"Full Load" Checkout

[Ralliart]

atpl53,

You misinterpreted what the thread was talking about ie: dual training and posted the student pilot permit (solo) regs by mistake.

[Cat Driver]

Wow, I am sure lucky I never got caught sending more than one student in the same airplane with my instructors on training flights.

It is simply terrifying looking back at all the things I did and never got caught.

[mcrit]

Ok, so is this the 5th or 6th time you've said you were going to stop posting in the flight training forum?
How do your customers feel about the stuff you write on here? How do they feel about the Hell's Angels? Hmmm....you get paid $1000/day to do 2 flights.....are your customers Hell's Angels?
As for when you and I first bumped heads, it came before my method of demonstrating adverse yaw. I seem to recall taking exception to some of your instructor bashing. Your reply was somewhat less than civil (sound familiar?) I'm not certain why you later went back and deleted it. It was a lovely little tantrum ..... very entertaining.
Ok Cat, in the interest of detente, you are.....er....I mean have....the biggest dick in all of aviation.
Hell, I'll even let you have the last word on this thread 'cause I'm bored of it.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Cat Driver

[quote="Cat Driver"]It isn't about winning V1 it is about trying to fathom where the industry is going to.

Over the past 55 years I have watched the training industry go from turning out PPL's on tail wheel airplanes in thirty hours who actually knew how to fly to the mind boggling situation we find ourselves in today. Where a student finally gets their PPL with maybe 100 hours of training and then they have to be checked to make sure they can fly the fu.kin airplane at the weight it was certified at.
[/quote

Fact: The average PPL was not done in 30 hrs, 50 yrs ago it was about 45 hrs.

Fact : The average PPL does not take 100 hrs today it is about 66 hrs.

Fact : There are extra mandatory training requirements in todays PPL which did not exist 50 yrs ago.

But I guess you do not want to let facts get in the way of another chance to take a shot at instructors.

Is todays flight training sytem as efficient or effective as it should be?
I think not.
Overall could we turn out better students in shorter time.
Yes I think so.

But the implication in your post that flight instructing 50 years ago was significantly better than it is now is in my personal opinion unsupported by anything you have actually posted.

I would also like to note that you have again declined to provide any actual specific examples of methods/techniques/training strategies that folks reading this forum could actually use. I guess it is easier to just heap scorn on forum contributors with expletive laden personal rants, as you have done on many recent past and recent posts, then actually share any of the knowledge you so often boast about.

Ah..... now I feel better.... With regards to the actual subject of this thread, I fully support the general consensus of this thread. IMO there is no ligitimate requirement to have to fly a C172 with a full load to be considered "checked out" . If a school makes this a requirment in order for you to fly their aircraft, then I think you should , as has been pointed out by others, take your business to another establishment.

[Cat Driver]

My,my , my the same two people are still not getting it right.

Fact: The average PPL was not done in 30 hrs, 50 yrs ago it was about 45 hrs.

Fact you Big Pistons Forever should at least know what you are talking about before you make a fool of yourself by posting something that is wrong. For your information when I got my PPL in 1953 the minimum time for the PPL was thirty hours and the government gave us back $150.00 for getting the license. Like many of the students during that time I got my PPL in the minimum time, 30 hours.

Fact : The average PPL does not take 100 hrs today it is about 66 hrs.

This is what I said:

to the mind boggling situation we find ourselves in today. Where a student finally gets their PPL with maybe 100 hours of training

You of course can deny that there are cases where they take that long.....did you read the post by Tizz in the flight training forum today?


I did not say the average was 30 hours, I said they were turning out PPL's in 30 hours. You can rant all you want about my attitude but it does not change the fact that the quality of flight instruction in many schools is below par.


mcrit:

Ok, so is this the 5th or 6th time you've said you were going to stop posting in the flight training forum?

In case you have not noticed this is the general forum.

In deference to you and B.P.F. I have quit posting in the training forum.

[Cat Driver]

mcrit:

To answer this question is simple.

