Instructor standards falling?
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't matter whether you work for a flying school or not; neither do I!
The basic premise, whether it applies to you Bose-x, or anyone else, is still the same - that whilst some people (in whatever circumstances, in whatever profession) are prepared to undercut wages by working for free, then wages rates across that market will be kept lower.
Anyone who is crusading for living wages for professional instructors should not also be accepting of those who work for free.
Cheers
Whirls
The basic premise, whether it applies to you Bose-x, or anyone else, is still the same - that whilst some people (in whatever circumstances, in whatever profession) are prepared to undercut wages by working for free, then wages rates across that market will be kept lower.
Anyone who is crusading for living wages for professional instructors should not also be accepting of those who work for free.
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't matter whether you work for a flying school or not; neither do I!
The basic premise, whether it applies to you Bose-x, or anyone else, is still the same - that whilst some people (in whatever circumstances, in whatever profession) are prepared to undercut wages by working for free, then wages rates across that market will be kept lower.
Anyone who is crusading for living wages for professional instructors should not also be accepting of those who work for free.
Cheers
Whirls
The basic premise, whether it applies to you Bose-x, or anyone else, is still the same - that whilst some people (in whatever circumstances, in whatever profession) are prepared to undercut wages by working for free, then wages rates across that market will be kept lower.
Anyone who is crusading for living wages for professional instructors should not also be accepting of those who work for free.
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose, are you saying you instruct for free? What are you, nuts?
Seriously, why would you do that? I wouldn't walk into someones office and offer to their job for naff all, so why would you do the same to other FI's?
Seriously, why would you do that? I wouldn't walk into someones office and offer to their job for naff all, so why would you do the same to other FI's?
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One can only imagine it's an inherent belief in Thatcherite ideals with a superficial hint of Scargillian solidarity!
Cheers
Whirls
Cheers
Whirls
A little less conversation,
a little more aviation...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bracknell, UK
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Say again s l o w l y
Bose, are you saying you instruct for free? What are you, nuts?
Seriously, why would you do that? I wouldn't walk into someones office and offer to their job for naff all, so why would you do the same to other FI's?
Seriously, why would you do that? I wouldn't walk into someones office and offer to their job for naff all, so why would you do the same to other FI's?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry mate!
It won't be long until winter though and you could probably nip up to the airfield and get one of the FI's there to do it for you, probably won't cost you more than a bag of chips.
It might be their only chance of meal once the weather has turned.
It won't be long until winter though and you could probably nip up to the airfield and get one of the FI's there to do it for you, probably won't cost you more than a bag of chips.
It might be their only chance of meal once the weather has turned.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I understand totally what people are saying about free instruction, but I am a PPL/FI who scraped together the funds to do CPL groundschool and FI course for the love of instructing and I can't charge for my flying (other than expenses for fuel to airfield etc..) so what should I do? Give up instructing until I've paid for a CPL when I can then charge? As a part-timer it could years to recoup the cost.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose, are you saying you instruct for free? What are you, nuts?
Seriously, why would you do that? I wouldn't walk into someones office and offer to their job for naff all, so why would you do the same to other FI's?
Seriously, why would you do that? I wouldn't walk into someones office and offer to their job for naff all, so why would you do the same to other FI's?
But there is more to life than money and I am a firm believer in what goes around comes around.
When you are doing things yourself and helping out people who never go near the schools the unexpected rewards are often worth it. I have 3000hrs of private flying and more than 120 different types in my log book and a significant number of those are a result of my belief. I have had the privilege of flying aircraft some people have laboured decades to restore and they have never let another soul fly. I have flown and taught in interesting types that most FI's won't go near because they don't have dual controls or are very difficult to fly.
There is a big world outside of the spam can trainer fleet and I am lucky enough to be trusted by people in this part of the aviation world to fly their aircraft. You also find philanthropy brings out the best in people as well, often resulting in unexpected touches. For some of us that is reward enough.
