Flying Instructor Selection

[tacpot]

BEagle suggested in another post (not necessarily in this forum) that some variability in the quality of Instructors might be expected because in the commercial world Instructors are not selected for their suitability for the role. As opposed to the military, where they are. (And apologies to BEagle if I have not paraphrased you correctly.)

If you were able to select those Pilots who you thought would make good instructors, what traits, qualities, attitudes and apptitude would you look for?

If BEagle or any other RAF QFI (ex or current) is on the forum, I'd be very interested in hearing what the RAF look for.

One final question:- Is the pre-entry Flight Test for the FI(A) rating supposed to assess anything other than piloting skills, e.g. apptitude for Instructing?

Thanks

tp

[FlyingForFun]

Ok, I'll start.

The first, most obvious quality would be someone with people skills, who enjoys teaching - some kind of previous experience of teaching would be a benefit in proving that.

The next quality would be someone who is not a natural pilot. The reason is that natural pilots sail through the PPL course with very few problems. Those of us who are not quite so natural struggle through the course, but overcome all the problems. When these people go on to become instructors, they can draw on their own experiences of struggles, problems and solutions, and use those experiences to guide their students through the same problems.

And finally, but least importantly, an enthusiasm for flying.

Note that I haven't included flying skills anywhere in my list of requirements, because I assume that anyone who can get a CPL (or even a PPL, for those who don't want to get paid), an FI rating and a bit of experience already has skills some way above what we need to teach our students to be safe competent PPLs.

FFF
-----------------

[Say again s l o w l y]

First of all, a prospective FI should be able to communicate effectively with all types of personalities and have enthusiasm for the job. (not just flying, but also for teaching.)
Bullies, liars and ego maniacs should be definately be excluded. (bang goes 50% of instructors straight away!!!)

Flying skill is important, but not to the exclusion of other things. An attitude that things should be done properly or not at all would be nice, especially someone who despises the phrase "that'll do' instead of ensuring a proper standard.

Basically a thorough, professional standards orientated enthusiatic and gregarious person. Not asking much at all really!

[Skytrucker]

For the Royal Air Force the qualities they look for in the initial stages of selection for Central Flying School are:

1. Above average Pilot in the air and on the ground.
2. Completed at least one operational tour.
3. Outstanding officer qualities.

then:

4. A recommendation for instructional duties.
5. A personal interview to determine suitability and attitude.
6. Passing the (closed) QFI selection board.

then:

7. Successful completion of 6 months training including an initial 6 week period of continual assessment in the air to determine capacity, suitability and potential.
8. Successful completion of a 6 month probation period on a training unit.
9. After 2 years attainment of an above average assessment as an instructor.

Miss anything on that list and you have failed in the eyes of your peers.

For a civilian TRE you will need:

1. A tick in your licence that you or someone else has paid for.
2. An ability to talk the talk.
3. A pen.
4. A piece of paper with 4 tricky questions, to last a year.
5. A list of all the company pilots who have passed the first list so you remember who not to take on; unless you, yourself are one of the very, very few.

And no I'm not one of the exalted superior beings but have been on the receiving end of both.
After my last OPC Captain and TRE were both ex mil QFIs. The Captains debrief was a rather apologetic "Did you notice what you did wrong there then ?"
"Yes, I was 4 knots fast on the engine out go around"
" Well as long as you noticed!!"
He took a little longer than that with me but was NEVER condescending, irate or gave the impression he knew more than me. At the end I felt like I was the good guy and then HE bought ME a beer.
If only I had my time again:\

[tacpot]

Thanks for the submissions so far.

I want to be an Instructor and wanted to check my own motivation and suitablity. I have delivered paid training courses, and enjoy teaching although it is only ever a small part of my job.


FFF's suggestion that someone who has struggled with aspects of the syllabus would be 'better' than someone who has flown(if you'll forgive the pun) through it, is interesting. But then perhaps this instructor might only be able to bring their own techniques and solutions to the party, not a wider range of coping strategies? (I'm a struggler!)

I think flying skill is important, but as FFF says with a CPL & FI, there shouldn't be any issue. It is clear that the instructor must be able to demonstrate each exercise with some precision.

I'm suprised nothing has been said about fault analysis. I'm involved with Root Cause Analaysis at work, and hence want to understand why mistakes are made? In flying, this could be because the student has a fundamental misunderstanding about something, perhaps an earlier lesson was not fully taken in, or was the student just overloaded?

