About Acellerated Courses for Private

Mike Rapoport wrote:

There are two aspects to flying, knowledge and the act of actually
controlling the airplane.

Three, actually. Experience is the glue that holds control and knowledge
together. Experience is what enables one to know not only what is
possible, but what is likely, before it happens and while something can
still be done about it.

It's not all in the book, and control that's adequate for solo, or even
a type rating, is just the beginning of becoming a pilot.


Jack

"gatt" wrote in message

We didn't learn to walk in ten days. How in hell can we expect to learn to
fly in the same?

Using the same logic, why only four years of college? Why not extend that
to 8, 12 or more?

A dedicated individual can get an advanced degree in as little as two years
if he wants. Not many people want to 'cause college is just too much damn
fun but it can be done.

If you are to take that stance, you must dictate what the "proper" amount of
time would be. Is 45 days enough? 60? 160?

At exactly what level is efficiency traded for overload?

Answer: There is no answer. Accelerated is probably good for some,
probably not for others. That's for me to decide and not some old school
CFI who knows only one way to teach.

--
Jim Fisher

"Jim Fisher" wrote in message
...
"gatt" wrote in message

We didn't learn to walk in ten days. How in hell can we expect to learn
to
fly in the same?

Using the same logic, why only four years of college? Why not extend that
to 8, 12 or more?

Four years is a long time. It's not ten days. I took five and a half years
because I couldn't take all of the elective material I needed for what I
wanted to do in only four.

A dedicated individual can get an advanced degree in as little as two
years
if he wants.

Still, I would question the robustness of that education. I mean, you can
get a degree from Devry, or some other agency over the internet without
having to take classes at all, but it might not be worth the paper it's
printed on.

If you are to take that stance, you must dictate what the "proper" amount
of
time would be. Is 45 days enough? 60? 160?

It shouldn't be measured in terms of hours or days, but at what point the
student pilot is qualified to become a private pilot. We already know that
the 40-hour legal minimum is unrealistic for most people and that some take
up to 80 hours or more.

At exactly what level is efficiency traded for overload?

That's a good question. I bet a guy could do his master's thesis by
comparing BFR data, or by somehow retesting pilots across all types of
training schemes, and get good data.

Answer: There is no answer. Accelerated is probably good for some,
probably not for others. That's for me to decide and not some old school
CFI who knows only one way to teach.

Depends on whether you're the student who doesn't know aileron from upper
camber or a private pilot who has used his 10-day PP/SEL for a couple of
hundred hours.

Me? I've got a clean record and every instructor, examiner and BFR
instructor I've had has told me I'm a better-than-average pilot for my time.
But I'll still defer to the old school CFI who has probably encountered and
survived countless situations about which I still have no idea. (My DE flew
a tour P-51s and by 1945 was back stateside training young Air Corps pilots,
and was still an instructor/examiner in 1988. I defer unconditionally.)

The FAA doesn't see a problem with it, though, so at this point it's just an
interesting subject to discuss.

-c

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 at 13:24:18 in message
, Jim Fisher
wrote:

Answer: There is no answer. Accelerated is probably good for some,
probably not for others. That's for me to decide and not some old school
CFI who knows only one way to teach.

I have watched this discussion without comment so far - partly because I
am not qualified to give very strong opinions about learning to fly.

I have met many people in my career who have no idea why they annoy
people so much. They are insensitive to how other people react. That is
probably a disadvantage in any instructional situation. Some of them are
trying to assert their credentials by deliberate rudeness. Some just get
their kicks from it. It is hard to assess this from usenet discussions.

The second sentence in the paragraph that I have quoted above comes
across to me as incredibly arrogant and insulting. I am affronted by
that insult to my friend Dudley. I don't know you so perhaps you don't
mean it to be that way. But right or wrong, Dudley deserves respect. He
certainly has mine. From what I know of Dudley I feel sure that his
instruction was subtly adjusted to meet the characteristics of every
pupil he ever taught.
--
David CL Francis

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 09:50:31 -0700, "gatt"
wrote:

We didn't learn to walk in ten days. How in hell can we expect to learn to
fly in the same?

