The minimum 45hrs

[RVR6000]

While there are some notorious "milking" instructors (who have no shame that all of their ppl students take 100 hours to a licence)

Its worse than that, at the last safety seminar in Toronto the speaker asked some students in the audience about there training. One guy solo'd at 49 hours, another student got there PPL at 120 hours.

[Hedley]

Keep in mind two things:

1) Even though you're paying (eg) $60/hr to the school for the instructor, he's not seeing all of that. He may only be seeing $20/hr, so he's gotta pump up the hours if he's going to put any money in his pocket (see milking above)

2) Transport threatens instructors with draconian punishment if they do not maintain a "satisfactory flight test record". So, if an instructor recommends a student, and the student fails, the instructor may very well have his rating pulled by Transport.

It's pretty easy to see why people get their private licences at 100 to 120 hours - there is considerable motivation for a flight instructor to take all the time in the world, put some money in his pocket, and ensure that there is NO WAY that the student will fail his flight test.

Of course, this screws the student (customer) but who cares about them?
Welcome to Canada!

. had the idea of flat-rating training for a licence, but he was soundly booed out of the building for THAT one ...

[Stinky]

I would think very few people care. I've had a couple students finish slightly under the requirement. To meet the requirement they rent the plane and fly around for fun, odds are they would do that even if they had there license signed off. What's the difference?

[dom692222]

listen folks. lets face the music. there are some students that are not quick enough. i mean at the end of the day if the student fails the flight test, who looks bad? the instructor. so you make them fly till they are at satisfactori level. i mean take for example first solo. transport says it shopuld be done in 9- 12 hours. impossible. unless you train circuits for the first 12 hours then maybe. even at that i think its impossible. anyways this is a touchy subjet, and can go on forever.good luck to you all. just remeber respect your instructor. cause it ain't as easy as it looks.

[shitdisturber]

listen folks. lets face the music. there are some students that are not quick enough. i mean at the end of the day if the student fails the flight test, who looks bad? the instructor. so you make them fly till they are at satisfactori level. i mean take for example first solo. transport says it shopuld be done in 9- 12 hours. impossible. unless you train circuits for the first 12 hours then maybe. even at that i think its impossible. anyways this is a touchy subjet, and can go on forever.good luck to you all. just remeber respect your instructor. cause it ain't as easy as it looks.

It all depends on the student, their dedication, aptitude, and in some cases their luck or lack thereof. I've sent a student solo in 9.1 hours and sent him for his flight test at 43 hours, with all instrument time complete. I've had other students that I sent solo at 25 hours and prayed they'd bring the airplane back in one piece. In one case, a serious medical condition that ocurred to a family member just as I was planning to send the individual solo resulted in no flying for over a year. Kinda set the student back a bit.

[Hedley]

example first solo. transport says it shopuld be done in 9- 12 hours. impossible

Sorry, but I soloed in under 5 hours in a tailwheel aircraft (on pavement) and that included full spin training, 'way back when. Lots of other people here have soloed under 10 hours.

[Shiny Side Up]

example first solo. transport says it shopuld be done in 9- 12 hours. impossible

Sorry, but I soloed in under 5 hours in a tailwheel aircraft (on pavement) and that included full spin training, 'way back when. Lots of other people here have soloed under 10 hours.

I think what he means is given TC's wonderous FIG (Which some inspectors I might add will view as set in stone while others have a more flexible view of - Your experience may vary) Given their timetable one is hard pressed - if you did it by the letter to do it in the time they say given the lesson plans and what not one would have to go through. Not to say its impossible, just improbable. Add on top of that bad weather, airplane problems, busy booking schedules, busy airports and a typical student's life problems. Soloing in 9-12 ours is unlikely - but like I said, not impossible, I've had quite a few who have. I know I didn't, but then I'm a slow learner and have always been more talented with a shovel than an airplane.

[shitdisturber]

example first solo. transport says it shopuld be done in 9- 12 hours. impossible

Sorry, but I soloed in under 5 hours in a tailwheel aircraft (on pavement) and that included full spin training, 'way back when. Lots of other people here have soloed under 10 hours.

I think what he means is given TC's wonderous FIG (Which some inspectors I might add will view as set in stone while others have a more flexible view of - Your experience may vary) Given their timetable one is hard pressed - if you did it by the letter to do it in the time they say given the lesson plans and what not one would have to go through. Not to say its impossible, just improbable. Add on top of that bad weather, airplane problems, busy booking schedules, busy airports and a typical student's life problems. Soloing in 9-12 ours is unlikely - but like I said, not impossible, I've had quite a few who have. I know I didn't, but then I'm a slow learner and have always been more talented with a shovel than an airplane.

