Lets have a think tank on improving flight instruction.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

You would have to talk to the major insurance companies. Have the agree that this is a great idea... they would turn around and tell you you need to go to one of the collages because in THEIR view a 2 or 4 (not up to speed here) diploma is worth more than a persons ability.

Wacko I hate to rain on your parade but you are dead wrong with that assumption.

I am in the business of setting standards for training and pilot skills levels for the issuance of insurance and deal directly with the underwriters in Lloyds of London and I can assure you that your level of formal education is not what we examine when measuring risk for the purpose of insurance coverage.

The bench mark is your flying skills....period.

Using Jazz as an example of what is required with regard to flying skills is the wrong example because Jazz is an airline with their own standards tailored to ensure that all pilots behind the controls perform in the exact same manner......sort of a Pavlov's dogs mentality.

Airline flying is a sector of aviation that has it's own set of standards and skills requirements.......but even airlines will not pass you by if you can actually fly an airplane.

[Meatservo]

Well, I guess this discussion can be summed up like a lot of other similar ones here...

1) Wouldn't it be nice if we could improve the instruction business?

2) Someone trots out a couple of ideas

3) Debate for a while about ideas

4) Someone points out that some of the ideas would work if only pilots had a professional organisation to administer standard principles.

5) Someone else says transport/business/other pilots would never let it happen anyway.

6) I start to wonder why I bothered to say anything. My "idea" wasn't even an idea at all... "let's increase qualifications"..."let's improve standards"..."Let's all be professional"..."Let's all take more pride in our profession"...Blah, blah, blah. I'm tired of reading my own crap.

I'll tell you the best idea I've heard all day: A body of representatives that puts down and enforces a standard of qualifications, ethics, compensation, etc, that employers and pilots are bound to contractually. Like the ontario college of Teachers. It's not a union, it's a governing body.

The trouble is, I don't know how to start one, and I suspect that as a group, pilots are too motivated by self-interest, too fractious, and maybe even too dumb to ever do anything like forming a group with a common goal.

The current crop of "students" entering the flying racket are doing the same thing to this industry as Rap did to the music industry, or reality TV did to the entertainment industry, or WWF did to the sports industry.

You don't want to be bothered to learn more than you have to, you don't want to work more than you have to, you want to be called "Captain" and boast about your flying exploits without ever having to go somewhere that's too cold, or too hot, or too far away, or has too many heavy things, two years or preferably less after "graduating" from your minimalist puppy-mill of a training scam.

And most of you are so under-educated you can't even f*$King SPELL.

[Hedley]

And most of you are so under-educated you can't even f*$King SPELL

What's really useless is your fetish with correct
spelling. According to you, spell-checking software
must be well-educated to do it's job

[Meatservo]

Below the belt, Hedley!! And flight-management systems must be practically self-aware because they can navigate better than the average pilot.

I see YOUR spell-checking software isn't helping you much. There's no apostrophe in "its",
as in "spell checking does ITS job".

Wait, that sounded nasty. I wasn't trying to be nasty. Maybe I should add one of these things: does that make me seem more friendly?

Proper spelling is something we can all agree on.

[N2]

[Hedley]

Proper spelling is something we can all agree on

Is "its" vs "it's" spelling or grammar?

P.S. I have learned that nothing here is "below the belt".

[Wacko]

All I'm saying is that the only realistic way things will change is when the operators decide to make the changes.

., how will your recommendations in one insurance company change Canadian flying habits? Even if you somehow create an apprenticeship program, who will mandate it? Will I, a commercially licensed pilot have to pay a membership fee to join? Will you put the burden on those who are aspiring to be commercially licensed?

A lot of the ideas are great but I don't think they can be implemented in the way flight schools operate today. How many flight schools will you be able to persuade to jump on the bandwagon?

IN MY OPINION, you need to start at the top and work down. Start with the places where most pilots want to end up (Charters etc), ask what THEIR needs are and trickle it down to the FTU's.

[Mostly Harmless]

Unionize.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Wacko:

I started this discussion to get people thinking and try and come up with some ideas on how flight instructors can earn a living like everyone else in society.

Quite frankly I personally don't give a fu.k what each one of you do or think individually and I sure am not dependent on aviation for my living any more.

[Meatservo]

Wacko:
Quite frankly I personally don't give a fu.k what each one of you do or think individually.

