"Those who can't, period"

[ROFCIBC]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, because the military has definitely proven that you can't make quality pilots in an accelerated training program!

JM2CW,
Heath

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting comment, but before I get much into a discussion of it I'd be interested in how you came to that conclusion, and what specific "program" you mean. Also how you define "quality"?

In my 9000ish hours of Air Force flying, about 85% of it was as an instructor and evaluator. I have a pretty good perspective of several different military training programs and would like to respond to your assertion.

 

[SteveC]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

I think it was a sarcastic comment as evidenced by the

smiley. Point being that the military style of training (accelerated, if you will) does work.

 

[ROFCIBC]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

[ QUOTE ]
I think it was a sarcastic comment as evidenced by the

smiley. Point being that the military style of training (accelerated, if you will) does work.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, but just wanted to clear that up.

I'm penning a few thoughts on training. While I never did the CFI thing I did a lot of instructing, with a bunch to pilots who were not qualified in the airplane. Learned a lot of how to, and how not to teach. Saw a massive shift in the philosophy of SAC as it pertained to "instructors" and their qualification and training, all due to a tragedy that killed a crew needlessly.

When I get it finished, I'll post it here.

 

[Heath]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

[ QUOTE ]
I think it was a sarcastic comment as evidenced by the

smiley. Point being that the military style of training (accelerated, if you will) does work.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup! The rolleyes was meant to make it clear that my toungue was inserted firmly into my cheek. I think military training is outstanding, and proof-positive that you can get high quality learning in an accelerated environment, if done properly.

It irks me to hear people condemn an accelerated program just because of the time involved in getting the ratings. That person has to pass the same writtens and practicals, and fly the same number of hours as anyone. And doing it in an accelerated environment takes more work. And many times the retention is BETTER because you get to build on what you learn before you have time to forget it. So the repetition leads to it sticking.

Now, this is not to say that there aren't some who simply teach the tests and shrug off everything else, to their own detriment. But, I think you're just as likely to find those characters in a part 61 self-paced environment as you are in an accelerated academy.

Heath

 

[ROFCIBC]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

[ QUOTE ]
Yup! The rolleyes was meant to make it clear that my toungue was inserted firmly into my cheek. I think military training is outstanding, and proof-positive that you can get high quality learning in an accelerated environment, if done properly.

It irks me to hear people condemn an accelerated program just because of the time involved in getting the ratings. That person has to pass the same writtens and practicals, and fly the same number of hours as anyone. And doing it in an accelerated environment takes more work. And many times the retention is BETTER because you get to build on what you learn before you have time to forget it. So the repetition leads to it sticking.

Now, this is not to say that there aren't some who simply teach the tests and shrug off everything else, to their own detriment. But, I think you're just as likely to find those characters in a part 61 self-paced environment as you are in an accelerated academy.

Heath

[/ QUOTE ]

Heath,

Understood, no harm, no foul.

I always felt there was a difference between "accelerated" and "intense" training.

To me "accelerated" was taking a course of training and compressing it into less time. Usually accomplished by reducing core content or even eliminating some of it.

"Intense" is a course of instruction where you have, to quote the old term, "drink from a fire hose". A course where you mist devote all your time to learning all the material in the course.

Too often "accelerated" is a product of cost cutting. If "X" time can be reduced to something less than "X" then the cost of providing that training goes down. For an airline that means less unproductive time for pilot assets. For a training school it might mean more students, hence more revenue in a given time.

I've seen military training cut in the interests of "filling the pipeline" when the needs are high and assets low. Eventually that shows up in the overall performance and is followed by an increase in training to make up for the loss due to the cuts.

Same with airline training. Reducing course content, training to minimum FAA requirements, making the training department smaller, hence lest costly, increasing more "home study" via computer use and other such things.

While in some cases there is "fat" in training that can be cut. The trick however is to cut the "fat" and not the muscle of the training. A fine line. A difficult balancing act. One that can result in tragedy if not done properly.