And in response to blagger - Well done - A true passion for aviation, prepared to put something in and expect nothing in return. My hat goes off to you.
Aviation is a passion for some........
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
Wow, you really are pissed with me. Never mind you can always come and kick my ass or something to make you feel better.
VFE.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This concept of providing something for free is an interesting one.
Aviation, like a few other sports, straddles the divide between a professional occupation and a “hobby”. I can also think of sub aqua and perhaps sailing as other examples. Sailing is at the extreme given that almost no body involved with sailing makes money from the sport - yes there are delivery skippers and there are some professional race skippers but in the main it is a “hobby”. Never the less there are RYA approved schools where you will pay for a course of sailing instruction, there are “non approved” schools where you will also pay, and clubs where members will take you out for a sail and will, with any luck, teach you how to sail, usually in a “non structured manner”.
Perhaps it is “structure” that provides the key. If you pay for a course of instruction you can reasonably expect that a feature of the contract will be the course is structured - structured in terms of how standards are maintained, at what times the service will be available and how the course material will be taught. (I might add because this is what you can reasonably expect it doesn’t always mean this is what you will get).
On the other hand, certainly with free lance instructors, analogous to a degree with the sailing club member, there may be a distinct lack of structure. The member will almost certainly have other commitments so the training will only be available when it suites him. The training will not be supported by the back up provided by an organisation. If the instructor is ill the training will stop, the instructor is not in the business of providing infra structure, so there will be no simulators, no back up aircraft or boats, no briefing rooms etc.
Aviation training, unlike sailing, is regulated by law. In consequence the standards of training should always exceed a minimum standard. However, the freelance instructor and the fly training school are both capable of meeting that standard. Each is offering a different product and has very different over heads to cover.
Training schools have confused themselves. Many of the instructors accept their pay is in two parts - the first part is money, the second part is hours which they need for their future career. In exactly the same way this is why delivery skippers use to be paid a pittance. The instructors are often self employed or at least are paid as if they were. The schools make money out of the aircraft rental. If you employ a solicitor he charges solely for his time, but something like 40% will cover his salary, 30% covers the overheads, and 30% is profit for the partners. As a consequence the instructors are devalued by the schools and are “treated” as if they were self employed but enjoy few of the benefits of being self employed because it is assumed part of their pay should be in kind. The instructors generate the profit of the business but as such they are not charged out as if they were.
So my point is that the training industry has always sat at an uncomfortable crossroad - it wants to operate as a “proper” business adopting the accepted model of a commercial service providers, but it doesn’t want (or cant or wont) adopt the same business practices of a commercial service provider in any other industry. It is therefore its own worst enemy and probably has little to complain about if some freelance instructors are willing to provide their services for free.
Aviation, like a few other sports, straddles the divide between a professional occupation and a “hobby”. I can also think of sub aqua and perhaps sailing as other examples. Sailing is at the extreme given that almost no body involved with sailing makes money from the sport - yes there are delivery skippers and there are some professional race skippers but in the main it is a “hobby”. Never the less there are RYA approved schools where you will pay for a course of sailing instruction, there are “non approved” schools where you will also pay, and clubs where members will take you out for a sail and will, with any luck, teach you how to sail, usually in a “non structured manner”.
Perhaps it is “structure” that provides the key. If you pay for a course of instruction you can reasonably expect that a feature of the contract will be the course is structured - structured in terms of how standards are maintained, at what times the service will be available and how the course material will be taught. (I might add because this is what you can reasonably expect it doesn’t always mean this is what you will get).
On the other hand, certainly with free lance instructors, analogous to a degree with the sailing club member, there may be a distinct lack of structure. The member will almost certainly have other commitments so the training will only be available when it suites him. The training will not be supported by the back up provided by an organisation. If the instructor is ill the training will stop, the instructor is not in the business of providing infra structure, so there will be no simulators, no back up aircraft or boats, no briefing rooms etc.
