Learning to fly in the USA

[Esperanza]

I'll start by saying that I'm a flying instructor who spends most of his time training PPL students in the UK. I've spent this afternoon flying with a lovely chap who "learnt" (I use the term loosely) to fly in Florida. Over the years I've flown with umpty gazillion graduates of the school that this chap attended. With regards to these students I can safely say that from my own experience very few of them had achieved the same level of competency that they would have had they learnt at a half decent UK school/club.
The above isn't exactly news, and there have already been numerous threads regarding the topic. As an instructor I find it extremely frustrating to keep on coming across students who have wandered off to the US to gain a cheaper PPL, with little regard for the end result. I realise that I am generalising at this point. I'm sure that there are probably any number of good US schools out there.
Anyway, my reason for writing is that I had a look at this chaps logbook and (as per normal) found that his training hadn't followed the standard syllabus. This helped to partly explain why he was struggling. He hadn't been taught the basics. For those of you that have learnt to fly in the UK you will hopefully know that generally Lesson 1= Effects of Controls, Lesson 2= Straight+Level, Lesson 3= Climbing/ Descending/ Turning, Lesson 4= Stalling. After four lessons we've still not got as far as landings. What we do have though is a good grasp of the basics. According to this chaps logbook; by his fourth lesson he had covered all of the above, plus landing, spinning, instrument flying, advanced turns, and practice forced landings...??!!
This appears to be the norm in the US. Am I wrong? Has anyone learnt to fly at one of these intensive Florida PPL schools and found it to have prepared them for flying once they return to the UK? This is of course a very tricky question as most people don't have experience of courses based in both countries.
Apologies for the long winded rant. I just think that it's a shame that so many potential PPL's travel so far to receive what I believe to be below standard instruction.
PS. I've previously worked in the US and so have first hand knowledge of the topic.

[mcgoo]

yep, i attended one of "those schools" you mention, passed first time and came back, had a 1 hour checkride with an experienced UK instructor and was signed off straightaway and he said I was a good pilot and well taught, I keep saying this but I don't believe you can pigeonhole people by where they trained, surely its more down to the individual.

[Paris Dakar]

Esperanza,

I've flown with umpty gazillion graduates of the school that this chap attended. With regards to these students I can safely say that from my own experience none of them had achieved the same level of competency that they would have had they learnt at a half decent UK school/club.

I take it that you intend reporting the shortcomings of these 'umpty gazillion' to the CAA then?

If you care to wander through some of my aviation related offerings you will see quite clearly where I learned to fly, where I fly from now, and where I've flown from in the past.

Tell you what, I notice on one of your threads that you instruct in the 'North' I know that can be a big area but how about I come and meet you and we can fly together, and then you can pass on your professional opinion face to face?

[Esperanza]

Hi Mcgoo, It's good to hear that I was indeed "generalising". You're right in what you say about the end result achieved being largely down to the individual. Hopefully you're not the exception to the norm. All that I know is that I've come across an awful lot of poorly (US) trained PPL holders.

[Esperanza]

Blimey Paris Dakar, I'm sensing a lot of aggression. My apologies to you and any other pilots who have taken offence at my ramblings. I was simply passing on an observation that I've made, based on years of experience.
I originally learnt to fly in the US and so know that there are both upsides and downsides to training abroad.
That's enough from me.:)

[Paris Dakar]

Esperanza,

Aggression :confused: :confused: ??

I am serious, If you are really concerned that there is a lack of basic skills being taught, then I would presume that as an Instructor you would have an obligation to report such findings?

My offer was to have a flight with you - not to fight with you?

[mcgoo]

I think it would be a safe bet to say that there are quite a few poorly trained UK students as well.

[Mercenary Pilot]

Hi Esperanza

Having flown in both countries’ I can sadly say that some of the worst flying I have personally seen was in the UK by UK pilots trained in the UK! Anyone who flew into the AeroExpo the other week can confirm this! Some of the Airmanship, flying skills, RT and general procedure following were absolutely abysmal.

I think it’s more down to poor training...if the students had gone to a better school in the US they would be better pilots. There are some awful schools in the UK but they don’t churn out anywhere near the amount of PPL's as the certain schools in Florida your talking about.(I know which ones you mean ;)).

[Paris Dakar]

mcgoo,

I think it would be a safe bet to say that there are quite a few poorly trained UK students as well.

