The Differences Between PPLicensing And Learning

On Mar 7, 5:27*pm, WJRFlyBoy wrote:
Which is the crux of the Subject of the thread. This is exactly what I am
finding, the PPL standards don't license you to do perform in the manner
you describe, Michael. On this we agree. Fine, then what, where and how do
you get the learning necessary to do so?

Fair enough question. There is even an answer.

First off, I'll tell you what the answer is not. It's not to be found
in extra attention paid to passing the FAA written tests (they are of
little value, and at the 95% score they are as much about learning
pointless trivia and answers to trick questions as they are about
learning anything useful) and it's really not found in practicing with
the flight sim (which is a useful adjunct to learning to fly,
especially when it comes to instruments, but does not really cover the
things that won't be covered in your training). It's certainly not
found by buying gadgets.

The answer comes in finding a mentor - someone who has been where you
are, is now where you are going, and can show you the way. I know of
no other path.

In an ideal world, that mentor would be your flight instructor. That
probably isn't going to happen. Very few pilots who routinely use
airplanes for practical transportation ever become flight instructors,
and I can count on my fingers the ones I know (and that includes the
ones posting here) who are available to the walk-in primary student at
the FBO. Most will only be available if you have or can arrange for
an airplane, or by some special arrangement - one you are unlikely to
be able to make unless you are well plugged into the local general
aviation scene.

You can take a shot at finding the sort of instructor who could be
your mentor (look for someone who owns an airplane that he uses for
routine all-weather travel first and foremost) but like I said, you
are unlikely to succeed. Or you can take what you get, solo (or even
get your license), and start hanging around the airport with the
owners, looking for a plane to buy (you can pretty much forget doing
any serious travel as a renter). People will come out of the
woodwork, and then you will find your mentor. He will tell you what
you REALLY need to learn, and will likely be able to teach you.

There are good books you can read too - but they're not going to mean
much without a basis in actual experience. I recommend Bach (Stranger
to the Ground, Biplane, Nothing by Chance), Lindbergh (Spirit of St.
Louis), Imeson (Mountain Flying, Mountain Flying Bible), Robert Buck
(Weather Flying), and Rinker Buck (Flight of Passage). I'm sure there
are other good ones I can't think of at the moment. I can't really
think of any book I would recommend for someone who has never flown.
Lots of people rave about Langewiesche (Stick and Rudder) but I can't
say I'm really impressed with it. On the other hand, I don't know of
anything better to recommend - and given that it's now half a century
old, that in itself is saying something.

One of the ways I am pursuing this is an highly active academic one, it
would premise that the more one knows the better decisions can be made as
to what needs learning.

This is a pretty decent assumption in an academic environment, largely
because of the peer review process. Stuff generally gets peer
reviewed both before publication (formally) and after (informally),
and the trash doesn't stick around. There is precious little peer
review in general aviation. There simply are not good books about how
to effectively use a light aircraft as reliable transportation. The
vast majority of training material is focused on commercial aviation,
military aviation, or passing exams. What little is left is generally
not peer reviewed in any way, is often wildly inaccurate, and
basically has all the problems of usenet - other than spam, poor
grammar/spelling/style, and personal attacks. On the other hand, it
is often out of date - see above.

I find new PPL, and in email commo with posters on
RAS/RAP they many have had disastrous lapses in their educations, they
simply did not know what was actually required to obtain the freedom you
have suggested "know enough to go where you want to go, when you want to go
there, on an average day."

And now they know more. Or think they do. On usenet, nobody knows
who you are. Of course that's not really true. Anyone with a shred
of 'net savvy can easily pierce the veil of so-called anonymity,
especially where it concerns those of us who have been here for a long
time, but that's not terribly helpful. With a name and a general
location, you could use the FAA database and figure out what kind of
aircraft we own and what kind of certificates we hold. That tells you
very little about what kind of pilot you're dealing with. Sure,
you'll get the occasional weirdie - like a guy expounding on the
differences between visual and instrument flying who doesn't even have
an instrument rating, or expounding on the proper way to teach Vmc
demos when his own multi rating is limited to centerline thrust - but
mostly people have ratings appropriate to what they are discussing or
clearly state they do not. What you will never get except by personal
knowledge is which guy is known for bending airplanes (I know at least
two who managed to have four wrecks without accumulating 1000 hours -
and one of them was a CFI and an aviation safety counselor), which guy
routinely gets stuck because he never developed the skills to handle
any but the most benign weather, and which guy really does use his
airplane for transportation and has survived real emergencies in real
weather. For that, you need to get out to an airport and meet
people. Then you hang out, look around, decide what kind of pilot you
want to be like, and ask him (or her) what he wishes he had known
starting out, what kind of reading, training, experience, etc. he
recommends - and do that.

Now go and do it.

Michael