Aviation training, unlike sailing, is regulated by law. In consequence the standards of training should always exceed a minimum standard. However, the freelance instructor and the fly training school are both capable of meeting that standard. Each is offering a different product and has very different over heads to cover.
Training schools have confused themselves. Many of the instructors accept their pay is in two parts - the first part is money, the second part is hours which they need for their future career. In exactly the same way this is why delivery skippers use to be paid a pittance. The instructors are often self employed or at least are paid as if they were. The schools make money out of the aircraft rental. If you employ a solicitor he charges solely for his time, but something like 40% will cover his salary, 30% covers the overheads, and 30% is profit for the partners. As a consequence the instructors are devalued by the schools and are “treated” as if they were self employed but enjoy few of the benefits of being self employed because it is assumed part of their pay should be in kind. The instructors generate the profit of the business but as such they are not charged out as if they were.
So my point is that the training industry has always sat at an uncomfortable crossroad - it wants to operate as a “proper” business adopting the accepted model of a commercial service providers, but it doesn’t want (or cant or wont) adopt the same business practices of a commercial service provider in any other industry. It is therefore its own worst enemy and probably has little to complain about if some freelance instructors are willing to provide their services for free.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cilboldentune, Britannia
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you paid instructors a proper wage the cost of learning to fly would go UP and the number of customers would go DOWN = less instructors and aircraft required; everyone suffers. It's the old law of supply and demand.
I did the AFI course at the same time BA was laying off pilots with the result that quite a few went back into instructing and as a result there were less instructing posts available and I couldn't afford to give up the day job. However, doing the course was interesting and educational.
I did the AFI course at the same time BA was laying off pilots with the result that quite a few went back into instructing and as a result there were less instructing posts available and I couldn't afford to give up the day job. However, doing the course was interesting and educational.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JXK - I don't think that is the case. Take a look at the earlier example about the economics of raising the price. It is not difficult to absorb.
The issue revolves around how FI's are paid as well. Most get a very tiny retainer and flying pay. They majority don't get paid for the briefing time in a 2hr slot and so this is an area where the standards suffer I think. The motivation is to get into the air as quick as they can so they don't lose any precious hours or flying pay often giving lip service to the briefing. This is exasperated by students turning up late, previous lessons overrunning etc.
The briefing is an equal part of any flying lesson and as such the Instructor should be paid properly for this time.
The issue revolves around how FI's are paid as well. Most get a very tiny retainer and flying pay. They majority don't get paid for the briefing time in a 2hr slot and so this is an area where the standards suffer I think. The motivation is to get into the air as quick as they can so they don't lose any precious hours or flying pay often giving lip service to the briefing. This is exasperated by students turning up late, previous lessons overrunning etc.
The briefing is an equal part of any flying lesson and as such the Instructor should be paid properly for this time.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To add to my earlier comments many of the flying schools run their businesses as if it were a hobby, not a business. The owners may make a living out of doing so, but they are unlikely to attract any investment. It is because they cant attract investment the PPL training market has remain unchanged for as many years as I can remember and will not change so long as the present regulatory environment remains in place.
That is the reason they don’t or cant pay their instructors properly and also the reason why the aircraft are poor.
A very few have tried to invest heavily themselves (where they have funds available from their own resources) but I don’t think any one has succeeded because the majority of the market is not willing to pay the prices necessary for them to recoup their investment. A few individual willing to pay an extra 10% or 20% an hour is not enough.
Take two aircraft, one new the other 20 years old in a condition that reflects its age, charge £20 a hour more for the first and watch what happens. As little as £20 is enough to ensure you have almost no takers for the first and a que for the second - extraordinary you might say, but they are the facts.
For that reason as I said earlier the business model is fatally flawed. Bose has a point that if the aim is to turn out good pilots there may be a better way in which everyone involved accepts they are running a club not a business.
The only exception are commercial training providers which is the only market where the schools can operate as a business. At this "level" the economics change. The "punters" are on a mission, the business is able to operate in almost all weathers, and must invest a considerable sum in the infra structure - which keeps the free lancers and smaller schools at bay. Schools like Oxford make money, they are a business and they are investable.
