Restrict Flight Training to Gov, funded programs?

[bushhopper]

**Disclaimer** It never was my intentions to offend or hurt anyone. I would like to bring up the topic I did, because I am worried about the quality training offered in our country. There is a huge discrepancy between many flight schools. In the end all young pilots are put into the same basket. I do not think that is fair. I also apologize for offending the spelling police.

Should we restrict flight training to selected few gov. funded colleges and universities? Should we allow foreign students to train in Canada and receive CPL?

I feel that many wannabies who never get accepted or make it through a program like Seneca, Sue, Confederation, or military, because they lack proper grades in high schools, just end up getting their CPL through a flying club or private FTU. Some pilots who failed a structured program, mostly due laziness, lack of motivation and focus, never receive equal training at a private flight training unit. The result of their misbehavior, is the devaluation of properly trained pilots. Another side effect of their lack of better judgment is the over saturation of our industry. Employers do not see the difference between two different grades of pilots, when they are apply for the same job with the same amount of TT. How do you differentiate between a pilot who barely past the flight test, and one who earned a high mark? Why try if no one cares?

I would like to present my opinion, why young (current day) privately trained commercial pilots (not the old dogs), in some cases but not all, are inferior to those trained through a structured program, that requires much higher standards.

1. Transport Canada standards on issuing a CPL are very low. Same goes for a PPL. Its a joke, anyone could pass it. FTU will not care if the student only meets minimum standards, paying customer right? Government subsided programs are mandated to meet much higher standards. In most cases double of what TC requires. They have no problem removing you from the program if you fail to meet those standards.

2. Requirements for minimum ground school hours are also very low. Naturally most people will try to avoid paying for extra ground school because it is expensive! Why should I get more ground school if I already have the minimum? Most structured programs require triple amount of ground school.

3. Lack of requirements for mandatory courses in math, physics, and other subjects that can be relevant. Most airlines refuse to hire unless you have a diploma or degree. The paper, shows that the potential employee has the ability to study, and learn. I guess if a private student earns a degree or diploma on there own time, I would also respect it.

4. Most private students work at their own pace, with out dead lines that create stress, stress is good during training because it can teach most how to deal with it, if you cant, don't fly. Flying at a private FTU, also offers the ability to choose your own instructor. You do not choose your future co-workers. We do not need Madonna's in our industry. Just because you do not like how your instructor smells and talks, is not a reason for you to change instructor. I feel that a good instructor is a strict instructor. Every time you show up for training, be prepared, not hanged over from last night party. Private instructor can't do much about it.

5. 7 hours is not enough to become a safe float pilot. It should be bumped to 20 minimum. At 7 hours, all you can do is barely fly a circuit on a perfect day. I know most operators will refuse to hire such pilots, and insurance will refuse to you coverage. But in my opinion, how can any float instructor agree to train a student with only 7 hours? Unfortunately some instructors will. TC is not promoting safety. It just show's they do not care.

Also, why in the world, would we allow foreign nationalities to train here at home? All they do is support instructors in a over saturated industry. I would hardly consider Moncton flying College a college, at Moncton money talks! Most of their business evolves around training Chinese pilots for Air China and other Asian airlines which do not care about safety. They offer Chinese ATPL's with ultra low hours. I feel like they are slapping the industry right in the face. Most instructors will instruct who ever is willing to pay! Then those foreign nationalities go back home, work for cheap money, and take away jobs that should go to properly trained hard working pilots. Those poorly trained pilots become FO's on a 737 at 300 hours with a Chinese ATPL, while instructors with 600-700 hours can barely move into a PC-12? That must be a joke! Good luck getting FO on a 737 in Canada with less then 2000 hours.

I also do not like when people say, flying is easy. Yes any retard can fly an airplane. But how well can you fly it? Passenger comfort? engine efficiency, are you organized, prioritized, do you offer good airmanship, proper radio calls, and are you a safe pilot? Obviously its easy for you to get a CPL if you only aimed to meet the minimum standards transport required. How about some of you trying aiming higher? Pilots are suppose to strive to be the best. CPL is a license to learn, I know that. I have tones to learn my self.

I guess I wont solve the issues our industry offers. But in my opinion some organization should regulate our industry like they do in the medical and teaching industry. College of Pilots would prevent over saturation to a point where safety is sacrificed.

Putting it in simple words. Our industry lacks quality control.

Thank you for reading my post. I will respect your opinions. My opinions are not written in stone. I am open to hearing what others have to say about this subject.

[ogc]

Should we restrict flight training to selected few gov. funded colleges and universities? Should we allow foreign students to train in Canada and receive CPL?

I feel that many wannabies who never get accepted or make it threw a program like Seneca, Sue, Confederation, or military, because they lack proper grades or skills, go and just end up getting their CPL threw a flying club or private FTU. Those pilots in my opinion, not all but most, never train at the same level. They are destroying the value of proper training and over saturate our industry.

Some reasons why privately trained Commercial pilot in most cases but not all, are inferior to those trained threw a proper program.

1. Because TC standards on issuing a CPL are very low. Same goes for a PPL. Its a joke, anyone can pass it. FTU will not care if the student only meets minimum standards. Government subsided programs are mandated to meet much higher standards. In most cases double of what TC requires.

2. Required minimum ground school hours are low. Some of the questions I seen on this forum are so basic. All I can say, go get more GS. Most government subsided receive double if not triple the amount of ground school hours required.

3. No requirements for mandatory courses in math, physics, and other subjects. Are you kidding me?

4. Most private students work at their own paste, and they get to pick their instructors. How can that ever train a young pilot to learn how to deal and work with others, who they may not get along very well with? We do not need Madonna's in our industry. WE need honest hard working pilots, who deserve to get paid for their work.

5. Minimum float hours for a float rating are ridiculous. It should be bumped to 20 minimum. At 7 hours, all you can do is barely fly a circuit on a perfect day.

Also, why in the world, do we allow foreign nationalities to train? Just so they can support instructors in a over saturated industry? Most instructors will instruct who ever is willing to pay! Even if it shit $. Then those foreign nationalities go home, work for dirt ass cheap money, and take away jobs that should go to properly trained hard working pilots.

Something has to change. Unless all of you just do not care about your future.

Iam assuming that your first language is French?

[bushhopper]

I never said, my opinion will sit well with the majority.

[ogc]

I never said, my opinion will sit well with the majority.

I am not referencing your opinions.

Merely the hypocrisy they would contain if your first language is English, and a rant about higher education for the profession had that many obvious spelling and grammatical errors.

If your first language was French (or otherwise) then I can understand the errors.

[chipmunk]

I disagree with pretty much all of the initial post.

I self-funded my training through being a member of the military reserves, training at 3 different flight schools all over North America, depending on where work and education (yes, university) brought me to at the time. After getting my CPL shortly after 9/11, I had to work incredibly hard to get the experience I needed to work with a company that gives me the lifestyle, challenge and remuneration I'm happy with.

The one thing I do agree with you is - anyone can get a CPL! It's not rocket science, nor should it be. It's a license to learn, and that's why it's so difficult to find a job with just 200 hours. You can't teach experience, be it in a well-funded college with incredibly experienced instructors, or a mom and pop flight school. You just can't. Everyone's equal at that point. It's the hard workers that will push and make it through the hard times and win that first job over other applicants, and it's those type of people that you want in this industry.

I have met incredibly smart, hard working and competent pilots from both the college side and the private side of things. I have also come across those who are lazy, incompetent and arrogant. In my opinion, private flying schools make aviation more accessible to small town and farm kids, and makes it less elitist - because face it - most of the flying in Canada is not a "white collar" job, so to speak. Colleges are very visible to city kids and some provide the financial subsidies, as well as a structure to those who need/like it.

It doesn't matter where you got your CPL. Bottom line - it's not about from where you learn to fly and how high of a grade you got in second year calculus (no one CARES), it's about your personality, your drive, your street smarts, your common sense, your ATTITUDE, and the connections you make along the way.

[bushhopper]

I never said, my opinion will sit well with the majority.

I am not referencing your opinions.

Merely the hypocrisy they would contain if your first language is English, and a rant about higher education for the profession had that many obvious spelling and grammatical errors.

If your first language was French (or otherwise) then I can understand the errors.

I agree with you, that my grammar is not perfect. I try to improve my writing skills everyday. I deleted the poll, not required for this topic. Its better if we discuss the topic. I would like to hear your opinions. I just don't feel like all pilots are trained equally.

You would be surprised how many pilots have trouble writing, or calculating simple math. English is not my first Language, but my 3rd. Not many here can speak more then 1 language. I would expect you to be very proficient at one! I have to stay proficient at 3, its not easy. Anyway, I am not here to talk about writing skills. But I thank you for pointing out that I need more work.

