Are Instructors in short supply?

[llanfairpg]

A friend was telling me the other day that they may have an instructor problem next year at their club and it seems one or two others are having similar problems.

Is this the case on/at your airfield/school/club?

[znww5]

That's the impression I get. One club at my airfield had to advertise for a replacement, an instructor I knew had no problem getting a job in another part of the country and a club 'down south' has been offering FI training in exchange for working for them for a time. All points to a shortage developing to me.

It will be interesting to see if the EASA rumour of removing the commercial licence requirement will materialise - and how that affects the FI market. Personally, I never have understood the logic in assuming a PPL holder is safe to qualify and work as an FI if they aren't paid, but have to have a commercial licence if they are. :rolleyes:

On the other hand, where are the aspiring airline pilots with £60,000 debts going to go?

[llanfairpg]

i suppose the split(PPL/CPL) is geared to helping the part time club member helping out at a club or a career instructor working at a school

[eharding]

Judging from the prominent banner advertisements at the top of Pprune pages, it isn't just civilian flying schools that are having trouble finding and retaining instructors.

https://cms.raf.mod.uk/rafinnsworth/rafcms/userpreview/7BA9023E-1143-EC82-2EB02C9649C20AB2.cfm

Interesting that the small print says they'd even take on civilians with no previous RAF service....the even smaller print says 'liability for call out to regular service'.:ooh:

[Chuck Ellsworth]

A shortage of flight instructors is a good thing.

Maybe the industry will review the situation and set standards for flight instructors that will demand a living wage be paid.

To do this of course the old school thinking that students can teach students has to be shi.canned.

[18greens]

Isn't it interesting that the shortage of instructors does not lead to livable wages and a long term career for keen dedicated flying instuctors.

Rather the cry is to reduce the qualifications required to allow the tape and shoestring operation to carry on.

And yes there is a big big shortage of people willing to pay £30,000 to become an instructor to earn £10,000 per year (and maybe get a job flying for an airline)

Basically the whole flying thing is all hung together by people who volunteer their time to teach people how to fly free because they just love it.

And if you can't take a joke, shouldn't have joined.

[englishal]

I can see absolutely no reason to be an instructor in the UK unless:

a) You have another job and you just do it for pleasure
b) You get to teach something interesting (Aerobatics, instruments)
c) You have your own flight school

Many instructors do it for the hours. If that is the case, I'd do it abroad. I've seen many people move out to the USA (or elsewhere) for 2 years, get their CFII/MEIIs etc..and then instruct for 18 months, often on new aeroplanes. They get visa's sponsored by the FTO, get a place to live and make $25-$30 per hour which goes in their pocket. Ok, not much but after 2 years they walk away with an FAA ATP, 1500+ hours, and a JAR conversion, and the whole lot has actually "only" cost them £30,000 as opposed to the £60,000+ for 250 hrs in the UK.

My mate did this, and came back in Jan. He converted to JAR, did a type rating (paid for by the company) and is now a captain of a turbo prop (interesting flying, not airline) earning a good wage.

Wish I had done it ;)

[stickandrudderman]

Only the idle rich will be able to become flying instructors soon.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

We should have a contest to see which country has the most stupid people in charge of flight training.

I know a couple here in Transport Canada that I would put money on to win the contest.

In fact I have one in mind that couldn't lose unless you put up someone that draws a flat line on a brain scan.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Chuck, I can think of a few like that here in the UK as well.

18greens makes an excellent point, why just because there is a shortage of experienced FI's do the "powers that be" suddenly decide that a lowering of qualifications required is a good thing?

How come a driving instructor can earn a good living, but a flying instructor cannot.

The situation is ridiculous and I for one am glad there is a shortage. At last we have a chance to keep the dedicated people in this industry, but to do it, you have to pay them at least a living wage, instead of forcing everyone to move on at the earliest opportunity.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Another underused supply of instructors is the older generation who are retired or semi retired from having flown for a lifetime....

......I don't know what it is like in Britain but in Canada our regulator makes it to difficult to get an instructors rating ( or to renew one ).

My personal opinion is they do not want to have to deal with people who understand how to fly and how to survive flying.....what they want is mindless submission to their ideas of how to teach flying....

It is easier for them to control those who have been brain washed than try and B.S. those who understand the subject.

[Solar]

All this talk about lowering instructor qualifcation standards is interesting and begs the question, has the quality of instructing been improved since the interduction of the requirement for the CPL theory exams to allow instruction to be carried out?
I'm not sure that it has but it has led to the present day shortage.
On the other side of the coin has the quality of newby comercial pilots improved, some postings on PPrune would indicate the contrary.
I do think instructors should have a decent wage but obviously one of problems is with ever increasing running cost due to excessive and lets face it, sometimes ludicrous certification costs which are mandatory on the planes we use so the instructor is one place where money can be saved.
The catch 22 is of course if we increase the costs to the student then they decide to spend their money on something else so we won't need the instructor anyway.
It's a bit like when the NPPL was interduced (which I think is a good thing) and while being discussed at the club where everybody was more or less in favour our instructor at the time said "yes its a good idea but if they hadn't made it so akward in the first place we wouldn't be praising them now" in other words keep the masses hungry and they will appreciate dry bread.

[Cuillin]

There is also a large number of SE Instructor rated airline pilots out there who would love to renew their ratings and do a bit of part-time instructing on their days off.

