@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Float Rating in Ontario

[Cat Driver]

What he needs to do is achieve your Avcanada qualifications. Assuming you take 5 minutes per post to gather - process - and submit - You have spent nearly 53 days of your life sitting at the computer telling people they are wrong and or contributing.

This figure is however , rough - and does not include browsing time.

However one has to look closer at this issue.

And consider that I have several pluses that allow for all my Avcanada time.

I am retired.

I can afford the time.

I can not spend all my time playing with my toys, so I spend time here for the entertainment value.

Gotta go because I have to move one of my toys out of the hangar because I want to play with it.

[Grantmac]

TC didn't come up with the requirements in a single day,
and there are plenty of experts at TC to come up with the requirements.
You only think that there should be a flight test,
because you don't have an access to see the bigger picture.

Instead of calling the TC guys morons,
I'm gonna show them some respect for their work on keeping this country one of the best countries to learn flying.

This has got to be one of the funniest things I'll probably see today. Someone's in for a shock some day. General aviation continues in this country in spite of TC's efforts, not because of them.

If GA didn't HAVE to exist in order to make FTUs and Colleges possible then TC would have found a way to can it years ago. As it is they introduce as many expenses and roadblocks as they think they can get away with at any one time.
If it didn't completely destroy an aircraft's value I'd be very tempted to just go OM and get away from most of their crap. As it is I'm thinking about trading for an AULA just to cut down on red tape.

-Grant

[Beefitarian]

winds_in_flight_wtf you're off a bit there, I'd say 2/3 of that time was bragging.

I flew thousands of hours on tail draggers before you were off the teet!
I fought TC and won!! Sort of, the bastards never coughed up any money and I didn't find a lawyer that would get it on contingency.
I was flying airshows in France while you were still crapping yellow in a diaper. [sic]

Not that there's anything wrong with that. To be honest I'm impressed and a bit jelly.

coreydotcom :blush, I like you too dude. How's it going?

[Dagwood]

Anything I save from my rating,
I can invest on something that I'm actually going to use.
...
Everyone's priority is different and Float Rating isn't my first priority.
...
And I'll probably never fly a seaplane ever again.

Note to employers: If anyone's resume starts with @@@@@@@@@ to get your attention, the person is probably better off working for the competition.

I spend time here for the entertainment value.

[Shiny Side Up]

If GA didn't HAVE to exist in order to make FTUs and Colleges possible then TC would have found a way to can it years ago. As it is they introduce as many expenses and roadblocks as they think they can get away with at any one time.

I don't even think they want FTUs to exist either if they could help it. When they figure out how to not need pilots for planes we're all in trouble.

[iflyforpie]

Well as 'H' said, aviation in Canada is a sin. I'm sure there are more than a few of our leaders that would end aviation at the push of a button if they could...

[winds_in_flight_wtf]

I did not say there was anything wrong with spending 53 days on AvCanada

[Beefitarian]

I think he needs to post more pictures personally.

[photofly]

Well as 'H' said, aviation in Canada is a sin. I'm sure there are more than a few of our leaders that would end aviation at the push of a button if they could...

There's precious little evidence in this thread that it would be a bad thing if they did.

[Lotro]

For what little it's worth, coming from a guy with 115 hrs, I got my float rating this summer and all I learned was : 7 hours is not enough time in which to learn to properly fly a float plane. I have a rating, but no intention of using it unsupervised.

[Grantmac]

For what little it's worth, coming from a guy with 115 hrs, I got my float rating this summer and all I learned was : 7 hours is not enough time in which to learn to properly fly a float plane. I have a rating, but no intention of using it unsupervised.

Good Call!

I think the float rating is clearly one of many areas where the insurance companies have got it way more figured out then TC. They require a hell of a lot more than 7hrs to be willing to underwrite you.

-Grant

[trey kule]

So TC has not got it right. Just 7 hours and no flight test! Yeah, they are dumber than all you experts who have never flown a float plane. Or evil, depending on your point of view.

