Anything lacking in your training?

jawright

Well-Known Member
For those of you who went to ATP, was there any area of your training where you felt the school could have done better? Has anyone who trained there not been able to find jobs and felt that it was because of some deficiency in their training? I'm interested in attending and am looking for opinions.
 

Hollywood

New Member
all in all i thought the training was pretty good. they definatley lack when in comes to NDB and i felt they rely a little to heavily on the GPS for the instrument training. you'll be one hell of a good multiengine pilot when you come up but it doesn't help to much if you don't get hired on at ATP and have to instruct somewhere else in cessna's. good program though.
 

mtsu_av8er

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
they definatley lack when in comes to NDB and i felt they rely a little to heavily on the GPS for the instrument training.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering that the FAA has announced that the NDB is a dying animal, and that GPS will be the primary nav system in the near future, is that really a bad thing? Just wondering...
 

pscraig

Well-Known Member
Our AST-300 sim had an RMI, and my instructor did teach me how to shoot an NDB approach even though it was not required.There are no ADFs in ATP aircraft.

The Garmin GNS is the primary NAV and COM unit. We teach our students to always load a full approach procedure for enhanced situational awareness. You could just tune the localizer and fly the needles if you really didn't want the help, but why not?
 

mtsu_av8er

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
You could just tune the localizer and fly the needles if you really didn't want the help, but why not?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you never know when you're going to have a complete failure of everything in the plane electrical (except the NDB, of course...), and you don't want to be there depending on this 'puterized gizmo to show you where to go.

Besides, back in the old days when I was learning to fly on instruments. . .

[/sarcastic rant]
 

aviator

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
The Garmin GNS is the primary NAV and COM unit. We teach our students to always load a full approach procedure for enhanced situational awareness. You could just tune the localizer and fly the needles if you really didn't want the help, but why not?

[/ QUOTE ]

I see the logic in this. To offer a different opinion FlightSafety IFR training takes the complete opposite stance. We have dual 430's also but unless it is a GPS approach we never load the full approach. In fact the majority of the time both are set to default 1 with no moving map. The thinking behind this is that enhanced situational awareness is not allways availible to pilot after they leave the academy. They need to be able to build the picture in their head without the GPS and a flashing reminder to TURN RIGHT TO 090 NOW. My 8 year old nephew could follow those instructions.
An example would be an airline like Great Lakes. When I was there no GPS, no autopilot, everything hand flown the old fashion way. This is a 121 airline (albeit a crappy one) And yes lots of NDB approaches. As an instructor I would quess one out of every 3 approaches I do is a NDB.

Not to say one way is right or wrong just different.
 

mtsu_av8er

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
And yes lots of NDB approaches. As an instructor I would quess one out of every 3 approaches I do is a NDB.

Not to say one way is right or wrong just different.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's my only point - as instructors, we set many of the trends. Of course, instrument pilots need to be able to visualize their position at all times during the approach, without the GPS. I encourage people to stay away from airplanes that don't have GPS equipment. Not always possible, not even possible most of the time. But it's a dead technology, and about 20 years late in it's vanishing.
 

SteveC

Really?
Staff member
[ QUOTE ]
...I encourage people to stay away from airplanes that don't have GPS equipment. Not always possible, not even possible most of the time. But it's a dead technology, and about 20 years late in it's vanishing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Anyone that works their way up through the ranks of freight or charter will find a lot of old equipment. Many of those operators work on a fairly tight budget and don't have the wherewithal to upgrade to moving maps, or even GPS for that matter.
 

Hollywood

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
they definatley lack when in comes to NDB and i felt they rely a little to heavily on the GPS for the instrument training.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering that the FAA has announced that the NDB is a dying animal, and that GPS will be the primary nav system in the near future, is that really a bad thing? Just wondering...

[/ QUOTE ]

actually, i think it is a bad thing. as a cfii, you need to be able to teach that to your instruments students. at most flight schools, other than ATP, it's part of the checkirde. your correct, it is "dying" but that's going to be a few years off. probably more. i did like an hour of NDB stuff in the sim at ATP but i don't feel qualified to teach it even though technically i am. don't get me wrong, ATP is a great program and probably the best decision i ever made. but, i stand by my statement that they rely a little to heavily on GPS. i flew with a few people there that would be totally lost without that garmin 430. especially on approaches.
 

sixpack

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
...Well, you never know when you're going to have a complete failure of everything in the plane electrical (except the NDB, of course...), and you don't want to be there depending on this 'puterized gizmo to show you where to go...[/sarcastic rant]

[/ QUOTE ] You're kidding, right?
 

sixpack

New Member
ATP does not typically train the NDB.

Let's say you finish the 90 day ATP program, with all of your ratings.
You are a CFII with about 150 hours of IFR experience.
How long do you think it would take you to learn to fly an NDB approach?

Remember, you already know the IFR rules, you know how to trim the plane, you know how to scan you instruments. You just need to learn how to use the ADF to do an approach.
 

Merlin

Well-Known Member
Keep in mind, no matter where you get your training, YOU are responsible for the quality and completeness of your education/training.

ATP's system, in many ways, expects this from you. You're expected to do a large amount of self study. Of course, they'll provide lessons on specific topics and go over areas that need improvement or where there is confusion, but for the most part, you're not going to get hours and hours of ground school on a given topic.

No matter what field (medicine, computers, law, aviation) or where you study (Harvard, community college, ATP), no one is going to take more interest in your education than you are.

If you are expecting to be "spoon-fed" and rely solely on what you are told or experience in the program, then you are definately going to exit the program with less understanding and experience than you would have if you had taken full advantage of the resources available to you.

Therefore, if you feel that you do not have a firm grasp of a specific topic, it is incumbent on you to ask and get the answers and/or practice. NDBs and GPS-less operation are definately two areas where questions and practice could be very helpful.

But you, as the student are responsible for acquiring that extra experience. As for those who would be totally lost without the GPS, that's their loss and hopfully they'll never have to encounter an aircraft or situation where that is not available to them.

As for me, I did acquire the knowledge and understanding to safely operate with the ADF and without the GPS (and a healthy respect for how powerful the Garmin 430 really is)--but I did have to consider the possibility, ask questions and get practice to gain that understanding.

Always be a student of your profession. The learning never stops.

Just my $0.02.
Jeremy
 

SATXaviator

New Member
Very well put Jeremy.

You get out of life what you put into it. If i were in a hiring or recruiting position, those very skills and attitudes are what I would be looking for in a potential employee. Airlines hire future captains.

As students we must be responsible for our quality of training and take ownership when there is a deficiency. (IMO)
 

pscraig

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind, no matter where you get your training, YOU are responsible for the quality and completeness of your education/training.

Jeremy

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't have said it better myself. Agree 110%.
 

mtsu_av8er

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...Well, you never know when you're going to have a complete failure of everything in the plane electrical (except the NDB, of course...), and you don't want to be there depending on this 'puterized gizmo to show you where to go...[/sarcastic rant]

[/ QUOTE ] You're kidding, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally!!
 
Top