A challenge for the CFI's

[nsdqjr]

Howdy folks. I'm a CFI and I like to read the forums here and on the other helicopter websites and see what's on everyones mind, every so often throw my 2 cents in for kicks and giggles. I've seen some things as of late on all the forums that concern and irritate me quite a bit. I'm talking about CFI responsibility and accountability.

 

If you look in the flight school forum here you'll see all kinds of pretty good questions. Most recently was a question about the Windmill Brake State. In the forum the poster asks a question and is told by several people "Oh you don't need to know that." Even at the school I teach at, I have heard instructors tell students," Oh that's Commercial level knowledge", and move on without answering the students question. I find this totally unacceptable. Every flight school out there has a career pilot program or something similar, and they take for granted that a student is going to stick around for the entire program. Some do and some do not. I give every single student ALL of the knowledge I possess about every subject that I teach, from day one, and I do expect them to be proficient before I will sign them off.

 

This accomplishes a couple things: First, I know that if one of my students passes his PPL and leaves before finishing another rating or certificate, that I have equipped him, to the best of my ability, with everything he'll need to know out there on his own. Do I know everything? No, of course I don't, my CFI books are constantly being updated as I learn more, but I give my students everything I have. As a CFI I feel that the students life is very much my responsibility, now and in the future. If I had a student die as a result of not teaching them "Commercial Level Knowledge" I would be grossly negligent, and I believe his death would be on my shoulders. I don't want that, so I teach it all.

 

Secondly, In 700+ hours of instructing, I've never had a student fail the written or a checkride. People will give you what you expect. Expect more and demand more, and your students will perform. It makes every single checkride that much easier, and with each pass comes additional confidence. It also creates better CFI's, which is exactly what this industry needs.

 

CFI's out there, teach the knowledge, all of it, and sleep well at night when that brand new Private Pilot who was supposed to stick around didn't.

 

Students out there, DEMAND the answers, don't accept the old "Private Pilot Level" answer. Expect more of your CFI and yourself and everyone will be successful.

Edited January 17, 2007 by nsdqjr

[rotor wing]

Howdy folks. I'm a CFI and I like to read the forums here and on the other helicopter websites and see what's on everyones mind, every so often throw my 2 cents in for kicks and giggles. I've seen some things as of late on all the forums that concern and irritate me quite a bit. I'm talking about CFI responsibility and accountability.

 

If you look in the flight school forum here you'll see all kinds of pretty good questions. Most recently was a question about the Windmill Brake State. In the forum the poster asks a question and is told by several people "Oh you don't need to know that." Even at the school I teach at, I have heard instructors tell students," Oh that's Commercial level knowledge", and move on without answering the students question. I find this totally unacceptable. Every flight school out there has a career pilot program or something similar, and they take for granted that a student is going to stick around for the entire program. Some do and some do not. I give every single student ALL of the knowledge I possess about every subject that I teach, from day one, and I do expect them to be proficient before I will sign them off.

 

This accomplishes a couple things: First, I know that if one of my students passes his PPL and leaves before finishing another rating or certificate, that I have equipped him, to the best of my ability, with everything he'll need to know out there on his own. Do I know everything? No, of course I don't, my CFI books are constantly being updated as I learn more, but I give my students everything I have. As a CFI I feel that the students life is very much my responsibility, now and in the future. If I had a student die as a result of not teaching them "Commercial Level Knowledge" I would be grossly negligent, and I believe his death would be on my shoulders. I don't want that, so I teach it all.

 

Secondly, In 700+ hours of instructing, I've never had a student fail the written or a checkride. People will give you what you expect. Expect more and demand more, and your students will perform. It makes every single checkride that much easier, and with each pass comes additional confidence. It also creates better CFI's, which is exactly what this industry needs.

 

CFI's out there, teach the knowledge, all of it, and sleep well at night when that brand new Private Pilot who was supposed to stick around didn't.

 

Students out there, DEMAND the answers, don't accept the old "Private Pilot Level" answer. Expect more of your CFI and yourself and everyone will be successful.