You ain't that good with a shovel either.

[Shiny Side Up]

I didn't say they were good, I only commented that they were better than my airplane skills.

[cruisecontrol]

Tough call excellent points for both sides but I think I'd like to keep things where they are maybe even look at raising the min. If the student is a star and can meet the standard in 4 hours that's great the rest of the time can be used practising PDM and going over senarios anything worthwhile to make them a better safer pilot. Keep in mind that those who are only seeking the PPL are on their own once they walk out the door with the license we do great deal of self regulation in this industry/hobby and it's unlikely somebody will try track them down and bring them in for a flight review whether it's needed or not so we may as well make sure they're safe and competent when they're cut loose.

Look at how some people drive there is no minimum training required and there are a lot of good people that can pass a drivers test but they're completely clueless behind the wheel.

And there is generally moreto know than in years past, look at a training manual from the 60-70's and today's. Although the physics have remained the same the available knowledge and understanding behind wx, avionics, and airspace among other things have increased and depending on that individual students needs it's difficult covering everything relevant to them without exceeding the minimum.

[Cat Driver]

Forgive me I'm sort of slow when it comes to understanding all these issues...so please explain to me how you practice PDM and what exactly is PDM, is it something a 250 hour flight instructor is an expert at? Or is PDM taught by an instructor specifically qualified and rated for that lesson?

I was taught to fly in a more basic simple era where the instructor made sure we could fly the thing and had enough neurons to not wander off and smash the airplane up.

And no matter how hard I try I can't conect flying hours in an airplane with learning about weather from some instructor who thinks 1000 foot ceiling and 3 miles vis is coming up on bad weather. As to learning about all these new fangled avionics ...can't you learn this stuff without having to get the airplane off the ground?

I guess a lot of us from the stone age must be just plain lucky to have flown so long without banging up an airplane with the lack of proper training we received.

[cruisecontrol]

Yes it's amazing you old timers who learned in the late 80s early 90s are still around given the weak training then. Most of that crap I wrote would apply more to groundschool and book knowledge but for PDM taking the basics further and making the student think about how all the factors affecting the flight real or otherwise will affect them then discussing available options and their impact. I'm not out to rip off a student but I do want them to be the best that we're both capable of training. You can teach someone to fly a plane and perform to the required standard like a trained monkey but using any time you have to work on the thought process how to conduct a flight safer or more efficently or as mentioned they could do a couple hours solo in the end doing whatever they like while still under supervision.
I think 45 is pretty resonable for a private and a good instructor can make that happen depending on the student and how well thy can retain what they've learned. As an instructor you don't work for the school you work for the student if they don't like you or feel you're holding them back you they can go to someone else I've done it and had it done to me my goal is to make them make themselves the best they can be.
Face it we need minimums not to hold people back but to maintain a safe standard 200' on an ILS is holding me back from a successful landing when I could fly it down to 100 but I'm not going to because under any normal circumstance the benefit of doing it doesn't outweigh the risk.

[Cat Driver]

Yes it's amazing you old timers who learned in the late 80s early 90s are still around given the weak training then.

If the "Old Timers " were given weak training in the late 80's and early 90's I guess I must really have had poor training because by the late 80's I had flown around 25,000 accident free hours. So my weak training probably didn't matter because I have horseshoes up my ass.

Most of that crap I wrote would apply more to groundschool and book knowledge but for PDM taking the basics further and making the student think about how all the factors affecting the flight real or otherwise will affect them then discussing available options and their impact.

It's to bad you were taught crap when you received your training.

So can you tell me when you received the better training that made you a more knowlegable pilot and where did you go to get this better training to improve on the poor initial training?

I'm not out to rip off a student but I do want them to be the best that we're both capable of training. You can teach someone to fly a plane and perform to the required standard like a trained monkey but using any time you have to work on the thought process how to conduct a flight safer or more efficently or as mentioned they could do a couple hours solo in the end doing whatever they like while still under supervision.

It is comforting that you are not out to rip off your students, and it is a credit to you that you take the time to teach them how to think, did you get a degree in psychology or some other subject dealing with how people think and how to reprogram their thought process?

I think 45 is pretty resonable for a private and a good instructor can make that happen depending on the student and how well thy can retain what they've learned.

I guess that is acceptable, but why have any definitive minimum? I had this idea that I could take a student and train them to the standard to pass the PPL in less than 45 hours, but I probably am just misguided and that is probably why I couldn't get my instructors rating renewed.

