Woman in the industry

[avbug]

Rotor wing offers fewer entry-level jobs that don't involve flight instructing than a pilot embarking on a fixed wing career, but the positions are out there. Truly it's a tragedy that some of the lowest paid positions, and those involving the least experience, are instructing jobs. Pilots teaching other pilots ought to be experienced pilots, but what we have in aviation is what I like to call a heritage of inexperience; low-time no-experience pilots teaching new pilots, who then turn around, having no more experience than their own instructor, and teach others. It's a vicious cycle into which misinterpretations, misunderstanding, lack of information, and other undesirable byproducts of the process are wrought.

 

Until instructor positions are to be had that pay as well as field jobs, instructor positions will remain the domain of entry level employment.

 

I really hate to hear from a pilot "but that's what I was taught." Never the less, I hear it all the time. I don't care about what you were taught: I care about what you know, and how you can apply it. If you were taught to jump off a cliff, do you know not to do it? Without experience, one can only fall back on what one has been taught, has read, or been told. One doesn't know, otherwise.

 

As an example, the FAA currently teaches that "ice bridging" in freezing conditions over inflatable "boots" on deice surfaces doesn't occur. I beg to differ, but it's based on practical experience in which I've seen it many times. The FAA's current party-line is that it's a myth. Having flown atmospheric research flights and having tested it and observed it first hand, I know that's not true, but the person reading current FAA literature on the subject might think differently. That individual might believe he or she is "informed," but it's bad information.

 

I've met pilots who were quite confident in what they'd seen in a simulator, but who had not a clue about reality. We see it regularly with pilots who have only flown under the hood doing simulated instrument flight, but who haven't been in the actual instrument conditions. Very different, and potentially very disorienting, whereas flight under the hood is very straight forward for most people. Not so much in the clouds. Therein lies the difference between theory and reality, and is where the rubber meets the proverbial road.

 

I've always been a loud, strong advocate of not building hours. I hate the term with a passion. If you want to build hours, then falsify your logbook. Write it in there. It's all hours are worth. Hours mean nothing. Experience is everything.

 

Two pilots can fly the same hour; one comes away with an hour of experience, and one with an hour of time. Two instructors can spend a year at a flight school, and one comes away with a thousand hours of riding around the pattern logging time, while the other comes away richly enhanced and better developed as a teacher, with a greater understanding of cockpit interdynamics, and more maturity behind the stick. Hours don't equate to experience.

 

If one wishes to look at instructing as a rite of passage, something to be endured, that is a required step along the way, they may certainly do so, much like someone who spends their waking 9-5 working hours watching the clock. I found instructing full time to be intensely personal, exhausting in it's demand for attention to the student, and quite rewarding. When not actually with a student, I built exquisitely detailed models for use during ground instruction, and other visual aids. I printed certificates to issue to students as they progressed through their training. I invested a lot of my own time meeting with students to cover problem areas, including countless lunches and dinners with students, and extended preflight and post flight time. None of it was a drag, none of it was a burden. I made it my mission in life, and didn't view it as something to be endured until a "real" job came along. I took it very seriously, and for me, it was my real job.

 

135 flying is what it is. Utility flying is what it is. No more.

 

My first 135 job felt like a big step. We had about 40 or so pilots, and I felt as though I had a real handle on aviation. After all, I'd been instructing full time. As I spoke with others, however, I realized they were all instructors too; every one of them had been an instructor full time. I discovered an important distinction, however: most of them had viewed their instruction time as a sort of prison into which they were trapped until able to find a "real" job. I became friends with a new hire. I was sent out to evaluate him. He had no instructor certificate, and no instruction experience. He arrived in his own aircraft. He didn't fly particularly well, but he was hired, and later went on to become the Chief Pilot at another company, down the line. He did fine.

 

I didn't instruct as an entry level pilot. I went out into the field and did other things; I didn't begin instructing until a number of years later...and I didn't get my instrument rating until I decided to begin instructing. I just flew. And turned wrenches.

 

I've had the mispleasure of flying with instructors who really didn't want to be there. It showed.

