PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - How does training compare to the 80s/90s?
Old 31st Aug 2009, 01:11
  #4 (permalink)  
Tinstaafl
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Escapee from Ultima Thule
Posts: 4,273
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
I must disagree strongly with atpcliff's contention. My experience with students who have 'taught' themselves using PC flight games is that they have to unlearn bad habits, poor & incorrect techniques before they learn the correct way to do things. That costs the student time & money. There *are* good things that can be done with MS flightsim and the like, but it needs to be guided by an instructor and/or limited to practicing those things where the correct technique has already been taught - and not as a means for self-teaching.


As for how learning to fly has changed, it depends on where you are. When I learnt in Australia in the early '80s, a PPL was gained in two stages: A Restricted PPL and then an Unrestricted PPL.

The Restricted PPL was restricted to the training area & circuit and had all the privileges of a PPL except for those that required navigation. Navigation was the 2nd half of a complete PPL course, ending with a navigation flight test to have the restriction lifted. ie an 'Unrestricted' PPL. Send your RPPL in to the Dept. & they stamped 'Restriction Lifted' over those RPPL limitations pre-printed in the licence. All up, I think it was 45 hours minimum training, and 4 Dept. set exams sat at the school: Basic Aeronautical Knowledge sat for the RPPL, and Navigation, Meteorology and Flight Rules & Procedures sat for the UPPL

The Oz equivalents to the UK's 'self improver' and CAP509 courses required 175 hours and 150 hours respectively for a CPL. A NVFR was usually required for a CPL. There were Dept. exams for the CPL: Flight Rules & Procedures, Navigation, Meteorology, Aircraft Performance & Operation, Engines Systems & Instrumentation and finally, Principles of Flight. All exams were sat during one of several exam weeks scheduled during the year. CPL theory exams could be sat instead of the three UPPL exams.

There was a Senior Commercial Pilot Licence as the GA equivalent to the Airline Transport Pilot Licence. Same exams but you had to work for an airline to get the ATPL. Four exams were required: Air Law, Navigation, Meteorology and Flight Planning. Unlike the UK, Oz SCPL/ATPL exams could never substitute for CPL level exams. Of the 1500 hours required for the ATPL (was it 1000 hours for an SCPL? Anyone remember?), 400 had to be PIC.

Instrument Ratings were different to now. There were First Class & Second Class IRs for airlines, and Class 1 & Class 3 IRs for GA. A Class 3 IR was a bit more limiting compared to a Class 1 IR. Two theory exams: IFR Procedures, and Radio Navaids.

In the '90s the whole licencing system was changed.

RPPL was done away with, and a faux-RPPL was substituted. The faux-RPPL is called a General Flying Progress Test and relaxes some of the Student Pilot Licence limitations such as the prohibition against carrying passengers. Minimum training to a PPL was reduced to 40 hours.

A minimum 150 hour CPL syllabus was introduced that any flying school could use. The 175 hour CPL was changed to a 200 hour CPL. NVFR was no longer a prerequisite.

The SCPL was dropped and ATPL made available to everyone.

The IR changed with the removal of the airline/GA distinction by changing to a single Command IR and Co-pilot IR for all.

Exams have changed numerous times for all licence levels in terms of content, mix, format and availability. Buggered if know what the Oz equivalent of the CAA specify now. Who knows, maybe they do?

The regulatory authority has had so many changes in structure, organisation, authority and management I wouldn't be surprised if there's quite a corporate memory loss and resulting change in competence.

I think quality of instruction waxes & wanes to some extent over the years, depending on the job market. The fewer pilots from GA the airlines hire over extended periods allied with a vibrant GA industry then I think the better the overall quality of training for students due to more experienced people still to be found in GA. The less vibrant the GA industry coupled with high airline drain from GA then the worse the average quality of training. That doesn't mean that there aren't excellent instructors in GA during airline hiring booms, because there are. Equally, even in the vibrant GA/airlines not hiring times, there are still piss-poor instructors & schools. But overall, the balance cycles one way or the other.

Last edited by Tinstaafl; 31st Aug 2009 at 15:16.
Tinstaafl is offline