hey
i'm wrapping up my commercial licence in brantford and i've been looking at 50 hour float courses for a future in the bush. Georgian Bay Airways in Parry Sound seems like the best option for me, however they do 49 hours dual and 1 hour solo. other places (B.C) offer the same courses but 25 hours dual and 25 solo. or 20 dual and 30 solo. as far as insurance companies are concerned and prospect employers, which time is more valuable ? Dual or Solo ?
nathan
to do dual or solo on floats?
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Rudder Bug
I don't think dual or solo is a question with insurance companies or future employers, PIC is usually the question and being with an instructor may make him/her the PIC and leaving you with less of that important time.
BTW, you will also learn a whole lot more on your own when you do go solo, of course you already know this from your CPL.
BTW, you will also learn a whole lot more on your own when you do go solo, of course you already know this from your CPL.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
" BTW, you will also learn a whole lot more on your own when you do go solo, of course you already know this from your CPL. "
In that case why have any dual training, why not just train yourself from hour zero?
In that case why have any dual training, why not just train yourself from hour zero?
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
Redneck_pilot86
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:47 pm
- Location: between 60 and 70
This would make it easier for the ones that made it to getting a licence to find jobs.Cat Driver wrote:In that case why have any dual training, why not just train yourself from hour zero?
The only three things a wingman should ever say: 1. "Two's up" 2. "You're on fire" 3. "I'll take the fat one"
-
cessnafloatflyer
- Rank 4
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:02 pm
You can log PIC once you have the rating in hand provided the pilot with you is genuine in that you are the PIC, making the decisions, not him with you logging it. That's how we do it. We fly along, you are PIC and if you get into trouble we are there to help, otherwise you learn and log it. Insurance never asks for solo time only PIC and time on Type. Get a hold of an insurance application and have a look. That can answer many questions. Play their game and know their rules...
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
This subject seems to make one wonder just what PIC and pilot under instruction really means.
I may be simplistic in my understanding of this issue because I just do not see how anyone can learn more flying by themselves versus flying under instruction.
If having a safety pilot riding along and logging it as pilot in command is O.K with TC and the insurance companies then why can't the operator have a safety pilot ride along for the five solo take offs and landings?
Why should any company or pilot have to fly for less just to have a safety pilot in the airplane?
Help me out here because I really don't understand this.
Cat
I may be simplistic in my understanding of this issue because I just do not see how anyone can learn more flying by themselves versus flying under instruction.
If having a safety pilot riding along and logging it as pilot in command is O.K with TC and the insurance companies then why can't the operator have a safety pilot ride along for the five solo take offs and landings?
Why should any company or pilot have to fly for less just to have a safety pilot in the airplane?
Help me out here because I really don't understand this.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
cessnafloatflyer
- Rank 4
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:02 pm
I'm not sure why it would be difficult to understand that with 7+ hours on a seaplane (only 1 as PIC) that a person would want to push their skills and challenge themselves in new and difficult environments and want to to have a skilled and knowlegable pilot with experience with them in case they were to find themselves in over their head.
It only makes sense. Redundancy is what flying systems are all about for safety...
Should and IFR rating be done with less than 40 hours TT. Doesn't it stand to reason that a newly rated IFR pilot should go two crew when conditions push his/her skills? Doesn't mean that they are not PIC ... or a newly rated night flyer?
Insurance feels that their risk is grately reduced with expereince... they know how to calculate risk sometimes i do wonder though! But they are not pressuring TC. Unfortunate! So we have to pay extra for insurance and thus extra from our custmers.
This 5 solo occupant is totally ridiculous!
The CARs state sole occupant, therefore sole occupant.
It only makes sense. Redundancy is what flying systems are all about for safety...
Should and IFR rating be done with less than 40 hours TT. Doesn't it stand to reason that a newly rated IFR pilot should go two crew when conditions push his/her skills? Doesn't mean that they are not PIC ... or a newly rated night flyer?
Insurance feels that their risk is grately reduced with expereince... they know how to calculate risk sometimes i do wonder though! But they are not pressuring TC. Unfortunate! So we have to pay extra for insurance and thus extra from our custmers.
This 5 solo occupant is totally ridiculous!
The CARs state sole occupant, therefore sole occupant.
-
Check Pilot
- Rank 6
- Posts: 426
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 4:26 am
One of the best things about PIC and being the one and only person in the Aeroplane is the responsibilty factor.
