Flight Time Credits question...

Fly777bigBIRD said:
I will be transferring to UND from Green River CC, Auburn, Wa in a year or so.

So if I get my private here at my FBO, does that mean I have to go through the classes and another checkride at UND?! I have to spend more greens out of my pocket?

Or sould i just take the Knowledge test first and wait to go to UND to get my Private?:whatever:
Click to expand...


you could take your private but youll have to go through a 14 lesson semester course (UND standardization) or if you have over a with 12 credits 2.5 or 1000 SAT you can go and take it over summer 6 weeks. if you wait then youll have to do the 30 lesson 102 private pilot course. choice is up to you depending on how much itll cost you at your FBO some save money doing the review course.
 
UND is by no means perfect, last weekend here is a perfect example:

A UND student rents the Cadet at Flight Support. they fly to Fargo. they do something in fargo (eat is my guess) hop back in the plane and off they go back to GFK, 15 minutes later they have what they thought was an alternator failure, what do they do? TURN BACK TO FARGO, why in God's name would you not continue the next 20-25 minutes w/o electrical power and turn on the radios or heaven forbid get LIGHT GUN signals when back @ GFK? they do what UND says, turn back (or possibly ditch in a field, oh wait that isn't what they teach, but it has happened before) so the plane sat in Fargo all weekend and yesterday and when the mechanic in Fargo looks at it, his logbook entry says "could not duplicate problem". The mechanic at FLight Support thinks this person forgot to turn on the alternator switch, the people who flew the plane back also could not duplicate the problem. Another case of UND's safety bubble and not realism. i am not sure what happened to land ASApracticable at UND, but it sure doesn't seem to exist.

I think the program @ UND is a good one (as far as pilot factories go) but it doesn't teach real world aviation. I learned more in the limited amount of time i have flown away from the UND bubble about aviation than i ever did when i was student there.

I do think that the 112 course is a joke and should be on a case by case basis only. take a checkride at UND and see if you can live up to the standards(which in my experience are HIGHER) and if not make them do a FEW flights, then another test, but don't make them do a shortened version of the 102 course.

the 105 course actually does make sense to me if it is a true shortened course, review a few things, then cover what the student needs to pass the final stage

:insane::insane::insane:
 
BuickCFI said:
UND is by no means perfect, last weekend here is a perfect example:

A UND student rents the Cadet at Flight Support. they fly to Fargo. they do something in fargo (eat is my guess) hop back in the plane and off they go back to GFK, 15 minutes later they have what they thought was an alternator failure, what do they do? TURN BACK TO FARGO, why in God's name would you not continue the next 20-25 minutes w/o electrical power and turn on the radios or heaven forbid get LIGHT GUN signals when back @ GFK? they do what UND says, turn back (or possibly ditch in a field, oh wait that isn't what they teach, but it has happened before) so the plane sat in Fargo all weekend and yesterday and when the mechanic in Fargo looks at it, his logbook entry says "could not duplicate problem". The mechanic at FLight Support thinks this person forgot to turn on the alternator switch, the people who flew the plane back also could not duplicate the problem. Another case of UND's safety bubble and not realism. i am not sure what happened to land ASApracticable at UND, but it sure doesn't seem to exist.

I think the program @ UND is a good one (as far as pilot factories go) but it doesn't teach real world aviation. I learned more in the limited amount of time i have flown away from the UND bubble about aviation than i ever did when i was student there.

I do think that the 112 course is a joke and should be on a case by case basis only. take a checkride at UND and see if you can live up to the standards(which in my experience are HIGHER) and if not make them do a FEW flights, then another test, but don't make them do a shortened version of the 102 course.

the 105 course actually does make sense to me if it is a true shortened course, review a few things, then cover what the student needs to pass the final stage

:insane::insane::insane:
Click to expand...

Very well said. UND's training is not conducive to getting students to think outside the box. Both scenarios (FBO vs collegiate program) have advantages and disadvantages.
 
roundout said:
in what piece of literature does UND suggest turning back after an ALT failure?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing he actually called the SOF for advice LMAO... "umm, I just had an engine failure, what do I do?"..."go through your checklist"..."oh, okay, thanks!!!"
 
JaceTheAce said:
Very well said. UND's training is not conducive to getting students to think outside the box. Both scenarios (FBO vs collegiate program) have advantages and disadvantages.
Click to expand...

When you get to CFI, this definitly changes. You write your lesson plans to follow a PTS, which in my opinion, follows a part 61 type training environment. Here, instructors are supposed to follow a TCO and adapt accordingly on a student by student basis depending on how well they're learning. I'm not sure a lot of instructors actually do that though.
 
roundout said:
in what piece of literature does UND suggest turning back after an ALT failure?
Click to expand...
policies and procedures would be my guess. It happened to me on a stage check, we were almost done with everything and the guy made me turn around. his exact words were "no we can't continue, UND's policies and procedures require us to turn back to the airport"
 
Another thing, apparently this person w ho rented the cadet didn't know that you can get LIGHT GUN signals to get back into a towered airport, because they ended up calling 911 from a cell phone in order to get a clearance to land, my guess is they were more than 15 minutes away, ran with ONLY battery on the ground/air etc and never shut anything off because i guess when they were coming back in the battery gave out as well
 
BuickCFI said:
Another thing, apparently this person w ho rented the cadet didn't know that you can get LIGHT GUN signals to get back into a towered airport, because they ended up calling 911 from a cell phone in order to get a clearance to land, my guess is they were more than 15 minutes away, ran with ONLY battery on the ground/air etc and never shut anything off because i guess when they were coming back in the battery gave out as well
Click to expand...

