15 Hour Wonders

On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 9:10:47 PM UTC-8, Ramy wrote:
I recall there was a fatal accident in Hawaii a decade ago or so with a very low time, young instructor who was only flying for few weeks. Very little experience but met the minimum the FAA requires. IIRC he did not manage to recover from a spin.
I don’t have a link but I am sure one can search for it in the NTSB site.

Ramy

Here is what you are referring to:

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...Final&IType=LA

On Tuesday, December 10, 2019 at 2:38:16 AM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 9:10:47 PM UTC-8, Ramy wrote:
I recall there was a fatal accident in Hawaii a decade ago or so with a very low time, young instructor who was only flying for few weeks. Very little experience but met the minimum the FAA requires. IIRC he did not manage to recover from a spin.
I don’t have a link but I am sure one can search for it in the NTSB site.

Ramy

Here is what you are referring to:

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...Final&IType=LA

Yes, that was a glider pilot who had only been qualified for three weeks.

On Tuesday, December 10, 2019 at 2:38:16 AM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
On Monday, December 9, 2019 at 9:10:47 PM UTC-8, Ramy wrote:
I recall there was a fatal accident in Hawaii a decade ago or so with a very low time, young instructor who was only flying for few weeks. Very little experience but met the minimum the FAA requires. IIRC he did not manage to recover from a spin.
I don’t have a link but I am sure one can search for it in the NTSB site.

Ramy

Here is what you are referring to:

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...Final&IType=LA

The SSA also made the statement that the pilot in question had been given a quick path to his rating. The NTSB noted lack of experience and inadequate training. This is exactly the message conveyed in the original post, 15 hour wonder. The standards are set to a minimum, which IMHO results in low experience instructors not capable of teaching proper techniques.

I believe it was George Benard Shaw who said "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches," in "Maxims for Revolutionists, Man and Superman," 1903. A more recent addition to this phase is "he who cannot teach, teaches teachers."

While I don't completely agree with this it has been my experience that there are those who are cut out to teach and others who clearly are not. I had the good fortune to always find myself in the hands of those with tens of thousands of hours both flying and teaching. My private and commercial were at the hands of a WW2 P51 pilot who instructed in the T6 for the Army Air Corps and later the USAF as a contact instructor and another who had flown the Ford TriMotor for an airline. My commercial glider add on was from a guy with thousands of glider flights, grey hair, an amazing level of skill and the proper personality and temperment to be an instructor. I have since added a private/rotorcraft certificate with a far younger instructor, relatively low time and about 1/3rd my age, such is the status quo at whirlybird schools. I was able to see the stark difference in communications and teaching technique.

My concern is not with the amount of time an instructor has but with his or her "ability to teach," to impart information and to know when the student has adequately achieved that level of skill. One can have amazing skills in the glider, skills that many top level Senior and National Champion racing competitors might not have and still not be able to judge when a student is ready to solo, allowing ones ego to get in the way of safety. I believe I have experienced this first hand as a tow pilot. I would strongly advise that any commercial or club operation closely supervise new CFIGs and before they solo a student to have the chief instructor ride with that student. The helicopter flight school with which I am now involved does this and it makes sense. While a new instructor may be up to date on rules and regulations and fresh from a check ride, there is NO substitute for experience..

Walt Connelly

Ditto what Walt says. I fly pipeline work in my winter off season from crop spraying and am responsible for training new pipeline fliers. The vast majority of our pilots are young CFI’s who are looking for additional hours on their way to the airlines. I can tell you first hand that the level of stick and rudder skills in the vast majority of these guys is attrocious!

Yes they can make a 360 holding alt to +-100 and airspeed +- 10 but just barely, with the nose pitching up n down and the ball all over the place and they are slavishly dependant on their instruments. Yes they “pass� the commercial standard but they have no feel or understanding, or more serious, no desire to understand the nuances of proper airmanship. I quite literally have to reteach these guys how to make a steep coordinated turn. There are exceptions, I do run into a few guys who love flying and want to learn all they can of the foundations of airmanship. These guys are a joy to teach. But they are the exception.

What we have is something of a dumbing down of basic flying skills. And this is being passed down the line. While guys are great at working the electronics and at flight communications, they are not taught or encouraged to perfect the flying of the airplane. I’m afraid this same trend is working its way into soaring.