 

 

My instructors said that all of the time. It turned out that they did not know the answers to our questions. One thing they did know was how to charge $50 - $65 an hour for these questions.

[FlyGirl86]

Wow----I wish you could be my instructor. you sound like you know what your talkin about and have a genuine concern about what kinda pilots you turn out. Unfortunately, instructors like you are few and far between.

[nsdqjr]

My instructors said that all of the time. It turned out that they did not know the answers to our questions. One thing they did know was how to charge $50 - $65 an hour for these questions.

 

I expected a response like this one.

 

During my time as a CFI, I have found that nothing saves the student more money during the course of training than studying. Whether it's reading, or chair flying, or going to dinner with the other students and talking about helicopters over a cold one. If my students can tell me what I want to hear, we move on. I understand that there are instructors out there that waste time and money. If you have one, get rid of him. Go into the owners, or the chief pilots office, and let them know you have someone sucking you dry. If that doesn't work, take your money elsewhere. If the school won't help you, call SLM or whoever financed your training and make some noise. All of that is dependent, once again, on your own study habits. If you're a slacker it's not going to cut it.

 

Another thing you can do is get on the forums and ask questions. The only problem with that is you sometimes get erroneous answers, so pick wisely. Hell, anyone has a question they can write me directly and I'll help out. nsdqjr@Hotmail.com. Have a great one!

Edited January 16, 2007 by nsdqjr

[Nat3hCFI]

Well Put, that is one of my irritations too.

[brushfire21]

This is the perfect argument for making sure you pick the right school and talking with the instructors and getting a feel of what they know and what other people say about them.

 

As a PPL that is just over half way done with my PPL (Written completed and several solo's under the belt), I would like to thank the CFI's that take time when a student asks for help or needs additional knowledge pounded into us. My hat is off to the ones that smile and take it on as its there only task and your the most important person in the world.

 

I do feel that the way some of the schools are set up, some of the students are not going to ask questions or want to gain additional knowledge above and beyond the minimums becuase of the cost of ground instruction. To be honest, I would be reluctant possibly to get into a discussion of Windmill Braking or advanced autorotation aerodynamics if it cost me $50 hr, mainly because its not needed some would say.

 

Lucky where I am at, ground instructing is a one time flat rate fee (no time contraints), and the ground instructor(s) bend over backwards for you in anyway possibly. They feel in by doing this that the student is less prone to not ask questions and a better interaction happens in the classrooom. I feel in this way we gain the necessary knowledge becuase of more instructor-student time prior to the written and oral, along with more knowledge and fundamentals that go beyond just the minimums to take up with me when flying.

 

And I agree with the first post, "Students out there, DEMAND the answers, don't accept the old "Private Pilot Level" answer. Expect more of your CFI and yourself and everyone will be successful". Only thing I would add is this: if something doesn't make sense, work it out and make sure you understand the theory inside and out. Don't nod your head in agreement if you don't have a clue, becuase your only hurting yourself and it will catch up to you. And CFI's, if you see the "deer in the headlights" look in your students eyes, don't move on until they have a clear understanding.

 

Sorry this was so long. - R

[tvman345]

...My instructor gave me the answer he thinks is best, but he is not doing my checkride. Whoever is doing my check ride might have another idea...

 

My point in the other thread should not be construed as trying to squash the desire to learn, however the initial poster was concerned that this was a check ride item. I do not believe it is and even if it is asked, you're not going to fail if you get it wrong.

 

...To be honest, I would be reluctant possibly to get into a discussion of Windmill Braking or advanced autorotation aerodynamics if it cost me $50 hr, mainly because its not needed some would say.

 

And I agree with the first post, "Students out there, DEMAND the answers, don't accept the old "Private Pilot Level" answer. Expect more of your CFI and yourself and everyone will be successful". Only thing I would add is this: if something doesn't make sense, work it out and make sure you understand the theory inside and out. Don't nod your head in agreement if you don't have a clue, becuase your only hurting yourself and it will catch up to you. And CFI's, if you see the "deer in the headlights" look in your students eyes, don't move on until they have a clear understanding.