I think that the short answer is we aren't infants when we are
learning to fly. You can't "teach" infants to walk because if their
motor skills haven't developed enough they literally cannot learn to
walk. Perhaps this is not a good comparison.

The college education is also, in my opinion, not a good comparison
either because there is more to the "education" process in college
than merely going to classes. There's a maturing process going on and
a snipping of the umbilical cord, so to speak, happening too. You
can't force the maturing process, unless you put the kids in combat,
like what happened in WWII. We aren't talking about that, I hope.

All we are talking about is learning to fly in an accelerated course.
It is possible that this kind of forced learning doesn't work as well
for long term retention as the traditional learning method but I think
we lack information to know this because the skills and information
are constantly used as our intrepid graduate flies. Perhaps the
flying helps reinforce the rapid learning so that retention is higher
than merely cramming for a bio exam that will never be used in life.

As someone pointed out there are three parts to the "learning to fly"
equation: Book learning (FAR's, weather, airplane technical
information, navigational techniques etc etc.), stick and rudder
skills and Judgement.

Items one and two can probably be learned in an accelerated manner but
I wonder if judgement can.

Corky Scott

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:46:25 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
wrote:

To put it bluntly, I can't remember a situation where I have checked out
a new pilot coming out of an accelerated course for Private Pilots where
the performance level was such that I felt no remedial work was
required....not ONE case!!!!

But you've checked out students who were taught in the traditional
method who required absolutely no remedial work what so ever? Not
even a little bit?

My take? I think accelerated courses may work for some people. My
wife is a teacher of learning disabled kids. She's studied teaching
methods and learning diabilities for much of her long teaching career.
Learning is a very complicated subject and one of the big difficulties
with teaching is that kids (and adults) learn at different rates.
Some pickup information almost instantly and retain it like they have
computers for brains. Others have to read and re-read or have it read
to them and then have it explained again and still don't get it. If
you try to teach everyone with one same method, the quick learners are
bored to distraction and the slow learners don't get it.

I think it's possible that those who learn fast and retain information
well could benefit from accelerated courses like you mention. Of
course, understanding something and translating that to coordinated
movement is different.

So practicing is important and the more you practice the better you
get. It would follow that a LOT of practice is better than a little
practice. Who does not benefit from practicing landings over and over
again? Most eventually get it, but not without practice, and
continued practice is what keeps the skill level high.

So I'm inclined to think that there's something to these accelerated
courses. They aren't for everyone of course, but they'd work for fast
learners I think.

Corky Scott

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:46:25 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
wrote:

To put it bluntly, I can't remember a situation where I have checked
out
a new pilot coming out of an accelerated course for Private Pilots
where
the performance level was such that I felt no remedial work was
required....not ONE case!!!!

But you've checked out students who were taught in the traditional
method who required absolutely no remedial work what so ever? Not
even a little bit?

No, that's inaccurate.
I have had pilots that I've checked out that came though traditional
training who also needed remedial work. That isn't the issue in context.
What IS indicative is that I have NEVER checked out a pilot who came
through a basic training accelerated course who didn't need remedial
work. There's a big difference in any reasonable interpretation between
the two situations.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

Hello All!

I am Cliff Manley of Perfect Planes, Inc.
I have trained many pilots in 10 days. I expect them to have done a home
study course for the written exam before they come. If they need further
help on any areas they are lacking in, I will give them ground schooling for
that. I also give them ground schooling for the oral exam.

I do not guarantee a 10 day course, as matter of fact everyone is different.
I would say that most people do not finish in 10 days, and I assure you that
I am not so ignorant that I would try to push someone through that is not
"safe" If someone needs 80 hours, that's what they get!

We do fly every day and I do believe that is the best way to learn anything.
You can't learn to play an instrument with a one hour a week lesson and no
daily practice. I don't believe that unless someone is learning disabled
they need many days to comprehend what I tell them. Ask any elementary
teacher if they teach reading comprehension that way? Do they ask a student
to read something and them tell them what it meant next week after they
comprehend it? Get real! I can tell right then if someone understands
through questions, if they don't I will reword it until they do! It's called
teaching!