I'm sure that is the case too.

But if umpty gazillion students are going the US route - then that begs the question why? If on their return, umpty gazillion are so poorly taught that they need re-training then I would presume the schools based here will be more than happy to sell them the additional hours they feel they need.

[airsupremacy]

frankly i believe most of these flight schools in florida cut corners just to get done with you as quickly as possible but Hey, that's not a general rule! we have reputable schools over there too. i think it's more on the individaul, some people have just got the instincts of a pilot right from childhood, they get it right naturally. now even if you train these calabre of people at the worsrt flight schools they'l still come out ace students (pilots).:ok:

[Mercenary Pilot]

Only things that fly "naturally" are birds, the rest of us have to work at it. The harder you work at it, the better you get. ;) :ok:

[mcgoo]

not necessarily, look at some drivers on the roads, sure they have a license and may have been driving years but they have no co-ordination, no spatial awareness, lack of judgement, i agree nobody can be a natural pilot but some people are better than others with innate skills that can't be learnt

[Kengineer-130]

Esperanza ,
heres an offer for you, I learnt to fly in florida last year, I passed my skills test in november, and my last flight was on the 2nd of december. Due to work commitments I have been out of the country for 6 months, so I am badly in need of a few hours and a bit of refresher training, so how do you fancy going up for a few hours and making an honest appraisal of how I fly, I would be very interested in your views :ok: Where do you fly from normaly? I live near wolverhampton, so bobbington is my local airport :O

[Kyprianos Biris]

I have a UK PPL, was flying in UK during the 90's and two years ago went to SW Florida to take the FAA PPL. After completing it in 4~5 days (incl ground exams) I continued for the IR which took me another 3 weeks.

Of course I did not do the full training course (Part61 using previous experience) but I can attest that the procedures were not sub standard. Perhaps because the school is owned partly by Brit's ( :E ) the training was better quality. The big difference I found from UK was the traffic levels and the intensity of R/T. That alone necessitated more sharpness while airborne. In UK I had never experienced such level of traffic & R/T. Also in the US the ATC trusts (even VFR's) that you will do what they ask you to and therefore they dare to do many more things than our conservative European folks.

I had never been in a circuit with 6 light aircaft at the same time while the seventh was a private jet on short finals :eek:

This alone increases the workload & sharpness in the US flying pilot and in the end provides a better experience for the PPL returning to Europe. On the other hand in US if you betray this trust and you f*ck up in the air (I & my instructor did as well during a session :E ) you are prone to get in trouble after landing much more than in Europe.

So to conclude, perhaps its not the training they do that is completelly up to UK standard but flying in US needs more essential skills of situational awareness when you get in busy airspace areas. That alone may, I say again, may, have an end result of a newbie pilot coming out much better in essential flying skills (the absence of which have killed people) than theoretical or "by the book" operations (the absence of which have not killed people but made their life difficult).

I hope you catch my drift :bored:

[unfazed]

This is of course a very tricky question as most people don't have experience of courses based in both countries.
Apologies for the long winded rant. I just think that it's a shame that so many potential PPL's travel so far to receive what I believe to be below standard instruction.


I have trained in both countries and have good experience of both training systems so feel qualified to comment. I believe that most UK instructors who have no US experience have a "mindset" about what they are looking for (someone who does things the way that they do them), when they don't see things done their way they label the performance as "wrong"...there are numerous minor examples based on actual differences in technique and training. I have seen good students and bad students from both systems.

What I would say is did you see the recent shuttle launch.....terrible airmanship they left the carb heat on all the way into space.....typical example of poorly trained american pilots (yes I am being ironic !)

Chief difference is in attitude

American system is positive and confident - just get on with it you'll be OK !
UK system is negative and pedantic - watch it you might screw up !
:)

[gcolyer]

yep, i attended one of "those schools" you mention, passed first time and came back, had a 1 hour checkride with an experienced UK instructor and was signed off straightaway and he said I was a good pilot and well taught, I keep saying this but I don't believe you can pigeonhole people by where they trained, surely its more down to the individual.

Same for me.

