Are Instructors in short supply?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

This industry is in the s**t precisely because of the idiotic practise of using "hour builders" It doesn't matter if someone stays for 6 months or 2 years, I don't call that experienced.


Don't feel bad because it is the same the world over....

It's the weekend so head out to your nearest airport and sit and watch the flight schools land their airplanes on the nose wheels....great entertainment and it's free...

[Penguina]

I've recently decided to get a 'real job' and do instructing occasionally, weekends only. It's a huge relief. Maybe that way I can afford the IR without horrendous debt.

If I could realistically carry on like this, I might. But I'm happy to swan out, knowing that they're all desperate and I could swan right back in again any time I fancied it. If I was offered a decent wage and some security, I'd jump at it and even self-fund further training as a career instructor, but right now? Sorry, but what's in it for me?

[IO540]

How come a driving instructor can earn a good living, but a flying instructor cannot.

The answer must be that there is a demand for driving lessons at the price they have to go for, but there isn't a demand for flying lessons at the price they have to go for.

And as an aircraft owner I know about operating costs and I know that there isn't much one can do about most of them.

Most people think that if there is a shortage of something then its price must rise until the demand drops enough to make the shortage go away. This principle holds up in most normal business but it fails where the demand is capped by some other factor.

In PPL training, the demand is capped to the number of people in a given radius interested in learning to fly. Yet the industry continues to live in the 1960s/1970s heyday and every airfield that isn't tightly run seems to have more than one school based there.

This is completely pointless. An airfield cannot have a catchment area that can support more than one decent school. The airfield where I learnt had eight fixed wing schools at the time; now it's a bit fewer (some went bust in a manner which was spectacular even by the industry standard, with massive internal fraud) but still there are several times more than there ever will be customers for.

It's of course trendy to say "we welcome competition" but in reality the only businesses who can afford competition are those with loads of unfulfilled demand, and there is no such thing in PPL training.

The demand will always be sucked dry by well wishing people who are willing to work for nothing out of a wooden hut.

One could do things locally if one had control of the airfield (via issuing leases banning new flight training operations) and had a great catchment area, but here isn't any easy way to increase that all around the UK.

[TheOddOne]

Most people think that if there is a shortage of something then its price must rise until the demand drops enough to make the shortage go away. This principle holds up in most normal business but it fails where the demand is capped by some other factor.

In PPL training, the demand is capped to the number of people in a given radius interested in learning to fly.

Simple Keynsian economics, like wot we did at college.

Actually, there's more to supply and elasticity of demand than that. It you can differentiate your product, then you can revitalise demand.

Here's a case study.

Our airfield now has resident 13, count them, 13 of these Cirrus things. They weren't there 2 years ago. I understand prices start at £250k a pop, that's £3.25 million more investment on the airfield in 2 years. There's now a whole training setup just to cater for them. I don't know if the people keeping all these Cirri going have been lost to the existing schools or whether they were privateers who have changed to the new type. The pilots are I believe all post-PPL types (I don't know if anyone anywhere is offering ab initio training on a Cirrus).

My point is that you can generate additional demand if the product is right.

Another case study: the R22. We've got dozens of the things and they're out in all weathers zooming up & down parallel to the runway. Again, this seems like newly-created demand that wasn't being satisfied by the PA28/C152 operations. This market is now more mature because it started about 10 years ago. Look at Sloane at Sywell. I never heard of anyone half way through their PA28 course suddenly saying
'I'm off now to learn to fly helicopters instead' (or the other way round, either!)'

You can create demand. It's called Marketing. A part of it is having the right product, another part is promoting it appropriately.

A grubby caravan with a line of C152's then waiting for the punters to knock on your door is neither.

TheOddOne

[Kanu]

I was forced to find other work in the midlands when my employer closed down. I was offered (AT BEST) £10 a day retainer (which included the first hour!!!). With those offers around, is it any f^&*ing wonder that instructors are pissing off to regionals????

[2close]

I have heard mention of a FI Union (and I mean that in the sense of a cooperative / professional body not a trade union before anyone gets their panty-hose twisted).

Anyone else heard that or is it one of those rumours that get banded about every few years (and probably has done over the past thirty years or so) but actually never sees the light of day?

