It would be nice to think so because you have much more aviation exposure.
I've recently seen some attrocious flying in my local circuit with instructors seemingly unable to cope with inbound aircraft, and total disregard for other circuit traffic. I have zero confidence in brand new CPL students then becoming instructors with zero industry exposure.
Is it irony to spell atrocious wrong? I can't tell.
I've also seen some 'attrocious' flying in the local circuit from highly experienced pilots new to instructing, unable to cope with an unfamiliar situationn
I know I'm busting your balls a bit, but this kind of statement;
"I have zero confidence in brand new CPL students then becoming instructors with zero industry exposure."
Grinds my gears.
Having industry experience doesn't make you a good instructor. Often, it can make you a terrible instructor. I've said this before but i'll repeat;
Experience is great, it has its place. No question. Otherwise experienced but new instructors were typically best when used in the capacity relating to that experience. 99% of them who came back into instructing had come from an airline style environment, operating IFR. So in IFR training, they were great. They could impart so much more than someone who had only ever instructed.
But nearly without exception, they were woeful at everything else. The first problem is attitude. You're experienced, you know you are. So you view those who don't have your experience with thinly veiled contempt, make comments like having no confidence in CPL instructors. Great start.
Next, the experience you have quite often is entirely irrelevant to what you're actually teaching. Its all well and good to have 5 figures operating IFR in a multi crew aircraft with sophisticated auto flight systems. But that has SFA to do with instructing someone a PFL or indeed most ab initio sequences.
Conversely, even the most junior instructor has only ever been operating this category of aircraft, doing just these sequences for hundreds of hours. ASPT, picking and using reference features, using those pedal things down the bottom of the cockpit that most of us never touch above 50 feet, visual navigation, time map ground, doing 1/60s and the list goes on.
In all these sequences they, not you are the experienced ones. They're the ones who have been knee deep in this stuff for the last few years. They may have been learning it at some early stage, true, but they're engrossed and familiar with it. Under direct supervision of senior instructors, they're more than capable of teaching the first ab initio sequences and as they gain experience, can be put into more advanced roles. You (2nd person plural) on the other hand, haven't been doing this stuff for the last few years, or even flying these types of aircraft. You're starting from 0. They at least have a running start.
So far I've only dealt with very junior instructors. The differences magnify when we look at experienced Grade 1's. The ability to impart knowledge is a learned skill. An experienced G1 sits in the right seat and 'sees' so much more than even an otherwise highly experienced but new instructor. They have in their arsenal a wide range of tools they can implement to identify and address difficulties the student is having. A student has played a lot of flight sim, but is now having difficulty maintaining straight and level. I know why, do you?
The ability of an instructor relates to their attitude. There are woeful instructors, and great ones. The only correlative factor I've ever witnessed is attitude. 737 time wasn't one.
To the OP of this thread, I quote GlenB. "The experienced guys are great, BUT you must come into it and conduct yourself like a Grade Three. Be prepared to be mentored, supervised, and advised. If you really wont be able to accept that. Don't do it".