[potkettleblack]

Perhaps the reason why the UK trained pilots are considered "better" is for a simple reason. They have been over trained. In the UK you are lucky to get 1 flight a week but more than likely 1 every 2-3 weeks. So next lesson you spend half of it going over what you learnt before as you have forgotten it. End result is the 45 hours is no longer a legal requirement but a target with most schools going over this. I did my IMC a few years back and they were more than happy to tell me over a few pints that their students on average took 55-60 hours to get through and that they didn't feel that the 45 hours was enough to train them. Well that will be news to the CAA then.

The best form of training includes continuity and unfortunately you just can't get that here in the UK unless you are very lucky and have a school committed to pushing you through during summer and bending over backwards. This hardly ever happens.

Being frank no planes that I am aware of are falling out of the sky as people have been trained in the US. So long as they are legal and safe then who really cares if they lose a bit of height here and are off heading there. It all takes practice and you can't expect much from someone with such few hours under their belts.

[EastMids]

Learned at one of those intensive schools in Florida. Just checked my logbook which reveals the following, for each flight:

1. General handling 0:50
2. General handling + turns 1:00
3. General handling + steep turns 1:05
4. General handling + stalls 1:00
5. General handling + stalls + PFLs 0:55
6. Circuits 0:55

and so it goes on. Pretty much in line with the suggestions of the OP, I think. I came back, did an hour or two with an instructor as a checkout and to get familiar with the local area, and that was that. Ten years ago now, mind you, but still flying despite all the mandatory and obligatory instructor encounters since!

Andy

[Paris Dakar]

EastMids,

We are getting on in our years now old boy but I think you'll find your PPL was actually 11 years ago :)

PD

[speedbird676]

I did my PPL training in the USA (Pennsylvania though) and found the training pretty much "standard" as you describe. Took at least 10 hours to cover all the basics and I solo'd after 20 hours. Didn't touch anything more complicated until I had mastered the basics. I was still regarded as a very fast learner, I passed my checkride with 46.5 hours logged.

[B2N2]

First question; why is this not in the instructor forum?
I''l be the first one to admit that there are truly miserable schools on both sides of the pond.
As for my experience? I started with my PPL at a flying club where some instructor tried to solo me after 4.4 hrs. I quit and went to a small school across the field. This was in Europe.
In the USA I have seen the resultt of both, very good and very bad.
Uk and non Uk, European and non European ,US and non US.
Hours don't really mean that much to me anymore.
I have seen truly exeptional low time pilots and horrendous high time (>700 hrs)
PPL's.
I have dealt with Europeans that would not be able to pass a US checkride no matter how much training they get. People that have held a European license in excess of 10 years.

In any case I think one of the problems is the time spent on getting the license and staying proficient.
Somebody will earn his/her license in the US in about 4 weeks.
That is all their vacation time for the year gone. Back to their home country and work and family.
Sometimes it will take these people months to get around to finding a suitable club/school and get back to flying again.
After learning a skill in 4 weeks do not expect to be even at solo standard after not flying for 2-3 months.
Check-out instructor at home should not expect this also.
You cannot compare a fresh PPL who hasn't flown in 3 months with somebody who just got their license at your club.


**** edited for beer-induced spelling errors*****

[Esperanza]

Sometimes it will take these people months to get around to finding a suitable club/school and get back to flying again.
B2N2. Some very good points raised by yourself. To answer your initial question, I chose to write on the Private Flying Forum because I wanted to address my thoughts regarding intensive/ largely Florida based training to the PPL community. With hindsight I feel that I have intruded into this forum and will remain clear in the future.
My thoughts on the topic have not changed. However, I believe that you have highlighted one of the major difficulties created by intensive training. Like you say, by the time that an average student has used up all of their holiday leave and spare cash there is more often than not a huge gap between gaining a licence and getting back into regular flying practice. This naturally means that their flying skills will require refreshing.
I hope that you all have a safe and fun summer.

[Paris Dakar]

Esperanza,

I feel that I have intruded into this forum

Your original posting was aimed at one school in particular, not the 'largely Florida based training' your last post suggests. If you really believe that 'umpty gazillion' of the folk that pass through their doors are poorly trained, then the fact is that some of those umpty gazillion will stand up and disagree with you.

You are perfectly entitled to your views and opinions about the said school but that won't stop hundreds of aspiring UK pilots heading to the US (Florida in particular) to do their training and hour building.