 

I completely agree!!

[joker]

Have high expectations of your students - agree totally.

Address every question sincerely - again, agree totally.

Be sure to admit when you don't know the answer, but promise to look it up and report back as soon as possible - yes, very good.

Give the student 110% when they are with you - definitely.

Encourage open dialogue, and genuine interest to question - a must.

Ensure you cover what is required by law - yes

Make available to the student ALL the knowledge you posses - YES

 

Give the student ALL the knowledge you possess - I have a niggle about this,

 

Nsdqjr,

 

Your post is great. As mentioned by others, the general philosophies you talk of are some basic education ones, which if more CFIs could take on board we might have better aviators and less accidents. I want to be clear that I don't mean to quash such thinking. I just want to raise an issue here.

 

In 700+ hours of instructing, I'm sure you faced this situation.

 

"NSDQJR, I want to do my private...I want to fly around my own field in my own helicopter. I don't want to do any more than is required to complete my PPL."

 

Are you going to reply, "Sorry, buddy. I'm going to teach you ALL the knowledge I posess before I sign you off. (And I'm a 700+hr CFI. Good luck!)?" The guy will walk out the door.

 

Actually today I am instructing an Open Water dive course. The student has no prior knowledge of diving...hasn't even been in the water. My own level of diving is CCR rebreather, mixed gas deep diving. Two points. If I were to teach this person 'everything' I knew, we'd be there for years! (That's how long took me to get to that level.) OK, a little tongue in cheek, I know but illustrates a point.

 

But there is a more important, serious and educationally relevant point to my post and that example. That is the matter of progression. A matter of readiness. A matter of ability. A matter of 'objective'.

 

One of the hardest skills an educator must posses is to be able to judge the student's current position and work out how to progress that student to the next level. But when do you stop? Hence another fundamental skill is to be able to identify a student's needs and create objectives for that student, which clearly define the path and endpoint of your teaching.

 

What are the objectives of a private pilot course? Is it to produce Commercial level pilot? Well for some students yes. Some students have the desire to go on with their training beyond PPL. They might show an interest in becoming an instructor as well. With these people, I think your post is spot on. With these you must foster that willingness to learn to a level greater than the benchmark, a trait so important for instructors. That is a truly valid objective when teaching a CFI-to-be.

 

However, what about when teaching Joe Bloggs who isn't interested in going on. What is your objective now? The same as the CFI-to-be? No. Possibly, "to arm the pilot with reasonable knowledge to be a safe pilot within the boundaries of his license." Then ask yourself the 'windmill brake' question. Isn't this knowledge surplus to that objective? Aren't you overstepping your duty as a PPL instructor by 'insisting' the student leave you with this knowledge?

 

Well, I tread carefully here, as I am definitely not advocating 'teaching to minimums'. Those that know me here (and in real life) will know that I have always promoted high expectations, and quality teaching and learning.

 

I do think though, that 'too much' teaching can sometimes be detrimental to learning. It sounds weird, but makes sense if you consider teaching and learning to be on either side of a set of weighing scales. Yes, they must be balanced or the scales will topple.

 

Or some teaching may sometimes be beyond the scope of the 'learning objectives'. As I said, to have high expectations of students is important, but the skill of the educator is to set the (high) expectations to a realistic and achievable level. This will be different for each student surely. Some will be ready for more information than others.

 

Well, there's my two cents (for kicks and giggles)!

 

Joker

Edited January 17, 2007 by joker

[nsdqjr]

Have high expectations of your students - agree totally.

Address every question sincerely - again, agree totally.

Be sure to admit when you don't know the answer, but promise to look it up and report back as soon as possible - yes, very good.

Give the student 110% when they are with you - definitely.

Encourage open dialogue, and genuine interest to question - a must.

