Screening Out The Nutters
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW,
The starting point in 'weeding out the nutters' has to start with FI's.
There are some first rate enthusiastic professional instructors out there, but there are also some lazy idiots.
An FI is only going to be as good as the person that taught them, because 'You don't know, what you don't know'.
It is no good an FI flying on a totally unsuitable day and then trying to convince ppl's they shouldn't. IMHO we should be setting the standard.
Examples:
The FI who on a fly out arrived looking like death warmed up, before proudly boasting he'd been on the 'pop' till 0400.
The CFI who before an LPC asked the collected FI's if the applicant smelt of booze? Applicant did, and still having flown walked away with an LPC
The CFI who proclaimed a SFH ppl needed his next ten hours flown dual as he'd been seen 'twirling' past a hotel at 100' agl as he flew past. Two guesses who'd shown the ppl that trick?
The same FI who buzzed a speedboat along a busy beach and who routinely flew over the water below the height of the nearby cliffs.
Maybe when 'our' own house is in order we'd be in a better position to identify the 'nutters'
Rotary wise I can only think of one place that fails people on LPC's if they don't make the required grade
And don't start me on FI's who don't brief properly.
My yard stick always has been and will always be - 'would I trust this person to fly my family'. For me it's that simple
The starting point in 'weeding out the nutters' has to start with FI's.
There are some first rate enthusiastic professional instructors out there, but there are also some lazy idiots.
An FI is only going to be as good as the person that taught them, because 'You don't know, what you don't know'.
It is no good an FI flying on a totally unsuitable day and then trying to convince ppl's they shouldn't. IMHO we should be setting the standard.
Examples:
The FI who on a fly out arrived looking like death warmed up, before proudly boasting he'd been on the 'pop' till 0400.
The CFI who before an LPC asked the collected FI's if the applicant smelt of booze? Applicant did, and still having flown walked away with an LPC
The CFI who proclaimed a SFH ppl needed his next ten hours flown dual as he'd been seen 'twirling' past a hotel at 100' agl as he flew past. Two guesses who'd shown the ppl that trick?
The same FI who buzzed a speedboat along a busy beach and who routinely flew over the water below the height of the nearby cliffs.
Maybe when 'our' own house is in order we'd be in a better position to identify the 'nutters'
Rotary wise I can only think of one place that fails people on LPC's if they don't make the required grade
And don't start me on FI's who don't brief properly.
My yard stick always has been and will always be - 'would I trust this person to fly my family'. For me it's that simple
Home guard...
I do agree with your statement in regards to allowing the student to follow through on the flight controls--if you wanna swim ---you gotta get wet
My opinions on the matter:
to preclude having to elbow students--or resort to other acts of violence:
All necessary info should have been drilled in at ground school and those touching the ship---understand it--- because it's difficult to advance manuevers and or procedures when conceptual understanding is poor---
I don't believe that ground school be taught in a superfluously technical manner---quite the opposite-in fact
---but ---
even at the most basic level VFR-contact---horizon /needle/ ball and airspeed there's gobs of material to be learned--and only true-hearted people would remain---of course that does not prevent a student from flying maneuver that they understand---very early on--but should the student tackle a cross country flight without thoroughly understanding weather/notams/ airspace/ flight planning and weight and balance with a modicum of aeronautical decision making skills? --NO---
but--
Turns/ climbs/unusual/ attitudes/ TO LDG are more immediate issues and can be readily understood---you can make a very professional pilot [in an average person!!} in less than 200 hrs---not experienced but professional---and a ppl who will live to tell plenty lies in the hangar
-- and --
--this could be done well within the US required time 40-50 hr---but IF and ONLY IF the instructors creative not necessarily the student--
My view of the matter may be too simple but to me flying is simply contact/ instrument/ aerobatic/ formation---with the personal option of stopping anywhere along the line--whilst staying safe and well within one's chosen personal limitations--
Flying really does it's own laundry anyways--I suppose
As for me I ONLY deal with professionals
PA
Stories of having to elbow people in the face to release their grip during a spiral dive were in the forefront of her mind. She would therefore introduce them to the controls only when they were at a safe height. A friend of hers from the same course also had had a few scares. They both seemed to have attended the Valhalla School of Death & Flight Instructing.