As an instructor you don't work for the school you work for the student if they don't like you or feel you're holding them back you they can go to someone else I've done it and had it done to me my goal is to make them make themselves the best they can be.

Face it we need minimums not to hold people back but to maintain a safe standard 200' on an ILS is holding me back from a successful landing when I could fly it down to 100 but I'm not going to because under any normal circumstance the benefit of doing it doesn't outweigh the risk.

I can't respond to that because I don't know what you were flying and what its limits were, but when I was flying for a living we had limits considerably lower than that and it seemed to be safe.

Anyhow I really do not understand the modern mindset in ab-initio training but it does facinate me hearing about it as I like to think I am never to old to learn.

Well I better qualify that, I am to old to learn the new stuff to pass a flight instructor ride, but what the hell everyone has their limitations.

[Shiny Side Up]

I feel I must clarify something here when it comes to the discussion. I'm not talking about whether 30hrs should be the minimum, 45hrs or even more. What I'm talking about is switching the onus from time spent to proficiency required to get a licence.

I was taught to fly in a more basic simple era where the instructor made sure we could fly the thing and had enough neurons to not wander off and smash the airplane up.

This hits the nail right on the head. What we need is a system that doesn't use hours as a measurement of said student's capability to "not wander off and smash the airplane up". I feel it would give instructors a better tool to ensure that students are stressed that how well they do something like say, navigating from A to B, is what's important, not that they've done their 5 hours of it. In other words there shouldn't need to be a minimum requirement hours wise for anything in a licence, the onus shold be for the licence candidate to prove their competence.

When a student asks an instructor "How many hours do we do this for?" The answer should be "Until you get it right."

Face it we need minimums not to hold people back but to maintain a safe standard 200' on an ILS is holding me back from a successful landing when I could fly it down to 100 but I'm not going to because under any normal circumstance the benefit of doing it doesn't outweigh the risk.

The problem with using minimum time that someone has done something, doesn't have anything to do with them doing it well.

Look at how some people drive there is no minimum training required and there are a lot of good people that can pass a drivers test but they're completely clueless behind the wheel.

By the same token, that system makes no difference beteen those who do it well, and those who do it poorly. One of the biggest jokes in this country is a motor vehicle driver's licence test - any idiot can pass it. Hell, you don't even have to speak English/French to pass it. Something that should change. But good you bring this up, because it does give us a good example of the fact that to get a licence in this case requires proficiency (albeit not very much) rather than hours in car. In this case its not the training or lack thereof that lets poor licencees through the system, but a poor testing of it (and if you think TC is bad in some of its practices in this regard, the DMV for your province is probably about ten times worse)

[Cat Driver]

In other words there shouldn't need to be a minimum requirement hours wise for anything in a licence, the onus shold be for the licence candidate to prove their competence

.

Exactly, and the standards being tested should reflect the flying skills not if they can tell the intercept orders from toilet paper.

There is no known way to determine if any individual will make the correct decisions in the future, but you can train them to fly their way out of a bad decision sometimes.

It is unreasonable to have the expetation that a twenty year old with a brand new instructors rating knows enough about decision making themselves, let alone be licensed to think they can teach decision making.

One thing for sure this discussion brings up some interesting thought processes and debatable methods for teaching flying.

[Shiny Side Up]

It is unreasonable to have the expetation that a twenty year old with a brand new instructors rating knows enough about decision making themselves, let alone be licensed to think they can teach decision making.

No that's the job of someone who's already made the mistakes and hopefully learned from them, to insure that these young new instructors have someone to make sure they do good decision making to pass on to their students. Unfortunately for one to end up in the position of a Chief Flight Instructor one assumes such an individual has very poor decision making skills of their own...

Ah hell.

[Cat Driver]

The bottom line shiney side up is we can pontificate all we want here and nothing will really change unless there is some quid pro quo for the decision makers in TCCA flight training in Ottawa.

Speaking of which it looks like they may be found something that will feather their own nests with this new thing they are tring to put into place that will probably cull all the small schools.

I bet there are a lot of people in Ontario today who are worried about just what these power brokers in Ottawa have in mind for you.

[shitdisturber]

[quote="Shiny Side Up
Unfortunately for one to end up in the position of a Chief Flight Instructor one assumes such an individual has very poor decision making skills of their own...

Ah hell. [/quote]

Things not going so well down south?

