Frustrated with current flight school

CC268

CC268

Final Approach
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
5,532
Display Name
Display name:
CC268
Hey guys,

So I have 25 hours now...today was my instructors last day so I have been assigned to someone else (I haven't met him yet). I am supposed to fly Saturday morning with the new guy.

I am quite frustrated with the plane I have been flying...its a piece of crap to be honest. I feel like almost every time I get in the plane there is something not working quite right...fuel gauges half ass working, heading indicator has to be re-positioned constantly, questionable carb heat, today I had to cancel the flight because the damn attitude indicator wasn't working on run-up...also have noticed the past two times during preflight that there has been a small amount of oil streaking coming from the oil cap access door on top of the cowl...not to mention the minimum oil capacity is 4qts...this plane is ALWAYS right at 4 qts (or slightly below). I can put a quart of oil in it and next time I fly it is right where it started.

I am pretty fed up about it and honestly thinking about switching flight schools since my instructor has left. I can go fly much much nicer fuel injected 172s for the same price across the way (literally another flight school across the runway. The people at the flight school itself have been good...but I am sick of dealing with a plane that I quite frankly don't feel comfortable in...I need to start getting my solo time now and there is no way I am going to fly that thing.

My worry is I have a block of time I paid for over there...not sure I can get my money back? We will see in the morning

Rant over....
 
Last edited:
Sounds like you answered your own question.
For me I searched out the school who had the most modern and well kept planes.
I'd switch in a heartbeat.
 
Last edited:
The school itself is good...but they are known to be a cirrus training center...they have very nice cirrus's...they have two 172s both 1979s...the other one is a decent plane but honestly I can go fly nice newer fuel injected 172s for the same price elsewhere so why not.
 
If you are switching instructors anyway...now is the time to jump ship.
 
Anybody willing to pay scottsdale prices should be getting a top quality airplane. I personally would switch airports while I was switching schools but that's not the question you had.
 
How many hours do you have left in your block time?

A refund will be difficult to pull off. Tell the owner you will fly it off once he brings the plane up to your standards. OBTW do not include the fuel gauges in your rant to the owner... They never work right. The only fuel gauge to pay attention to is your watch or other time piece.

Set your own personal minimums. One of mine is "Don't fly junk!"

-Skip
 
Skip Miller said:
OBTW do not include the fuel gauges in your rant to the owner... They never work right. The only fuel gauge to pay attention to is your watch or other time piece.

-Skip
Click to expand...
Fuel gauges are required to work. Unfortunately, Skip came by his misconception honestly, as most pilots don't understand what fuel gauges are supposed to do, and the myth is reinforced.
 
Go ahead and make the switch if you can afford it. You have enough on your plate just learning how to fly and being safe without having equipment to worry about on top of all of that. Since you pre-bought a block of time, I am sure you can use it in different ways. Examples would be to use it to pay for instructor time for ground school. Do they have a certified simulator that you can rent to work towards your IFR ticket? I personally would just use it for ground instructor time to grill you and get you ready for PPL oral. Just use it to get a bunch of prep and mock oral time and that way you will not just walk away from the cash! I am guessing the reason that many of these schools who have junk give discounts to students for buying blocks is that a high percentage feel exactly the way you do and now they have your cash!!!
 
NJP_MAN said:
Anybody willing to pay scottsdale prices should be getting a top quality airplane. I personally would switch airports while I was switching schools but that's not the question you had.
Click to expand...

Not an option...Glendale is way too far away, I couldn't find anything that didn't have a long wait list at Deer Valley, and Falcon Field is too far as well.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Fuel gauges are required to work. Unfortunately, Skip came by his misconception honestly, as most pilots don't understand what fuel gauges are supposed to do, and the myth is reinforced.
Click to expand...
All depends on what the OP meant by "half-assed" working. If they usually don't read anything, then the plane is unairworthy. If they're simply inaccurate and unreliable in their readings, then as far as I'm concerned that's normal.

OP - I was in something like your position during my PPL training. The only plane my CFI had access to on a reliable basis was an old 150 that had several missing Lord mounts, fluids of various colors on the cowl, and water in the fuel more often than not. I had just soloed and it was coming time for me to do my solo XCs. I just didn't trust it and had visions of having to land off-airport or worse. Plus, I had a few dual tasks still needed, summer was coming, and in the warmer weather it was clear the plane was not performing well with both of us in it (CFI weighed something like 250). I liked my instructor but I couldn't continue like that, so I switched schools. I never regretted it. From what you say, I suspect you won't, either.
 
