average to first solo

[rons22]

Could someone please let me know what would be the average number of hours to first solo flight? Thank you! Rona

[Blackshift]

Divide your age by two and add a few hours for good measure.

This is a very rough and ready estimate though - it depends on your individual aptitude (which can widely vary at different stages in training), the amount of continuity you acheive (often depending on weather and other factors beyond your control), whether or you're training at a busy international airport with three frequencies and frequent holds before getting airborne or a quiet GA field in the sticks etc, etc ...

Some people take a bit longer to solo and then rattle through the rest of the course and get their PPL at first attempt in minimum hours, others go solo in a prodigously short time and yet require 60 hours or more to qualify.

The important thing is not to get too fixated about this.

[Speed Twelve]

Blackshift's correct, don't worry about it. The only people who put any emphasis on hours to solo are the military. They use it as a guide to student capacity, rate of learning and 'natural ability'. The crucial thing is that this is assessed in a controlled environment, full time course with very tightly standardised instructors. MoD Flying Scholarship cadets were required to go solo within 13 hours maximum or they were chopped. Remember these were mostly teenagers who had been through aptitude selection and were subject to the above course environment.

If you are on a ppl course then relax and let it happen. Same for commercial, as long as you are not getting into the 20-25 hours plus and not been solo regime, in which case the flying school may well be wasting your money...

The ability to fly a stable approach, flare and landing is the most common stumbling block prior to first solo. I've trained many students who sailed through their training until they reached the circuit and then took hours to hack the approach and landing. If you are stuck at this point and find yourself frustrated, sometimes flying with a different instructor helps. Your existing instructor may be perfectly able, it's just that a different viewpoint or teaching technique can make all the difference.

Instructors aren't looking for perfect landings when making the first solo judgement call. We're looking more for a stable approach and a decently, consistently judged flare, but most importantly that the student can realise when it's going pear-shaped and make a positive decision to bin the landing and execute a safe go-around. This is the key, and a lot of students become fixated on carrying out some sort of landing regardless, even if they should have thrown it away and gone around already.

ST

[Irv]

It would be interesting to know a school's average to first solo, but with the weather since last July, I suppose figures at the moment might be unrepresentative - large gaps between lessons extend hours.

[homeguard]

The idea of having statistics for the average hours pre-solo is a horrendous idea. Already we have a competition between some IR schools that boast of their first time pass rates. Some of these schools no doubt extend the training well beyond what may be reasonal, perhaps much more to protect their statistics rather than reflect the students needs.

Are you being taught thoroughly and safely? The hours are irrelevant. To compete on the basis of hours to first solo could lead to an irresponsible and dangerous regime.

The Tortious and the Hare syndrome also comes to mind.

[Irv]

The idea of having statistics for the average hours pre-solo is a horrendous idea.
Don't agree - I'd like to see schools publishing hours to first solo and hours to PPL licence as open information and if they wanted to split that by age group, fair enough, but I'd still like to see the figures...!

[homeguard]

If you like revelling in statistical nonsense OK.

I'm always appalled when I hear of an individual being told by an instructor "you will never make pilot", what arrogant nonsense.

One of the most enjoyable parts of being an instructor is to nurture an individual who is finding it hard to achieve their ambition. With patience and hard work it is always possible. The hours that they take will mean nothing when they succeed.

The RAF (CFS) are currently reviewing their whole approach to their initial training with just such a problem in mind. Sq. Ldr. Malcom Hunt outlined this problem a year or so back at the GAPAN Instructor Seminar held at CFS. They too had come to the conclusion that the chopping policy they had used to date had indeed lost them a significant number of very good pilots. Many that had excelled at the early stage had not always developed later and failed at much later stages of training. I've also seen this happen with PPL's over and over.

The overiding factor must be the quality of training. Currently we in the UK have no method in place to assess that. Training hours in most cases are relevant to the individual ability of the student. One problem that could occur if hours were to be published is that many some schools may start training only to pass the Skill Test and bypass the full syllabus where it is not actually examined.

[Irv]

Homeguard:
I'm usually the one pointing out that statistics used unintelligently are a bad thing, but I think whether they are "nonesense" or not depends on the user understanding what they actually measure and why. The people that can use statistics intelligently should be allowed to by having them! I don't expect it to happen generally, I just wish it would.

I admit if you dumb down the statistics enough and everyone only takes them at face value without intelligent thought, they can be useless. However if you don't have any statistics at all, you take out the chance of them being used intelligently.

My initial interest in having information available was due to rumours of a school having a secret 'delay first solo' policy - however good the student - invariably extending the PPL beyond 45 hours, which benefits whom? The school.

When you think about it, someone, especially close to London, is going to spend the sort of sum on a licence which could buy a new car. When they are buying a car, they can easily get independent 'test' reports and see information, including manufacturers supplied figures. They know that they probably won't get the manufacturers mileage figures, but they can use them as a guide and for discussion and comparison.

When they want to spend the same order of magnitude of cash on a pilots licence, what do they have for comparison information? I can't think of much - maybe they could be lucky to find a previous pupil for a reference, but the closest they get to pre-course measurement information may be the promise of a guaranteed PPL in Florida to be compared to.. what? And although I don't know, I'd bet you and I would have the same opinion about 'guaranteed ppls'.

I don't see why it's wrong to have information available to form the basis for investigation, discussions and choice. Learning to fly is a bit like losing virginity - too late if you decide you made the wrong choice. I'd better not pursue that analogy too far though.

