Improving the Pilot Pool

[Dynamic Rollover]

To find the solution, you must first fully understand the perceived problem.

 

 

Is there a problem with the current pool of pilots or is that your perception?

 

According to the information I located online, helicopter accidents are actually on the decline and have been lower in the past few years than any other time in history. This is quite an accomplishment considering the dramatic increase of helicopter traffic over the past ten years.

 

http://www.griffin-helicopters.co.uk/accidentstatsmonthyear.asp

 

Is the industry attracting qualified candidates?

 

Surprisingly, yes. Even with high training costs, low pay, lack of jobs and undesirable locations…People still have a drive to fly helicopters. Like you said, the pool has no shortage of 1,000-hour pilots. The pilots that are not truly dedicated to this profession will be naturally weeded out. In general, I feel new pilots are required to be more dedicated than their predecessors.

 

We are in an unusually industry. In no other profession will you find the "new guys" instructing the "new guys" and this will always be a hurdle for our line of work. It is not the responsibility of the FAA or flight schools to hand your company qualified pilots. Each license and rating is just a minimum competency requirement. If flight schools ever train pilots up to your operations expectations, your expectations are too low. Tickets & ratings are just a "license to learn" and it is up to individuals (with employer) to polish their pilot skills for the given mission. No employer in any line of work is interested in bettering employees for possible employment elsewhere.

 

Are your expectations too high for the quality of your operation?

 

If you are not happy with your operation's current and prospective pilot pool, you should look inward first. Quality pilots are out there and they are attracted to quality compensation & quality working conditions. If your operation cannot offer this, you need to surrender to the fact that you will be a training ground for lower caliber pilots looking to better themselves in order to move on.

 

Why did you wait to see a problem before you "tightened up your interview process, strengthened your training program, and added a higher level of scrutiny on our 135 check rides"? Is there an issue in your organization due to a lacked of training or scrutiny in the past? Is your operation willing to spend the additional money in training to better your staff or will you let go of any pilot not meeting your new "higher level of scrutiny"? Strong statements? Yes.

 

Sure there will always be employees that are less desirable in any profession, but you are painting with a very broad brush…It cost approximately 80K of a pilot's own money to get trained. Many new pilots struggle and are lucky to make close to the same wage as a shift manager at McDonalds. There are still pilots willing to "Beg, Borrow, but not steal" to find any fly job that actually pays the bills. You think things are bad now, just wait until the pendulum swings and there isn't even a surplus of 1,000-hour pilots.

 

I think you mean well, but I suggest you don't expect anything for free, hire the best pilots your operation can afford and supply the training needed to keep everyone safe. Thats all any operator can do.

[Goldy]

Could you elaborate?

 

Butters- He is speaking of the Robinson Blade AD and the daily inspection of main rotor blade bond lines that is required.

[gary-mike]

How many companies offer a ride along, or "day in the life of..." Or better yet, which ones do and what are the requirements? (student pilot, already rated, medical ect.) May be something the industry could implement to help give direction to students and improve their applicants. As it is now, A student knows, or at least should know, there are limited jobs out there, and they are going to go for whatever they can get. Training could be focused more for students that have a mentor and a destination for where they want to be. Yes the basics need to be mastered and you need to be professional but, a student is going to be more focused when they have a goal to work towards. If the goal tends to be nothing more than hours required, time in type, and certifications, then many students probably feel that they are doing what is right.

Edited February 28, 2012 by gary-mike

[rollthbns]

To find the solution, you must first fully understand the perceived problem.

 

 

Is there a problem with the current pool of pilots or is that your perception?

 

According to the information I located online, helicopter accidents are actually on the decline and have been lower in the past few years than any other time in history. This is quite an accomplishment considering the dramatic increase of helicopter traffic over the past ten years.

 

http://www.griffin-h...tsmonthyear.asp

 

Is the industry attracting qualified candidates?

