
It is a shame that the majority of civvie pilots, at least the ones from traditional training backgrounds, have never been upside down in an airplane. Such a basic thing that builds so much confidence quickly....it is astounding to me that this isn't part of every syllabus


Being one of those "civvie" pilots you mention, I agree wholeheartedly. After 4,000hrs. and never really having been upside down in an airplane, I can personally attest that there is a lack of confidence, at least for me, in that area. I'm not saying that if the situation ever arose that I'd have to return an aircraft to level flight from an inverted postition, I don't think I could do it. It would just be nice to experience it in a controlled setting before it happening in the real world by suprise.
 
Back
Top