The point of (civilian) instructors enjoying and nuturing the occasional individual pupil to a goal with more or less any means that works - well it sounds like we agree entirely - I've been saying that for years but I don't see it as a reason to keep information under wraps.

Sounds like CFS are doing a worthwhile review - presumably it's not just the wastage that has caused it - I would guess their supply volume is not as large as it used to be either (rise in asthma, etc)

[homeguard]

Well, of cause the CAA do have statistics with regard to the average hours that the PPL takes in training. They are well known. The figure is around 60 hours. This figure interestingly is replicated throughout the world and has hardly changed over the years. The figure was actually used in defence of the 45 hour JAA PPL.

But, first solo statistics. Surely not. In fact more to the point going solo at an early stage of training isn't even a requirement of the course but more of an habitual tradition. Many students are quite capable of going solo at say 12 hours but will not, they simply are not ready in themselves. I have over the years taught a number of PPL's who cannot achieve an unrestricted medical (having sight in one eye for instance) and therefore we have continued through the syllabus with approved accompanied solo taking place toward the end of the course. Others delayed by a technical hiccup with medicals but confident in getting the medical eventually - we have done the same, with the student going solo very late on.

Going solo early is a measure of nothing other than ignorance over knowledge when undertaken as early as it is. How many prospective pilots expect to go solo at all yet alone so early in their training - not many. It is something imposed from the past. It is not important. It is however a very good exercise in self reliance and decision making to be achieved before being tested and qualifying. Can be just as well achieved at the end which is really where it should be done, undertaken with the much greater knowledge from the additional training.

[john_tullamarine]

While I concur with the views above that time to first solo is a rather useless statistic, it is interesting to look at it from the student's comfort viewpoint. (I choose to ignore the integrity aspects of commercial greed here).

Co-incidentally, I went solo very early. The specific number of hours is not important and, I guess, the now long dead instructor was quite comfortable with me as I was his first solo after a 20 year airline break from his previous instructing jobs. It is illustrative to note that, of our course of about 10 RAAF ATC flying scholarship folk, all but one went solo in well under 10 hours .. perhaps this particular instructor put some emphasis on rapid progress. Certainly he kept the pressure on .. I have never since been under such intense pressure to learn as in that particular course ... in my view, the fellow was a superb passer-on of things to students .. I guess the occasional belt over the back of the head with a rolled-up newspaper helped maintain focus as well ...

However, the interesting question is along the lines of "did I have much of a clue about what I was doing when I got launched off by myself ?"

The facile answer is "yes", otherwise Cec wouldn't have sent me off.

The considered answer after many more years in the Industry is that I didn't have a clue what was going on. I could push and pull the stick and find the runway, sure, but I thank my lucky stars nothing choose to go wrong.

Sober reflection suggests to me that I would have sent me off a couple of hours further along the learning curve ?

['I' in the sky]

Irv,

the people who would in reality be influenced most by statistics of hours to first solo are exactly those who wouldn't be able to interpret them sensibly, ie inexperienced and even prospective students.

eg. Student at school A is worried because he's done 14 hours and not gone solo whereas his mate at school B 'says' he's gone solo in 8.

School B says 'School A is wasting your time, all our students go solo in under 10 hours' Student is suitably impressed whilst having no knowledge of variables such as:

If student at school A has an engine failure or other emergency anywhere in the circuit he stands a good chance of dealing with it. Student at school B has probably had one EFATO demonstrated to him.

School A is maybe a bit more consciencious because he owns some of his own aeroplanes whereas School B leases all his and if one gets slightly bent it's somebody else's problem.

Also how do you oblige a school to reveal the hours that their student who just went solo in 7 hours, actually did at another school before he joined them, and maybe hasn't even told them about ?

'To delay first solo policy ..... extend PPL beyond 45 hours' - most take longer than 45 hours as this is the absolute minimum deemed necessary to complete the syllabus, not a maximum in which to 'prepare somebody for test'. I remember in my first instructing job a student stirring up amongst other concerned students by persistently shouting 'Oh I easily finished in 45 hours, it shouldn't be a problem' He never though told anybody that before starting that PPL course he already had 15 hours from the UAS. Oh and guess what, when I came across him again years later both instructing at the same school, it was interesting to note how many of his students didn't pass their various progress tests first time.

IMHO, Homeguard is quite correct, such statistics just become a meaningless bickering tool between schools. If a school had an average of 25 hours to first solo do you think they would actually publish it rather than find a way of massaging it ?

'Nuff said, rant over.

Rona, are you for some reason worried about your own progress or just wondering ? Again, IMHO, depending on a reasonable training environment and continuity of training ( I don't think age is that important unless we're talking extremes ), 'average' hours to first solo should be about 12 to 15.

[criticalmass]

It's not how many hours that matters for a first solo, the basic questions are:-

"Am I satisfied the student has attained the level of airmanship and skill necessary for a first solo?"

" Are the conditions suitable?"

"Has the student completed all the necessary theory work and examinations for a first solo?"

"Does my student pilot know within themselves they are ready for solo?"

How many hours they have done is only of interest as a gauge of their overall progress, and that may vary according to how frequently they have been able to train, how bad the weather has been over their total training period, serviceabliilty of training aircraft etc.

Students don't delete their hours under instruction after they start logging hours solo. Every hour in the air is an hour's experience. This applies equally for those on the long, hard road to heavy jet command as it does to the weekend recreational pilot flying an ultralight.