They are, generally, unable to do it as it affects their Flight Time Limitations/days off requirements (as stipulated by the CAA as it is classed as aerial work).

An airline pilot, on his day off, is unable to do a 30 minute trial lesson but could drive a taxi for 12 hours to help pay off his training loan. Which is the more stressful/tiring?

Experience that could be put to good use is lost to the light aviation fraternity.

Bonkers.

[portsharbourflyer]

I have mentioned this in previous posts, but the biggest cause of the instructor shortage is the JAA training system. Under the CAA self improver route you had to obtain 700 hours to upgrade the BCPL to a full CPL, as a consequence nearly every modular/self improver went instructing to build the required hours. As aerial photography, tug and jump plane jobs are few and far between instructing was the only option for building the hours. The BCPL to CPL upgrade course was available but an expensive option.

Under JAA as you can hold a full CPL with only 200 hours many are opting for self sponsored type ratings as a way into the airlines rather than building hours by instructing. Flying school have always relied on hour builders as a source of instructors and the BCPL was in place for years under the CAA system. Look at the amount of modular 250 hour frozen ATPL holders starting with Ryanair this year by self funding a 737 rating; if the old CAA system was still in place all these candidates would have to instruct to get 700 hours in order to get a full CPL before been able to apply for an airline job.

This is the reason for the instructor shortage 1) Able to hold a full CPL at 200 hours and Self sponsored type ratings.

[Say again s l o w l y]

But by forcing people to instruct to gain 700 hours, how is that keeping a cadre of experienced FI's? All that happens is you get hour builders who disappear after a year or so.

That is rubbish for the industry and a prime reason why you get so few "career" FI's. People were forced into instructing, not because they wanted to, but because they HAD to.

If anyone thinks that reintroducing forced instructing is a way to get better standards, they are delusional.

At least now more of the FI's that are coming through actualy think there is something to gain from teaching, rather than just as a stepping stone.

I have been very impressed with some of the "new" FI's I have seen this year, far, far better than a lot of the people I started instructing with.

Whilst there may be a shortage, it does seem as if the standard is finally starting to go up a bit.

[portsharbourflyer]

Actually forcing people to get 700 hours worked extremely well, it is exactly how the system worked before 2002. Yes it kept them in the ppl instructing system for at least a year or two; where as now some clubs may only keep an FI(R) for a few months before he/she disapears to the airlines.
SAS, you may have some valid points but the CAA self improver route was in place for a couple of decades, only phased out in 2002 when JAA was implemented.

As far as I am aware PPL instruction standards between 1982 and 2002 were pretty good and having to obtain 700 hours meant the instructor was around long enough to see several students all the way through the course.

PPL Instructing was always a stepping stone to the airlines for probably 80/90% of people who ever instructed. However the system worked it provided the industry with a steady stream of instructors, yes you lost QFI to the airlines but at least you had a stream of BCPL/AFIs to replace them.
PPL instructing was never viable as a career and hour building instructors have infact help keep the price of flight tuition down over the years.
Career FIs are going to move onto CPL/IR instructing and so will never remain in the PPL training system for long.

Quote:
At least now more of the FI's that are coming through actualy think there is something to gain from teaching, rather than just as a stepping stone.

Correction, some people realise that instructing is a far better way to progress your flying career, develop skills than forking out 20,000 for a type rating.

[Say again s l o w l y]

This industry is in the s**t precisely because of the idiotic practise of using "hour builders" It doesn't matter if someone stays for 6 months or 2 years, I don't call that experienced.

What we need is people to make a career out of instructing. The stupidly low rates of pay and borderline illegal practises of forcing FI's to be self employed when they blatantly aren't can be directly related to the "self improver" route, as people were forced into instructing and the terms and conditions were foisted upon them.

Now, the FI's have the choice and we need to stand up and be counted. It isn't greed to want to be paid a sensible amount and enjoy the job protections afforded to everyone else in this country. By doing this, we will also help to make the GA business stronger and more realistic. If it forces a fw small and cr*ppy clubs to the wall, then so be it, they will be replaced by something much, much better, that actually has a future.

We don't want to turn the clock backwards, but need to look as to how the industry can be made better and more stable. Having good, committed instructors is a start, but we also need to stop artificially keeping the costs low and set realistic prices.

If that makes flying less inclusive, that is something that can only be changed by utilising new machines like Ikarus etc, that can flown as a microlight.

Looking to the "olden days" just means you put on rose tinted specs and forget how rubbish they really were. Don't forget the lessons of the past, but don't be fooled into thinking that what went on was actually any good.

[Ivor_Novello]

At the rate at which fuel costs are increasing it's maybe not a bad thing.
In the space of less than 3 year, with what I would pay an hour lesson plus instructor now I can barely selh hire a 152.

Given that my wage hasn't increased, and going to the petrol station is a shocker, nevermind the avgas, if I was to start learning to fly all over again I'd probably give it a second thought now....

[portsharbourflyer]

I don't disagree instructors ideally in a real world should be paid more, but GA in this country is already under pressure from fuel prices, regulatory charges so any further price rises from increased instructor wages is only going to set back GA further.
Figures show people undertaking PPL courses has reduced in the last few years so anything that increases prices further really needs to be avoided.
SAS your suggestions are more likely to wipe GA of the face of the country than promote it.