The requirement means that the Operator has enough confidence in the new pilot to finally take the aeroplane out alone. If the operator is not willing to do that, it means the new guy just isn't ready as a Pilot-In-Command anyway. An operator that tries to push the old stale "safety pilot" routine while solo just isn't doing a proper job of teaching the basics. That old game is just another scam to pull money out of another suckers wallet. Caveat Emptor for newby's here.
Riding along as a "safety pilot" during solo flight means that the newby is still not ready to walk away yet with a licence. If the operator can't trust the judgement of a new pilot to be safe, with the Operators own aircraft, there is no reason the public, his family, his dentist, doctor, girlfriend, significant other or the regulator should expect the same. Why would an operator expect anything less? I can understand pure greed for flying hours. That's normal. Trying to get someone out the door with a rating without an industry level of confidence- that is in doubt. There seems to be a big difference about solo and PIC when the operator has to put the company aircraft directly in the line of "inexperienced" fire.
Do you, or do you not , trust the new student to bring your preciou aircraft home safely? If not, don't let the new guy out as PIC.
The requirement means that the Operator has enough confidence in the new pilot to finally take the aeroplane out alone. If the operator is not willing to do that, it means the new guy just isn't ready as a Pilot-In-Command anyway. An operator that tries to push the old stale "safety pilot" routine while solo just isn't doing a proper job of teaching the basics. That old game is just another scam to pull money out of another suckers wallet. Caveat Emptor for newby's here.
Riding along as a "safety pilot" during solo flight means that the newby is still not ready to walk away yet with a licence. If the operator can't trust the judgement of a new pilot to be safe, with the Operators own aircraft, there is no reason the public, his family, his dentist, doctor, girlfriend, significant other or the regulator should expect the same. Why would an operator expect anything less? I can understand pure greed for flying hours. That's normal. Trying to get someone out the door with a rating without an industry level of confidence- that is in doubt. There seems to be a big difference about solo and PIC when the operator has to put the company aircraft directly in the line of "inexperienced" fire.
Do you, or do you not , trust the new student to bring your preciou aircraft home safely? If not, don't let the new guy out as PIC.
I did the 5 solo t/o and ldg...I don't think it would have felt as good if the instructor was beside me. I did my rating 3 years or so ago at Gander Flight Training-not sure if they still offer it truly solo but if so, I would definitely recommend it!
BTW for whoever was inquiring about the "bush course" and thinking to go to Georgian Bay in Perry Sound, check out my past posts....My only question is, do you really want to be a Professional BUSH pilot or just pay for the fancy named course. I really think it is a crock when the owner was hell bent about spending a night with his beloved airplane in the REAL BUSH. Spend your money wisely.
BTW for whoever was inquiring about the "bush course" and thinking to go to Georgian Bay in Perry Sound, check out my past posts....My only question is, do you really want to be a Professional BUSH pilot or just pay for the fancy named course. I really think it is a crock when the owner was hell bent about spending a night with his beloved airplane in the REAL BUSH. Spend your money wisely.
-
cessnafloatflyer
- Rank 4
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:02 pm
It's an insurance thing... facts straight... INSURSNCE WILL NOT LET ANYBODY FLY THE AIRPLANE UNLESS THEY ARE LISTED ON THE POLICY! Except for the 5 solo t/o and landings... no greed by the operator... greed from the underwriter... that is the fact! We've had no accidents, clean record no chance from the underwriter.... that's the deal. We have many happy students, nobody has ever complained and many have found great jobs flying in the bush on floats... don't knock it till you've tried it! Sorry to hear that so many have spoiled that reputation of great float flying experiences.
ALL of our students do their 5 as sole occupant of the aircraft ALWAYS! After that they get their rating and mostly we keep insurance happy by shutting up and saving the day iof necessary... what else can we do?
Also, rates drop @25 hours in the 50 hour course and the instructor rate is waived, so much for the 'taking money from your wallet' there! Have a look at our site and check it our for yourself http://www.oceanair.ca . I don't know what other operators do, perhaps you are right, but integtiy and honesty is found here. We are sincere and want our students to suceed and the do!
ALL of our students do their 5 as sole occupant of the aircraft ALWAYS! After that they get their rating and mostly we keep insurance happy by shutting up and saving the day iof necessary... what else can we do?
