Nicely divided into two subjects and I am going to try to link these together.
Bellfest words are worth recalling as are a lot of Paco's and Topendtorques.
Many others have valid comments on both sides of the debate but what is apparent is that those with time worry that the 200hr instructor is not as capable as a 2000hr pilot and those with 200hrs cannot understand why not? They operate under the protection of the regulatory authority that pokes the 'wings' into their chests and pushes them out the door. Blind leading the blind and feeling empowered to boot. 85% of flying is not about hands and feet, seat of the pants feel but really important extras like:
See that cloud, that tell you that is about to happen…
When you are heavy, avoid this…
Feel that vibration, that’s called a 2 per, tells you this is wrong…
Watch this guy approaching here, bet he forgets too…
See over here, make sure you have a backdoor to escape too…
Where is the wind coming from now? OK, here is another trick…
See that there? I once saw one of those come loose…
And a hundred odd more.
I too do not advocate hangar sweeping as a necessary requirement to producing a good pilot. As it has been said; it does teach you a lot about aircraft and that 'round thing near the tube that makes all the noise..." and for that it has plenty of validity. Unfortunately there is not necessarily a progression from this lowly servitude and a LOT abuse by individuals and the industry. I did the hangar and loader time and have varying sad and good stories about this. What occasionally happens in this situation is a lack of progress for the hangar rat.
We need a more formalised process of advancement into the industry for new pilots. The 'unregulated' approach is working but it would be better for individuals, the families and the aviation community if there was a more structured career path.
Ideally there should be an apprentiship starting pilots in the hangar. The intention being to move them to the 'other' seat during commercial operations therefore enabling them to watch more experienced pilots from inside the aircraft. Not all jobs can accommodate this but I wonder why it could not happen 50% of the time in jobs like Agwork, Logging, or resource support. Big problem is who will pay for all this. But why not? The same system works for plumber, mechanics and electricians.
It happens already in its own way with guys "slaving" and doing that for free or government support or wages the equivalent of the benefit. It's nothing to be proud of but it is an investment of your time into a career. Everyone needs a beginning and with insurance rates and limited opportunities in the industry it's never going to be easier.
Hence the popular route of buying a job via an instructor rating – "I don't have the strength to go through the BS to get this overrated job, so I will book it up to the bank, government loan or work 3 more jobs"
Your problem solved but more problems with degredation of training quality for our industry. Sorry 200hr instructor sitting in the other seat not flying: you cannot teach what you are not doing or do not know.
A scheme might work or it may not. It's merely an idea and the only one that I have. Trying to find a regulatory body to commence this idea would be harder than pulling the teeth on a croc guarding her eggs and the backlash from the training schools losing their cheap labour... priceless.
POSSIBLE structure?
CPL graduate apprentice – 1st year apprentice pilot (hanger slave, engineering assistant) – 2nd year apprentice (marketing, field work, ferry flights)
3rd year senior apprentice (ferry pilot, maintenance flights, tourism and photography, intro to commercial work, commence ATPL studies or fulltime Co-pilot position)
4th year – Final year senior apprentice (commercial work, ATPL subject completed)
Post this and with 1000hrs PIC you can voluntarily start Instructor Training.
What do you think?