SAS by the fact your profiles states you fly a 737 I would also assume you yourself were once an hour builder.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Yes, I was once an "hour builder" like most of us, but I have continued to teach no matter what else I have flown.

People gaining experience are not neccesarily the problem. I use the term "hour builder" for those FI's who do a rubbish job and really don't care about GA or light aircraft.

There are plenty of FI's I worked with who only came into instructing to get enough hours to get a jet job, but they did an excellent job as Instructors.
GA in the UK is in the dark ages. The standards are generally awful interms of equipment avaiable, training given and value for money.

The whole thing needs a shake up. Paying FI's more than an insult needn't kill the industry, I would argue that it would actually strengthen it.
PPL's and students need to realise that they are paying an artificially low amount in this regard.

Since the club I'm mainly involved with charges seperately for the a/c and the FI, this has allowed us to actually charge a sensible amont for an FI's time ad guess what...........The students don't whinge. A good FI is worth £30-40 an hour. We all know what an a/c costs to run, so there is nothing hidden.

Are we the cheapest around? No, are we the best value for money. Easily and that is why we are busy. Good instructors, even though the prices are higher are worth it in the long run.

Charging unrealistic amounts for any goods and services is stupid in the long term. GA in the UK is now suffering for it. We simply aren't a big or strong enough industry to do anything about it. If there were big associations or big companies invlved woth GA, then we would have a lot more success lobbying for change, rather than the disperate group we are today. Especially as flying is seen as a rich mans hobby.

You want tax relief........ Yeah right.

Will GA die in this country? I hope not, but in it's present form it is just wating for the lethal injetion at the moment. It isn't the cost that's killing it, rather the atrocious service that most clubs provide. All that will happen as prices go up, is that the numbers who can't afford it will have to change to other forms of aviation, such as microlight or "sport" flying rather than flying in your standard spamcans.

The industry will change and eventually be stronger for it, it just has to go through some pain first.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

This industry is in the s**t precisely because of the idiotic practise of using "hour builders" It doesn't matter if someone stays for 6 months or 2 years, I don't call that experienced.


Don't feel bad because it is the same the world over....

It's the weekend so head out to your nearest airport and sit and watch the flight schools land their airplanes on the nose wheels....great entertainment and it's free...:E

[Penguina]

I've recently decided to get a 'real job' and do instructing occasionally, weekends only. It's a huge relief. Maybe that way I can afford the IR without horrendous debt.

If I could realistically carry on like this, I might. But I'm happy to swan out, knowing that they're all desperate and I could swan right back in again any time I fancied it. If I was offered a decent wage and some security, I'd jump at it and even self-fund further training as a career instructor, but right now? Sorry, but what's in it for me?

:(

[IO540]

How come a driving instructor can earn a good living, but a flying instructor cannot.

The answer must be that there is a demand for driving lessons at the price they have to go for, but there isn't a demand for flying lessons at the price they have to go for.

And as an aircraft owner I know about operating costs and I know that there isn't much one can do about most of them.

Most people think that if there is a shortage of something then its price must rise until the demand drops enough to make the shortage go away. This principle holds up in most normal business but it fails where the demand is capped by some other factor.

In PPL training, the demand is capped to the number of people in a given radius interested in learning to fly. Yet the industry continues to live in the 1960s/1970s heyday and every airfield that isn't tightly run seems to have more than one school based there.

This is completely pointless. An airfield cannot have a catchment area that can support more than one decent school. The airfield where I learnt had eight fixed wing schools at the time; now it's a bit fewer (some went bust in a manner which was spectacular even by the industry standard, with massive internal fraud) but still there are several times more than there ever will be customers for.

It's of course trendy to say "we welcome competition" but in reality the only businesses who can afford competition are those with loads of unfulfilled demand, and there is no such thing in PPL training.

The demand will always be sucked dry by well wishing people who are willing to work for nothing out of a wooden hut.

One could do things locally if one had control of the airfield (via issuing leases banning new flight training operations) and had a great catchment area, but here isn't any easy way to increase that all around the UK.

[TheOddOne]

Most people think that if there is a shortage of something then its price must rise until the demand drops enough to make the shortage go away. This principle holds up in most normal business but it fails where the demand is capped by some other factor.

In PPL training, the demand is capped to the number of people in a given radius interested in learning to fly.

Simple Keynsian economics, like wot we did at college.

Actually, there's more to supply and elasticity of demand than that. It you can differentiate your product, then you can revitalise demand.

Here's a case study.

Our airfield now has resident 13, count them, 13 of these Cirrus things. They weren't there 2 years ago. I understand prices start at £250k a pop, that's £3.25 million more investment on the airfield in 2 years. There's now a whole training setup just to cater for them. I don't know if the people keeping all these Cirri going have been lost to the existing schools or whether they were privateers who have changed to the new type. The pilots are I believe all post-PPL types (I don't know if anyone anywhere is offering ab initio training on a Cirrus).

My point is that you can generate additional demand if the product is right.

Another case study: the R22. We've got dozens of the things and they're out in all weathers zooming up & down parallel to the runway. Again, this seems like newly-created demand that wasn't being satisfied by the PA28/C152 operations. This market is now more mature because it started about 10 years ago. Look at Sloane at Sywell. I never heard of anyone half way through their PA28 course suddenly saying
'I'm off now to learn to fly helicopters instead' (or the other way round, either!)'