Anything else is a hobby, which as a bonus you might make a bit of money at and have a lot of fun running. It is just a shame these operations sit at the cross roads as I commented earlier - neither fish nor fowl - and it is the instructors and students that often suffer the consequence.
That is the reason they don’t or cant pay their instructors properly and also the reason why the aircraft are poor.
A very few have tried to invest heavily themselves (where they have funds available from their own resources) but I don’t think any one has succeeded because the majority of the market is not willing to pay the prices necessary for them to recoup their investment. A few individual willing to pay an extra 10% or 20% an hour is not enough.
Take two aircraft, one new the other 20 years old in a condition that reflects its age, charge £20 a hour more for the first and watch what happens. As little as £20 is enough to ensure you have almost no takers for the first and a que for the second - extraordinary you might say, but they are the facts.
For that reason as I said earlier the business model is fatally flawed. Bose has a point that if the aim is to turn out good pilots there may be a better way in which everyone involved accepts they are running a club not a business.
The only exception are commercial training providers which is the only market where the schools can operate as a business. At this "level" the economics change. The "punters" are on a mission, the business is able to operate in almost all weathers, and must invest a considerable sum in the infra structure - which keeps the free lancers and smaller schools at bay. Schools like Oxford make money, they are a business and they are investable.
Anything else is a hobby, which as a bonus you might make a bit of money at and have a lot of fun running. It is just a shame these operations sit at the cross roads as I commented earlier - neither fish nor fowl - and it is the instructors and students that often suffer the consequence.
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
At the end of the day I see no statistical evidence of instructor standards decreasing from any organisational body involved with flight safety. I do however see that more GA pilots are falling foul of airspace changes, more regulations and an AIS made no easier for the majority of pilots both professional and recreational, but alas I digress...
To me this thread seems a puerile attempt by *some* to elevate their status by creating a perception that they somehow know better than everybody else. I see it all the time working at an airfield all week - everybody is an expert... it's endemic! At times I think Freud would've had a field day routing out the hidden issues behind someone who feels they have to constantly poke their head above the parapet to seek affirmation from their peers. Sadly, it's always the ones with the loudest voices which we get to hear time and time again but that's life I guess.
This thread has no grounds. In the words of Dragons Den: "I'm out!"
VFE.
To me this thread seems a puerile attempt by *some* to elevate their status by creating a perception that they somehow know better than everybody else. I see it all the time working at an airfield all week - everybody is an expert... it's endemic! At times I think Freud would've had a field day routing out the hidden issues behind someone who feels they have to constantly poke their head above the parapet to seek affirmation from their peers. Sadly, it's always the ones with the loudest voices which we get to hear time and time again but that's life I guess.
This thread has no grounds. In the words of Dragons Den: "I'm out!"
VFE.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation is a passion for all of us, just because you are happy to prostitute yourself doesn't mean you have any right to denigrate what others do.
Hours = so what, in my book. Like any job, the longer you are in it, the more experience you gain, it's just that in flying we record things to a greater degree.
Trying to say that the hours themselves have a tangible benefit is rubbish, especially nowadays.
If an FI wants to go off to the airlines, then whether they have 1000, 2000 or 3000 hours matters very little now. Does your face fit and do you have a rating/ability to pay for one is far more important than what is in your log book.
So the old, "but you are getting hours" argument is simply out of date.
If somebody does a job, then they should be paid the market rate. You don't need the money, but are happy to take work away from someone who does, just because you are "freelance"? Whether you are associated with a school or not matters not a jot. I'll fly outside of any school association, but I preform the same job, to exactly the same standard as I would in a school, so therefore I expect to get paid for it.
I have a passion for flying, but I also have a passion for paying my mortgage. People working for naff all damage that and make it very hard for the anyone trying to earn a living from teaching to do so.
