Please Teach the Students

[Bushav8er]

Over the past little while posts have been made regarding such things as:

AIM
CARs
AOIs
Mixture use
MCM
Ops Manual
Exemptions and Ops Specs

I won't go into each one but when I read these posts I have to shake my head and ask WHY? Why are the items being discussed even an issue?

Instructors/schools, please cover more than 'whats required' to the new breed of Commercial students. Commercial (professional) pilots should know more to prepare them for the working world.

Granted books and paper work are dry subjects but as pilots you/they are responsible for more than flying - you must know how, where to find information and how it applies to your job and the legal implications.

When I learnt to fly we had to buy a copy of the ANOs and keep it amended. Today students don't have to buy the CARs but the school should have hard copies of this and other relevant pubs to review, and everything is available online now for free - find it and learn to use it. As a school they have all the documents required, beyond CARs, for a commercial operation - pull them out and review them. Review the AOC, what aircraft are listed on it? Any limitations/Ops Specs? Teach these to the students, please.

Most students can name the documents required on-board but do they actually know what is in those documents and how they relate to each other?

Answering questions after someone has looked something up and requires clarification is one thing but having to take their hand to find the reference, or worse, they don't even know the reference exists, is another.

You have to actually teach. To tell a student "that's just the way we do it here." is unacceptable. Teach them the details so they understand the 5 W's and then add, "The policy here is this however."

Sorry for the rant but really.

Here is a little test, as an example;

Is an airspeed indicator thats only in Knots legal in the Dhc2 Beaver? Why or why not. (You don't have to know or fly the Beaver to answer this)

[Shiny Side Up]

Back to this again...

To try and keep it brief: It takes two to learn. We all know that there are good schools out there and there are not-so-good ones, just like there are good pilots out there and not-so good ones. It has to do with the real world vs the paper world which exists in aviation - to steal from hedley. As a student you have to seek out and learn stuff, the world isn't going to come to you. Being a pilot, like any profession or job, take your pick, is going to require you to learn stuff constantly throughout training for it and working at it.

People have a choice when they start on the path of learning a skill, do you want to fulfil the paper requirements of it or do you wish to master it to the extent of your capabilities? Any school can help you fulfil the paper requirements. By law that's all they're required to do.

Personally as an instructor, I can't turn all the students I get into excellent working pilots. I simply don't have that much time available to me in this life. I also only have as much time with the student as the student is willing to give me. As an instructor I probably give up way too much unpaid time, but will always give it if someone wants to know more. In my experience there is only the few rare sparks out there who really burn with that desire to know more.

It might be just me, but usually the only time people come to me with burning questions about how things work is usually the result of them scaring the shit out of themselves when they realised how their gaping hole of ignorance just about killed them.

The fool who realises he's a fool, can no longer be considered one.

[Brewguy]

And not every student is a commercial student. We don't know what type of students these people are who are starting these threads. Some may well be Private or even Recreational or Ultralight. Do they need to know about an MCM, Ops Manual, etc? Sure it's great if they do, and I'd agree that it should be necessary for a Commercial pilot to learn (at some point before their training is complete) ... but even if every commercial student were made an expert on these subjects, we'd still get these questions on the forum from non-commercial types.

[5x5]

Man, am I getting tired of so many people slagging flight training all the time. Like schools in the "old days" turned out experienced line or bush pilots. BS to that.

Anyone with a fresh CPL/MIFR is just the same today as they've ever been. They need further development and training that only comes effectively on the job. Small operators are a vital link in the training chain and can't expect flight schools to provide fully turned out pilots for them.

Our society and people's attitudes certainly have changed, but that affects all professions the same way. In the relative scheme of things, flight training graduates today are the same as they've always been.

All the older, more experienced pilots going on about the poor skills/knowledge of todays CPLs aren't remembering their own beginnings realistically.

[Bushav8er]

Good points guys but please;

- Not all instructors/students are poor, it'd be foolish to suggest otherwise,
- I did refer to 'Commercial' students
- If it flies it's in the CARs and pilots should at the very least know where to find and how to reference them,
- If someone comes out with a licence and doesn't even know what the AIM is, or worse, that it even exists, that's a problem.

Teach what is relevant to the situation, and no, you can't make them actually 'learn' it, but you've done your job by at least demonstrating them.

Today even the registered owner Private pilot is responsible for all and should know the basics; CARs, AIM, ADs, ANs, Service Diff Advisories/Alerts etc so they can understand what they are 'contracting' with their AME. Private pilots can own a Piper Cub to a DHC2 to a KingAir under Private Operator. You don't have to hold a CPL to be exposed to these things.

All the older, more experienced pilots going on about the poor skills/knowledge of todays CPLs aren't remembering their own beginnings realistically.

I'm merely pointing out what appears to be tending as a weak area of study. I'm not knocking new CPLs - even PPLs, I've met a lot of good ones merely lacking experience, which comes over time and is normal. I do recall my beginnings and did know what was relevant at the time, and I kept up with the changes, continued learning.

[. ._]

Is an airspeed indicator thats only in Knots legal in the Dhc2 Beaver? Why or why not. (You don't have to know or fly the Beaver to answer this)

I'd guess "yes it's legal".

Why? I just said I guessed. I don't know.

I figure if you apply full power, go kind of fast and yank back on the yoke, you'll get up in the air. That's how I've done it so far.

[phantom]

I couldn't agree more that students should know where the information applicable to them is located and how to get that information. I also agree that flight schools should cover those soft skills such as knowing the difference between a regulation and a standard.

However, if you really want to see poor training, look back to the ground school cirriculum and flight test guides 20 plus years ago (for civil training). The standards and technical knowledge that is required today is at a much higher level and today's students are tested on that. As an example, today there is now an 80 hours minimum required for the CPL ground school. If a student doesn't know what the AIM is (a very basic thing especially after 80 + 40 hours of ground school)...I think that's more an individual student problem then say an FTU or the regulator.