How employable are Instructors?

[Boney]

I remember many years ago a 1500hr Instructor having a go at me on CTAF.

Yes, I was the only aircraft in the circuit and because us charter guys are so shonky, I was landing an empty C182 onto a 1,000m + strip with 3-5kts tailwind.

Living on the edge eh????

[Monopole]

ITS GOING TO GET THICK AND DEEP!!!

pakeha, are you refering to the previous post

Wdn, no offence, but if you are yet to gain a CPL, then this fight is not yours

I've done both, and consider myself reasonably experienced at both. When I started charter after instructing, I thought I new it all. My work colleges, most of which were a third of my age and a third of my experience (total time) quickly taught me otherwise. I actually learnt something from someone who was once MY student. I made a few mistakes that someone with my time should not have and after a little bit of ridiculing and a few beers, I think I became a better Charter pilot for it. I also know that some of these Charter pilots learnt something from me.

The two are worlds apart, but also very similar. If you play by the rules neither are as dangerous as the other. Point in case:

(nothing personal ContactMeNow, just an example)

I remember a time when I was doing my ME_CIR and we flew into a cloud and got very mild icing as a result of it, the instructor was crapping themselves, "Oh my god, we are icing up!" this resulting in a decent to LSALT

As someone doing a rating, you don't yet have the experience to make a differant call to the instructor. You may question him in my opinion. You may request a differant instructor if you dont have confidence in him, however as an Instructor I to would have descended. Most light GA twins don't have any anti icing gear, therfore the AFM states flight in KNOWN ICING conditions are forbidden.
Ok, it may have seemed excessive at the time, and in hindsight you may still think it's excessive, but an Instructor has to impress the student with the rules and regs aswell.

Charter is a different situation, you can find yourself in a tight spot that is not of your own making, and it is how you deal with it that determines whether you survive the experience or not

I really cant swallow this one. I have never found myself in such a spot. I have never, and I dont think anyone should have to break a rule to get them out of trouble (unless you are trying to hide your mistake). That being said I found myself in a bit of a spot the other day, but I dealt with the problem (by the rules) and noone is any the wiser. Another lesson learnt that has made me a better pilot.

Instructing has its moments as does Charter, but remember
1000 hours of CCTS = the same hour 1000 times, but
1000 hours of scenics = the same hour 1000 times also

Mono

[remoak]

wdn

i could go on, but i've gotta go get my CPL and all......

Good idea... come back when you have even a slight idea what you are talking about.

The way to impart knowledge and skill is NOT in the demonstration... it is the subsequent coaching of the student, while he or she is flying, that does that (as you will find out if you ever get as far as an instructor rating). Motor skills, judgement and so on can only be achieved by practice on the part of the student, not watching an instructor do it.

The rest of your post is, well, nonsense.

And if by "fully feathered approach" you actually mean an approach with one propellor feathered... that is about the safest assymetric manoeuver, if carried out correctly... and if you go around from a safe height.

[ding duck]

from somebody flying charter in the north of our fine country, who has no instructing experience whatsoever, here is my two cents worth.

the organisation that I work for currently have on the books approx 25 pirates...of which 4 are from instructor background.

They are worlds apart.

First, anyone who bad mouths instructors needs to take a good hard look at themselves and ask "who was it that taught me to fly?"
Unless you are gods gift to aviation (as some of you think you are ), somebody out there at one point in time taught you how to fly an aeroplane, you didn't teach yourself.

Secondly, instructors from my perspective have a better understanding of the rules and regs, capabilities of the aircraft (you cannot teach anybody else to fly an aeroplane and the complexities associated with rules and regs unless you have a thorough understanding of them yourself),

on the charter side of the coin, instructors have very little experience trying to fit 5 pax plus 100kg luggage into a 210 or 206 whilst also requiring inter or tempo fuel. Only one pax, the student and fuel required for the flight.

time restrictions on charter, instructors fly when the student is ready to fly. student does the planning, refuelling etc. Somewhat different to a charter flight that comes up that should have taken off 10 minutes ago and you still need to plan, refuel.

A little bit of respect on either side of the fence is required, appreciate each aspect of aviation for what it brings to the industry. People in glass houses should not be throwing stones...or bricks.

