CFI's and people who can teach

[rrogerramjet]

I have a breadth of experience with various 'instructors' and most of them have been adequate because I'm still hee today.

 

I found this tonight and putting aside the specific of the lesson I think if I had a CFI with this much skill I'd be both a better pilot and massively reduce my hours to test / endorsement.

 

The communication the setup and the guidance is a skill itself.

 

I touched on this in another thread but didn't get the message through. There's people who make a $ trying to teach people to fly and then theres real instructors....

 

 

 

[SSCBD]

Many think they can - but cant. simple fact. Love to do a rating on flying schools from a independent point of view, outside RAA or GA bubble system. Then again would probably be sued from hurting some feelings of the precious.

 

However teaching 25 hours ish to a student is not hard just tick the boxes.

 

 

[RossMc]

Those two are my favourites to follow on Youtube. I have been listening to the TFP podcast for a while now and have gleaned a few good nuggets from it.

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

So I wonder if there is a formal instructors course for CFI's ? Should all instructors be required to do a Cert IV in Training, at the very least?

 

Beyond being a good pilot with the right hours in the logbook what else certifies a CFI as someone who can effectively instruct?

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

So I have confirmed that Cert IV training and assessment is the minimum requirement for CFI I did this certification with my eyes closed and beers at lunchtime during the course. Not ideal.

 

Using simple sums I think the requirements suggest 300hrs minimum.

 

https://www.casa.gov.au/file/161086/download?token=ePQhndV7

 

Given I am topping out towards 100 hrs I got my Cert IV training maybe 20 yrs ago.....its not too mamy hrs until I can potentially teach all my bad habits to the next sucker. ..hmm. Scary.

 

Fly safe

 

Ramjet

 

 

[Geoff13]

Better do some more homework I think.

 

RRAus Ops Manual is very clear on requirements for an Instructor, a Senior Instructor and then CFI.

 

It is certainly niether a simple step nor a short step to become a CFI.

 

Aand if you cant find those requirements yourself, then you probably dont meet the rquirements of an instructor let alone a CFI

 

 

[TBLG]

My first lesson at EGBG (Leicester East) in the U.K. was with an ex WW ll Hurricane pilot. On arriving at the club house he took me into the kitchen and told me that he would demonstrate the theory of flight with: A knife, a fork, a spoon and a pencil. (?)

 

1. He asked me to introduce the knife held by two fingers into a stream of water from the tap. Naturally the flat blade of the knife was repelled by the stream of water.
    
    
   
2. He then asked me to introduce the back of the spoon, held in the same manner, into the same stream of water. The spoon was pulled into the stream. He explained that similarly the top of a wing is curved to allow the airstream to 'suck' at the top of the wing to support the weight of the aircraft.
    
    
   
3. He then crossed the knife and fork and stood beside me holding the pencil which I moved and he climbed, dived and turned the (knife and fork) aircraft accordingly. He also warned me to always check fuel cap security on the top of a wing as the fuel can disappear VERY quickly!
    
    
   

 

 

A lesson that I have always remembered from 1967. Thank you John!!!

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

Better do some more homework I think.

RRAus Ops Manual is very clear on requirements for an Instructor, a Senior Instructor and then CFI.

It is certainly niether a simple step nor a short step to become a CFI.

 

Aand if you cant find those requirements yourself, then you probably dont meet the rquirements of an instructor let alone a CFI

Hi @Geoff13

The base requirements to commence instruction as someone who teaches others in GA are prety straighforward. I presume RA is same or similar.

You're pointless personal barbs add nothing to a discussion about the general abilities of people to instruct. I certainly hope you are not one with such a blunt and derogatory attitude. I'd loathe to be a struggling student in your cockpit.

Thanks anyway,

Ramjet

[rrogerramjet]

A lesson that I have always remembered from 1967. Thank you John!!!

Hi @TBLG

That's a great example of a use of props to deliver a lifelong memorable lesson. Does anyone have any other tales of memorable, or insufferable, lessons that left some imprint?