Not saying I'm for or against, although I can't see how a professional body can be a bad thing provided it doesn't become a platform for militants who think there are fourteen 21 year old virginal female students waiting for them on the other side after the last final approach.

[VFE]

Remove the CPL requirement for instructing and you'll still see the same level of flight instruction from older and more experienced PPL's, possibly better, who's to say?

The problem of where the hours builders will go is of no concern to the CAA in my opinion however, the airlines may find they need to lower their entry requirements, at least until the multi-crew CPL comes to fruition at which point there'll be little problem for either camp will there?

No instructor shortage during winter months tho that's for sure. I'm bored ****less.

VFE.

[IO540]

The Odd One

Our airfield now has resident 13, count them, 13 of these Cirrus things. They weren't there 2 years ago. I understand prices start at £250k a pop, that's £3.25 million more investment on the airfield in 2 years. There's now a whole training setup just to cater for them. I don't know if the people keeping all these Cirri going have been lost to the existing schools or whether they were privateers who have changed to the new type. The pilots are I believe all post-PPL types (I don't know if anyone anywhere is offering ab initio training on a Cirrus).

My point is that you can generate additional demand if the product is right.

I have been saying more or less exactly the above on pprune for the several years I've been here, and sure as clockwork I have been jumped on by traditional rag and tube / spamcan types who make up the bulk of UK GA and who treat the suggestion of "going after the money" as elitist crap which they presumably fear will price them off their airfield. I've had these fears voiced to me in person at a few places, too, when e.g. the airfield proposed to add an ILS.

There is no doubt in my mind that setting up a slick PPL/IR training & club operation which trains people to fly from A to B for real (that is, right across Europe - what else is one going to be doing in an SR22??), while paying only the barest legally required lip service to the WW1 UK PPL syllabus with its stupid circular slide rule and map+compass+stopwatch navigation, is the way ahead. Obviously such a "PPL" would be a bit more than the usual £8k You would be converting people to the 150kt complex type before the skills test.

And it's the only way ahead that's left today. (Apart from a specialised aerobatic school, perhaps.)

Now, what sort of instructors would one need for such a school? No hour builder with a fATPL would be any good - they fall short on experience on type (zero), time on real IFR routes (zero), European IFR flight planning experience (zero). You would need ex airline pilots with GA IFR experience. Or keen private IR pilots but most of them are on N-reg and you would not get most of them to squeeze the JAA CPL/IR in between their business interests to enable them to legally instruct.

You would also need an accessible IR, with a short US-style ground school because the N-reg option is not really viable in the training/club context even if it does continue indefinitely.

There is work being done in the USA on an integrated one-step PPL/IR and the results look promising.

[TheOddOne]

IO

Now, what sort of instructors would one need for such a school?

Well, probably not me, my FI course certainly did nothing for equipping me to teach on this class of aircraft. I've only sat in one, yet to have the opportunity to fly in one but I was most impressed with the overall layout and I was shown a brief tour of the avionics.

I think I'd probably want 1500 hours or so more, working up through maybe an Arrow with twin Garmin 430/530 or such and a conversion course. Even then, I'm not sure the Cirrus as such is a good idea for effects of controls or climbing and descending! Is there a suitable ab initio type to feed in to the Cirrus?

TheOddOne

[Say again s l o w l y]

The instructor course is just about giving you the bare bones and some ability to teach.

There is no course in the world that can take someone with no experience in a high performance aircraft and turn them into an instructor on it in a couple of weeks. (Mind you I wouldn't call an SR22 particularily high performance.)

It would be wonderful if we could have modern aircraft, good instructing and a sensible "aftercare" package to help encourage people post PPL issue.

Until that happens, most PPL's will be stuck flying the usual cr*p with no help and generally getting ripped off and treated like shi*e.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

There are hundreds of us with not only modern glass cockpit experience but modern teaching techniques who would do flight instruction.....we just do not want to submit to the frontal lobotomy that would be required to parrot back all the old school crap that is needed to get our instructors rating back.

[IO540]

The SR22 is OK for ab initio training. There have been schools (not in the UK) training ab initio in TB20s which has similar performance.

