Jump to content

just wondering how many people get private in 50 hr or less??


Recommended Posts

private add-on to SE airplane in 30 hrs.( not me ) My FSDO takes the 40 hours of flight experience for heli-add on in any type. That leaves the required 20hrs dual and 10hrs solo. They do the same with commercial add ons...heli specific flight requirements only. I hope some faa type doesnt read this and make 'em change. There's plenty of people who get their tickets in the minimum times, they're safe fully trained people too...so no remarks about pencil whipping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's plenty of people who get their tickets in the minimum times, they're safe fully trained people too...

 

And there are even more people who get their tickets in the minimum times, who are awful pilots, don't know anything about aviation, and quite frankly shouldn't be in the sky putting me and my family at risk. Whose fault is that?..the instructor, who thought he was doing that guy a favour by signing him off early.

 

All the talk of 'how quickly' can I get thru, is not healthy. It's not a race. With a good instructor, you'll get through when you're ready to aviate. That could be 40hrs or 80hrs.

 

To be honest, I am initially wary of someone who passed in anything too close to minimums from nil avaiation experience. I think the average person is unable to assimilate the information necessary to be a good pilot in that time.

 

Joker

Edited by joker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there are even more people who get their tickets in the minimum times, who are awful pilots, don't know anything about aviation, and quite frankly shouldn't be in the sky putting me and my family at risk. Whose fault is that?..the instructor, who thought he was doing that guy a favour by signing him off early.

 

All the talk of 'how quickly' can I get thru, is not healthy. It's not a race. With a good instructor, you'll get through when you're ready to pass. That could be 40hrs or 80hrs.

 

To be honest, I am initially wary of someone who passed in anything too close to minimums from nil avaiation experience. I think the average person is unable to assimilate the information necessary to be a good pilot in that time.

 

 

WOW! i rarely say anything negative on these boards and usually just enjoy the reading. but i have to say that this statement is utter B.S. first off, its not the instructors fault that the student is an awful pilot, or that they are now licensed. it is the stundent, and examiners fault. The examiner gave the license to the guy, HE is the final authority if you get your license, NOT the instructor, all an instructor is signing off is saying he gave you the needed training and information, not that you studied and he guarantees your a good pilot. my instructor laid out the basics for me, i studied my ass off, if i hit a bump, he straightened it out, no one should be spoon fed by there instructor. were all in an industry were you should be able to take care of things yourself, not depend on the instructor to put it down your throat.

 

I talk of how "quickly" i got through it because i studied ALOT, practiced in ever way i can (with plungers if i had too), did mental drills, read, examined and watched every helicopter fly around. The quicker the better, i saved that much more money than the guy who didnt put in the effort.

 

as far as assimilating the information necessary, again, it has nothing to do with the school. You go to school to get the general idea, the initial learning, then you go home and study your ass off. for every hour i did ground AT school, i probably did 3 or more at home. Im done with my rant, and i dont even know that it made to much sense. Its almost 1 a.m. and im tired. but i dont think the instructor should be blamed for a bad pilot. and that is my whole point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clay,

 

Thanks for the reply. Obviously from the heart. Well done for putting the effort in during your training. There are many who don't.

 

Look, I didn't say that you were a poor pilot. I said that on average, of those who get through in minimum times, more will have poorer standards. I've seen it so. Emphasis on the word 'AVERAGE'.

 

I didn't say that ability to assimilate information has anything to do with the school. All the school can do is be a provider, and then make a judgement on the candidate's readiness to aviate.

About the instructor responsibility:

 

Minimum time and minimum standards are different issues.

 

1. All the examiner is supposed to test for is the minimum standard. I personally think the minimum standards (while fine in many areas) are severely lacking in other ares. i.e. situational awareness, problem solving, coping with stress and a host of other areas....

 

The checkride is not a good tool for testing these. It is a snapshot of that candidate's competency, measured against set criterea. Add to this the largely subjective nature of the checkride and the varying personalities of examiners, then the whole tool becomes more of a formality then a good measure of candidate's aviation capability. I worked with one examiner who would pass anyone who was into motorbikes! In my private, I only nailed the autorotation because the examiner was so fat that his belly stopped me pulling too much aft cyclic!

 

As brushfire21 suggests, a good pilot can have a nightmare and fail a checkride, just as a poor pilot can slip through with a little luck and pass. It's these who instructors need to catch.

 

So I am proposing that it is possible to get your ticket without being a 'good' pilot. Minimum standards don't produce good pilots. With a critereon referenced system such as this, the pass mark often becomes somewhere close or just above 'average'. That's a pitfall of CRT. In terms of all current aviators though, it stands to reason that if you passed just on mimimum standard, then you should be right at the bottom of the normal curve of current aviatior's. Is that where you want to be or your students to be?

 

Here's food for thought - imagine a 'norm-referenced system' where only the top say, 30% of students get their licences. What would that do to the hours? Point made.

 

So, yes, while the examiner signs off the ticket, I don't think that is a statement to the overall competency of the pilot, other than that pilot, on that day met the minimum required standards. Additionally, we all know that the knowledge tests are a joke, as are some examiners!

 

A good pilot has experience and understanding and ability beyond the minimums. That's where the instructor comes in. As an instructor, it is my responsibility to produce good pilots. I don't teach to minimums. While not in a legal sense, I firmly believe that I have that moral obgliation. The instructors are there as a line of defence to catch what the incompetencies of the system could let through.

 

This often causes a conflict. About half the folk reading this will say, "The minimums are there for a reason. We should teach to those." The other half will be of my thought and say that we should strive to teach above minimums.

 

It causes a conflict with students. Some students will say, "Let me take a stab at the checkride and I might get lucky on the day." They believe anything more than minimum required and the the instructor is screwing them. Others will expect the instructor to go beyond the knowledge required by the PTS so that their checkride is a breeze and they can be comforted by the knowledge that they are 'well above' minimum; well above average.

 

Either way, I am saying that the instructor has to take some responsibility. Not all. As you say, some will get through due to the system itsself having flaws in its structure.

 

2. With due respect, your style of learning is not everybody's style. Some prefer a more directed style of learning. (Isn't there another thread running on this subject at the moment?). So don't think of this as 'spoon-feeding'. That's an insult to all those whose preference is not for the 'self-study' style.

 

Again I stress, I am not having a go at individuals here. I'm not saying that all minimum-time pilots are poor.

 

Joker

 

min·i·mum (mibreve.gifnprime.gifschwa.gif-mschwa.gifm) n. pl. min·i·mums or min·i·ma (-mschwa.gif) 1. a. The least possible quantity or degree.b. The lowest degree or amount reached or recorded; the lower limit of variation.2. A lower limit permitted by law or other authority.3. A sum of money set by a nightclub or restaurant as the least amount each patron must spend on food and drink.4. Mathematics a. The smallest number in a finite set of numbers.b. A value of a function that is less than any other value of the function over a specific interval.

Edited by joker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree and then disagree with Clay's statements. The Examiner does have the final say in the end, but the instructor(s) are what give the student the basics and general foundation to build on for the the rest of there career.

 

Blame needs to be shared, maybe not 50/50, but heavier on the examiners side. I have also heard that examiners are more likely to overlook certain items on the PPL becuase they know its a license to learn and that mistakes will be made with only 40-80hrs under the belt. I am hoping that by the time the student makes it to the CPL level, that some of these "problems" are gone, and that is done by the instructor. Just my .05 cents worth.

 

When I took my checkride for PPL, I may not have done my best on a couple of items (mainly do to stress possibly), but we (examiner, instructor and myself) talked about it afterwards and I learned alot from it. It didn't help that we sucked in a bag into the MR on the taxiway and the examiner wanted me to do something other than what my instructor had taught me either. But problems happen every day to many other pilots, regardless of A/C. Am I a bad pilot becasue I I didnt have a perfect checkride? I can't answer that, but I strive to be the best I can and then some on top of that.

 

I was one of those that did it in the 50hr range (my log book is not near right this second to look). I am sure I could have done it sooner, and I was in a part 141 syllabus to boot. But I enjoyed doing XC, nite flying and offsite landings and practicing Auto's, so those things extended my time to get the ticket. Minimums are just that..... minimums.

 

Joker, Well Said!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know a single person who finished with their initial ppl in less than 50hrs. I completely agree with Joker on this one; its nearly impossible to develop the mental faculty to be a 'good' pilot in less. A chimp can learn to fly a helicopter in 30 hours- thats why fixed wing add ons do it. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought 40 hours was the min. to get your private, those folks saying less, are those add-on's?

 

yeah. Some FSDOs interpret the FAR to mean 40 hours of flight time total, any type aircraft. To some it means 40 hours heli time, add on or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey,

 

I agree the minimums are a joke. I am in the process of getting my ppl in part 141 and will probably have it with about 60 hrs. I spend alot of time at home studying and my flying skills are coming along very nicely. I can't imagine being done already. There is just so much going on and so much to be aware of, I would'nt want me flying over my house at 35 hrs.

 

I would much rather spend a little more time and money and know that I could approach a sittuation with thought and confidence. Rather than a kind of reaction that could get someone else hurt. Make a rational decission (quickly) rather than an oh my god what should I do and hope to survive. At 35 hours I don't care how good you are I my opinion it's not enough. Just my thought from a newby. :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought 40 hours was the min. to get your private, those folks saying less, are those add-on's?

An add-on rating, for example a PP-ASEL can get his PP-RH rating with a minimum of 19 hours (the sum of (1),(2),(3), and (4) below) of aeronautical experience. Note that the referenc to 40 hours doesn't say anything at all that requires the 40 hours be done in a helicopter:

 

© For a helicopter rating. Except as provided in paragraph (k) of this section, a person who applies for a private pilot certificate with rotorcraft category and helicopter class rating must log at least 40 hours of flight time that includes at least 20 hours of flight training from an authorized instructor and 10 hours of solo flight training in the areas of operation listed in §61.107(B)(3) of this part, and the training must include at least—

 

(1) 3 hours of cross-country flight training in a helicopter;

(2) Except as provided in §61.110 of this part, 3 hours of night flight training in a helicopter that includes—

 

(i) One cross-country flight of over 50 nautical miles total distance; and

 

(ii) 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full stop (with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport.

 

(3) 3 hours of flight training in preparation for the practical test in a helicopter, which must have been performed within 60 days preceding the date of the test; and

 

(4) 10 hours of solo flight time in a helicopter, consisting of at least—

 

(i) 3 hours cross-country time;

 

(ii) One solo cross-country flight of at least 75 nautical miles total distance, with landings at a minimum of three points, and one segment of the flight being a straight-line distance of at least 25 nautical miles between the takeoff and landing locations; and

 

(iii) Three takeoffs and three landings to a full stop (with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an operating control tower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only advantage to getting your private at the min is that you will then be able to start logging PIC time for your Commercial ticket. But beyond that you will most likely continue training just as before, dual instruction most of the time. The reality is that you solo at the earliest 20 hours in a 22 so you should be safe enough to fly and not kill anyone. Now having your private ticket at the mins, I myself would not take any passengers yet (other than my instructor), but at about 80hrs was the point where I was feeling barely safe enough to take a passenger. Now at 170 hours I would feel fine taking passengers up, although I have not yet.

 

The thing was that before I had my PPL I was talking with my instructor about being able to fly by myself and he said this. Even though legally you can, you really want to minimize the amount of time flying solo at such low hours because you don't want to build any bad habits. So because of that, and realizing I'm trying to build my second career in life, I have no desire to fly solo more than I have too.

 

So all I'm trying to say is that if your trying to do this as a job, nothing will really change once you get your PPL, you will continue flying with your instructor just like before you had your PPL. So IMO don't even look at the number of hours your except to make sure you are covering your requirements. When your ready your ready.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if some one puts enough effort into it they can do anything well in any amount of reasonable time... I know it will take time and its not a race, i dont think anyone would rush to get a PPL and not have 100% confidence in them selves, I hope anyway. I was just courious to see if it was possible to log PIC ASAP for commercial and so on and make it as cheap as possible last time I checked you still learn after you get your private anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just courious to see if it was possible to log PIC ASAP for commercial and so on and make it as cheap as possible last time I checked you still learn after you get your private anyway.

 

Yeah sorry, thread drift was getting pretty strong there. To address your specific request...

 

YES, folks can get it done at the minimums. My first instructor had received all of his tickets at the minimums and to this day is the best pilot I have ever flown with. Some folks are naturals so not much is needed to get the basics down. Some folks are not naturals and it will take a bit more time.

 

Oh, and we are always students to some degree IMO...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clay,

 

Thanks for the reply. Obviously from the heart. Well done for putting the effort in during your training. There are many who don't.

 

Look, I didn't say that you were a poor pilot. I said that on average, of those who get through in minimum times, more will have poorer standards. I've seen it so. Emphasis on the word 'AVERAGE'.

 

I didn't say that ability to assimilate information has anything to do with the school. All the school can do is be a provider, and then make a judgement on the candidate's readiness to aviate.

About the instructor responsibility:

 

Minimum time and minimum standards are different issues.

 

1. All the examiner is supposed to test for is the minimum standard. I personally think the minimum standards (while fine in many areas) are severely lacking in other ares. i.e. situational awareness, problem solving, coping with stress and a host of other areas....

 

The checkride is not a good tool for testing these. It is a snapshot of that candidate's competency, measured against set criterea. Add to this the largely subjective nature of the checkride and the varying personalities of examiners, then the whole tool becomes more of a formality then a good measure of candidate's aviation capability. I worked with one examiner who would pass anyone who was into motorbikes! In my private, I only nailed the autorotation because the examiner was so fat that his belly stopped me pulling too much aft cyclic!

 

As brushfire21 suggests, a good pilot can have a nightmare and fail a checkride, just as a poor pilot can slip through with a little luck and pass. It's these who instructors need to catch.

 

So I am proposing that it is possible to get your ticket without being a 'good' pilot. Minimum standards don't produce good pilots. With a critereon referenced system such as this, the pass mark often becomes somewhere close or just above 'average'. That's a pitfall of CRT. In terms of all current aviators though, it stands to reason that if you passed just on mimimum standard, then you should be right at the bottom of the normal curve of current aviatior's. Is that where you want to be or your students to be?

 

Here's food for thought - imagine a 'norm-referenced system' where only the top say, 30% of students get their licences. What would that do to the hours? Point made.

 

So, yes, while the examiner signs off the ticket, I don't think that is a statement to the overall competency of the pilot, other than that pilot, on that day met the minimum required standards. Additionally, we all know that the knowledge tests are a joke, as are some examiners!

 

A good pilot has experience and understanding and ability beyond the minimums. That's where the instructor comes in. As an instructor, it is my responsibility to produce good pilots. I don't teach to minimums. While not in a legal sense, I firmly believe that I have that moral obgliation. The instructors are there as a line of defence to catch what the incompetencies of the system could let through.

 

This often causes a conflict. About half the folk reading this will say, "The minimums are there for a reason. We should teach to those." The other half will be of my thought and say that we should strive to teach above minimums.

 

It causes a conflict with students. Some students will say, "Let me take a stab at the checkride and I might get lucky on the day." They believe anything more than minimum required and the the instructor is screwing them. Others will expect the instructor to go beyond the knowledge required by the PTS so that their checkride is a breeze and they can be comforted by the knowledge that they are 'well above' minimum; well above average.

 

Either way, I am saying that the instructor has to take some responsibility. Not all. As you say, some will get through due to the system itsself having flaws in its structure.

 

2. With due respect, your style of learning is not everybody's style. Some prefer a more directed style of learning. (Isn't there another thread running on this subject at the moment?). So don't think of this as 'spoon-feeding'. That's an insult to all those whose preference is not for the 'self-study' style.

 

Again I stress, I am not having a go at individuals here. I'm not saying that all minimum-time pilots are poor.

 

Joker

 

min·i·mum (mibreve.gifnprime.gifschwa.gif-mschwa.gifm) n. pl. min·i·mums or min·i·ma (-mschwa.gif) 1. a. The least possible quantity or degree.b. The lowest degree or amount reached or recorded; the lower limit of variation.2. A lower limit permitted by law or other authority.3. A sum of money set by a nightclub or restaurant as the least amount each patron must spend on food and drink.4. Mathematics a. The smallest number in a finite set of numbers.b. A value of a function that is less than any other value of the function over a specific interval.

 

 

Yeah .... that means all minnimum pilots can improve. did i miss something who said minnimum pilots were good??

Edited by Helihead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know a single person who finished with their initial ppl in less than 50hrs. I completely agree with Joker on this one; its nearly impossible to develop the mental faculty to be a 'good' pilot in less. A chimp can learn to fly a helicopter in 30 hours- thats why fixed wing add ons do it. :D

 

I guess that makes me a chimp then. You can call me Bubbles!

 

I got my private in about 43 hours. Failed the checkride first time on the autorotation. I then went straight on and did my instrument, then commercial. I got my CFI with 175 hours.

I then started to instruct the next day. How scary is that? Talk about the blind leading the blind.........

 

Time wise I started on March 21st and got my CFI on December 6th. So about 9 months. It would have been quicker if it wasn't for weather, maintenance and airspace closures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess that makes me a chimp then. You can call me Bubbles!

 

I got my private in about 43 hours. Failed the checkride first time on the autorotation. I then went straight on and did my instrument, then commercial. I got my CFI with 175 hours.

I then started to instruct the next day. How scary is that? Talk about the blind leading the blind.........

 

Time wise I started on March 21st and got my CFI on December 6th. So about 9 months. It would have been quicker if it wasn't for weather, maintenance and airspace closures.

 

ha, ok Bubbles. I ended up with CFI in about the same # of hours, but took 55 for pvt. I guess most of it starts to even out between rated and unrated heli students by the time you get up towards commercial. The blind do lead the blind, especially in the us, but as long as you're aware of the fact you're blind and fly conservatively new cfi's are ok with me because they remember the stumbling points, havent had time to pick up bad habits, etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's right you two.

 

The requirements for commercial are such that really, the hours you take to get your pvt get washed out in the instrument and commercial training. It all evens out as you get to 150hrs. So for those going all the way through to CFI, then it really is a mute point how many hours they got pvt, or solo'd.

 

The danger lies with those people who only want to get their PPL to fly for pleasure, and have no intention of going further; and who might rush through the course, then never take a proper lesson again after their checkride. They are the ones who could be a danger to themselves and others.

 

Joker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"All the talk of 'how quickly' can I get thru, is not healthy." I couldn't agree more. While helicopter pilots tend to have inflated egos the "I got my PPL at 40.0 hours" crap extends to airplane pilots even worse. It pisses me off for a couple of reasons. One, no one cares how many hours it took. Two, it's likely to make the student pilot who is on his 60th hour feel like a failure. Three, newbies reading the board will more likely feel rushed, as if it's a contest to get their PPL, CPL, etc. in the fewest hours possible. Personally, I would prefer to fly with the pilot that took his time to get it right, damn the number of hours. THAT'S an attitude of someone that wants to do it right.

 

"The danger lies with those people who only want to get their PPL to fly for pleasure, and have no intention of going further; and who might rush through the course, then never take a proper lesson again after their checkride. They are the ones who could be a danger to themselves and others."

 

I was first a PPL airplane pilot who got the add-on just to fly for pleasure. If they're flying helos they'll have to go back for their BFRs (granted, it doesn't have to be a helo) and if they're flying R22s they'll need the annual sign off, so there aren't going to be many in that category.

Edited by Gerhardt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

G- I hear ya, I'm not in the category but ref. my first post. I think most of the conversation here is about averages, and I doubt there are many here who are on the 'unsafe' side of the equation. The focus tends to be on the people Joker has just described because they are the ones who draw the attention and make life difficult for the rest of us in a myriad of ways. There is no insult intended toward anyone on this thread, we're just only discussing the negative possibilities that exist with getting a lisence in the minimum required times. If you've got a positive one, tell us about it and balance out the conversation.

-P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...