Letter to RAA mag

[shafs64]

I recived my latest copy of the RAA mag and there was a interesting letter about a chap who was haveing a lot issues getting his pilot certificate and siad that all the schools that he had been to where moveing the finish line on him.

 

Has anyone else had these sort of issues.

 

.

 

 

[kgwilson]

All instructors have different personalities and their own interpretation of any given process or procedure while following a given syllabus. When I was doing my PPL I had good and bad instructors. I have never been able to deal with poor performance without comment so I made sure that the CFI knew about it. I only ever flew once with a bad instructor.

 

Part of the problem as I understand it is that RAA instructors don't seem to follow a standard process. There was a thread a year or so back where some instructor was getting students to fly circuits before having been through the stalling process. A student needs to know what happens when an aircraft stalls before that IMHO as that's what you have to do to land.

 

The standard procedure for umpteen years & a tried & proven method was Familiarisation, Effect of Controls, Straight & level Flight, Climbing & descending, medium turns, Basic stalls, Power & flap stalls & after mastering those came Introduction to the Circuit.

 

The moving of the finish line needs a bit more clarification. It may be that the student when moving from one school to another feels that he is going through the same stuff again. Certainly he is going to have to demonstrate competence in any facet of flying with a new instructor and if not considered up to speed will need revision in any area the instructor deems necessary. This could be the problem. One instructor may consider the student competent and another may not. See my first paragraph.

 

I think the person who wrote the letter needs to elaborate a bit more.

 

 

[sfGnome]

I only had one instructor, but I've been on check flights since with a number of them and I think I understand a bit of what he was feeling. Different instructors have different emphases; one will crucify you if you don't know what his favourite acronym stands for, while another will take you to task for the 'wrong' approach in circuit. I'm confident enough now to know that I can learn something from all of them so there's nothing to fear, but the student is much more likely to be thrown by the variations.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Interesting discussion.

 

RAA badly needs to do work to produce a formal sequence so a student can study and be ready for the next lesson, subjects aren't missed, and the student doesn't go solo before key safety subjects have been taught.

 

Having said that, a similar formal Instructor training syllabus is badly needed

 

HOWEVER, even with both those sequences in place there will always be a variation in culture and attitude by instructors. If you get a bad one, or even a good one you can't relate to, move on immediately. You are the customer, it's your money you are pouring down the drain for no result.

 

Be honest with yourself though - if you know that what he/she is saying is true, grit your teeth and persevere; if you are careful and methodical you can still make a good pilot.

 

 

[johnm]

Instructors ........ touchy subject

 

I've always believed instructors are regular pilots just like the rest ........... they are just more current - and they have the ability to teach .............. some probably don't have liberal lashings of this ability

 

The only instructor that's given me the hebbie gebbies - without exaggeration - NZ - PPL flight - 1 to 2 mile finals - say < than 1000 feet - controlled airport - C152 (probably an aerobat) - he took control ........... full tit - did a loop - handed me control - continued on final to land ! ........... the instructor probably had to break out of the chains that held him - pity he had to involve me in it !

 

 

[cscotthendry]

I too have had good instructors and not-so-good instructors. The first instructor I ever went up with put me off flying for 20 years. I just assumed they would all be like that guy.

 

Unfortunately for me, I found more bad instructors or instructors that I had personality mismatches with (not conflicts) than good instructors. What I did find though is that when I found an instructor that I could relate to and that allowed me mental space whilst in the cockpit, I made great progress.

 

I also found that when I found an instructor that I really felt good with (in this case the CFI) I found that there were other instructors at the same school who were also to my liking. This seems to be consistent with the philosophy that the character of an organisation comes from the top down.

 

I have also heard of and narrowly missed getting involved with flying schools that "milk' the students. These unscrupulous operators keep the student stringing along and take a very looong time to allow the students to go solo or pass their exams.

