PDA

View Full Version : AOPA Mentoring Scheme - Call for Mentors


Timothy
11th Mar 2009, 12:33
Can you help less experienced pilots?

Would-be mentors can find out more about the AOPA Mentoring scheme from Timothy Nathan in the clubhouse at White Waltham on Saturday April 18th, starting at 13.00. Please email mandy at aopa.co.uk if you would like to come. Expressions of interest are welcome even if you can’t come on the day; there will be other opportunities later. Part of the purpose of the day is to hear back from you about anything we have missed in the planning.

The AOPA Mentoring Scheme aims to stem the drift of pilots away from general aviation, encourage them to take on new challenges and help them progress up the skills ladder.

Some 75% of PPLs fail to renew their licences after five years, and one cause is the perceived difficulty of moving from being a newly-qualified, low-hours PPL to being a confident and capable flyer. Exemplifying the problem is the low-hours pilot who rarely ventures beyond the local area for fear of complex and unknown airspace, mistrusts his own ability to evaluate the weather, isn’t very good on the radio, can’t confidently operate all the kit in the aircraft or unravel the NOTAMs, or sticks to familiar territory for other reasons. For him or her flying will soon pall, and there is a high risk that they will be lost to general aviation.

The AOPA Members Working Group recognises that the pilot’s response is generally not to seek help, but to turn to other pursuits.

The Mentoring Scheme would put them in touch with more experienced pilots on whom they can call informally for advice and assistance – a sort of ‘buddy system’ which would give the uncertain pilot the confidence to tackle a flight they would not otherwise attempt. At its most basic, this might be a matter of being accompanied on a land-away by someone who’s been there before.

AOPA can act as a clearing-house between pilots who need a comforting presence in the cockpit and more experienced pilots who are willing to help them. Formalising this contact system makes it easier to ask for help.

This scheme addresses a ‘sub-instruction’ dimension which is not adequately provided for. AOPA’s roster of more experienced pilots would never replace instructors – indeed, on first contact they would be required to evaluate whether a pilot was really asking for instruction, and would refer him to an instructor immediately should there be any suggestion that this was the case. The less-experienced pilot would remain PIC and would handle the controls. The more experienced pilot would neither log the time nor charge for it. The situation would be no different from having two friends, both qualified pilots, in the aircraft at the same time.

It’s a simple sounding concept but much work has gone into establishing the basics, not least in terms of liability and limits of responsibility. It has been decided to launch the scheme for VFR flights only, and to look to extend it to IFR after a shakedown period.

All responsibility for the safety and legality of any flight will lie with the PIC, who will normally be the person being mentored. In order to be part of the AOPA scheme, both mentors and mentees must meet the following minimum requirements:

Mentors – current PPL/CPL, current medical and current class rating, plus CRI and/or AOPA Silver Wings, and a minimum of 200 hours P1.

Mentees – current PPL, current medical, and AOPA Bronze Wings.

Both mentors and mentees must register with AOPA, providing documentary evidence of these qualifications. This will be done via AOPA airfield representatives where available, otherwise through head office. Mentors and mentees indemnify AOPA from responsibility for the outcome of the mentorship. However, AOPA will have liability insurance in case the indemnity is found to be inadequate. Additionally, both mentor and mentee must take responsibility for checking each other’s qualifications before flight. In particular the mentor must check the legality of the flight.


In order to be a registered mentor, members must familiarise themselves with the guidance notes and attend a workshop.

The guidance notes set out how it must be made clear before the flight who is the Commander for the whole flight. They are very comprehensive and leave no room for doubt about who does what and when.

A typical example of a VFR mentoring flight could be a trip from a Midlands airfield to Deauville in France for lunch. This would require the mentee to plan and execute the flight with appropriate guidance from the mentor. This type of flight would give the mentee an opportunity to prepare for subsequent AOPA Wings Scheme achievements and would certainly build confidence and keep the fun in his flying.

The mentor might be required to provide advice on everything from document review to Customs and Special Branch clearances, weight and balance, weather, NOTAMs, flight planning, correct RT, fuel drawbacks, range and endurance, lost procedures – anything that helps keep a pilot from infringing controlled airspace is especially vital at this time.

Depending on the mentor’s skills and strengths he or she might provide help with farm strip flying, noise reduction, flying into major airports, or a hundred other issues.

AOPA must be satisfied that mentors meet an acceptable standard of knowledge and experience, and are in concordance with the ethos of the scheme. AOPA will arrange workshops to explain the scheme. There will be no formal flight or ground instruction, but applicants will be expected to show a good understanding of their role, responsibilities and duties to themselves, the mentees and AOPA. There will be recurrency requirements and peer reviews.

Are you up for it? The purpose is to help staunch the flow of pilots out of general aviation, something that all of us have an interest in. The scheme will be rewarding for both mentors and mentees, and may just prove equally invigorating for both parties.