You can create demand. It's called Marketing. A part of it is having the right product, another part is promoting it appropriately.

A grubby caravan with a line of C152's then waiting for the punters to knock on your door is neither.

TheOddOne

[Kanu]

I was forced to find other work in the midlands when my employer closed down. I was offered (AT BEST) £10 a day retainer (which included the first hour!!!). With those offers around, is it any f^&*ing wonder that instructors are pissing off to regionals????

[2close]

I have heard mention of a FI Union (and I mean that in the sense of a cooperative / professional body not a trade union before anyone gets their panty-hose twisted).

Anyone else heard that or is it one of those rumours that get banded about every few years (and probably has done over the past thirty years or so) but actually never sees the light of day?

Not saying I'm for or against, although I can't see how a professional body can be a bad thing provided it doesn't become a platform for militants who think there are fourteen 21 year old virginal female students waiting for them on the other side after the last final approach.;)

[VFE]

Remove the CPL requirement for instructing and you'll still see the same level of flight instruction from older and more experienced PPL's, possibly better, who's to say?

The problem of where the hours builders will go is of no concern to the CAA in my opinion however, the airlines may find they need to lower their entry requirements, at least until the multi-crew CPL comes to fruition at which point there'll be little problem for either camp will there?

No instructor shortage during winter months tho that's for sure. I'm bored ****less. ;)

VFE.

[IO540]

The Odd One

Our airfield now has resident 13, count them, 13 of these Cirrus things. They weren't there 2 years ago. I understand prices start at £250k a pop, that's £3.25 million more investment on the airfield in 2 years. There's now a whole training setup just to cater for them. I don't know if the people keeping all these Cirri going have been lost to the existing schools or whether they were privateers who have changed to the new type. The pilots are I believe all post-PPL types (I don't know if anyone anywhere is offering ab initio training on a Cirrus).

My point is that you can generate additional demand if the product is right.


I have been saying more or less exactly the above on pprune for the several years I've been here, and sure as clockwork I have been jumped on by traditional rag and tube / spamcan types who make up the bulk of UK GA and who treat the suggestion of "going after the money" as elitist crap which they presumably fear will price them off their airfield. I've had these fears voiced to me in person at a few places, too, when e.g. the airfield proposed to add an ILS.

There is no doubt in my mind that setting up a slick PPL/IR training & club operation which trains people to fly from A to B for real (that is, right across Europe - what else is one going to be doing in an SR22??), while paying only the barest legally required lip service to the WW1 UK PPL syllabus with its stupid circular slide rule and map+compass+stopwatch navigation, is the way ahead. Obviously such a "PPL" would be a bit more than the usual £8k :) You would be converting people to the 150kt complex type before the skills test.

And it's the only way ahead that's left today. (Apart from a specialised aerobatic school, perhaps.)

Now, what sort of instructors would one need for such a school? No hour builder with a fATPL would be any good - they fall short on experience on type (zero), time on real IFR routes (zero), European IFR flight planning experience (zero). You would need ex airline pilots with GA IFR experience. Or keen private IR pilots but most of them are on N-reg and you would not get most of them to squeeze the JAA CPL/IR in between their business interests to enable them to legally instruct.

You would also need an accessible IR, with a short US-style ground school because the N-reg option is not really viable in the training/club context even if it does continue indefinitely.

There is work being done in the USA on an integrated one-step PPL/IR and the results look promising.

[TheOddOne]

IO

Now, what sort of instructors would one need for such a school?

Well, probably not me, my FI course certainly did nothing for equipping me to teach on this class of aircraft. I've only sat in one, yet to have the opportunity to fly in one but I was most impressed with the overall layout and I was shown a brief tour of the avionics.

I think I'd probably want 1500 hours or so more, working up through maybe an Arrow with twin Garmin 430/530 or such and a conversion course. Even then, I'm not sure the Cirrus as such is a good idea for effects of controls or climbing and descending! Is there a suitable ab initio type to feed in to the Cirrus?

TheOddOne

[Say again s l o w l y]

The instructor course is just about giving you the bare bones and some ability to teach.

There is no course in the world that can take someone with no experience in a high performance aircraft and turn them into an instructor on it in a couple of weeks. (Mind you I wouldn't call an SR22 particularily high performance.)

It would be wonderful if we could have modern aircraft, good instructing and a sensible "aftercare" package to help encourage people post PPL issue.

Until that happens, most PPL's will be stuck flying the usual cr*p with no help and generally getting ripped off and treated like shi*e.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

There are hundreds of us with not only modern glass cockpit experience but modern teaching techniques who would do flight instruction.....we just do not want to submit to the frontal lobotomy that would be required to parrot back all the old school crap that is needed to get our instructors rating back.

[IO540]

The SR22 is OK for ab initio training. There have been schools (not in the UK) training ab initio in TB20s which has similar performance.

You don't need 1500hrs either. I went to a TB20 with 120hrs TT and it took me about 20hrs to get used to it. A decent instructor who went on a specialised course which explores the envelope (anybody can fly an SR22 conventionally) would be up to speed in a few weeks.