So belly up to the float experts....Exactly how many hours do you think TC should mandate as a miniumum....100? 200? 300?
As I think most float drivers will tell you they were still on a fairly steep learning curve along time after they got their rating. It is about experience, and more training is not a substitute for it, unless you are going to go with 200 hours or so , over an entire season.That would surely help on the experince side.. And as the majority of float ratings are done for pilots who are going to go to work flying, and thus get company training, and then a fast track of experience How do you think companies are going to take to that? Seems the training right now is meeting their requirements. This whole '50 hour bush course' industry that has popped up has taken the training to a new high , or low depending on how you view it. When are we going to stop letting those who have absolutely no experience decide what is important?

I was choked when TC raised the minimum to 7 hours from five, but I understood their reasoning . After all you had some west coast operators who were so good at training (and very cheap BTW) that the students never actaully went solo. And in some cases only went solo with a radio to the ground telling them what to do...Quality training. But relatively cheap..
The system works just fine I think, right now, and the last thing we need is more hoops to jump through..

I was surprised, when I read others reaction to the @@@thingies. Seems that sometimes people think they are being clever without recognizing how they are really coming across. People would have read the thread anyway..

Like some others, I find it odd that someone would go and take a basic rating without plans to use it.. A float rating is very very basic.
And it is really only of value is you are going to follow it up with experience. Yes , yes , I know, we should all be learning, any education is a good thing...blah blah blah.. Like the community colleges that have courses in how to walk....and I am not making that up.

[Dagwood]

... Like the community colleges that have course in how to walk....and I am not making that up.

I thought you were kidding until I read this: 17 Weird College Classes You can Actually Take

Maybe a useless float rating isn't such a bad idea.

[Beefitarian]

Like the community colleges that have course in how to walk....and I am not making that up.

Don't hold out on us like that, leaving so many questions unanswered.

What did you learn, should we take the course, would you hire a guy with that on his resume over a float rating, what's the certificate look like?

[. ._]

http://startpage.com/do/metasearch.pl?

test

OK, that didn't work.

Type in "float rating ontario" to start.

[trey kule]

Absolutely Beefrick. You should, nay, must, take the course...It is definitely a one upper for inclusion in the old resume. Walking is such an important skill needed for a pilot that I really can not understand why there has not been a demand by the industry on TC to regulate it.. At least minimum hours, and a written and practical test. Or maybe TC should have played a leadership role by at least setting some standards on walking and how to intigrate it into a company SMS and CRM program.. Maybe a cute cartoon in the next issue of Flight Safety showing a pilot at Blackeye bumping into something and the necessary and appropriate response....

CWO....(Controlled walking into objects), is a real and serious problem in aviaition. Right now, all over the world, pilots are walking into the trailing edges of wings. Walking under refueling ladders. Stumbling and falling after a hard duty day...I know,, I was one of them.
I think if we get together and demand more regulations and stringent testing requirements we can lower the number of potentially fatal incidents. CWO incidents will never be entirely eliminated but we should all strive to do our part to make that the goal.

And now back onto topic. How is it that we have come to a place in aviaiton where a pilot is deeemd, without any experience or training, in a particular area, to know more about how to accomplish it than TC or the reams of experienced and trained pilots, as well as the trainers? There is something wrong with this approach. It almost feels that when we are trying to get it straight from the horses mouth, we end up getting our advice from the wrong end.

Literally thousands of float pilots have undertaken training and obtained the rating over the years. What has changed, or was the training so inferior that we simply must address the problem?

[Big Pistons Forever]

Absolutely Beefrick. You should, nay, must, take the course...It is definitely a one upper for inclusion in the old resume. Walking is such an important skill needed for a pilot that I really can not understand why there has not been a demand by the industry on TC to regulate it.. At least minimum hours, and a written and practical test. Or maybe TC should have played a leadership role by at least setting some standards on walking and how to intigrate it into a company SMS and CRM program.. Maybe a cute cartoon in the next issue of Flight Safety showing a pilot at Blackeye bumping into something and the necessary and appropriate response....