AOPA member Mick Elborn has agreed to project-manage the Mentoring Scheme following an appeal for volunteers in the last issue of General Aviation, and the scheme now stands a good chance of being brought to fruition during this flying season.

The Mentoring Scheme is the brainchild of Timothy Nathan, a member of the AOPA Members Working Group, and has been strongly supported by the AOPA Executive and the Instructors Committee. A complex and ambitious undertaking, it was developed principally by Timothy Nathan with help from Steve Copeland, but progress has slowed because both are extremely busy in their working lives. Mick Elborn is a retired professional project manager, single and multi pilot with more than 500 hours, and is better placed to give the scheme the impetus it needs.



HOW TO APPLY TO BECOME A MENTOR

Register your interest with mandy at aopa.co.uk indicating also whether you could attend an initial meeting at White Waltham on Saturday 18th April 1300h – 1500h.

Accommodation at WW limits us to a maximum of 20 applicants for that meeting. Don’t worry if you cannot attend this initial meeting, or if it is over subscribed and you cannot get a place. We will inform you of more meetings at differing locations that will follow.

Fuji Abound
12th Mar 2009, 18:01
This seems like a great idea. It is therefore disappointing there has not been more comment on here.

Maybe it just needs lifting to the top again. :)

Timothy
12th Mar 2009, 23:52
It is good to move it to the top, but no real comment is required here, just an email to Mandy is enough :)

will5023
13th Mar 2009, 08:49
Sounds like a carbon copy of the LAA/Pilot Coaching Scheme Scheme, I 'm all for keeping people flying, but if someone has an accident while on the buddy system, who will be deemed as "in charge"? In one statement the wording says it is the Mentee, the other says it's the "mentors responsibility" best get these things sorted out before there is a hiccup and lawyers get involved.

Halfbaked_Boy
13th Mar 2009, 08:56
I should imagine it would fall to the pilot who is acting as PIC for that specific flight as normal :ok:

Cheers

S-Works
13th Mar 2009, 09:52
Sounds like a carbon copy of the LAA/Pilot Coaching Scheme Scheme, I 'm all for keeping people flying, but if someone has an accident while on the buddy system, who will be deemed as "in charge"? In one statement the wording says it is the Mentee, the other says it's the "mentors responsibility" best get these things sorted out before there is a hiccup and lawyers get involved.

Will,

it is nothing like the LAA scheme. I am an LAA coach and the co-creator of the AOPA scheme so can categorically assure you it it nothing like LAA coaching.

Lister Noble
13th Mar 2009, 11:18
Good morning,
I am a member of LAA and have been considering the coaching scheme to improve my flying.
I've also looked at the AOPA one,and think I can see the variance between the two.

I wonder,would you be kind enough to explain the differences in benefits to the "trainee" pilot?
Thank
Lister:)

S-Works
13th Mar 2009, 12:16
Lister,

The scheme is not aimed at the trainee pilot. Training of them is the remit of the flying schools. The aim of the mentoring scheme is to help those who have gone through training and the initial flush of the £100 bacon butty and flying the family and friends. These are generally people who either than lack general direction or are nervous of spreading there wings further.

For example, someone who wants to do that first trip to France but lacks experience in flight planning, NOTAM, customs etc could do the trip with a mentor who would show them the ropes. Or maybe someone who is fairly new out of the training environment and want someone to come with them on a cross country flight to give 1st hand guidance on RT or airspace transits etc.

It is meant to be an informal no cost of helping people keep flying, building experience and confidence.

The LAA Coaching scheme is aimed at largely at teaching, revalidation, differences training etc which is why all coached must be Instructors.

IO540
13th Mar 2009, 12:37
There is a long thread on flyer (http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=53295&start=0) on this topic. I guess this is why the response here has been lower than one might expect.

My view on this is that a mentoring scheme is to be welcomed, but there are some issues which need working through very carefully.

For example it would be awfully hard to maintain with a straight face, post-accident, that the "mentor" was a mere passenger, for insurance and/or legal purposes. IMHO this risk is theoretical (in the UK, no known legal cases AFAIK).

I say the above because there are widely known "CRM" issues when flying with a passenger who is perceived (by the original PIC) to be more experienced. A fair # of AAIB reports have these factors in them, evident as a modification of what the original PIC claimed would have been his normal decisionmaking process.

Moreover, in the USA, the FAA has gone after instructors (which means a CFI or CFII) who were present (RHS) on an accident non-instructional flight. AFAIK this is totally unheard of in the UK, but the AOPA mentor requirement in this scheme is either (IIRC) Silver+ Wings, or a JAA CRI. And a CRI is a kind-of "instructor"; not ab initio capable but certainly capable of doing some instruction which (AIUI) the LHS can log as PU/T.

So the potential for the inference is obvious; with a CRI in the RHS, the only difference between the LHS being PIC and not being PIC is what the two of them agreed beforehand.....