 

Surprisingly, yes. Even with high training costs, low pay, lack of jobs and undesirable locations…People still have a drive to fly helicopters. Like you said, the pool has no shortage of 1,000-hour pilots. The pilots that are not truly dedicated to this profession will be naturally weeded out. In general, I feel new pilots are required to be more dedicated than their predecessors.

 

We are in an unusually industry. In no other profession will you find the "new guys" instructing the "new guys" and this will always be a hurdle for our line of work. It is not the responsibility of the FAA or flight schools to hand your company qualified pilots. Each license and rating is just a minimum competency requirement. If flight schools ever train pilots up to your operations expectations, your expectations are too low. Tickets & ratings are just a "license to learn" and it is up to individuals (with employer) to polish their pilot skills for the given mission. No employer in any line of work is interested in bettering employees for possible employment elsewhere.

 

Are your expectations too high for the quality of your operation?

 

If you are not happy with your operation's current and prospective pilot pool, you should look inward first. Quality pilots are out there and they are attracted to quality compensation & quality working conditions. If your operation cannot offer this, you need to surrender to the fact that you will be a training ground for lower caliber pilots looking to better themselves in order to move on.

 

Why did you wait to see a problem before you "tightened up your interview process, strengthened your training program, and added a higher level of scrutiny on our 135 check rides"? Is there an issue in your organization due to a lacked of training or scrutiny in the past? Is your operation willing to spend the additional money in training to better your staff or will you let go of any pilot not meeting your new "higher level of scrutiny"? Strong statements? Yes.

 

Sure there will always be employees that are less desirable in any profession, but you are painting with a very broad brush…It cost approximately 80K of a pilot's own money to get trained. Many new pilots struggle and are lucky to make close to the same wage as a shift manager at McDonalds. There are still pilots willing to "Beg, Borrow, but not steal" to find any fly job that actually pays the bills. You think things are bad now, just wait until the pendulum swings and there isn't even a surplus of 1,000-hour pilots.

 

I think you mean well, but I suggest you don't expect anything for free, hire the best pilots your operation can afford and supply the training needed to keep everyone safe. Thats all any operator can do.

 

I could not disagree more with many of the the comments in this post. It is possible that through the lack of inflection, tone and context, or even my inability to articulate, you missed what was being said in the original post.

 

There is absolutely a concern with the pool of pilots that are just now coming into the first tier of the job market. Can I find excellent people to fill my spots? Absolutely, and we do. Accident data is not the barometer by which you can gauge the level of professionalism that we are seeing.

 

Expectations are extremely high, and certainly must remain high for anyone in this industry. It is on the individual pilots to meet those expectations. Your certificate is not a union card, and it entitles you to nothing when it comes to the job search. The industry has long been "pay to play" and will always be that way. Part of the "pay" has little to do with finances.

 

This discussion was initiated to discuss ways to increase professionalism and quality for those pilots learning now. When someone comes in for an interview who has been an active CFI, they should exhibit a high level of basic knowledge. If this is lacking, what is this candidate giving to their students? Our interview panel can tell you, knowledge is lacking.

 

That is the bottom line. Improving the quality of new pilots coming into the first tier jobs in this industry. My hope is that some will jump in and be a part of the solution, as many have. Improvement is a process to which there should be no end.

[Flying Pig]

I've always been of the opinion that one should make it a goal to become an expert in whatever you fly. If you're training for a private pilot license then study the manual and know the aircraft inside and out. I felt like a lot of guys during my training, including the CFIs teaching me, only wanted to accomplish training to the standard. If it was needed to pass a checkride that's all we went over. Why wouldn't you want to go further? The only way I was able to get more out of my training was by hanging around the lounge and BSing with the CFIs, because it certainly wasn't worked into their curriculum.

 

I agree with this post. I find this to be one of the items I point out in ground schools. You need to take an interest in your training and where you want to go with it. I think I have a fair amount of knowledge to pass on beyond your average new CFI simply because of my full time job. But its not something I can really pass on to you necessarily because you need to master the PTS way of doing things before we can move on to other things. Example. The way I am taught to do autos isnt something you can teach a student working towards one of their ratings. But you can definitely go to a school and pay to learn it. Now....if you want to pay for that extra training by all means we can. But with limited funds, as most students have, I would be doing you a disservice by teaching to anything BUT the PTS. I dont own the aircraft, so its not up to me.