[portsharbourflyer]

Get back to the point everyone, the instructor shortage.
When the JAA modular training was proposed just prior to 2000 the aviation press predicted this would result in an instructor shortage as the need to build 700 hours to hold a CPL was removed; this is exactly what has happened now. The BCPLs holding self improvers were a major source of instructors to the industry.
SAS, far more people in the eighties were obtaining PPLs than they are now, therefore these "inexperienced" AFIs/QFIs were by and large making a reasonable job of PPL instructing.
To make PPL instructing a viable career option you will need to start paying PPL instructors the same as Commercial instuctors, so the price of a PPL will start becoming well over 10,000, so please don't tell me that this is going to help the industry or encourage popular flying.
Oddone,
At Denham you have technically advanced aircraft, your catchment area is London, where disposable incomes are high, there are reasons why TAA are based at Denham and not in Plymouth. That is a marketing idea that will work in London not at Plymouth or many other parts of the country.
It is simple eveyone, the biggest contributor to the instructor shortage has been the introduction of the JAA modular system.

[Tony Hirst]

I agree with the spirit of Odd One's and IO540's views. That the punter can start training with a goal in mind and if that goal is business into Europe then why spend 43 hours training in a 152 with an intermittent transponder. However, as most students are not Captain Capacity incarnate and the course take considerably longer to complete - how do you market that?

Problem is, I get the idea that 90% of students start off with one idea and end up doing something completely different anyway.

Also I can't agree that the traditional methods should be compromised because of technology. The navigation principles learnt (or that should be learnt at PPL level) apply regardless of flight rules or tools. It is difficult to see what should be changed in the PPL without adding more.

On a sombre note, as the economy is wavering a little bit, and as it doesn't seem to take much for the airlines to find that all of a sudden they have too much capacity, then I wonder if the shortage will last long?

[Say again s l o w l y]

The "rot" set in the period you are describing.

How come people are happy to pay more than 10k for a helicopter licence?

Paying a sensible amount for a good experienced FI is VALUE FOR MONEY.

Why should I bother my a*se teaching ab inito students if I'm not going to get paid a sensible amount for my experience, skill, training and knowledge. I very rarely go near ab-inito PPL stuff anymore, as it just isn't worth it to me.

How is losing 10 years and thousands of hours of different types of flying experience because I feel like I'm being taken advantage of a good thing?

I don't teach for a living, but I would never do anything for free or less than the market rate, as it would undermine those who are trying to make a living from it.

To say that paying sensible wages would kill the industry is absolutely ridiculous. It shows that the pricing is unrealistic. The FI is the cheap part of the training cost. With the implementation of new aircraft types like 3 axis microlights that outperform most light a/c, but cost far less to run, this industry will change.

What we have to do is ensure that the instructing fraternity gets better not worse. Paying a sensible wage will help keep good, committed people in the business.

Carrying on the outmoded victorian era practices will just let this business die.

It's in the poop now and doing the same old nonsense will just kill completely.

[znww5]

Clearly the instructor shortage is down to the abysmal pay and conditions offered to potential FI's - I was appalled to find that my instructor had to top up their income with an evening cleaning job . . . and we all know how well that is paid.

However, the fact remains that outside of London and the M4 corridor, there simply isn't the disposable income available to support the 'shiny new aircraft' marketing strategy.

I originally started to learn to fly in the late 80's before other things got in the way and one of the most noticeable differences when I came back to it recently was that the demographic profile had lurched upwards from 20/30 to 40/50/60. The reason is simple, with ballistic house prices and mediocre wages, only the better off older people can actually afford to fly.

The upshot of this is that I do agree that instructors are paid insulting wages - but the problem is that students can't, for the most part, afford what it would otherwise cost. Evidence of that is provided by those who either migrate to microlights from Group A licences, or go directly to microlight training in the first place. It would be interesting to hear from microlight instructors to get an idea of how they see things.

[portsharbourflyer]

Quote

How come people are happy to pay more than 10k for a helicopter licence?

Answer: Not that many people are.

Look at the figures for PPL(H) and PPL(A) holders, there is significantly less people holding a PPL(H) than a PPL(A)., the main reason is cost. One of my current students had done PPL(H) training in the states, upon returning to the UK he opted to do a fixed wing PPL(A) due to the cost of rotary flying.

If PPL(A) holders reduce to the levels of PPL(H) holders the instructor shortage will be easily solved.

[Say again s l o w l y]

There speaketh the PPL's. Believe me, in every part of the country, there is plenty of money available to learn.

Yes there are fewer PPL(H) holders, but we in the fixed wing world could learn an awful lot from the Heli training side.

It is generally done better and very few "schools" rely solely on training for their income. Aircraft sales, AOC work etc.etc all help to make a more viable business model.

To be frank, keeping cost artifically low helps no one. It does make it more inclusive, but that doesn't make it better.

I would rather have fewer, richer students and members who fly more often.

This is nothing to do with richer people being "better" or other such nonsense, but having a stable community. At the moment what we have is people who save up for a licence, but once they have got it, they can no longer justify the cost and end up flying rarely, lose confidence and give up after a couple of years.

That is rubbish for the industry as a whole. If you raise the entry barriers to a more realistic level, then you might not get as many coming through the door, but you will get better "quality" clients.

Now that all sounds rather arrogant, but it is just a business look at it, not a look at the personalities.

There are ways of making flying more affordable, but that will take a change in regulation and aircraft types used.

This business needs a stable future and going back to the dark ages is the last thing we need.