I am here to talk about minimum requirements for a successful flight test. 67 points out of 124 or 127 is low! I think a minimum passing grade for a PPL should be 90 points.

We should bump the float rating to minimum 20 hours.

[chipmunk]

I went and looked up some of your posts and I take it you're still a fairly new CPL, perhaps an instructor since you're talking about doing diversions and needing 3000' to fly cross country. It may seem like the industry sucks right now (it does, pretty much) but honestly, I know how you feel. (See above about getting my CPL just after 9/11!) It's how you deal with the rough times and get through it, never alienating anyone in the process. It's a SMALL world.

Ten years down the road you'll see things with a different perspective, but now is the time to grow some cojones, work your ass off, make those connections and treat every person you meet, be it a rampie or that fam-flight off the street who smells like B.O. as if they are the boss of a company you really want to work for. Newbies these days seem to think they deserve everything handed to them on a silver platter and don't know what a good work ethic is anymore, which, in my opinion, is worth more than an "A" in calculus.

And I will say it again, not to be harsh, but it's the truth - no one CARES where and what score anyone gets on their CPL!

[2R]

The Government should get out of the funding of flight schools and schools that offer degrees in basketweaving and spearchucking.
Airlines should train cadets from Ab Initio like Lufhansa, JAL and BA or get them from the military like Delta and AA.
Maybe then the massive incongrueities that exist between Airlines requirements and what is offered at most flight schools can be eradicated.Those lying scumbags that take a mans life savings promissing a career as a pilot would not leave them penniless and homeless

[iflyforpie]

People seem to think that raising standards and filling people's heads with knowledge is going to somehow change things.

It's not.

You raise the standards, you lower the supply. You lower the supply, you raise the wages. You raise the wages, you raise the prices. You raise the prices, you reduce demand. Then joe six-pack is going to send his package by ground, he is going to drive instead of fly to California, he is not going to get his PPL.

So what, you say? Flying was meant for the elite and government, and people with money will always fly, no? After all, we aren't going to have as many pilots! Well, volume goes down, fixed costs increase. Aircraft become more expensive or unavailable, infrastructure becomes more costly to maintain or redundant, other specialists (AMEs, Aeronautical Engineers, ATC) become scarce.

I am sure that the fast food industry could come up with a way to make flipping burgers a highly exclusive and specialized field by adding on all kinds of extra education and standards to follow. It might be the same day a nation gives up fast food because nobody but us aviation nuts are going to pay $100 for a hamburger.


Let's face it, flying a plane--like the type of plane that you would fly with 250 hours--isn't all that hard. I was flying a turbocharged twin solo with 250TT and flying a float plane solo at 100TT (big deal ). As far as float flying goes, the insurance companies and the operator have the last word about who flies. There will be no seven hour wonders bombing off in any weather or sea state they please.

When you are left seat on a 250 tons of metal with 300 people in the back going 0.8, or doing some other type of flying that requires rare skills; then you will be compensated for your unique abilities.

Basket Weaving 101 certainly isn't one of them...

[Speed_Bird1]

WTF? Bushhopper, as you can tell, I don't usually comment much on these posts, but you really are an idiot!

[2namelt]

People seem to think that raising standards and filling people's heads with knowledge is going to somehow change things.

It's not.

You raise the standards, you lower the supply. You lower the supply, you raise the wages. You raise the wages, you raise the prices. You raise the prices, you reduce demand. Then joe six-pack is going to send his package by ground, he is going to drive instead of fly to California, he is not going to get his PPL.

So what, you say? Flying was meant for the elite and government, and people with money will always fly, no? After all, we aren't going to have as many pilots! Well, volume goes down, fixed costs increase. Aircraft become more expensive or unavailable, infrastructure becomes more costly to maintain or redundant, other specialists (AMEs, Aeronautical Engineers, ATC) become scarce.

I am sure that the fast food industry could come up with a way to make flipping burgers a highly exclusive and specialized field by adding on all kinds of extra education and standards to follow. It might be the same day a nation gives up fast food because nobody but us aviation nuts are going to pay $100 for a hamburger.