 

If you spend your career thinking of where you could be, rather than focusing on where you are, it may be an unpleasant career. I've often been asked about my favorite aircraft, and I always respond the same: it's whatever I'm being paid to fly right now. Favorite job? What I'm doing right now, whatever that is, whenever that is. Favorite place to be? Here, of course.

 

Many moons ago I opined to an examiner that the cub I was flying had a built-in headwind. Way too slow. He looked at me with a puzzled expression for a few moments, then asked "does it matter how long it takes you to get there if you're happy where you are?" I never complained about that again. He was right.

 

He still is.

 

Patience.

[eagle5]

...Hours mean nothing. Experience is everything

 

If a 150hr "commercial only" pilot can get a job flying a 206, then it seems experience doesn't mean very much either!

 

JJ, you've opened up Pandora's box here, so if you want to leave us any ounce of hope,...please!,...for the love of god, tell us,...HOW DID SHE GET THAT JOB!?

[Roondog]

Yo know what this post needs, is some picture of women in the industry. Peferably with their machines.

[gary-mike]

Great post avbug! I actually copied it to a word doc for future reference, hope you don't mind. I did keep your name intact (I'm not one to plagerize anothers words of wisdom).

[jjsemperfi]

Well as my fiancee always says, have a plan. If we never talked about the future, the next job, how to get there, the best ways to get there, what I need to do know to get there, chances are, you'll be unprepared when you get there. It doesn't mean you don't like where you're at, it just means you aspire for more. Which I don't think is a bad thing.

[Mikemv]

Rotor wing offers fewer entry-level jobs that don't involve flight instructing than a pilot embarking on a fixed wing career, but the positions are out there. Truly it's a tragedy that some of the lowest paid positions, and those involving the least experience, are instructing jobs. Pilots teaching other pilots ought to be experienced pilots, but what we have in aviation is what I like to call a heritage of inexperience; low-time no-experience pilots teaching new pilots, who then turn around, having no more experience than their own instructor, and teach others. It's a vicious cycle into which misinterpretations, misunderstanding, lack of information, and other undesirable byproducts of the process are wrought.

 

Until instructor positions are to be had that pay as well as field jobs, instructor positions will remain the domain of entry level employment.

 

I really hate to hear from a pilot "but that's what I was taught." Never the less, I hear it all the time. I don't care about what you were taught: I care about what you know, and how you can apply it. If you were taught to jump off a cliff, do you know not to do it? Without experience, one can only fall back on what one has been taught, has read, or been told. One doesn't know, otherwise.

 

As an example, the FAA currently teaches that "ice bridging" in freezing conditions over inflatable "boots" on deice surfaces doesn't occur. I beg to differ, but it's based on practical experience in which I've seen it many times. The FAA's current party-line is that it's a myth. Having flown atmospheric research flights and having tested it and observed it first hand, I know that's not true, but the person reading current FAA literature on the subject might think differently. That individual might believe he or she is "informed," but it's bad information.

 

I've met pilots who were quite confident in what they'd seen in a simulator, but who had not a clue about reality. We see it regularly with pilots who have only flown under the hood doing simulated instrument flight, but who haven't been in the actual instrument conditions. Very different, and potentially very disorienting, whereas flight under the hood is very straight forward for most people. Not so much in the clouds. Therein lies the difference between theory and reality, and is where the rubber meets the proverbial road.

 

I've always been a loud, strong advocate of not building hours. I hate the term with a passion. If you want to build hours, then falsify your logbook. Write it in there. It's all hours are worth. Hours mean nothing. Experience is everything.

 

Two pilots can fly the same hour; one comes away with an hour of experience, and one with an hour of time. Two instructors can spend a year at a flight school, and one comes away with a thousand hours of riding around the pattern logging time, while the other comes away richly enhanced and better developed as a teacher, with a greater understanding of cockpit interdynamics, and more maturity behind the stick. Hours don't equate to experience.