Ensure you cover what is required by law - yes

Make available to the student ALL the knowledge you posses - YES

 

Give the student ALL the knowledge you possess - I have a niggle about this,

 

Nsdqjr,

 

Your post is great. As mentioned by others, the general philosophies you talk of are some basic education ones, which if more CFIs could take on board we might have better aviators and less accidents. I want to be clear that I don't mean to quash such thinking. I just want to raise an issue here.

 

In 700+ hours of instructing, I'm sure you faced this situation.

 

"NSDQJR, I want to do my private...I want to fly around my own field in my own helicopter. I don't want to do any more than is required to complete my PPL."

 

Are you going to reply, "Sorry, buddy. I'm going to teach you ALL the knowledge I posess before I sign you off. (And I'm a 700+hr CFI. Good luck!)?" The guy will walk out the door.

 

Actually today I am instructing an Open Water dive course. The student has no prior knowledge of diving...hasn't even been in the water. My own level of diving is CCR rebreather, mixed gas deep diving. Two points. If I were to teach this person 'everything' I knew, we'd be there for years! (That's how long took me to get to that level.) OK, a little tongue in cheek, I know but illustrates a point.

 

But there is a more important, serious and educationally relevant point to my post and that example. That is the matter of progression. A matter of readiness. A matter of ability. A matter of 'objective'.

 

One of the hardest skills an educator must posses is to be able to judge the student's current position and work out how to progress that student to the next level. But when do you stop? Hence another fundamental skill is to be able to identify a student's needs and create objectives for that student, which clearly define the path and endpoint of your teaching.

 

What are the objectives of a private pilot course? Is it to produce Commercial level pilot? Well for some students yes. Some students have the desire to go on with their training beyond PPL. They might show an interest in becoming an instructor as well. With these people, I think your post is spot on. With these you must foster that willingness to learn to a level greater than the benchmark, a trait so important for instructors. That is a truly valid objective when teaching a CFI-to-be.

 

However, what about when teaching Joe Bloggs who isn't interested in going on. What is your objective now? The same as the CFI-to-be? No. Possibly, "to arm the pilot with reasonable knowledge to be a safe pilot within the boundaries of his license." Then ask yourself the 'windmill brake' question. Isn't this knowledge surplus to that objective? Aren't you overstepping your duty as a PPL instructor by 'insisting' the student leave you with this knowledge?

 

Well, I tread carefully here, as I am definitely not advocating 'teaching to minimums'. Those that know me here (and in real life) will know that I have always promoted high expectations, and quality teaching and learning.

 

I do think though, that 'too much' teaching can sometimes be detrimental to learning. It sounds weird, but makes sense if you consider teaching and learning to be on either side of a set of weighing scales. Yes, they must be balanced or the scales will topple.

 

Or some teaching may sometimes be beyond the scope of the 'learning objectives'. As I said, to have high expectations of students is important, but the skill of the educator is to set the (high) expectations to a realistic and achievable level. This will be different for each student surely. Some will be ready for more information than others.

 

Well, there's my two cents (for kicks and giggles)!

 

Joker

 

Actually, you hit the nail on the head, and here's why: The helicopter has no clue how many hours you have or to what level you've been instructed. Yes, I do say "Sorry, you're going to learn everything I have to teach." It's not a request, it's a responsibility. I haven't had one yet, but if I ever have a student that isn't willing or able to learn everything I have to teach, to my standard, I won't sign him off. It's that simple. I lost my dad in a helicopter crash back in '83, and I'm not going to sign anyone off if I feel like I'm potentially putting their family in that same situation. It may seem cold, but I'd rather hurt their feelings than send them to a speedy grave. I tell all of my students the same thing the first day that I meet them: I hope to someday hear that you died of old age in your own bed. Yeah, it's hard for business. Yeah it might piss some people off, but a CFI's first responsibility is to protect. Period. I know I'm not going to change the world, but I wrote this thread in hopes that it might inspire people to expect more, or to give more. You may only have one month to make your mark on that Private Pilot, what mark is that going to be??

[FlyGirl86]

My point in the other thread should not be construed as trying to squash the desire to learn, however the initial poster was concerned that this was a check ride item. I do not believe it is and even if it is asked, you're not going to fail if you get it wrong.

I completely agree!!

 

EH...I was told it could pop up on a check ride. And if it doesn't, at least I understand it in full now and will be prepared. Even if one of the instructors at school is messing with me and just decides to randomly ask me questions while I am walking out to my helicopter...as they have done in the past...i will know the answer.

[apiaguy]

Well, you just made your own FAR's by requiring your students to perform to your standard. I wonder why they wrote the far's when we have you, our gift to instructing. I agree with joker. Not saying you aren't a great instructor with much to teach but please teach what is required and save your profound knowledge until it is asked for.

[nsdqjr]

Well, you just made your own FAR's by requiring your students to perform to your standard. I wonder why they wrote the far's when we have you, our gift to instructing. I agree with joker. Not saying you aren't a great instructor with much to teach but please teach what is required and save your profound knowledge until it is asked for.

 

Actually, I am teaching by the regs. 61.103 (d) speaks specifically about the endorsements that, in this case, a Private Pilot applicant must have in order to be eligible for the certificate. They say the authorized instructor must certify that the student is prepared for the Practical test. You my argue the PTS, but the PTS is the MINIMUM standard. How would you like to go for a flight with your friend and listen to him brag about his 70% that he got on his checkride? I suppose that's fine for you, but it isn't for me.

 

The attitude from this poster is the very reason that people die in helicopter accidents. You go ahead and fly "good enough", my students will not.

[PhotoFlyer]

Well, you just made your own FAR's by requiring your students to perform to your standard. I wonder why they wrote the far's when we have you, our gift to instructing. I agree with joker. Not saying you aren't a great instructor with much to teach but please teach what is required and save your profound knowledge until it is asked for.

 

[sarcasm]Thats right, only teach your students the absolute minimum to pass the checkride. Don't strive to train to a higher standard. Don't try to prepare your students for the challenges they will face in the real world. Knowledge won't get you anywhere after all. I can drive my car without knowing anything about it, why do I need to understand the helicopter?[/sarcasm]

 

I'm glad I wasn't your student.

 

The very first thing joker said was: "Have high expectations of your students - agree totally."

 

There is a big difference between giving all of your knowledge to a student, making it available, and only teaching what you have to for the student to pass.

[apiaguy]

the point of my sarcasm was merely to agree with joker in that situations may vary. Your primary post and continued insistance that you must teach above the requirements or you are not really teaching and that you won't let students who are "good enough" go to take a test is just silly. Teach what they need to know, then as time permits continue. By all means, if they ask, answer.

[500E]

Surely we are all still learning (a student more so) every time we fly? if not the accident will happen.

Each flight there is something not quite as we expected, and we learn.

When you fly with other pilots we should watch and learn it does not matter if they have less or more experience as you there is always another view, ask the question why did you do that? then it is up to the you to either rationalize or query the reply.

When a student asks questions they should always be addressed in a way that they can grasp within their depth of understanding, I must have driven the FI crazy with questions but at a later time the answers helped.

There is a post about night flying where an experienced P2 nearly flew into the sea due to fixating on vis rather than instruments The P1 who posted EXPLAINED how easy this was to do, this is stored in my memory and I hope that it will surface in the mind when on Instruments, remember it,s the edge that keeps you alive.

Perhaps I am to cautious\old, or inquisitive to be flying

[flingwing206]

Gang, before this devolves into a flame-war...

 

There is knowledge - in its breadth and depth. Then there is judgement - in this case the judgement of the CFI, who has to decide what the student needs to know (breadth) and how extensive their knowledge of that particular topic needs to be (depth). Does a pre-solo student need to know how a turbine engine works, or need to have trained in downwind quick-stops or ag turns? Probably not, and in fact these topics would probably only serve to distract and confuse.

 

There is no question that judgement comes from experience and applied knowledge. We want our students at any level to apply good judgement. We need to provide the knowledge that will best help them in the situations they may encounter (Here's where someone will pipe up, "well we can't know what they will encounter, so..."). In fact, the knowledge and training we provide our students should control what they might encounter - if you are a CFI in Florida, you will probably make sure a pre-solo student knows how to read a weather radar, but perhaps pass on mountain/pinnacle flying. If a student seems weak in their ability to judge weather, we can make sure they only solo in the best of weather. Should they solo without complete weather ability? That's the CFI's decision, and it depends on more factors than I can list here.

 

I'm not going to beat this to death, but there is no need or way to teach everything you know to your students - your job is to provide the necessary knowledge combined with the appropriate experiential training that will allow your students to develop the judgement they need at each level of their development as a pilot. A commercial pilot may not need more skill than a private pilot, but they are going to need a broader and deeper knowledge and experience base in order to exercise "good judgement" in the much larger operational arena they will face.

 

Usually, the "best" instructors are those with the knowledge and experience to provide only what's required, but leave the student with a thirst to know more. If a student has what they need to succeed, but are still coming after me for more and more, I know I'm doing a good job.

[500E]

Good reply Flightwing 206 I understand where you are coming from,and agree with most but if a student inquires about a manover \topic surely you should explain to the best of his present understanding ? you can also say you will\should not be asked to preform\answer this at your present level.

If I ask a question I expect a reply, rather than be told you don't need to know, there is also a feeling that a little knowledge is dangerous.

I am not trying to flame anyone but If I pay my $ and ask a question I want a reply why is this so strange ?

If I ask my doctor a question I EXPECT a reply, If this is a profession as people say what is the difference.

The thirst to know more brings the questions

[joker]

500E / NSQJDR (et. al.)

 

OK. Neither Fling and I have suggested that you shouldn't answer the questions posed to you. I tried to reiterate this more than once in my first post.

 

surely you should explain to the best of his present understanding ? ?

 

Halleluja!!!! That's exactly what we are saying!!!

 

I would never answer a question by saying, "You don't need to know!" What I will do though is answer the question at a level appropriate to their point in learning. If the student is hungry to go deeper into something than I had orgininally planned, then great I'm all for that. I'm all for sitting and chatting with a student. Of course I am.

 

But that is not the current debate! Agreed? So let's talk about the other issue.

 

 

Fling talks about 'depth and breadth' of knowledge. The minimum depth of knowledge is that which is required by the law. But we agree that we should set our standards higher than the benchmark, don't we.

 

But having high standards doesn't mean loading a student with all the breadth of knowledge he can or cannot take. In fact sometimes doing this could even be detrimental to learning, and even unsafe. Telling someone about advanced autorotation theory without giving them ample time to practice them could be irresponsible.

 

High standards means improving the level of learning to the highest you can. (See your FOIs)

 

Anyway, I would rather my PPL student go away with an 'correlation' level of learning' on a narrower (carefully chosen) range of topices, than a 'rote' or 'understanding' level of learning in a range of topics as broad as my own knowledge.

 

NSQDJR suggests that in order to make a safe pilot his knowledge breadth must be as wide as possible.

 

I am simply saying I can make just as safe a pilot by narrowing that breadth to carefully chosen subjects, then focusing on increasing the levels of learning in those subjects.

 

I think it is impossible (and unnecessary) to acheive maximum breadth and maximum depth. Hell, it took me 9 months from 0 to CFII. I haven't got that long!

 

Sometimes we forget the Fundamentals of Instruction. Although the FAA version are pretty simplistic they are a good start.

 

Basic steps in planning a course of learning:

1. Determine standards/objectives

2. Develop blocks of learning

3. Identification of blocks of learning

 

Here's a website link to a PDF document. Fundamentals of Instruction For those who haven't read it, please go through, look at the headings and consider how 'teaching a PPL student ALL the knowledge you have' could work against the instructor and student in the teaching and learning process. (Hint: Barriers to learning - Interference, Laws of Learning - Readiness, Characteristics of Learning - Purposful are just a few examples on the first page alone!).

 

Joker

Edited January 17, 2007 by joker

[deadstick]

NSDQ-JR,

 

One question:

 

What has been the average time for your clients to reach the check ride?

 

Judgement is one aspect of flying that is very difficult to teach. That comes with experience. I had been flying for many more years before earning my first CFI ticket. I've had some of those "come to Jesus" experiences that I believe have made me a better pilot and, I hope, a better instructor. I have worked those "lessons learned" into the training as informal/FYI/casual converation pieces (NOT in the format of "So there I was, inverted, NOE with NVGs, the TOT spiked and the chips lights came on...blah-blah-blah...piece o' cake"). I won't test them on these tid-bits, but I hope to give them something to think about. If, heaven forbid, they have a similar situation down the raod, they will have that small building block to make good decisions.

 

What you can do is be proactive and call them a couple of months after the checkride. Ask if they want to go up and do some autos or some advanced flying. It might get you another student, too.

[nsdqjr]

Ya know, I'm amazed at how many egos I seem to have bruised with this post. The meaning of the post was very simple, so allow me to simplify even further. The point I was attempting to make is that you never know when you're going to lose a student. If you teach someone the bare minimums because you think they're going to go all the way through CFI, and they leave after they get their Private, then you've just released a guy into the world with very little knowledge. That student may never have another dual flight in his life, so what you teach him is what he gets. The post was a challenge for CFI's to think of the Private as more than a stepping stone. I'm sorry if that got lost in the translation.

 

Deadstick to answer your question, 50-60 hours has been the norm, and since you hyphenated my screen name I suppose you know where I'm coming from. Look at the memorial wall, 4 Oct 83, and you'll see the reason that all of this matters to me. I'm sure I'll get plenty of posts now saying that's too long or whatever, but the bottom line is, once again, I don't sign anyone off until I know that if they left tomorrow, they'd be safe and thoughtful pilots for years to come. I'm just like everyone else. I know how much flight school costs, I've been there and done it too. I also know that funerals run around 4-6 thousand these days. How would you rather spend your students money?

Edited January 18, 2007 by nsdqjr

[500E]

I think we all are trying to do the right thing by the student, and arrive at the same result by a different root.

But the quote that started this was!!

"In the forum the poster asks a question and is told by several people "Oh you don't need to know that." Even at the school I teach at, I have heard instructors tell students," Oh that's Commercial level knowledge",.

So there is a problem to be addressed by some people.

That little bit of knowledge might just slot in and save their a**s one day, that is why this forum is good, there are enough HIGH time pilots to give their knowledge to people who want further information.

[Jeff]

I think we're all misunderstanding where NSDQJR is coming from. When I read his comments I immediately thought of another instructor that I know who teaches his students to the same high level of knowledge and experience. The difference being is that the guy I know needs, oftentimes, 100+ hours to teach them. NSDQJR can do it in 50-60! I've flown with this guy's students after they get their PPL and they are very good pilots. They fly like 100+ hour pilots. But then again, I've flown with other instructors' former students who got their PPL's in about 50+ hours. When I flew with them, they had around 100 hours or so, and they were also very good pilots. They fly like pilots with around 100 hours or so.

 

I have to take sides with Joker and some of the others. (Sorry, I don't remember all the handles.) Funny, this is the second thread I've seen where I see eye-to-eye with Joker. I can't think, even after a lot of head-scratching, how I can possibly teach my students to fly at my personal skill level and with my level of aviation knowledge in just 50-60 hours. When I teach a PPL, I teach them to the PPL level, not the CFI level or ATP level. I don't sign anyone off for a checkride unless they can fly accurately well within the PTS, and they exercise good judgement in flying. NEVER do I take the cavalier attitude that, "well... your flying is to PTS [barely], and you kinda know what you need to, so go ahead and take your checkride and see what happens." Also, if you come to me for PPL training, I will teach you to the same high standards whether you intend to just get a PPL or continue on with a flying career. I provide thoughtful, experience-filled lessons that are effective in teaching the needed skills. Some students take longer than others to master the skills. With certain students, I have to change my approach on the fly (sorry about the pun). They sometimes need a skill broken down into smaller subsets of that skill to learn; hence, they take longer to train. Flexibility in instructing styles is key.

