Quality of newbies
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quality of newbies
As a proud hirer of newbies, I am very concerned of a trend that seems to have been happening in GA over the past 10 years. The quality of newbies abilities in my opinion, generally with basic stick and rudder skills and flight planning has been in slow decline.
Why? Is it due to sausage factories turning out pilots to get the fees, without a sense of responsibility, or inexperienced instructors with no commercial time teaching without any real world experience just to get hours up?
We shake our head at the confidence of some of these ex instructors, yet the real lack of skills these guys and girls actually have, when they come to us with their 500 hours of 1 hour experiences, bad habits and attitude so intrenched, that we now don't take on any ex instructors that haven't got commercial GA time it's just not worth it.
It's very frustrating for us, as we have had to increase our ICUS time, as lately in no way, are so many new pilots ready for command in outback or isolated work within 10 hours. I can see why some operators are looking at going to 50 hours ICUS plus when employing newbies.
I have always thought, we as operators in GA have a responsibility to the industry to keep a stream of new pilots coming in at ground level. We take on the baton to fine tune pilots and give them a set of skills that will put them in good stead for the next step up the ladder. In the mean time, that sort of pilot will eventually make us and their future employers money, that's why we do it if we are all honest. It's not up to us to complete basic training in short field or crosswind landings.
It's not just us, a lot of operators I have talked with are experiencing the same.
Some even feel, that even though they have raised the minimum hours for a start, that they still, are not getting good pilots. Some even suggest that fudging of logbooks are happening to get hours up, to get jobs. Pilots presenting with some of the hours in the logs don't equate to cockpit skills. However without going and ringing every aircraft owner or previous employer it's impossible to prove.
What to do is open for discussion, but my thoughts are, make it mandatory that to start instructing you must have at least 500 hours of GA commercial experience. Remove GPS's from training aircraft and get back to marks on a map or reinforce the importance of dead reckoning.
The reason I say this is, it develops situational awareness, gets their heads out the cockpit. It's a habit best developed in training. I am not against EFB or GPS but you would be amazed at the problems we have now, due to compete reliance newbies have on electronic cockpits. Same goes for flight planning. For Christ sakes they are flying 206's and 210's VFR at 2 to 6000 feet not A380's at 40,0000 ft. It's not that hard. It will make better pilots that think ahead of the aircraft.
This all maybe just sign of the times, and I maybe a dinosaur or an old grumpy, but this is at the route of all future GA operations.
Good operators make good pilots make good operators.
MS
Why? Is it due to sausage factories turning out pilots to get the fees, without a sense of responsibility, or inexperienced instructors with no commercial time teaching without any real world experience just to get hours up?
We shake our head at the confidence of some of these ex instructors, yet the real lack of skills these guys and girls actually have, when they come to us with their 500 hours of 1 hour experiences, bad habits and attitude so intrenched, that we now don't take on any ex instructors that haven't got commercial GA time it's just not worth it.
It's very frustrating for us, as we have had to increase our ICUS time, as lately in no way, are so many new pilots ready for command in outback or isolated work within 10 hours. I can see why some operators are looking at going to 50 hours ICUS plus when employing newbies.
I have always thought, we as operators in GA have a responsibility to the industry to keep a stream of new pilots coming in at ground level. We take on the baton to fine tune pilots and give them a set of skills that will put them in good stead for the next step up the ladder. In the mean time, that sort of pilot will eventually make us and their future employers money, that's why we do it if we are all honest. It's not up to us to complete basic training in short field or crosswind landings.
It's not just us, a lot of operators I have talked with are experiencing the same.
Some even feel, that even though they have raised the minimum hours for a start, that they still, are not getting good pilots. Some even suggest that fudging of logbooks are happening to get hours up, to get jobs. Pilots presenting with some of the hours in the logs don't equate to cockpit skills. However without going and ringing every aircraft owner or previous employer it's impossible to prove.
What to do is open for discussion, but my thoughts are, make it mandatory that to start instructing you must have at least 500 hours of GA commercial experience. Remove GPS's from training aircraft and get back to marks on a map or reinforce the importance of dead reckoning.
The reason I say this is, it develops situational awareness, gets their heads out the cockpit. It's a habit best developed in training. I am not against EFB or GPS but you would be amazed at the problems we have now, due to compete reliance newbies have on electronic cockpits. Same goes for flight planning. For Christ sakes they are flying 206's and 210's VFR at 2 to 6000 feet not A380's at 40,0000 ft. It's not that hard. It will make better pilots that think ahead of the aircraft.