Walboy said:
Go to Chandler Air Service. They're not perfect, but you'll get it done. The chief flight instructor is also a DPE. The checkrides aren't cakewalks, but they're fair. 10% discount for cash upfront. They're not going out of business anytime soon. They'll be a good place to rent from and continue with instrument rating too.
Click to expand...

Chandler is one of the furthest from me...I would have to only fly once or twice a week and it would have to be on the weekends...
 
In terms of the left fuel gauge...it had a crack in the fuel float so it would actually sort of work for a few mins and then it would get filled with fuel and sink to the bottom and read no fuel
 
CC268 said:
In terms of the left fuel gauge...it had a crack in the fuel float so it would actually sort of work for a few mins and then it would get filled with fuel and sink to the bottom and read no fuel
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that's legally an airworthiness issue...
 
Most trainers around here are clapped out, safe, but pretty beat up. I doubt you can get any refund because the purpose of block time is to get a discount? Right? So if you have flown a portion of your block, it wouldn't be fair to be reimbursed because of the discounted rate. I hope that makes sense.
 
I can get a full refund already talked to the school - not an issue. They just have to remove my future flights from the discounted rate...no big deal.
 
azure said:
All depends on what the OP meant by "half-assed" working. If they usually don't read anything, then the plane is unairworthy. If they're simply inaccurate and unreliable in their readings, then as far as I'm concerned that's normal.
Click to expand...
based on 23.1337 (or its equivalent in CAR 3, which reads essentially the same)
(b) Fuel quantity indication. There must be a means to indicate to the flightcrew members the quantity of usable fuel in each tank during flight. An indicator calibrated in appropriate units and clearly marked to indicate those units must be used.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how you could call unreliable readings airworthy.
 
Skip Miller said:
How many hours do you have left in your block time?

A refund will be difficult to pull off. Tell the owner you will fly it off once he brings the plane up to your standards. OBTW do not include the fuel gauges in your rant to the owner... They never work right. The only fuel gauge to pay attention to is your watch or other time piece.

Set your own personal minimums. One of mine is "Don't fly junk!"

-Skip
Click to expand...
Be careful about delivering ultimatums. They usually backfire. I learned in an aeronca champ. No attitude indicator, that was in the seat of your pants, it was kept a quart low on oil as most of these small aircraft engines just burp out the first quart quite quickly. Etc. etc. the best fuel gauge is a dip stick and the instructor should have insisted you use one before every flight. I had to top it off before he came out the door. No stall warning in a champ either. The hours I spent in it before and after I got my license made flying a mooney, 172, bonanza, Stearman , etc. very easy. ( about 100 hours. ) I've never trusted a fuel gauge in any aircraft.
 
Last edited:
I should add here that the instructor was old and had instructed in Stearmans during WW2. He usually sat in the back seat smoking a cigarette with baseball cap pulled low. He loved to slip and spin and would demonstrate both until you could do both correctly. Very low key and calm.
 
Alright guys - don't want this to turn into a tangent conversation...some people will fly in anything others won't...I am not picky but I want to be comfortable in the plane that I am flying..
 
CC268 said:
Alright guys - don't want this to turn into a tangent conversation...some people will fly in anything others won't...I am not picky but I want to be comfortable in the plane that I am flying..
Click to expand...

Obviously you'll have to ignore things people say like that. You don't feel safe, you're getting your refund, and now all you need to do is go across the field and get 'er done!
 
MauleSkinner said:
based on 23.1337 (or its equivalent in CAR 3, which reads essentially the same)

I'm not sure how you could call unreliable readings airworthy.
Click to expand...

By "unreliable" I mean you can't trust them to tell you with reasonable accuracy how much fuel you have left. I don't mean the readings can be inconsistent - maybe that's how you read my post, and if so, sorry for the confusion.

Anyway, nothing there says the gauges must be accurate. If you're going to say they must be then you're going to ground almost the entire fleet of 40+ year old Cessnas, unless they've been upgraded with fuel totalizers certified to replace the OEM gauges.

In the OP's case I think we both agree that from the description, the plane is unairworthy as the gauges have a known defect.
 