Also, rates drop @25 hours in the 50 hour course and the instructor rate is waived, so much for the 'taking money from your wallet' there! Have a look at our site and check it our for yourself http://www.oceanair.ca . I don't know what other operators do, perhaps you are right, but integtiy and honesty is found here. We are sincere and want our students to suceed and the do!
cessnafloatflyer..
I don't think you get the big picture... When there is a "safety pilot" on board, the student will not have to worry so much because if the screw up so badly as to put the airplane in jeaprody, you, as the safety pilot will bail them out...
Now, if they are doing it solo, they do not have that option..
Now for a different thought, if they have someone with them who can actually teach them something, then we can make some progress....
You will learn far more from someone else (who knows what they are doing) than you will ever learn from yourself..
I don't think you get the big picture... When there is a "safety pilot" on board, the student will not have to worry so much because if the screw up so badly as to put the airplane in jeaprody, you, as the safety pilot will bail them out...
Now, if they are doing it solo, they do not have that option..
Now for a different thought, if they have someone with them who can actually teach them something, then we can make some progress....
You will learn far more from someone else (who knows what they are doing) than you will ever learn from yourself..
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Cessnafloatflyer:
I fully understand your frustration with the insurance requirements and the cost of insurance, and I agree that the five solo takeoff and landing requirements for the sea plane rating is a burden on the schools through higher insurance costs.
However there seems to be some real smoke and mirrors being used in deciding what dual instruction and PIC time consists of.
Twotter is correct, dual training with an experienced teacher is far more valuable than flying solo, and having a safety pilot along seems to be a half and half solution, of course we all understand the safety pilot is there to save the airplane and passengers in the event the student is about to wreck it. So why not have the safety pilot give instruction during the flight rather than just sit there doing nothing?
The bottom line in your sea plane fifty hour training course is the client gets to fly a Cessna 180 for $252.50 per hour dual/ supervised.
That is a very good deal for the client but does not seem to be all that profitable for the operator with the cost of operating a commercial airplane in todays market.
I am not really sure what the answer to this dilemma is, but getting the five solo take offs and landings removed from the sea plane rating would be a step in the right direction insurance cost wise.
Cat
I fully understand your frustration with the insurance requirements and the cost of insurance, and I agree that the five solo takeoff and landing requirements for the sea plane rating is a burden on the schools through higher insurance costs.
However there seems to be some real smoke and mirrors being used in deciding what dual instruction and PIC time consists of.
Twotter is correct, dual training with an experienced teacher is far more valuable than flying solo, and having a safety pilot along seems to be a half and half solution, of course we all understand the safety pilot is there to save the airplane and passengers in the event the student is about to wreck it. So why not have the safety pilot give instruction during the flight rather than just sit there doing nothing?
The bottom line in your sea plane fifty hour training course is the client gets to fly a Cessna 180 for $252.50 per hour dual/ supervised.
That is a very good deal for the client but does not seem to be all that profitable for the operator with the cost of operating a commercial airplane in todays market.
I am not really sure what the answer to this dilemma is, but getting the five solo take offs and landings removed from the sea plane rating would be a step in the right direction insurance cost wise.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
The Old Fogducker
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1784
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:13 pm
Howdy Cat:
First, congrats on your recent birthday and I hope you have another 30 or so ahead of you.
Now the pleasantries are over, I just don't think dropping the solo requirement is the answer. I'm super-uncomfortable with the concept of a newbie flying passengers or a loaded cargo haul the very first time he's alone in the airplane on floats.
If I were in charge of the world, they would need about 50 takeoff & landings to qualify for the rating.....probably something closer to the so-called 50 hour "bush courses" for commercial ops. For some PPL holder who just wants to go out and defy death for nthe thrill of the adventure .... let 'em do whatever the heck they want to do. When you bring the dumb as dirt fare-paying passenger into the equation, I think they are entitled to a far higher standard than the present minimum to obtain the rating.
While I agree that insurance costs are high, I also have to think thay are that way for some reason other than a simplistic explanation of the greedy underwriters wanting to squeeze the maximum amount of money possible out of operators.
Regards,
Fog
First, congrats on your recent birthday and I hope you have another 30 or so ahead of you.
Now the pleasantries are over, I just don't think dropping the solo requirement is the answer. I'm super-uncomfortable with the concept of a newbie flying passengers or a loaded cargo haul the very first time he's alone in the airplane on floats.