But they needed that electrical power robbing KL89 to get back to Fargo, otherwise they would've been completely lost! :insane:
 
BuickCFI said:
Another thing, apparently this person w ho rented the cadet didn't know that you can get LIGHT GUN signals to get back into a towered airport, because they ended up calling 911 from a cell phone in order to get a clearance to land, my guess is they were more than 15 minutes away, ran with ONLY battery on the ground/air etc and never shut anything off because i guess when they were coming back in the battery gave out as well
Click to expand...
whooooooa 911?!?!?!?! I can imagine the expression on the face of the operator...must've been a hassle to get hold of the controllers. They get paid, true, but talk about misuse of the system...
 
AngelFuree said:
whooooooa 911?!?!?!?! I can imagine the expression on the face of the operator...must've been a hassle to get hold of the controllers. They get paid, true, but talk about misuse of the system...
Click to expand...

And talk about a prime example of a pilot trained at UND - the whole entire training culture here prohibits pilots from thinking outside the box. You must only rely on a checklist in SPP's so much that you can't solve any safety issue in the airplane by thinking critically. Very systematic.

It's just like when you call tech support for a Linksys router issue. The people on the other end in India have absolutely no idea what they are talking about, but they've got a checklist flow pattern to assist. If you ask them a question that they do not know how to answer, they will beat around the bush by referring to the checklist for a "one size fits all" canned answer.
 
it's easy to monday-morning quarterback someone else's decisions. perhaps GFKFS should add a scenario to their checkout procedures in which they give the renter an ALT failure and see what he or she does since this situation evidently didn't end to the favor of FBO staff.

in my opinion, you should be happy that the renter took the plane to an airport and didn't land in a muddy field at night.
 
roundout said:
in my opinion, you should be happy that the renter took the plane to an airport and didn't land in a muddy field at night.
Click to expand...

Like this girl did...she had an alternator failure in the Warrior and decided it'd be just wonderful to land in this field AT NIGHT:

246ndfq4.jpg
 
Whooooooooa so it's true then!! I thought it was just a rumot. Girl didn't know what an alternator was.

edit: I must add that for my first CFI stage check, I had a female flight instructor. She didn't ask me any questions on systems. Go figure.
 
roundout said:
it's easy to monday-morning quarterback someone else's decisions. perhaps GFKFS should add a scenario to their checkout procedures in which they give the renter an ALT failure and see what he or she does since this situation evidently didn't end to the favor of FBO staff.

in my opinion, you should be happy that the renter took the plane to an airport and didn't land in a muddy field at night.
Click to expand...
can't argue with you there. i have no idea when this person was checked out or who did it. the Alternator failure is a question as part of the checkout
 
JaceTheAce said:
Like this girl did...she had an alternator failure in the Warrior and decided it'd be just wonderful to land in this field AT NIGHT:

246ndfq4.jpg
Click to expand...
where did you get that pic? i remember seeing it in the paper, but i didn't keep it, i should have!
 
i have nearly the same pic from the paper....i printed it out and taped it to the shirt i soloed in (i soloed 246ND) :)

i didn't mean to come across harsh earlier in the thread. in fact, i remember my thoughts clearly at the time of the 246ND incident - about the same as everyone else's in this thread. presently, i have a couple more years flying experience, have lost a former employee in an accident (outside my school), and i act as the chief instructor for a school with 5 planes. after seeing some of the landings renters make and hearing stories about what other pilots have seen my planes do, now i'm just happy if they come back undamaged and without people getting hurt.

personally, my propensity to make fun of others' reaction to misfortune has declined quite a bit in the 3 years i've been CFIing.
 
roundout said:
i have nearly the same pic from the paper....i printed it out and taped it to the shirt i soloed in (i soloed 246ND) :)

i didn't mean to come across harsh earlier in the thread. in fact, i remember my thoughts clearly at the time of the 246ND incident - about the same as everyone else's in this thread. presently, i have a couple more years flying experience, have lost a former employee in an accident (outside my school), and i act as the chief instructor for a school with 5 planes. after seeing some of the landings renters make and hearing stories about what other pilots have seen my planes do, now i'm just happy if they come back undamaged and without people getting hurt.

personally, my propensity to make fun of others' reaction to misfortune has declined quite a bit in the 3 years i've been CFIing.
Click to expand...
i didn mean to make fun, i was using it as an example of how sheltered UND's training is. i learn a lot in the few hours i have mountain flying outside of UND. more than i learned in all my training at the school.

i too am happy the airplane was undamaged and did get brought back the an airport, even if it was the "wrong" one
 
American Champion 8KCAB, N67ND, July 28, 2003 in Stephen, MN "he said he thought we hit a bird, but we had lost the right wing of the plane..." The pilot's failure to maintain clearance from the transmission line and the pilot's continued operation with known deficiencies in equipment. Factors to the accident were the power lines and the low altitude the pilot was flying at.
Click to expand...

i remember this one very clearly i was doing both my ACRO and Tailwheel courses at the same time with probably the best instructor i had on a "fun" scale. no it was not the pilot in the accident
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top