 

My advice to wannabe pilots:Keep your eyes peeled and if you don't get along with your instructor or you suspect that your progress is being artificially impeded, walk out the door and don't go back. Don't allow yourself to be bullied, intimidated or conned. It takes a lot of focus and concentration when you're learning to fly. If you're not getting along with the other person in the cockpit, it just slows the whole process down.

 

 

[facthunter]

It might be worthwhile to expand the concept a bit here. You don't need to have the instructor as your best mate. All that really matters is that he knows what he/she is doing and can pass those skills on to you, effectively so that you attain a good standard. You should be "pushed" a bit by your instructor or you will think it is too easy. You should have preparation, preflight briefing and post flight discussion. All instructors work to a similar format of sequences being successfully achieved and signed off with comments, in your file.

 

Don't rush the first solo. Often students start to get concerned if they don't solo early.

 

One problem is what I would call idiosynchratic behaviour or "quirks". Some particular thing being done their particular way. A confident and experienced instructor should be able to cope with a wide variation in the way students approach the aviation learning process. If there is a clash of personality ( which should be rare) and it is bad, get another instructor. That's the usual best way out of it.

 

A large number of different instructors early in your experience, would have to add to the confusion, most times. It would be rare if it didn't. Later on every conversion or change should be seen as an opportunity to revisit your basic skills. ( As they apply to what you are doing , not go back to S&L etc specifically)

 

If you change schools, expect some extra "scrutiny' till you establish yourself with the new place, and the individuals. That always happens. Nev

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Do the RAA schools face any sort of auditing?

 

 

[Sapphire]

"Instructors" is one of my favorite topics. In your initial flying, impossible to evaluate as to good or bad or otherwise. Many are there to get hours to move on. A good instructor can adapt to the personality of the student. I rated them as barking dogs, mumblers, not very knowledgeable to top notch, spot on. Starting my navs, I had an an ex airline pilot instruct me in such a way, that today I would never use his methods [too much time on auto pilot for him] Since then, using a system so simple you can teach to a 6 year old. An incompatable or poor instructor is big bucks [from you and for him]

 

 

[Sapphire]

The only instructor that's given me the hebbie gebbies - without exaggeration - NZ - PPL flight - 1 to 2 mile finals - say < than 1000 feet - controlled airport - C152 (probably an aerobat) - he took control ........... full tit - did a loop - handed me control - continued on final to land ! ........... the instructor probably had to break out of the chains that held him - pity he had to involve me in it !

 

I've seen a senior flying instructor loose everything he had for pulling out of aerobatics with a passenger at a low altitude. One instructor for my commercial was telling me how docile that aircraft was in a stall and stalled it at about 50 feet take off from Jandakot. Air traffic control, I guess, informed the CFI who confronted me. That same instructor was fired after later collapsing an undercarrage. A gliding instructor thought I was too high on final and did a 360 turn. He was wrong on those two issues and others backed me up. Guess pilots get bored. Studies of dangerous points in a flying career show above average accidents at this stage.

 

 

[M61A1]

Do the RAA schools face any sort of auditing?

It is my understanding that they do. The first school that I trained at had people (AUF at the time) that came around at intervals and checked their record keeping and training facilities to make sure the used the appropriate syllabus and and aids in an appropriate environment.

I'm certain also that I have heard comment made by another more recent instructor regarding those that audit their facilities.

 

I suspect though, that the worst ( and not that bad really) instructor I've trained with, would have passed an audit with flying colours. He was meticulous, but I was basically paying him to take me flying, and the only learning I got was from watching him.

 

 

[facthunter]

I don't think the instructor should spend a lot of time actually demonstrating sequences. Do what is necessary but I think students resent it greatly when the instructor "hogs" the flying. I recall some of the ones I had did that, so it's possible I overcompensate. Opinions? Nev

 

 

[petetheprinta]

I was very lucky, I had one instructor throughout my training. I found her patient, understanding, firm when required but quick to compliment me on the odd occasion I got something right. A lovely lady whom I still ask to accompany me when I am unhappy with my flying and point out my errors.