If I were in charge of the world, they would need about 50 takeoff & landings to qualify for the rating.....probably something closer to the so-called 50 hour "bush courses" for commercial ops. For some PPL holder who just wants to go out and defy death for nthe thrill of the adventure .... let 'em do whatever the heck they want to do. When you bring the dumb as dirt fare-paying passenger into the equation, I think they are entitled to a far higher standard than the present minimum to obtain the rating.
While I agree that insurance costs are high, I also have to think thay are that way for some reason other than a simplistic explanation of the greedy underwriters wanting to squeeze the maximum amount of money possible out of operators.
Regards,
Fog
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
" Now the pleasantries are over, I just don't think dropping the solo requirement is the answer. I'm super-uncomfortable with the concept of a newbie flying passengers or a loaded cargo haul the very first time he's alone in the airplane on floats. "
Then you must also be uncomfortable with getting the multi engine rating and the instrument rating with no solo required?
What is wrong with getting rid of the five solo T&L's and having a flight test passed before they get the rating?
And I agree 7 hours is not enough for commercial operations on sea planes.
Then you must also be uncomfortable with getting the multi engine rating and the instrument rating with no solo required?
What is wrong with getting rid of the five solo T&L's and having a flight test passed before they get the rating?
And I agree 7 hours is not enough for commercial operations on sea planes.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
The Old Fogducker
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1784
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:13 pm
Good point Cat and I hadn't considered those ratings.
I guess maybe because I know "the system" wouldn't see a super-low time pilot being given an IFR twin without some form of "line indoc" program and I had confined my thoughts to the floatplane world of somebody being sent out in a 180 or 185 with a load the first time he/she was alone ... but you make a good point.
Hey ... take a look at my post on page 4 of the Cessna Caravan in Texas thread ... I think it'll give you a smile or two. I've spent too much time in a hotel room this week and my sick sense of humour is getting the better of me.
Fog
I guess maybe because I know "the system" wouldn't see a super-low time pilot being given an IFR twin without some form of "line indoc" program and I had confined my thoughts to the floatplane world of somebody being sent out in a 180 or 185 with a load the first time he/she was alone ... but you make a good point.
Hey ... take a look at my post on page 4 of the Cessna Caravan in Texas thread ... I think it'll give you a smile or two. I've spent too much time in a hotel room this week and my sick sense of humour is getting the better of me.
Fog
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Yeh, fog its real easy to lose sight of the forest for the trees in Avcanada.
But it beats beating your meat for entertainment.
My thoughts are the bush flying side of aviation needs a whole new way of training the pilots patterened after the "Flight Safety " kind of training.
That would give some reliefe from the ever increasing insurance burden.
We already have such a program set up in Europe for the large flying boats.
Cat
But it beats beating your meat for entertainment.
My thoughts are the bush flying side of aviation needs a whole new way of training the pilots patterened after the "Flight Safety " kind of training.
That would give some reliefe from the ever increasing insurance burden.
We already have such a program set up in Europe for the large flying boats.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
The Old Fogducker
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1784
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:13 pm
Cat:
After a few minutes of contemplation, I think Check Pilot has it right. If the recommender doesn't have the confidence to let somebody do 5 circuits in his airplane, is the new kid really ready to be flying passengers around for hire & reward?
I'd equate it to being the same as first solo.
Your comment on the program being in need of structure is well founded but a "proper" float rating sure couldn't be done in the 7 hours now in place. If you went with all of the things that should be taught to a newcomer to water flying, (sailing and docking, docking in confined areas, beaching, crosswinds, rough water, planning approaches, considering escape routes, selecting departure routes with respect to terrain, glassy water, external loads, proper knots, how and when to use a paddle, how to prepare ropes for quick use .. and a million other things) .. the costs would be far higher and there would be a huge outcry about needing "all that senseless stuff" just to get a rating so the guy can apply for a job.
Just to get on high horse for a moment, few things say "dolt" to me faster than seeing a guy tie up an airplane with layer upon layer of granny knots. at least they should know a Clove Hitch with locking loop on top and a Bowline for crying out loud.
There could maybe be a separate "Commercial Seaplane Rating" versus a level for a PPL who just wants to go out on a perfect day and splash around a little for the joy of flight in his own airplane.
Not sure I agree about the meat beating statement though Cat, but then I'm almost 20 yrs younger than you and still am consumed by the sight of a pretty blonde in heels and a short skirt with way too much makeup .. LOL. There is never a time when one is within a 1,000 ft of me that I don't know it.
