Instructor Shortage.

[Walrus 7]

Agree with you on the standards. OK, lets just say that you are all correct and the private PPL is a bad idea. Accepted. Can I then have suggestions on how to solve the problem below?

Young instructors are only in it to build hours so they can clear-off to the regionals when they get the chance. That is very disappointing for the students who have become used to the instructor and really don't like having to change. On Saturday I spoke to one student who was in dismay that his third instructor in six months had left. It impedes the student's progress and costs them more money as they then have to spend air hours getting used to the new instructor's idiosyncracies before any further progress can be made.

Imagine spending a year at a college and having three lecturers in that time; each one of which doesn't totally agree with the way the previous one taught. When I was studying for my UPPL in 1989, my instructor moved to another school that was 100 kms from my home. I drove the extra distance every weekend to stay working with him rather than stay at the old school and have another instructor.

The problem of poor flying standards in this country will improve when the instructors themselves can pass on significant experience learned from getting it wrong in the real world. Give me a grey instructor who only works on the weekend rather than a passing youngster who only knows what the books say.

Walrus

[mingalababya]

Originally Posted by Walrus 7

Agree with you on the standards. OK, lets just say that you are all correct and the private PPL is a bad idea. Accepted. Can I then have suggestions on how to solve the problem below?

I'd like to see a system whereby 'career' instructors can get secondment to an airline on a monthly basis whilst still instructing most of the time, thereby allowing them the best of both worlds. They'll get to fly faster and more sophisticated aircraft (which is what we all aspire to) whilst on secondment, but at the same time, still be at the grass roots level with 'back to basics' flying.

It would probably never happen, but this surely would be one way to ensure that top quality instructors stay at the grass roots level, whilst fulfilling their desire to fly in the airlines. Thoughts anyone?

[milehighsociety]

BUSHY SAID THE FOLLOWING:

Most GA pilots do not want to be in GA. They should not be. There should be another way to get airline jobs.
GA is too important to have uninterested, temporary pilots and operators. If we had permanent pilots and operators, we would have "permanent" salaries.

Mile High SAYS:

Bloody good on you Bushy, well said. I am an operator up north.. I pay above award wages with room for raises for good performance and have great conditions as well as lots of flying hours. I do a bunch of training etc etc..

Recently, I had a pilot who took a job at above conditions.. promised for those conditions in return, 12 - 18 months. With this I was satisfied. The pilot left after 9 weeks and 200 hours.

I wasted time and money training someone to do a job well... and am now left with a gap in my experience pile to fill just as I really need it for our expansion.

Basically, I got screwed.. future pilots will ask "why is pay so poor in GA?"

My answer will be "Becasue pilots rape employers for their own good and then move on, making it no where near worth paying well, nor training well, so just shut up and do your hours and clean the plane." - Its harsh, but you pilots are bringing it on yourself...(Not pointing the finger at everyone, I have some awesome employees, but most ruin it for some)

So.. to all you pilots up and coming and especially to those of you happy with a great GA career, what would make you happy enough to stay with one operator?? Given all my pilots are more than happy with their pay and treatment, even the ones leaving. I am keen to know. Id love to have some loyalty from those I work hard to treat well, and perhaps even get that treatment back.

If you can come up with a decent suggestion and reasonable proposal, Im all ears.

[kiwiblue]

Originally Posted by milehighsociety

The pilot left after 9 weeks and 200 hours

not bad, not bad at all. If those hours are consistent I'm surprised there is not a path being beaten to your door.

Originally Posted by milehighsociety

My answer will be "Becasue pilots rape employers for their own good...

Please don't take this comment as a personal attack... but in exactly what way is that any different to how employers have been treating pilots for how many decades??? I am not going into specifics here, but from experience I can tell you of years living below the poverty line (as defined by the government), paid only for airborne hours -and few enough of them in the off-season, paid significantly worse than minimum wage, no protections, no conditions... and you want me to sympathise because the worm is turning??? The only thing I can say in defense of that situation was it was better than being on the dole -at least I had a reason to get out of bed in the morning.

Originally Posted by milehighsociety

I pay above award wages with room for raises for good performance and have great conditions as well as lots of flying hours. I do a bunch of training etc etc...

Good for you. Again, I'm surprised there is not a path being beaten to your door.

[milehighsociety]

Cheers Mate

I know you werent looking at directly at me with your comments however, I have just been through GA myself.. Im probably younger than alot of you. Im not going to subject my pilots with anything like what other operators have..

That pilot was pretty quick to jump on our wagon... and still she jumped ship first opportunity, despite a good multiple type twin job just 6 or 8 weeks away.. Not to mention strong possibility of turbine time shortly after..

Where does that leave me?? Leaves me pretty badly stung and for the first time I understand why pilots have earnt their treatment.. I should have seen this earlier when I was on the other side of the fence.

So anyway, its a catch 22. Pilots want all the fair treatment in the world, but despite expensive training to line etc etc etc... they are more than happy to depart without a wink of any feeling of any wrongdoing, they dont take into consideration what they are doing to their employers.

This can only be desribed as being used and abused. Whilst not all pilots do it, the ones that do really really hurt the system. My company will be very seriously affected for up to 6 months for what I can see becasue of this pilots departure and she was well aware of her importance in the system, and how much we gave to get her in that position.

If pilots use and abuse GA operators just so they can piss off to the airlines, future pilots will get used and abused to recover the losses incurred by the old pilots. Operators simply cant offer a good deal and lose out every time, its not worth it. The result..... todays current industry treatment of pilots.

