What would you do??
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Timbuktoo
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose, there you go again exaggerating with reference to lynch mobs to suit your own cause. The only mention of lynch mobs has come from your camp.
Some fellow has a misunderstanding and another tried to help, nothing to get excited about. Had it been a slip of the tongue then I would suggest he would have said as much when it was pointed out to him, wouldn't you?
Anyway it's not something the instructor or the student should get worked up about, however in my opinion it is something that should be addressed.
Now your opinion may differ and that of course is your prerogative, but whether you like it or not my opinion along with the OP's is every bit as valid.
Some fellow has a misunderstanding and another tried to help, nothing to get excited about. Had it been a slip of the tongue then I would suggest he would have said as much when it was pointed out to him, wouldn't you?
Anyway it's not something the instructor or the student should get worked up about, however in my opinion it is something that should be addressed.
Now your opinion may differ and that of course is your prerogative, but whether you like it or not my opinion along with the OP's is every bit as valid.
OMG this thread is a riot.....
No I would not correct him, slip of the tongue, whatever.
This is what a colleague told me one day I put my foot in my mouth; " you can't be an ace everyday.."
Trust me (us), the student is not going to be any worse off, they only retain 15% of what you say in ground school anyway. That's why you send them home to study afterward.
No I would not correct him, slip of the tongue, whatever.
This is what a colleague told me one day I put my foot in my mouth; " you can't be an ace everyday.."
Trust me (us), the student is not going to be any worse off, they only retain 15% of what you say in ground school anyway. That's why you send them home to study afterward.
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
My reaction to the originator of this thread is that if all you have to worry about is what another instructor is saying to his student during a briefing then consider yourself lucky. It is none of your business. Go and wash an aeroplane if you are sat twiddling your thumbs! 
VFE.
VFE.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I disagree with that VFE.
At a school it is beholden on all instructors to work towards a quality product with standards. If you hear a fellow instructor talking out of context or misusing jargon it is in everyones interest to sort it out.
I know we tend to see rotary as a different breed but the fundementals of nav etc are going to be the same.
But the who does the talking to to whom is very dependent on the personalities involved.
Myself if someone had picked me up on a tongue slip like described I would be full of thanks to them. It could have been the least/most experenced instructor or even student in the place. I wouldn't have a problem with them speaking to me personally or going through the "chain of command"
What does come across from the poster is that there is no form of standards within the building that works in a meaningfull manner. If there was there would have been no issue.
to CFI(fixed wing): "mate just heard one of the rotary boys talking about knots per hour in a Nav brief"
CFI (fixed wing): "cheers I will bring it up and list it on the points for the next standards meeting, there are a few other pieces of suspect terminology creeping in, leave it with me"
A couple of weeks later memo goes out to all instructors about using correct terminology the "knots per hour" is mention as an example along with a reason why this is incorrect. No finger pointed, no mention of names of or flavour of aviation. Problem sorted.
As soon as you get more than 2 instructors working together you need to have a process in place for this sort of thing. If for nothing else than to decided which of the many ways of skinning a cat you are all going to teach intially. So the poor student knows if they are coming or going if they have to swap instructors.
At a school it is beholden on all instructors to work towards a quality product with standards. If you hear a fellow instructor talking out of context or misusing jargon it is in everyones interest to sort it out.
I know we tend to see rotary as a different breed but the fundementals of nav etc are going to be the same.
But the who does the talking to to whom is very dependent on the personalities involved.
Myself if someone had picked me up on a tongue slip like described I would be full of thanks to them. It could have been the least/most experenced instructor or even student in the place. I wouldn't have a problem with them speaking to me personally or going through the "chain of command"
What does come across from the poster is that there is no form of standards within the building that works in a meaningfull manner. If there was there would have been no issue.
to CFI(fixed wing): "mate just heard one of the rotary boys talking about knots per hour in a Nav brief"
CFI (fixed wing): "cheers I will bring it up and list it on the points for the next standards meeting, there are a few other pieces of suspect terminology creeping in, leave it with me"
A couple of weeks later memo goes out to all instructors about using correct terminology the "knots per hour" is mention as an example along with a reason why this is incorrect. No finger pointed, no mention of names of or flavour of aviation. Problem sorted.
