Instructing with 75 hrs command...WTF?

[Willborne]

Sorry to say this but 75 hrs TT to begin to instruct in any capacity is a joke. By all means shadow a good CFI or senior at your school and learn more from their experiences but you need breadth and depth to take on this responsibility, having a CFI back in the hangar is no use when on short final low in a wind sheared PFL that YOU have to get out of while calmly coaching the student and fixing at the same time. I watched this happen in the motorcycle industry when Q RIde came in where instructors who had barely got their opens were teaching new riders . 7 years and many too many fatalities later I attended many "think tanks" on how to fix the problem that shouldn't,t have happened in the first place. Yes their were training standards issues but essentially it was the blind leading the blind.Now I know that this may offend some out there but maintaining and developing training standards is at the core of aviation safety.

 

Build two or three hundred hours at least, and I do mean least, and learn where an aircraft can be taken that it never should and then know what you need to do to get it back and then learn the polish to sell this in the vast amount of styles that the students who sit beside you will need but not know that until years later...

 

Then decide or better let those with this experience choose you.

You can have hundred or thousands of hours in command but if you don't know HOW to instruct and pass on knowledge it doesn't really matter. I've seen plenty of high hours instructors that can fly great but their briefings are hopeless, they bark at the student and keep stating just how good they really are and how bad the student is. Its not just hours and expereince its how the student is taught. Has the instructor got a good appreciation of the learning cycle? Can they communicate effectively? Or is it all about an ego hit for them. A good CFI wouldn't let a junior instructor anywhere near a student until they are satisfied they have the goods.

 

Don't just wrap it up in hours flown.

 

 

[Ultralights]

Don't forget, the 75 hr number is a legal number, in reality, i have never met a new instructor with just 75 hrs. Most if not all the Raaus instructor i know, myself included had at least 500 hrs before deciding on instructing, and all are CPL or GA rated instructors before becoming RAAus rated instructors.

 

 

[kiwicrusader]

Willborne I agree. However you can learn to teach, but you can't learn experience.

 

 

[Piet Fil]

Everyone in this discussion seems to gloss over the fact that that 75 is just a minimum requirement. There is also the fact that there is also:

 

1. an instructor training course to be done,

 

2. a competency based assessment to satisfy,

 

3. a pilot examiner, regional ops co-ordinator, Ops manager or Instructor trainer to put their name against the assessment of competence to instruct, and

 

4. then a CFI to satisfy to be employed and be able to instruct anyone.

 

It is the spirit of competency based training that if you can satisfy all the other barriers in the minimum time then you should be able to instruct. I think it would be a very rare occurence that a low hour pilot would be able to get through all the requirements and satisfy the competency elements. If they can, then they should be able to instruct under the supervision of a CFI.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Phil

 

 

[facthunter]

The big ego person will not be a good instructor. There should be no need for anyone to continually prove the point. There should be no contest, in the cockpit. Neither should there be any doubt about the necessary flying skills of the instructor, since in most situations the instructor is in command, I would not subject myself to any instructor I think would be a problem in that respect. Nev

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

...The RAA ops manual sets out a system where by a new instructor can only operate under the direct supervision of a CFI and cannot authorize any student for first solo or subsequent solo, also they are subject to regular check flights with the CFI as well as any student of the new instructor must have a check flight with the CFI at regular intervals . So an instructor until he/she has work up to and passed the criteria to become a senior instructor is very much under the wing of a CFI .

...

Even a Senior Instructor operates under the supervision of a CFI.

 

You cannot train without a CFI, albeit that for a Senior Instructor the CFI may be remote (as in a satellite FTF), but there must still be adequate supervision.

 

...Do I need a full FI rating to issue endorsements or is there some other sort of approval I can get based on experience, like a D Cat instructors rating in NZ?

Actually, even the CFI only recommends that an Endorsement be issued. The RAA Operations Manager is the sole issuing authority in RAA.

