groupboard:
I know for a fact that the POH in a 172 says that you are not to use more than 10 flap on t/o. A t/o from a touch and go is still a t/o. The a/c is passing through the same region of the drag and power curves regardless of if the t/o began from a roll or a stand still. If other instructor's are using more than 10 on ANY t/o PM me with their names and place of work. I'll chat with their CFI and TC because they are wrong (you can take my word on the matter; my time instructing instructor candidates on 172s is about an order of magnitude larger than 90 hrs).
Incompetent instructor?
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister, North Shore
-
groupboard
- Rank 1
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:58 pm
You begin a normal takeoff with your takeoff flap setting and zero velocity. You begin a touch-and-go takeoff with almost takeoff speed and (potentially) full flap. Don't you see the difference?Spokes wrote: The idea that a touch and go is not really a take-off and therefore the POH instructions for take-off do not apply is rediculous. Your on the runway, then your not. You have done a take-off.
A touch-and-go is somewhere between a balked approach and a normal takeoff, but it isn't exactly the same as either. To suggest otherwise is "rediculous".
Here is an intelligent discussion on the subject:
http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.aviat ... c91b7897eb
Getting the a/c unstuck isn't the only factor considered when choosing a flap setting. One must also worry about getting the a/c out of slow flight and established in a climb. Hanging flaps increases drag (specifically induced) and that delays getting out of slow flight. Slow flight really reduces your ability to climb, hence hanging too much flap delays getting the a/c established in a climb. In fact, if you are heavy, the weather is hot and you only retract 1 stage of flap (leaving 30 degrees down) you may not even get out of ground effect; at which point you will get aquainted with the trees at the end of the runway.
Even if you get out of slow flight, the extra flaps hanging will increase drag. This will eat up power and hence reduce your rate of climb.
The upshotof these two points? The guys that built the a/c knew what they were doing, so follow the instructions they gave you in the POH.
Also, instead of getting your info from a bunch of ying-yangs on google, go read Kershner....he knows what he is talking about.
Finally, a touch and go is no where close to a balked approach in terms of the lift drag curves. If you let yourself slide back the drag cruve that far on a balked approach you should find a nice piece of earth and STAY on it 'cause you're gonna wind up dead if you keep flying.
Even if you get out of slow flight, the extra flaps hanging will increase drag. This will eat up power and hence reduce your rate of climb.
The upshotof these two points? The guys that built the a/c knew what they were doing, so follow the instructions they gave you in the POH.
Also, instead of getting your info from a bunch of ying-yangs on google, go read Kershner....he knows what he is talking about.
Finally, a touch and go is no where close to a balked approach in terms of the lift drag curves. If you let yourself slide back the drag cruve that far on a balked approach you should find a nice piece of earth and STAY on it 'cause you're gonna wind up dead if you keep flying.
-
mellow_pilot
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2119
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 1:04 am
- Location: Pilot Purgatory
Spokes,
INDUCED drag- Drag produced by all surfaces contributing to lift.
PARASITE drag- Drag from all other sources, including; form, interference, skin friction, etc..
When you increase the coefficient, you increase the coefficient of drag.
INDUCED drag- Drag produced by all surfaces contributing to lift.
PARASITE drag- Drag from all other sources, including; form, interference, skin friction, etc..
When you increase the coefficient, you increase the coefficient of drag.
Dyslexics of the world... UNTIE!
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Spokes made the best comment here.
" Agree with above statements - retract flaps first, then apply power for the go. It's not a race to get airborne. "
" Agree with above statements - retract flaps first, then apply power for the go. It's not a race to get airborne. "
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.
Hey...maybe you are finally listening to what I have to say! Congrats!groupboard wrote: A good pilot takes on board what is said in the POH (including warnings about retracting flaps in stages, and the sink associated with raising flaps), and where the POH negelects to mention something (such as touch-and-go landings) you use your judgement and experience, as well as the input of more experienced pilots.
So...I think the moral here is listen to what the POH states! If it states to not take off with more than 10 degrees of flaps, then don't do it! Whether it is a touch and go or a normal take off...they are both accomplishing the same thing...taking off!!
And finally, if the POH neglects to mention something...then use the judgement of someone more experienced than your 90 hours in a C172...listen to the instructor! Don't try to argue this...just do it!
Enough said! Be a good pilot and use your POH!
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
This was an interesting comment by flyergirl:
" Sometimes instructors actually know what they are teaching...."
Unfortunately she is correct.
The problem that students have is knowing who actually knows the subject being taught.