I had an instructor who left me with 'Flying is the pusuit of perfection' Timing descent into circuit perfectly, fuel planning that pans out to the litre, trimming and leaning in cruise perfectly. Etc etc. Each thing you do should be not just 'good enough' but has it been done with greatest efficiency and outcome. We all know landings are a endless pursuit of perfection.

 

Cheers

Ramjet

[poteroo]

Roger,

 

I'd suggest that you talk with several CFI's around our large country. Becoming a 'successful' instructor/SI or CFI has a lot less to do with passing Certificate IV or PMI, but more to do with being empathetic and perceptive with students. You also don't have to be Chuck Yeager insofar as aircraft handling is concerned - just steady and safe does the trick. Not meant as criticism btw. happy days,

 

 

[facthunter]

Sometimes being a perfectionist can be an obsession and like all obsessions can become a cause in it's own right. No landing is PERFECT If it was it's a fluke to a certain extent. FAQ all the time with good control is better than mostly greasers with the occasional ....What happened there moment?. If you try for greasers above all things you may float too far (approach with extra speed). In the wet you don't aim for a greaser or you might burst a tyre. Set yourself a high standard by all means, but that should be more directed at the decisions you made and how you managed the conduct of the flight with respect to the changing circumstances you encountered.. How accurate was the planning. did you brief your passengers appropriately. Did you have ready alternatives of something went wrong?. There is always room for improvement. Getting some sums right to the 3rd decimal place is no point, if you took the deviation off instead of putting it on, when on a reciprocal track. Nev

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

Sometimes being a perfectionist can be an obsession and like all obsessions can become a cause in it's own right. No landing is PERFECT If it was it's a fluke to a certain extent. FAQ all the time with good control is better than mostly greasers with the occasional ....What happened there moment?. If you try for greasers above all things you may float too far (approach with extra speed). In the wet you don't aim for a greaser or you might burst a tyre. Set yourself a high standard by all means, but that should be more directed at the decisions you made and how you managed the conduct of the flight with respect to the changing circumstances you encountered.. How accurate was the planning. did you brief your passengers appropriately. Did you have ready alternatives of something went wrong?. There is always room for improvement. Getting some sums right to the 3rd decimal place is no point, if you took the deviation off instead of putting it on, when on a reciprocal track. Nev

And therein inherent in that approach to flying is an honest debrief after each flight on ' how could I have done that better'? Which is 'the pursuit of perfection'.

On the odd occasion I'm up with pax it's often useful to ask what they thought of the flying (as opposed to the flight experience). Surprisingly I often get quite insightful responses, views on high approach speeds, less than perfect landings, poor pax briefings...etc.

 

Cheers

 

Ramjet

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

Roger,

 

I'd suggest that you talk with several CFI's around our large country. Becoming a 'successful' instructor/SI or CFI has a lot less to do with passing Certificate IV or PMI, but more to do with being empathetic and perceptive with students. You also don't have to be Chuck Yeager insofar as aircraft handling is concerned - just steady and safe does the trick. Not meant as criticism btw. happy days,

@poteroo I'm not (yet) interested in instructing just interested to know what people might think is good, bad or otherwise.

Many have said I'm a great mentor, but that doesn't mean I'm cut out for high pressure instruction. If I ever feel confident, maybe as a semi-retirement gig.

Not that I ever plan on redoing my RA and PPL certs all over again, but there are some signs I've identified to pick up early on who's a good/bad instructor. And to throw another variable in, people have different learning styles.

One bad sign I've noted ( and unfortunately you need two different instructors to note the delta ) is those who ask " What did you think was wrong with that?" take partial control, runs verbally through actions vs. " That was wrong, here let me demonstrate" grabs controls, flies like an ace, explains nothing, " There see how it's done!"

Often subtle, but markedly different.

 

Cheers

Ramjet

[Geoff13]

Hi @Geoff13

The base requirements to commence instruction as someone who teaches others in GA are prety straighforward. I presume RA is same or similar.