This all maybe just sign of the times, and I maybe a dinosaur or an old grumpy, but this is at the route of all future GA operations.
Good operators make good pilots make good operators.
MS
I was privileged to meet a CPL who could not name the instruments required as a minimum for a VFR SE charter flight.
He was due to sit his instructors final exam just 3 days later....
He was due to sit his instructors final exam just 3 days later....
Couldn't agree more.
Personally, my advice to those considering instructing is if you aren't going to dedicate a lot of time and effort into producing the best pilot you can, don't even start. If it wasn't for the demand for fixed wing trainers, I would love to see the rotary equivalent with no Grade 3's and 400hrs command minimum, however this isn't realistic. Everyone needs to start somewhere, but schools need to be monitoring their products better.
Until then, we will continue to see pilots who think every aircraft has to run up into the wind (at least until the first engineer makes them sweep out the hangar they just dusted), strobes and transponders on from startup, radio calls that sound cool, circuits five miles wide, crap crosswind circuits and if they're able to fly without a GNSS, eyes glued to the map watching those ten mile markers go by just to name a few.
I am seeing more and more students who just want to look like pilots. Even heard of one who took their student epaulettes off and put on four bars at the servo before getting out of the car to fill up.
Personally, my advice to those considering instructing is if you aren't going to dedicate a lot of time and effort into producing the best pilot you can, don't even start. If it wasn't for the demand for fixed wing trainers, I would love to see the rotary equivalent with no Grade 3's and 400hrs command minimum, however this isn't realistic. Everyone needs to start somewhere, but schools need to be monitoring their products better.
Until then, we will continue to see pilots who think every aircraft has to run up into the wind (at least until the first engineer makes them sweep out the hangar they just dusted), strobes and transponders on from startup, radio calls that sound cool, circuits five miles wide, crap crosswind circuits and if they're able to fly without a GNSS, eyes glued to the map watching those ten mile markers go by just to name a few.
I am seeing more and more students who just want to look like pilots. Even heard of one who took their student epaulettes off and put on four bars at the servo before getting out of the car to fill up.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too am involved in training young aviation professionals. This probably wont go down very well, but in my honest opinion half the issue is best described as "Gen Y"..
It's true. I see it every day. Most under 30's in 2014 aren't interested in doing 'hard yards'. It's all about 'just give me the answer, I have no interest in exploring HOW you go about deriving it'. I don't think it's necessarily 'laziness', I just honestly think in most cases they just don't know how to push themselves. They've never had to.
If something requires hard work, its too much like hard work.
I know this is a generalisation, and that there are always exceptions to every rule. But my experience says it IS the majority.
It's true. I see it every day. Most under 30's in 2014 aren't interested in doing 'hard yards'. It's all about 'just give me the answer, I have no interest in exploring HOW you go about deriving it'. I don't think it's necessarily 'laziness', I just honestly think in most cases they just don't know how to push themselves. They've never had to.
If something requires hard work, its too much like hard work.
I know this is a generalisation, and that there are always exceptions to every rule. But my experience says it IS the majority.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why? Is it due to sausage factories turning out pilots to get the fees, without a sense of responsibility, or inexperienced instructors with no commercial time teaching without any real world experience just to get hours up?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: YMEN
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can you ever expect newbies to be GA job ready, when the only thing the instructor knows is the quickest route to the training area?!
I hate to tarnish all new G3 instructors with the same brush, but unfortunately they are doing the same to all fresh CPLs chasing charter work.
I hate to tarnish all new G3 instructors with the same brush, but unfortunately they are doing the same to all fresh CPLs chasing charter work.
aussieflyboy
It's not all about the ability to do a 1:60 under pressure or the GPS failing. It's about situational awareness. Looking at a map, noticing what's on the map, reading the ground. Reading the wind. Seeing that town, seeing that airstrip, seeing that road, or salt lake, or homestead. Knowing how tall the trees are, how sparse the vegetation is. It might all be subconscious, but when you need it in a hurry one dark stormy day, it will be there. It's getting a feel for the terrain.
You don't get that feel on a GPS direct to.
Its the same for satnav driving around streets. I hate using them in an unfamiliar city as it does nothing for my situational awareness and my "feel" of the town. I will always study a map first.