 

 

[djpacro]

Agreed Nev.

 

Slightly off topic but the same attitude is even more annoying with aerobatic instructors trying to prove how good they are. Dangerous when you encounter one like Sapphire - and I know of one well known around.

 

CFI where I learnt to fly was first class, did some lessons with him towards my restricted PPL many years ago and he did my RPPL test. He is still instructing RAA at Barwon Heads and I would thoroughly recommend him to anyone. When he did my ab initio training I had no idea he was a top aerobatic pilot inc low level displays. He taught me aerobatics later.

 

 

[johnm]

Yes facthunter - instructors don't have to be your best mate ................ but from 0 to 75 hours (I was a sloowww PPL)the relationship is close - probably for the student than the instructor

 

During training, I believe that even if you have found the bestest instructor ................ you need to fly with others - you need different ideas, techniques etc

 

On the subject of who hogs the controls - these days I always make a point of letting the instructor fly the plane, at some point - they never say no ........ and its good for the cockpit interaction

 

 

[kaz3g]

Good instructors, like good teachers anywhere should be valued and appreciated. They are not necessarily qualified to fly heavy metal or to compete in a Red Bull, but they are able to communicate the essential skills they possess effectively and efficiently. The ability to communicate, listening as well as speaking, is the ultimate test of an instructor's skill.

 

I was very fortunate. After years of trying to kill myself by engaging in various risky behaviours, I finally learned to fly properly in gliders with a succession of great instructors... Peter Johnson, John Viny and Mike Valentine amongst them ... And became an instructor myself. Gliding quickly teaches you to think ahead, to fly always with an out landing in mind, to watch the weather and understand thermal and ridge currents, to beware of wind shear, to plan your circuits and to use the available landing area to best advantage always.

 

I later gained my PPL with Pat Schipp at Benalla who was exacting and demanding, but also very encouraging of high standards in his students. He also had a wicked sense of humour, especially when converting glider pilots.

 

On about my third lesson we did some recoveries from unusual attitudes... He stood the Warrior on its tail, chopped the throttle and said "your aircraft!"

 

We were hanging vertically on an idling prop and I immediately kicked the rudder and did a left-hand stall turn... A good one, too!

 

NO, NO, NO! He then demonstrated how the Warrior can easily be flown out of a stall using power and elevator without an appreciable height loss. Unstall the aircraft by releasing the back pressure on the elevators and apply power.

 

I went on and did a TW endorsement and some aeros with Sharpie at Coldstream in its early days and then spent my money on education for the kids instead.

 

And after a long period away from flying, I came back to it with Dick Gower's encouragement and benefited from his many years of experience. I even did a TW refresher with DJP at one stage and an Auster check with Nick Caldwell at Tyabb before purchasing BYM.

 

These are the people in aviation who left lasting good impressions on me. There were others of course, not all good, but those mentioned above are the people who have most impressed me for their instructional skills and I feel privileged to have shared a cockpit with each of them.

 

Kaz

 

 

[johnm]

good anecdote kaz3g

 

I was flying with and instructor in a piper tomahawk one day ...... a warm day ........... after a touch and go the tomahawk was not climbing out to well ........... probably a minute or 2 upwind we found the plane went a lot better with carb heat off

 

we both made the same mistake at the same time - but, I'd still call him a good instructor

 

 

[facthunter]

Everything contributes. Your mistakes, somebody elses,. reading reports and discussions like this one, provided you are of the mind to learn more.

 

With reference to the Carb. heat off problem, for the last 10 years or so, I have always recommended ( and practiced) checking it "off" whenever the throttle is fully opened. before that, I didn't..... The reason.that I double check.now...

