Screening Out The Nutters
Dancing with the devil, going with the flow... it's all a game to me.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread.
Homeguard's attitude, whilst admirable, does suprise me - you must be insane mate, sorry!
Whirlybird speaks sense as usual, Mad_Jock tells it how it is as usual and Cap'nn Arrr gives sound advice. Many thanks for those postings guys & gals.
For me the answer comes down to one thing and that one thing is what helps me answer any burning questions regarding a potential PPL holder under my instruction.
That one thing is my own conscience. Think about it.
VFE.
Homeguard's attitude, whilst admirable, does suprise me - you must be insane mate, sorry!
Whirlybird speaks sense as usual, Mad_Jock tells it how it is as usual and Cap'nn Arrr gives sound advice. Many thanks for those postings guys & gals.
For me the answer comes down to one thing and that one thing is what helps me answer any burning questions regarding a potential PPL holder under my instruction.
That one thing is my own conscience. Think about it.
VFE.
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That one thing is my own conscience. Think about it.
I agree. It's the reason I'm thinking of telling a particular student that if he doesn't change I think he's liable to kill himself - this is a timely thread for me. If he does kill himself, I need to know that at least I did everything possible. I can't do much more - he's not really 'my' student (except occasionally) - and I've mentioned my fears to everyone else involved anyway.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What nutter rubbish!
To talk of people killing themselves (and others) or just about every other level of catastrophe unless that is you the instructor intervene is appallingly arrogant. It is taking oneself as an instructor far too seriously.
I DO NOT allow any talk in our club about people killing themselves or of death at all. A flying club is not the place for it. I have never had anyone 'try to kill me' in an aeroplane ever and I don't expect to. Safety at my place is paramount. When I have found myself in the position of a student going too far it has been MY fault not the students. I've therefore been required, in the past as I learnt my trade, to look at myself and to consider how much better I could have tackled things. If I couldn't come up with the answer from my own experience i've then been given good advice.
To believe that because we are Flight Instructors we hold a moral high ground that is much much superior to many of our students is way off the mark. Whirlygig argues that we should teach them (students, sometimes called nutters by others) how to morally behave. As an example she would go to the authorities and report someone so as to give her students a lead. A kind of peoples police. We used to call such people 'tell tales' or 'sneaks' and usually got a slap from mum for 'telling tales out of doors'. Why whirligig thinks that running to sir will make much difference I don't know. It would be sure to be counter productive with an almost certain 'tit for tat'. Not much of a contribution to safety when everyone is watching their back.
Anyway, let us all get a life. We're not gods because we can fly an aeroplane. We're usually very ordinary, narrow minded and blinkered. To teach students to fly we can do but for anything else, like real life, most of us probably have an awful lot more to learn.
I DO NOT allow any talk in our club about people killing themselves or of death at all. A flying club is not the place for it. I have never had anyone 'try to kill me' in an aeroplane ever and I don't expect to. Safety at my place is paramount. When I have found myself in the position of a student going too far it has been MY fault not the students. I've therefore been required, in the past as I learnt my trade, to look at myself and to consider how much better I could have tackled things. If I couldn't come up with the answer from my own experience i've then been given good advice.
To believe that because we are Flight Instructors we hold a moral high ground that is much much superior to many of our students is way off the mark. Whirlygig argues that we should teach them (students, sometimes called nutters by others) how to morally behave. As an example she would go to the authorities and report someone so as to give her students a lead. A kind of peoples police. We used to call such people 'tell tales' or 'sneaks' and usually got a slap from mum for 'telling tales out of doors'. Why whirligig thinks that running to sir will make much difference I don't know. It would be sure to be counter productive with an almost certain 'tit for tat'. Not much of a contribution to safety when everyone is watching their back.
Anyway, let us all get a life. We're not gods because we can fly an aeroplane. We're usually very ordinary, narrow minded and blinkered. To teach students to fly we can do but for anything else, like real life, most of us probably have an awful lot more to learn.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Homeguard,
If I see someone breaking into your home, I wil do nothing. After all we don't want to be tell tales now do we?
Your post correctly shows that instructors must be examples to other members of the flying community. i.e. They must show good example in all aspects of their operation.
----------------
No they can't. However, if it was serious enough, I would write them a line explaining where I thought their standard fell below that expected of a basic safe and competent pilot and send a copy to the CAA for attaching to their file. If they are not members of our club then a letter to the other club / group / airfield owner will do. Thus when they ignore your advice and have the accident you expect, the evidence is there that you did your best to prevent it rather than simply turning a blind eye.
Regards,
DFC
If I see someone breaking into your home, I wil do nothing. After all we don't want to be tell tales now do we?
Your post correctly shows that instructors must be examples to other members of the flying community. i.e. They must show good example in all aspects of their operation.
----------------
If PPL examiners had the power to cancel class ratings on seeing a substandard level of piloting ability; there could be some hope but they can't.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
homeguard,
With respect, some people ARE likely to kill themselves and they have to be told. I don't think it's something we can "sweep under the carpet".
Talking of "nutters", have you heard the one about the trial flight customer who decided to "loop the loop" on climbout in a C152, just like she'd seen on TV? They're out there!!
With respect, some people ARE likely to kill themselves and they have to be told. I don't think it's something we can "sweep under the carpet".
Talking of "nutters", have you heard the one about the trial flight customer who decided to "loop the loop" on climbout in a C152, just like she'd seen on TV? They're out there!!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Breaking in
Well yes I would of course appreciate it should you call the police when you see someone breaking into my home.
There are clearly defined rules/laws that are obvious to us all but there are others which only some subscribe but others do not. Whose to say when I act in one way that i'm wrong simply because some others don't like what i'm doing or simply wants to cause me gip for whatever reason. It is interesting that the reporting hotlines for tax dodgers and the like all report the same, that is that something like 80% of the calls are vindictive or simply wrong. The CAA tell the same story. Perception isn't always fact.
The line that I do not like about this thread and i'm therefore fighting it, is this awful smug I know best thing thats gathered pace. The idea that you are willing to call your bread and butter 'nutters' bothers me enough but there is also a hint of; "no one seems to listen to me, neither the CFI or the owner, what am I to do"? Perhaps the CFI or owner has got a better perspective but that isn't being asked. The idea that 'my student tried to kill me .....' strikes me as being a wee bit precious and a part of a not very good instructiing technique (I do not claim to be above that) and whatever that has lead up to such an event needs revising.
The purpose of the examiner is to ensure as best you can a minimum standard of safety by assessment. The flying skills and airmanship is only demonstrated during one short moment on a particular day. The examiner job isn't a culling exercise - how horrific that would be if it was. There has been much talk with regard to a new stand alone FI qualification which i'm very much for. However some of it, it is proposed, should be an assesment of suitability to be an instructor. A sickening thought and god only knows what sort of animal would be produced. Certainly not one that I would like.
There are clearly defined rules/laws that are obvious to us all but there are others which only some subscribe but others do not. Whose to say when I act in one way that i'm wrong simply because some others don't like what i'm doing or simply wants to cause me gip for whatever reason. It is interesting that the reporting hotlines for tax dodgers and the like all report the same, that is that something like 80% of the calls are vindictive or simply wrong. The CAA tell the same story. Perception isn't always fact.
The line that I do not like about this thread and i'm therefore fighting it, is this awful smug I know best thing thats gathered pace. The idea that you are willing to call your bread and butter 'nutters' bothers me enough but there is also a hint of; "no one seems to listen to me, neither the CFI or the owner, what am I to do"? Perhaps the CFI or owner has got a better perspective but that isn't being asked. The idea that 'my student tried to kill me .....' strikes me as being a wee bit precious and a part of a not very good instructiing technique (I do not claim to be above that) and whatever that has lead up to such an event needs revising.
The purpose of the examiner is to ensure as best you can a minimum standard of safety by assessment. The flying skills and airmanship is only demonstrated during one short moment on a particular day. The examiner job isn't a culling exercise - how horrific that would be if it was. There has been much talk with regard to a new stand alone FI qualification which i'm very much for. However some of it, it is proposed, should be an assesment of suitability to be an instructor. A sickening thought and god only knows what sort of animal would be produced. Certainly not one that I would like.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The "they are all out to kill you" line is purely a method of trying to get you to survive until your experence level is up enough you can spot and deal with problems while they can still be laughed at.