My opinions on the matter:
to preclude having to elbow students--or resort to other acts of violence:
All necessary info should have been drilled in at ground school and those touching the ship---understand it--- because it's difficult to advance manuevers and or procedures when conceptual understanding is poor---
I don't believe that ground school be taught in a superfluously technical manner---quite the opposite-in fact
---but ---
even at the most basic level VFR-contact---horizon /needle/ ball and airspeed there's gobs of material to be learned--and only true-hearted people would remain---of course that does not prevent a student from flying maneuver that they understand---very early on--but should the student tackle a cross country flight without thoroughly understanding weather/notams/ airspace/ flight planning and weight and balance with a modicum of aeronautical decision making skills? --NO---
but--
Turns/ climbs/unusual/ attitudes/ TO LDG are more immediate issues and can be readily understood---you can make a very professional pilot [in an average person!!} in less than 200 hrs---not experienced but professional---and a ppl who will live to tell plenty lies in the hangar
-- and --
--this could be done well within the US required time 40-50 hr---but IF and ONLY IF the instructors creative not necessarily the student--
My view of the matter may be too simple but to me flying is simply contact/ instrument/ aerobatic/ formation---with the personal option of stopping anywhere along the line--whilst staying safe and well within one's chosen personal limitations--
Flying really does it's own laundry anyways--I suppose
As for me I ONLY deal with professionals
PA
Last edited by Pugilistic Animus; 12th May 2008 at 16:30. Reason: lots of spelling errors
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flingingwings,
You got that spot on!! There are some real idiots out there. Im looking at possibly doing an FI course but the two FIC instructors Ive looked at so far are appaling!
One's an ex old School RAF person whos stuck in WW2! The other is a bitter failed airline pilot!!
Im not going to pay 6-7k to get abused!! I'm mad but not a sadist!!
A couple of freinds have said finding a good FIC instructor is like gold dust, but when you do find one, you cant go wrong!
You got that spot on!! There are some real idiots out there. Im looking at possibly doing an FI course but the two FIC instructors Ive looked at so far are appaling!
One's an ex old School RAF person whos stuck in WW2! The other is a bitter failed airline pilot!!
Im not going to pay 6-7k to get abused!! I'm mad but not a sadist!!
A couple of freinds have said finding a good FIC instructor is like gold dust, but when you do find one, you cant go wrong!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And thats my point.
Good schools is the wrong line of thinking. What this industry needs are good instructors, and to weed out those that aren't.
It's a chat I've had with VeeAny at the helicopter safety evenings. The after meeting chats in the bar have shown that a high number of students get little to no pre flight briefings and some schools will suggest that brand new students start on 3 hours actual flight training per day
Problem is students know no better and have no idea what to expect. It's been suggested that the CAA create a form on line that is basically a Code of Practice. A form that will allow a new student to know exactly what they should be getting for their money. The form to be printed off (for free) and signed by the new ppl student. The form becoming the front sheet of any training records. No form = no training
All FI's pass the initial rating test but three yearly isn't enough to ensure standards are maintained. It's also been suggested that every once in a while a CAA Ops Inspector arrives unannounced and asks to sit in on a pre flight briefing. We could all make the extra effort to pass a revalidation, but what 'we' need is a way of seeing who's not making the effort on a day to day basis.
I made a better job of explaining hovering over a beer to one student, than the students actual instructor who'd provided no preflight brief, and when the student struggled with hovering suggested they look at take offs and landings
Other suggestions were a prescribed Wx minima for trial lessons, and an official line removing the myth that good pilots or instructors will get students to solo after 5 hours. IMHO thats nothing to boast about! This information could go on the same form as above, and be required to be kept by the schools.
Nobody disagrees that the lot of FI's can be pretty poor at times, whats wrong with parting the wheat from the chaff and taking active steps against the cowboy operators????? I'd never advocate paying a lazy instructor the same as a thorough professional instructor.