Your motivations come across as incredibly selfish. "I'm loaded, so I'm alright Jack." I'm also in the lucky situation where I have a few quid in the bank and an income from elsewhere, so flying could be just a hobby for me, but I count myself as a professional pilot who has not just my own interests at heart, but those of my students and other members of the FI community. Working for free doesn't fit any of those criteria.
I've still got plenty of hours in the book, flown some wonderful machines, met some amazing people and always done my damndest to ensure that I offer value for money, but I have never worked for free and never will. I've done favours for friends and have waived my fee on occasion
(For example I had a young student who had bags of talent, but due to some horrid circumstances couldn't afford to fly anymore. I found him a cheap machine and donated my time for free as I couldn't bear the thought of him being lost to the industry and having seen how distraught he was, I just did what any normal person would do when they saw someone working as hard as he did. I helped out in the only way I could. That is alright, doing it as a matter of course is not.)
Being "trusted" with someones aircraft.......... What are you on about? You're an FI, your job is to be PIC and teach someone. How can you do that if you aren't competent enough to be "trusted"?
You do a job, you get paid. Simple.
Hours = so what, in my book. Like any job, the longer you are in it, the more experience you gain, it's just that in flying we record things to a greater degree.
Trying to say that the hours themselves have a tangible benefit is rubbish, especially nowadays.
If an FI wants to go off to the airlines, then whether they have 1000, 2000 or 3000 hours matters very little now. Does your face fit and do you have a rating/ability to pay for one is far more important than what is in your log book.
So the old, "but you are getting hours" argument is simply out of date.
If somebody does a job, then they should be paid the market rate. You don't need the money, but are happy to take work away from someone who does, just because you are "freelance"? Whether you are associated with a school or not matters not a jot. I'll fly outside of any school association, but I preform the same job, to exactly the same standard as I would in a school, so therefore I expect to get paid for it.
I have a passion for flying, but I also have a passion for paying my mortgage. People working for naff all damage that and make it very hard for the anyone trying to earn a living from teaching to do so.
Your motivations come across as incredibly selfish. "I'm loaded, so I'm alright Jack." I'm also in the lucky situation where I have a few quid in the bank and an income from elsewhere, so flying could be just a hobby for me, but I count myself as a professional pilot who has not just my own interests at heart, but those of my students and other members of the FI community. Working for free doesn't fit any of those criteria.
I've still got plenty of hours in the book, flown some wonderful machines, met some amazing people and always done my damndest to ensure that I offer value for money, but I have never worked for free and never will. I've done favours for friends and have waived my fee on occasion
(For example I had a young student who had bags of talent, but due to some horrid circumstances couldn't afford to fly anymore. I found him a cheap machine and donated my time for free as I couldn't bear the thought of him being lost to the industry and having seen how distraught he was, I just did what any normal person would do when they saw someone working as hard as he did. I helped out in the only way I could. That is alright, doing it as a matter of course is not.)
Being "trusted" with someones aircraft.......... What are you on about? You're an FI, your job is to be PIC and teach someone. How can you do that if you aren't competent enough to be "trusted"?
You do a job, you get paid. Simple.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS, as you wish. I am not getting into a fight over that one. To many fronts at the same time.....
Reward does not have to be about cash, it's as simple as that. I am happy with the rewards I get for teaching so lets leave it at that.
Reward does not have to be about cash, it's as simple as that. I am happy with the rewards I get for teaching so lets leave it at that.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, reward is about getting "market rate". That = money, or at least it does to the rest of the population. Try and convince yourself otherwise, but the basic fact is that by working for free, you denigrate our profession.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: originaly from Edinburgh but now EGKK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I right in thinking that to be an instructor you must achieve at least the theory examinations at CPL level, but you do not actually need to have a 'CPL'? But without a CPL then you cannot be paid for the instruction?
If that is the case then perhaps that's why Bose-x and others don't charge for their time, because they cant?
If that is the case then perhaps that's why Bose-x and others don't charge for their time, because they cant?
