YOUR INSTRUCTOR--Friend or Foe?

[llanfairpg]

Running the programme is the hardest job in the school and needs a special skill to get it right

[17thhour]

What do you think of your instructor?

Perfect, expreienced, always reliable, interested in aviation, instructs full time having retired from career.

How do you think his/her technique could improve?(audible,content,clarity,knowledge,interes t, etc)

honestly wouldnt change it.

Does he/she dive on the controls just as you are about to make a correction?

nope.

Is he/she relaxed when giving instruction?

Definently
Do you get a 10-15 minute briefing before each flight?

Always, sometimes longer and in more depth than required, which is what I want.

Do you feel your instructor is really interested in you?

Yes i get the impression he cares about his work not doing it for a living.
Do you feel you are getting value for money?

Certainly am, with briefings not included.

Apart from landing fees of course!!


Are you learning to a syllabus or does it just seem haphazard?

Syllabus, all well strucured and clearly set out what I will be doing and whats next or what to read up on etc.

Do you get the impression that everything is being rushed.

Nope, all done at a good pace that i can absorb information.

Would you change instructors given the chance and if so, why?

Although it would be good to see different techniques, Id rather wait untill I have something to compare it all too.

So no I wouldnt.

[llanfairpg]

Thanks for taking the trouble to answer ALL of those questions I was rather meaning you just picked out one or two!!.

Reading them again I get the impression that some of you are not aware of a syllabus EG you may be unsure of what you are going to do on the next lesson, am i right?

[FlyingForFun]

I'd be curious about the break-up of hours which your instructor has, besides you, and how this affects the program.

It's been a while since I was involved in PPL instructing, but my previous school used to give me 75 minutes per student. My first thought when I started working there was how the hell am I supposed to brief, fly and debrief my student in that time?

Actually, because the program contained a lot of 20 and 30 minute trial lessons (they have a fairly short brief - don't want to overload a trial lesson with theory beyond what they'll need; they are shorter than a typical lesson; and the de-brief is very short for the typical student who has expressed no desire to take the training any further), I always, without exception, managed to find time to brief and debrief every single student for every single flight (including trial lessons). There were other factors at this school which helped, e.g. PPL volunteers who would refuel aircraft, etc, so I would always make sure the volunteers knew my requirements if I had a particularly busy day..... but I'm curious about how a typical instructor's day at another school is made up, especially if the instructors are so pushed for time they have to brief whilst taxying.

FFF
---------------

[llanfairpg]

I worked at a couple of schools with 1hr 15 mins slots--hillarious.

You knew if you were on first you might be lucky and get away on time but if you were last flight of the day it may be 30 mins duration or cancelled.

As long as the aircraft fly that all that matters--some flying club owners actually believed that students liked hanging around in the school waiting!!!!

Service with a snarl

[dah dahdit dah]

Why do instructors come on here and create threads to pick holes in other instructors?

I've briefed while on the taxi out - I must be s&%t. I've also gone through the start up to save time because I've been running late - double s%$t

we've all done it at some point! too many hypocritical high hourses round here.

[foxmoth]

I don't think it is necessarily the instructor who is at fault here rather the school that allocates the available time. Ideally aircraft would have 1:15 slots and instructors 2:30 slots with 2 instructors/aircraft, though a larger school could reduce the instructor time and swap instructors between aircraft. For normal 1 hour PPL slots the minimum instructor time should be 1:45 (15 min brief,15 min walk out and preflight, 1hour flying and 15 mins for walk in & debrief. Often not practical though.

[llanfairpg]

Why do instructors come on here and create threads to pick holes in other instructors?

I created the thread and it certainly wasnt for the purpose of picking holes in other instructors I was actually more interested in picking holes in myself and listening to the experiences of students from other clubs/schools, an opportunity I cannot get anywhere else.

I have done a few stupid things in my flying career but I have never yet briefed anyone while taxing and certainly no instructor who has ever worked for me has done that either. If you are running late you adjust the programme not the level of service you are giving to the customer. The student is paying for a briefing before the lesson so thats what they should get.

Why get yourself into a position, especially in flying, that you have to be in a hurry? Being in a hurry is usually a false perception brought on by poor planning and discipline both of which are qualities that have no place in a professional flying school.

[Katherine Alexandra]

One of my instructors gave me 2 briefings out of about 25 flights, but that worked alright for me, in the end, as I learnt really well from his flying techniques instead. If I ever had a problem, I knew he'd attempt to try and rectify it.

I had another instructor who, whilst very good in general, though I only flew with her twice, wouldn't let me do the R/T in the circuit. Fair enough if you're just starting but I was on my 3rd flight before my Skills Test, so it was a bit of a pain. At that point, you just want someone there to check you're not going to kill anyone! However, saying that, I guess it's worked with past students as then they've had fewer things to concentrate on and hence can refine their circuit work. Maybe?

[llanfairpg]

One of my instructors gave me 2 briefings out of about 25 flights, but that worked alright for me, in the end, as I learnt really well from his flying techniques instead. If I ever had a problem, I knew he'd attempt to try and rectify it.

But if you had of been briefed how much different would your training have been.