Hmmm....you get paid $1000/day to do 2 flights.....are your customers Hell's Angels?

Contact Wings Over Holland and ask them what the charge is for training on the Catalina, and specifically ask for me as your instructor.

They will give you the same rate I was charging in Holland for the last three years I worked there. 250.00 Euros per flight hour....two and a half hours of flight time is $1,000,00 dollars Canadian.

Here is the web site:

http://www.pbyflighttraining.com

While you are in that web site click on " The Cat Connection " which will take you to this site.

http://www.ewa-uk.com

There is a fair amount of stuff there about some of the movies we have been part of, here is me and Fifi Kate which was in " The Band of Brothers " TV series.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e353/ ... 0045-1.jpg

You may not like me and my poor interpersonal skills mcrit but we do have a very well known business in Europe in the war bird and movie industry....

[basher]

Deleted

[Cat Driver]

the first thing transport is going to look at is his experience. If he hasn't done a full load check then the flght school is at fault for not properly training that pilot. Like regency at the boundary bay airport, the pilot of that plane is suing regency for not properly training him

So what you are saying is that TC issues pilots licenses to people but the license does not cover flying the airplane at its legal all up weight and you now have to take extra training to be legal to fly an airplane at the airplanes certified weight?

Do they issue you a new license once you have been trained to fly at the airplanes certified weight or do they just give you an endorsement on the license they first issued?

[basher]

Deleted

[Cat Driver]

basher, the bottom line is a school can have any policy they want when it comes to renting their airplanes.

However in the legal sense and for the purpose of an insurance claim if the airplane is within its certified weight you are legal to fly it if you hold a license that covers the type....as long as you can show recency if you are carrying a passenger..

[Doc]

So, what you're saying there, "basher" if that really is your name....is you check a guy out on a 172, but he isn't "really" checked out? That's pure bull shit. An "insurance" requirement...my ass! The insurance company either covers the pilot in your 172, or they don't. It's 172. It's on the policy as....wait for it....a 172! Read it. It says 172! Nowhere will you find the term "partially loaded" 172.....DUH! That would require them (the insurance company) to define "partially" loaded????
BTW, aircraft insurance is usually by the number of seats on the airplane....not the weight of the bodies IN the seats. What do some of you smoke??

[Ralliart]

In the interest of absolute safety, I recommend each FTU implement the following mandatory checks without delay:

- Prairie Check: For pilots who intend to fly aircraft outside of mountainous regions.

- Open Water Check: For pilots who intend to fly aircraft across stretches of water such as Vancouver-Victoria or Halifax-Moncton.

- Busy Airspace Check: For pilots who intend to fly into Boundary Bay/Springbank/Toronto Island etc.

- Uncontrolled Aerodrome Check: For pilots who intend to land/depart from an uncontrolled aerodrome.

- CARS Check: For pilots who intend to fly to an aerodrome served by a CARS.

- NDA Check: For pilots who intend to fly to the Northern Domestic Airspace.

- Runway Gradient Check: For pilots who intend to land / depart a runway that is not 100% level.

- Flat-Tire Check: To ensure pilots can safely land with a flat tire, simulated by the instructor reaching out and deflating the right main tire during the downwind check.

- Dual Comm Check: For pilots prior to renting an aircraft equipped with more than 1 radio.

- Ferry Check: For pilots who intend to fly an aircraft between point A and B for maintenance.

- Solid Colour Check: For pilots who want to rent an airplane that isn't white with stripes.

[basher]

Deleted

[Pugster]

The thing is, as my good buddy Ralliart put it (haven't seen ya in a while bro!) rather nicely...

Insurance companies don't care if the plane is fully loaded or not. If you go into a flight school and they give you a ridiculous type of "checkout" and say it's for insurance reasons, guess what - you are being fleeced. I'm not even sure that a 1 hour checkout would appear on any insurance document...only recency on the aircraft type, and maybe only recency period.