Flight training would be better served by changing the antiquitated use of the inexperienced pilots teaching the beginners.
This would improve not only the quality of instruction it would improve the pay scale for instructors.
The cost should remain the same because the total number of hours to get the license would be less covering the extra pay for the instructors.
" Sometimes instructors actually know what they are teaching...."
Unfortunately she is correct.
The problem that students have is knowing who actually knows the subject being taught.
Flight training would be better served by changing the antiquitated use of the inexperienced pilots teaching the beginners.
This would improve not only the quality of instruction it would improve the pay scale for instructors.
The cost should remain the same because the total number of hours to get the license would be less covering the extra pay for the instructors.
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.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
alpha1, there is a real problem in the flight training business that seems to be getting worse, not better.
The requirements for getting the PPL are 45 hours layed out by TC.
The industry standard seems to be around 75 hours on average.
This is disgraceful and needs to be changed.
Here is a question for all you instructors out there.
When I got my PPL the requirements were 30 hours, which most of us finished in.
We flew from the Toronto Island Airport with a control tower and the traffic was relatively busy.
We learned on tail wheel Cessna 140's and Fleet Canucks.
Why does it take over twice the number of hours to learn today on nose wheel airplanes?
Cat
The requirements for getting the PPL are 45 hours layed out by TC.
The industry standard seems to be around 75 hours on average.
This is disgraceful and needs to be changed.
Here is a question for all you instructors out there.
When I got my PPL the requirements were 30 hours, which most of us finished in.
We flew from the Toronto Island Airport with a control tower and the traffic was relatively busy.
We learned on tail wheel Cessna 140's and Fleet Canucks.
Why does it take over twice the number of hours to learn today on nose wheel airplanes?
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.
Yeah, just so you know, 172 and 182 are different planes. Yes, the 182 is approved for takeoffs with 20 and no 172s aren't.buck82 wrote: However I know for a fact we used 20 (TC approved SOP) on the 182, and the plane made it off the ground just fine. Bush flying wether in cubs or a cessna, and yes 172, the plane definitely takes off sooner with more than 10, probably somewhere in the 18/20 range, once you're at takeoff speed. In a float plane the benefits are very noticeable. Keep it in ground effect bring it to 10 and then climb out at published speeds.
As far as the overshoot side of things... at least in cessnas, I would think you want to put the power on first before pulling up your flaps! Just think; your are 5 above stall, lots of flap.... hmm... pull up flaps or add power first??
Take it one step further.. imagine you just touched down when that cow steps onto the runway. Do you waste time with your head down in the cockpit pulling flaps up (maybe pulling up all the flap in haste) and loosing momentum, or get the power on right away???
I think this guy has simply confused procedures for normal takeoffs, short or soft fields and overshoots.
Keep in mind that flying an aircraft in a way that's not in accordance with the POH (ie taking off in a C-172 with more that 10 degrees of flaps regardless of your ass-backwards reasoning) renders the a/c unairworthy.
groupboard, read your POH, don't guess, brush up on your procedures (unless the instructor specifically told you you were doing short or soft field technique the PA28 is 0 flaps... yes I did check the POH), then go have a chat with the CFI at this FTU and have him put you in your place since you obviously came here to bitch about this instructor, not actually seek the input of other pilots.
I'd hate to see what you'd be doing in this plane without an instructor.
"Young man, was that your landing or were we just shot down?"
-
Ramp Monkey YYJ
- Rank 1
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:13 pm
groupboard,
I'm not sure where you learned these things, but you make it out to be very confusing when in fact it's quite simple.
First of all, Cessna built the airplane. You can't possibly argue that. Cessna also made the POH for their airplane. In Cessna's POH for the 172 Skyhawk, it is made quite clear that you never take off with more than 10 degrees of flaps, or 1 stage.
It seems to me that you have a bit of confusion with respect to what a touch and go actually is. Think about it this way; In a normal landing, you would simply land, and then brake as needed in order to exit on the desired taxiway/runway/in order to stay on the runway. In a touch and go, you simply land, and rather than braking, prepare to take off again. I will now run through the procedure for "Go" in a T&G in a 172. THE FIRST THING YOU DO is retract your flaps to either 10, or 0, NO EXCEPTIONS. Next, you adjust your trim for takeoff. Finally, you apply full power, and push the Carb. Heat to the "Cold" position. You can begin applying back pressure whenever you like, obviously depending on what kind of takeoff you are doing.