You're pointless personal barbs add nothing to a discussion about the general abilities of people to instruct. I certainly hope you are not one with such a blunt and derogatory attitude. I'd loathe to be a struggling student in your cockpit.

Thanks anyway,

Ramjet

 

It wasn't meant to be a personal Barb. But if you took it as such I am sorry.

I was merely pointing out that within RAA there is far more to becoming a CFI than a Cert 4.

As it turns out you will never have to worry about being a struggling student in my cockpit because I am not an instructor.

I did once consider becoming one purely to try and improve my own flying skills, but RAA instructor rating according to the Ops Manual is more directed at instructional techniques rather than flying training so I decided not to bother.

For me personally becoming an instructor so that I can teach is a low priority as I fly for pleasure and worry that if I started to instruct it become another job to me.

[rrogerramjet]

It wasn't meant to be a personal Barb. But if you took it as such I am sorry.

I was merely pointing out that within RAA there is far more to becoming a CFI than a Cert 4.

As it turns out you will never have to worry about being a struggling student in my cockpit because I am not an instructor.

I did once consider becoming one purely to try and improve my own flying skills, but RAA instructor rating according to the Ops Manual is more directed at instructional techniques rather than flying training so I decided not to bother.

For me personally becoming an instructor so that I can teach is a low priority as I fly for pleasure and worry that if I started to instruct it become another job to me.

Thanks and appreciated @Geoff13 ,

Interesting comments there, you were considering CFI to improve your own flying skills, so it might be your motivations were misdirected, but you recognised that.

I wonder how many long term PPL / CPL who never quite crack the big time commercial game (or make a choice not to) but after a 'semi career' of flying in smaller ops say, ah well I'll just get my CFI and be an instructor, theres a job.

I would suggest the RA and GA instructor endorsements should start with some sort of psychometric assessment on your ability to instruct, as a stage gate for continuance. Mind you I can get a teachers degree without any such assesment... and then teach all your precious little children.

Aptitude to pass knowledge is often an intangible.

 

Cheers

R

[facthunter]

. Instruction... Some people might show a greater "aptitude" for it. but a lot can be taught about how to instruct. TRAINING is important in ALL parts of aviation. An instructor will learn fast in the early stages as the students will put the plane into situations the instructor never would. His standard of flying should always be upstream of "sound". Briefing in the air should be minimal It's not the best use of your money as you can't concentrate and you don't have the aids and whiteboard or charts there.. Talking someone through a particular sequence is not what I would call a briefing. Briefing before flight covers the skill and technique involved in the sequence in conjunction with a study guide or manual. The debriefing covers how it went and any questions the student may want to clarify and consolidate what happened..

 

Students are always different. The instructor has to vary the "way" the skill is imparted to the individual. The older way was to just do the more or less standard patter and keep things "by the book and simple" More ROTE learning than is optimum). Always a % were expected to fail.

 

It's unlikely a low hours instructor will have developed the skills to do this effectively that is why he/she acts under the CFI significantly in the early stages of their instructional career.. Obviously a fair bit of psychological "nous" of handling people's idiosynchracies and preconceptions is an advantage. People are and always will be, complex creatures. Nev

 

 

[SDQDI]

Thanks and appreciated @Geoff13 ,

Interesting comments there, you were considering CFI to improve your own flying skills, so it might be your motivations were misdirected, but you recognised that.

I wonder how many long term PPL / CPL who never quite crack the big time commercial game (or make a choice not to) but after a 'semi career' of flying in smaller ops say, ah well I'll just get my CFI and be an instructor, theres a job.

I would suggest the RA and GA instructor endorsements should start with some sort of psychometric assessment on your ability to instruct, as a stage gate for continuance. Mind you I can get a teachers degree without any such assesment... and then teach all your precious little children.

Aptitude to pass knowledge is often an intangible.

 

Cheers

R

 

Geoff didn't say he considered becoming a CFI he said he considered getting his instructors rating. There is a fair difference between a simple instructor and a CFI.