Thats my rant.

dd

[wdn]

remoak

And if by "fully feathered approach" you actually mean an approach with one propellor feathered... that is about the safest assymetric manoeuver, if carried out correctly... and if you go around from a safe height.

go around from an asymmetric approach with a propeller feathered in training? come on, no one here can seriously suggest that that method is safe, or even demonstrates that remoak's comments, as PB says, are

professionally qualified....PB

The way to impart knowledge and skill is NOT in the demonstration... it is the subsequent coaching of the student, while he or she is flying, that does that

coaching while they're flying? demonstration doesn't help? i'll quote form the recently revised CASA flying instructors manual, p vi

An instructor should assume full control of the aircraft when it is necessary to re-brief or debrief the student in flight. This allows the student to better concentrate on what is being said.

not listening to some snide comments while the students are trying to practice fault corrections for themselves

and, p vi again

If remedial instruction is required for a correctly identified problem it often only involves a re-demonstration.....

the demonstration of the instructor's high standard of airmanship is critical in developing the same in the student. i note, remoak, that you only mention knowledge and skill as important for a charter pilot.

In charter, you aim is to exercise knowledge and skill.

why am i not surprised by that?

in general, good instructors make good charter pilots, very few pilots make good instructors.

[remoak]

go around from an asymmetric approach with a propeller feathered in training? come on, no one here can seriously suggest that that method is safe,

Depends what you are training on. When I was involved in airline check and training in the UK, an asymmetric approach and single-engine landing was a certification requirement. That was on turboprops of course, with plenty of excess power - if you do it on a piston twin, you don't EVER feather the prop... you simulate zero thrust. Even safer.

An instructor should assume full control of the aircraft when it is necessary to re-brief or debrief the student in flight. This allows the student to better concentrate on what is being said.

Leaving aside that I don't use an Aussie publication to refer to when instructing, it is pretty obvious that rebriefing is not the same as coaching, which you manual does not refer to. What do you do, sit there silently while the guy screws up? Have you ever even instructed? Doesn't sound like it.

the demonstration of the instructor's high standard of airmanship is critical in developing the same in the student.

You don't have to handle the controls to "demonstrate a high standard of airmanship". The student learns by doing, not by watching the instructor doing. This is instructing 101.

You may care to note that, in the airlines, the instructor or check pilot virtually NEVER handles the controls, whether in the sim or the aircraft. He or she does not usually occupy a crew seat, either. You will learn the reason why if you ever progress to airline-level flying. It is the same reason why an instructor in GA should handle the controls as little as possible. Sadly, many instructors just can't help themselves, and feel that they must demonstrate their superior skills (or rhather, their planet-sized egos) far more than is necessary.

i note, remoak, that you only mention knowledge and skill as important for a charter pilot.

Not what I said at all. Read it again...

very few pilots make good instructors.

Errr... yeah. Right. Whatever...

[JimmyReeves]

You need demonstrations to help the student visualise what you are talking about. Imagine an ab-initio student attempting to land for the first without ever seeing it done before.

[Hugh Jarse]

Hands up how many instructors use:

Demonstrate

Direct

Monitor?

Not many

[remoak]

You need demonstrations to help the student visualise what you are talking about. Imagine an ab-initio student attempting to land for the first without ever seeing it done before.

Sure, but only once, then let the student try a few times, if he or she has obviously not got it, demonstrate again and then let the student do it a few more times until they have got it.

The only way to learn complex motor skills, and the judgement that goes with them, is by actually performing the task, not watching someone else do it. Most of what an instructor does when demonstrating a manouever is completely lost on a student as they cannot feel his or her inputs - they are simply observing the expected visual cues.

And even if all that wasn't true, the student is paying money to fly, not to watch an instructor fly.

This yet another reason why sensible CFIs try to find a few older, experienced heads for their team. The older ones generally get it.

[JimmyReeves]

Remoak I agree with you. One of the best instructors I ever had was an was an old DC3 pilot. His knowledge was valuable and his explanations were easy to understand. It's difficult to find a truly experienced instructors like that these days.

[Captain Sand Dune]

Hands up how many instructors use:

Demonstrate

Direct

Monitor?

Not many

Ummmm………….ADF instructors?
I hear what you're saying Jarse, and I thoroughly agree. A good demo is worth a thousand words. This is hammered into every ADF QFI on instructors course.

You don't have to handle the controls to "demonstrate a high standard of airmanship".

True. The instructor flies the aircraft to demonstrate a sequence and/or to pre/de-brief the student. However you must agree that because airmanship permeates everything we do with aircraft, airmanship is being taught indirectly (at least!) anyway when the instructor is handling the aircraft. Bloggs will learn lots by the example (good or bad - up to you!) being set.


Back to the original title of thread though…………………IMHO a pilot with a pre-dominantly instructional background will make themselves as employable (or not!) as they want to be. Resting on your laurels is not a good idea.

[remoak]

However you must agree that because airmanship permeates everything we do with aircraft, airmanship is being taught indirectly (at least!) anyway when the instructor is handling the aircraft. Bloggs will learn lots by the example (good or bad - up to you!) being set.

I certainly do agree.