R
Roger, Roger
Guest
Did we ever figure out what this thread was about in the first place?
Dear Instructors
- Thread starter meritflyer
- Start date
Douglas
Old School KSUX
Nah, I just like to type. :laff:
Pretty much, anything beyond the personal barbs....
Cessna414JJB
Unknown Member
:cwm27:
No better than the genitals/ religion thread.
Different opinions - not suitable for adult discussion.
Add to that an automatic exclusion of 'non authorized' posters and the value quickly goes to nada. Almost hoping "Approach Control" would chime in and set us all straight. But, Ohhh well...
Gotta cowboy up and convince some business to take my money (buying the CFI from ATP or maybe American Flyers?) so I can have CFI threaz too...
So, I'll blurt out a solid :yeahthat: and hope to share this nopinion...
Cessna414JJB
Unknown Member
This must be one of the best posts I have ever read on any (!) forum.
Woof! Really nicely written!
However, point 6&7. leaves me (as an upcoming CFI longhauler) with the question what your opinion would be about the motives of the majority of flight instructors hitting the market with.. what... 200-260 hours?
From what I can see, many of them are full of it when it comes to their future career, if they had any (ANY) chance to circumnavigate the instruction they would rather wash dishes if it was 'loggable' time.
What kind of skills, knowledge and habits, in terms of stick and rudder skills, decision making and safety orientation can such instructors impart on their clients? To some respect "paying dues" has become a fulfillment of minimum requirements (flight time, PTS, you name it) that gets the person one step further towards the 'defined goal'. "Gotta get 100 hours of Multi to get that job... oh, well, I'll get the MEI and you'll be done with that in 6 weeks..."
Teaching people how to fly should not solely be something learned on the job. Sorry. There should be a tougher selection process and a true motive check, including a age limit and minimum flight time requirements to even sit for the CFI. Go pull banners, or fly as a real target for the military to practice on to get the time. Don't risk other people, don't waste their time and money.
If someones goal is to be an airline pilot, so be it. Teach future airline pilots to the standards your flightschool has set. Don't install academy style training and bridge principles into the free market. I can avoid most, if not all airline flying in my day to day life. I could care less about which standards their pilots are trained to. "Don't fall on my house, and we are golden." Teaching and learning to fly has become a pure service industry. No complaints, there is no business aptitude or customer service skills in 80% of the flight schools I have seen in 20 years. But somehow, it appears as if we are wiping the wrong asses. The final factor to get a job, or finish that certificate should not come from a wallet. I am afraid it does. If you have a deep wallet someone will cut, pamper and cover you in shape, size and form, possibly with "Airline Agreements" (conflict of interest, fraud?) and examined by DPE's in bed with these flightschools. The system has become unfair and unjust, but most importantly it is out of 'balance'. This is just one longhauler, looking into my future career. I have sucessfully ignored all the naysayers, taught groundschool for months, learned, expanded knowledge and skills, gained experience flying with more than Private Pilot pressure levels and now I feel more ready to go and fly with people who look to me for the simple fact that I won't lie, cut them short, leave them stranded or otherwise let them pass with minimum effort. There is more to this than the PTS, and there is more to being a good instructor than having fulfilled the bare legal minimums.
I know there are people with great attitudes, speaking right in this thread, so please don't accuse me of being blind or arrogant, or categorizing people. My opinion has been 'grown' for the last 10 years flying in the U.S. it's not set in stone, and people I thought bad off, continue to amaze me with their depth (not debt!) and dedication. But the few the lousy make the batch go bad.
One bad orange in a whole bag of good ones will "infect" other oranges.
I would not say it if I did not think there was no merit to it. Many old schoolers (stick and rudder people) agree with my thoughts even though not always officially, for avoiding the regular youngster flak...
What can be done to improve the "Instructors Guilde" in the U.S. of A.? This is no longer the ELITE... our industry cranks out whatever is needed, instant gratification, you pay, you say... We are catering to flukes. Not realisitic market demands.
How can we make people intimately aware that they are the very last straw and the backbone of Aviation in it's very CORE? What can we do to make this a profession again?
splash
your social justice comic center
ILS37R
Well-Known Member
It is quite unfortunate that instruction is often the entry-level job in aviation in the US. In my case, I think I was able to make up initially for my limited flying experience with previous educational experience. Not everyone has the opportunity.
But we have a couple problems. Firstly, it's hard to attract the best and brightest with (frequently) poverty-level wages, long hours and no benefits. Is it possible to make a good, career-level living as a CFI? Absolutely, but that's more an exception than the rule. This, I think, is the core of our "up-and-out" problem: once someone finally has the instruction experience to be an "elite" instructor, they have the ability to get a job whose tangible remuneration is tolerable. It's hard to get mad at someone for wanting benefits and to live other than paycheck-to-paycheck. What best and brightest we get, it's very hard to hang onto.