You don't need 1500hrs either. I went to a TB20 with 120hrs TT and it took me about 20hrs to get used to it. A decent instructor who went on a specialised course which explores the envelope (anybody can fly an SR22 conventionally) would be up to speed in a few weeks.

[portsharbourflyer]

Get back to the point everyone, the instructor shortage.
When the JAA modular training was proposed just prior to 2000 the aviation press predicted this would result in an instructor shortage as the need to build 700 hours to hold a CPL was removed; this is exactly what has happened now. The BCPLs holding self improvers were a major source of instructors to the industry.
SAS, far more people in the eighties were obtaining PPLs than they are now, therefore these "inexperienced" AFIs/QFIs were by and large making a reasonable job of PPL instructing.
To make PPL instructing a viable career option you will need to start paying PPL instructors the same as Commercial instuctors, so the price of a PPL will start becoming well over 10,000, so please don't tell me that this is going to help the industry or encourage popular flying.
Oddone,
At Denham you have technically advanced aircraft, your catchment area is London, where disposable incomes are high, there are reasons why TAA are based at Denham and not in Plymouth. That is a marketing idea that will work in London not at Plymouth or many other parts of the country.
It is simple eveyone, the biggest contributor to the instructor shortage has been the introduction of the JAA modular system.

[Tony Hirst]

I agree with the spirit of Odd One's and IO540's views. That the punter can start training with a goal in mind and if that goal is business into Europe then why spend 43 hours training in a 152 with an intermittent transponder. However, as most students are not Captain Capacity incarnate and the course take considerably longer to complete - how do you market that?

Problem is, I get the idea that 90% of students start off with one idea and end up doing something completely different anyway.

Also I can't agree that the traditional methods should be compromised because of technology. The navigation principles learnt (or that should be learnt at PPL level) apply regardless of flight rules or tools. It is difficult to see what should be changed in the PPL without adding more.

On a sombre note, as the economy is wavering a little bit, and as it doesn't seem to take much for the airlines to find that all of a sudden they have too much capacity, then I wonder if the shortage will last long?

[Say again s l o w l y]

The "rot" set in the period you are describing.

How come people are happy to pay more than 10k for a helicopter licence?

Paying a sensible amount for a good experienced FI is VALUE FOR MONEY.

Why should I bother my a*se teaching ab inito students if I'm not going to get paid a sensible amount for my experience, skill, training and knowledge. I very rarely go near ab-inito PPL stuff anymore, as it just isn't worth it to me.

How is losing 10 years and thousands of hours of different types of flying experience because I feel like I'm being taken advantage of a good thing?

I don't teach for a living, but I would never do anything for free or less than the market rate, as it would undermine those who are trying to make a living from it.

To say that paying sensible wages would kill the industry is absolutely ridiculous. It shows that the pricing is unrealistic. The FI is the cheap part of the training cost. With the implementation of new aircraft types like 3 axis microlights that outperform most light a/c, but cost far less to run, this industry will change.

What we have to do is ensure that the instructing fraternity gets better not worse. Paying a sensible wage will help keep good, committed people in the business.

Carrying on the outmoded victorian era practices will just let this business die.

It's in the poop now and doing the same old nonsense will just kill completely.

[znww5]

Clearly the instructor shortage is down to the abysmal pay and conditions offered to potential FI's - I was appalled to find that my instructor had to top up their income with an evening cleaning job . . . and we all know how well that is paid.

However, the fact remains that outside of London and the M4 corridor, there simply isn't the disposable income available to support the 'shiny new aircraft' marketing strategy.

I originally started to learn to fly in the late 80's before other things got in the way and one of the most noticeable differences when I came back to it recently was that the demographic profile had lurched upwards from 20/30 to 40/50/60. The reason is simple, with ballistic house prices and mediocre wages, only the better off older people can actually afford to fly.

The upshot of this is that I do agree that instructors are paid insulting wages - but the problem is that students can't, for the most part, afford what it would otherwise cost. Evidence of that is provided by those who either migrate to microlights from Group A licences, or go directly to microlight training in the first place. It would be interesting to hear from microlight instructors to get an idea of how they see things.

[portsharbourflyer]

Quote

How come people are happy to pay more than 10k for a helicopter licence?