Turning the GPS off in flight these days is becoming an unrealistic failure. Most GA aircraft I fly have dual GPS's in them and I carry a handheld Garmin and an Ipad with Ozrunways!!
I would much prefer having some more common realistic failures being trained like door opening in flight, pod or locker opening, Alternator failure ect
I would much prefer having some more common realistic failures being trained like door opening in flight, pod or locker opening, Alternator failure ect
It's not all about the ability to do a 1:60 under pressure or the GPS failing. It's about situational awareness. Looking at a map, noticing what's on the map, reading the ground. Reading the wind. Seeing that town, seeing that airstrip, seeing that road, or salt lake, or homestead. Knowing how tall the trees are, how sparse the vegetation is. It might all be subconscious, but when you need it in a hurry one dark stormy day, it will be there. It's getting a feel for the terrain.
You don't get that feel on a GPS direct to.
Its the same for satnav driving around streets. I hate using them in an unfamiliar city as it does nothing for my situational awareness and my "feel" of the town. I will always study a map first.
aussieflyboy
Turning the GPS off in flight these days is becoming an unrealistic failure. Most GA aircraft I fly have dual GPS's in them and I carry a handheld Garmin and an Ipad with Ozrunways!!
Turning the GPS off in flight these days is becoming an unrealistic failure. Most GA aircraft I fly have dual GPS's in them and I carry a handheld Garmin and an Ipad with Ozrunways!!
You seem to be making a strong case for the overreliance on GNSS argument.
Very similar vein to the whacker a while back on here (not you, afb) trying to get a GNSS enroute certification so that he could use it for his CPL test.
I think we need to remember that a freshly minted CPL is a license to learn. Does not being able to quote minimum instrument requirements mean he/she can't do the job properly?
Turning the GPS off in flight these days is becoming an unrealistic failure. Most GA aircraft I fly have dual GPS's in them and I carry a handheld Garmin and an Ipad with Ozrunways!!
Unfortunately most of the new pilots coming from training are a product of the times not just aviation. My daughter, 24, and an accountant is going great guns with her career.
The reason, she listens, does her work, not afraid to ask when she doesn't know and has a strong work ethic.
I see a lot of instructors around Bankstown, most think they are gods gift to aviation.
I agree with other posters, new comers need to be able to be situation aware, and have the ability to navigate and aviate with the barest minimum.
The reason, she listens, does her work, not afraid to ask when she doesn't know and has a strong work ethic.
I see a lot of instructors around Bankstown, most think they are gods gift to aviation.
I agree with other posters, new comers need to be able to be situation aware, and have the ability to navigate and aviate with the barest minimum.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Darwin
Age: 37
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can only speak from personal experience and maybe a few fellow fresh CPL holders who I have spoken to.
I agree I need some 'real' experience of flying A -B rather than flying big circles and dealing with some of the commercial pressures before I would make a good pilot.
I as most have worked hard to get to where I am but the next step is someone taking a chance on me
I agree I need some 'real' experience of flying A -B rather than flying big circles and dealing with some of the commercial pressures before I would make a good pilot.
I as most have worked hard to get to where I am but the next step is someone taking a chance on me
Aussieflyboy
Been there, done that. Actually, the first time did was as an instructor - without a GPS - in a 172. Did around the Tanami many times after before I had my first GPS.
Well he didn't do his homework before flight, or look out the window, or mark it on his map. I've still got my first Arnhem Land WAC with circles all over it - every time I saw a community strip (there was no public list of runways then) I drew them in. These days, why hadn't he got his shiny new WAC and circled all the runways shown OzRunways? Poor preparation if it was a check ride IMHO.
Agreed (although I think if you need to teach a pilot how to do this, he should be back in his PPL training). If there is a tool, use it, but know how to get by without it.
People managed to fly around the top end for 70 years without GPS. It's not rocket science, and not that hard a skill to have, and by practising it, you gain the habits of very good situational awareness and get to read the ground.
But back to the crux of instructing. I loved my time GA instructing, and wouldn't mind doing ab-initio again one day, but its hardly a career path from a $$ point of view. And from the outside of GA these days, flying schools seem to be teaching people to be airline pilots at the expense of any other flying variant.
Standard instructor replies above - now how about you grab your WAC and fly from Halls Creek to Tennant Creek...
