Best Option for Private Pilot to Multi Commercial Instrument Ratings

C Kingsbury wrote:

wrote in message
...

Your flight school could afford to overtrain its students.



Red herring. The military has historically moved people from 0TT to jet PIC
in less time than civilian or airline ab-initio programs. The example is all
the more salient considering how picky they are about the students.

Yes, and the reason is that they get the fundamentals solid before
moving on. Many civilian instructors and flight schools move students
along too fast and this increases the total time in the end.


Matt

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:33:42 GMT, "C Kingsbury"

Well, as long as we are into logic fallacies, it woudl be a non
sequitur to assume that simply because the U S Navy has a training
requirement of n hours for its aviators, that the same requirement is
a reasonable one for general aviation pilots.

Worst case we're talking an additional 8 hours of instruction, or roughly
$1000, for the average GA pilot. In the big scheme of things that's
chicken****, especially if it leads to better results.

"Michael" wrote in message
ups.com...


there is no way in
the world that an insurance company will cover you in a twin without
hundreds of hours of twin time

This is also incorrect. Just recently (about a year ago) someone I
know bought a Twin Comanche to train in.
snip
Just about any other twin would
have been easier to insure.

It's one thing to say "you can't get insured in a twin unless you're Chuck
Yeager" which seems to be the conventional wisdom these days, but the OP is
talking about a 421, which is rather a bit more plane than a twinkie or even
a Baron.

wrote:
Worst case we're talking an additional 8 hours of instruction, or
roughly $1000, for the average GA pilot. In the big scheme of things
that's chicken****, especially if it leads to better results.
[...]
Anyway, $1000 may be chickenfeed to you, but some people consider it
real money.

I think the point is that time spent early on making sure the
fundamentals are solid is made up later because the student is better
prepared to handle more advanced topics. You can't navigate if you're
still struggling with BAI, and you can't fly approaches if you're still
struggling with navigation.

So, the question is not "Can the student afford to spend $1000 for 8
hours of BAI drills?", but "If the student skimps on BAI training, how
much more will the whole program end up costing him when he struggles to
fly approaches he's not ready to be flying yet?"

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:10:13 -0500, Roy Smith wrote:

wrote:
Worst case we're talking an additional 8 hours of instruction, or
roughly $1000, for the average GA pilot. In the big scheme of things
that's chicken****, especially if it leads to better results.
[...]
Anyway, $1000 may be chickenfeed to you, but some people consider it
real money.

I think the point is that time spent early on making sure the
fundamentals are solid is made up later because the student is better
prepared to handle more advanced topics. You can't navigate if you're
still struggling with BAI, and you can't fly approaches if you're still
struggling with navigation.

So, the question is not "Can the student afford to spend $1000 for 8
hours of BAI drills?", but "If the student skimps on BAI training, how
much more will the whole program end up costing him when he struggles to
fly approaches he's not ready to be flying yet?"

I guess it depends on one's definition of "skimping".

I seldom spend more than 3-4 hours on attitude flying before moving
on, even though the student might need further improvement with his
attitude flying skills. My personal belief is, when the attitude
flying is good enough so as not to cause a distraction and interfere
with further learning, it's time to move on. It doesn't have to be
perfect. The skills will improve with practice while doing other
work. Every procedure turn is an opportunity to practice and improve
attitude flying skills.

I am satisfied with my results. My students rarely exceed 40 hours
of instrument time when they take their practical test, unless the
student comes with many previous hours logged, and I rarely have a
practical test failure, and I have never had a failure in 15 years of
teaching because of weak attitude flying skills.

I know other instructors with comparable records, and I know they are
not spending 12-14 hours of attitude flying training before moving on
to other phases.

But there is no single way of going at this stuff. I have changed
something after just about every rating I have ever done, because I
thought I could improve things in some way for the student.

So if you are satisfied that the students you turn out are adequately
trained, and you have trained them as efficiently as possible so that
they have not wasted their hard-earned time and money on a lot of
unnecessary stuff, what else can be said?

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:10:13 -0500, Roy Smith wrote:

I think the point is that time spent early on making sure the
fundamentals are solid is made up later because the student is better
prepared to handle more advanced topics. You can't navigate if you're
still struggling with BAI, and you can't fly approaches if you're still
struggling with navigation.

So, the question is not "Can the student afford to spend $1000 for 8
hours of BAI drills?", but "If the student skimps on BAI training, how
much more will the whole program end up costing him when he struggles to
fly approaches he's not ready to be flying yet?"



I've always wondered about this:

What do you think the FAA had in mind when they determined the
training requirement under Part 61, which is 15 hours, I believe?


Certainly not 12-14 hours of attitude flying instruction, it is safe
to say.

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Red herring. The military has historically moved people from 0TT to jet
PIC
in less time than civilian or airline ab-initio programs. The example is
all
the more salient considering how picky they are about the students.

Yes, and the reason is that they get the fundamentals solid before
moving on. Many civilian instructors and flight schools move students
along too fast and this increases the total time in the end.

Really? I'd say they move along at a snails pace. How many students take
50-60 hours to get their private certificate and take a year to get those
50-60 hours? In the military it's non-stop, every day learning.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Matt Barrow" wrote in
:

Really? I'd say they move along at a snails pace. How many students
take 50-60 hours to get their private certificate and take a year to
get those 50-60 hours? In the military it's non-stop, every day
learning.

I think that's really the difference. With the military training, it's
all day, every day, and the incentive to do well is very high. Waiting
days, weeks, or even months between sessions means you start over, or
very nearly, each time. There is certainly a loss between flights even
if it's only a week in between. The more often the training is done, the
more is retained and the less total time is required, or if the total
time is the same, more training can be done during a concentrated
program.

Back when I was going through flight school, I knew that if I didn't
complete the course, I would be entering the jungle war games on foot,
and I did not want to do that, so I studied very hard.

--
Regards,

Stan

C Kingsbury wrote:
It's one thing to say "you can't get insured in a twin unless you're
Chuck
Yeager" which seems to be the conventional wisdom these days, but the
OP is
talking about a 421, which is rather a bit more plane than a twinkie
or even
a Baron.

Yes, it is. I was referring to planes that someone might actually
train or build time in - C-310's, Barons, Aztecs. The 421 is in a
completely different class. You have to go to FlightSafety (or
equivalent) AFTER you get your multi to get checked out.

Michael

"Stan Gosnell" wrote in message
...
"Matt Barrow" wrote in
:

Really? I'd say they move along at a snails pace. How many students
take 50-60 hours to get their private certificate and take a year to
get those 50-60 hours? In the military it's non-stop, every day
learning.

I think that's really the difference. With the military training, it's
all day, every day, and the incentive to do well is very high. Waiting
days, weeks, or even months between sessions means you start over, or
very nearly, each time.

When I did my private ticket, I did the flight portion in just over seven
weeks (44.5 hours @ three times a week 2 hrs each lesson). I was determined
not to repeat any part of the course just because I got rusty during an
interval. By taking and passing the written first, I was prepared for the
flight phase. Also, the instructor went over what he intended to cover in
the air so there were no surprises.

I don't know if that would work for every one, but it seems easy now,
looking back over all these years. Reading what some people struggle
through, I can only sympathize for their slow and unsteady progress.

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO