Actually Shiny, I dont "hate" instructors. I don't "hate" anyone. It's a discussion on safety and training standards.
There are many great instructors.
There are also lazy instructors, and a lot (more, likely) lazy students and PPL's. They get my wrath, too. It's unbelievable some of the stupid decisions licenced pilots make. You read about them in aftermath.
Personally I despise laziness, sloppiness if you had to characterize what I "hate".
I used to buckle the seatbelts when I left my rental plane. Every time. It's just what you do. Order. Few care though.
On the exact topic I can't see how introducing more realism would do anything other than improve training.
Maybe I'm different, but if I was your student, even for non required training flights, I would always be willing to go up -- and pay for -- extra flights in challenging conditions. Just to be better, and safer. And I'm still willing (although I haven't lately) But not every instructor wants to teach in nasty conditions. Yeah I get it no payback to risking the AC.
I get icing is a problem but there are doable days. I did some actual during my rating and I think it's a good idea. Is different than a hood.
Canadian FTU issues.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
Two stage amber is the best way to teach instrument flying....period...beyond doubt.
-
Colonel
- Posts: 3450
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 10:31 am
[quote]what happens at a FTU is as far away from this crash as anything[/quote]
Not really. One of the pilots - they may very well have been
flying on his instrument rating, which is very common with
very expensive privately-owned aircraft, who's owner/operators
often don't have instrument ratings - was a low-time flight
instructor who had his class 4 for less than a year, or so the
news reports claim.
Like Rookie, the owner/operator of the moo-too perhaps drank
the FTU koolaid about the abilities of the guy next to him,
who quite possibly was seeing the inside of a cloud for the
very first time. And the very last time.
There was a dentist near me that used to own a Learjet and
operated it off a grass strip - I am not making this up - who
used to always advertise in COPA for low-time pilots with
instrument ratings to fly with him, so he could go over 18,000
feet.
Not really. One of the pilots - they may very well have been
flying on his instrument rating, which is very common with
very expensive privately-owned aircraft, who's owner/operators
often don't have instrument ratings - was a low-time flight
instructor who had his class 4 for less than a year, or so the
news reports claim.
Like Rookie, the owner/operator of the moo-too perhaps drank
the FTU koolaid about the abilities of the guy next to him,
who quite possibly was seeing the inside of a cloud for the
very first time. And the very last time.
There was a dentist near me that used to own a Learjet and
operated it off a grass strip - I am not making this up - who
used to always advertise in COPA for low-time pilots with
instrument ratings to fly with him, so he could go over 18,000
feet.
-
Colonel
- Posts: 3450
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 10:31 am
[quote]Show us an accident that has occurred that would be directly related to an instrument rated pilot's lack of cloud time[/quote]
Cardinal crashed at CYOW. Wx too low for the NPA
at CYRP, tried to do the ILS07 at night, lost control,
2 dead. Icing not a factor, he lost control before GS
intercept - NOT below 500 AGL.
[url=http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=140426]http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=140426[/url]
Turned out he had a Santa Claus FTU examiner.
SSU has a point, though. Like a PPL (or a multi, or
a seaplane rating) an instrument rating is a LICENCE
TO LEARN.
Despite the posing and false advertisement of FTU's,
they really don't teach you very much about instrument
flying when you get your initial class 3/1. You do a hold
and two approaches, generally on auto-pilot. It's a test
of your auto-pilot programming skills. Not using the
auto-pilot is a "major error".
What the FTU teaches you, for an instrument rating.
in addition to auto-pilot programming, is all sorts of
regulatory nonsense near and dear to the idiots at
TC (are you inside or outside the FAF when you
received the RVR? Is the RVR fluctuating?).
It is disappointing how badly FTU's teach IFR, but
take a look at how their students perform crosswind
landings. Hell, they can't even fly NORMAL landings.
You expect these people to be the IFR experts?!
I think what Rookie might be pissed off about, is
the mis-representation - the bait-and-switch - that
he experienced, when he went to an FTU, and
expected to learn about instrument flying.
He didn't learn about instrument flying. Instead
he got an instrument rating.
Remember, FTU's live in fear of TC. Like TC, they
push paper. If they actually teach you anything
about actually operating an aircraft, it was either
by accident or a nice bonus.
Don't have high expectations of FTU's. Don't
have any expectations at all.
[img]http://www.troll.me/images2/grammar-cor ... -thumb.jpg[/img]
Cardinal crashed at CYOW. Wx too low for the NPA
at CYRP, tried to do the ILS07 at night, lost control,
2 dead. Icing not a factor, he lost control before GS
intercept - NOT below 500 AGL.
[url=http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=140426]http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=140426[/url]
Turned out he had a Santa Claus FTU examiner.
SSU has a point, though. Like a PPL (or a multi, or
a seaplane rating) an instrument rating is a LICENCE
TO LEARN.
Despite the posing and false advertisement of FTU's,
they really don't teach you very much about instrument
flying when you get your initial class 3/1. You do a hold
and two approaches, generally on auto-pilot. It's a test
of your auto-pilot programming skills. Not using the
auto-pilot is a "major error".
What the FTU teaches you, for an instrument rating.
in addition to auto-pilot programming, is all sorts of
regulatory nonsense near and dear to the idiots at
TC (are you inside or outside the FAF when you
received the RVR? Is the RVR fluctuating?).
It is disappointing how badly FTU's teach IFR, but
take a look at how their students perform crosswind
landings. Hell, they can't even fly NORMAL landings.
You expect these people to be the IFR experts?!
I think what Rookie might be pissed off about, is
the mis-representation - the bait-and-switch - that
he experienced, when he went to an FTU, and
expected to learn about instrument flying.
He didn't learn about instrument flying. Instead
he got an instrument rating.
Remember, FTU's live in fear of TC. Like TC, they
push paper. If they actually teach you anything
about actually operating an aircraft, it was either
by accident or a nice bonus.
Don't have high expectations of FTU's. Don't
have any expectations at all.
[img]http://www.troll.me/images2/grammar-cor ... -thumb.jpg[/img]
-
Rookie Pilot
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:44 am
I actually had pretty good training all in all because I chose carefully. Both my instructors were also charter guys on a HO so they had line experience. But that obviously is hard to find.
I've had great mentors too that I sought out. My rant isn't personal, it's related to the Cardinal accident, ect.
Nevertheless I learned more about real world trips for GA from flying with an IR rated PPL, very cautious and thorough, though all flight instructors seem to say this is exceedingly dangerous.
You know, Flight instructors, it ever occur to you some PPL's might actually know what they are doing, and could contribute? Even me, I have like no time, and I would bet for Eg I have more actual IMC than 95% of instructors.
I've had great mentors too that I sought out. My rant isn't personal, it's related to the Cardinal accident, ect.
Nevertheless I learned more about real world trips for GA from flying with an IR rated PPL, very cautious and thorough, though all flight instructors seem to say this is exceedingly dangerous.
You know, Flight instructors, it ever occur to you some PPL's might actually know what they are doing, and could contribute? Even me, I have like no time, and I would bet for Eg I have more actual IMC than 95% of instructors.
-
Colonel
- Posts: 3450
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 10:31 am
[quote]Flight instructors, it ever occur to you some PPL's might actually know what they are doing[/quote]
This seems kind of obvious to me.
A PPL that owns his own IFR-equipped aircraft,
with 1000TT and 50 real hours of cloud time,
will know a heck of a lot more about instrument
flying than an FTU instructor that won't fly inside
of cloud (probably because he never has before).
The PPL will have likely seen a little ice, and
driven around a few Cb's, both critical subjects
that the FTU instructor will know nothing about.
The FTU instructor will likely be sharper about
the regulations - all the CAP GEN crap - but,
well, you know what I think about that nonsense.
Paper doesn't keep you safe.
This seems kind of obvious to me.
A PPL that owns his own IFR-equipped aircraft,
with 1000TT and 50 real hours of cloud time,
will know a heck of a lot more about instrument
flying than an FTU instructor that won't fly inside
of cloud (probably because he never has before).
The PPL will have likely seen a little ice, and
driven around a few Cb's, both critical subjects
that the FTU instructor will know nothing about.
The FTU instructor will likely be sharper about
the regulations - all the CAP GEN crap - but,
well, you know what I think about that nonsense.
Paper doesn't keep you safe.
-
Rookie Pilot
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:44 am
[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=2586.msg7692#msg7692 date=1459513893]
[quote]Flight instructors, it ever occur to you some PPL's might actually know what they are doing[/quote]
This seems kind of obvious to me.
A PPL that owns his own IFR-equipped aircraft,
with 1000TT and 50 real hours of cloud time,
will know a heck of a lot more about instrument
flying than an FTU instructor that won't fly inside
of cloud (probably because he never has before).
The PPL will have likely seen a little ice, and
driven around a few Cb's, both critical subjects
that the FTU instructor will know nothing about.
The FTU instructor will likely be sharper about
the regulations - all the CAP GEN crap - but,
well, you know what I think about that nonsense.
Paper doesn't keep you safe.
[/quote]
Um...check check, check check.
Curious how you saw my logbook. Almost exact, actually. Maybe around 70 IMC.
Something I learned this past year. CB's can grow REALLY fast sometimes. (Behind me). Deserve respect.
[quote]Flight instructors, it ever occur to you some PPL's might actually know what they are doing[/quote]
This seems kind of obvious to me.
A PPL that owns his own IFR-equipped aircraft,
with 1000TT and 50 real hours of cloud time,
will know a heck of a lot more about instrument
flying than an FTU instructor that won't fly inside
of cloud (probably because he never has before).
The PPL will have likely seen a little ice, and
driven around a few Cb's, both critical subjects
that the FTU instructor will know nothing about.
The FTU instructor will likely be sharper about
the regulations - all the CAP GEN crap - but,
well, you know what I think about that nonsense.
Paper doesn't keep you safe.
[/quote]
Um...check check, check check.
Curious how you saw my logbook. Almost exact, actually. Maybe around 70 IMC.
Something I learned this past year. CB's can grow REALLY fast sometimes. (Behind me). Deserve respect.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 1 Replies
- 605 Views
-
Last post by Squaretail
-
- 1 Replies
- 635 Views
-
Last post by Colonel
-
- 0 Replies
- 3864 Views
-
Last post by Scudrunner