When working as a CFI I get paid by the hour or the flight. My job is to get you to the point where you can meet the FAA PTS standard and pass a checkride in the shortest amount of time possible. It is up to the examiner to determine that I have done that as a CFI. The only way you will get better is to pay for advanced training and study and learn on your own. Now, I have no issues with hanging out in the lounge eating my lunch talking with a student or answering questions. If Im not doing anything, I love sitting around talking with new students. But dont try and score a free two hours of ground. I know the difference. I have an aquaintance who is a well known Psychologits. His biggest complaint is people trying to get a free Psych assessment out of him by trying to disguise it as a casual conversation!

But as a Private Pilot, if you want to sit at the next table over and listen in on my ground lesson with a Commercial student, go right a head. Just dont interput the lesson that guy/gal is paying for. Like what was said in this post, become the master of the aircraft. Youd be surprised how much you can learn about aviation just by reading and understanding the POH and the AIM!

 

I just see it as an unrealistic expectation that someone or some organization will form that will somehow start teaching pilots more advanced skills or take an interest in just training pilots to make them more competitive so they can run off and go to work for someone else beyond what is already out there. AOPA (yes, I know its an airplane organization but they have great info) FAASafety, going to CFI seminars offered by the FAA. You dont have to be a CFI to go to the free CFI workshops they offer. Online courses, the Wings program. But when it comes to training, it seems with new pilots, if they cant put it in their log book and have it count towards their total time, they arent interested.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Flying Pig

[Hotdogs]

In every aspect of Army flight training, they have recently cut down the flight hours afforded to students, as well as the oral time with instructors. This results in simply too much information being pushed onto a student, and unfortunately they must prioritize.

 

That's probably not a fair comparision. The military has extra requirements that students are required to learn. Each service has it's own operating rules, each command has it's own operating procedures, and that's in addition to all the FAA regs that are required. You throw in the fact that we go straight into turbines, do more dynamic stuff at a faster pace, (NVGs, CALs, sling loads, forms). The level of knowledge required is not on the same playing field. You could probably cut out a lot of stuff from Army or Navy/Marine flight school and still have a proficient instrument rated helo pilot at the end. Add in the fact that they're all college grads, commissioned officers, usually a little older and mature, and surrounded by uber-type-A personalities, may end up in hot LZ in the near future (frequently emphasized), the expectations and comparisons are not the same. Not to mention the fact that we get paid to learn (big factor) and it takes a lot of work and sacrifice to get there in the first place.

[Pohi]

Oh God, this isn't gonna turn into a mil-vs-civi thread like you see on the other forums several times a day is it?

[Hotdogs]

Oh God, this isn't gonna turn into a mil-vs-civi thread like you see on the other forums several times a day is it?

 

Haha, no, I hope not. I'm merely pointing out there are different motivational factors and underlying issues that make that comparison not as accurate for both sides.

[Azhigher]

It is my belief that when it ccomes to flying attitude is the primary indicator of how well you'll do and how far you go. Having said that, I wonder what affect (If any) the big credit crunch of 2008-9 had on the pilot pool. With credit so hard to come by, funding was a major issue and a lot of candidates that really wanted to fly unfortunately couldn't find the money to do so. At least at my school it seemed like a bigger and bigger slice of the students were people taking advantage of a GI bill. I wonder if having uncle sam foot a large portion of the bill affected their attitude?

 

((Disclaimer)) One of my very best students was using a GI bill and had an amazing attitude

 

Or it could be that part of "Generation Me" is making their way into the biz and taking their attitude with them. (This coming from someone who's young enough to still be included in that special bunch)

[gary-mike]

Have we, or can we get down to the real underlying problem here? Seriously, I am ready to take some pretty great risks to follow my dreams.