The real scares are usually with students who you have relaxed your guard with because they are actually pretty good. They would suddenly out of the blue pull a blinder when you lest expect it.
Generally 99% of students are completely without problems apart from learning to fly
of the 1 % there are 2 distincted groups
1. overconfident but pretty good sa/handling/nav/reflex skills and a pretty good knowledge of the rules. They get away with murder because they can make it up as they go along. Generally they just annoy people, lots of close shaves but never get themselves in to much trouble.
2.Overconfident but clueless, average handling skills if that, navigating a circuit can be hit or miss. The rules that they don't know are stupid and not worth thier time. But they can pull it off on the day to pass the test. These are the ones which end up causing problems.
To be honest I never had a duty of care to the student I really didn't care if they killed themselves after passing. I did have a duty of care to the pax that they took with them and other aircraft.
The real scares are usually with students who you have relaxed your guard with because they are actually pretty good. They would suddenly out of the blue pull a blinder when you lest expect it.
Generally 99% of students are completely without problems apart from learning to fly
of the 1 % there are 2 distincted groups
1. overconfident but pretty good sa/handling/nav/reflex skills and a pretty good knowledge of the rules. They get away with murder because they can make it up as they go along. Generally they just annoy people, lots of close shaves but never get themselves in to much trouble.
2.Overconfident but clueless, average handling skills if that, navigating a circuit can be hit or miss. The rules that they don't know are stupid and not worth thier time. But they can pull it off on the day to pass the test. These are the ones which end up causing problems.
To be honest I never had a duty of care to the student I really didn't care if they killed themselves after passing. I did have a duty of care to the pax that they took with them and other aircraft.
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
homeguard,
So what would you do if you sent a student on a half-hour solo flight with a nearly full tank of fuel, and he came back after nearly two hours with a low warning fuel light on...and when we dipped the tanks, he must have been practically running on fumes! If when it was pointed out to him, he swore there had been fuel there, but someone must have siphoned it off? If that was only one example of a number of other silly, over-confident, and dangerous things of a similar ilk which he'd done? If you'd mentioned it to the powers that be, who agreed that he was an accident waiting to happen, but figured he'd pass a test and maybe improve...and they can't stop him flying his own helicopter after that?
You can call it arrogance or telling tales if you want...personally I think you listened to nanny a bit too much as a child. I will tell him what I think, in the hope that he'll maybe change his ways. Because if he does die in an aircraft - and I think the odds are too high for comfort - I don't want to think that maybe, just maybe, I could have changed things....if I'd tried. I don't want that on my conscience. Would you? Or maybe you don't have one! Or you're one of these people who can shrug it off since it wouldn't legally be your fault.
Finally, my name is WhirlyBIRD!!!!
So what would you do if you sent a student on a half-hour solo flight with a nearly full tank of fuel, and he came back after nearly two hours with a low warning fuel light on...and when we dipped the tanks, he must have been practically running on fumes! If when it was pointed out to him, he swore there had been fuel there, but someone must have siphoned it off? If that was only one example of a number of other silly, over-confident, and dangerous things of a similar ilk which he'd done? If you'd mentioned it to the powers that be, who agreed that he was an accident waiting to happen, but figured he'd pass a test and maybe improve...and they can't stop him flying his own helicopter after that?
You can call it arrogance or telling tales if you want...personally I think you listened to nanny a bit too much as a child. I will tell him what I think, in the hope that he'll maybe change his ways. Because if he does die in an aircraft - and I think the odds are too high for comfort - I don't want to think that maybe, just maybe, I could have changed things....if I'd tried. I don't want that on my conscience. Would you? Or maybe you don't have one! Or you're one of these people who can shrug it off since it wouldn't legally be your fault.
Finally, my name is WhirlyBIRD!!!!
Homeguard
Whilst I can see where your annoyance at this "Instructors High Ground" in this thread comes from, it is not about someone who fails to make the field a few times in a forced landing, or who take longer than usual to go solo.
It is about those rare students who consistently knock back advice or instructions given to them, and who have the attitude that they know better. The ones who consistently have incidents, doing stupid things like descending without a clearance more than once, damage aircraft regularly, and refuse to accept responsibility for their own actions, unless they do something right. As a 600 odd hour instructor, yes, I do know more than the guy on his 3rd lesson about flying a plane, even though I do not and never will know everything. It's not about arrogance, it is a simple fact.