Then why bother starting a thread in the first place? You don't mean that, do you, .? Say it ain't so.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Then why bother starting a thread in the first place? You don't mean that, do you, .? Say it ain't so.

O.K......it ain't so.

But sometimes I get depressed seeing the fear of trying to change things because the status quo is easier......

[Wacko]

Lets face it. Every time something like this comes up here, at an FTU or wherever it always fails. I WANT IT TO SUCCEED! So... rather than trying to change the world in one clean sweep.. which won't happen... people should come up with ideas to work toward that goal. We all want to get paid well and fly in safe aircraft... what can we do NOW to put us on that road?

If anyone here thinks that we can change the industry into an apprenticeship you're stoned.. and I want to know the number of your dealer! HOWEVER if we can determine that 6.50 is NOT a good starting salary for a class 4 in Vancouver we should advertise that and shame those who pay does rates... a lot of people just don't know of opportunities out there.

Also, how about posting some ideas about how we could try to change the owners of FTU's? Why is it that it always falls on the guys with 200 hours to change?

Anyway... I am done pissing people off on this thread....

<edit> oh wait.. and one more thing.... it should be mandatory to post salary for positions posted on this site.. wtf is as per company scale? post the f@king company scale then!

[the goal is soul]

There is something that you CAN do. There are groups that look at these, and similar issues in aviation who feel the same way, that the industry does not belong to Transport Canada.

It's not easy, which is why most aviation interest groups have trouble sustaining themselves, but there some amazing people who keep the industry going while they work in the background - managers from AMOs, CPs, Owners, CFIs...people who "get" that the all the parts need to work for the aviation machine to run, and that there is a need to support each other.

Take action - find out when your aviation council meets, and show up. Participate. The industry needs people willing to step up to the plate and play a role. We can't just expect that others will express these concerns on our behalf. And there are people who are already at the table raising these issues, and they're don't have enough of our support.


http://atgb.gotdns.com:6889/

http://aircraftoperators.aviationalberta.com/start

http://www.saskaviationcouncil.ca/

http://www.manitobaaviationcouncil.ca/

[Chuck Ellsworth]

There is something that you CAN do. There are groups that look at these, and similar issues in aviation who feel the same way, that the industry does not belong to Transport Canada.

I knew there were others out there who understand this simple fact.

It's not easy, which is why most aviation interest groups have trouble sustaining themselves, but there some amazing people who keep the industry going while they work in the background - managers from AMOs, CPs, Owners, CFIs...people who "get" that the all the parts need to work for the aviation machine to run, and that there is a need to support each other.

And they do this in spite of the road blocks set up by TC.

Remember there are still more of you than there are of TC and you do not have to submit to unfair or unworkable demands by TC.

[MichaelP]

It's gone to Transport Canada again...

The real problem is that the industry has not set a line below which nobody passes.
This line is the minimum profit margin.
In the UK business used to be done this way, I can't say it is done this way now, but when this line is drawn everyone makes a living unless they do stupid things in business.

The Canadian model is to undercut your competition and therefore it's the survival of the leanest.
The fact that the ramp here is populated by cast-off Cessnas of a certain vintage and some of them in terrible states is evidence of poor investment in giving the students what they deserve.
Yes, this is the cheapest place in the world to learn to fly, but at the same time we have aircraft that shame us.

Like seeing a dirty house, our reputation drops when foreigners come and see what we have.

Everything is on the cheap, and people are treated cheap too.
Cheap people aren't good working, happy people. Unhappy people do not do a good job and are not interested in staying.

Raising the cost of flying in Canada by a few dollars could mean better aeroplanes, and better instructors.

The helicopter training industry here is very good. There are no cheap helicopters, a helicopter would be positively dangerous if maintained to the Cessna 152 average standard.
Helicopter instructors are not paid cheap like their cesspit counterparts either. It's a professional business and has the respect as such.

So let's look at changing this Canadian culture with it's Zellers mentality.

[Hedley]

Michael, think about cars for a second.

Some people want to buy the cheapest possible
car that they can get legally licensed for the road.

Some people drive Lexus/Acura/Infinity/BMW/Audi
etc, because they can tell the difference that quality
makes, and they are prepared to pay for the difference.

Two problems come to mind here:

1) someone who can only afford a used KIA with
300,000 km on the clock doesn't have the bucks
for a quality car

2) it's not hard to tell the difference between a
KIA with 300K on the clock, and a new Mercedes,
but it can be pretty hard for an outsider to tell
the difference between a bad flight school and
a good flight school. Most people go on appearances,
so they think a good flight school has a large
building with lots of glass and chrome, and a good
aircraft has a shiny paint job, even if it's got
30,000TT and is corroded and loose as a goose.

So. You need to figure out how to position
your flight school as a "high end" operation,
and deliver the high-quality goods (or services,
in this case). Most flight schools position themselves
as the "Walmart" of flight training - lowest
possible prices, and try to make it up on the volume.

After a while, people will know the difference.
Like a restaurant that goes cheap on the meat
it buys, but tries to charge top dollar for a steak,
people figure it out after a while. Outfits like that
can only stay in business if they have a continual
stream of naive customers, which unfortuately
is often the case with flight training.

[Airflow]

It took me a few years to decide to get into instructing as a I had a not so good instructor during my ppl. But when I did, I really enjoyed it. In 2 years I've gone from class 4 to class 1. Yeah, as a 4 I didn't make a lot (which sucked) but that was also the motivation to upgrade. In other words, it will depend on the individual, as instructing isn't for everyone.
Something I noticed reading through the thread is that no one mentioned about the CFI! In my opinion, if there's a class 4/3 that isn't providing quality instruction, the supervising instructor should step in and ask "Why". And if the CFI isn't taking note (or supervising instructor), checking up on progress (making sure the program is being followed), then there's another break down in the system.
Some of the idea's here have been very creative, but if the industry were to only let ATPL's teach, there would be even less instructors (I think). Again, it boils down to the individual. Also, not all flight schools have a twin, so what would be the point of holding grp 1 IFR?
On the flip side, an FTU is also a business. So, business owners are setting the pay... Industry influence of course. What a balance, to make a profit, pay the bills and people, while still providing relative cheap training (quality or not) to get more people flying at that location (which there may be direct competition on the same field). I am not a business person, so I wouldn't really know what to do there.
Someone mentioned about working 15/18 hr day only to get 4/5 hr of flying. I don't think that’s right either (been there, done that). As long as there are no 700 ops, there seems to be no duty day. This is also something that should be addressed.
The initial case in point being to increase pay for instructors, I don't think we would need more regulations (there's already an apprentiship with the class 4), but there is defininately a need for improving pay.
The last instructor refresher course I was on, there was talk about getting rid of the class 4 and as a 3, there would be 2 levels: as an apprentice and as a non apprentice. Any word on this? Not to mention, how would this affect the pay scales! (Again, thinking from the perspective of a business owner or even an accountant!)

[gongshowking]

Complex problems here. Seems many of the "flying clubs" have gone belly up over the years...why is this? Did clubs make money? Im sure they were not cut throat enough to ward off college type and "schools". If the profit could be taken out and a club was well run ...where instructors are paid for showing up each day and not just the hobbs. Perhaps add some loopholes where old retired hightime guys can instruct?? Perhaps in a non for profit guise clubs could get help and grants from various levels of govt. Ill end by saying that most "clubs" ive seen seem like there is a flow of money somewhere...and not back into the club....maybe to some other kinda "club" who knows.

[the goal is soul]

A former employer was of the opinion that within 5-10 years, there would be maybe 20 schools left in the country where you could get trained. Everyone else would be unable to afford to operate, and 'GA' would become a privilege of the wealthy, and the rest who could afford it would become part of the 'sport aviation' community.

The only way you'd be able to fly is if you have a well paying job in another industry to fly your RV-6, or you sink your future into it by signing your life away to the bank.

On the other hand, the infrastructure needed to run one of those 20 schools would now mean a significant economic impact for that airport, that city, etc. Instead of one school dropping out of the game, and another one taking it's place, local politicians would want that school in thier riding, and aviation might get some government backing. It makes you think what it might be like if there were 20 'Southports' around the country; it's a pretty amazing set up that Allied Wings/Bombardier have (had) going on there. You might even compare it to the training scheme that firefighters have to go through.

[TC Guy]

Raising the cost of flying in Canada by a few dollars could mean better aeroplanes, and better instructors.

Maybe it is time for these "progressive" ideas. Good poeple, good equipment. Better instruction? Very likely.

The helicopter training industry here is very good. There are no cheap helicopters, a helicopter would be positively dangerous if maintained to the Cessna 152 average standard.
Helicopter instructors are not paid cheap like their cesspit counterparts either. It's a professional business and has the respect as such.