 

If one wishes to look at instructing as a rite of passage, something to be endured, that is a required step along the way, they may certainly do so, much like someone who spends their waking 9-5 working hours watching the clock. I found instructing full time to be intensely personal, exhausting in it's demand for attention to the student, and quite rewarding. When not actually with a student, I built exquisitely detailed models for use during ground instruction, and other visual aids. I printed certificates to issue to students as they progressed through their training. I invested a lot of my own time meeting with students to cover problem areas, including countless lunches and dinners with students, and extended preflight and post flight time. None of it was a drag, none of it was a burden. I made it my mission in life, and didn't view it as something to be endured until a "real" job came along. I took it very seriously, and for me, it was my real job.

 

135 flying is what it is. Utility flying is what it is. No more.

 

My first 135 job felt like a big step. We had about 40 or so pilots, and I felt as though I had a real handle on aviation. After all, I'd been instructing full time. As I spoke with others, however, I realized they were all instructors too; every one of them had been an instructor full time. I discovered an important distinction, however: most of them had viewed their instruction time as a sort of prison into which they were trapped until able to find a "real" job. I became friends with a new hire. I was sent out to evaluate him. He had no instructor certificate, and no instruction experience. He arrived in his own aircraft. He didn't fly particularly well, but he was hired, and later went on to become the Chief Pilot at another company, down the line. He did fine.

 

I didn't instruct as an entry level pilot. I went out into the field and did other things; I didn't begin instructing until a number of years later...and I didn't get my instrument rating until I decided to begin instructing. I just flew. And turned wrenches.

 

I've had the mispleasure of flying with instructors who really didn't want to be there. It showed.

 

If you spend your career thinking of where you could be, rather than focusing on where you are, it may be an unpleasant career. I've often been asked about my favorite aircraft, and I always respond the same: it's whatever I'm being paid to fly right now. Favorite job? What I'm doing right now, whatever that is, whenever that is. Favorite place to be? Here, of course.

 

Many moons ago I opined to an examiner that the cub I was flying had a built-in headwind. Way too slow. He looked at me with a puzzled expression for a few moments, then asked "does it matter how long it takes you to get there if you're happy where you are?" I never complained about that again. He was right.

 

He still is.

 

Patience.

 

Avbug,

 

Thank you for bringing your wisdom and experience forward in this post.

 

It is one of the best post ever on VR!

 

And, for you guys attending Heli Success, wait until you hear Janey Foster speak!

 

Mike

[gary-mike]

As for the original topic, I understand how our culture works wether I agree with it or not. I have yet to think of what job flying a helicopter there is that one sex race ect. couldn't do that the other could though? After all, you are manipulating the controls, not trying to bench press the dang thing. Maybe some companies don't have separate quarters or something, IDK.

Edited October 4, 2012 by gary-mike

[pilot#476398]

...most of them had viewed their instruction time as a sort of prison into which they were trapped until able to find a "real" job.

 

 

That's certainly understandable! However, if you don't really WANT instruct, but you feel like you HAVE to because its the only job you could get, think of it this way:

 

Instructing is a way of proving to employers that you know what you're doing!

[Flying Pig]

There is the old saying (I did NOT make it up if its the first time youve heard it)

 

Do you have 1000 hours, or do you have 1 hour 1000 times.

[Spike]

And, for you guys attending Heli Success, wait until you hear Janey Foster speak!

 

Years ago, while running a flight school, a distinguished lady came to see me about changing her life. If I remember correctly, at the time, she was struggling in the Advertising /Marketing Industry and wanted out. From the get go, she was professional in her demeanor and knew what she wanted. I subsequently assigned her to another female CFI on staff and she began her journey in this industry. During her training, I split for another gig. Sometime thereafter, I heard my former job as DO was eventually taken over by this student while she was just a private pilot! Impressive…. This student was none other than Ms. Janie Foster….

[Spike]

Instructing is a way of proving to employers that you know what you're doing!

 

Amongst other things, flight instruction provides you with an opportunity to save your ass by getting out of a bad situation which the student put you in. Employers know, by you saving your ass, by association, you saved the machine as well. And, the fact is, the “bad situation” in not simulated or performed. It’s real and teaches the CFI valuable lessons. What other kind of flying job can you say this?

[Rupert]

In my experience, women generally fly better and more safely than men. (I trained one of the first seven women to fly for the military, back in the early 1970's.) It makes sense to hire a low-time female pilot before she gets too hireable.