Connundrums of aviation
Horatio,
Considering that on average actual IF time only makes up about 5% of a pilots hours, if someone had 200 hrs IF then they would have approx. 4000hrs. Enough to to probably consider yourself competent to instruct.
Considering that on average actual IF time only makes up about 5% of a pilots hours, if someone had 200 hrs IF then they would have approx. 4000hrs. Enough to to probably consider yourself competent to instruct.
Yeah sure Fonz - agreed. but 200 IF doesn't make you a skygod. 
Points 3 onward are all completely valid,
Point #1 - Agree that some commercial experience will improve an instructors capabilities, more so experience as an instructor tends to expand the bag of tricks. The CPL test is just a test of flying ability and airlaw aplication, that is fly within the tolerances and understand the rules and you get through. The newer pilots may have a better grasp of law and new procedures/techniques as they have just been through the process.
Point #2 - Very similar to point #1, and agree with horatio in the way 200 hours IF means nothing without context. 200 hours monitoring an coupled autopliot mostly straight and level may not have improved your techniques much at all. 200 hours of night freight minus an autopilot or radar with many approaches in bad weather and you might have learnt a thing or two.
Just because a pilot has vast experience in no way makes them a good instructor, if anything some older pilots may be the equivelent of doctors who still practice leeching. Having trained a number of instructors in the past I have seen this first hand, there are good and bad from all experience levels. No matter how experienced an instructor if they can not explain how to achieve something clearly they will be ineffective.
Point #1 - Agree that some commercial experience will improve an instructors capabilities, more so experience as an instructor tends to expand the bag of tricks. The CPL test is just a test of flying ability and airlaw aplication, that is fly within the tolerances and understand the rules and you get through. The newer pilots may have a better grasp of law and new procedures/techniques as they have just been through the process.
Point #2 - Very similar to point #1, and agree with horatio in the way 200 hours IF means nothing without context. 200 hours monitoring an coupled autopliot mostly straight and level may not have improved your techniques much at all. 200 hours of night freight minus an autopilot or radar with many approaches in bad weather and you might have learnt a thing or two.
Just because a pilot has vast experience in no way makes them a good instructor, if anything some older pilots may be the equivelent of doctors who still practice leeching. Having trained a number of instructors in the past I have seen this first hand, there are good and bad from all experience levels. No matter how experienced an instructor if they can not explain how to achieve something clearly they will be ineffective.
3/ We barter with FELLOW pilots, and FELLOW union members for the most meagre of pay increases.
I made four times as much dosh as my instructor last year! No, I don't fly for a living...