As an instructor I have a duty of care. I have to take care that the student I am instructing, or sending solo, is not about to do something outside his limits, be they physical limits, or just a big crosswind, or become a danger to himself or anyone else along the way.
Fact is, the way I see it, nutters isnt the best word. Only nutter I ever heard of asked for a trial flight in a warrior to take him up to 15000', where he would get out but be ok thanks to his protective invisible shield. And I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with the 80 hours to first solo students, the ones who push on because they love flying, and strive to improve and listen to everything they get told, even though they take longer to learn.
Even of the ones who initially have an attitude problem, many of them will calm down after a serious talking to (or 2) by an instructor. There is, however, the rare one out there who will not, and I believe that is the type of person about whom advice is being sought. Should a decision need to be made, I agree that one person cannot make it, however after transferring his training to another instructor, if he/she also has similar issues, it is probably a little more than yourself not getting along with the student.
Anyways, that went way longer than intended. It's not a personal attack on you homeguard, just my opinion. Comments welcome, and I'm off.
Whilst I can see where your annoyance at this "Instructors High Ground" in this thread comes from, it is not about someone who fails to make the field a few times in a forced landing, or who take longer than usual to go solo.
It is about those rare students who consistently knock back advice or instructions given to them, and who have the attitude that they know better. The ones who consistently have incidents, doing stupid things like descending without a clearance more than once, damage aircraft regularly, and refuse to accept responsibility for their own actions, unless they do something right. As a 600 odd hour instructor, yes, I do know more than the guy on his 3rd lesson about flying a plane, even though I do not and never will know everything. It's not about arrogance, it is a simple fact.
As an instructor I have a duty of care. I have to take care that the student I am instructing, or sending solo, is not about to do something outside his limits, be they physical limits, or just a big crosswind, or become a danger to himself or anyone else along the way.
Fact is, the way I see it, nutters isnt the best word. Only nutter I ever heard of asked for a trial flight in a warrior to take him up to 15000', where he would get out but be ok thanks to his protective invisible shield. And I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with the 80 hours to first solo students, the ones who push on because they love flying, and strive to improve and listen to everything they get told, even though they take longer to learn.
Even of the ones who initially have an attitude problem, many of them will calm down after a serious talking to (or 2) by an instructor. There is, however, the rare one out there who will not, and I believe that is the type of person about whom advice is being sought. Should a decision need to be made, I agree that one person cannot make it, however after transferring his training to another instructor, if he/she also has similar issues, it is probably a little more than yourself not getting along with the student.
Anyways, that went way longer than intended. It's not a personal attack on you homeguard, just my opinion. Comments welcome, and I'm off.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Knowledge
Of course we know more than the student with a particular regard to the course they are undertaking with you.
Whirlybird (I apologise for getting your name wrong - no excuse) the student should not have been signed off for the flight unless you could be certain he would comply with the briefing and would be safe. For me there is no morality or concience in it, the chap that you describe would not be cleared to go by me. Why did you send him on the flight knowing what you do? That for me is the real question. If you were pressed to do so raises another question.
Meanwhile I sincerely believe that you should try to shrug off your pre-occupation with death. That I presume is what workers talk an awful lot about in funeral parlers. In flying clubs flight should be the central issue. The Great Reaper comes in his own time.
Whirlybird (I apologise for getting your name wrong - no excuse) the student should not have been signed off for the flight unless you could be certain he would comply with the briefing and would be safe. For me there is no morality or concience in it, the chap that you describe would not be cleared to go by me. Why did you send him on the flight knowing what you do? That for me is the real question. If you were pressed to do so raises another question.
Meanwhile I sincerely believe that you should try to shrug off your pre-occupation with death. That I presume is what workers talk an awful lot about in funeral parlers. In flying clubs flight should be the central issue. The Great Reaper comes in his own time.
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why did you send him on the flight knowing what you do?
I'm not preoccupied with death...unless I see someone trying very hard to get the Grim Reaper to speed things up! But neither do I think it's a taboo subject. In flying clubs safe flight should be the central issue.