[potkettleblack]

If you are of the opinion that the UK GA scene is in a pretty sad state at the moment imagine what it would be like without people heading out to the US or further afield to get their licences.

If you go to any overseas FTO you will see a complete cross section of society from young wannabees aspiring to go commercial to mums and dads and older folks that have saved hard to learn to fly. The only thing that they usually have in common is that they can't afford the prices in the UK nor have the time to spend up to a year getting a licence. These people will all need checkouts to fly the club hack or group aircraft, possibly add an IMC or multi rating on their return and give the UK some much needed cash. So go and b*tch and moan about them if you want to but I would suggest you don't bite the hand that feeds.

[EastMids]

I don't think that there will ever be a winner in the UK vs USA debate. Some will always claim that learning in the USA means not learning the British way or in British weather conditions, or that the training isn't as good because of the instructors, or because there's pressure to get people passed, or whatever. Others [like me] will always regard the British system as flawed, because people don't fly for three weeks or more (due weather maybe) and end up taking three steps forward at each lesson and two back inbetween, or worse are forced to repeat certain exercises (stalls, etc) if they aren't done for a certain period of time meaning you go over the same ground over and over again. Likewise, there are too many stakeholders with vested interests to draw a really objective conclusion - British schools and instructors regarding the USA as doing them out of business, US schools claiming they offer a good service for those on a budget or with a limited amount of free time, people who might not otherwise even get into GA.

Its impossible to really assess the results of the USA versus UK, because evernone learns at their own pace and its not possible to train the same person through each system from scratch. Equally, post training there's no mandatory checks in the system for two years (by which time some will have dropped out, and those still in GA will have changed to some degree), which means any overall generalisation about the raw output from flying schools either side of the pond cannot be reliable. I am certain, as suggested above, that each system generates its fair share of good and not so good pilots at the end of the process.

Training in the US showing no signs of going away, no matter how much some people don't like the idea. Whether training in the USA or the UK turns out good or not so good pilots, surely the objective post qualification is not to bitch about the system that produced them, but to keep them in GA, keep them flying, and keep them safe.

Andy

[B2N2]

Very well put East Mid.:ok:
That's actually what I meant to say, however I am not as eloquent as you...:O

[englishal]

One thing to bear in mind, if the student goes to a JAA approved school in the USA then the examiner is *probably* a Brit / European who examines outside of the FARs i.e. as far as the FAA is concerned, the flight is probably an instructional dual flight unless the JAA examiner is also an FAA examiner - they would have to be IMO at least an FAA FI. This means the FAA has no control over the standards of students passing a JAA flight test in the USA.

Therefor the blame should lie wholely with the CAA for not enforcing proper standards are met during their (expensive) approval inspections and they should call suspect examiners in to answer for it.

If the PPL is FAA, in my experience FAA FE's are very stringent in the examinations (it is their neck / income on the line) and will only pass a student who meets the FAA requirements. FAA PPL syllabus is different to JAA, and includes night flying as well as other ground reference manouvres and their log book may reflect this.

[Kengineer-130]

Esperanza,
not interested in my offer then? :confused: :} ;)

[Monocock]

I brought this subject up four years ago and was slated for my observations on the UK / USA differeces.

I persoanlly have no issue with Brits going to the US to do a condensed course as long as they are prepared to come back and have a PROPER assessment of their ability and take any necessary further training that might be required to fly seafely in UK airspace.

My biggest gripe is the people who go to the US, spend their £5k, return to Blighty and then moan about the age/condition of the a/c they have to hire to stay current. If more £5k's went inot our club's coffers might we all benefit from better hardware and therefore a more flourishing industry?? I don't know but it must be a contributor to the issue.
:ugh:

[Lower the Nose!]

If more £5k's went inot our club's coffers might we all benefit from better hardware and therefore a more flourishing industry??

I doubt it, because 5k is only the start if you want to fly in the UK. I have learnt to fly in the US where I have been living for the past few years. But I have no intention of flying in the UK when I get back. I can't bring myself to spend so much hard earned on rotten old planes, under a regulatory regime that clearly doesn't want me there, flying into airports which charge me the earth for the privilege. You need a sea change of regulation and financing (hypothecation of taxes: you spend the tax money, you get it back in direct state spending) in the UK, which is never going to happen. I fear GA in Europe will eventually be only for the super rich.