[Happyflyer]

Geoff didn't say he considered becoming a CFI he said he considered getting his instructors rating. There is a fair difference between a simple instructor and a CFI.

There may be some confusion coming in from the US where any flight instructor is a CFI (certified flying instructor).

 

 

[Geoff13]

Geoff didn't say he considered becoming a CFI he said he considered getting his instructors rating. There is a fair difference between a simple instructor and a CFI.

 

There may be some confusion coming in from the US where any flight instructor is a CFI (certified flying instructor).

That was where my original comment was headed. In RAA at lease there are big steps to becoming a CFI.

 

Not certain of the hours now but basically I think it follows something similar to the below.

 

Instructor

 

100hours plus PMI plus Instructors course.

 

Senior Instructor

 

d. have utilised their instructor rating at an RAAus FTS and satisfied their CFI (or higher approval holder) that they will be capable of carrying out the duties and responsibilities of a Senior Instructor, detailed in Section 1.07; and e. have demonstrated to their CFI the ability to satisfactorily train and correctly assess at least 3 RAAus Student Pilots for their first solo flight; and

 

RAAus OPERATIONS MANUAL Section 2.09 - 1 ISSUE 7.1 –AUGUST 2016

 

GROUP A and B

 

f. Demonstrate to a CFI (or higher approval holder) the ability to give ground and in-flight instruction to persons undertaking training in recreational aeroplanes in the Aeroplane Group for which the rating is sought.

 

Note: First solo means the first solo flight of a Student Pilot who has never acted as pilot in command under any other Certificate or Licence.

 

CFI

 

AERONAUTICAL EXPERIENCE

 

4. Prior to undertaking an in-flight examination for the issue of a Group A or B Chief Flying Instructor Approval, an applicant must: a. have a minimum of 250 hours logged as a flight instructor in Group A or B recreational aeroplanes; or  b. have held a RAAus Instructor Rating, or RAAus Senior Instructor Rating, for a combined period of at least 12 months.

 

5. If having recognised qualifications from a recognised organisation other than RAAus, the candidate must satisfy the requirements of Section 2.13 Paragraphs 12 and 13 of this manual.

 

 

[rrogerramjet]

. Instruction... Some people might show a greater "aptitude" for it. but a lot can be taught about how to instruct. TRAINING is important in ALL parts of aviation. An instructor will learn fast in the early stages as the students will put the plane into situations the instructor never would. His standard of flying should always be upstream of "sound". Briefing in the air should be minimal It's not the best use of your money as you can't concentrate and you don't have the aids and whiteboard or charts there.. Talking someone through a particular sequence is not what I would call a briefing. Briefing before flight covers the skill and technique involved in the sequence in conjunction with a study guide or manual. The debriefing covers how it went and any questions the student may want to clarify and consolidate what happened..

Students are always different. The instructor has to vary the "way" the skill is imparted to the individual. The older way was to just do the more or less standard patter and keep things "by the book and simple" More ROTE learning than is optimum). Always a % were expected to fail.

It's unlikely a low hours instructor will have developed the skills to do this effectively that is why he/she acts under the CFI significantly in the early stages of their instructional career.. Obviously a fair bit of psychological "nous" of handling people's idiosynchracies and preconceptions is an advantage. People are and always will be, complex creatures. Nev

Good points @facthunter. Its a complex interplay between instructor and instructee. In your humble experience, do you still think there are some people who, under any tutelage, will never achieve the practical skills to pass a flying test?

 

Cheers

Ramjet

[facthunter]

Ramjet, There are and always will be some who just won't make it, and this applies at all levels. Perhaps flying with a safety pilot would cover some access for them. if their desire to fly is strong, in the sport and recreational area.. It's a big question you raise. The question of predictability of the pilot's capacity to fly safely is a large ask. "Would my wife and kids be safe flying with this person?" was often the unofficial standard applied. Certain personality traits may make the decision difficult. This may not matter as much in the U/L environment as it would in say airlines, because of the larger responsibility entailed in the operation, and the pressures put on the operator. to provide a service virtually 24/7 in all kinds of flying conditions, and on time.