Let's face it, flying a plane--like the type of plane that you would fly with 250 hours--isn't all that hard. I was flying a turbocharged twin solo with 250TT and flying a float plane solo at 100TT (big deal ). As far as float flying goes, the insurance companies and the operator have the last word about who flies. There will be no seven hour wonders bombing off in any weather or sea state they please.

When you are left seat on a 250 tons of metal with 300 people in the back going 0.8, or doing some other type of flying that requires rare skills; then you will be compensated for your unique abilities.

Basket Weaving 101 certainly isn't one of them...

+1!

[bushhopper]

People seem to think that raising standards and filling people's heads with knowledge is going to somehow change things.

It's not.

You raise the standards, you lower the supply. You lower the supply, you raise the wages. You raise the wages, you raise the prices. You raise the prices, you reduce demand. Then joe six-pack is going to send his package by ground, he is going to drive instead of fly to California, he is not going to get his PPL.

Just a quick example of what I mean by poor training. Job offer for a CFI position.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=67347

Experience Required * Total Time Minimum 1500+ hours
* Instructional Time 750+ hours *

I personally hardly consider a CFI with 1500h sufficient or capable of running a quality flight school. Perks are great, someone will apply for sure. CFI should have 10-15 years of industry experience on top of those requirements. CFI lacking experience will not be able to properly lead a team of instructors with same or lower hours. Madness. The less CPL's we issue, more real jobs will become available. I prefer if our industry was under saturated then over saturated. People are willing to pay what ever it takes to safely fly. It is an essential service.

Pilots account for less then 3% of the cost of a flight. Paying respectful wages will not brake anyone's bank. Customers are willing to pay for a comfortable safe flight.

Just by improving the safety, many operators could safe millions in fines. I heard Southwest or Delta paid $15 million fine. I forgot what the reasoning was for it. I saw it on CNBC last month.

Don't sell your self like a cheap sl*t. have some respect for your fellow pilots. Flying was meant to be a respectful career. I hear some pilots say we are bus drivers. We are not bus drivers! Our work load is much higher then a bus drivers. If a bus brakes down, just pull over! I can't believe some pilots compare flying to bus driving. If they want to be bus drivers, please quit flying and drive a bus. What ever you do, don't call us bus drivers.

I wonder if they would ever call a doctor a nurse? Would they ever call a cop a security guard? If they can't respect our profession, I would ask you to leave our industry.

[Meatservo]

Our industry does lack quality control. I can't understand why any pilot considers it in his or anyone else's best interest (other than the execs I suppose) to portray flying as "not that hard". It's okay to be modest, but when you're talking about something that you make money at, where is the profit in downplaying your qualifications and skill level? Humility is a fine character trait, but please don't try to apply that "pilots are a dime a dozen" and "flying is no big deal" crap to what I do for a living, I've been trying hard to convey the exact opposite impression to my employers for almost 20 years!

I'm afraid I agree with the original poster in principle. I'm not sure that I agree with what he is proposing should be done about it, but I can't disagree too vehemently since I did come from one of those gov. funded programs myself. I have plenty of colleagues who did not however. I think there should be higher standards, but not necessarily a restriction on where you can train. Just better training. A bit of exclusivity would do wonders for wages. I was always hoping I would make some decent money at this racket, but I'm starting to wonder...

[whyisitdoingthat]

As for the initial post,

Wow, OK, that makes sense on paper, and that's excactly what I thought when I first started. However it does not make sense in the long run and I'll tell you why. First, flying is not rocket science, I mean not even close. The more experience you have the more you realize the mechanics of actualy moving the plane around in different conditions is not the impotant part, it's dealing with the information coming in and going out as you work with your teamates to get the job done.

I've never done the calculus thing, or any math for that matter. Plus I didn't have to jump through the hoops and write book reports on Porter. All that stuff is just fluff in my opinion.

You say it shows a persons propensity to work and study, and would be a future indicator of success. It would also make the pool of pilots an 'elite' one. Well that's just asking for trouble.

You see, the weeding out process you want does happen naturally and quite effectively I might add over a person's career. When a person works thier way into the industry they interact with people and show their ability to get along and work with their collegues. On a persons first navajo co-p. job he shows one set of skills, if those are good for the operation he may be promoted, if not he fades away or finds a place that fits better. It all happens on its own. A complete tool won't make it very far at all (myself being one of the only exceptions).

However, you can have one of these top-gun 200 hour pilots from a college program who is also a tool but in a different way. All the calculus in the world won't stop this person from having a dangerous attitude in the cockpit.