Paul, I think our issue is not the shortage of CFI-G’s, but their reluctance to use their rating. Our club has three who are licensed but don’t teach. I think you will see the same trend nationally. Just in the last issue of Soaring there are at least five new cfi’s in the picture section, but I wonder how many of them are actually going to become active in teaching.

As for guys meeting the FAA standards to get a rating, I think my post above and walts experience says/demonstrates what we think about that.

Le mardi 10 décembre 2019 15:31:15 UTC+1, a écritÂ*:
I believe it was George Benard Shaw who said "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches," in "Maxims for Revolutionists, Man and Superman," 1903. A more recent addition to this phase is "he who cannot teach, teaches teachers."

While I don't completely agree with this it has been my experience that there are those who are cut out to teach and others who clearly are not. I had the good fortune to always find myself in the hands of those with tens of thousands of hours both flying and teaching. My private and commercial were at the hands of a WW2 P51 pilot who instructed in the T6 for the Army Air Corps and later the USAF as a contact instructor and another who had flown the Ford TriMotor for an airline. My commercial glider add on was from a guy with thousands of glider flights, grey hair, an amazing level of skill and the proper personality and temperment to be an instructor. I have since added a private/rotorcraft certificate with a far younger instructor, relatively low time and about 1/3rd my age, such is the status quo at whirlybird schools. I was able to see the stark difference in communications and teaching technique.

My concern is not with the amount of time an instructor has but with his or her "ability to teach," to impart information and to know when the student has adequately achieved that level of skill. One can have amazing skills in the glider, skills that many top level Senior and National Champion racing competitors might not have and still not be able to judge when a student is ready to solo, allowing ones ego to get in the way of safety. I believe I have experienced this first hand as a tow pilot. I would strongly advise that any commercial or club operation closely supervise new CFIGs and before they solo a student to have the chief instructor ride with that student. The helicopter flight school with which I am now involved does this and it makes sense. While a new instructor may be up to date on rules and regulations and fresh from a check ride, there is NO substitute for experience.

Walt Connelly

In Germany or Switzerland, any new CFI gets a preliminary rating and is required to do his teaching for the first 150 flights or so under the supervision of an experienced CFI. Only then his rating is turned into the "permanent" 3-years rating.
Training towards the rating is a 14 days fulltime course with an entry test, and a final test. Candidates must carry the endorsement of the head of the flight school they want to teach for (typically the club's chief instructor).

On Tuesday, December 10, 2019 at 9:31:15 AM UTC-5, wrote:
I believe it was George Benard Shaw who said "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches," in "Maxims for Revolutionists, Man and Superman," 1903. A more recent addition to this phase is "he who cannot teach, teaches teachers."

While I don't completely agree with this it has been my experience that there are those who are cut out to teach and others who clearly are not. I had the good fortune to always find myself in the hands of those with tens of thousands of hours both flying and teaching. My private and commercial were at the hands of a WW2 P51 pilot who instructed in the T6 for the Army Air Corps and later the USAF as a contact instructor and another who had flown the Ford TriMotor for an airline. My commercial glider add on was from a guy with thousands of glider flights, grey hair, an amazing level of skill and the proper personality and temperment to be an instructor. I have since added a private/rotorcraft certificate with a far younger instructor, relatively low time and about 1/3rd my age, such is the status quo at whirlybird schools. I was able to see the stark difference in communications and teaching technique.

My concern is not with the amount of time an instructor has but with his or her "ability to teach," to impart information and to know when the student has adequately achieved that level of skill. One can have amazing skills in the glider, skills that many top level Senior and National Champion racing competitors might not have and still not be able to judge when a student is ready to solo, allowing ones ego to get in the way of safety. I believe I have experienced this first hand as a tow pilot. I would strongly advise that any commercial or club operation closely supervise new CFIGs and before they solo a student to have the chief instructor ride with that student. The helicopter flight school with which I am now involved does this and it makes sense. While a new instructor may be up to date on rules and regulations and fresh from a check ride, there is NO substitute for experience.