The fuel gauge is only required to be accurate at Empty. The Attitude Indicator is not required for VFR. DG's precess and your taught to check that against your mag compass.

I'm not saying they have top notch maintenance, just that none of the squawks you've described are airworthiness issues.
 
rolivi said:
The fuel gauge is only required to be accurate at Empty. The Attitude Indicator is not required for VFR. DG's precess and your taught to check that against your mag compass.

I'm not saying they have top notch maintenance, just that none of the squawks you've described are airworthiness issues.
Click to expand...

Even if it's NOT required, it must still be either removed from the airplane or handled as per 91.213. Just because it's not required and broken doesn't mean you can or should depart in a plane in that condition.

Going flying in a plane with non-functioning stuff that HASN'T been handled as per 91.213 is a bad idea and could put you in hot water. While you could continue a flight if one failed in the air (landing as soon as practical for repair), I would not operate an aircraft under normal conditions with equipment KNOWN to be inop.
 
Lesson learned - I should not be worried about flying in a plane even if none of the instruments are working - silly me :p

I am being facetious
 
CC268 said:
I am not picky but I want to be comfortable in the plane that I am flying..
Click to expand...

Speaking directly with the owner and not the counter person can sometimes help. Most rentals will have some issue. I stopped IFR training and concentrated on purchasing a few years ago because I got fed up with the rentals, occasional "over booking" and getting bumped for practical exams. Ownership is wonderful, until surprise expensive maintenance arises, and then it's not quite so fun.:eek:

There are so many aircraft at my field that are minimally used by the old owners, it's unbelievable. In my T-hangar row only (11 hangars) there are only 3 of us that fly at least once every two weeks. My A&P tells me the V-Tail Bonanza across from me is annualed every year, but that the airplane hasn't been off of asphalt in over 3 years. Might check on partnering with someone.
 
Back when I was working on my PPL, the FBO's girlfriend bought a really nice C-172 (not new, but really nice). The FBO put it on the rental line. I flew it a little, but stopped using it in favor of a cheaper C-150. After about six months on the rental line, it was a disaster. Someone had broken off one of the knobs on the radio, the seats looked horrible, etc., etc. The general public (even pilots) treat other people's property very badly. I can understand ragged out looking airplanes on the rental line. Even a brand new airplane would soon be ragged out if rented.
 
danhagan said:
Speaking directly with the owner and not the counter person can sometimes help. Most rentals will have some issue. I stopped IFR training and concentrated on purchasing a few years ago because I got fed up with the rentals, occasional "over booking" and getting bumped for practical exams. Ownership is wonderful, until surprise expensive maintenance arises, and then it's not quite so fun.:eek:

There are so many aircraft at my field that are minimally used by the old owners, it's unbelievable. In my T-hangar row only (11 hangars) there are only 3 of us that fly at least once every two weeks. My A&P tells me the V-Tail Bonanza across from me is annualed every year, but that the airplane hasn't been off of asphalt in over 3 years. Might check on partnering with someone.
Click to expand...

Dan, yeah I had that experience too..I recently sold my plane, but when I owned it I would walk by V-Tail Bo's, 152's, RV's, a Sonex, all kinds of aircraft. And they'd be there when I got back, and every day I flew. I think most of the owners just parked em and took em up like once a year.

One of my former CFI's used to get paid to go fly someone's plane around the pattern because he couldn't be bothered to fly it. And that plane was a Cirrus, probably a $400,000 GTS.

The "plane graveyards" at the fields where I live are sad indeed...
 
rolivi said:
The fuel gauge is only required to be accurate at Empty.
Click to expand...

That is an old, tired old wives tale. All required instruments are required to be accurate. However, "accurate" is never defined...

If your statement were correct, why would manufacturers go through the expense of putting in a gauge? It would be cheaper to stick on a placard showing the face of a gauge and the needle on the big E.

What is true is that the needle on E is supposed to mean no usable fuel left, and this is consistent across manufacturers, and models. This takes the fuel gauge out of the reach of the marketing department - which brought us MPH instruments instead of Knot instruments to make the plane sound faster in the print ads....

-Skip
 
Skip Miller said:
That is an old, tired old wives tale. All required instruments are required to be accurate. However, "accurate" is never defined...

If your statement were correct, why would manufacturers go through the expense of putting in a gauge? It would be cheaper to stick on a placard showing the face of a gauge and the needle on the big E.

What is true is that the needle on E is supposed to mean no usable fuel left, and this is consistent across manufacturers, and models. This takes the fuel gauge out of the reach of the marketing department - which brought us MPH instruments instead of Knot instruments to make the plane sound faster in the print ads....

-Skip
Click to expand...
Yep.

23.1337 Powerplant instruments installation.
Fuel quantity indication. There must be a means to indicate to the flightcrew members the quantity of usable fuel in each tank during flight. An indicator calibrated in appropriate units and clearly marked to indicate those units must be used. In addition: [] Each fuel quantity indicator must be calibrated to read "zero" during level flight when the quantity of fuel remaining in the tank is equal to the unusable fuel supply.
 
CC268 said:
Lesson learned - I should not be worried about flying in a plane even if none of the instruments are working - silly me :p

I am being facetious
Click to expand...
You certainly don't need an attitude indicator OR a directional gyro for VFR.

There is also nothing wrong with an old plane by itself. 1979 isn't that old. It's not a car.
 
MAKG1 said:
You certainly don't need an attitude indicator OR a directional gyro for VFR.

There is also nothing wrong with an old plane by itself. 1979 isn't that old. It's not a car.
Click to expand...

Your right what was I thinking MAK...
 
Last edited:
Skip Miller said:
That is an old, tired old wives tale. All required instruments are required to be accurate. However, "accurate" is never defined...
Click to expand...

Tired old wives aren't always wrong. And you clearly ended your equally old tired retort by stating there is no defined requirement for the accuracy of said instrument. Visually check both tanks and go fly.
 
CC268 said:
Your right what was I thinking MAK...
Click to expand...
If you say so....

I'd want to chat with MX about the oil, but if it's STABLE at 4 quarts, it's not a leak. Might be a blow-by issue, but that won't cause sudden failure. Most of the other stuff you mentioned was not important. Thinking otherwise is just 25 hours inexperience.

With some more experience, you'll figure out that glass has drawbacks as well. Most significantly, weight. It's worth about one adult in payload. A 172S with G1000 is a two person aircraft. You can fit three in any other 172.

If you aren't yet proficient in G1000, you have a significant unnecessary learning curve in your future.
 
Last edited:
Well MAK good thing I'm staying with the 172N then...the other 1979 172N
 
rolivi said:
Tired old wives aren't always wrong.
Click to expand...
The fuel gauge is only required to be accurate at Empty.
Click to expand...
This one is. Show me the far that says that.

And you clearly ended your equally old tired retort by stating there is no defined requirement for the accuracy of said instrument.
Click to expand...

This one is true. Again, show me the definition of "accuracy in the FARs, please. I will be glad to admit when I am wrong.

Visually check both tanks and go fly.
Click to expand...

On this we agree completely. Blue skies!

-Skip
 
Skip Miller said:
This one is. Show me the far that says that.
Click to expand...
23.1337(b) Fuel quantity indication. There must be a means to indicate to the flightcrew members the quantity of usable fuel in each tank during flight. An indicator calibrated in appropriate units and clearly marked to indicate those units must be used. In addition:

(1) Each fuel quantity indicator must be calibrated to read “zero” during level flight when the quantity of fuel remaining in the tank is equal to the unusable fuel supply determined under §23.959(a);
Click to expand...


This one is true. Again, show me the definition of "accuracy in the FARs, please. I will be glad to admit when I am wrong.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a good definition, although "accurate" is not used.
calibrated to read “zero” during level flight when the quantity of fuel remaining in the tank is equal to the unusable fuel supply determined under §23.959(a)
Click to expand...

In general use, "accurate" means "correct". The fuel gauge must be correct when it indicates zero, with "zero" defined as only unusable fuel remaining.

Throughout the rest of its range, the fuel gauge must be "precise", which in general usage is defined as "repeatable". If the gauge says 1/2 in level flight, and there are 5 gallons of usable fuel remaining, there should always be 5 gallons of usable fuel remaining when the gauge reads 1/2 in level flight. This covers the part of the reg that says "There must be a means to indicate to the flightcrew members the quantity of usable fuel in each tank during flight."
 
Last edited:
CC268 said:
Chandler is one of the furthest from me...I would have to only fly once or twice a week and it would have to be on the weekends...
Click to expand...

its worth it though.
Are you at alliance now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top