 

[kellwolf]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

[ QUOTE ]
I do think a quickie CFI (i.e. all three in two weeks) means there is no way in hec one second is spent on actually learning how to teach flying. It seems to me the gripe in the article (one I strongly agree with) is that some of these CFI programs do nothing to train you to be effective at teaching and passing on knowledge effectively.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it really depends. Are they teaching you the gouge on an examiner or are they teaching you to be a CFI? When you say "two weeks" are we talking five actual days of flying with maybe one or two hours worth of lessons a day or are we talking full on, all day long training for seven days a week? I don't really see the difference in getting it all done in two weeks if you work hard at it than getting in done in a month at a normal pace. It comes down to the quality and type of instruction, not the time it took you to get the rating. If you're being taught the fundamentals of CFIing, then it shouldn't matter if you finish in two weeks or two months. You really won't be able to hone the skills until you get that first student anyway. If the school is training you to pass a certain examiner's checkride, then you're being cheated out of your money.....

 

[FO_SHIZZLE]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

 

[Old Pete]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

I thought it was unprofessional. I don't know Arlynn or Aero-Tech, in fact I have never heard of them before I read this thread. And I have no affiliation with the flight school she disparages.

This article came across to me as a sleazy attack ad masquerading as an article on flight training. Perhaps in this day and age it is common place. (It sure is in political campaigns) But I was always taught not to knock your competitor, because in the end, you still have to convince your customer that you have a quality product or service that will benefit him. Simply smearing your competitor won't ever close a sale and often reflects poorly on yourself and your character. In fact, I once worked for a corporation where the first time you did it you were warned, the second time you were asked to leave.

What Arlynn wants you to believe is that this terribly inept, incompetent applicant is not only typical of the pilots produced by the flight school she slams, but that her inability to pass a test "which is compiled directly from FAA Private Pilot questions" is not her fault but "Any blame for that should be laid directly on her instructors and the flight school for which they worked."

That's absurd. The blame for an applicant's inability to answer basic private pilot questions rests squarely on that applicant's shoulders. Why this particular applicant was not better prepared for her interview (assuming everything Arlynn claims is factual) I'm not going to speculate, but it certainly was not the fault of the flight school she graduated from 12 months earlier.

Don't misunderstand me. I think there is a legitimate topic to be discussed concerning what type and methods of training is best. And I have already read a few very good threads on this forum. But this article does not do that. In fact, I think Arlynn does a poor job of articulating how her flight school teaches and why a prospective student should attend. Her attitude is a real "turn off" to me and would make me far less inclined to become a student at her flight school and I am surprised that AOPA published this.

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

[ QUOTE ]
So this person's first rating to her private certificate was multi-engine land?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, some schools are now teaching the private first then the multi right after. This way they can do all the certs/ratings and log multi time. Then you can graduate with 50 to 100 hrs multi.
This is how I did it and am now using the Seminole for my instrument.

Its better to use a multi for your instrument anyway, even if you didn't do it that way. At least IMHO.

 

[tgrayson]

Re: \"Those who can\'t, period\"

Comment on how smart and correct that seems to you and how you intend to incorporate it into your flying...Emphasize that you really value their opinion and/or extensive knowledge.

Wise advice. (And try to sound sincere.)

 

[flyguy]

Re: "Those who can't, period"

Doug,

So you failed a checkride you probably didn't deserve to fail. If you don't mind me asking, how did you explain that in your airline interviews? (they did ask about them right?) The reason I ask is because I failed my private and feel the examiner was unreasonable. If asked about it and I say that I deserved to pass and the examiner was a dick (of course I wouldn't use those exact words), they will think that I do not take responsibility for my actions and pass the blame onto others. But to say otherwise would be a lie, and I'd have to make up some canned story about how I take full responsibility and it was a learning experience bla bla bla....and they'll probably see right through it. Anybody have any suggestions?