[speedbird676]

If it wasn't for the USA I would never have learnt to fly an aeroplane and gained my PPL. I spent £3.5k when I was learning and got my license in 4 weeks. If I had tried to learn in the UK I would have been constantly slowed down by the weather and would have probably spent £10k+, getting out of it a very similar license and a lot less experience.

I learnt to fly in Pennsylvania, not reknowned for it's good weather. I learnt to cope with haze, rain, high temperature and humidity, thunderstorms, things that I would likely not encountered in the UK. I also flew in and out of Lancaster airport, a proper tower controlled field visited frequently by commercial traffic and a lot of GA. During my cross country flights I got practice at landing on loads of very short and narrow farm strips as well as full blown commercial airports, in amongst the Boeings and Airbus's. I learnt to fly close to restricted airspace above New York and Washington and was able to be under constant air traffic control. Since there were no landing fees to worry about I could practice as many landings as I wanted, often being signed off by my instructor to go and fly the pattern for the afternoon, practicing varying techniques on the two tarmac runways at Lancaster. When I got my license I then got to fly into Philadelphia International, albeit with a friend and experienced pilot next to me. Personally I think that I now have more experience in my 50 hours logged than if I'd flown at the weekends in and out of a grass strip in the UK. Oh, and I've got a lot more money left in my back pocket for my next flying trip.

When the fuel tax in the UK is cut and landing fees are abolished then maybe, just maybe I'll consider flying here on a reguar basis.

[EastMids]

My biggest gripe is the people who go to the US, spend their £5k, return to Blighty and then moan about the age/condition of the a/c they have to hire to stay current. If more £5k's went inot our club's coffers might we all benefit from better hardware and therefore a more flourishing industry?? I don't know but it must be a contributor to the issue.
:ugh:

There we go again with an attitude that suggests pilots who trained in the USA owe UK GA something? :rolleyes: Most people who go to the USA to train don't do so just for the sake of it - they go there because the USA can offer them something that the UK can't or won't offer, typically a fast paced course in pretty much guaranteed weather, or lower prices. I learned in the USA for exactly one of those reasons, and its UK GA's loss that it couldn't offer what I needed - sorry, but I think its called globalisation or something like that! :bored: Sure its a difficult problem to fix, but it isn't just going to go away. I don't feel embarrassed that I cut UK GA out of my training needs, but on the other hand I believe I've supported UK GA in the 11 years since I got my PPL by consistantly putting money into it week in week out, year in year out. Without the initial training in the USA, I doubt UK GA would have had any of that money.

At the club I use, the rental fleet is to a large extent isolated from the training fleet, so unless there's some cross-funding involved, I fail to see how people who learn to fly in the US cause the rental fleet to be old and tired. Clapped out rental aircraft in the UK aren't the fault of those who go to the USA, but they may well be contributory reasons why pilots don't stay in the system and provide UK GA with a steady income when they get back. Again, instead of criticising those who go there to train, those who train in the US need to be embraced by UK GA and encouraged to stay in the system and provide ongoing income on a regular basis.

I am of the opinion that with ever increasing costs, the UK training and club scene has got to do something radical if it is to last - I don't think it can just go on hiking prices for ever ageing Cessnas and Pipers. Without ongoing income its difficult to see where the funding for improvements comes from, so if those who train in the USA come back and provide some of that income, I see no reasons for UK GA to complain about that.

Andy

[IO540]

I think there is nothing wrong with doing one's PPL in the USA rather than the UK.

If one spent the £8k+ (£5k is rather optimistic, for most locations and the average ability pilot) at the local UK airfield, this is likely to result in yet another flying school opening up, having yet more "just passing through" ATPL hour builders sitting on the sofas thumbing through the airline ads, so that nobody is actually going to make any money.... In most cases of several fixed-wing schools in a given airfield, one could shut all but one and everybody would be better off.

The thing which would make a real difference would be if one could attract even a tiny little bit more of the very copious money which is splashing around the world outside GA; attract some people with realistic budgets into flying, and then everybody would benefit from extra traffic, extra landing fees, extra tea and chocolate cakes sold, and the holes in the WW2 runways might finally get patched up because anybody with a half decent plane doesn't want to wreck in in a pothole.