 

One cold day I had a bulky vest on with largish sleeves. and during the taxy process the sleeve pulled the carb heat on. During the take-off when things were not going as fast as they should have, I did a quick recky and moved the carb to "cold". and the engine went like it should. The situation was actually quite critical and becoming more so rapidly. A side mounted throttle and mixture control without a friction lock was a contributor as well as the bulky sleeves.Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

Yep, those puffoon sleeves will do it every time.

 

Good idea that.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Flying in a pirate shirt is a no no.

 

Would the RAA be likely to investigate this sort of claim?

 

 

[kaz3g]

Speaking of letters in the current Sport Pilot, I was a tad amused by the letter and rapid response re use of non-TSO'd GPS equipment for navigation.

 

We have already had a lot of discussion in this forum about the rules that apply but I saw this and was then somewhat bemused as well:

 

http://www.macworld.com.au/news/ipad-takes-to-the-skies-as-qantas-pilots-scrap-paper-documents-63557/

 

Qantas has announced that it will be giving its pilots iPads for use during flights.

 

The Aussie airline has teamed up with Telstra to bring more than 2200 64GB iPads to the cockpit, to enable pilots to access operational information digitally, replacing paper charts, flight plans, manuals and forms for good, reports .

 

Currently, Qantas prints around 18,000 pages a day, a figure that will be reduced to just 3000 pages with the introduction of iPads. Plus, the weight of the paper on board will drop by 20kg.

 

Each of the iPads will have two apps that have been developed specifically for use by pilots. One app is for flight charts and the other is developed by Qantas itself for other flight information.

 

“The revolutionary capabilities of iPad technology, combined with the powerful customised apps, give our pilots the ability to replace cumbersome hard copies – saving time, resources and costs,” said Qantas Technical Pilot, Captain Alex Passerini.

 

Just tongue in cheek I was just wondering what they do if the batteries fail which seems to be part of the rationale for not using them in GA atm. I was also wondering why they can use their Jeppersen charts instead of WAC's etc like the rest of us. Perhaps they operate on a higher plane than us mere mortals?

 

kaz

 

 

[motzartmerv]

You have to 'click' with your instructor. He/she should know quite quickly if his methods are working, ie, if your learning. You don't have to personally like the guy, but if you feel your making progress then your in business.

 

Its a pet hate, and I see and hear of it frequently. No objective based training, no goal setting, no light at the end of the tunnel. Just what I call 'stoog' training, where you do lessons out of sequence, or a few different lessons in your hour.

 

We have a school nearby that are a great example. People come to us with 40-50 hours in their log books, and NO GFPT, let alone a PPL. A quick parouse shows whats been happening. No direction, no objectives. Just flying for the sake of flying.

 

A good question to ask of your instructor is "what is the objective for todays lesson?"

 

"Circuits" is not a good enough answer (for example.)

 

"Your objective today is to learn and fly a correct shape. Maintain 1000 ft on downwind. Adapt heading for drift, and give a turning base call".

 

Thats the sort of 'objective' based training and discussion you should be having. If your goal for THIS flight is clearly defined, you stand a much better chance of achieving it. Your instructor should focus his patter to the objectives you have discussed.

 

Later on it will change. ie,

 

"Now your flying the cct well, shape and height is good. Today we will focus on the appro0ach. I want to see you controlling the speed, maintaining the center line,the work cycle far end-aim point-airspeed, good rudder and aileron co-ordination and judging the flare height."

 

This IMHO is a key method in asuring you not only are, but that you feel you are progressing.

 

Also clearly expressing where you are in the 'order of things'. Ie, what sequences you have left before your cert issue, is very important.

 

I believe that Before solo, the correct sequences MUST be flown and a standard achieved IN THE CORRECT ORDER. After solo you can addapt a bit more and pick and choose from the sequences, providing the standard is being met and the solo consolidation is a priority.

 

cheers

 

 

[facthunter]

kaz responding to your tic comment. Most Internationals ( if not all) use Jeppessen approach charts. you can also access weather from other sources than BOM. I think I can recall using Jeppessen, offshore.