If your wheels are firm and flush on the ground, the plane is no longer flying! You would never takeoff from a standstill with 20 flaps, so why would you do it in a touch and go?
I'm not sure where you learned these things, but you make it out to be very confusing when in fact it's quite simple.
First of all, Cessna built the airplane. You can't possibly argue that. Cessna also made the POH for their airplane. In Cessna's POH for the 172 Skyhawk, it is made quite clear that you never take off with more than 10 degrees of flaps, or 1 stage.
It seems to me that you have a bit of confusion with respect to what a touch and go actually is. Think about it this way; In a normal landing, you would simply land, and then brake as needed in order to exit on the desired taxiway/runway/in order to stay on the runway. In a touch and go, you simply land, and rather than braking, prepare to take off again. I will now run through the procedure for "Go" in a T&G in a 172. THE FIRST THING YOU DO is retract your flaps to either 10, or 0, NO EXCEPTIONS. Next, you adjust your trim for takeoff. Finally, you apply full power, and push the Carb. Heat to the "Cold" position. You can begin applying back pressure whenever you like, obviously depending on what kind of takeoff you are doing.
If your wheels are firm and flush on the ground, the plane is no longer flying! You would never takeoff from a standstill with 20 flaps, so why would you do it in a touch and go?
REMOVE BEFORE FLIGHT
I have not yet read this disucssion, but I will. I am always open to seeing things in a new light if they seem reasonable.groupboard wrote:You begin a normal takeoff with your takeoff flap setting and zero velocity. You begin a touch-and-go takeoff with almost takeoff speed and (potentially) full flap. Don't you see the difference?Spokes wrote: The idea that a touch and go is not really a take-off and therefore the POH instructions for take-off do not apply is rediculous. Your on the runway, then your not. You have done a take-off.
A touch-and-go is somewhere between a balked approach and a normal takeoff, but it isn't exactly the same as either. To suggest otherwise is "rediculous".
Here is an intelligent discussion on the subject:
http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.aviat ... c91b7897eb
A T&G should most definitely not be something between a balked approach and a takeoff. You land make sure you are in a stable roll down the runway. Then you retract the flaps to the t/o setting be it 0/10/20 or whatever is appropriate for the a/c you are flying. Then you apply power for the go and take off. The langding ends, then the takeoff begins. To mush the two together really defeats the purpose of doing T&Gs I think. The only difference between this form of takeoff and that from a stop is that you have forward motion left from the landing.
Wahunga!
-
Justwannafly
- Rank 8
- Posts: 896
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:12 am
- Location: Cyberspace
HAY! I resent that statment!Cat Driver wrote:This was an interesting comment by flyergirl:
" Sometimes instructors actually know what they are teaching...."
Unfortunately she is correct.
I ALWAYS know what I'm talk'n about!......most of the time....sometimes......every now & then.....maybe
A couple points: Big barn doors hanging down from the back of your wings increases parasite drag. Both profile drag is increased (Greater frontal area) and skin friction drag from the increase in wing area created by extending fowler flaps. Not convinced, stick your hand out the side of a moving car palm down, then put the flaps down (turn palm forward)mcrit wrote:Getting the a/c unstuck isn't the only factor considered when choosing a flap setting. One must also worry about getting the a/c out of slow flight and established in a climb. Hanging flaps increases drag (specifically induced) and that delays getting out of slow flight. Slow flight really reduces your ability to climb, hence hanging too much flap delays getting the a/c established in a climb. In fact, if you are heavy, the weather is hot and you only retract 1 stage of flap (leaving 30 degrees down) you may not even get out of ground effect; at which point you will get aquainted with the trees at the end of the runway.
Even if you get out of slow flight, the extra flaps hanging will increase drag. This will eat up power and hence reduce your rate of climb.
The upshotof these two points? The guys that built the a/c knew what they were doing, so follow the instructions they gave you in the POH.
Also, instead of getting your info from a bunch of ying-yangs on google, go read Kershner....he knows what he is talking about.
Finally, a touch and go is no where close to a balked approach in terms of the lift drag curves. If you let yourself slide back the drag cruve that far on a balked approach you should find a nice piece of earth and STAY on it 'cause you're gonna wind up dead if you keep flying.
Induced drag results from the downwash created by a wing that is producing lift, tilting the wing lift vector backwards. It varies with the coefficient of lift produced and the aspect ratio of the wing. I guess stick fowler flaps out does reduce the wing aspect ratio so this may contribute to an increase in induced drag. When level or in a stead climb coeficient of lift should not change much. (I believe this is true - might have to think about this awhile though)
If you takeoff into slow flight you are not really doing a very good job. When you first take off you are in ground effect. This reduces your induced drag and therfore changes the shape of the backside of the power curve. The reduction of induced drag should substantially lower the speed at which slow flight is entered. Ideally you will have accelerated past the 'normal non-ground effect' speed at which you would be in slow flight prior to leaving ground effect. (paraphrased from 'Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators' by Hurt)
I do agree with you completely when you suggest adherence to the POH. It is of the most importance escpecially when you are a 90hr new pilot and still learning the finer points of flying.
Wahunga!
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
" I do agree with you completely when you suggest adherence to the POH. It is of the most importance escpecially when you are a 90hr new pilot and still learning the finer points of flying. "
May I add that following the POH is best regardless of your experience?
I have still to learn all the finer points of flying after fifty four years of learning, and find that the POH is good insurance against making the mistake of thinking I have better ideas than the manufacturer and their test results.
If you want to always keep yourself sharp flying get a Pitts Special, that will keep you awake..
Cat
May I add that following the POH is best regardless of your experience?
I have still to learn all the finer points of flying after fifty four years of learning, and find that the POH is good insurance against making the mistake of thinking I have better ideas than the manufacturer and their test results.
If you want to always keep yourself sharp flying get a Pitts Special, that will keep you awake..
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.
Cat Driver: You asked why it takes twice the amount of time to get a private these days as it did for you. While I am not an instructor I would like to comment to your question.
I started my private during summer break from college with an instructor who spent most of his life in the Air Force flying almost everything there was. He then went on to Cat's, M18's, Thrushes, Ag Trucks etc as a semi retirement for about 10 years. He gave that up and bought a 172 and opened a small flying school out of a small unicom airport. Flying with him was enjoyable, relaxing, and I always had complete confidence in him. I finished up at 45 hours and did the flight test and passed, but lazy me I did not complete the written exam within the 1 year period.
After finishing school and getting into the engineering side of the industry I wanted to finish off my private, but living in a different city I had to try a local FTU. This was when I realized how good I had it. Most of the instructors stated that students usually solo after about 20 hours and the private takes about 65-70 hours to finish. I was shocked but continued anyways. At this time I had been working in aviation for about 5 years. The instructor I had was the usual few hundred hour wonder, an ok guy but a mediocre instructor. This went for the majority of the instructors getting the private students. The atmosphere was definitely that of people just stepping stones. It was anything but a professional environment, that is until it was time to pay the bill. In the end I added another 20 hours to my time from before, then gave up and did the rec permit flight test and exam. I was hampered by an instructor who occasionally would not show up, showed a lack of preparedness, a lack of motivation, and was in reality stepping stones.
My point is the reason why it takes so long is because it is the blind leading the blind. There are some low timers that are keen and like instructing but for most it is a stepping stone, and it shows.
I went to school - learned, got a job and apprenticed - learned, got a licence - continued to learn, added a couple years of experience and now am independant. Not yet I have taught others.
Another place to look for an answer to your question is helicopter flight schools. Very unlikely to find an instructor there with a couple hundred hours. Also very unlikely to find a student who does not finish the program close to the required 100 hours.
I started my private during summer break from college with an instructor who spent most of his life in the Air Force flying almost everything there was. He then went on to Cat's, M18's, Thrushes, Ag Trucks etc as a semi retirement for about 10 years. He gave that up and bought a 172 and opened a small flying school out of a small unicom airport. Flying with him was enjoyable, relaxing, and I always had complete confidence in him. I finished up at 45 hours and did the flight test and passed, but lazy me I did not complete the written exam within the 1 year period.
After finishing school and getting into the engineering side of the industry I wanted to finish off my private, but living in a different city I had to try a local FTU. This was when I realized how good I had it. Most of the instructors stated that students usually solo after about 20 hours and the private takes about 65-70 hours to finish. I was shocked but continued anyways. At this time I had been working in aviation for about 5 years. The instructor I had was the usual few hundred hour wonder, an ok guy but a mediocre instructor. This went for the majority of the instructors getting the private students. The atmosphere was definitely that of people just stepping stones. It was anything but a professional environment, that is until it was time to pay the bill. In the end I added another 20 hours to my time from before, then gave up and did the rec permit flight test and exam. I was hampered by an instructor who occasionally would not show up, showed a lack of preparedness, a lack of motivation, and was in reality stepping stones.