CWO....(Controlled walking into objects), is a real and serious problem in aviaition. Right now, all over the world, pilots are walking into the trailing edges of wings. Walking under refueling ladders. Stumbling and falling after a hard duty day...I know,, I was one of them.
I think if we get together and demand more regulations and stringent testing requirements we can lower the number of potentially fatal incidents. CWO incidents will never be entirely eliminated but we should all strive to do our part to make that the goal.

And now back onto topic. How is it that we have come to a place in aviaiton where a pilot is deeemd, without any experience or training, in a particular area, to know more about how to accomplish it than TC or the reams of experienced and trained pilots, as well as the trainers? There is something wrong with this approach. It almost feels that when we are trying to get it straight from the horses mouth, we end up getting our advice from the wrong end.

Literally thousands of float pilots have undertaken training and obtained the rating over the years. What has changed, or was the training so inferior that we simply must address the problem?

What should be: The 7 hour float rating is an introduction to the basic float flying skills, then the guy/gal gets hired by an operator who provides type/location specific training and a mentoring program that allows for him or her to acquires the skills to be a safe and productive line pilot.

What all too often happens: Guy/Gal gets hired as a dock hand. Promises of flying non rev legs and ride alongs always come second best to the requirement to wash the bosses truck, fix the cabin, haul the trash etc etc....until one of the pilots has enough and quits in mid season. Then its "hey you dockboy, take the 185 to XXX lake, and you are allready late !, oh and I will sort out the training records later". Maybe a bit of an exaggeration, but I personally knew two young guys who took their new CPL with 7 hour float course Ontario. One died in a crash on his second week on the job and the other scared himself so badly he quit flying. Neither one got any meaningful training before they were put on the line. That is one of the reasons I tell wannabe float drivers to do the 50 hour course taught by one of the experts like Dave Budd or Randy Hanna.

[Grantmac]

Absolutely Beefrick. You should, nay, must, take the course...It is definitely a one upper for inclusion in the old resume. Walking is such an important skill needed for a pilot that I really can not understand why there has not been a demand by the industry on TC to regulate it.. At least minimum hours, and a written and practical test. Or maybe TC should have played a leadership role by at least setting some standards on walking and how to intigrate it into a company SMS and CRM program.. Maybe a cute cartoon in the next issue of Flight Safety showing a pilot at Blackeye bumping into something and the necessary and appropriate response....

CWO....(Controlled walking into objects), is a real and serious problem in aviaition. Right now, all over the world, pilots are walking into the trailing edges of wings. Walking under refueling ladders. Stumbling and falling after a hard duty day...I know,, I was one of them.
I think if we get together and demand more regulations and stringent testing requirements we can lower the number of potentially fatal incidents. CWO incidents will never be entirely eliminated but we should all strive to do our part to make that the goal.

And now back onto topic. How is it that we have come to a place in aviaiton where a pilot is deeemd, without any experience or training, in a particular area, to know more about how to accomplish it than TC or the reams of experienced and trained pilots, as well as the trainers? There is something wrong with this approach. It almost feels that when we are trying to get it straight from the horses mouth, we end up getting our advice from the wrong end.

Literally thousands of float pilots have undertaken training and obtained the rating over the years. What has changed, or was the training so inferior that we simply must address the problem?

Your forgetting the equally troubling subject of Controlled Walking Off Objects (CWOO). This is keenly felt in the already substandard float segment of general aviation, just think of the number of ruined mobile phones and wallets. This represents countless tens of dollars of lost revenue for the companies employing workers without the correctly training in handling themselves while on the dock.

Back to seriousness:
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe any insurance company will underwrite you with 7hrs on floats. Not for commercial or private operations. Doesn't that tell you just how unsafe someone is with that little level of experience.
Sure if you get hired into a business they should train you to a level where both they and their underwriter are comfortable with your competence. But what about the recreational float flyer, that 7hr float course is a lot more then just a resume item to them; it is the legal requirement to allow operating a float equipped aircraft.
I don't think you could safely teach someone how to operate a boat in 7hrs, let alone one that flys.

-Grant

[iflyforpie]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe any insurance company will underwrite you with 7hrs on floats. Not for commercial or private operations. Doesn't that tell you just how unsafe someone is with that little level of experience.

Well, you need to do five solo takeoffs and landings to satisfy the standards of the seaplane rating.

For those operators who 'ride along' with their students, the Personnel Licensing and Training Standards leave no ambiguity to this requirement.

(B) a minimum of 5 takeoffs and landings as sole occupant of the aeroplane, except for two crew aircraft, in which case the takeoffs and landings shall be done as pilot-in-command.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/r ... htm#421_38


I took my wife up as soon as my rating was signed off, but with fresh training on a big lake on a good day.

[Shiny Side Up]

And now back onto topic. How is it that we have come to a place in aviaiton where a pilot is deeemd, without any experience or training, in a particular area, to know more about how to accomplish it than TC or the reams of experienced and trained pilots, as well as the trainers?

Maybe you're forgetting that you're reading this information off of the internet and that anyone who has access to it can spout off what they please. Incidentally, its not just aviation that suffers on the internet from this malaise, there are millions of archair experts on any given subject.

There is something wrong with this approach. It almost feels that when we are trying to get it straight from the horses mouth, we end up getting our advice from the wrong end.

There is indeed something wrong with that approach. I hope this isn't the only place you're getting information on the expertise of pilots. One of the unfortunate things about the age of the information highway. To use your metaphor, remember here that when you're looking for info from the horse's mouth, you've also got a few donkeys, mules and the odd cow behind the keyboard as well.

[trey kule]

I don't think you could safely teach someone how to operate a boat in 7hrs, let alone one that flys.

So, what is the number of hours you would suggest?

I have absolutely no problem with the seven hour requirement. If the new float rated pilot goes on to work commercially, the company hiring them will provide training to the standard they feel is safe. If they are privately flying, then hopefully they will understand that they have only just learned the basics, and will undertake to get experience and expand their skills slowly and carefully.

what exactly are you hoping to accomplish with more hours..You simply cannot train anybody in lieu of experience.. You have to strive to make them initially safe under limited conditions, and then let them get experience.

SSU you really opened my eyes to this whole internet thing.

As to controlled walking off objects. In the past I have campaigned vigoursly for increased restricitons on new float pilots wearing 22kg watches as they seem to act like a bit of an anchor when one falls into the water. But alas, my efforts have been in vain, as the watches are necessary so that the fallee can later tell exactly to what depth they fell, the exact time of the incident in three time zones, and use the slide rule function to determine that decompression times will not be exceeded in order to surface quickly. It is hard to argue with that logic.

[Beefitarian]

Don't hate me because my watch is beautifull.

[trey kule]

hate you????

Beefi, I could never hate the man who is married to my current girlfriend and raising and supporting one of my kids

[Beefitarian]

If it's the boy you should give me a break and come pick him up. Your girl friend as you call her is the sole provider in this house currently. Tell Cat to post pictures I'm on his foe list and he can see my posts because I'm so mean.

[boogs82]

Will you know what to do the first time this happens? What do you save? Not taught in any float rating!

.

This one's easy. If you're going in the bush and you're flying a float plane you want to consider your weight and balance very carefully, depending on the length of the trip. Reason being is you want to conserve fuel.

So. Cans are lighter than bottles. Chances are you have your beer in the cooler in cans. So what you can do is toss the cooler onto the deck and hope it doesn't fly open. As you're doing that, drop your legs to the water and be prepared for a little swim. Reach over, grab the pontoon, or the rope on the pontoon, and drag it back to the dock. This way you've saved all three. Problem solved.