By limiting the number of pilots artifically you have what they have here in where I am, a bunch of super educated tools that are most opften completely useless, with some notable exceptions. What I mean is this, the government makes it very hard for people to get into the industry, but they are eliminating candidates for all the wrong reasons. It's not the guys that does the best math or does the best power points that is good to fly with, its the guy who has the best work ethic.

Sure it take a lot of work to get all those maths and sit through that time worried about getting washed out at college, but, you know people are watching. The person with the good work ethic work weather he's being tested or not. That's the person you want. Just think about it, what really makes a good pilot?

Anyways, your whole post is the reasoning for the way things are in the country I work in, and it does work.

[skymarc]

As they say its a license to learn. All we learn is the minimum so we dont kill ourself, the rest we learn in the real world. keep it private, dont need the government to step more in this.

[. ._]

IMHO, all discussion and ideas for better training and flight safety should be encouraged.

I'm not saying that I agree or have any answers, but if you want to start some passionate debate here, government funding, the purchase of PPCs, and Transport Canada issues are a great way to start off with a BANG!

Good thread, bushhopper!

[Bushav8er]

I feel that many wannabies who never get accepted or make it through a program like Seneca, Sue, Confederation, or military, because they lack proper grades in high schools, just end up getting their CPL through a flying club or private FTU. Some pilots who failed a structured program, mostly due laziness, lack of motivation and focus, never receive equal training at a private flight training unit. The result of their misbehavior, is the devaluation of properly trained pilots. Another side effect of their lack of better judgment is the over saturation of our industry. Employers do not see the difference between two different grades of pilots, when they are apply for the same job with the same amount of TT. How do you differentiate between a pilot who barely past the flight test, and one who earned a high mark? Why try if no one cares?

You went right to poor grades, laziness and misbehaviour, nice.

All flight training, in the end, train to meet government standards to receive a Commercial licence (and whatever ratings).

The main difference between Colleges and flying clubs/small flight schools COST! Not everyone has Daddy to pay for it! Contrary to popular opinion the primary focus of colleges is NOT education but PROFIT. Flying clubs primary focus is the promotion of aviation. Both 'newbies' have zero experience and min hours. As someone that used to hire, College kids have a sense of entitlement and flying club kids want to work and learn. All the fancy extra courses (beyond a comm. lic. / rating) a college gives mean nothing.

Lets face it - flying is easy. The hard part is knowing all the regs and exercising good judgment. Flying is a continual learning endeavourer.

Proper training and experience at the 'in the field' level is more important and to improve the Industry what is really needed is a Restriction on number of students accepted to flight training (not including Private) to the number of ACTUAL jobs available: No jobs - No training. Jobs come available, open the training doors again. Pilots at a dime a dozen and willing buy a PPC and to 'work for nothing' hurt everyone.

[Meatservo]

You see, the weeding out process you want does happen naturally and quite effectively I might add over a person's career. When a person works thier way into the industry they interact with people and show their ability to get along and work with their collegues. On a persons first navajo co-p. job he shows one set of skills, if those are good for the operation he may be promoted, if not he fades away or finds a place that fits better. It all happens on its own. A complete tool won't make it very far at all (myself being one of the only exceptions).

I agree with this.

Lets face it - flying is easy.
Flying is a continual learning endeavourer.

(So is spelling)

I don't get it. Is it easy, or is it a continual learning endeavour? Or is it a perpetual, easy, learning endeavour?

A lot of floatplane pilots this summer seem to have had a fatally difficult time doing something "really easy".

[Bushav8er]

Sorry, it was early.

Flying; take-off, A to B, circuit, landing is easy.

A new commercial doesn't know it all, because he hasn't seen any of it yet - more learning.

Judgment is hard, all the regs can be difficult.

Constant learning of regs and staying up to date, how to do things, new situations that face them and judgment, based on previous experience or someone else's, to deal with it.

A lot of floatplane pilots this summer seem to have had a fatally difficult time doing something "really easy".

I don't know the cases, only whats been posted here, but how many were 'mechanical'?

Judgment of weather, weights/loads, fuel, to name a few...and yes, even experienced guys sometimes take things for granted or become complacent.

[mattas350]

People seem to think that raising standards and filling people's heads with knowledge is going to somehow change things.

It's not.

