Flight Training around the GTA
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister
-
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5927
- Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
- Location: West Coast
Re: Flight Training around the GTA
I like flying aerobatics and formation and warbirds and flying floats and tailwheel aircraft but my respect "threshold" for other pilots does not require them to do the same.
All I care about is simple. For the aircraft they are flying, do they genuinely want to be a safe and competent pilot. There are lots of pilots at the club where I do some part time teaching that are content to experience the magic of flight in Buck Seventy Two around the local area. For them a local flight on a sunny evening with that "magic hour" soft light gives them everything they want out of aviation. Who am I to say they are lesser people unworthy of the title "Pilot" ?
As long as they are willing to put the effort into maintaining their skills and vow to be a little bit better with every flight I think they should be encourage to continue not pilloried because they don't fly the right kind of aircraft.
All I care about is simple. For the aircraft they are flying, do they genuinely want to be a safe and competent pilot. There are lots of pilots at the club where I do some part time teaching that are content to experience the magic of flight in Buck Seventy Two around the local area. For them a local flight on a sunny evening with that "magic hour" soft light gives them everything they want out of aviation. Who am I to say they are lesser people unworthy of the title "Pilot" ?
As long as they are willing to put the effort into maintaining their skills and vow to be a little bit better with every flight I think they should be encourage to continue not pilloried because they don't fly the right kind of aircraft.
- Colonel Sanders
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7512
- Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
- Location: Over Macho Grande
Re: Flight Training around the GTA
You miss the point entirely.not pilloried because they don't fly the right kind of aircraft
Bottom line is that it doesn't matter what you fly - what matters is
how you fly it
If someone can land a 172 effortlessly in a steady 25 knot direct
crosswind, right down the centerline, wing down, upwind main first ...
my hat is off to them. I know a guy that does pipeline patrol in
172's, has over 10,000 hours in them. He can really fly the crap
out of that thing, and doesn't work very hard to do it.
However my point is that precious few 172 drivers are capable of
flying their aircraft, because it has taught them to be sloppy pilots.
Same thing on a motorcycle. Rossi on a 250 could spank me on
a track if I was on a literbike. His skill is incredible, like that of Bob
Hoover's, and it really disappoints me to see pilots that just don't
care. They are sloppy and ham-fisted and that's "good enough".
The 172 allows them - nay, encourages them - to be a slovenly
pilot, and that is what offends me.
A tailwheel aircraft simply won't allow a pilot to be slovenly and
incompetent, and will punish them brutally for their incompetence
and indifference. It gives them no choice but to improve their skills.


Re: Flight Training around the GTA
There's a lot being said here but I guess, the basic point may be that a standard PPL license training in a C172 may be insufficient for crafting a well-rounded, air-worthy pilot, on average?
Like everything else, and as you said, pilots come in all flavours. Some could fly the hell out of that plane while others could just do the basics. That's a little scary though - if a student is stuck with a disinterested or inadequate trainer, would that end up risking his/her flight career/technique? My worry about trainers stems from this, which is why I was asking about the importance of ratings.
Like everything else, and as you said, pilots come in all flavours. Some could fly the hell out of that plane while others could just do the basics. That's a little scary though - if a student is stuck with a disinterested or inadequate trainer, would that end up risking his/her flight career/technique? My worry about trainers stems from this, which is why I was asking about the importance of ratings.
- Shiny Side Up
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5335
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
- Location: Group W bench
Re: Flight Training around the GTA
I would beg to differ, if only because I've been through a lot of journey logs and researched damage histories of a lot of airplanes. Some which it seems had a lot of money to make repairs, and another pilot I had talked to in his opinion that smashing wingtips and bending landing gear on one poor taildragger didn't count as "major damage". The best was one fellow who claimed to have ground looped at least 6 Cessna 180/185s and therefore was an expert in its handling now. I was somehow dubious of his expertise since one of his students after "learning from the master" suffered the same fate. You're right it will punish them, but you have a lot more faith in people if you think such punishment "improved the skills" of even your above examples.A tailwheel aircraft simply won't allow a pilot to be slovenly and
incompetent, and will punish them brutally for their incompetence
and indifference. It gives them no choice but to improve their skills.
Basic economics of general aviation again. Its possible it could have, but airplane performance and affordability still are the driving factors here. The 150 despite relatively more difficult handling characteristics (emphasis on relatively) out performs it in every way. All metal construction to date is still the most durable hands down and the ercoupe was still wood and fabric for a good part of its construction. Cost wise upgrading to the 172 isn't that much more money, and especially wasn't when they were introduced. The Cessna high wing design is just plain makes sense for overall usefulness - much like the previous most useful plane - the Piper Cub, for your average Joe owner. The only design feature to make the old cessna high wing shape more durable was replacing the nose oleo with a simpler castoring nose leg - a notable change on the new 162, its suprising really that the 172s ahven't been so retrofitted, but that speaks probably more to the problems of design certification than anything else.I do wonder why the Ercoupe didn't triumph over the Cessna though.
In spite of the Colonel's disdain though, the ercoupe is still a pretty fun little airplane to fly and does have stuff to teach someone new to one. One can get a good appreciation for what "underpowered" really means. There is the novelty of being able to cruise around the countryside with an open cockpit. Since you can't make a slipping approach, you must learn how to crab and guage the wind for maintaining centerline (though no kicking it out) it is wierd to fly something that has crosswind gear, though your landing speed is so low it isn't the traumatic jolt you might expect. Incidentally the Ercoupe does hold an aviation first that is pretty cool.