Spicy Meatball
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Liverpool UK
Age: 41
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't been on this forum for a year or so now, but I caught this thread, like I tend to do whenever this subject comes up, and I feel that maybe a different perspective.You all seem to be clued up on instructing and the like, either as a professional or someone who has a lot of hours. Let me give it from my perspective (8hrs post PPL).I'm lucky to be in a very good job with good pay and conditions etc. It's nothing to do with aviation, but you'd class it as a good job. Big problem though, I have never to date woke up to my alarm and been happy about the day ahead – looking forward to my job. There is only one job in the world (so far as I know in my life to date) that I would truly look forward to going to each morning, and I believe that to be Flying Instructor. Here’s two very simple little problems: it costs a packet to train, and the wages are insufficient to live in the current era. The first problem of training wouldn’t be so much of a problem really, if I didn’t have any commitments – which I do. However, if I was to go back in time and stay single and live at home and reject any commitments, it would still take me years to build up a career to be able to afford training etc. Catch 22. Even if I was lucky to get the CPL and FI and all that, I’d still need another job to be able to afford to live. So the only other option I am left with is the PPL/FI where I can enjoy flying, and still have a career elsewhere. This is NOT a rant, but the way it IS. I am living with that, and have accepted it. I’m not going to argue about flying for free etc but I honestly have to say that if someone offered me an hour a week to do trial flights or something, unpaid, I wouldn’t say no. Bose-x, I do agree with a lot of the things you say, especiallyQuote: (button not working in works browser)"Reward does not have to be about cash, it's as simple as that. I am happy with the rewards I get for teaching so lets leave it at that."Don’t get me wrong, I’d never actively go out and seek full time free employment, because that would mean I was either rich, or had nothing better to do, in which case I like the idea of getting paid and giving the money to charity or something, therefore not undermining paid work. I do think people have been very harsh with their personal attacks (I certainly hope anyone who calls you a c*** on here never makes it to FI as I wouldn’t want them teaching me). And back to the age old argument of quality of instructors – I think it’s arrogant to pick on one particular reason why you think an instructor would be good or not. You can either teach, or you can’t – it’s probably all down to personality (but then I’m calling myself arrogant).I live in hope that one day I’ll have a PPL/FI and that I can do an hour or so here and there, passing on something I love doing. Quote:"Apprentice instructors, mentored and overseen by the professional so as to build up their teaching skills in a structured manner. These apprentices would of course receive a wage that would allow them to stay in the industry."Show me where I sign up. All the best.(Sorry for lack of formatting - works browser is junk).
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting post Mazzy, but you are missing one vital point, that any job eventually becomes that. A job.
I love flying, I have spent 10's of thousands on it and I am very lucky to be able to earn a living from flying aircraft, but I never lose sight of the fact that it is a job.
Sometimes it is awful, sometimes it is the best thing in the world, but flying for a living is a whole heap different from being a PPL.
An FI doesn't get the choice as to who they fly with, where they fly or when (obviously wx is a factor) and you are constantly at work in the cockpit, or on the ground.
Many people make that mistake and try to equate PPL flying with teaching. The two things are totally different, yes you are up in the air, but that is about the only similarity.
It's about as different as going for blast across a wonderful mountain pass on a beautiful day in your new car compared to slogging up the motorway driving a lorry.
I love flying, I have spent 10's of thousands on it and I am very lucky to be able to earn a living from flying aircraft, but I never lose sight of the fact that it is a job.
Sometimes it is awful, sometimes it is the best thing in the world, but flying for a living is a whole heap different from being a PPL.
An FI doesn't get the choice as to who they fly with, where they fly or when (obviously wx is a factor) and you are constantly at work in the cockpit, or on the ground.
Many people make that mistake and try to equate PPL flying with teaching. The two things are totally different, yes you are up in the air, but that is about the only similarity.
It's about as different as going for blast across a wonderful mountain pass on a beautiful day in your new car compared to slogging up the motorway driving a lorry.