Say Again Slowly's comment about being able to communicate will all sort is also very valid. In a commercial environment, you don't know who the next paying customer is going to be and what their learning style will be. So I agree you have to adapt and be flexible.

I was bullied (or it felt like it!) by one instructor at the UAS I flew with, and quickly became nervous when due to fly with that instructor, of course the flying went to pot, and the instructor became more convinced I couldn't learn! If it is in your nature to bully, I couldn't agree more that the cockpit is not the place for you.

Skytruckers long comment on the CFS selection process hinted at the RAF requirements but without really delving into what the required "suitablity and attitude" criteria were or what sort of "capacity" was being measured. Can anyone expand on this?

Thanks all

tp

[BEagle]

Well, I think that any FI applicant must be assessed first as having:

Good oral communication skills (can talk without mumbling, doesn't use 'kewel-yoof' talk full of 'y'knows', 'loikes' or 'innits' or have an extreme accent. Can explain a simple event clearly - "Describe your journey here today.")

Sound personal qualities (isn't an argumentative little so-and-so, know-it-all, shifty character etc. Ask yourself whether you'd take him/her to the pub with you? Does he/she stink like a 3-day dead pig?) But don't expect him/her to come along in an uncomfortable interview suit - 'smart casual' (no ties, no T-shirts) would seem reasonable.

Sound flying skills and experience (where did he/she train? How much relevant flying has he/she achieved? Did he/she burn minimum time holes in Floridian skies - or did he/she add a seaplane rating, MEP Class Rating or fly to a host of different UK aerodromes to gain expereince? If he/she hasn't got an IR, does he/she have an IMC Rating? If not, why not?)

He/she should then be assessed for:

Potential ability to impart instruction (give him/her 10-15 minutes to read a simple instruction manual, then teach how to do a simple task. Such as 'teach me how to programme this videorecorder to record tonight's news on BBC1'.)

Sound theoretical knowledge (part should be a multi-choice written exam, part should be a 5 min lecturette on a given question - e.g. "Why do I need to add power in steep turns?")

Incidentally, monitoring student flying and debriefing errors is relatively straightforward. It is teaching them how to correct those errors which takes the instructor's skill!

[Charlie Foxtrot India]

As well as all those mentioned already, when employing someone I look for someone I can trust to do the job (nearly) as well as I can...! And that I could trust to run things if I am not there.

Maturity, a good sense of humour, relevant experience (especially teaching in other areas) able to run to time, great people skills and sense of humour, (has to laugh at my jokes!) and fit in well with the other instructors and ground crew, understand commercial considerations of how to combine safety with maximum bums on seats in air time...and of course can fly well, but not pretend to be perfect. Meticulous paperwork is also essential.

But mainly someone who loves their job, and realises that the more you put into it, the more you and your students get out of it. Someone with the motivation to make every lesson a bit better than the last time they taught it.

Previous life skills are very important, but maturity doesn't necessarily come with age, I currently have a 21 year old instructor who is more mature than a 50 year old I used to employ! Also very important to eastablish the boundaries to keep respect; being friends is OK, going on a wine women and song bender with students is not.

The following need not apply:
People who think it's ok to shout or otherwise belittle their students
People who became instructors to "Show off"
People who think it's OK to eat garlic or smoke before flying
People who teach that it's OK to break the rules as long as you don't get caught
"Seagulls" who find every excuse under the sun not to fly
People who keep students waiting
People who don't try to get along with their colleagues
Swearing and other nasty personal habits

[vivadavinci]

As long as my students keep farting in the cockpit, I'm going to keep smoking before flights!
:D

[African Drunk]

Pay sensible rates for instructing and you will have a wider pool of instructors at a sensible standard.

[porridge]

Charlie Foxtrot India
With no aspersions cast on you or your excellent post on this thread I happen to know certain CFI/FTO owner who is a PPL & RT examiner as well as being a FIC instructor to who most of your comments apply below (with some slight modification by myself to apply to the individual concerned).
People who think it is OK to shout, bully or otherwise belittle the students and instructors
People who became instructors to "Show off"
People who think it is OK smoke whilst flying and examining
People who teach that it's OK to break the rules as long as you don't get caught and if you do you threaten and intimidate the CAA so much that they never get prosecuted
People who will teach in VFR in IFR conditions and encourage their instructors to do the same
People who keep students waiting
People who don't try to get along with their colleagues and verbally and physically assault them if they feel so inclined
Swearing and other nasty personal habits
It Herts me to say that if this Banana is the role model for instructors he teaches and employs then it is no wonder some of the people in this game are of this ilk as well!
Caveat Mercator!