[flyingscotsman]

Q: where experianced instrutors not at one time newbie instuctors. Example if a new commercial pilot 250hrs persay and a newly minted instructor rating and a experianced commercial pilot with 15000 and an instructor rating, who is to say who is the better instructor and teacher, because flying is not just about training there has to be some measure of education involved.
You shouldn't just train someone to fly you should teach them to fly.

very few make it under 45 hours I will not dispute that some do but is that a reason to remove a blanket rule.

The private licence is a licence based less on being perfect and one based more on being a safe competent pilot

well thats all my ranting on the subject

[Cat Driver]

because flying is not just about training there has to be some measure of education involved.

What education are you refering to?

Do you mean the brief training that a new flight instructor gets for the rating?

[eternalhold]

Easy Cat, it sounds like Cruisecontrol was trying to crack a joke about about those of us that learned to fly when AC was gliding their new 767 fleet and the DC3 was a thing you only read about in movies.

If he (or she) wants to teach more than the basics in the instructor guide and can do so without robbing the student I really could care less. It sounds like they want to make the best pilot they can and I'm not going to fault them for it.

Let's face it instructing has evolved and not just in aviation, in the good ol' days a cop was trained how to swing a nightstick and now there is more of a "psychological" aspect to understanding the criminal element or whatever. It's not something I would spend too much time on with a private student though, you get into that more so with the airlines in situation based training and LOFT stuff.

The remark about doing it until you get it right is bang on, great way to put it. That's what matters can the person fly the plane, it's one thing to know when and why you do something it's a different thing actually putting it into practice and keeping the aircraft in the right part of the sky.

[Cat Driver]

Well I guess we sometimes mistake what someone else means in their posts enternal hold.

But even though I may not understand some of the new age lingo I do have a fair grasp on how to teach flying as that is my business.

My disconnect with ab-initio and the Canadian flight instructor culture is from having been out of touch with that level of training for a fair number of years.

But when it comes to actually teaching advanced stuff I seem to do O.K.

Oh and I still manage to re teach simple stuff like how to land properly etc....

[niwre]

I have a new courses I am going to teach.

How to deal with pilots like Cat Driver 101
Developing a thick skin 101


Some of the new people in the industry see these comments from Cat and cannot take it worth a grain of salt. All they see is someone calling down them and their new instructing job they just got. Its transport this transport that, I cannot believe these people are allowed to instruct with so few hours. Some people are decent at 100hrs instructing, some never will be. Some more experienced pilots forget sometimes that they were a 200 hour wonder trying to make it.

[Cat Driver]

Some more experienced pilots forget sometimes that they were a 200 hour wonder trying to make it

Most of us do not forget our early years.

Some of us do however try and improve the level of flight instruction.

Now I am aware that many of the instructors may look on us as has beens who come from an era when flight instruction was inferior to todays....

.....however the skills levels of a lot of todays pilots do not reflect this, quite to the contrary, in fact I believe that there has a movement towards inferior training, and a lot of that has to do with the way instructors are structured by the system.

One of the most notable examples of this is the number of pilots who think you " feel " where an airplane is in relation to the runway during the landing process when in fact you must "see" where it is.

Anyhow I don't spend to much time worring about what flight instructors think about my ideas....

My only real concern re flight instruction is the hourly rate of pay I am able to generate through referrals from satisfied clients.

And last but not least, I have a question to ask.

Leaving aside the fact that some may resent what they preceive to be my poor delivery and my obvious contempt for TCCA's flight training under its present management would it be possible that I do understand the training industry and just may be qualified to comment on same?

Part of your answer may be found by comparing the hourly rate I am paid and then examine your hourly rate.

You may not think that is a good benchmark by which to measure instructional worth, but it has to be a factor worth examining.

Oh, I almost forgot to add I've been teaching pilots how to fly for about half a century, surely I must have learned something about teaching along the way?

[Shiny Side Up]

The bottom line shiney side up is we can pontificate all we want here and nothing will really change unless there is some quid pro quo for the decision makers in TCCA flight training in Ottawa.

The point of "pontificating" here Cat isn't to convince the decision makers in TC, its to convince the people at the bottom. We already know, as you've stated, that we're not getting change from the top. Indeed revolution has never started at the top, it grows from the bottom. Maybe I'm an idealist, but I fully believe that as the people at the bottom in and in the field doing said flight training, its up to us to change things should they need to for the better of all. I know full well to have the idea of "minimum hours" will never leave the system. What I'm trying for, is to convey the idea to those within that system to look past it to what matters in terms of attitude towards and performance within that system. Just because TC gives us a "minimum 45" doesn't mean we have to base our thinking around it.

I guess maybe, just maybe if one instructor or student changes their view on how flight training should be conducted, then it was all worthwhile.