I personally don't really mind going up with a guy and doing some circuits so he can be sure I won't flare at 30 feet, but seriously, a few circuits should do it...I remember when I was an instructor going up with guys that were in the industry (or had some experience) and cutting the checkout short with the first landing if they were comfortable. I had other guys who were happy to trundle around with me for a bit just to get reaquainted with flying VFR in a light single. In either case, once I could determine they wouldn't pile up the airplane, the checkout was done. My boss didn't like it too much, but my customers did.

On a final note, my guess is basher works at a school with such a policy (or a similar one), or he has had numerous strips torn off him when he has to present such a policy to a customer. Lets go easy on the instructors out there as they are not the ones coming up with this bs...they're just the ones who have to force it on the renter. Myself, I'm choosing to protest with my wallet...and sure as hell won't pay a ludicrous amount of money for a checkout on a 172.

Lets face it folks...on this one it's all about the Benjamins.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Lets face it folks...on this one it's all about the Benjamins.

Exactly,

Who knows as a result of this thread, folks may start balking at paying for this bullshit checkout and force schools to reconsider when folks start taking there business elsewhere....and it all started on good old Avcanada

[Ogee]

I do think it would be a good idea to name names.

Having said that, if you did all your training on a 152, which is fully loaded, or near enough to, with an instructor, and want to move up to the 172, I would insist on what is being called a "full load" checkout. That doesn't mean doing a checkout and then saying Ok, we're going to do a full load checkout. It means out for the stalls and stuff you can't do with people on board, or shouldn't do, then back in and pick up a couple of buddies for the circuit work. If I were doing that, I'd ask the renter to watch where he lifted off light, and then see where he lifts off heavy and to note the difference in climb performance, the like. It probably doesn't make more than .1 difference in what would have been the empty seats checkout anyway.

All of that is talking about a low time pilot. Obviously its different and is keyed to the first checkout on that type. If a guy already has 172 time, you can be pretty sure he's already flown it near to gross quite a few times before and it isn't an issue.

This was a very weird thread. Kind of depressing really. There are some situations where these types of checkouts are very valid so long as its not solely about the Benjamins, assuming you are in the US, or the Mrs. Windsors up here, to use her proper name as Gerry Adams would say.

[iflyforpie]

We don't have an FTU here, we just rent our 172 out to licensed pilots. The average checkout will last about 1/2-3/4 hour with some upper air work, a couple of circuits, and a forced approach.

If the pilot has no previous mountain flying experience we will do a one hour checkout to show basic mountain flying techniques and considerations if they want to fly out of the Trench. Insurance does not require it but most renters appreciate it anyways since I can show them a few neat things to check out.

I actually find that most renters appreciate the extra time spent refreshing and a few will voluntarily do some additional dual flights. But if I get someone who is obviously current and handles the plane well, I won't try to milk him for more money.

For renters we've already checked out but haven't flown in the required 60 or 90 days, we will typically just do one or two circuits.

[Grey_Wolf]

Deleted,

[Pugster]

Food for thought.

My PPC is valid whether the airplane weighs 120,000lbs or it weighs 184,500lbs. It doesn't change when the aircraft has a forward C of G or an aft C of G. It's valid whether the temperature is -45 or +40.

A "full load" checkout should be simulated by the instructor early on by adding some ballast, and letting the student flog it around to see how little the aircraft handling changes. Yup, that's right...how little it changes.

Another question...do you require your students to get checked out when the temperature is 30+ degrees and the barometer is low?

I stick by my "bah!".

[Ogee]

Food for thought.
A "full load" checkout should be simulated by the instructor early on by adding some ballast, and letting the student flog it around to see how little the aircraft handling changes. Yup, that's right...how little it changes.

I'm sure you're right with the heavy stuff, Pugster, but what you say can be very wrong with the little fellas. As an example, get a Cessna 206 at gross and just comfortably clear the trees at the end of the runway on a hot day. Get a Cessna 207 at gross and you'll be hitting those trees down near the roots. The handling changes a lot between these two Cessnas and I'm sure that applies for other singles as well and some twins. The 207 is just a 206 that's 200 pounds over gross. Same engine, same wing.

