Ed Guthrie
Cleared for Takeoff
In another thread, Arnold suggested that the only means to increased flight safety is via regulatory means. In part I agree, and I think there is a quick, simple, single pen stroke fix to a large part of the problem. I believe we should lobby to delete 14CFR61.51(e)(3). In a single stroke of the regulatory pen all time building CFIs would disappear from the flight training world. The low time pilot/CFI looking to build time as his/her ticket to the majors would be forced to find another venue. The only folks providing flight instruction would be those who wanted to flight instruct.
After 61.51(e)(3) disappeared, the CFI population would rapidly diminish. Supply and demand would force a strong increase in CFI pay. Experienced pilots/CFIs who wished to teach for the sake of teaching would pull a decent salary and could afford to stay in the industry. The flight training system for the first time in history would economically incentive good teacher/pilots to remain within the CFI profession. IOW, Arnold would resume flight instructing. Furthermore, with salaries high, flight schools would have the economic tools necessary to shop for good CFIs instead of being forced to accept available CFIs. IOW, flight schools would engage in a bidding war for Arnold's flight instruction services.
As average CFI experience level increased, GA flight safety would increase, too.
And the world would be as it should.
The only downside I see to this proposal is that flight training costs would necessarily increase. But in reality the increase would be relatively modest. Assume CFI take home pay increases from $20/hour to $50/hour. At the minimum hours required by FAR, a private certificate would cost $600 more, an instrument rating would cost $450 more, and a PVT helicopter add-on to a PVT-ASEL certificate would cost $570 more. In a world where it seems as if every pilot is toting around a $1000 handheld GPS the increased discretionary cost is obviously within means of most pilots.
I suggest we all immediately request that the AOPA and EAA lobby the FAA on our behalf asking that 14CFR61.51(e)(3) be removed immediately as it is an obvious impedance to flight safety.
Much as I post this with tongue somewhat in cheek, I do think 61.51(e)(3) is part of the overall problem.
After 61.51(e)(3) disappeared, the CFI population would rapidly diminish. Supply and demand would force a strong increase in CFI pay. Experienced pilots/CFIs who wished to teach for the sake of teaching would pull a decent salary and could afford to stay in the industry. The flight training system for the first time in history would economically incentive good teacher/pilots to remain within the CFI profession. IOW, Arnold would resume flight instructing. Furthermore, with salaries high, flight schools would have the economic tools necessary to shop for good CFIs instead of being forced to accept available CFIs. IOW, flight schools would engage in a bidding war for Arnold's flight instruction services.
As average CFI experience level increased, GA flight safety would increase, too.
And the world would be as it should.
The only downside I see to this proposal is that flight training costs would necessarily increase. But in reality the increase would be relatively modest. Assume CFI take home pay increases from $20/hour to $50/hour. At the minimum hours required by FAR, a private certificate would cost $600 more, an instrument rating would cost $450 more, and a PVT helicopter add-on to a PVT-ASEL certificate would cost $570 more. In a world where it seems as if every pilot is toting around a $1000 handheld GPS the increased discretionary cost is obviously within means of most pilots.
I suggest we all immediately request that the AOPA and EAA lobby the FAA on our behalf asking that 14CFR61.51(e)(3) be removed immediately as it is an obvious impedance to flight safety.
Much as I post this with tongue somewhat in cheek, I do think 61.51(e)(3) is part of the overall problem.
Last edited: