There will be accidents

[Roondog]

On a recent thread a VR member stated that "When you have low time instructors flying with new students, there will be accidents." This is typical in the US, however, as I understand it, in Canada most instructors are high time pilots. What is the difference in accident rates concerning training missions, between the two countries? Nevermind the type of A/c. This not an A/c bashing thread. If, as I suspect, there are fewer accidents in Canada because of this structure in training, why won't the US follow suit?

[RotorWeed]

On a recent thread a VR member stated that "When you have low time instructors flying with new students, there will be accidents." This is typical in the US, however, as I understand it, in Canada most instructors are high time pilots. What is the difference in accident rates concerning training missions, between the two countries? Nevermind the type of A/c. This not an A/c bashing thread. If, as I suspect, there are fewer accidents in Canada because of this structure in training, why won't the US follow suit?

 

That is a valid point, and I’m sure there isn’t a good answer to the question.

Student pilots should conceder this fact when looking for an instructor.

[ChopperJ]

There is no reason a flight school in the US couldn't have 5,000 hour instructors, excpet the student would have to pay $450 an hour for R22 instruction (like Canada) to pay the higher salary.

[Gomer Pylot]

One word. Money. The US is a capitalist country, and everything favors the capitalists. It matters not how many people are killed, whether the training is good, or whether the sky is blue. We follow the golden rule: those who have the gold make the rules. We have the best government money can buy, and it has been bought over and over. The goal of training schools is to get the highest number of students possible, thus bringing in the greatest amount of money possible, while paying out the least amount of money possible. This is true of almost all schools, and especially larger ones. The only way you'll get really good instruction from experienced instructors is to find a small, one-aircraft school run by an old pilot who's doing it because he loves it, not to get rich. There aren't many of those left.

Edited August 17, 2007 by Gomer Pylot

[montu]

If everyone was looking for a high hour pilot how the heck would a poor low hour pilot get his hours? You gotta start somewhere.

 

Jordan

[500E]

How much did I know at 200 hours? enough to be dangerous.

My instructor had numerous thousands of hours Mil & Civy, I felt he could cope with any stupid thing I did,( & I did a few) with low hours I would not have felt that the Instructor had that edge in an emergency.

There must be low hour people out there that are real competent, & high hour people that are not so good, but talking to high hour pilots they all say they learn every trip, & every time you fly is different,

[Flybiwire]

If everyone was looking for a high hour pilot how the heck would a poor low hour pilot get his hours? You gotta start somewhere.

 

Jordan

 

I was just talking to some pilots in Ft. McMurray and they really face this dilema... most get out of school with 200 hours and aren't allowed to get to the magic grand via flight instruction. They can't fly for the mines without 1000 hrs, so they mostly hang around the hangar pumping gas and hoping for 2nd seats or shuttling ships. In short, it's really hard to build the first block of time -- some come to the US since it's easier.

[Gomer Pylot]

There are pilots with 10,000 hours of experience, and there are some pilots with one hour of experience 10,000 times. But those tend to get weeded out as time goes by.

[Marc D]

On a recent thread a VR member stated that "When you have low time instructors flying with new students, there will be accidents." This is typical in the US, however, as I understand it, in Canada most instructors are high time pilots. What is the difference in accident rates concerning training missions, between the two countries? Nevermind the type of A/c. This not an A/c bashing thread. If, as I suspect, there are fewer accidents in Canada because of this structure in training, why won't the US follow suit?

 

There are so many things to be said on this subject, but the plain and simple answer is - MONEY. The R22 is the trainer of choice because of money and the experienced guys don't do it because of the aircraft and the money. I'm not bashing the R22, but if someone would pay me a reasonable wage to do flight instruction in an R44 or 206 I would love to do it. I really like teaching. I wouldn't teach in an R22(I did for 6 years) just because it is too unforgiving and one bad day and it is all over. I know this can happen in any helicopter, but with 2200 hours in the R22 myself, I will say that it is very unforgiving. If all schools in the U.S. changed to R44s or 300s, personally I think the accident rate would decline(or of course, use highly experienced instructors). But -- MONEY-- drives it all. When guys ask me where to train I always recommened Canada these days. Great training and just a simple U.S. checkride when you come home to be dual licensed. Great training and expanded job opportunities. They use mostly R22s, but they have the experienced teachers.

Some might not agree with me on some of this, but it is just my opinion.

 

Marc D.

Edited August 18, 2007 by Marc D