 

Now here's something to chew on (just for kicks and giggles). I do stage checks for a local Part 141 airplane school. I see a common problem with students at all levels: private instrument, and commercial. When I evaluate a pilot on a stage check, I do just that--evaluate. I sit there and ask them to perform maneuvers much the same way an examiner would, except only to the level required by the syllabus at that stage. I don't play games with them; I'm straight forward and let them know it in the pre-flight briefing. And I find that the pilots don't do certain things that they normally do with their regular instructor. I'm finding out that the regular instructor fails to keep his/her mouth shut sometimes. The instructor is constantly reminding the student to do things that are forgotten or are doing the tasks for the student. A good example that comes to mind is descending at step-down fixes on an instrument approach. Go ahead and try to make it from vectoring altitude to the MDA from the FAF with less than a 1500-fpm descent rate. (And yes I know this doesn't apply to every approach, just to the one in my example here.)

 

I had one of my pre-solo private students ask me on downwind one day, "What should I do?" I forget what the problem was. So I simply said, "I don't know. You tell me. You're the pilot." And guess what? He made a descision about what to do all on his own. It made for a great post-flight discussion. Disclaimer for you critics: I would not have let him carry out a dangerous or risky decision. But that's what I'm talking about when I say "thoughtful, experience-filled lesson". There's a lot to learn for a PPL, and I think it muddies the waters when an instructor adds too much information and too many skills that are not required at that level. We should, IMHO and sometimes not so humble, teach PPL students to be the best private pilots they can be, and not the best ATP's they can be.

 

Jeff

[joker]

But the quote that started this was!!

"In the forum the poster asks a question and is told by several people "Oh you don't need to know that." Even at the school I teach at, I have heard instructors tell students," Oh that's Commercial level knowledge",.

 

500E,

 

Yes, you are right. But I thought we have answered that one, by all agreeing that it is bad practice to do that. I didn't think there was any debate about that. (See my first post.)

 

ALSO in the same paragraph as your post above are the words, "I give every single student ALL of the knowledge I possess."

 

It was this rather sweeping statements that I took issue with from a purely educational view. I don't think it is reasonably possible to do this.

 

Maybe I took it too literally and / or maybe NSQDJR didn't mean what he wrote, I don't know. But it is this point I am trying to resolve in this debate. Does he stand by this 'original statement' or does he want to modify it?

 

Joker

 

Added: Anyway, I think we have exhausted this one. I agree with NSDQ-JR, PPL is not 'just a stepping stone'. It is a course in its own right, and should be taught to high standards regardless of the future intentions of the student.

 

No bruised egos; I'm perfectly happy with the standards to which I conduct courses.

 

So everyone is happy then? Good!

Edited January 19, 2007 by joker

[deadstick]

nsdq-jr,

 

50-60 sounds pretty good. I was asking because I have seen people who have 50 hrs at solo and 100 at the checkride. Sometimes it's because of the student, but other times it's because of the CFI.

 

In the f/w world, I believe the national average is almost 70 hrs. Anybody know the r/w number? Hopefully FITS is working its way into r/w training. This will do away with the differences between the "real-world" and "training-world" flying.

[LostHeliBoy]

NSDQjr.. everyone else.too...

 

Anyone realising the end of his/her training at the PPL level and has won lotto and can afford the high costs of Private Helicopter flights

 

My Hats off to them but for the reality of the rest of us it is a career track driven by a passion and a desire to better our skills.

 

I feel that the student needs all the ammo possible for their flying career... Understandably then if the student only wants to joke around his personal little helipad with his 500e model that is a different question .. I still think that arming them, the PPL, with all the information that is availible is prudent for survival in the real world but in moderation that is usable for him at that level ...

The education needs to be timed, to the proficency level that the student is at, and seeks to aquire.

Ag turns and Sling at the PPL level is not an example of good timing thought.

 

BUT

 

A wide thin encompassing knowledge without depth is no substitute for deep collabrative knowledge.