The DE's examine my students probably more closely than others, and would
not pass them if they where not satisfied with their competency. My pass
rate is about 90% on the first try. The ones that fail are usually in the
45-60 year old group and get nervous.

I don't have time to answer all of the foolishness I have seen here, but be
sure of one thing, the students that I teach can fly better and safer than
most. If you do anything everyday you WILL be better! I do not offer a 10
day course, I claim only that it can be done in as little as 10 days. I have
had some students that I think I could have finished in half that. They were
gifted and did everything right the first time! VERY RARE! But as much as
some of you would like to believe, flying an airplane is not rocket science,
it is not really very difficult or FAA would require more than the average
work week of time to learn it. some of the slow learners take two weeks
worth of time. The fact is that most people cannot afford the time off of
work, so they don't have any other choice than to take a lesson a week and
have to re-learn each time stretching out the process. Some instructors and
schools actually like that, since they make more money if someone takes 80
hours instead of 50. Helps pay the light bill so to speak. I just love to
teach, am not a time builder, but a teacher. I love to see others enjoy the
gift of flight! I have also flown over 100 young eagles! Kids love it too!

Anyway have fun guys! I do. If someone learns in 40 or 100 hours, they are
just as excited to fly!

Cliff

After viewing this person's website cover to cover and reading what he
has posted here I will only say that even if I were to choose an
accelerated training program, it wouldn't be THIS particular one with
THIS specific instructor! Again, only an opinion.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

"Cliff" wrote in message
nk.net...
Hello All!

I am Cliff Manley of Perfect Planes, Inc.
I have trained many pilots in 10 days. I expect them to have done a
home
study course for the written exam before they come. If they need
further
help on any areas they are lacking in, I will give them ground
schooling for
that. I also give them ground schooling for the oral exam.

I do not guarantee a 10 day course, as matter of fact everyone is
different.
I would say that most people do not finish in 10 days, and I assure
you that
I am not so ignorant that I would try to push someone through that is
not
"safe" If someone needs 80 hours, that's what they get!

We do fly every day and I do believe that is the best way to learn
anything.
You can't learn to play an instrument with a one hour a week lesson
and no
daily practice. I don't believe that unless someone is learning
disabled
they need many days to comprehend what I tell them. Ask any elementary
teacher if they teach reading comprehension that way? Do they ask a
student
to read something and them tell them what it meant next week after
they
comprehend it? Get real! I can tell right then if someone understands
through questions, if they don't I will reword it until they do! It's
called
teaching!

The DE's examine my students probably more closely than others, and
would
not pass them if they where not satisfied with their competency. My
pass
rate is about 90% on the first try. The ones that fail are usually in
the
45-60 year old group and get nervous.

I don't have time to answer all of the foolishness I have seen here,
but be
sure of one thing, the students that I teach can fly better and safer
than
most. If you do anything everyday you WILL be better! I do not offer
a 10
day course, I claim only that it can be done in as little as 10 days.
I have
had some students that I think I could have finished in half that.
They were
gifted and did everything right the first time! VERY RARE! But as
much as
some of you would like to believe, flying an airplane is not rocket
science,
it is not really very difficult or FAA would require more than the
average
work week of time to learn it. some of the slow learners take two
weeks
worth of time. The fact is that most people cannot afford the time off
of
work, so they don't have any other choice than to take a lesson a week
and
have to re-learn each time stretching out the process. Some
instructors and
schools actually like that, since they make more money if someone
takes 80
hours instead of 50. Helps pay the light bill so to speak. I just love
to
teach, am not a time builder, but a teacher. I love to see others
enjoy the
gift of flight! I have also flown over 100 young eagles! Kids love it
too!

Anyway have fun guys! I do. If someone learns in 40 or 100 hours, they
are
just as excited to fly!

Cliff