 

In the basic flying skills area, like riding a motorbike, some minimum sound level of operating is required. I have never believed that ANYBODY can fly a plane beyond performing the simplest attitude changes. .The view that ALL can is often run as a sort of advertising campaign/assertion by commercial interests, and I don't believe it's completely honest.

 

Often foreigners come here, pay their money (or their parents do) and then DEMAND their pilot's licence as a right. This is hard to square with the performance based assessment that is the accepted basis of being signed off, here. and users of the Industry expect.. If you want to, you can fail almost anybody if you load them right up with near impossible tasks. THAT is not what should happen from a fairness aspect. Pilots will leave the Industry of their own volition sometimes or fail to pass checks and not have their rating renewed, or they fail on a new type endorsement. The recurrent checks are frequent and thorough. If an airline shows some apparent lack of safety the Plane's builder or the Authority will buy into it and pressure the operator re flight standards. Could be an incorrect procedure being taught, or an upgraded one being needed in the light of incidents and experience world wide.. Nev

 

 

[SDQDI]

It is true that not everyone is cut out for flying but it is nearly impossible for a student pilot to be able to tell whether they can or not. We all know that 99% of people that learn to fly go through a time in their training where they feel like they are going nowhere and as a student it can feel like you will never progress any further but most with practice eventually get through this.

 

Instructors have the best chance of being able to tell if someone doesn't have it BUT there are a few things that can affect this one of which is the fact that if they turn a student away they no longer get paid. Second to this is the fact that some people just don't click and simple things can be missed. Changing instructors if progress has stopped can sometimes help, getting the same thing explained in a slightly different way can make a huge difference.

 

None of that takes into account people's psychological factors, imo it is unfair to expect instructors to be able to catorgorise people reliable as being mentally fit or unfit. For recreational flying I think testing for this would be way to expensive and could negatively impact too many middle ground people. For professional flyers I don't know enough about the systems to comment but flying with two pilots should negate most cases. (Obviously in recent history it has proved to not be a perfect fix)

 

 

[facthunter]

I'm not advocating psychological testing for Rec flying. Sometimes it has been a failure at higher levels as well only discovered at initial command stage where failure rate was higher than previous with no testing. Obviously it wasn't done right. or it would have shown benefits.

 

An individual should try to be honest with themselves. with flying. (It's not like altering your scorecard with golf when no ones looking I hate Golf) This as you point out is difficult as some will be hard on themselves. (I always was) others will make excuses or blame others. self assessment is difficult to be objective with.. But try. It's worth it.

 

Some flying schools do just keep taking money from people. That's not ethical, but unless safety is being compromised further training may just achieve something of a breakthrough with a different instructor. Like in medicine,( 2nd opinion) If you aren't happy with your instructor and things are not working out, go try another..

 

Most pilots don't fly much with other pilots (Unless multi crew) so don't really get a good idea of how they rate in the general comparison sense re standards.. If you ask "how did I go" You will [probably get a "well I passed you, didn't I? Or Whadiya want ..Praise?..Now pi$$ off before I change my mind" . Most checkies or instructors, won't dish out lavish praise either. Best you can hope for is a good extensive analysis of how you managed your check, Good and not so good. Turn it into a learning experience. You can learn from other pilots all the time. Don't imitate the dopey ones even if they are good company.

 

I always tensed up when a check was coming up. I presume that's natural and part of the process. You CAN FAIL a check. Try to show what you believe is how you should do it and do do it. when not being checked. How you have been taught .and by the ops manual.. Not what you've heard this bloke likes. While that might work it's too cute and you can't argue some one else's style with any conviction.. You can argue facts. and what's in the approved manual. If it's wrong THEY have to change it.. If you disobey the approved manual they can dismiss you, and probably should. (Unless you have a VERY good reason). Like some disaster would have happened if you didn't..

 

In RAAus the "cowboys" (usually the girls don't show off as much) will get themselves noticed or worse (make the headlines). We don't need too much of that.. Nev