[solowflyer]

Just going back to the PPL instructor thing. I know several retired ex instuctors/ex airline pilots who have hung there headsets up due to all the BS in trying to keep a class 1 medical but are still able to hold a class 2,surly there is a way the industry can accomadate these older instructors.

[poteroo]

Soloflyer - not a silly idea at all! If RAA instructors, who often operate in the same airspace as GA, only need a Class 2 medical - then there's some precedent.

Have to admit to becoming a bit more aware of the medical these days

happy days,

[tubby one]

not sure if it has been mentioned - Pt 61 will make provision for instructors with Class 2 medicals, there are a number of other changes contained in the Part which make good sense particularliy withe current shortage of instructors.

[nibbio86]

What about international instructors?

Hi,I'm an italian guy living in Melbourne. As I've just started my training,I would like to know if with the current instructors shortage is it likely to be sponsored by any australian school barely with a CPL,NVFR,CSU/RU and of course a Grade 3 instructor rating.

Cheers

[Over and gout]

a great GA career

I didn't know that existed!

[kiwi chick]

Mine's pretty close.

Just not quite enough flying - but when is there ever?!

[Walrus 7]

Getting retired captains in on Class 2 medicals is a great idea. But will there be enough of them to go around? Will it be enough to make a difference at the lower end? Probably not, but it would be a great start.

Any other good ideas?

Walrus

[Bendo]

PPL Instructors

Guys there IS scope for instructing as a PPL - it's called RAAus.

I am not knocking RAAus instructors (I have been one myself) or their clients, but I have just exited a Club situation where a few of the PPLs had egos that certainly outstripped the priviledges and limitations of their licence, as well as their ability.
As a few have said above, if you think you want to be an instructor, go out and get qualified as a professional instructor.

[hoggsnortrupert]

Experiance recognition:

Back in 1994, I undertook B737 training in the USA:
The FAA testing Officer was an "elderly" chap, in his 70's with a PPL:
This guy had a history of having flown "every boeing having been produced" and after being told I had Passed, and we shot the S--t, proceded to show me his invitation from Boeing to fly, or train on the 777:
Please forgive me if my "FACTS" are a bit jaded, but some that read this may recall his name, as it evades me just now.
But the point is that the FAA were only happy to have his experiance?
Is there a moral in here somewhere?
H/Snort

[djpil]

Seems to be a mish-mash of stuff on PPL instructors here.
- PPL because of medical issues - so the question is whether it is safe for an instructor to have only a class 2 medical. This was the basis of the proposal discussed at FLOT 2003. My experience in the USA is that aerial work doesn't have the same medical requirements as RPT.
- PPL rather than CPL course completed? My experience is that the nav work on CPL was not relevant to PPL stuff.
- in any case, any proposal that I've seen still needed an instructor rating which would address all issues of competency regarding training towards a PPL.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

"My experience is that the nav work on CPL was not relevant to PPL stuff"

Hmmm! Interesting comment.

1) Low level of training / low level of experience = low hr PPL

2) High level of training / low level of experience = low hr CPL

3) Low level of traing / high level of experience = high hr PPL

4) High level of training / high level of experience = high hr CPL

Now, who should we ideally have training the next generation of pilots, especially given that most CPLs start out as PPLs?

Really a no-brainer, isn't it!

I was a (3) for 6 or 7 of the first 10 yrs of my flying career.

I was pretty good too! .....or so I thought!

You will never convince me that I was not a much better pilot for having undertaken CPL training - including the navs.

Dr

[Walrus 7]

DJP,
You have summed-up my main contentions quite well. Having a CPL means you have a higher level of training than a PPL, but it doesn't make you a better pilot. Flying hours are what make you a better pilot.

I spoke with my CFI today about a PIFR course that was planned. Now under a cloud because the instructor that was going to run it has bolted to fly Shrikes. It's left the school and the students in deep brown stuff.

Sure, they can replace him with a newbie, but that newbie won't be qualified to run a PIFR course!

That's one example of the problem right there.

Walrus

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

"Having a CPL means you have a higher level of training than a PPL, but it doesn't make you a better pilot. Flying hours are what make you a better pilot"

Let me get this right!

A higher level of training does not make you a better pilot!

Just keep telling yourself that - it will make you feel better for your lack of training.

Go do the PretendIFR. You may well be the ideal candidate. It was created for PPLs who can't get their flying up to the standard of a SEIR or MEIR

Dr

[hoggsnortrupert]

So Littoral"

The FAA testing Officer was an "elderly" chap, in his 70's with a PPL:
I should have said: He had held a ATP, with regard to the medical and age he was reduced to a PPL, but held/retained type rating examiner:
I am at work right now, away from my Log Book, I "think"? his name was Budd Bricker?????.
Heavy duty in the experiance, and a bloody neat chap:
H/Snort

[Unhinged]

Instructor should mean CPL holder for all of the reasons which I and others have already said.

Nevertheless, there are scenarios where an Instructor who has previously held a Class 1 medical, but now has a Class 2 and so is technically operating as a PPL, should be allowed to operate as an instructor - and get paid for it !
e.g - Conducting a BFR renewal for someone whose BFR has not yet expired
- Subsequent twin endorsement (not initial twin endorsement) where the new type is substantially similar to a type already held by the student (e.g. Seneca endorsement when they already have Seminole)

The Instructor has a CPL, they are just not medically authorised to exercise those privileges, and in these situations the student is still capable of operating with a high degree of safety if the Instructor is suddenly incapacitated.