I went to an industrial tribunal with a CFI once who had been sacked.

One student stood up in the court and said" On my 23rd flying lesson I found out the aircraft was fitted with flaps.

This student who qualified after 80 hours(the school average) didnt learn too well from his instructors flying technique. (only taught flapless approaches)

[llanfairpg]

I had another instructor who, whilst very good in general, though I only flew with her twice, wouldn't let me do the R/T in the circuit. Fair enough if you're just starting but I was on my 3rd flight before my Skills Test, so it was a bit of a pain. At that point, you just want someone there to check you're not going to kill anyone! However, saying that, I guess it's worked with past students as then they've had fewer things to concentrate on and hence can refine their circuit work. Maybe?

Some instructors are too helpful--a good intention but poor technique. We learn best by doing things ourselves

[Katherine Alexandra]

I completely agree, especially so close to Skills Test, where the examiner wasn't going to do it for me.

However, it's not done me any harm in the long run and I'd still fly with the instructor again

[Fake Sealion]

Katherine Alexandra

Who operated the radio during your solo circuit consolidation phase?

[Katherine Alexandra]

Oh, I just stayed quiet

[kevmusic]

During my long, long career as a PPL stude, and as a glider pilot, I've had LOADS of instructors, and most were very good. One or two, however, have made a bad impression and one of them was recently. He jumped on the controls in every phase of flight and, despite my comparative experience, made my confidence plummet. I discussed it a little while ago on the FI's forum and it helped me change back to an instructor I was happy with.

Kev.

[TheOddOne]

Our school might be regarded as fairly expensive, but I'm allocated a 2-hour slot per 1-hour student flight. Even then, with a low-hour student, a proper brief and making them do all the checks correctly in accordance with our very comprehensive checklist, I do struggle to fit it in. We do 'aircraft-share' amongst instructors to maximise utilisation.

Of course, for a longer 'nav-ex' lesson, more time is allocated, but there is still 30 mins brief and de-brief built-in each side of the aircraft time.

We record all time in so-called 'decimal' time, i.e. blocks of 6 mins. We're allowed 6 mins each side of airborne; whilst taxying in and shutdown might only take 3-4 mins, frequently brakes-off to airborne might be 15-20 mins to go through the checks properly. The student only pays for 6 mins of this.

Perhaps we should declare our charges for the full time allocated rather than just the flight time; that way our rates would appear to be around the cheapest!!

TheOddOne

[maxdrypower]

Reading them again I get the impression that some of you are not aware of a syllabus EG you may be unsure of what you are going to do on the next lesson, am i right?
Are you aiming this question at PPL holders or those that instruct it ?
The subtle piss taking was due to your AOPA Syllabus quote .
The requirements of qualifying for a PPL are laid down in stone by the CAA not the AOPA (Or so I was brought up to believe ) . Most flying schools will teach to a tried and tested syllabus . not sure to be honest where it exactly came from but you will notice that it bears a very striking resemblance to the exercises laid down in the Trevor Thom Book One .Perhaps Llanfairpg knows the exact genetics
This is a logical syllabus , after all you wouldnt do a first lesson on Unusual attitudes before you've done effects of controls , or at least one would hope not . You wil also find no mention of air pockets in any Met manual available currently , although I stand to be corrected . Ballooning is more often caused by the seat to stick interface rather than any Wx phenomena .
But again I stand to be corrected , on all counts

[Tony Hirst]

The current PPL syllabus has its roots in a training scheme devised by a particular officer (I don't know his name!) in response to accidents and the rather variable quality of pilots post training. This was devised shortly after WW1 I believe. He is the person who defined the exact same "Exercises" that we use today (except for radio nav). But straight and level, circuits, PFLs, etc, all the same apparently.


Standing by for mild tirade from IO540 about out dated this that and the other

[maxdrypower]

Aha WW1 that would be as a result of these then :-

The following safety tips from Daedalian Foundation are excerpts from
Royal Flying Corps monthly report of December 1917. The report was
signed C. St. John-Culbertson, Royal Flying Corps Colonel and was dated
21 December, 1917.

INTRODUCTION
Another good month. In all, a total of 35 accidents were reported, only
six of which were avoidable. These represented a marked improvement over
the month of November during which 84 accidents occurred, of which 23
were avoidable. This improvement, no doubt, is the result of experienced
pilots with over 100 hours in the air forming the backbone of all the
units.

RESUME OF ACCIDENTS
Avoidable Accidents

1. There were six avoidable accidents this last month:

a. The pilot of a Shorthorn, with over 7 hours of experience, seriously
damaged the undercarriage on landing. He had failed to land at as fast a
speed as possible as recommended in the Aviation Pocket Handbook.

b. A B.E.2 stalled and crashed during an artillery exercise. The pilot
had been struck on the head by the semaphore of his observer who was
signaling to the gunners.

c. Another pilot in a B.E.2 failed to get airborne, an error in
judgment, as he was attempting to fly at mid-day instead of at the
recommended best lift periods, which are just after dawn and just before
sunset.

d. A Longhorn pilot lost control and crashed in a bog near
Chipping-Sedbury. An error of skill on the part of the pilot in not
being able to control a machine with a wide speed band of 10 MPH between
top speed and stalling speed.

e. While low flying in a Shorthorn the pilot crashed into the top deck
of a horse drawn bus near Stonehenge.

f. A B.E.2 pilot was seen to be attempting a banked turn at a constant
height before he crashed. A grave error by an experienced pilot.

