Lima_Charlie
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also the program doesn't cost $80,000 it only cost $47,000 for PPL thru multi-engine. Not a real signifigant differnce in price compared to many FBO's which are charging $37-39k for their ratings package.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd call $8-10K significant. Then again, I'm broke.
In the end, it all boils down to personal preference and what works best for the individual. I'm not a believer of ONLY getting a quality training experience at an academy. I've had too much experience to the contrary with FBOs, so I tend to get defensive when someone says or implies that. Although looking at Air Orlando's new "pricing," I think they're starting to price themselves out of the market. Some people prefer to fly newer equipment and spend the money that goes along with that. Once again, that's their choice, and not one I would make myself. I'd rather use that extra money to pay off debts, put a downpayment on a house or sock it away for my kid's college. I'd love to fly newer equipment, but personally I'd rather get paid to fly it as an instructor than pay someone else to let me use it. $13K for instructor ratings, however, is a damn rip-off. Sorry, that's the only way I can put it. That's over twice what American Flyers, Skymates, ATP, etc quote.
I'm glad to see Pan Am taking a more realistic approach to the industry as far as recruiting goes, though. If they're comminicating honestly and openly at the open house, hopefully it's just a matter of time before the marketing materials on their flyers and website are change to reflect that. I don't agree with offering a "no instructor" track. I'm learning all about how little I actually know now that I'm studying for my CFI stuff, and I think it's really gonna help down the road. From the outside, a lot of people say "Sure, CFIs know tons about the regs, but what else do they learn other than how to fly from the right seat?" I can tell ya, regs are probably the SMALLEST part of what I'm learning right now......
[/ QUOTE ]
It is really more about providing options rather than encouraging people not to instruct. The fact of the matter is, not everyone WANTS to be an instructor, and not everyone will make a good instructor. In the past the PA program was a "One-size-fits-all" kinda deal. Now you have the option...
I am all for the instructor track. Until you are in the position of instructing, you have NO IDEA how much you don't know about flying, no matter how "in the know" you think you are. The best instructors that I have had along the way, had a certain quality that some people just don't have. If you don't have "it" then now you have an option. The problem is going to be with the people that THINK they have "it", but really don't.
[ QUOTE ]
Also the program doesn't cost $80,000 it only cost $47,000 for PPL thru multi-engine. Not a real signifigant differnce in price compared to many FBO's which are charging $37-39k for their ratings package.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd call $8-10K significant. Then again, I'm broke.
In the end, it all boils down to personal preference and what works best for the individual. I'm not a believer of ONLY getting a quality training experience at an academy. I've had too much experience to the contrary with FBOs, so I tend to get defensive when someone says or implies that. Although looking at Air Orlando's new "pricing," I think they're starting to price themselves out of the market. Some people prefer to fly newer equipment and spend the money that goes along with that. Once again, that's their choice, and not one I would make myself. I'd rather use that extra money to pay off debts, put a downpayment on a house or sock it away for my kid's college. I'd love to fly newer equipment, but personally I'd rather get paid to fly it as an instructor than pay someone else to let me use it. $13K for instructor ratings, however, is a damn rip-off. Sorry, that's the only way I can put it. That's over twice what American Flyers, Skymates, ATP, etc quote.
I'm glad to see Pan Am taking a more realistic approach to the industry as far as recruiting goes, though. If they're comminicating honestly and openly at the open house, hopefully it's just a matter of time before the marketing materials on their flyers and website are change to reflect that. I don't agree with offering a "no instructor" track. I'm learning all about how little I actually know now that I'm studying for my CFI stuff, and I think it's really gonna help down the road. From the outside, a lot of people say "Sure, CFIs know tons about the regs, but what else do they learn other than how to fly from the right seat?" I can tell ya, regs are probably the SMALLEST part of what I'm learning right now......
[/ QUOTE ]
It is really more about providing options rather than encouraging people not to instruct. The fact of the matter is, not everyone WANTS to be an instructor, and not everyone will make a good instructor. In the past the PA program was a "One-size-fits-all" kinda deal. Now you have the option...
I am all for the instructor track. Until you are in the position of instructing, you have NO IDEA how much you don't know about flying, no matter how "in the know" you think you are. The best instructors that I have had along the way, had a certain quality that some people just don't have. If you don't have "it" then now you have an option. The problem is going to be with the people that THINK they have "it", but really don't.
