How to adhere to this obstacle departure procedure?

Greg Esres wrote:

Not really. What makes you think that an experienced pilot or
instructor necessarily has any higher level of knowledge regarding
obstacle clearances on IFR departure procedures? Opinions, sure, but
knowledge?

I am making the assumption that one who flies often in the system is more
proficient and experienced. Proficiency and knowledge, when coupled with
a desire to instruct, carries a lot more weight than one who received their
ratings back-to-back with an ultimate goal of flying for the airlines.

A pilot who has logged many hours flying in the system for real, as in
commuting, traveling, etc., is going to encounter many more of the
procedural and weather subtleties of IFR flight than a time-building
instructor who logs 95 percent of his/her hours as an instructor.

Not only have I encountered this first hand, but I have spoken with others
at about my same level have also encountered this issue when seeking IFR
refresher training.

This is one reason why I subscribe to _IFR_ and _IFR Refresher_. I look to
the articles within these periodicals to learn from the experiences of
those who have been flying or controlling IFR aircraft for many
hours/years.

Point two is that students only retain a small fraction of what
they're taught.

Is that so? Have a study to back this up? I suggest that those who
routinely exercise their rating in actual IMC will reinforce all that they
have learned and then some. That's my opinion, worth what you paid for
it.

Even if your instructor had understood the sublties
regarding ODP's, it's not likely that you would have digested them in
their entirety.

Perhaps. IMO this would depend on the student and what they actually do
with their IFR rating once they receive it. If it gets tucked away on a
shelf and rarely used to fly in actual IMC, then I would agree.

--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

I am making the assumption that one who flies often in the system is
more proficient and experienced. Proficiency and knowledge, when
coupled with

You're confusing the concepts of "proficient", "experienced", and
"knowledge".

Lots of experienced, proficient pilots out there with no knowledge of
obstacle clearance requirements. Lots of experienced, proficient
pilots with lousy radio technique. Lots of experienced, proficient
pilots who don't understand how airplanes fly.

retention level is low...Is that so? Have a study to back this
up?

Six years instructing, and sampling knowledge levels after training is
over? But any learning theory book will supply you with the studies
you seek, if common sense doesn't.

IMO this would depend on the student and what they actually do
with their IFR rating once they receive it.

Not in this case. The only way you can reinforce your knowledge of
ODP's is to hit something every now and then. Until you do, this
knowledge is merely theoretical.

I don't disagree with the answers you received on this question, but
you bought into the idea that turning to the heading is "close enough"
without any idea of whether the posters knew what they were talking
about.

You can learn a lot from _IFR_ and _IFR Refresher_ but the knowledge
level of the authors is highly variable. I dumped "Refresher" after
some random CFI wrote a "Pitch vs. Power" article. When I want that
sort of analysis, I'll turn to aerodynamics texts. I stopped taking
"IFR" after I noticed that so many of their quizzes contained
incorrect answers. These guys are supposed to be experts?

Opinion from experienced pilots can be useful, but you need a way to
discern the good stuff from the bad stuff. Unless they rigorously
work to improve their own knowledge, they're as likely to be as full
of crap as the newbie -II, maybe more so.

Greg Esres wrote:

Lots of experienced, proficient pilots out there with no knowledge of
obstacle clearance requirements. Lots of experienced, proficient
pilots with lousy radio technique. Lots of experienced, proficient
pilots who don't understand how airplanes fly.

You comment how I bought into the responses I received to my original
question in this thread, then proceed to spout the above and the theory
about student knowledge retention as if I should just accept these ideas.

Sorry, but unless you can back the above comments up with an official
definition of "lots," "lousy," "experienced," and "proficient," I simply
read this as just another pilot's opinions.

Six years instructing, and sampling knowledge levels after training is
over?

Just out of curiosity, in the last six years were the majority of your
hours were accumulated through instructing? Did you have time before your
instructor rating to fly with a purpose to many destinations?

I ask this seriously because I don't want to underestimate your background.
However, the title "instrument instructor" alone doesn't do it for me since
I have met a few instrument instructors with zero IMC time.