You raise the standards, you lower the supply. You lower the supply, you raise the wages. You raise the wages, you raise the prices. You raise the prices, you reduce demand. Then joe six-pack is going to send his package by ground, he is going to drive instead of fly to California, he is not going to get his PPL.

So what, you say? Flying was meant for the elite and government, and people with money will always fly, no? After all, we aren't going to have as many pilots! Well, volume goes down, fixed costs increase. Aircraft become more expensive or unavailable, infrastructure becomes more costly to maintain or redundant, other specialists (AMEs, Aeronautical Engineers, ATC) become scarce.

I am sure that the fast food industry could come up with a way to make flipping burgers a highly exclusive and specialized field by adding on all kinds of extra education and standards to follow. It might be the same day a nation gives up fast food because nobody but us aviation nuts are going to pay $100 for a hamburger.


Let's face it, flying a plane--like the type of plane that you would fly with 250 hours--isn't all that hard. I was flying a turbocharged twin solo with 250TT and flying a float plane solo at 100TT (big deal ). As far as float flying goes, the insurance companies and the operator have the last word about who flies. There will be no seven hour wonders bombing off in any weather or sea state they please.

When you are left seat on a 250 tons of metal with 300 people in the back going 0.8, or doing some other type of flying that requires rare skills; then you will be compensated for your unique abilities.

Basket Weaving 101 certainly isn't one of them...

I would like to agree with my honourable colleague from the Pacific coast and agree whole heartedly with what he posted.

By changing flight training in Canada to what you suggest you effectively price aviation out of the market for the markets it serves as you can see in the points my collague raised above. And hey buddy, you kno what? alot of the instructors at the places you mentioned that should be the only ones allowed to train the all knowing great mythical commercial pilots, well guess how many hours their instructors have? not the great experienced people you'd expect, alot even have class 3 instructors with no operational experience BLASPHAMY (sarcasm here) yes for sure these big schools have a number of experienced hands on staff but alot are lower time, It seems you have a over inflated view of who can and should teach in aviation, well remember buddy, they had to get the experience somewhere! Flying a plane is easy, WHEN NOT TO FLY A PLANE is where you make your money, and that comes with experience (to quote a poster here on Avcan), some people seem to think pilots or captains are these all knowing mythical deites who are in touch with the cosmos on whether they should shoot the approach! , well remember they all had to get their experience somewhere, whether it was co-pilot first or instructing then first officer. In the end we all have the same licence, my CPL from mom and pops flight school in Podunk is the same CPL you have from a fancy `training college`that has stringent entrance requirements, and why does it have those stringent requirements, well the colleges only get a certian amount of funding for X number of students so obsivouly they want their students to succeed and as a result be a good investment, whereas the student as Mom and pop`s flight school in Podunk only has to put in the effort he wants, but if he doesn't measure up well what happens? more training, and what's the catch with more training? it costs more money, so even little old me who did my CPL at a "regular" FTU has the same licence as the guys coming out of the flight colleges and I felt i received good training from them, at the level you would get at the colleges, no one really cares where you went to school or what you got on your exam, in the end we all have the same licence and were tested to the same standard with the feds.

I do not work at a big fancy college, so i should not be able to teach CPL, etc? Well i can tell you any instructor if hes worth his salt ensures his students are safe and well within standard before flight testing them not "Private instructor can't do much about it." as you say. This is a slap in the face of every
private instructor" implying that we do not care about the quality of the students we train.


I think everyone here can say they have flown with some sharp low time pilots with good hands and feet, procedural knowledge and good decision making skills and then flown with some experienced captains (all knowing and mythical) from the big colleges who wouldnt pass a PPL flight test today, so what I am trying to get at here is throwing more ground school, flight training and "math, physics" education wont necessarily net a better pilot as you imply, the industries quality control process is a career one, if you get a cojo job on a 'ho and cant pass your PPC for captain, well then, do not expect to go any further, or if word gets around that your a pin head, yes sometimes people fall thru these cracks and you get a pilot who you wouldnt trust to fly your worst enemy.