The problem of instructors who have no interest in instructing and don't have the professionalism to give their stepping-stone job their full effort is, sadly, pervasive. I have no problem with people who don't want to teach as part of their aviation career, I just wish they would find other sectors of the industry in which to work. If there were more jobs to get these people from 250 hours to 135 IFR minimums, that would help, but something needs to be done about the industry wisdom that the path of least resistance is student->instructor->"real" pilot. Of course, if schools could hang onto their experienced instructors, there wouldn't be the pull to that path caused by revolving-door instructor vacancies. Back when times were good, a CFI certificate was an instant job, provided you weren't 110% incompetent, and that's a problem.
As to the standards argument, my opinion is that the buck here lies firmly in the lap of flight schools. As it stands, the CFI checkride is brutal--as it should be--but ultimately comes down to objective standards that can be quantitatively judged--as it must. The qualitative stuff comes down to the hiring school: it's their responsibility not to give jobs to people who can't--or won't--hack it. Age limit? It seems the current standard, the ability to earn a commercial certifcate and, thus, vote, is sufficient. I suppose more hours could be thrown in as a requirement but, honestly, ability and interest in teaching is the greater problem here, and flying experience is only tangently related to that. Someone with a commercial certificate should be able to handle the flying aspect of flight instruction. The teaching? Who knows?
***
Speaking of tangents, NAFI really needs to get its &@*$ together.
bdhill1979
Gone West
:yeahthat:
I started about half a dozen replys to the questions and couldnt say what I wanted to.
I think livable wages are the biggest issue. If instructing was my only job my family would have been living in a van by the river for the last two years. It has only been within the last six or eight months that the paychecks that I get from instruction have been worth the time put in.
Change that and the revolving door would close quicky; and the market would wash out those that dont want to be there because there just simply would be fewer openings to fill.
will it happen? No
But that is what it would take.
Douglas
Old School KSUX
Youngster flak incoming
------
Towing a banner for 1000 hours will not make a lick of difference in quality of instruction. An instructor certificate is not a pilot certificate.
I think we just see opposite sides of the coin, we both want good instruction.
------
Towing a banner for 1000 hours will not make a lick of difference in quality of instruction. An instructor certificate is not a pilot certificate.
I think we just see opposite sides of the coin, we both want good instruction.
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
A good instructor doesn't make a good pilot though, it makes you more knowleagable yes, but knowledge alone doesn't make you a better aviator. Remember, an instructor certificate is not a pilot certificate. And as it turns out, most people want to fly and be good pilots more than they want to be good instructors. That's probably part of the reason that people move on so quickly for a "real job." To be honest thoguh, CFI-ing is about the best and most fulfilling job in the industry. Every career CFI i've met maeks decent money and also loves their job. Not so in commercial aviation.
Cessna414JJB
Unknown Member
<--- scanning the sky for little puffs of smoke, but cannot find any.
Sure you are aiming right?
I don't see this as youngsters flak, against popular belief I look for and respect my fellow JC'ers opinions. I can take quite a slapping, if it comes across reasonably well. I think you are right. Here's my side of the coin...
Experience to flying in the real world, as opposed to controlled, structured purposeful, uniformed timebuilding exposure, offered by academy style schools will improve the pilots skills and build the right attitude for instructors to teach something that goes beyond the PTS and minima.
It will instill confidence, and "self sufficiency", something many students desperately miss in their training.
Im going to catch some flak for this but I think there should be more oversight and control. I feel uncomfortable washing out unmotivated people through training. While they are being washed out, others learn from them. Nothing beats experience and exposure to the real thing.
Having someone who doesn't really want to do a job teach others, looks almost silly. I agree that the responsibility rests with the schools but I cannot muster the agression to blame them for something they have to do in order to stay competitive. I think the simple fact that they are abe to FIND employees for that money is ridicoulous. If you have a choice to employ someone for $16/ hour as a 250 hour CFI, and to have someone on payroll for no less than $40 (maybe 1000 dual given), what will you do, considering the current state of affairs? Who would you prefer? Not only as a flight school, but who would you rather learn from as a student?
Sorry to rant, it just baffles me to always come back to the same thing, and that is that we are our own worst enemies. A nurse who hates her job is going to be a terrible nurse. Maybe she does the right things, but it's gonna be a bummer to be treated by her. Don't allow people to get in, even though they have "I don't think instructors are any better than McD employees" written all over them. It's those who kill your standards, and they do it for almost free, on top of that. As a long time salesperson I always went and looked at who I am competing with. In many cases I was not scared about my paycheck, because I knew, the second I walked into the competitors place that I could 'outperform' or 'outservice' or 'outstyle' my peers at hello.
Every CFI I ever flew with had something to teach me, in some cases I even learned how and what I don't want to become.
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
<--- scanning the sky for little puffs of smoke, but cannot find any.
Sure you are aiming right?
I think you are right. Here's my side of the coin...
Experience to flying in the real world, as opposed to controlled, structured purposeful, uniformed timebuilding exposure, offered by academy style schools will improve the pilots skills and build the right attitude for instructors to teach something that goes beyond the PTS and minima.