Anyone who thinks paying FI's starvation wages will help this industry is either a flying school owner or has no idea of the work of an FI. Let alone one of good business practice.

[BackPacker]

There's another thing that I don't get.

You want to fly for the airlines. You've done the PPL, done the CPL/IR/ME/MCC all in the minimum required hours (something like 250?) and on the side done all the ATPL exams. The airlines will not want you because you do not "have enough experience".

So instead of self-funding your hour building (e.g. flying IFR airways all over Europe), you acquire an FI, teach a bunch of ab-initio students how to bash around the circuit and navigate to the dozen or so airfields that are within reasonable range yet qualify for the QXC, until you've seen them all and can get there without unfolding a map. Hundreds of hours spent at low level, in VMC, in a simple single engine airplane. Until, at some point in time, you have enough hours PIC to be acceptable to the airlines.

Now someone tell me: how does this additional experience help you in your airline job? Sure, with a bit of (bad) luck you might have some additional experience in dealing with emergencies and a bit of patience in dealing with a strange acting bloke in the LHS will help you as well. But for the rest?

In other words, are we really doing wannabe-airline pilots, and the airline industry, a favour by allowing all these hour-building instructors to count those instruction hours towards unfreezing an ATPL (or whatever it's called), or is this just a conspiracy to keep "the system" working?

[Say again s l o w l y]

A lot of the skills you learn as an FI can be directly related to the job of being an airline pilot.

There is an awful lot more to being a pilot than just the basic handling skills of flying on instruments.

As an FI you learn how to work wth people in the cockpit, you gain confidence, you get scared, but most of all you learn decision making skills.

Being an FI helped me massively when I got my first airline job. You can even now see the difference between those straight out of school and those who've done a bit of instructing. The handling skills might not be that different, but there is a huge difference in their thinking and let's face it, that's what flying an airliner is all about nowadays.

So saying an FI has no "relevant" experience is totally wrong. Certainly on a bad night, I'd rather be sat next to an ex-instructor rather than someone straight out of school who has never really been in command of an aircraft in real terms.

Airlines currently seem to love cadets that they can mould in their own image, but long term, I personally think that isn't going to be great for the industry.

It is unfashionable now to work your way up in this business and everyone is in a rush to fly shiny jets, paying for ratings etc.

Who would be the better pilot really? the person who has instructed, flown IFR in marginal machines, turboprops and then gets on a jet or the person who walked out of Oxford paid for a rating and then went straight in as an F/O on a 737 or airbus?

I know who I'd prefer to sit next to, the old school method pilot would probably have an awful lot better line in stories as well and when you're sat next to someone for 10 hours a day, that is one thing you'd be thankful for!

[llanfairpg]

I cannot agree that the airlines will not want you. When this scheme was introduced I for one thought we are going to get some real no chancers in the right seat. I have to say apart from the one or two odd characters which has nothing to do with hours, only poor interviewers and selection, the standard is very good and the airlines know this. However if their is a shortage of first officers its more than likely that an experienced FO will get prefeference as you need a body of people to promote into the left hand seat either in the near future or in a year or so.

You could look at the problem the other way round;

How does sitting by a student for another say extra 450 hours make you a better airline pilot that a pilot who was specificallyl trained for airline flying even though he may only have around 250 hours

[znww5]

SAS said "There speaketh the PPL's." Well, could that possibly be because this is a PPL forum :confused:

As for the notion of there being plenty of money around for people to fly I can only ask - so where are they?

Assuming that there are plenty of rich (ie 'quality' :hmm:) students, what are they going to do the minute they qualify? If they are canny business people, they will either buy an aircraft or a share in one and wave goodbye to the school, avoiding the hassle of trying to hire through a club and minimum hire-time limits.

There was one very well heeled student training at the same time as me and he had bought his brand new aircraft even before he had qualified. Sure, he pops in now and again for a cuppa and a chat - and he'll probably be back for his revalidation, but the club isn't going to make any more money out of him than they do out of any other student. It seems to me that you'll need an awful lot of high-rollers to replace the plethora of working Joe's who fly as often as they can afford.

The problem with flight instruction is that it is squeezed at one end by high hardware operating costs and at the other by students with finite resources. Sadly it is the instructor who is expected to take up the financial slack.

[GASH !]

Does the 'hour building' instructor really exist? I'm pretty sure that most FI's wised up years ago that the way to secure an airline job is simply to purchase a type rating.

Surely nobody gets into instucting now thinking it's a fast track to an airline job? For every job that requires a few hundred hours of SEP time there's 20more that require you simply to purchase a type rating.

As for the experience counting for something, I agree that it's pretty worthless in the current market. Of the FI's I work with, several have over 2000 hours with hundreds of hours of multi IFR time. None of them expect to be able to move into an airline job based on this. None of it counts for anything compared to a freshly minted 200 hour guy prepared to pay £25k to get into Ryanair.

This is the reason instructors are in short supply, it's no longer a viable route to a multi crew job. So taking this into consideration what you now end up with is instructors getting into the industry because they want to do the job, and enjoy doing the job. The fact that there's fewer of them is no bad thing.