 

As I understand it, you would have to get your FI rating, then operate under a FTF's CFI, at their school. After becoming a Senior Instructor, you could continue in the same way, teach as a Satellite FTF, again under the FTF's CFI, or eventually apply for grant of a CFI Approval and open your own FTF.

 

 

[Ballpoint 246niner]

You can have hundred or thousands of hours in command but if you don't know HOW to instruct and pass on knowledge it doesn't really matter. I've seen plenty of high hours instructors that can fly great but their briefings are hopeless, they bark at the student and keep stating just how good they really are and how bad the student is. Its not just hours and expereince its how the student is taught. Has the instructor got a good appreciation of the learning cycle? Can they communicate effectively? Or is it all about an ego hit for them. A good CFI wouldn't let a junior instructor anywhere near a student until they are satisfied they have the goods.

Totally agree with everything you say mate, and as we know each other, and worked around the same PE( who is excellent), your argument is completely valid. You must teach because you love teaching and people, not just flying. All the experience in the world is useless unless you can pass it on to your students.

[Ballpoint 246niner]

Totally agree with everything you say mate, and as we know each other, and worked around the same PE( who is excellent), your argument is completely valid. You must teach because you love teaching and people, not just flying. All the experience in the world is useless unless you can pass it on to your students.

 

 

[frank marriott]

My view cost.

 

In GA at least [most] instructors are there to get command hours in order to gain employment in charter/airlines.

 

If good experienced instructors were paid what they are worth to keep them in training then the cost of learning would be too high.

 

This is a very general opinion and there will always be exceptions and not relevant to RA-AUS instructors in general.

 

Frank

 

 

[68volksy]

75 hours seems nowhere near enough hours in my view. Even the GA limit of 200 hours minimum seems pretty much useless. However if the CFI in charge is competent then things should, in theory, be fine. By competent I mean hard-nosed and immobile when it comes to safety procedures and pilot competence. They'd also need to actually be there supervising these 'green' instructors. There are plenty of (mostly young) instructors out there waving around a fresh "Instructor Rating" from schools who care more about the fees generated by the student than they do about pilot competence...

 

 

[JimG]

Well, I'm happy with my arrangement and how things are progressing.

 

Being a low time Pilot/Instructor, I'm not young , have no intentions of airlines or commercial, I definitely don't do it for money (it usually costs me more than I get paid) so that only leave flying and helping people learn to fly,that's it, that is where I get my reward and let me say I get a big kick out of it and find it very fulfilling.! As far as safety is concerned my CFI is a hard task master and my instructor training with him was like being in a boot camp, he taught how to recover the Drifter from extremely bad situations , attitudes and at low level as well. So I feel very confident to recognize and recover from student mishaps .

 

I know that most of the posts here would imply my experience is a long way short of what most consider reasonable and would most likely not want themselves or their relatives to fly with me and I respect that, but this also reminds me of 20+ years ago when I had a workshop and people would leave their cars with me and tell me most definitely not to allow the apprentice to work on there cars. One day I asked one of these people 'just who do you reckon is going to work on your car in 15 years from now if no apprentice is allowed to work on them today '.

 

Yes ,yes I know, this is a lot more serious than someone working on a car but I hope you get my drift.

 

My 2 cents

 

JimG

 

 

[gareth lacey]

*/Hi JimG

 

i agree the comments about apprentices if we as employers dont let them do the job they will never know how on thier own that being said if a an instructor isnt good with student pilots it would be hard to get the message across ie to stressful (especially older students )and could possibly put them off, i have a new instructor and i learn much quicker than with the last one (not regressing at all) good luck with your instructing as you say its not about the money(instructing seems to be poorly paid)you have to have a passion .

 

Bye the way if i lived closer i would get some instruction

 

cheers Gareth

 

 

[Willborne]

Totally agree with everything you say mate, and as we know each other, and worked around the same PE( who is excellent), your argument is completely valid. You must teach because you love teaching and people, not just flying. All the experience in the world is useless unless you can pass it on to your students.

Cheers Big Fella.