 

I think that FITS, SBT, HOTS, ADM,SRM, SA, ect are all great step in improving training. It is frustrating to see that many people are against it, As a student, (free ground school and self study...so far), I think that many are underestimating their students capabilities and there fore hindering further progression. To a new student, these methods may as well be the way it always was, or at least should have been.

 

In my current job I have conducted performance analysis on units AF wide, some at the MAJCOM level, and some more at a base, or wing level. What Dynamic Rollover was saying (IMO) was you need to really get to the root of the problem. Questions in his post were some I would have put on a survey if I was nothing more than an outsider looking in. (which by the way is the only way to get raw data (outsider looking in)). It is a proven method, the military wouldn't use it if it wasn't. If you want a fix to the problem, first find the TRUE root of the problem, determine the best fix, build a solution, and implement it. If it involves building new curriculum, so be it, just know that if you are teaching it is your responsibility to know it is there and offer it! Trust me students want the most bang for their buck, and if they don't give a sh!t, better chances for those that do.

[gary-mike]

It is my belief that when it ccomes to flying attitude is the primary indicator of how well you'll do and how far you go. Having said that, I wonder what affect (If any) the big credit crunch of 2008-9 had on the pilot pool. With credit so hard to come by, funding was a major issue and a lot of candidates that really wanted to fly unfortunately couldn't find the money to do so. At least at my school it seemed like a bigger and bigger slice of the students were people taking advantage of a GI bill. I wonder if having uncle sam foot a large portion of the bill affected their attitude?

 

((Disclaimer)) One of my very best students was using a GI bill and had an amazing attitude

 

Or it could be that part of "Generation Me" is making their way into the biz and taking their attitude with them. (This coming from someone who's young enough to still be included in that special bunch)

 

AZ,

 

I don't think it has to do with the VA footing the bill, I may be wrong though. When dealing with the military folks, I think it is more of an issue of "I fought for my country and now my country will love and support me" type attitude. This is simply not true and no military member should feel this way. (remember Vietnam vets getting spit on?) We all serve because we wanted too, nobody forced us to do it. For the most part our days serving have been our proudest moments in our lives. My views may differ from others, but I think that I speak for the majority. Granted there are a few that made it through one enlistment and couldn't hack it (probably on the verge of getting the boot, and squeaked bye with their gi bill). But for the most part, military folks have many attributes to provide such as integrity, punctuality, drive, determination, knowledge, ect... Why do you think vets already have a foot in the door for so many jobs? (outside this industry of course).

 

I don't want to turn this into a mil vs civ thread by any means but, please tell me that our troops are going out and making military folks look unprofessional by any means. That is the first and foremost thing we train to be is professional.

 

By the way, there are many military going towards civilian training for various reasons. Not everyone made the age cut off, (to focused on the mission at hand, no time for school due to 14hr shifts and deployments, and family, learned about the program too late...(yeah excuses, but have you lived through them?))

 

You know what, I could wright a book about this but, I have to go serve my country in the morning. My point is, the vets are not the problem with this industry, especially if you are bringing up the topic of professionalism.

 

edit: sorry AZ, I wasn't trying to direct this all towards your post, it just helped spark my creative writing.

Edited March 1, 2012 by gary-mike

[rjl2001]

at my school it seemed like a bigger and bigger slice of the students were people taking advantage of a GI bill. I wonder if having uncle sam foot a large portion of the bill affected their attitude?

 

((Disclaimer)) One of my very best students was using a GI bill and had an amazing attitude

 

I've often asked myself this same question. Having had lots of fellow GI Bill users as classmates, more than one person has told me in no uncertain terms that they were merely pursuing the training because they knew it would be paid for and thought it looked 'cool'. Much like RagMan mentioned in an earlier post. I'm not saying those people can't change their mind, decide they love flying and that they will put forth the effort needed to be a competent professional pilot. In all honestly though, for each of those GI Bill users who exhibit that attitude, I've also met at least one civilian who for whatever reason had the same attitude. I suppose the difference is the civilian is more likely to drop out of training quicker. So I think there's just that percentage in every group of people who won't take the training as seriously or put forth as much effort as they should.

 

Sort of related, I just had a conversation with a classmate today who told me there was not one but at least two others at our school who were at ~150hrs. to get their private certificate (hearsay). I can appreciate extenuating circumstances, but apparently there were none in these cases. Probably these individuals circumstances are none of my business, but it did bring up the question of how I would handle that as an instructor. None of your other students have had any issues during private, but you have one or two who are taking two or three times longer to complete. They demonstrate a lack of motivation, and one student had one or two seperate runway incursions during one of their solo flights in the pattern. My thinking was that at some point I may have the conversation with them asking if it is something they truly wish to pursue further. Perhaps there are some people that are not as well suited for the job as others. I'm thinking I would do that entirely with the student's best interest in mind.

[Pohi]

In an ideal world, if somebody lacked the ability to be a good pilot they could be encouraged to save their money and do something else.

 

I have only seen this happen in 2-3 extreme cases. In the end, it's the students choice to continue or not, and it's rare to see a school not want to take their money. I've taught people that had no business being in the air, but to the best of my knowledge there isn't a place where the instructor has any input or opinion as to how good of a pilot the person will be. Only if they can fly to the standards or not at the time of their checkride.

[Spike]

Have we, or can we get down to the real underlying problem here? Seriously, I am ready to take some pretty great risks to follow my dreams.

 

In my opinion,

 

You are the only one who can determine what occurs during your training. You get out of it what you put into it. The one thing which must be understood is; you are the customer and footing the bill. This means, if you believe you are not getting straight answers from your flight school then you need to speak up. Simply put, mentorship should not come from the internet. It should come from the people you have entrusted with your dreams….. And, your cash…….

 

I think that FITS, SBT, HOTS, ADM,SRM, SA, ect are all great step in improving training. It is frustrating to see that many people are against it, As a student, (free ground school and self study...so far), I think that many are underestimating their students capabilities and there fore hindering further progression. To a new student, these methods may as well be the way it always was, or at least should have been.

 

Again in my opinion,

 

Let’s be clear. I’m not against the alphabet soup… However, understand the alphabet soup is not new. It just has been defined as deficiencies….

 

Sometime ago, some fight schools utilized these methods without having them defined nor were they listed as pertinent subject matters. These methods were considered the “culture” (for a lack of a better word) which the student would absorb through the training and subsequently pass on. What happened over time is up for speculation, but for whatever reason, there now appears a need to; not only define these methods, but to list them as specific subject material as well. The results of the soup are yet to be seen…..

 

Again, in my opinion, the underlying problem is:

 

1. As a business practice, flight schools train to pass the test (albeit not all flight schools).

2. DPE’s are not standardized.

3. Gen-Y, entitlement culture.

 

Sidebar: Free ground school? Err…. Red flag…….

Edited March 1, 2012 by Spike

[Azhigher]

 

edit: sorry AZ, I wasn't trying to direct this all towards your post, it just helped spark my creative writing.

 

Ha, no worries man. In hindsight I think a better way of stating my theory is that regardless of who exactly is funding your training, whether it's a GI bill OR rich parents, someone else's home equity etc. If you are not the one putting up the money out of pocket or from savings, I wonder if your attitude will be different from the student who is getting under a mountain of debt in their own name.

 

Again, in my opinion, the underlying problem is:

 

1. As a business practice, flight schools train to pass the test (albeit not all flight schools).

2. DPE’s are not standardized.

3. Gen-Y, entitlement culture.

 

 

I think you're spot on with those points. You'd think that at least the Gen-Y / Gen-Me folks would get weeded out by landing their first CFI job, but I guess timing is everything in some situations.

[gary-mike]

Again, in my opinion, the underlying problem is:

 

1. As a business practice, flight schools train to pass the test (albeit not all flight schools).

2. DPE’s are not standardized.

3. Gen-Y, entitlement culture.

 

Sidebar: Free ground school? Err…. Red flag…….