Fog
After a few minutes of contemplation, I think Check Pilot has it right. If the recommender doesn't have the confidence to let somebody do 5 circuits in his airplane, is the new kid really ready to be flying passengers around for hire & reward?
I'd equate it to being the same as first solo.
Your comment on the program being in need of structure is well founded but a "proper" float rating sure couldn't be done in the 7 hours now in place. If you went with all of the things that should be taught to a newcomer to water flying, (sailing and docking, docking in confined areas, beaching, crosswinds, rough water, planning approaches, considering escape routes, selecting departure routes with respect to terrain, glassy water, external loads, proper knots, how and when to use a paddle, how to prepare ropes for quick use .. and a million other things) .. the costs would be far higher and there would be a huge outcry about needing "all that senseless stuff" just to get a rating so the guy can apply for a job.
Just to get on high horse for a moment, few things say "dolt" to me faster than seeing a guy tie up an airplane with layer upon layer of granny knots. at least they should know a Clove Hitch with locking loop on top and a Bowline for crying out loud.
There could maybe be a separate "Commercial Seaplane Rating" versus a level for a PPL who just wants to go out on a perfect day and splash around a little for the joy of flight in his own airplane.
Not sure I agree about the meat beating statement though Cat, but then I'm almost 20 yrs younger than you and still am consumed by the sight of a pretty blonde in heels and a short skirt with way too much makeup .. LOL. There is never a time when one is within a 1,000 ft of me that I don't know it.
Fog
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Fog...
The 7 hour float rating has worked for years, everyone in Canada has started float plane flying with that number of hours training...except for those of us who got their float rating in 5 hours before the 7 hour requirement came along.
No one here seems to grasp why I am against the 5 solo take offs and landings....it is very simple. That is what is driving up the cost of insurance for the schools.
If a check ride was put in place instead of solo flying the insurance rates would be far cheaper for the schools.
Once the person has the rating then they can worry about getting insurance to fly one.
As far as I am concerned it really has no effect on me for the simple reason I no longer own a FTU.
Cat
The 7 hour float rating has worked for years, everyone in Canada has started float plane flying with that number of hours training...except for those of us who got their float rating in 5 hours before the 7 hour requirement came along.
No one here seems to grasp why I am against the 5 solo take offs and landings....it is very simple. That is what is driving up the cost of insurance for the schools.
If a check ride was put in place instead of solo flying the insurance rates would be far cheaper for the schools.
Once the person has the rating then they can worry about getting insurance to fly one.
As far as I am concerned it really has no effect on me for the simple reason I no longer own a FTU.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
The Old Fogducker
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1784
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:13 pm
I see your point now, but the universal introduction of a flight test .. or prof test of some kind will cause a hue & cry of greater government in your face. Ultimately it would have to come from somebody with govt accreditation of some sort to to act as a tradeoff. Maybe I'm just a dinosaur, but I still have a hiccup with not having the pilot ever fly the airplane by himself....don't know why I can't stretch my thinking as far as you can Cat.
The insurance problem to my way of thinking is more one of quality of instruction and supervision rather than the solo requirement. The number of acccidents on floats is due to the environment more so than during the solo portion I'd think.....but that's off the top of my head BS gut feeling more than anything.
I was super-lucky and started my float training with about 80 hrs tt in the Vancouver area and stayed on floats for most of my CPL training around the Soo. When I got the licence I had well over 100 hr on the water....taught by a neat old guy named Orville Piper ... now passed on. Even from his name, you knew he was a dyed in the wool pilot and had a pile of time in all kinds of situations.
While it wasn't called a "Bush Course" I did a lot of extra time with him just to be certain I knew what was up before I started flying commercially ... which I did on the afternoon of my cpl flight test. After a couple of years there, came back to YVR to work across the ramp from you during your days at Air West. Then over to fly for Bill Sylvester in YYJ on the Beaver.
That sort of school just doesn't exist anymore .. at least not that I know of.
Also ..I've meant to comment on your orange tabby at the steering wheel. I've had orange tabbies almost all my life. My present one is named "Ubi" .. short for Ubiquitous ... really enjoy 'em and could watch feline behaviour for weeks. They're neat animals and have 4 cats at home now.
As us "Hep-Cats" would say ... see 'ya later alligator.
Fog
The insurance problem to my way of thinking is more one of quality of instruction and supervision rather than the solo requirement. The number of acccidents on floats is due to the environment more so than during the solo portion I'd think.....but that's off the top of my head BS gut feeling more than anything.
