![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Andrew Gideon" wrote in message online.com... Dudley Henriques wrote: What I said was that I had never flown with a product of an accelerated basic training program where that pilot didn't in my opinion need remedial training to bring them up to what I consider to be appropriate comprehension standards. This shouldn't be read to imply that these pilots were unsafe. It should however be interpreted to mean that in my opinion, these pilots might have had better comprehension had they not taken the accelerated route. Why is the PPL exam set permitting people to become pilots with a level of comprehension you find inappropriate? - Andrew Just because I found the comprehension levels "inappropriate" shouldn't be misconstrued into meaning that I believe the flight test standards were lax. This wasn't the case at all. I would consider the standards to be an established MINIMUM for defining a safe pilot. What I am saying is that in my experience, the comprehensive levels of the accelerated trainees could have been BETTER!!!! My standards are fairly high it's true, especially for my airplanes, but they are not so high that I wouldn't check out a safe pilot who I felt simply needed remedial work on his comprehension. My usual method was to simply spend the time necessary with the pilot and bring them up to speed on anything I found during the check flight that I thought was out of line with that pilot's experience level. The rub on all this is that many of the things that I discovered needing some work were not critical things necessarily, but rather things that I felt a pilot at the level of experience I was checking should know. A lot of it had to do with the depth of the understanding, rather than the total absence of comprehension. Being safe is one thing. Being evaluated by a check pilot looking for a specific depth of comprehension to match your hours of experience is quite a different thing. All of us, including me, can use more comprehension. What I was finding was a pilot who I felt should be understanding what was happening at a deeper depth than I was getting for the rating held and the hours flown. You could classify it as something I felt the pilot should know more about than I was getting from him. Nothing critical, just something I wasn't getting from a lot of the pilots who were coming through the program taking a little more time BETWEEN FLIGHTS!!!! Dudley Henriques International Fighter Pilots Fellowship Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired For personal email, please replace the z's with e's. dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pilot Courses | John Stevens | Piloting | 1 | April 30th 04 09:11 PM |
Best GA Pilot Continuing Education Courses | O. Sami Saydjari | Instrument Flight Rules | 7 | January 2nd 04 07:54 PM |
instrument courses | Tony Woolner | Piloting | 0 | November 9th 03 12:31 AM |
instrument courses | ArtP | Piloting | 0 | November 8th 03 01:02 PM |
Wanted: Experienced CFIIs to Teach 10-day IFR Rating Courses near Pittsburgh | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | October 1st 03 01:50 AM |