Dancing with the devil, going with the flow... it's all a game to me.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To avoid the issue of possbile death at a flying school is like avoiding the issue of sex education at school! Head in the sand behaviour Homeguard, sorry but I think you need to rethink - see me! You appear here as a very experienced instructor who for some reason has a desire to appear meek and humble... perhaps a self preservation instinct all of your very own?
Granted, scares happen when we take our eyes off the ball and it's only ever our own fault but sometimes, just sometimes, a student comes along who raises alarm bells. Call it instinct, call it common sense but most instructors experience it sooner or later. Homeguard claims many years of instructing so I find it hard to believe he/she has yet to experience this themself. One can only surmise they're trying to quell a percieved bigheaded arrogance here.... but my perception of this thread is that some very thoughtful, conscientious and caring instructors are genuinely concerned about the safety of persons under their tutelage.
Nothing arrogant about that IMHO.
VFE.
Granted, scares happen when we take our eyes off the ball and it's only ever our own fault but sometimes, just sometimes, a student comes along who raises alarm bells. Call it instinct, call it common sense but most instructors experience it sooner or later. Homeguard claims many years of instructing so I find it hard to believe he/she has yet to experience this themself. One can only surmise they're trying to quell a percieved bigheaded arrogance here.... but my perception of this thread is that some very thoughtful, conscientious and caring instructors are genuinely concerned about the safety of persons under their tutelage.
Nothing arrogant about that IMHO.
VFE.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The great reaper
Yes most certainly i've experienced some of what has been described but certainly not all. The issue is not that. The difference appears to be where one puts the blame. When things have gone wrong and of course it has, it has usually been my own naive, stupid and sometimes extremely arrogant fault. People can be like aeroplanes and bite when not handled correctly. However, i'm convinced no one has ever tried to kill me, save on occasion my wife when i've arrived home at some ungodly hour from the airfield.
Some years ago a smashing FI(r) working for me (she's a Capt. on a B757 nowadays i've heard) came to me to say that in just a few weeks of instructing she'd had two instances of a T/F grabbing the controls during the take-off and the initial climb. What was she doing, if anything, wrong?
The questions to be asked; Had she fully involved the T/F perhaps allowing them to apply the starter, check their brakes, steer the aeroplane, check the controls full and free etc, etc. Most importantly did the T/F have their feet on the rudders and one hand on the stick/column for the take-off. Did she patter rudder (yaw), elevator (pitch), Aileron (roll) during the initial roll and the take-off with them following through. In other words were they fully involved. She said no for she'd been taught that for a trial flight she should emphasise to them that they keep their hands and feet away from the controls. A T/F could kill she had been told. Stories of having to elbow people in the face to release their grip during a spiral dive were in the forefront of her mind. She would therefore introduce them to the controls only when they were at a safe height. A friend of hers from the same course also had had a few scares. They both seemed to have attended the Valhalla School of Death & Flight Instructing.
My advice was simple, she should involve the T/F's fully right from the off and that it was important that the student had their hands and feet on the controls and that they should follow through during the T/O. She took the advice and applied it and the scares she had twice experienced so soon in her career never ever happened to her again. Was I particular clever? No, for I only repeated that which I had been taught and what I had also learned from some educating occasions experienced some time later but just the same, the hard way.
Whirlibird, you were clearly sold a pup. Shouldn't your anger be directed at those who should have told you about this individual? Shouldn't the training record have primed you and had you read it? Are you just possibly taking out your quite understandable embarrassment and tossing it at the student, who has the privilege of knowing no better (sic). Could it have been poor judgement on your part to send this student solo without better knowledge of them. We've all done it by the way and I claim to be no better just wiser from the event.
Talk of safety is the way forward and I support that 100%. It is a positive thought.
Some years ago a smashing FI(r) working for me (she's a Capt. on a B757 nowadays i've heard) came to me to say that in just a few weeks of instructing she'd had two instances of a T/F grabbing the controls during the take-off and the initial climb. What was she doing, if anything, wrong?