Walt Connelly

Well put Walt, you hit the nail on the head. I like you have been around this game for quiet a few years, have seen many accidents and have watched several new instructors tell students the opposite of what they should know. There is no substitute for experience, I remember the instructor that endorsed me for my checkride back in the 70's. A very good instructor and qualified to say the least, his obit noted that he had 60 thousand hours of flight time. When Bill Harris wasn't flying for Delta he was at the glider club in Miami teaching. When Mary Gaffaney was called to do the checkride there was never a question about the students ability. The common factor there was experience, plain and simple and never any doubt when Mary was called to examine.
Our club has very good experienced instructors, and my towplanes are safe as you have observed. Our club double checks with two instructors prior to taking a student to the checkride phase. Just last weekend one of our instructors asked me to get another instructor to confirm the students ability prior to the checkride. That instructor happened to be CFI in rotor and aircraft along with CFIG and when he is not flying a G5, or his helicopter, or Staggerwing he is teaching in gliders for volunteer work at the club. The big attribute is experience and there is no substitute for it.

On Sunday, December 8, 2019 at 6:22:28 PM UTC-6, Bob Youngblood wrote:
The FAA has made it possible for glider plots with very limited time to acquire a CFIG rating with only 15 hours of total glider time. This is truly an accident waiting to happen, what could a glider pilot actually know with such limited time? What do you think?

"There's no substitute for experience." Well, there's more to it than that isn't there? While it is popular to cringe at the idea of a pilot with less time in the seat to move through ratings and endorsements quickly it's the old salts I've seen make the worst mistakes. As a former "wunderkind" I watched the Experts do all of the following:
1.) Spin a glider onto it's wing tip from 10 feet with a passenger after an extraordinarily poor traffic pattern with multiple better scenarios available.
2.) Stall a 2-33 on short final while trying to show another CFIG how short they could land into a headwind so they wouldn't have to walk so far after landing.
3.) Pull up to clear power lines after letting a student get too low and fly too wide of a pattern. (with better out landing options)
4.) Strike props.
5.) Wrap tow ropes around wings demonstrating slack rope recovery.
6.) Santa Clause flight reviews for buddies who shouldn't be flying.
7.) No endorsement solos.
8.) Check ride sign offs without proper endorsements.
9.) A general attitude of having seen everything and knowing everything. But you'll never see one of them at a seminar or with a book in their hand. And you sure as hell won't see them outside of the traffic pattern let alone on a cross country flight.

Geez I could come up with examples all day... It takes effort to be a good CFI, while the low time instructor may not have the time in the seat they can usually make up for it with good margins and dedication. They won't be perfect but they'll do better than the guy who's in it for a free tow.
I'll agree that there is a lack of quality in the instruction available. However, if you look a bit past the hourly requirement you'll see there isn't much to earning any of the glider certificates in the U.S. The PTS/ACS at every certificate level is designed to evaluate a person's ability to fly a 2-33 in the local area and traffic pattern. Examiners seem to gloss over the sections about soaring. I understand in Europe CFIG applicants have much higher standards then the US. Maybe if we improved our product our population wouldn't be in decline?

Bob,

My point is that time is not the Be All and End All, other skills which one brings to the table are important. Intelligence, desire, previous teaching experience and an in check ego can make the 15 hour pilot the perfect candidate. The disparity in flying ability from one person to another is ginormous, as a tow pilot you know this well as do I. Pull a guy who has flown in the military for 20 years and/or the airlines and then pull a low time private pilot. Yes there are some outstanding PPLs but in general the difference is palpable.

Someone like Paul with an ATP, 5 Type Ratings, Comm-ASEL, Comm-Rotorcraft, CFI-A and CFI-R, 2000 hours instructing and 21,000 hours of flying brings much to the table. You can't buy that, it comes with time and experience. Those of us without that level of experience would do well to pay attention when they speak. That is NOT to say that someone with 15 hours PIC in a glider and wet ink on a CFIG cant be a good instructor and someone has to be their first student. However as Tango Whiskey noted in Germany and Switzerland a new CFIG is supervised for a period of time by an experienced instructor, a requirement that might need to be adopted here in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I was recruited to teach Nuclear Medicine to student technologists at a Community College. I met all but one of the minimum requirements and could have picked that up easily but I'm not the type. I've seen lots of teachers and instructors who were not the type. Like Dirty Harry said, "A man's got to know his limitations."

Walt Connelly
Former tow pilot
Now happy helicopter pilot.