I recently flew with a guy who could tell me that we were flying over gemesomegrogmate river and said he'd land there if he had an engine failure but missed the 1500m community strip 5nm away!!
also teach them how to use the GPS to apply there [sic] position to a map.
People managed to fly around the top end for 70 years without GPS. It's not rocket science, and not that hard a skill to have, and by practising it, you gain the habits of very good situational awareness and get to read the ground.
But back to the crux of instructing. I loved my time GA instructing, and wouldn't mind doing ab-initio again one day, but its hardly a career path from a $$ point of view. And from the outside of GA these days, flying schools seem to be teaching people to be airline pilots at the expense of any other flying variant.
Last edited by compressor stall; 13th Jul 2014 at 06:13.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a former instructor, current FO.
The reality is, that instructing and air transport require very different skill sets.
Instructing does not require getting it right first time every time - even on a flight test the examiner is looking as much for the ability to correct errors, than not making them in the first place. It does require knowing how to impart knowledge in context. I have known good instructors who could not make the grade as air transport pilots. I did, but it required the full quotient of line training offered.
On the other hand, air transport does not require an understanding of the building blocks of flight, the "how" of making a machine act the way you want. It requires the hard yards of learning facts relevant to the job, and learning them so well you get it right every time. I know pilots who would not make the grade as GA instructors, but who are very good at operating from A to B every day in all weather.
As to standards dropping - yes. The world is highly focused on user pays and each individual being responsible for their own training at their own cost. This unfortunately means a race to the bottom in cutting training costs and therefore cutting training standards.
You get what you pay for, but you don't see the consequences of cheap training until you've personally seen what expensive training produces!
The reality is, that instructing and air transport require very different skill sets.
Instructing does not require getting it right first time every time - even on a flight test the examiner is looking as much for the ability to correct errors, than not making them in the first place. It does require knowing how to impart knowledge in context. I have known good instructors who could not make the grade as air transport pilots. I did, but it required the full quotient of line training offered.
On the other hand, air transport does not require an understanding of the building blocks of flight, the "how" of making a machine act the way you want. It requires the hard yards of learning facts relevant to the job, and learning them so well you get it right every time. I know pilots who would not make the grade as GA instructors, but who are very good at operating from A to B every day in all weather.
As to standards dropping - yes. The world is highly focused on user pays and each individual being responsible for their own training at their own cost. This unfortunately means a race to the bottom in cutting training costs and therefore cutting training standards.
You get what you pay for, but you don't see the consequences of cheap training until you've personally seen what expensive training produces!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eclan,when was the last time you did a 70 mile diversion picking your way home between thunderheads in the wet whilst doing constant fuel calculations and keeping the forever shifting alternate landing areas in your head and keep VFR. Not PNG, really! Tell me you don't need ICUS training when this can happen. Even seasoned guys get a sweat up.
It would be irresponsible for me as an operator to let anyone go out in this sort of stuff if we didn't think you could handle it and come home safe. Sometimes Mother Nature can throw stuff at you you need to be prepared for. Miles with someone experienced as a backup telling stories of what to look for and places to look out for gets your head out the cockpit. Trust me I have been doing this for over 30 years.
Situational awareness is as compressor stall said is what makes a good pilot. Being ahead of an aircraft takes planning and the ability to think on the go, not sit back fat dumb and happy looking at a GPS screen.
We have only had a 10 hour ICUS policy in the past but are looking to extend that as recent newbies haven't got to a standard that our CP feels happy that they can do a run, safely,on time and economically. CP is frustrated that they have to spend time just getting short field and crosswinds sorted before they can progress onto commercial considerations.
This is basic stuff that they are not proficient in. 500 hour instructors we have employed haven't lasted long as whilst good in a circuit have problems with running to times, fuel use, and navigation. One in particular caused trouble amongst other pilots because thought they knew it all and couldn't handle ICUS time. We had to let him go before he was lynched, Was that you?
MS
It would be irresponsible for me as an operator to let anyone go out in this sort of stuff if we didn't think you could handle it and come home safe. Sometimes Mother Nature can throw stuff at you you need to be prepared for. Miles with someone experienced as a backup telling stories of what to look for and places to look out for gets your head out the cockpit. Trust me I have been doing this for over 30 years.
Situational awareness is as compressor stall said is what makes a good pilot. Being ahead of an aircraft takes planning and the ability to think on the go, not sit back fat dumb and happy looking at a GPS screen.