I am sorry to say this but there is nothing to be gained supporting the decrepit PPL training industry as it stands. It is a sausage machine, churning out PPLs, of which nearly all chuck in the towel nearly right away. Banging around circuits is of no long term benefit to UK GA. It's not a sustainable business. It is the "bit after that" that needs addressing.

[neilcharlton]

A nice bit of Esperanza (http://www.pprune.org/forums/member.php?u=72195) bashing there. Esperanza was merely expressing his observations . He is an experienced instructor , he's taught in the US and the UK and he finds many pilots that are taught in the US under par. So unless your an instructor and regularly teach these people how are YOU qualified to express an opinion ?

Yes there will always be exceptions to the point and I’m sure there's a lot of well trained pilots from US schools.

How do other instructors find US trained pilots flying in the UK?

[unfazed]

neilcharlton

How do other instructors find US trained pilots flying in the UK?

An interesting question but one with an interesting opposite

Q- How do US instructors find UK trained pilots flying in the US ?

Nothing like a bit of balance....

Let me suggest that most would need an hour or two of dual to get up to speed with
Local area
Airfield specifics
Radio
etc

This would also be true when changing clubs in UK hence why clubs require a dual check flight. I fail to see the point of the question.

[Mercenary Pilot]

So unless your an instructor and regularly teach these people how are YOU qualified to express an opinion ?


You dont need to be an FI to know what awful/gash/dangerous flying looks like.:p

[Kengineer-130]

still no answer to my offer on the previous page :(

[scooter boy]

I was trained in fixed wing at Van Nuys CA in 1994 (IR Louisville KY 2000) and rotary in the UK in 2002.

Without a doubt aviation is more evolved in the USA and far more user friendly. I would say that standards of training are comparable and that it is not possible to generalise...

But in my experience (he says generalising massively...)::)

In the US you have to learn to get slick on the radio fast. There were often 5 or 6 aircraft in the pattern - many commercial a/c and jets.

When I returned to the UK I really couldn't believe the number of miserable old farts involved in flying here - generally older men who were very quick to criticise the US system despite having had no experience of it themselves - the anti-GPS brigade. Jealously guarding their rusting ill equipped elderly cessnas. The US is generally younger (aircraft and pilots), more positive and has a far more "can do" mentality.

In the US getting a temporary airman certificate on the day you pass your test so that you can go flying immediately beats the hell out of waiting for the license in the post before you can fly.


As I previously stated we should not generalise though - experience on both sides of the Atlantic is valuable and should be respected.

[172driver]

When I returned to the UK I really couldn't believe the number of miserable old farts involved in flying here - generally older men who were very quick to criticise the US system despite having had no experience of it themselves - the anti-GPS brigade. Jealously guarding their rusting ill equipped elderly cessnas. The US is generally younger (aircraft and pilots), more positive and has a far more "can do" mentality.

Exactly. And then they wonder why not more people are partaking in GA in the UK :ugh:

In the US getting a temporary airman certificate on the day you pass your test so that you can go flying immediately beats the hell out of waiting for the license in the post before you can fly.


And at the end the CAA hand you a stack of paper that can seriously impact your W&B :}

[meditek]

Just a passing thought but in the UK I got the impression that natural ability, intelligence and confidence gets you labelled as 'overconfident' with subsequent extra hours to eliminate it while in the US they are more likely to get excited by it and nurture it. Americans admire success in other people - Brits mostly hate it.

[IO540]

How true that is.

[fly_sd]

Don’t stop by this forum that often but on the odd occasion I do I have several of this kind of thread – usually either starts by an instructor talking about the “inferior” training in the US to which there are several counter posts to claim otherwise or starts off by someone asking about training in the US to which someone makes this claim followed by all the subsequent posts etc. I recall seeing posts saying US trained pilots need 10 hours extra training on the radio, instrument rating in the US is inferior because apparently we do not have many NDBs :confused: , US trained pilots ride the brakes etc etc. Assuming that these posts are made by instructors being pissed off at the number of people going over to the US to fly I would have thought a better way to do this would be promote the benefits of learning at home rather than putting out posts like this.

[speedbird676]

Anyone read the thread about someone wanting to fly into Birmingham? Going to cost £70 in fees for a PA28...

It's no wonder that people like myself choose to fly in the USA... My trip to Philadelhia International cost me the equivalent of £20 and included use of the private terminal and a free shuttle bus to the main terminals so I could fly home....