It will instill confidence, and "self sufficiency", something many students desperately miss in their training.
Im going to catch some flak for this but I think there should be more oversight and control. I feel uncomfortable washing out unmotivated people through training. While they are being washed out, others learn from them. Nothing beats experience and exposure to the real thing.
Having someone who doesn't really want to do a job teach others, looks almost silly. I agree that the responsibility rests with the schools but I cannot muster the agression to blame them for something they have to do in order to stay competitive. I think the simple fact that they are abe to FIND employees for that money is ridicoulous. If you have a choice to employ someone for $16/ hour as a 250 hour CFI, and to have someone on payroll for no less than $40 (maybe 1000 dual given), what will you do, considering the current state of affairs? Who would you prefer? Not only as a flight school, but who would you rather learn from as a student?
Sorry to rant, it just baffles me to always come back to the same thing, and that is that we are our own worst enemies. A nurse who hates her job is going to be a terrible nurse. Maybe she does the right things, but it's gonna be a bummer to be treated by her. Don't allow people to get in, even though they have "I don't think instructors are any better than McD employees" written all over them. It's those who kill your standards, and they do it for almost free, on top of that. As a long time salesperson I always went and looked at who I am competing with. In many cases I was not scared about my paycheck, because I knew, the second I walked into the competitors place that I could 'outperform' or 'outservice' or 'outstyle' my peers at hello.
Every CFI I ever flew with had something to teach me, in some cases I even learned how and what I don't want to become.
Personally, I have kind of a thing against Zero-to-Hero academies, to include colleges. I just don't think you get a lot of what you need to learn flying inside the bubble of 141. Flying like that is how the airlines fly, you have a TCO, you essentially have dispatch that tells you where you can and cannot go, you have usually very strict minima. Contrast that to where I got my private or the FBO I worked at and learned at for awhile. "Hey, I'm going to take 67J for awhile tomorrow ok?" "Where ya goin?" "Ehh, I dunno, just around, I gotta fly." "Sounds good, have fun." I don't think all of the 250hrs from stopped to running should be training either. Sometimes you learn a little more from just being out and screwing off than you do from aggressively trying to cram information into your head. Just thinking.
Cessna414JJB
Unknown Member
I guess we are in agreement. I used to be totally contra ATP style. I disliked the idea of being in uniform and learn from kids who have never been a Airline Pilot about how to behave like one. My training in Europe included a bunch of flying with guys captaining 747's, A320's, ATR72's and when they got in our 172's they had a looooot to teach, but did not need to portray their uniforms, raybans or any other things who would put you below them in the cockpit. They instructed for our club because thats where they came from, before ever knowing that they could and would become airline captains. In fact one ATPL 15000 hour Check Captain did a yearly checkout with me in the 90's and entered the cockpit with his special "Pilots Case". It was a little "funny bears and kittycats" tin box. In it, he kept a banana, a chart and a logbook with a bunch of pens.
All our showoffs would be intimmidated because they had spend so much money on show off items.
Well, I was against ATP because what they represent caters to airlines. Everything is highly structured, no flight has no specific purpose, everything follows strict and frankly sometimes silly rules. Besides that, I blame them for having contributed to our misery by cranking (and continuing to crank out) pilots with a slightly distorted sense of reality when it comes to their future career. They most certainly can be accused of false advertising by continuing to promise young people a true chance, whereas only a handfull of their students have been placed with airlines under some sort of fraudulent (I scratch your back, you scratch mine) agreement. However, if you run into certain people who fly and/ or teach for them, you quickly find out that just like everywhere there are extremely good people and extremely bad people.
So, when I blurt out accusations or blame others (maybe it comes across like that) I do so because I dislike their concept and motivation. If I, however, have a choice I will be taught about flying by someone with more in depth knowledge, skill and experience than me. The one time I flew with a 250 hour CFI I was in charge, and when I noticed... the flight ended. I don't need some kid to sit and calculate his logbook while I try to figure a NDB approach out. And I certainly do not need some kiddo to suddenly act fluffy because there is actual IMC ahead. I still believe he came close to declaring an emergency to avoid touching any visible moisture. After the flight I asked how much actual he had seen in Florida and he answered: "almost nothing". How in the world can you run around and call yourself a CFII if you have not the slightest clue about how it is to actually fly instruments? My last actual lasted 3.6 hours out of a 4.5 hour flight. It never even scratched me. 3 months in those shoes is not enough. They have NOTHING to teach. Certainly not outside of their high structure, high control, dispatched environment. If they stayed with ATP, taught and went on to fly airliners, never to touch a student again, I would have no issues. But seeing people who hated and disliked instruction prior to getting a FO job, now on furlough snatch good jobs, is somewhat silly. Especially if they just came back to "having to do it, until something better shows up". It's cutting students and schools short.
Half a cookie for full price is a bad deal.