[VFE]

The problem with flight instruction is that it is squeezed at one end by high hardware operating costs and at the other by students with finite resources. Sadly it is the instructor who is expected to take up the financial slack.
But the cost of learning to fly has hardly risen in the last eight years. If schools had put their prices up TOGETHER in line with inflation then maybe they and their instructors would be a little better off? Having said that, there's been a drop in all PPL(A) licence issues of around 1000 in the UK over the last 4 years - amazing considering prices have been almost frozen. General aviation is certainly in decline - an interesting thread would be what to do about it?! I honestly do not know how some schools continue to operate with such tight profit margins.

VFE.

[portsharbourflyer]

Quote:
Yes there are fewer PPL(H) holders, but we in the fixed wing world could learn an awful lot from the Heli training side.
No we couldn't learn a thing it is a totally different situation to the fixed wing world; the price of an hour in an R22 is 280 an hour, heli instructors I understand get around £40 an hour, the average PPL(A) instructor is on £20 an hour flown. So for the heli world the extra 20 pounds an hour makes the training price change from £260 an hour to £280 an hour, for someone who can afford 260 an hour paying 280 an hour makes little difference. Put 20 an hour on the price of training in a C150 then 130 an hour to 150 will make a difference to your trade.
Also it costs the average CPL FI(H) 50,000 just to get the VFR CPL and FI rating; also as you mentioned SAS several helicopter schools run AOC work, due to the tenuous nature of helicopter VFR rules then it is possible for VFR only qualified helicopter pilots to fly air taxi charters. As said the charter company the CPL FI(H) moves onto is in most cases the school they already work for. Most CPL FIs(H) will do a combination of instruction and charter work. So SAS for most CPL FI(H) they are paying 50,000 for a licence that has an earning cap of 25,000-30,000 a year; in comparison in the fixed wing world 50,000 can get you a CPL,MEIR, fATPL,MCC and FI rating where the earning potential by moving into the airlines is 40,000 to 80,000 a year.
For CPl FI(H) the only way to improve your earning is invest a further 35,000 to get an IR in order to move into North Sea Oil work.
So for then last 20 years in NZ, Australia, America and the UK PPL(A) instructing was always a breeding ground for the airlines.
SAS, yes you are correct there is a problem with retaining PPLs,

Quote
I would rather have fewer, richer students and members who fly more often.

Fixed wing flying does not need to be exclusive.
The main problem is club hire is expensive and inflexible; however do you ever make your fresh PPLs aware that by doing a tailwheel conversion they could join a syndicate opeating out of a grass strip where they could be flying a Cub or a jodel for as little as £40 pounds an hour. That is where affordable flying lies.

SAS, if we followed your proposals then the price of the commerical training, would rocket, you seem to forget the current system has allowed many of us an affordable route into an aviation career.

Also have you ever heard the term a fool and his money are soon flying more money than they can handle; consequently this is why Cirrus aircraft feature so heavily in the MOR reports for airspace infringements; certainly evidence that money does not lead to better competence.
Gash,
Does the hour building instructor still exist; what do you think I am and my instructional exeprience has gained me four airline interviews in the last two months. However you are correct the popularity of self sponsored type ratings is one of the main factors that has contributed to an instructor shortage. This is why I advocate a return to the old CAA self improver system where 700 hours was needed to hold a full CPL.
With the MPL to be introduced in the next few years the relationship between the airlines and GA will be further severed and the instructor shortage will only get worse.

[xrayalpha]

VFE wote:

>>there's been a drop in all PPL(A) licence issues of around 1000 in the UK over the last 4 years - amazing considering prices have been almost frozen. General aviation is certainly in decline - an interesting thread would be what to do about it?! I honestly do not know how some schools continue to operate with such tight profit margins.<<<

Perhaps some of the figures from Flight Training News might be interesting. There are now about 100 microlight flying school and the same number of light aircraft flying schools. I think there are 99 of one and 100 of the other.

Now, I appreciate that many microlight schools are one man bands in a Portakabin, but some GA schools are little more than that too.

Also of interest is the number of light aircraft movements at Scottish airports as referenced in a Highland and Islands Enterprise report on Connel airfield referenced in the Oban thread. Quite simply, GA movements at Glasgow and Edinburgh have halved in the past decade.

No wonder, BAA want the commercial passengers for WH Smith etc.

The problem is that another part of the report says that student pilots are unwilling to travel more than 30 minutes to their lessons. So what other airfields etc are within 30 minutes of Glasgow and Edinburgh?

There are a couple, Cumbernauld being one. And when I started teaching microlights there, there was one GA school. Then there were three! (and then one went bust!) But there is nowhere to hanger an aircraft! (and if you find a space, you won't be able to afford it!)

So where do you go post-licence?

I, of course, own a grass airfield near Glasgow. My hanger is know as the "rubber hanger" because it seems to stretch to get just one more inside! But I have now even had to derig my microlight to get a paying customer in.

This year we have had eight students gain licences. Seven of them have bought their own aircraft. This is microlights - with prices from £1500 to £25,000.

How many GA students in Scotland have bought their own aircraft after gaining their licence this year? If they did, where would they hanger it?

That's the problem, in a nutshell.

No facilities.

Very best wishes,

Colin

[znww5]

Very interesting post from Colin, xrayalpha. Certainly if being an FI is increasingly being seen as a non-starter for aspiring airline pilots the instructor shortage will continue to increase. Being an increasingly rare commodity should lead to better pay and conditions for FI's generally, but of course schools will have to pass on the extra cost to students.

