Flight instructing vs Working the ramp. Doesn't add up?

[Colonel Sanders]

If money is your primary motivator, you're in the wrong field. Really.
There are plenty of other occupations where you can earn a lot more
money with a lot less pain.

[Chaxterium]

If money is your primary motivator, you're in the wrong field. Really.
There are plenty of other occupations where you can earn a lot more
money with a lot less pain.

Very true.

I wish I could refute it but unfortunately Colonel Sanders is right. Don't get me wrong, I love my job but I have had to make a number of sacrifices to get to where I am and I'm sure many more sacrifices are coming. I haven't seen my girls in 9 weeks. Coming home next week though! Can't wait!

Flightman you seem to certainly have a passion for aviation and that's key in this industry. Not a lot of people can put up with all the crap the comes along with it if they're not passionate about it. My two cents; listen to the people here. I've been in this industry for a good number of years now and still a lot of the people on this forum, and in this thread for that matter, have probably forgotten more about aviation than I'll ever learn. Never turn away an opportunity to listen to someone with more experience than you. Even if you don't agree with that they're saying it will give you a different perspective. Everyone here has something to give and that's how we all learn. I still love picking the brains of old timer pilots and usually end up in awe of how things used to be done. I used to fly with one gent who has more time going backward in a Twin Otter than I have going forward and he always had great stories. I don't know how many times he said "Son, back when I started flying we had one piece of paperwork to fill out. The journey log. That was it! None of this crap!" Needless to say I was his paperwork bitch but that was fine by me. Anyway, the point of my thread is always stay humble to those who have come before you. They obviously know what they're talking about because in this industry you don't last long if you don't know what you're talking about. With that in mind though keep asking questions. Nothing wrong with that.

I sincerely wish you the best of luck with your endeavours,
Chax

[Cat Driver]

Ahhh those were the days before all the paperwork B.S. and rules that have become part of aviation today.

Not only was there very little paperwork to do there were no PPC's needed so we were not one or two trick ponies only able to fly one or two airplanes.

If we could satisfy the chief pilot we could fly a given airplane and our license covered it that was all that was needed.

I had one job where I flew two different helicopters, three different piston engine twins ( Piper Apache, Beech 18, De Havilland Dove. ) and a bunch of different single engine airplanes on a random basis as needed.

The puzzle is how did we do that without all the human factors training all the CRM stuff and all those SOP's that are required today?

[Flightman7]

Will my "skill" as an aviator be adversely effected because my first job was a turbine FO instead of a FO on an old Navajo, or a Single pilot on a light twin vs a 206? No, it wont. At any of those jobs I would have done my best, learned my plane and safely flown my passengers around. The important thing to consider when looking for that job is the company. Making sure you are working for a good operator. If you are working for a good operator they will train you well on whatever you are flying, and improve your skill. Saying anything else is just bias in my opinion because it was the way YOU did it. Of course the guy who worked his ass off on a dock in the middle of nowhere to finally get his shot at the 185 feels that anyone who went through anything else didn't learn as much as him. Same as the guy who spent every night after his ramp shift studying the systems of the turbine twin he hoped to fly feels the guy in the 185 had it easy cause he didn't have to memorize 3 tech manuals and a CRM course. As long as both the above pilots flew for people who didn't bend the rules, push weather, weight, fuel, and rest, they both will have come away from either job with the valuable knowledge and skills to safely and professionally do his job.

Thank you, I agree 100%.

If money is your primary motivator, you're in the wrong field. Really.
There are plenty of other occupations where you can earn a lot more
money with a lot less pain.

Money is by far not my primary motivator, Im expecting to make low wages and im fine with it as long as it allows for comfortable living, which may not always be the case, but I think that is more up to the individual and who he/she is willing to work for and or do in order to progress.

Even if you don't agree with that they're saying it will give you a different perspective. Everyone here has something to give and that's how we all learn. I still love picking the brains of old timer pilots and usually end up in awe of how things used to be done.

the point of my thread is always stay humble to those who have come before you. They obviously know what they're talking about because in this industry you don't last long if you don't know what you're talking about.

I am by no means challenging any of these experienced pilots, I will state yet a again, Im an idiot you guys are the professionals. I just wanted to clear up what I meant by my last post, because I steel feel I am not totally wrong in saying that.

Thanks again to all you guys, and sorry if I've affended, I mean no disrespect, I just want a freindly conversation between Pros and Joes (Me) Im lucky to have the opourtunity to talk to you guys as well, I certainmly dont take it for granted.

[Chaxterium]

Nothing wrong with a healthy discussion.

Cheers,
Chax

[Slats]

Flying a plane is not difficult, and not all of us are acrobatic airshow performers or military fighter pilots. Will my "skill" as an aviator be adversely effected because my first job was a turbine FO instead of a FO on an old Navajo, or a Single pilot on a light twin vs a 206? No, it wont.....Saying anything else is just bias in my opinion because it was the way YOU did it.....As long as both the above pilots flew for people who didn't bend the rules, push weather, weight, fuel, and rest, they both will have come away from either job with the valuable knowledge and skills to safely and professionally do his job. As everyone on here repeatedly states, this industry IS about the journey. However, there are a thousand different variations on that journey, each on of them as viable and important as the next.