My point is the reason why it takes so long is because it is the blind leading the blind. There are some low timers that are keen and like instructing but for most it is a stepping stone, and it shows.
I went to school - learned, got a job and apprenticed - learned, got a licence - continued to learn, added a couple years of experience and now am independant. Not yet I have taught others.
Another place to look for an answer to your question is helicopter flight schools. Very unlikely to find an instructor there with a couple hundred hours. Also very unlikely to find a student who does not finish the program close to the required 100 hours.
spokes a dit
Overall I think we are in agreement though, just follow the POH! You'll live longer
Yes, but hanging flaps also increases chamber and increased chamber means increased induced drag alsoA couple points: Big barn doors hanging down from the back of your wings increases parasite drag. Both profile drag is increased (Greater frontal area) and skin friction drag from the increase in wing area created by extending fowler flaps. Not convinced, stick your hand out the side of a moving car palm down, then put the flaps down (turn palm forward)
Yes, the idea is to get past slow flight before starting the climb out. Hanging extra flaps (beyond POH limits) is going to increase the amount of time it takes to get past slow flight and increase the upper speed limit of the slow flight range. My point was that in such conditions it is possible to inadvertently attempt the climb out while in slow flight.When you first take off you are in ground effect. This reduces your induced drag and therfore changes the shape of the backside of the power curve.
Overall I think we are in agreement though, just follow the POH! You'll live longer
I have to know why a 90 hour wonder seems to think he/she know more than the instructors and other pilots here. Not saying instructors don't make mistakes, but.....
Touch and goes are not a race to get airborne, as was previously stated. The correct procedure, when firmly on the runway, is flaps set to take off, full power (carb heat off if you've got it), and rotate.
If you're rotating when the flaps are still retracting, you're moving way too fast in the cockpit. Slow down, or you'll miss something. There's a lot of time to get everything done. And if there's not, maybe you should be considering a stop and go.
Touch and goes are not a race to get airborne, as was previously stated. The correct procedure, when firmly on the runway, is flaps set to take off, full power (carb heat off if you've got it), and rotate.
If you're rotating when the flaps are still retracting, you're moving way too fast in the cockpit. Slow down, or you'll miss something. There's a lot of time to get everything done. And if there's not, maybe you should be considering a stop and go.
Oh, and I wanted to comment about the time it takes to complete the licence.
I finished mine in 41 hours. Had to go flying for fun to get the last 4. That was 12 years ago.
Today, it doesn't happen.
One reason I can think of is the lack of commitment in a lot of the instructors out there. They can't commit in 2 ways.
1. The industry is scooping them up. So the student doing training is left with a new instructor....who does things slightly different. Yes, we should all teach it the same, but let's be real. That just doesn't happen. We're all legal, TC approved, but we all have variations.
2. The instructors just don't give a damn. They're here to build time and move on. So why bother doing a good job. They're only here for a year, maybe two. If they're lucky, maybe even just 6 months.
My small rant: I think the industry is slightly backwards. A lot of people call instructors circuit jockeys. Instructors don't really fly, they sit and watch.
INSTRUCTORS PUT THEIR LIVES IN THE HANDS OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW THEIR HEADS FROM THEIR BUTTS!!!
I don't agree with 200 hour pilots being able to do another 30 hours of training, and now you know enough to teach the world to fly. Shouldn't we all have to gain some experience??? I don't like the thought of someone being taught IFR by an instructor who's never seen the inside of a cloud. I don't like the thought that the commercial course is being taught by and instructor who's never been up north, down south, or even out of mom's house for that matter.
IMHO, I think things need to be re-thought. Put experienced people in the instructor's chair.....AND PAY THEM WHAT THEY'RE WORTH!!!!!
I finished mine in 41 hours. Had to go flying for fun to get the last 4. That was 12 years ago.
Today, it doesn't happen.
One reason I can think of is the lack of commitment in a lot of the instructors out there. They can't commit in 2 ways.
1. The industry is scooping them up. So the student doing training is left with a new instructor....who does things slightly different. Yes, we should all teach it the same, but let's be real. That just doesn't happen. We're all legal, TC approved, but we all have variations.
2. The instructors just don't give a damn. They're here to build time and move on. So why bother doing a good job. They're only here for a year, maybe two. If they're lucky, maybe even just 6 months.
My small rant: I think the industry is slightly backwards. A lot of people call instructors circuit jockeys. Instructors don't really fly, they sit and watch.
INSTRUCTORS PUT THEIR LIVES IN THE HANDS OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW THEIR HEADS FROM THEIR BUTTS!!!
