The Differences Between PPLicensing And Learning

In article ,
WJRFlyBoy wrote:

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:04:54 GMT, Steve Foley wrote:

"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message
...
I have been reading the various threads about spins, forced landings, etc
and talking with CFIs. The road to a PPL is preset in requirements by FAA.
I see that most people are happy to do nothing more than that.

Where do you see that?

I don't understand. For the most part, I see people who want to get x hours
in y (shortest) time to get their license.

How does that show that they don't want to do anything past the minimum
requirements?

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 11:27:12 -0800, Steve Hix wrote:

"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message
...
I have been reading the various threads about spins, forced landings, etc
and talking with CFIs. The road to a PPL is preset in requirements by FAA.
I see that most people are happy to do nothing more than that.

Where do you see that?

I don't understand. For the most part, I see people who want to get x hours
in y (shortest) time to get their license.

How does that show that they don't want to do anything past the minimum
requirements?

It shows in how they focus, I have sons in their early 30s, it is societal
and environmental. This is the approximate age group that makes up the
student pilot population give or take 5 years. The schools, many of them,
pander to this, slam bam thank you ma'am mentality, when is the last time
you saw an ad that had a pipe-smoking geyser with a cardigan sweater and a
look of slow process in his eyes? Not to mention that the schools are
driven by financial necessity to get em in and out.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:04:54 GMT, Steve Foley wrote:

Dissect the anatomy of my training aircraft
Understand what and how the instrumentation works (shortcomings included)
Own all the fundamentally necessary flight gear (i.e carry-ons in flight
bag or on person)

Obtain hours in flight simulation

See Dudley's comments regarding pre-solo students and simulators.
More...enough for now.

I can see hour your program will save lives. Unfortunately the only reason
is that there will be few or no pilots due to unreasonable traiing
requirements.

1) I passed on answering your questions that honestly aren't worth my
effort or the Usenet space.

2) Read first, then post. I never claimed this to be /the/ training route,
that it would save lives or anything else you have insinuated either
purposefully or foolishly.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message
...


1) I passed on answering your questions that honestly aren't worth my
effort or the Usenet space.

And I will to the same

plonk

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:56:26 GMT, Steve Foley wrote:

"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message
...

1) I passed on answering your questions that honestly aren't worth my
effort or the Usenet space.

And I will to the same

plonk

lol Touchy I would say.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

In article ,
WJRFlyBoy wrote:

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:56:26 GMT, Steve Foley wrote:

"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message
...

1) I passed on answering your questions that honestly aren't worth my
effort or the Usenet space.

And I will to the same

plonk

lol Touchy I would say.

Well, you *were* pretty rude. Unless you think that blowing off someone
because they're too stupid to deal with is good manners.

Think about it.

On Feb 28, 5:04 am, "Steve Foley" wrote:
"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message

Outside of the cost factors, I find this much more than curious
considering the
consequences. You can get killed, that one keeps jumping out at me

I don't follow. Reading accident reports, I see very few incidents of pilots
getting killed because they had inadequate training (unless you consider VFR
into IMC).

There are plenty of examples. The ones that jump out at me
are the landing accidents that often don't hit the headlines,
accidents caused by poor training. Landing fast and flat, running off
the end, ballooning and stalling and landing hard. Accelerated stalls
caused by pulling back hard after a buzz job. (Those are usually fatal
and hit the newspapers.) Failing to understand DA and trying to depart
an inadequate runway. A really common one is carb ice; we hear of
accidents/incidents all the time due to that one. It's not well taught
or understood. And, of course as you mentioned, VFR into IMC.

Dan

wrote in message
...
On Feb 28, 5:04 am, "Steve Foley" wrote:

I don't follow. Reading accident reports, I see very few incidents of
pilots
getting killed because they had inadequate training (unless you consider
VFR
into IMC).

There are plenty of examples. The ones that jump out at me
are the landing accidents that often don't hit the headlines,
accidents caused by poor training. Landing fast and flat, running off
the end, ballooning and stalling and landing hard. Accelerated stalls
caused by pulling back hard after a buzz job. (Those are usually fatal
and hit the newspapers.) Failing to understand DA and trying to depart
an inadequate runway. A really common one is carb ice; we hear of
accidents/incidents all the time due to that one. It's not well taught
or understood. And, of course as you mentioned, VFR into IMC.

Dan


If this were truly a lack of training, I would expect to see more of these
types of accidents immediately after getting a certificate.

When they occur years later, I can't see how they can be attributed to
inadequate training from years ago.

I think most good pilots agree that a private certificate is really a
license to learn.

I'd love to see a syllabus that includes "avoiding accelerated stalls after
a buzz job"g

Steve Foley wrote:

I'd love to see a syllabus that includes "avoiding accelerated stalls after
a buzz job"g

I had that training when I got my PPL about 20 yrs. ago. When we got to
the section on accelerated stalls, my instructor took me out and we performed
them at altitude, simulating a buzz job. He noted that the most common
scenario where a private pilot might encounter an accelerated stall would be
during a botched buzzing. The lesson stuck pretty well.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:30:52 GMT, Steve Foley wrote:

There are plenty of examples. The ones that jump out at me
are the landing accidents that often don't hit the headlines,
accidents caused by poor training. Landing fast and flat, running off
the end, ballooning and stalling and landing hard. Accelerated stalls
caused by pulling back hard after a buzz job. (Those are usually fatal
and hit the newspapers.) Failing to understand DA and trying to depart
an inadequate runway. A really common one is carb ice; we hear of
accidents/incidents all the time due to that one. It's not well taught
or understood. And, of course as you mentioned, VFR into IMC.

Dan


If this were truly a lack of training, I would expect to see more of these
types of accidents immediately after getting a certificate.

If you did, you would argue that it was a lack of experience not training
to make it fit your argument.

When they occur years later, I can't see how they can be attributed to
inadequate training from years ago.

Wouldn't that depend on what was learned in the training, or better yet,
not learned?

I think most good pilots agree that a private certificate is really a
license to learn.

The Differences Between PPLicensing And Learning /is/ the Subject of the
thread.

--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!