I was super-lucky and started my float training with about 80 hrs tt in the Vancouver area and stayed on floats for most of my CPL training around the Soo. When I got the licence I had well over 100 hr on the water....taught by a neat old guy named Orville Piper ... now passed on. Even from his name, you knew he was a dyed in the wool pilot and had a pile of time in all kinds of situations.
While it wasn't called a "Bush Course" I did a lot of extra time with him just to be certain I knew what was up before I started flying commercially ... which I did on the afternoon of my cpl flight test. After a couple of years there, came back to YVR to work across the ramp from you during your days at Air West. Then over to fly for Bill Sylvester in YYJ on the Beaver.
That sort of school just doesn't exist anymore .. at least not that I know of.
Also ..I've meant to comment on your orange tabby at the steering wheel. I've had orange tabbies almost all my life. My present one is named "Ubi" .. short for Ubiquitous ... really enjoy 'em and could watch feline behaviour for weeks. They're neat animals and have 4 cats at home now.
As us "Hep-Cats" would say ... see 'ya later alligator.
Fog
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Good morning Fog :
" Maybe I'm just a dinosaur, but I still have a hiccup with not having the pilot ever fly the airplane by himself....don't know why I can't stretch my thinking as far as you can Cat. "
Like everything else in life understanding the computer operated airplanes is nothing more than being around them and operating them. I only lucked into getting training on these aircraft due to who I have been working for.
If you have not flown them I wouldn't worry about it if I were you as they are in another world all together compared to the aircraft we grew up flying. The airline and high end corporate jet aircraft are not really airplanes as we knew them, they are very complex flying computers and have to be flown by numbers and SOP's. ( For the brief moments you actually hand fly them. )
" The insurance problem to my way of thinking is more one of quality of instruction and supervision rather than the solo requirement. "
Exactly, most flying schools use flight instructors that have never flown floats for a living to teach the rating.
" After a couple of years there, came back to YVR to work across the ramp from you during your days at Air West. "
Were you around when I had to take Air West and TC to court to enforce the aeronautics act to bring some semblance of safety to their operation?
Cat
" Maybe I'm just a dinosaur, but I still have a hiccup with not having the pilot ever fly the airplane by himself....don't know why I can't stretch my thinking as far as you can Cat. "
Like everything else in life understanding the computer operated airplanes is nothing more than being around them and operating them. I only lucked into getting training on these aircraft due to who I have been working for.
If you have not flown them I wouldn't worry about it if I were you as they are in another world all together compared to the aircraft we grew up flying. The airline and high end corporate jet aircraft are not really airplanes as we knew them, they are very complex flying computers and have to be flown by numbers and SOP's. ( For the brief moments you actually hand fly them. )
" The insurance problem to my way of thinking is more one of quality of instruction and supervision rather than the solo requirement. "
Exactly, most flying schools use flight instructors that have never flown floats for a living to teach the rating.
" After a couple of years there, came back to YVR to work across the ramp from you during your days at Air West. "
Were you around when I had to take Air West and TC to court to enforce the aeronautics act to bring some semblance of safety to their operation?
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
The Old Fogducker
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1784
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:13 pm
Cat:
I don't recall that situation from when I worked there, but remember you telling me that in some post over the years here on the forum.
Will never forget listening to Air West company freq and hearing the Pres .. Mr. Gold berating some poor Twin Otter crew for not getting in on 2 approaches into Nanaimo. He treatened the crew with firing if they didn't get in on approach number 3 ... never heard of a crash on the front page of the newspaper, so I guess they made it.
Around roughly the same time, a buddy was right seat on the one that went into the mountainside in subsidence and was slightly injured. Was back on the line a few days later.
That pales by comparison to our good old buddy Raf Zur though ...
Fog
I don't recall that situation from when I worked there, but remember you telling me that in some post over the years here on the forum.
Will never forget listening to Air West company freq and hearing the Pres .. Mr. Gold berating some poor Twin Otter crew for not getting in on 2 approaches into Nanaimo. He treatened the crew with firing if they didn't get in on approach number 3 ... never heard of a crash on the front page of the newspaper, so I guess they made it.
Around roughly the same time, a buddy was right seat on the one that went into the mountainside in subsidence and was slightly injured. Was back on the line a few days later.
That pales by comparison to our good old buddy Raf Zur though ...
Fog