Unavoidable Accidents

2. There were 29 unavoidable accidents from which the following 3 are
selected:

a. The top wing of a Camel fell off due to fatigue failure of the flying
wires. A successful emergency landing was carried out.

b. Sixteen B.E.2's and 9 Shorthorns had complete engine failures. A
marked improvement over November's fatigue.

c. Pigeons destroyed a Camel and 2 Longhorns after mid-air strikes.

COST OF ACCIDENTS

Accidents during the last three months of 1917 cost 317 pounds, 10
shillings sixpence, money down the drain and sufficient to buy new
gaiters and spurs for each and every pilot observer in the Service.

ACCIDENT BRIEFS

No. 1 Brief
No. 912 Squadron, 3 December 1917

Aircraft type B.E.2C, No. KY678, Total Solo - - 4.20 Pilot Lt. J.
Smyth-Worthington, Solo in type - - 1.10

The pilot of this flying machine attempted to maintain his altitude in a
turn at 2,500 feet. This resulted in the airplane entering an
unprecedented maneuver, entailing a considerable loss of height. Even
with full power applied and the control column fully back, the pilot was
unable to regain control. However, upon climbing from the cockpit onto
the lower mainplane, the pilot managed to correct the machine's
altitude, and by skillful manipulation of the flying wires successfully
side -slipped into a nearby meadow.

Remarks: Although, through inexperience, this pilot allowed his
aeroplane to enter an unusual attitude, his resourcefulness in
eventually landing without damage has earned him a unit citation.
R.F.C . Lundsford-Magnus is investigating the strange behaviour of this
aircraft.

No. 2 Brief
No. 847 Squadron, 19 December 1917

Aircraft Type Spotter Balloon J17983, total solo 107.00 Pilot Capt.
***, Solo in type 32.10

Capt * * * of the Hussars, a balloon observer, unfortunately allowed the
spike of his full-dress helmet to impinge against the envelope of his
balloon. There was a violent explosion and the balloon carried out a
series of fantastic and uncontrollable maneuvers, while rapidly emptying
itself of gas. The pilot was thrown clear and escaped injury as he was
lucky enough to land on his head.

Remarks This pilot was flying in full-dress uniform because he was the
Officer of the Day. In consequence it has been recommended that pilots
will not fly during periods of duty as Officer of the Day.

Captain* * * has requested an exchange posting to the Patroville Alps, a
well-known mule unit of the Basques

No. 3 Brief
Summary of No. 3 Brief dated October 1917 Major W. de Kitkag-Watney's
Neuport Scout was extensively damaged when it failed to become airborne.

The original court of Inquiry found that the primary cause of the
accident was carelessness and poor airmanship on the part of a very
experienced pilot.

The Commandant General, however, not being wholly convinced that Major
de Kitkag-Watney could be guilty of so culpable a mistake ordered that
the court should be re-convened.

After extensive inquiries and lengthy discussions with the Meteorlogical
Officer and Astronomer Royal, the Court came to the conclusion that the
pilot unfortunately was authorized to fly his aircraft on a day when
there was absolutely no lift in the air and could not be held
responsible for the accident.

The Court wishes to take this opportunity to extend congratulations to
Major de Kitkag-Watney on his reprieve and also on his engagement to the
Commandant General's daughter, which was announced shortly before the
accident.

FLYING SAFETY TIPS

Horizontal Turns
To take a turn the pilot should always remember to sit upright,
otherwise he will increase the banking of the aeroplane. He should never
lean over.

Crash Precautions
Every pilot should understand the serious consequences of trying to turn
with the engine off! It is much safer to crash into a house when going
forward than to sideslip or stall a machine with engine trouble.
Passengers should always use safety belts, as the pilot may start
stunting without warning. Never release the belt while in the air, or
when nosed down to land.

Engine Noises
Upon the detection of a knock, grind, rattle or squeak, the engine
should be at once stopped. Knocking or grinding accompanied by a squeak
indicates binding and a lack of lubricant.


WATCH THAT FIRST STEP
The First Marine Air Wing had this write up in their safety publication,
some 60 years ago:

It was conceded by all that the pilot had accomplished a brillant piece
of work in landing his disabled machine without damage under the
circumstances. It is not with intent to reflect less credit upon his
airmanship, but it must be noted that he is a well-experienced aviator
with over 40 total hours in the air, embracing a wide veriety of
machines, and this was his seventh forced landing due to complete
failure of the engine.

It was doubly unfortunate that upon alighting from his machine he missed
the catwalk on the lower airfoil and plunged both legs through the
fabric, straddling a rib, from which he received a grievous personal
injury.

Some thought should be devoted to a means of indentifying
wing-traversing catwalks to assist aviators in disembarking from their
various machines

[IRRenewal]

Why do instructors come on here and create threads to pick holes in other instructors?

Self gratification?