As soon as you get more than 2 instructors working together you need to have a process in place for this sort of thing. If for nothing else than to decided which of the many ways of skinning a cat you are all going to teach intially. So the poor student knows if they are coming or going if they have to swap instructors.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I was going to leave this post well alone, but Bose-x is again accusing me of
Again, where did I say anything that particularly judged this instructor (at least, before you yourself made the observation about what standard of instructor he was), I overheard an instructor make a BASIC error and then asked what people would do about it - no judgement there on his capability. Not being perfect I may well in the past have made errors when instructing and would like to think othrs could point this out to me without me getting upset or it making me a bad instructor.
I have no idea of the general instructing ability of this chap I do not have the information to make that observation and have no wish to judge anyone on one piece of overheard briefing.
the same as foxmoth which entitles you to join him as judge jury and executioner?
I have no idea of the general instructing ability of this chap I do not have the information to make that observation and have no wish to judge anyone on one piece of overheard briefing.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Emirates Living - The Meadows
Age: 79
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an Englishman I thought that I was duty bound to disagree with all Scots however..
Mad Jock
Spot on agree with you, one of the biggest issues we have in GA aviation and to a lesser extent in commercial aviation is that of standardisation.
Some PPL schools seem to think that SOPs are the devil that only airlines use and that they overcomplicate matters.
If oft appears that they forget when times are hard, stress is high and cockpit workload is heavy (i.e all students in the early phases of flying) it is then that not having to think too deeply about it and just following the skills, drills and SOPs will at some point probably save their lives.
Bose X and Foxmoth you seem to have a problem being corrected full stop. It may be a minor transgression but wrong is wrong, how wrong is it that we can let something go before we correct it?
Does that not lead to the the well we will just firmly apply one SOP and loosely apply another or that rule is not as important as this rule type scenarios!
One of the corner stones of my previous military flying was that rank and position/appointment were relevant only to specific phases of work.
i.e of course it is the Squadron Commanders job to discipline Sgt X for being late/fighting/matrimonial indiscretion, etc etc but if same Sqn Comd is meant to be time on target +/- 30 secs and is late then they are late and Sgt Bloggs will rightly say "Boss you were late don't sc**w it up next time please, Sir" This was widely accepted as at the end of the day we are all after the same thing every time it has to be right or we have to practice it again until it is.
At the end of the day there are only so many second chances that we get. The better we train, the more self critical we are, the more professional, safe and efficient our aviating is and are we not just that little bit more proud when we have a nice day/night out AND do it all correctly to boot rather than just hoping it will all be ok and saying things like well it was only a minor error and it worked out ok so who really cares. YOU SHOULD CARE you fly in the same skies!
Spot on agree with you, one of the biggest issues we have in GA aviation and to a lesser extent in commercial aviation is that of standardisation.
Some PPL schools seem to think that SOPs are the devil that only airlines use and that they overcomplicate matters.
If oft appears that they forget when times are hard, stress is high and cockpit workload is heavy (i.e all students in the early phases of flying) it is then that not having to think too deeply about it and just following the skills, drills and SOPs will at some point probably save their lives.
Bose X and Foxmoth you seem to have a problem being corrected full stop. It may be a minor transgression but wrong is wrong, how wrong is it that we can let something go before we correct it?
Does that not lead to the the well we will just firmly apply one SOP and loosely apply another or that rule is not as important as this rule type scenarios!
One of the corner stones of my previous military flying was that rank and position/appointment were relevant only to specific phases of work.
i.e of course it is the Squadron Commanders job to discipline Sgt X for being late/fighting/matrimonial indiscretion, etc etc but if same Sqn Comd is meant to be time on target +/- 30 secs and is late then they are late and Sgt Bloggs will rightly say "Boss you were late don't sc**w it up next time please, Sir" This was widely accepted as at the end of the day we are all after the same thing every time it has to be right or we have to practice it again until it is.