Just maybe, one day decent instructors will teach 'nutter' students properly, so that they become decent licence holders.
I'd also like to add that I'm not tarring all instructors with the same brush.
Thoughts/comments???????????
Good schools is the wrong line of thinking. What this industry needs are good instructors, and to weed out those that aren't.
It's a chat I've had with VeeAny at the helicopter safety evenings. The after meeting chats in the bar have shown that a high number of students get little to no pre flight briefings and some schools will suggest that brand new students start on 3 hours actual flight training per day
Problem is students know no better and have no idea what to expect. It's been suggested that the CAA create a form on line that is basically a Code of Practice. A form that will allow a new student to know exactly what they should be getting for their money. The form to be printed off (for free) and signed by the new ppl student. The form becoming the front sheet of any training records. No form = no training
All FI's pass the initial rating test but three yearly isn't enough to ensure standards are maintained. It's also been suggested that every once in a while a CAA Ops Inspector arrives unannounced and asks to sit in on a pre flight briefing. We could all make the extra effort to pass a revalidation, but what 'we' need is a way of seeing who's not making the effort on a day to day basis.
I made a better job of explaining hovering over a beer to one student, than the students actual instructor who'd provided no preflight brief, and when the student struggled with hovering suggested they look at take offs and landings
Other suggestions were a prescribed Wx minima for trial lessons, and an official line removing the myth that good pilots or instructors will get students to solo after 5 hours. IMHO thats nothing to boast about! This information could go on the same form as above, and be required to be kept by the schools.
Nobody disagrees that the lot of FI's can be pretty poor at times, whats wrong with parting the wheat from the chaff and taking active steps against the cowboy operators????? I'd never advocate paying a lazy instructor the same as a thorough professional instructor.
Just maybe, one day decent instructors will teach 'nutter' students properly, so that they become decent licence holders.
I'd also like to add that I'm not tarring all instructors with the same brush.
Thoughts/comments???????????
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Take a look at On Track training at Wellesbourne. I find them to be first class. They are staffed by airline pilots and senior CAA staff. They also only do Instructor training so are very focused.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope did my Instructor course with them a couple of years ago. A friend has just done it with them and still says the same impeccable standards are maintained.
They do the full gammt of trainining right up to training instructor trainers.
They do the full gammt of trainining right up to training instructor trainers.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst it may be off thread, I also did both the CPL and FI courses with On Track. Superb instruction. Mostly ex RAF aircrew instructors (which I also had for Post-PPL continuation training, IMCR and Aeros and I believe to have the best instructional techniques but that's just my opinion ).
).
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's our responsibility as instructors to slightly aid in this process.
In the spirit that every flight instruction is provided, there is also assessment. I all too often see instructors passing students on lessons before they are ready to move on. If they don't meet the required standard they shouldn't progress further through the syllabus.
If the situation, does arise, I think it's best to try and make the student come to their own decision that flying (or trying to fly commercially isn't best for them). Try and put the flight into scenario and ask how they would see them fitting into a commercial airline.
There has been one student who I flew with once, and others flew with who I would have serious misgivings about getting into an aircraft with. He did, however, pass on his 6th series commercial
In the spirit that every flight instruction is provided, there is also assessment. I all too often see instructors passing students on lessons before they are ready to move on. If they don't meet the required standard they shouldn't progress further through the syllabus.
If the situation, does arise, I think it's best to try and make the student come to their own decision that flying (or trying to fly commercially isn't best for them). Try and put the flight into scenario and ask how they would see them fitting into a commercial airline.
There has been one student who I flew with once, and others flew with who I would have serious misgivings about getting into an aircraft with. He did, however, pass on his 6th series commercial
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Homeguard - don't you feel there is a limit somewhere in how much time and effort you should require to pass a PPL or CPL or whatever license? I know that some are slow learners but the issue is that it doesn't end with them completing their exam. They then need to practice on their own, safely. If it takes 6 attempts to complete a CPL then perhaps there's more than just slow learning to worry about.