 

I think that covers about all the different directions this thread has gone in.

 

About the ground school, red flag? I will be going over it again once enrolled as a real student, only I will have a better understanding of the material, and hopefully it won't take as long. My intentions are to be one of (evidently) the few that put forth the extra effort to learn as much as I can.

 

Oh yeah, Once I do have an instructor, I plan on listening to him/her and trust what is said face to face over what I read on here. I do enjoy reading what the experienced pilots views are, and knowledge they share.

 

Thanks for having the patience to put up with this newbie

[rick1128]

This is simply not true and no military member should feel this way. (remember Vietnam vets getting spit on?) We all serve because we wanted too, nobody forced us to do it. For the most part our days serving have been our proudest moments in our lives.

 

Unfortunately during Viet Nam, the majority didn't have a choice. With the draft, you got called up and sent wherever. Which made the spit incidents even more painful.

[Spike]

About the ground school, red flag? I will be going over it again once enrolled as a real student, only I will have a better understanding of the material, and hopefully it won't take as long. My intentions are to be one of (evidently) the few that put forth the extra effort to learn as much as I can.

 

Okay… Thanks for clearing that up. Pretty much anything in this business has a dollar amount attached to it. Anytime the word “free” is mentioned, it should send up a red flag. Furthermore, even though the information here at VR is free, if it’s bad information, you’ll pay. One way or another……

 

In any case, it would appear you’re in-it-to-win-it so keep at it and you’ll do fine….

[colberc1]

 

 

That's probably not a fair comparision. The military has extra requirements that students are required to learn. Each service has it's own operating rules, each command has it's own operating procedures, and that's in addition to all the FAA regs that are required. You throw in the fact that we go straight into turbines, do more dynamic stuff at a faster pace, (NVGs, CALs, sling loads, forms). The level of knowledge required is not on the same playing field. You could probably cut out a lot of stuff from Army or Navy/Marine flight school and still have a proficient instrument rated helo pilot at the end. Add in the fact that they're all college grads, commissioned officers, usually a little older and mature, and surrounded by uber-type-A personalities, may end up in hot LZ in the near future (frequently emphasized), the expectations and comparisons are not the same. Not to mention the fact that we get paid to learn (big factor) and it takes a lot of work and sacrifice to get there in the first place.

 

I'm not saying the military doesn't provide good pilots, or that they are not motivated. What I am saying is you have x amount of time to learn x material. It is a lot, and its usually all you can do to keep up, you often don't have the time to learn extra or non-testable information.

[zippiesdrainage]

I'm currently a CFII instructor, and I agree that most schools could be teaching more and providing a deeper understanding of the material. However, for the Joe-Schmo student, you're already looking at $100,000 in school debts (plus or minus). It's a fine line to walk to give the students what they need vs what they should know, and every step over that line has to come out of their pocket. I agree whole-hearted that we need to not train students to simply pass tests, but we have to be very careful about what's necessary.

 

As an example, when I took my checkride for my Instrument-Instructor rating, the DPE told me:

"I'm passing you because I think you'll be safe up there, I don't expect you to be the best Instrument Instrutor pilot out there by passing you. You'll be learning as you go and becoming better, this is just permission to begin teaching yourself."

 

There are some things that you have to teach yourself, and if someone came out of school knowing everything that a guy whose been in the industry for 40 years, he wouldn't know which way is up and he would be horribly in debt. What I'm getting at, is that you have to be careful deciding what is in the best interest of the student and what is just going to waste his time and money.

[SBuzzkill]

I'm not saying the military doesn't provide good pilots, or that they are not motivated. What I am saying is you have x amount of time to learn x material. It is a lot, and its usually all you can do to keep up, you often don't have the time to learn extra or non-testable information.

 

Tell that to the PCs in my troop. You'll get your ass handed to you with non-testable information. We may not have the time in flight school to learn that stuff, but that's why I sit around the orderly room and study.

Edited March 6, 2012 by SBuzzkill