At the end of the day there are only so many second chances that we get. The better we train, the more self critical we are, the more professional, safe and efficient our aviating is and are we not just that little bit more proud when we have a nice day/night out AND do it all correctly to boot rather than just hoping it will all be ok and saying things like well it was only a minor error and it worked out ok so who really cares. YOU SHOULD CARE you fly in the same skies!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: E Anglia
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A telephone scammer who rang me once to buy (or rather con me out of) my aeroplane gave himself away very early in the conversation when in response to my answer to his question about performance he asked me 'what are knots?'
Cusco
Cusco
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Abroad
Posts: 1,172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And now if I can have the prize for thread drift of the day please...
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Abroad
Posts: 1,172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That still doesn't explain the use of "nauts/knots per hour". If it was the latter, I (as a hypothetic student) would have probably cancelled the course, as it shows ignorance of a very basic concept, and would have got me wondering what else he doesn't know that he is supposed to teach me. If he was unreceptive to criticism (assuming a tactful approach, of course) that would make me particularly concerned.
On a different note:
And I will say again for the last time.....
He who is without sin cast the first stone.
What about the bloke himself? If he was walking about with his flies open, you'd tell him wouldn't you? Or is the received wisdom to let him look a tw@t?
CG
CG
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Blue Planet
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a student's point of view: I'd like to be taught the correct things, even if it is something that might seem a minor issue... Sometimes small things stick in our mind's and as mentioned in a previous post: Until the wrong answer is given by a student in an exam...
Last edited by Tasslehoff; 28th Sep 2010 at 21:16.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a student's point of view: I'd like to be taught the correct things, even if it is something that might seem a minor issue... Sometimes small things stick in our mind's and as mentioned in a previous post: Until the wrong answer is given by a student in an exam...
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People that jumble up units invariably have a jumbled up idea about maths and physics. It might look like a little thing but actually its the tip of the iceberg.
If my instructor would have messed up units consistently in the ground school I would have lost confidence for both him and the flying school. He would also have had to take the embaressment of me as a student correcting him in front of the other students.
I don't think an instructor has to be an expert in math and physics, but I would expect him to get the units relevant to the profession of flying correct!
This is all about professionalism, something that probably is even more important in avitaion than some other trades.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People that jumble up units invariably have a jumbled up idea about maths and physics. It might look like a little thing but actually its the tip of the iceberg.
And as for letting a fellow instructor wander around with his fly undone. To right I would. My best mate was wandering around with his shirt end sticking out of his zip for 3 lessons. All the students were briefed by flyingschoolsec not to tell him. He also for about a month was announcing that he was away off for fud (he is from the west country I believe it means food) means something totally different in Scotland.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Devon
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worried by this thread
The subject of this thread and many reponses to it is ....errr worrying to say the least. If an instructor is so misinformed/ignorant to use such a phrase my mind goes to all the other mistakes he might be making. Of course it matters.
I doubt it was a slip of the tongue - when I have heard it used before it has always sounded like deep routed misunderstanding. If it had been a slip of the tongue due multi-tasking surely he would have corrected himself.
Students take everything from us FIs as gospel truth so it has to be correct. The mumbe of people who think this is not important is disappointing.
I doubt it was a slip of the tongue - when I have heard it used before it has always sounded like deep routed misunderstanding. If it had been a slip of the tongue due multi-tasking surely he would have corrected himself.
Students take everything from us FIs as gospel truth so it has to be correct. The mumbe of people who think this is not important is disappointing.
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
Okay, so I may have been rather flippant in my response to this thread - long day, tired, yadda yadda...
Just ask the instructor involved why he uses that term. Act ignorant. See what he says and then tell him what term you use and why. It will avoid any confrontation and should leave you looking like a decent chap and not anally retentive.
There. Not so difficult is it? Seriously, some of the problems so-called professionals have trouble dealing with here really worry me. Is it that hard to voice your concerns without damaging an ego or risking WWIII erupting? I think not.
VFE.
Just ask the instructor involved why he uses that term. Act ignorant. See what he says and then tell him what term you use and why. It will avoid any confrontation and should leave you looking like a decent chap and not anally retentive.
There. Not so difficult is it? Seriously, some of the problems so-called professionals have trouble dealing with here really worry me. Is it that hard to voice your concerns without damaging an ego or risking WWIII erupting? I think not.
VFE.