A recent student of ours just bent up a C172 in unbelievably nice weather, no wind (2 knots variable), CAVOK etc. Still managed to run off the runway and into a fence about 100 m from the centerline after a run of 500 meters. Nothing wrong with the aircraft, but you need to pay attention to what you are doing.
Nobody understands why this happened and he has no explanation of his own. Wants to fly the jets but I'm seriously worried. Still, he managed a PPL so it's all fine and dandy then, or?
A recent student of ours just bent up a C172 in unbelievably nice weather, no wind (2 knots variable), CAVOK etc. Still managed to run off the runway and into a fence about 100 m from the centerline after a run of 500 meters. Nothing wrong with the aircraft, but you need to pay attention to what you are doing.
Nobody understands why this happened and he has no explanation of his own. Wants to fly the jets but I'm seriously worried. Still, he managed a PPL so it's all fine and dandy then, or?
Dancing with the devil, going with the flow... it's all a game to me.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Matthew,
I would imagine other instructors have flown with your students and thought some were not showing the required level too. All we can go by is the level displayed at the end of the previous lesson - if the student ticks all the boxes we move on. If, for some reason, the student has forgotten or regressed slightly on their next lesson with another instructor (bad day perhaps?) it is often just part and parcel of learning and also, the slight pressure of flying with a different instructor. Also, students all too often will pretend they have not been taught something when questioned about it by a different instructor. To mount the high horse and suspect poor instruction is rather naive.
VFE.
I would imagine other instructors have flown with your students and thought some were not showing the required level too. All we can go by is the level displayed at the end of the previous lesson - if the student ticks all the boxes we move on. If, for some reason, the student has forgotten or regressed slightly on their next lesson with another instructor (bad day perhaps?) it is often just part and parcel of learning and also, the slight pressure of flying with a different instructor. Also, students all too often will pretend they have not been taught something when questioned about it by a different instructor. To mount the high horse and suspect poor instruction is rather naive.
VFE.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nobody understands why this happened and he has no explanation of his own. Wants to fly the jets but I'm seriously worried. Still, he managed a PPL so it's all fine and dandy then, or?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too fast
deice
Can only be three reasons for overshooting; Too high, too fast or both. Only one rule - GO AROUND unless height and speed are correct. Light winds are usually the most difficult condition for most. Get things wrong and no time to correct - events overtaking.
Breaking an aircraft is an expensive way of learning but how much effort and how long it takes dosn't matter much. Often in my experience the slow learner is often the one who learns in depth and will be the most experienced.
A point that we instructors must not forget is the importance of the student understanding the factors with relation to calm conditions. The student should be checked out on a calm day for the same reasons as on a windy/gusty day. On the one hand too high a speed will be consequential but on the other control ability is essential. On a strip of only 600m the calm day will require that the pilot has established the correct speed early on and is always on guard to go around. Our single engine SOPS require that an assessment is made at 300ft with an absolute land/go around prior to the threshold. If they are deciding during the hold-off - that is too late!
Can only be three reasons for overshooting; Too high, too fast or both. Only one rule - GO AROUND unless height and speed are correct. Light winds are usually the most difficult condition for most. Get things wrong and no time to correct - events overtaking.
Breaking an aircraft is an expensive way of learning but how much effort and how long it takes dosn't matter much. Often in my experience the slow learner is often the one who learns in depth and will be the most experienced.
A point that we instructors must not forget is the importance of the student understanding the factors with relation to calm conditions. The student should be checked out on a calm day for the same reasons as on a windy/gusty day. On the one hand too high a speed will be consequential but on the other control ability is essential. On a strip of only 600m the calm day will require that the pilot has established the correct speed early on and is always on guard to go around. Our single engine SOPS require that an assessment is made at 300ft with an absolute land/go around prior to the threshold. If they are deciding during the hold-off - that is too late!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To mount the high horse and suspect poor instruction is rather naive.
Just suggesting that sometimes students do need consolidation before moving on, the old building block technique, how can they move on when they haven't grasped the basics idea?