We have only had a 10 hour ICUS policy in the past but are looking to extend that as recent newbies haven't got to a standard that our CP feels happy that they can do a run, safely,on time and economically. CP is frustrated that they have to spend time just getting short field and crosswinds sorted before they can progress onto commercial considerations.
This is basic stuff that they are not proficient in. 500 hour instructors we have employed haven't lasted long as whilst good in a circuit have problems with running to times, fuel use, and navigation. One in particular caused trouble amongst other pilots because thought they knew it all and couldn't handle ICUS time. We had to let him go before he was lynched, Was that you?
MS
I know pilots who would not make the grade as GA instructors, but who are very good at operating from A to B every day in all weather.
Why can't a good operator flying A-B in all weather instruct in how to be a good operator flying from A-B in good weather and vice versa with a good instructor going to charters/transport. They might not get it right the first time but with hard yards will get better.
Back to thread, many good points but lack of attitude comes to mind with lots of people who just "fell" into the industry. In the past you really had to be dedicated and have an passion in flying to make it. Now you just need to be able to pay. Merit doesn't count anymore.
It's all very simple really because you can only thin down the quality of instructors so far.
Bit like today's volume built houses, they are crap quality being built by tradies who pump them out for peanuts, quality doesn't figure in housing these days nor does pilot training.
Starting from a well taught student by someone from many years ago with enthusiasm when flying was a stable career whom then moves on to instructing himself with a little less enthusiasm to the next guy with even less enthusiasm to the next to the next to the next, next thing you know you have bare basic pilots whom have been taught by instructors that are only passing thru the system to get to that big shinny jet. Why put in excess effort when there is no need to would be a lot of what's the problem out there as a lot expect an easy path to that jet where as many years ago only the top shelf guys got the gig.
Today's Formula: Take one instructor who is or was just barely taught to get thru the syllabus then + dozens of students along the way with the same basic teachings (just learn enough to get thru the syllabus due cost) = today's pilots.
Welcome to the future.
Wmk2
Bit like today's volume built houses, they are crap quality being built by tradies who pump them out for peanuts, quality doesn't figure in housing these days nor does pilot training.
Starting from a well taught student by someone from many years ago with enthusiasm when flying was a stable career whom then moves on to instructing himself with a little less enthusiasm to the next guy with even less enthusiasm to the next to the next to the next, next thing you know you have bare basic pilots whom have been taught by instructors that are only passing thru the system to get to that big shinny jet. Why put in excess effort when there is no need to would be a lot of what's the problem out there as a lot expect an easy path to that jet where as many years ago only the top shelf guys got the gig.
Today's Formula: Take one instructor who is or was just barely taught to get thru the syllabus then + dozens of students along the way with the same basic teachings (just learn enough to get thru the syllabus due cost) = today's pilots.
Welcome to the future.
Wmk2
Aviation is only reaping what it has sown. The days of people who are giving up careers in other industries to become pilots are over. GA companies used to get highly self motivated people who would probably make more money in another industry but would subject themselves to the whole GA BS. Many people have worked for free just to get a shot at flying piston single.
Unfortunately the tide has turned, and this is what is left. GA has to change or die. If that means changing the way you hire then so be it. If that means you do more training then that's what has to happen.
Aviation is just becoming like every other industry where you compete for talent now whereas before talent come knocking on your door.
With the cost of training so so high now and the ease and better paid jobs elsewhere the industry is going to struggle in the future finding people with the right mindset skills and health to be pro pilots.
Reality is the risk involved in being a pilot now is so high that I doubt people are willing to risk it. The growth of the airlines is over and so the chance of getting a good paying job is reducing.
Unfortunately the tide has turned, and this is what is left. GA has to change or die. If that means changing the way you hire then so be it. If that means you do more training then that's what has to happen.
Aviation is just becoming like every other industry where you compete for talent now whereas before talent come knocking on your door.
With the cost of training so so high now and the ease and better paid jobs elsewhere the industry is going to struggle in the future finding people with the right mindset skills and health to be pro pilots.
Reality is the risk involved in being a pilot now is so high that I doubt people are willing to risk it. The growth of the airlines is over and so the chance of getting a good paying job is reducing.
Absolutely agree. The old school operators who may have helped you learn things the hard way through hangar appreciation, less than award wages and lots of psychological 'conditioning' have larger fallen by the way-side thankfully.