Yes their is problems with the system, if you go anywhere in the world each system will have its own problems (even the mythical difficult JAA systems has its issues) . How is making Joe do 300 hours or so of ground school to get his PPL going to help his flight skills, yea sure it will give him a higher score on his written exam and a overall knowledgeable pilot, but where do you draw the line? make it a pre-req to have a aerospace engineering degree to get your PPL, well what are you smoking buddy because i want some of that if you think that! But in the grand scheme of things, remember MONEY talks. You dilute the supply, prices go up for pilots (pay) and thats a good thing, but then those prices get passed onto the customer (which makes sense because we are running a business here) and what the customer use to be able to afford they now cannot afford so they will seek alternative means of transportation, I am not saying this to justify low wages to keep customers but saying if you dilute the supply to what you imply then as a industry we will be highly paid but no business to work at!
I yield the floor to my honourable colleagues!

[slam525i]

restrict flight training to selected few gov. funded colleges and universities

As someone who trained from old-school flying clubs, very few of which still exist, this is precisely the kind of crap that is killing off GA. I totally agree that anyone flying airliners should be well trained at a large organization with the adequate resources. That's also why airlines have in house training or contract out to large organizations, but is that necessary for PPL and CPL? The licenses we carry means that we should be able to operate the aircraft safely, not necessarily well, but safely. The rest of it is up to us and the people in charge of hiring. If we limit flight training to big organizations, we might as well eliminate GA.

Flying at a private FTU, also offers the ability to choose your own instructor. You do not choose your future co-workers. We do not need Madonna's in our industry.

I paid for my training; I chose my own instructor. I chose not to continue with an instructor who was insisted on landing flat to avoid tail-strikes on a Cessna. If you insist that one shouldn't choose one's own instructor, then by the same logic, you shouldn't have a choice of which college to attend either.

Also, why in the world, would we allow foreign nationalities to train here at home? All they do is support instructors in a over saturated industry. I would hardly consider Moncton flying College a college, at Moncton money talks! Most of their business evolves around training Chinese pilots for Air China and other Asian airlines which do not care about safety. They offer Chinese ATPL's with ultra low hours. I feel like they are slapping the industry right in the face. Most instructors will instruct who ever is willing to pay! Then those foreign nationalities go back home, work for cheap money, and take away jobs that should go to properly trained hard working pilots. Those poorly trained pilots become FO's on a 737 at 300 hours with a Chinese ATPL, while instructors with 600-700 hours can barely move into a PC-12? That must be a joke! Good luck getting FO on a 737 in Canada with less then 2000 hours.

All they do is support instructors in an over saturated industry, which is very true. They bring foreign money to spend on locals who would otherwise be unemployed or not flying. That doesn't even take into account their living expenses, basically injecting foreign money into our economy. How is that a remotely bad thing?
"Then those foreign nationalities go back home, work for cheap money, and take away jobs that should go to properly trained hard working pilots." You mean take away jobs from ex-pats? Why should they give jobs to foreigners who earn their money and take it out of the country? And what authority do you have to tell other countries' governments and airlines what their standards should be?

College of Pilots

In terms of serving the interests of the airline pilots, there are plenty of airline pilots' unions. In terms of serving the interest of GA pilots, we have COPA/AOPA. A College of Pilots as you desire only serves to limit the entrance into the industry. Picture yourself on the other side, wanting to get in, qualified to do so, but disallowed due to quotas. How will you feel about such an organization then?


Look, I understand you want to be a big airline pilot. I understand you spent money on a college but there aren't enough jobs to go around. You're upset that anyone can be a pilot and there are people out there competing for jobs who aren't as qualified as you are. The problem, honestly, isn't them; it's you. If you want that big airline job, you have to work for it. You have to get more hours. You may even find yourself instructing at one of those no-quality-control little FTUs that you so detest, maybe even instruct a few of those damned foreign pilots. Perhaps, you're more of a man of principles, and you'll refuse to instruct at little FTUs and spend the rest of your life tilting at windmills and complaining about how you couldn't get a job flying and now you have to make a living doing ________.

I'm sure with age, your perspectives will change. Until then, I would recommend you work hard. The answer to you getting a job isn't to limit the competition; it's to make yourself better than the competition.

[URC]

Should we restrict flight training to selected few gov. funded colleges and universities ? Given the fiscal state of our governments at all levels the bottom line is we simply can not afford it. In a time when taxes (HST) and user fees (AIF's) keep increasing while the basic level of public service is being cut, it's outrageous that there is still taxpayers money being used to fund these programs.