The questions to be asked; Had she fully involved the T/F perhaps allowing them to apply the starter, check their brakes, steer the aeroplane, check the controls full and free etc, etc. Most importantly did the T/F have their feet on the rudders and one hand on the stick/column for the take-off. Did she patter rudder (yaw), elevator (pitch), Aileron (roll) during the initial roll and the take-off with them following through. In other words were they fully involved. She said no for she'd been taught that for a trial flight she should emphasise to them that they keep their hands and feet away from the controls. A T/F could kill she had been told. Stories of having to elbow people in the face to release their grip during a spiral dive were in the forefront of her mind. She would therefore introduce them to the controls only when they were at a safe height. A friend of hers from the same course also had had a few scares. They both seemed to have attended the Valhalla School of Death & Flight Instructing.
My advice was simple, she should involve the T/F's fully right from the off and that it was important that the student had their hands and feet on the controls and that they should follow through during the T/O. She took the advice and applied it and the scares she had twice experienced so soon in her career never ever happened to her again. Was I particular clever? No, for I only repeated that which I had been taught and what I had also learned from some educating occasions experienced some time later but just the same, the hard way.
Whirlibird, you were clearly sold a pup. Shouldn't your anger be directed at those who should have told you about this individual? Shouldn't the training record have primed you and had you read it? Are you just possibly taking out your quite understandable embarrassment and tossing it at the student, who has the privilege of knowing no better (sic). Could it have been poor judgement on your part to send this student solo without better knowledge of them. We've all done it by the way and I claim to be no better just wiser from the event.
Talk of safety is the way forward and I support that 100%. It is a positive thought.
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
homeguard,
I'm neither embarrassed nor angry, as it happens. Why should I be? I knew this chap was well on in the course, and had done quite a bit of solo flying, but was simply rusty after a winter break. I did a couple of circuits with him, suggested he do a couple more alone before he flew off on the mini-crosscountry he wanted to do, and made sure he had plenty of fuel. At that point no-one else knew either, AFAIK. To me he had always appeared a bit odd and maybe not that bright, but so what?
But now that we all know, and know that he appears not to listen to anything that's said to him by anyone, and if mistakes are pointed out says they didn't happen or were someone else's fault, and exhibits potentially dangerous behaviour in a number of ways, but is close to getting a PPL as he could probably pass a flight test....what, precisely, do you suggest we can do? I really, really would like to know!
I'm neither embarrassed nor angry, as it happens. Why should I be? I knew this chap was well on in the course, and had done quite a bit of solo flying, but was simply rusty after a winter break. I did a couple of circuits with him, suggested he do a couple more alone before he flew off on the mini-crosscountry he wanted to do, and made sure he had plenty of fuel. At that point no-one else knew either, AFAIK. To me he had always appeared a bit odd and maybe not that bright, but so what?
But now that we all know, and know that he appears not to listen to anything that's said to him by anyone, and if mistakes are pointed out says they didn't happen or were someone else's fault, and exhibits potentially dangerous behaviour in a number of ways, but is close to getting a PPL as he could probably pass a flight test....what, precisely, do you suggest we can do? I really, really would like to know!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what, precisely, do you suggest we can do? I really, really would like to know!
Having reviewed the training record with the student you can have a discussion with them about the standards required to operate safely as a pilot and make it clear that unless they display the appropriate standards they will not be put forward for the flight test and if standards do not improve they will be limited to dual flights only.
The instructors see how the pilot operates over the full length of the course. If they put forward a person for test then the examminer must take it that in your professional opinion they are suitable and reach at least the minimum required standard.
So it is not a weeding out process - unless they decide to weed themselves out.
Once they get their licence then it is very hard in the UK to stop them doing their best to kill unsuspecting members of the public.........and the clever ones are often good students because they recognise that they have to be to complete in minimum time so that they can get on with doing ti their way asap.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on DFC, you know you haven't got a shred of evidence for
The only way to make this business 'perfect' is to turn it into something like the RAF, which rejects any applicant whose **** is outside a very narrow dimension range.
Once they get their licence then it is very hard in the UK to stop them doing their best to kill unsuspecting members of the public
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume we will all be issued with Brown shirts when we join the Insgructor 'police' force. After all we are just protecting the public and these people from themselves......
Someone remind me how many times in history that line has been used?
I prefer to think that as FREE people we have a choice, some make bad choices but on the whole I think we do a pretty good job.