 

Aircraft above fl210 are not VFR anyhow. Most jets wouldn't carry a WAC.. I'm a bit surprised at the iPad use but one would think it would have to be approved to be used. There would have to be some back-up for essential information, also.

 

Can't see a non- TSO'd navigation instrument being permitted for IFR use. Nev

 

 

[kaz3g]

kaz responding to your tic comment. Most Internationals ( if not all) use Jeppessen approach charts. you can also access weather from other sources than BOM. I think I can recall using Jeppessen, offshore.Aircraft above fl210 are not VFR anyhow. Most jets wouldn't carry a WAC.. I'm a bit surprised at the iPad use but one would think it would have to be approved to be used. There would have to be some back-up for essential information, also.

Can't see a non- TSO'd navigation instrument being permitted for IFR use. Nev

Thanks, Nev. it was very tongue in cheek but it still makes you wonder about the reliance issue as they are being used for both charts and for aerodrome and other documentary information which would appear to be absolutely essential for their safe operation.

 

I think we are being a little slow on the uptake here. The US military and airline pilots are already using iPads to replace paper and that is precisely what the big Q is doing here now. I see this as a different question to that of TSO'D or non TSO'd GPS equipment even though I use the moving map AirNav program and the iPad as adjuncts to my clock,compass and paper navigation.

 

Each of these systems, AirNav running on my laptop with a Bluetooth GPS 22 satellite receiver and the iPad similarly linked and running Ozrunways have proven exceptionally accurate over a big area of Australia. On a recent trip up to Scone I planned via Wellington township but was having trouble seeing the field which is a few miles from the township ... I like to be sure of places I can land at ... against the westering sun of the late afternoon.

 

My moving map both gave me a very accurate ground fix and took me straight to the airstrip.

 

I know some die-hards won't use them at all but I figure the more help the better in the long run. Not like one FI I know who ended up out of daylight and outlanded because he couldn't find Broken Hill. One of his passengers had a GPS in his bag but didn't get it outs because the FIs dislike of them was well known. Not a good look!

 

Kaz

 

 

[turboplanner]

You have to 'click' with your instructor. He/she should know quite quickly if his methods are working, ie, if your learning. You don't have to personally like the guy, but if you feel your making progress then your in business.Its a pet hate, and I see and hear of it frequently. No objective based training, no goal setting, no light at the end of the tunnel. Just what I call 'stoog' training, where you do lessons out of sequence, or a few different lessons in your hour.

We have a school nearby that are a great example. People come to us with 40-50 hours in their log books, and NO GFPT, let alone a PPL. A quick parouse shows whats been happening. No direction, no objectives. Just flying for the sake of flying.

 

A good question to ask of your instructor is "what is the objective for todays lesson?"

 

"Circuits" is not a good enough answer (for example.)

 

"Your objective today is to learn and fly a correct shape. Maintain 1000 ft on downwind. Adapt heading for drift, and give a turning base call".

 

Thats the sort of 'objective' based training and discussion you should be having. If your goal for THIS flight is clearly defined, you stand a much better chance of achieving it. Your instructor should focus his patter to the objectives you have discussed.

 

Later on it will change. ie,

 

"Now your flying the cct well, shape and height is good. Today we will focus on the appro0ach. I want to see you controlling the speed, maintaining the center line,the work cycle far end-aim point-airspeed, good rudder and aileron co-ordination and judging the flare height."

 

This IMHO is a key method in asuring you not only are, but that you feel you are progressing.

 

Also clearly expressing where you are in the 'order of things'. Ie, what sequences you have left before your cert issue, is very important.

 

I believe that Before solo, the correct sequences MUST be flown and a standard achieved IN THE CORRECT ORDER. After solo you can addapt a bit more and pick and choose from the sequences, providing the standard is being met and the solo consolidation is a priority.

 

cheers

This is worth repeating.