But any learning theory book will supply you with the studies
you seek, if common sense doesn't.

Common sense? How is it common sense that a student only retains a small
fraction of what they were taught? It seems to me that any instructor
hiding behind this "theory" may want to consider the manner in which he is
teaching the material, rather than concede that this as true.

I don't disagree with the answers you received on this question, but
you bought into the idea that turning to the heading is "close enough"
without any idea of whether the posters knew what they were talking
about.

Would an incorrect response to an IFR procedure question posted in this
newsgroup survive uncontested by the many experienced regulars? The 100%
agreement between the responders in this thread was pretty telling.


--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

question in this thread, then proceed to spout the above and the
theory about student knowledge retention as if I should just accept
these ideas.

Not *should* but probably *would*. :-)

I simply read this as just another pilot's opinions.

Ah, very good. The question is, how to verify knowledge?

Obstacle clearance: read TERPS. Read Wally Roberts articles. Call
Flight procedures offices. Tim seems to be a "TERPS" guy, which I
infer because the information he dispenses conforms with information
to the above sources.

Radio Technique: read the AIM.

How airplanes fly: read aerodynamics textbooks.

However, the title "instrument instructor" alone doesn't do it for
me since I have met a few instrument instructors with zero IMC time.


No doubt. But what I question is the standards by which you judge
your instructors.

You certainly want someone with a reasonable amount of IMC time, so
that you will feel safe when you fly with him. But beyond that, what
benefit does it provide you?

We have a local guy with 25,000 hours who sometimes allow flight
instructors to ride right seat in his King Air to build turbine time.

This guy has been known to takeoff into IMC without a clearance. He
never uses approach plates or enroute charts, and will often descend
right through MDA until he sees the runway. He's rude and obnoxious
on the radio.

But hey, the guy is experienced! Sounds like the instructor for you.


Would an incorrect response to an IFR procedure question posted in
this newsgroup survive uncontested by the many experienced regulars?
The 100% agreement between the responders in this thread was pretty
telling.

Ah, truth by majority vote. The only terpster that replied is "Tim".

Greg Esres wrote:

No doubt. But what I question is the standards by which you judge
your instructors.

What's to question? Being that I already have my instrument rating, I now
prefer an instructor who has actually flown in the system for real, not one
who sat right seat as an instructor all of his hours. I seek to learn more
of the "IFR subtleties" we touched on in this thread.

I noticed you conveniently skipped over the sincere question about your
background.

You certainly want someone with a reasonable amount of IMC time, so
that you will feel safe when you fly with him.

It has nothing to do with "feeling" safe when I fly with the instructor.
Instead, it has everything to do with getting what I pay for, which is to
learn from someone much more experienced than I. An instructor who has
little actual IMC time and has placed a hood on a student's eyes more than
he has flown behind one himself is not one on which I wish to spend my
money.

But beyond that, what benefit does it provide you?

See above.

snip
But hey, the guy is experienced! Sounds like the instructor for you.

LOL! You are funny. This pilot sounds like a real a-hole and a two-minute
conversation with him would certainly reveal this.

Greg, it seems to me that you may have taken my comments about instructors
personally. My apologies if this is so and I do not desire to continue
down this ever-eroding path with you.

--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

it seems to me that you may have taken my comments about instructors
personally.

Hardly. Locally, I'm "high time" so you'd probably be flying with me.

I seek to learn more of the "IFR subtleties" we touched on in this
thread.

My original point is that you would not have learned them from
"experienced" instructors or pilots, any more than from a newbie. You
learned them here.

It has nothing to do with "feeling" safe when I fly with the
instructor. Instead, it has everything to do with getting what I pay
for, which is to learn from someone much more experienced than I.

While you're an instrument student, everybody is more experienced than
you are, even a time builder..

Again, my orignial point was that while learning, the time builder was
fine for you, as long as he was competent. A more knowledgable
teacher would have been wasted on you, until you learned the basics.