To be frank I am terrified of people like who think it is perfectly reasonable to make laws to suit there own point of view and then naturally rigorously enforce these laws. Writing to the CAA to 'attach' your point of view to a strangers file just because you don't like the way they do something........ I assume you will be seeking powers of detention next because you don't like they way they did the Check or they ignored some part of your made up rules.
Someone remind me how many times in history that line has been used?
I prefer to think that as FREE people we have a choice, some make bad choices but on the whole I think we do a pretty good job.
To be frank I am terrified of people like who think it is perfectly reasonable to make laws to suit there own point of view and then naturally rigorously enforce these laws. Writing to the CAA to 'attach' your point of view to a strangers file just because you don't like the way they do something........ I assume you will be seeking powers of detention next because you don't like they way they did the Check or they ignored some part of your made up rules.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Crunch
But the student dosn't need to be 'put forward' for the test. They can be tested by whom they wish when and wherever. They do need the completion certificate completed and signed. That certificate should not be held back if they have completed. Their log book also will require verification. If the log book is correct then it should be verified. Should they wish to go elsewhere then they can expect that their training record will be forwarded. An examiner will be entitled to see the training record.
Whirlibird, what can you do. I don't know what AFAIK means. You say he has completed lots of solo - good. Has he dissappeared in a similar fashion before. Presumably he had fully planned his xcountries in the past and have stuck to the plan - why did he not do so on this occasion. Had he properly planned the short excusion on this particular day or did he perhaps have it in his head that a short jolly in the local area didn't require such detail. Sounds a bit like that, to me. When your enjoying yourself two hours can seem only minutes. Regarding stolen fuel - people say all sorts of silly things in self defence.
I recently had a candidate, trained by us, that I briefed for his QXC. In answer to my question; what is your fuel endurance, what is the fuel required and what is your reserve contingency, he looked at me with a blank stare. After some thought, prompted by me, he replied "i've got plenty, the same trip is done lots of times and there's always been loads of fuel left over". Needless to say once i'd peeled myself off the ceiling we addressed the matter.
I also wanted to know from the instructors concerned why the student didn't complete their plog fully and understand it. I discovered that he did but was lazy and always required prompting. He wasn't lazy again I can promise you.
He will doubt be a captain taking me on me hols in a few years time, somewhere cheap and warm. If i'm too hard on him now he could have me thrown off before we depart, for talking during the safety brief, ugh!
Whirlibird, what can you do. I don't know what AFAIK means. You say he has completed lots of solo - good. Has he dissappeared in a similar fashion before. Presumably he had fully planned his xcountries in the past and have stuck to the plan - why did he not do so on this occasion. Had he properly planned the short excusion on this particular day or did he perhaps have it in his head that a short jolly in the local area didn't require such detail. Sounds a bit like that, to me. When your enjoying yourself two hours can seem only minutes. Regarding stolen fuel - people say all sorts of silly things in self defence.
I recently had a candidate, trained by us, that I briefed for his QXC. In answer to my question; what is your fuel endurance, what is the fuel required and what is your reserve contingency, he looked at me with a blank stare. After some thought, prompted by me, he replied "i've got plenty, the same trip is done lots of times and there's always been loads of fuel left over". Needless to say once i'd peeled myself off the ceiling we addressed the matter.
I also wanted to know from the instructors concerned why the student didn't complete their plog fully and understand it. I discovered that he did but was lazy and always required prompting. He wasn't lazy again I can promise you.
He will doubt be a captain taking me on me hols in a few years time, somewhere cheap and warm. If i'm too hard on him now he could have me thrown off before we depart, for talking during the safety brief, ugh!
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
homeguard,
AFAIK - "As far as I know"....sorry!
I can only hope you're right. It's true, people do lie and come up with silly excuses, not something I understand, but that doesn't make it a dangerous thing to do. I don't know his history that well. I do gather he's a bit of a walking disaster. But like I said, I just hope you're right.
AFAIK - "As far as I know"....sorry!
I can only hope you're right. It's true, people do lie and come up with silly excuses, not something I understand, but that doesn't make it a dangerous thing to do. I don't know his history that well. I do gather he's a bit of a walking disaster. But like I said, I just hope you're right.