If there was ever an airplane you wish you had some extra oomph on take off, it would have to be an ercoupe.

Re: Flight Training around the GTA
I'd love to get this thread back on topic. I just signed up for training with Toronto Airways in Buttonville.
It was between them and Burlington, being about an equal distance away from my residence. How do they compare? I've only attended a few ground school classes so far so I would like to determine if there are any appreciable differences in instruction quality, procedure, costs in favour of one or the other.
It was between them and Burlington, being about an equal distance away from my residence. How do they compare? I've only attended a few ground school classes so far so I would like to determine if there are any appreciable differences in instruction quality, procedure, costs in favour of one or the other.
- Colonel Sanders
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7512
- Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
- Location: Over Macho Grande
Re: Flight Training around the GTA
I'm sure there are good and bad instructors at both, and
your flight training experience is going to be 90% determined
by your instructor.
I would choose a good instructor at a crappy school with
sh1tty aircraft over a bad instructor at a big shiny school
with new aircraft any day.
your flight training experience is going to be 90% determined
by your instructor.
I would choose a good instructor at a crappy school with
sh1tty aircraft over a bad instructor at a big shiny school
with new aircraft any day.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 104
- Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 9:53 am
- Location: Toronto
Re: Flight Training around the GTA
I agree with the post above. I'm training out of the city airport (so that narrows down the school I'm with
) I really like my instructor for very many reasons but if I'd have had a choice I'm not sure that I would have picked the school I'm currently with. But living in downtown Toronto without a car limits your choices somewhat

Re: Flight Training around the GTA
Yeah it does - I ended going with Waterloo anyway simply because a lot of aspects fit well and I got a great instructor. I would've gone with YTZ had it not been for the traffic, travel distance to practice area and cost. Factoring in transport costs and all, the Island still comes out to $1,500 more. I will probably look into it if I ever need to get ratings or train beyond the PPL.omgwereallgoingtodie wrote:I agree with the post above. I'm training out of the city airport (so that narrows down the school I'm with) I really like my instructor for very many reasons but if I'd have had a choice I'm not sure that I would have picked the school I'm currently with. But living in downtown Toronto without a car limits your choices somewhat
Re: Flight Training around the GTA
I asked similar questions before, but to be honest, you'll have to visit the schools and take a flight. Talk to other instructors if you can. I've heard good things about Burlington but can't vouch for them personally.koalorka wrote:I'd love to get this thread back on topic. I just signed up for training with Toronto Airways in Buttonville.
It was between them and Burlington, being about an equal distance away from my residence. How do they compare? I've only attended a few ground school classes so far so I would like to determine if there are any appreciable differences in instruction quality, procedure, costs in favour of one or the other.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 104
- Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 9:53 am
- Location: Toronto
Re: Flight Training around the GTA
I live within walking distance of city airport and don't drive ( don't ask why a potential pilot doesn't drive !)Ivan42 wrote:Yeah it does - I ended going with Waterloo anyway simply because a lot of aspects fit well and I got a great instructor. I would've gone with YTZ had it not been for the traffic, travel distance to practice area and cost. Factoring in transport costs and all, the Island still comes out to $1,500 more. I will probably look into it if I ever need to get ratings or train beyond the PPL.omgwereallgoingtodie wrote:I agree with the post above. I'm training out of the city airport (so that narrows down the school I'm with) I really like my instructor for very many reasons but if I'd have had a choice I'm not sure that I would have picked the school I'm currently with. But living in downtown Toronto without a car limits your choices somewhat
I'd have gone with Canadian flyers if they were still here