Answer: Not that many people are.

Look at the figures for PPL(H) and PPL(A) holders, there is significantly less people holding a PPL(H) than a PPL(A)., the main reason is cost. One of my current students had done PPL(H) training in the states, upon returning to the UK he opted to do a fixed wing PPL(A) due to the cost of rotary flying.

If PPL(A) holders reduce to the levels of PPL(H) holders the instructor shortage will be easily solved.

[Say again s l o w l y]

There speaketh the PPL's. Believe me, in every part of the country, there is plenty of money available to learn.

Yes there are fewer PPL(H) holders, but we in the fixed wing world could learn an awful lot from the Heli training side.

It is generally done better and very few "schools" rely solely on training for their income. Aircraft sales, AOC work etc.etc all help to make a more viable business model.

To be frank, keeping cost artifically low helps no one. It does make it more inclusive, but that doesn't make it better.

I would rather have fewer, richer students and members who fly more often.

This is nothing to do with richer people being "better" or other such nonsense, but having a stable community. At the moment what we have is people who save up for a licence, but once they have got it, they can no longer justify the cost and end up flying rarely, lose confidence and give up after a couple of years.

That is rubbish for the industry as a whole. If you raise the entry barriers to a more realistic level, then you might not get as many coming through the door, but you will get better "quality" clients.

Now that all sounds rather arrogant, but it is just a business look at it, not a look at the personalities.

There are ways of making flying more affordable, but that will take a change in regulation and aircraft types used.

This business needs a stable future and going back to the dark ages is the last thing we need.

Anyone who thinks paying FI's starvation wages will help this industry is either a flying school owner or has no idea of the work of an FI. Let alone one of good business practice.

[BackPacker]

There's another thing that I don't get.

You want to fly for the airlines. You've done the PPL, done the CPL/IR/ME/MCC all in the minimum required hours (something like 250?) and on the side done all the ATPL exams. The airlines will not want you because you do not "have enough experience".

So instead of self-funding your hour building (e.g. flying IFR airways all over Europe), you acquire an FI, teach a bunch of ab-initio students how to bash around the circuit and navigate to the dozen or so airfields that are within reasonable range yet qualify for the QXC, until you've seen them all and can get there without unfolding a map. Hundreds of hours spent at low level, in VMC, in a simple single engine airplane. Until, at some point in time, you have enough hours PIC to be acceptable to the airlines.

Now someone tell me: how does this additional experience help you in your airline job? Sure, with a bit of (bad) luck you might have some additional experience in dealing with emergencies and a bit of patience in dealing with a strange acting bloke in the LHS will help you as well. But for the rest?

In other words, are we really doing wannabe-airline pilots, and the airline industry, a favour by allowing all these hour-building instructors to count those instruction hours towards unfreezing an ATPL (or whatever it's called), or is this just a conspiracy to keep "the system" working?

[Say again s l o w l y]

A lot of the skills you learn as an FI can be directly related to the job of being an airline pilot.

There is an awful lot more to being a pilot than just the basic handling skills of flying on instruments.

As an FI you learn how to work wth people in the cockpit, you gain confidence, you get scared, but most of all you learn decision making skills.

Being an FI helped me massively when I got my first airline job. You can even now see the difference between those straight out of school and those who've done a bit of instructing. The handling skills might not be that different, but there is a huge difference in their thinking and let's face it, that's what flying an airliner is all about nowadays.

So saying an FI has no "relevant" experience is totally wrong. Certainly on a bad night, I'd rather be sat next to an ex-instructor rather than someone straight out of school who has never really been in command of an aircraft in real terms.

Airlines currently seem to love cadets that they can mould in their own image, but long term, I personally think that isn't going to be great for the industry.

It is unfashionable now to work your way up in this business and everyone is in a rush to fly shiny jets, paying for ratings etc.

Who would be the better pilot really? the person who has instructed, flown IFR in marginal machines, turboprops and then gets on a jet or the person who walked out of Oxford paid for a rating and then went straight in as an F/O on a 737 or airbus?

I know who I'd prefer to sit next to, the old school method pilot would probably have an awful lot better line in stories as well and when you're sat next to someone for 10 hours a day, that is one thing you'd be thankful for!