Very few people here actually know how much a helicopter instructor makes. It is a living wage, as it should be.

So let's look at changing this Canadian culture with it's Zellers mentality.

Lets do that.

-Guy

[Hedley]

The last instructor refresher course I was on, there was talk about getting rid of the class 4 and as a 3, there would be 2 levels: as an apprentice and as a non apprentice.

At the risk of offending the cranky, twisted little gnomes here
who bleat and squeal whenever I state "2+2=4" ...

That's astounding, if it's really coming from Transport. Because
that's exactly the way it is in the USA, and everyone knows the
USA isn't as good as Canada, right? (heavy sarcasm)

Last time I looked at the FARs, in the USA, when you get your
instructor rating (for maximum confusion for us, it is called a
Certified Flight Instructor or CFI) you are immediately equivalent
to a class 3 instructor in Canada - there is no supervision
requirement.

In fact, the day you get your FAA CFI, you can start instructing
(part 61) on your own buck-fifty. No onerous FTU OC, which
takes a year to get, is required in the USA for a flight instructor
to teach on his own aircraft.

24 months after you got your CFI, you now have the privilege
of teaching new instructors. No test, nothing. So much for
the incredible class 4/3/2/1 treadmill.

Ok, time for an "I Am Canadian" rant. Everything is better in
Canada. Back bacon. Got it.

But if the FAA system is SO bad (which I am sure everyone
here thinks it is) why Transport honour FAA pilot certificates
with the new reciprocity agreement?

Anyone can get their FAA pilot certificate, walk into Canada,
get a Cdn medical and write a really short written test and
based on their FAA pilot certificate, get a Cdn pilot licence
(private, night, multi, IFR, commercial, ATP). Hmm.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

In fact, the day you get your FAA CFI, you can start instructing
(part 61) on your own buck-fifty. No onerous FTU OC, which
takes a year to get, is required in the USA for a flight instructor
to teach on his own aircraft.

Hedley, if it were that way in Canada I would consider starting up another training business as a retirement hobby.

But alas that is wishful thinking.

[tired of the ground]

Cat, why don't you just register your 150 in the USA and offer training under part 61. You can do all the training and provide a US Private. A simple written test and your students can have a Canadian Private.

[MichaelP]

I am still looking for good Class 1 and Class 2 instructors...
It seems that this is not a good time to set up a school even with really good new aeroplanes.

I had a decent Class II instructor coming here to teach for a little more money, and for a better lifestyle than flying a Beech 1900!
When his company realised what was happening, they offered him $12,000 a year more, some days off, and the prospect of becoming a captain sooner. Even though it was 'bad' for us it did put him in a better position.
Pilots have not had such a good bargaining position for so long. It's about time Canadian operators started to treat people better.
Now if only that bargaining position could go far enough to ensure the maintenance is done on some of these aircraft.

But for us in the lowly position of supplying crews for these B1900s etc, the position is dire.
There are too few instructors with Class 2 and Class 1 ratings with enough knowledge to take on the responsibilities that such ratings allow.
Where can we generate the skilled people we need?

[Grey_Wolf]

There are too few instructors with Class 2 and Class 1 ratings,
with enough knowledge to take on the responsibilities that such ratings allow.
Where can we generate the skilled people we need?

Food for Though ...

Sept 2007 Quarterly License Report
http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/gener ... ats007.htm
http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/gener ... 07_pg2.htm

Looking at TC's latest report (above) ... When there are only 800 or so
combined Class 1 & 2's for almost 12,000 SPP's ... it goes without saying.

As for finding/generating them, most folks that could teach
(presumably those with CPLs/ATPLs and years of service in the industry)
aren't willing to invest 8,000$+ for the rating and/or have to jump through TC's hoops
in order to receive a minimalist pay. (Assuming an hourly rate only, as a Class 4 making
25$/hr multiplied by, maybe, 1000 billable hours a year?)

Simple Economics; too much demand, not enough supply. Compounded with no/little
incentive for instructors to remain with an FTU, the only viable option(s) is to limit those
allowed to hold a license (therefore limiting the demand, which isn't likely going to happen
because it generates revenue for the school's bottom line) or increase the supply
(which again could be done by "lowering" the bar as to who can teach, but that
raises the question of quality, which we know would deteriorate).

In the race to the bottom, we're finding out in a hurry that it's a Catch 22 situation that we're in !