UK case law absent, one could therefore take the view that this is all moot, but UK AOPA do seem to be saying that they have identified the need for some sort of insurance, which suggests they have identified some kind of liability.

will5023
13th Mar 2009, 12:47
Hi Steve, was not having a dig, just making sure that everyone goes into this eyes open. As far as the LAA/PCS are concerned, yes we do instruct as well as coach, post PPL pilots in a number disciplines, it has been very sucessfull and one of the benefits of being a member of the LAA. Good luck with your system.

Lister is you have any questions send them to [email protected], as a member you will have a vast network of pilots and courses to choose from which may suit your needs.

Genghis the Engineer
13th Mar 2009, 12:58
First I've heard of it I must confess.

Frankly, I doubt it'll do much good since the people who will join such a scheme are probably already pretty dedicated. Also, it might work better at a club than national association level, and I'm unconvinced about the requirement for a CRI or AOPA silver wings for the mentor, which will eliminate an enormous number of very able people who won't see why they need to gain specific qualifications for the privilege of volunteering their time.

But what the heck, very best of luck to them, I hope I'm wrong, and hope that it helps keep more people in flying.

G

Lister Noble
13th Mar 2009, 12:58
Thank you Will,
I was going along that route,really to check that I don't pick up bad habits as I fly on my own nearly all of the time.
Lister

Fuji Abound
13th Mar 2009, 13:33
Worth mentioning because I missed it:

BOTH mentor and mentee must be AOPA members.

Genghis the Engineer
13th Mar 2009, 13:56
So both need to be AOPA members, and in all likelihood both have gone through the AOPA wings awards.

Okay, I'm cynical, but it increasingly sounds very much more like an AOPA recruitment and retention scheme than a scheme to keep people in flying.

G

IO540
13th Mar 2009, 15:39
Okay, I'm cynical, but it increasingly sounds very much more like an AOPA recruitment and retention scheme than a scheme to keep people in flying.

Some could certainly see it that way. Unavoidable I suppose since it is an AOPA scheme so they are bound to go for membership.

The pilot being mentored needs AOPA Bronze Wings, which AIUI means joining AOPA plus another £30 to purchase the Bronze Wings.

S-Works
13th Mar 2009, 16:27
The pilot being mentored needs AOPA Bronze Wings, which AIUI means joining AOPA plus another £30 to purchase the Bronze Wings.

Bronze wings are free on joining the scheme. We decided when the wings scheme was re-launched that everyone who joined the scheme would get bronze. Each level after that has an admin.

Okay, I'm cynical, but it increasingly sounds very much more like an AOPA recruitment and retention scheme than a scheme to keep people in flying.

It is a combination of both actually. It gives people a chance to see and understand what AOPA does and then helps to keep AOPA members flying, if they keep flying they hopefully stay as AOPA members. I see no reason to be cynical about it as hopefully it gives everyone a win-win situation?

stickandrudderman
13th Mar 2009, 21:26
Sounds like an excellent idea to me.
Am I naive to long for the days when one could take things at face value and not be too overly concerned with the "what ifs?" and "who's liability is it?".
I've around 250 hours and aside from my mountain flying escapades which some of you have read about on here, I find it ever more difficult to motivate myself to extend my horizons.
Some regular posters on here often allude to the more pragmatic approach to flying that is afforded to the experienced GA pilot, whereas those that are still very much a product of "the system" continue to labour under the tiresom weight of correct methodology.
I applaud those who would offer their time and expertise under this scheme, and shall certainly be very interested in availing myself of it.
Perceived fear that if it goes wrong then who might carry the can is exactly what society doesn't need! (IMO)

Timothy
14th Mar 2009, 00:26
To be absolutely clear the Mentee will be PIC at all times, and that will be part of the contract between the Mentor and Mentee.

Clearly the Mentor is not going to sacrifice his or her life to uphold this principle, so we can see that circumstances could arise (incipient spin on turn to final for example) where the Mentor might decide that life or limb are at stake and take direct remedial action, but the PIC is a qualified pilot and, except in exceptional and hopefully very rare circumstances, the Mentor is only there to give helpful nudges to give the Mentee confidence to spread wings.

There may be wrinkles around the question of the value placed on the Mentor's advice, but the Mentee will have to take responsibility for accepting or rejecting that advice. As Bose says, we envisage that most of the advice will be related to procedural matters, such as how to do an FPL or how to read NOTAMs, rather than acute safety concerns.

If there are concerns about the Mentee's ability and safety, the Mentor's guidance will be to terminate the mentoring and suggest that the Mentee turns to an instructor. (Incidentally this is one reason the schools should not feel threatened by the scheme; the hope is that we will identify people who really need a brush up and push them towards professional instruction. I have done that many times when I have mentored informally. Xwind landings seem to be the biggest bugbear, but just being able to approach reliably at approach speed is an all too rare art.)

We can do this relationship to death, but we will only really know with experience. If once the scheme starts, participants report back horror stories we will have to change guidance to match, but hey guys! Let's try and get it going without the prophets of doom trying to wreck yet another initiative to reinvigorate flying!