I had a talk with the bloke at Sandy Lake Seaplanes or whatever its called a month back and we got to talking about the 207. I asked him if he'd ever seen one on floats. He said that if you had one, you'd have "...the fastest boat on the lake." It was one of the funniest aviation comments I heard in a long time.

[Rudder Bug]

Last winter I had to rent a 172 to go somewhere, with a dirt strip recently plowed. I asked one flying school about the check ride and it was a mandatory 1.5 with the young, green instructor, regardless of my 12,000 hours. I called the other one and they got me and the girlfriend going after one circuit. The guy was able to see I could safely fly his 172 within that time. I am now a customer and will use their plane again.

[StudentPilot]

I had a talk with the bloke at Sandy Lake Seaplanes or whatever its called a month back and we got to talking about the 207. I asked him if he'd ever seen one on floats. He said that if you had one, you'd have "...the fastest boat on the lake." It was one of the funniest aviation comments I heard in a long time.

Here is a 207 on floats, in Alaska too. Granted it is a turbine.

[E-Flyer]

To anyone paying attention i've been checking out across the land what people are renting out for 172's, pipers and so forth. I also like to see other school's layouts for their training and what not. Heres a question and if im way out in left field excuse me....but what is this so called "Full Load" checkout? I've seen this on a few websites saying if you want to carry pax in the aircraft they want you to have a fully loaded checkout in the plane. Is this a common? I can understand a mountain check but this kinda surprised me. Anyways if its normal just wanted to know...

Thanks!

Wierd... you learn what the characteristics of a heavy plane is in private ground school. It will act more nose heavy, more tail down force is needed due to leverage, higher stall speed. Make sure you go easy on the controls and take your time entering a turn. Remember, a heavy plane will penetrate through loads much easier than a less heavy plane, your sense's may tell you you're not pulling so many g's while in reality, those wings are. I unno, maybe a briefing would be the absolute biggest thing a flight school would charge you for, but a flight? hmm.

Or maybe this checkout is necessary since the educational side of aviation in canada is so broad from good to bad, people might not actually know what the basic's are ? that works as an excuse too lol

Same wierd thing goes along with a lot of school having "island" check out's. I'm sort of undecided whether that is necessary or not, but I really am leaning towards that it isn't.

What are they going to teach you on the full load check out? how much more stable the plane is when you encounter chops?

[basher]

[Big Pistons Forever]

My,my , my the same two people are still not getting it right.

Fact: The average PPL was not done in 30 hrs, 50 yrs ago it was about 45 hrs.

Fact you Big Pistons Forever should at least know what you are talking about before you make a fool of yourself by posting something that is wrong. For your information when I got my PPL in 1953 the minimum time for the PPL was thirty hours and the government gave us back $150.00 for getting the license. Like many of the students during that time I got my PPL in the minimum time, 30 hours.

Fact : The average PPL does not take 100 hrs today it is about 66 hrs.

This is what I said:

to the mind boggling situation we find ourselves in today. Where a student finally gets their PPL with maybe 100 hours of training

You of course can deny that there are cases where they take that long.....did you read the post by Tizz in the flight training forum today?


I did not say the average was 30 hours, I said they were turning out PPL's in 30 hours. You can rant all you want about my attitude but it does not change the fact that the quality of flight instruction in many schools is below par.


Car Driver:

The flight training stats say 50 yrs ago the average PPL too 45 hrs or 50% more hours than the Dept of Transport minimum hour requirement. So if the average is so much higher than the minimum than the inescapable conclusion is that not very many PPL's were being done in 30 hrs.

Don't you just hate it when the facts get in the way of your prejudices....

Oh and guess what, today it still on average takes about 50% longer than the fed minimums to get a PPL.

I guess the good news from yout point of view is the instructors from your era must have been the same quality as the "200hr wonders", "Fu*king morons" ,"imbicles"
and "stupid" flight instructors of today.

Damn and here I vowed to keep my posts upbeat and positive...Oh wait I made a special exception for you Cat Driver