The argument that raising the bar above the present required minimum standard during the initial training stages (CPL,ATPL) would increase safety in the field is an interesting one. Can you provide any actual data that shows pilots trained at gov. funded colleges vs flying clubs are actually safer pilots (less accidents) once they get that first job ? Having been employed in the industry here in Canada for over 25 years, from the bush to the major airline level, and having flown with all types of pilots from those trained at Seneca, Military and private flying clubs, I can't tell the difference based on where one did their initial training.

[FlaplessDork]

I personally hardly consider a CFI with 1500h sufficient or capable of running a quality flight school. Perks are great, someone will apply for sure. CFI should have 10-15 years of industry experience on top of those requirements. CFI lacking experience will not be able to properly lead a team of instructors with same or lower hours. Madness. The less CPL's we issue, more real jobs will become available. I prefer if our industry was under saturated then over saturated. People are willing to pay what ever it takes to safely fly. It is an essential service

I disagree. Being CFI has very little to do with your flying experience. Its primarily an administrative position.

[mattas350]

restrict flight training to selected few gov. funded colleges and universities

As someone who trained from old-school flying clubs, very few of which still exist, this is precisely the kind of crap that is killing off GA. I totally agree that anyone flying airliners should be well trained at a large organization with the adequate resources. That's also why airlines have in house training or contract out to large organizations, but is that necessary for PPL and CPL? The licenses we carry means that we should be able to operate the aircraft safely, not necessarily well, but safely. The rest of it is up to us and the people in charge of hiring. If we limit flight training to big organizations, we might as well eliminate GA.

Flying at a private FTU, also offers the ability to choose your own instructor. You do not choose your future co-workers. We do not need Madonna's in our industry.

I paid for my training; I chose my own instructor. I chose not to continue with an instructor who was insisted on landing flat to avoid tail-strikes on a Cessna. If you insist that one shouldn't choose one's own instructor, then by the same logic, you shouldn't have a choice of which college to attend either.

Also, why in the world, would we allow foreign nationalities to train here at home? All they do is support instructors in a over saturated industry. I would hardly consider Moncton flying College a college, at Moncton money talks! Most of their business evolves around training Chinese pilots for Air China and other Asian airlines which do not care about safety. They offer Chinese ATPL's with ultra low hours. I feel like they are slapping the industry right in the face. Most instructors will instruct who ever is willing to pay! Then those foreign nationalities go back home, work for cheap money, and take away jobs that should go to properly trained hard working pilots. Those poorly trained pilots become FO's on a 737 at 300 hours with a Chinese ATPL, while instructors with 600-700 hours can barely move into a PC-12? That must be a joke! Good luck getting FO on a 737 in Canada with less then 2000 hours.

All they do is support instructors in an over saturated industry, which is very true. They bring foreign money to spend on locals who would otherwise be unemployed or not flying. That doesn't even take into account their living expenses, basically injecting foreign money into our economy. How is that a remotely bad thing?
"Then those foreign nationalities go back home, work for cheap money, and take away jobs that should go to properly trained hard working pilots." You mean take away jobs from ex-pats? Why should they give jobs to foreigners who earn their money and take it out of the country? And what authority do you have to tell other countries' governments and airlines what their standards should be?

College of Pilots

In terms of serving the interests of the airline pilots, there are plenty of airline pilots' unions. In terms of serving the interest of GA pilots, we have COPA/AOPA. A College of Pilots as you desire only serves to limit the entrance into the industry. Picture yourself on the other side, wanting to get in, qualified to do so, but disallowed due to quotas. How will you feel about such an organization then?


Look, I understand you want to be a big airline pilot. I understand you spent money on a college but there aren't enough jobs to go around. You're upset that anyone can be a pilot and there are people out there competing for jobs who aren't as qualified as you are. The problem, honestly, isn't them; it's you. If you want that big airline job, you have to work for it. You have to get more hours. You may even find yourself instructing at one of those no-quality-control little FTUs that you so detest, maybe even instruct a few of those damned foreign pilots. Perhaps, you're more of a man of principles, and you'll refuse to instruct at little FTUs and spend the rest of your life tilting at windmills and complaining about how you couldn't get a job flying and now you have to make a living doing ________.

I'm sure with age, your perspectives will change. Until then, I would recommend you work hard. The answer to you getting a job isn't to limit the competition; it's to make yourself better than the competition.

+++++++1!!!!

[McJagger]

Id love to see this guy get his hands dirty working on a plane

even a bus driver can change a tire.. these college guys would probably end up with a rearranged face given their best try.