On 12/29/07 9:16 AM, in article
,
"
wrote:

I think the problem goes all the way back to manufacturers and cost of
soaring as it is not ´paid´sport and FAI. As Bill said lot of
instructors would fly more, if the óffice´ is nicer. But cost of a
desent (good) 2-seater is huge. Not many operation can buy those
(except Gavin . When you take the cost of glider and try to add
instructor´s salary on top of it, the formula is pretty impossible
(except for Gavin . And soaring is not a ´top´ sport which draws new
young students. Can anyone think another sport that the cost of
equipment is as high as in soaring and if you are world number 1,
you'll be paid NADA Hopefully this new GP format will turn the next
page. Finally a good desision from FAI side. Finally...

PS



On 29 joulu, 17:13, "Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote:
"fredsez" wrote in message

...

Where are the CFIs?
Without enough good CFIs... the number of new soaring pilots will
decline.
A potential CFI asked me what is the first requirement to become a
CFI? Perhaps I didn't think of the FARs, but my answer was; "You need
a strong desire to teach".

Some CFIs need to build flying time to get an ATP job. Some cannot
afford to fly at all, so they fly as CFIs just to enjoy the life of
flying. Most glider sites are remote from city life, and offer less
attractions to young pilots as a full time job.

Glider sites cannot afford the real estate costs of nearby city life.
Most cannot offer housing that is affordable. A well paid glider CFI
earns more per hour than a comparable SEL instructor is paid, but
where can he live? Where is life?...(females)

Instructor pay is the smallest part of a students cost to learn to
fly. Good clubs, for example; TSA south of Fort Worth, seems to have
solved the problem.

The top pay or cost to the student for an instructor runs about $57
per hour. A popular instructor, flying at a good operation may earn
about $32,000 per year. An Auto mechanic at a dealers shop will do
much better.




Where are the instructors? Fred

Fred, I think I know part of the answer.

There are many pilots who hold an instructor certificate and for whom the
pay is not an issue but they don't teach. There are many reasons but one
that comes up a lot is that they absolutely hate the back seat of a 2-33.
I'm no longer willing to risk my back in one.

If there were a more attractive, more comfortable trainer, at least some of
these instructors would become active.

Bill Daniels


My own view only, everyone else may have a completely different perspective
for which I have enormous respect.

I am in a club which bends over backwards with incentives for the towpilots
(and are discussing more incentives), but gives no incentives at all for
instructors. I am a CFIG who chooses to donate the instructor fees to the
Club, but I get no break on dues or personal tow fees. I also pay to attend
FIRC's and if I want instructors insurance, that's out of pocket, too.

No offense to the students, without whom our sport wouldn't survive, but for
the CFIG getting a student is like acquiring the Albatross from Coleridge's
Rime of the Ancient Mariner. Naturally the student wants to fly, and the
student wants to fly during the good times of the year, and at the good
times of the day (when thermals are likely). Thus, the CFIG's personal
flying in their own ship becomes either very limited (when the student is
not available), or guilt-ridden.

So, in the zero-sum game of investing of the limited time I have available
for soaring, I lose in multiple ways when I am an active instructor.

So, personal opinion only, I am very selective about what instruction I will
provide, because I like to fly. Does that make sense?

Respectfully,
Bullwinkle

p.s. By the way, I also hate the back seat of the 2-33, for the same reason
Bill does. Some of us aren't getting any younger, any more limber, or any
lighter.