I don't agree with 200 hour pilots being able to do another 30 hours of training, and now you know enough to teach the world to fly. Shouldn't we all have to gain some experience??? I don't like the thought of someone being taught IFR by an instructor who's never seen the inside of a cloud. I don't like the thought that the commercial course is being taught by and instructor who's never been up north, down south, or even out of mom's house for that matter.
IMHO, I think things need to be re-thought. Put experienced people in the instructor's chair.....AND PAY THEM WHAT THEY'RE WORTH!!!!!
-
shitdisturber
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2165
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:38 pm
- Location: If it's Monday it's got to be somewhere shitty
Cat's right about rushing things. Having semi - retired from instructing my thought is there's something very wrong with being airborne before the flaps are all the way up in a 172. God only knows how many students I've done circuits with over the years, but I have yet to see one who followed the "flaps, power, carb heat" method who was airborne before the flaps reached zero. I have however, seen more than a few who got the order messed up and left the flaps til the end. When that happens a 172 pretty much staggers into the air with the stall horn playing a merry tune; at this point in the adventure, I usually pay very close attention to the amount they retract the flaps, as they've generally already figured out that power first was a really bad idea.
Cat Driver Wrote:
I went to flight training full time and finished in 50 hours. I think that one big reason in the increase in flight time is that flying is expensive. Most people that can afford to fly have full time jobs and because of this can only dedicate themselves to one or two bookings per week. I also strongly believe that if someone is flight training less than twice a week they will not retain a lot of procedural knowledge and will also have a much harder time developing flying skill.
I was a 200hour wonder instructor and my first student finished his ppl in 50ish hours and his cpl ride in 151 hours (everyone knows that the requirement is 150 hours for the ride right?) I think that more of the onus lies on the student and not on the low time instructor, to a point. If you want to finish in the minumum time your going to have to bust your balls and show up a few days a week well rested and well prepared. There are some major bad apple instructors who will exploit students for time, but I think that in MOST cases this is not true. As a low time instructor you know how much flight training costs, most instructors can sympathize with student’s financial situations.
I have around 1000 hours total so I am still very inexperienced as a "well rounded pilot" I do think that I am starting to become a pretty experienced instructor and I have a lot to offer my students. I still put some students out in around 50 hours and I have some that are around 40-50 hours that are not even close to flight test standard because they fly once every 2 weeks and when they do show up they are exhausted from a full day of work and are far from prepared. I expect that some of those students will well exceed 75 hours of flight training before they are ready for flight test. They know this too, as I will not keep this from them. I think and strongly believe that it is much the student’s dedication and discipline that will get them done sooner than later.
JW
I have a couple ideas why the standard or average is around 65-75 hours that I'd like to get into even though I know that is really what this thread is all about. Cat, first I would like to ask a couple questions. What was included in the 30 requirement? What was the dual XC? What was the solo XC? What was the required instrument time? What were the items on the flight test compared to all the items now? Was the marking scale congruent to what it is now? These are questions that I would really need to know to get a better clue on why the standard has more than doubled.The industry standard seems to be around 75 hours on average.
I went to flight training full time and finished in 50 hours. I think that one big reason in the increase in flight time is that flying is expensive. Most people that can afford to fly have full time jobs and because of this can only dedicate themselves to one or two bookings per week. I also strongly believe that if someone is flight training less than twice a week they will not retain a lot of procedural knowledge and will also have a much harder time developing flying skill.
I was a 200hour wonder instructor and my first student finished his ppl in 50ish hours and his cpl ride in 151 hours (everyone knows that the requirement is 150 hours for the ride right?) I think that more of the onus lies on the student and not on the low time instructor, to a point. If you want to finish in the minumum time your going to have to bust your balls and show up a few days a week well rested and well prepared. There are some major bad apple instructors who will exploit students for time, but I think that in MOST cases this is not true. As a low time instructor you know how much flight training costs, most instructors can sympathize with student’s financial situations.
I have around 1000 hours total so I am still very inexperienced as a "well rounded pilot" I do think that I am starting to become a pretty experienced instructor and I have a lot to offer my students. I still put some students out in around 50 hours and I have some that are around 40-50 hours that are not even close to flight test standard because they fly once every 2 weeks and when they do show up they are exhausted from a full day of work and are far from prepared. I expect that some of those students will well exceed 75 hours of flight training before they are ready for flight test. They know this too, as I will not keep this from them. I think and strongly believe that it is much the student’s dedication and discipline that will get them done sooner than later.
JW
