Ha! Bloody hell!
Move over old timer - your time is done! (Ch.OTBrd)
HillerBee is about right.
Its all about whether these people are able to teach to the minimum standard required.
Sure, a newer CFI won't be able to preach about the pros and cons of a steep approach when landing in hot LZ in 'Nam. But, he's not required to do that. He's able to perform a perfectly safe maneouver, and that's all he's required to teach.
Gone are the day's of apprenticeships and internships. Nowadays, the apprenticeship is carried by the company not the educational institution. Its simply a shift in the pardigm.
As far as quality of instruction goes, hours don't necessarily increase the quality of primary instruction at all. Show me figures that say otherwise. Good quality instruction requires the instructor to be able to convey the concepts and knowledge in an effictive manner, and to know and have experience of what he is required to teach. To not try to teach more. Some of the best teachers I know (and I know a few) are not experts in their fields, but their quality of instruction is enhanced by knowledge and enthusiasm.
I know of a great many 'high-time' pilots who would make CRAP instructors, because they don't know the first thing about people, they are too stuck up their own arses to be able to empathise with a student and understand his needs. So don't come in here griping about low-time pilots without substantiating your claims with solid educational philosophy!
Of course, you can argue that a 10000 hr instructor has a lot more 'experience' to draw from. True, but as I said before, why does a primary student need to know about how to land in a hot LZ?
The last words from me, are those written by Bob Dylan...
Your old road is
Rapidly agin'.
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'.
cl12pv2s
Flamesuit on!
Last edited by cl12pv2s; 20th May 2006 at 07:25.