Well we agree on many things, and disagree on a few. Flying a plane IS difficult. Sure any idiot CAN fly, but not any idiot can fly WELL. Just because we as pilots are so practised at what we do that we can perform complex intricate tasks with relative ease and make it appear easy, does not detract from the inherent difficulty of the task or manoeuver. In a way it's good that we can perform these things at such a high level as to fool ourselves into thinking they are simple. It means we are probably really skilled at it (or delusional in some cases.) At the root of that ability, is hands and feet skills which, in my opinion, is the second most important skill for ANY pilot to possess, closely behind decision making and ahead of knowledge and proficiency in aircraft, SOP's, procedures, etc. These hands and feet skills come naturally to some gifted individuals, but more often are learned through repeated practice. And in my opinion, no avenue into an aviation career develops the 2 most important core skills of decision making and hands and feet more quickly and more thoroughly than flying around in that 185 or 206 you mentioned. Let me explain, as I'm certainly not suggesting that instructing or sitting right seat IFR is in any way a negative or less valuable.
Take a 1000 hour pilot from each option and let's look in general at that 1000 hours they've flown. All will almost certainly be completely competent at their respective jobs. However, the instructor might actually fly only 15 minutes of every hour flown. Not a lot of time to develop, BUT that time is very concentrated in airwork, etc. which can develop finely tuned skill. The instructor also operates in a very strictly controlled environment when it comes to weather, etc. and does not have much exposure to real operational experience as it relates to 703/4/5 ops, which means they probably don't have great deal of difficult decisions to make. The instructor obviously knows the art of teaching people and will probably make an enjoyable captain for FO's to fly with one day.
Now take the 1000 hour FO. If they swap legs with the skipper, they do 50% of the flying, and generally all particularly challenging situations are handled by the captain. BUT, they do have an experienced pilot next to them, to teach them and help develop those skills which, with the right captain, could really accelerate their learning and development. However, in a 2 crew environment, the decision making buck stops in the left seat. The FO is never on the hook for making the tough call. That said, 2 crew operations and SOPs are second nature to this pilot.
Finally, the 1000 hour piston Cessna pilot. That's 1000 hours of genuine Pilot in Command time in every sense of the term. They have no experience with 2 crew ops and have likely never read an SOP in their life, but they have flown all of that 1000 hours by themselves in whatever situation good luck, bad luck, stupidity and mother nature brought their way. They have likely expanded the boundaries of their comfort level and ability by dealing with those situations out of necessity. They had to fly in barely legal weather to make it home to safety after the forecast for the day proved inaccurate. Likewise they probably had to make the decision to divert elsewhere and wait it out, when that barely legal turned illegal and/or unsafe. They've had to deal with strong gusting crosswinds at the absolute limit of their abilities. They've had to work through plans A, B and C when everything was going wrong with their plan for the day. Situations near or at the edge of a person's capability have a way of expanding their skill set in a big way when they are forced to deal with it out of necessity, or make the hard decision to admit it's over the edge and walk away. That is why my personal belief is that more often than not, 1000 hours of bush flying will inherently develop the core skills faster and to a greater degree.
My post was certainly NOT intended to belittle any of the three typical avenues into aviation: instructing, right seat IFR and bush. I know pilots from all three avenues that I would trust my life to with no hesitation. It's simply that after giving all three the old college try very early in my career (yes, I've tried them all), I found the bush to be far and away the most beneficial to me. Again, all three roads are perfectly viable options and I'm NOT saying one is superior to the others in achieving your career goals. However, I am bothered by what I perceive to be a lack of respect for bush flying by most 200 hour wonders and I'm just trying to point out the very real value in bush flying that MANY young pilots fresh out of flight school overlook when they don't even consider it based on very poor reasons (excuses.) Just because that bush job will have you out in what you perceive to be the middle of nowhere instead of at home with mom and dad, and that 206 doesn't have all the fancy avionics a 1900 might have, doesn't mean you can't learn more than you expect and further your career just as easily by doing it while enjoying yourself more than you might anticipate.

[C-GGGQ]

I agree with many of your points. Especially as one who has (limited) experience in all three, I prefer the single pilot Vfr bush flying. I will agree to disagree on the skill required to PHYSICALLY fly an airplane (not the decision making skills required to do it safely and consistently) with obvious caveats of clear day at a big paved runway.

[Beefitarian]

Ahhh those were the days before all the paperwork B.S. and rules that have become part of aviation today.

Not only was there very little paperwork to do there were no PPC's needed so we were not one or two trick ponies only able to fly one or two airplanes.

If we could satisfy the chief pilot we could fly a given airplane and our license covered it that was all that was needed.

I had one job where I flew two different helicopters, three different piston engine twins ( Piper Apache, Beech 18, De Havilland Dove. ) and a bunch of different single engine airplanes on a random basis as needed.

The puzzle is how did we do that without all the human factors training all the CRM stuff and all those SOP's that are required today?

Cat there must have been guys in the 1940s that would fly a DC-4 everyday for years. Today there's some people out there that fly many different types.

Iflyforpie comes to mind he used to post here and maybe doesn't get in the diversity you did and type ratings might be needed before he flys some but he seemed to fly quite a few different types. You're right things are maybe overcomplicated by the lawyers but it's easy to be nostalgic and think everything was way better. Some things are better now. You like your hand held GPS.