I suspect that Colin is right in so far as the migration from group A to microlight training will continue and the trend certainly seems to be more advanced than I had thought, given his statistics. What would be interesting however, would be to see how many group A schools follow the market and migrate to microlight instruction.

The reason for this migration is clear - cost. A case in point would be the 2 schools at Sywell, where each operates a version of the Eurostar - the microlight school charges £98/hr dual, whereas the group A school charges £127/hr. OK, the group A version has a more powerful engine and a very nice paint job, but these are as near to being the same aircraft as you can get.

So the effect of this process will probably be an improvement in pay for Group A instructors, followed by a drop in demand and an acceleration towards modern microlight training becoming the natural starting point for leisure flyers.

Which will, perhaps, lead us on to a discussion of whether there is a microlight instructor shortage in a few years time!


David

[xrayalpha]

David,

There is a microlight instructor shortage now!!

(In my view, it all boils down to 800 hours times the hourly rate, minus expenses and VAT. So at 100 an hour, you have 80k to pay for aircraft, fuel maintenance, insurance, building, hangerage, publicity, phone, light, heat, office, personal at desk etc, etc, etc)

Hence, not a lot left in it for the instructor.

My thoughts (and actions) are £35 a flying hour for instructors in school aircraft, £70 an hour for those in their own aircraft.

As a result, I am the most expensive microlight school in the country, at £110 a hour for lessons.

(and on weighshift microlights, you are lucky to do 500 hours in a year!)

Very best,

Colin

[Say again s l o w l y]

I differ slightly in my view of this Colin. The Instructor should never be taken as part of the aircraft costs. They are a seperate entity. So if you charge £100/hr and make £80k a year, that is all down to the aircraft.

The FI should be a totally seperate charge, so that the FI is never left picking the up simply "what's left".

£35/hr is a very sensible figure and I wish there were more school owners like you around. Mind you I suppose that's what comes when a schools is owned by an experienced instructor rather than someone with no real experience of flight instruction other than as a student.

p.s when is the fly-in at Strathaven this year? I'll try and make it, but since the nasty Mrs CAA person took my medical away, I won't be flying unless I can get a lift!

[xrayalpha]

Hi SAS,

Well, I see the cost of the lesson as a whole package - unlike most of the aviation industry!

(I loved the beer advert spoof of Ryanair where the beer was 40p a pint, plus glass hire charge, alcohol duty, VAT, glass washing charge, beer mat fee, etc etc etc.)

All I mean is that when, as a flying school, you have to price flights you have to factor in all the costs - such as fuel, depreciation, staff, etc etc.

But give the customer one price. Not some low figure that gets inflated with VAT and landing fees etc.

I am fortunate in owning my own airfield, so I can choose not to charge landing fees. However, I still have to put an element in the flying lesson costs for grass cutting and cost of capital!

My point is that, as an instructor, there are a finite number of hours you can work in a year.

Whether you get paid a salary, a daily rate, or by the flying hour, there is a minimum you need to earn to pay your family's bills.

If that sum is 80k a year, you'll never make ends meet as an instructor.

If it is 10k a year, then you could be saving some useful cash every year if you earn 20k!

I, personally, think flying instructors should be able to earn the national avergae wage (about 22K).

So, in trying to ensure that the people who work for me can earn that sort of living, I start from 500 hours flying a year and work from that to come up with my hourly rate at which there is money left to pay for aircraft, fuel, repairs etc.

What I don't do is work out what is the maximum the market can bear and look at how little I can pay for all my costs, which is how many traditional GA flying schools take as the basis for their operations.

It works, as long as you don't mind the high staff turnover. But my margins as a flying school operator and airfield operator are so tight that I can't afford to have aircraft doing nothing because I don't have the staff (CFS comes to mind last summer!)

Indeed, my Ikarus has been out of service for four months due to pathetic customer service at Aerosport and it has cost me 15 quid a day in lost income from the captial invested in it!

Then there is the profit on each flying lesson that would have helped pay the airfield bills.

I appreciate microlighting is very different. Instructors often own their own aircraft - and then go off flying in them for fun at the end of a busy day! Schools often operate their own airfields, or lease hangers that they then sublet. Students often buy their own aircraft, and the school can get a commission from the manufacturer for sales.

None of that is very common in GA.

But what is vital to all flying is good customer expereinces.

Since there is a shortage of instructors, to be a good school you have to retain staff - because that is what students overwhelmingly want, continuity of instruction.

To keep staff, you have to pay them a living wage.

So, am I in business for me? Or am I in business for my staff - to keep them earning a living wage? Or am I in business for my customers - providing them what they want?

Fortunately, I believe - and it seems to work - that if you get the second two right, then the first will work.

But gosh, it is hard!

Now off to try and sort out paypal payments for our new venture: www.hovercraft scotland.com

If they won't let you fly anything else, then why not come and fly these!

ps Strathaven fly-in will be the Sunday of the English August Bank Holiday weekend - to tie in with the balloon festival. But we plan a few more too.

[Say again s l o w l y]

I agree with everything you say there Colin. Customer service is seriously lacking in the flight training world. A lot of people talk aout it, but in reality have stuff all idea about what it actually means. Let alone how to implement it!

I'm probably not allowed on hovercraft at the moment, but I'll be there as soon as possible. Sounds great.

Good luck with it and all the best.