Cost of a private pilot certificate now??

I earned my US Private Cert starting in a Cub and finished it in a Vag.
 
ColinD said:
View attachment 138163

I'm punching the air right now.

I paid $173/hr wet in 2022 for a 172R (fairly new one... only 24 years old.)
Click to expand...
That inflation computer does not reflect the independent increase in fuel cost. Just an item that cost $22 in 1980 would be $85 today.
Also the increased cost of maintenance, parts and insurance that accelerated independently and well above a normal average inflation rate.
Cost of used airplanes almost doubled during Covid. An engine rebuild that cost $30K in 2015 is almost $50K 10yrs later, and that is not include the R/R labor costs.
 
BillTIZ said:
That inflation computer does not reflect the independent increase in fuel cost. Just an item that cost $22 in 1980 would be $85 today.
Also the increased cost of maintenance, parts and insurance that accelerated independently and well above a normal average inflation rate.
Cost of used airplanes almost doubled during Covid. An engine rebuild that cost $30K in 2015 is almost $50K 10yrs later, and that is not include the R/R labor costs.
Click to expand...
Not amortizing the $97.50 for the STC, Mogas is $2.99 gal today.
 
pfarber said:
I've seen garbage CFIs yell at a young woman for God know what. CFI wouldn't sign off my long XC because he had a bad IFR student before me and was ****ed... one small not even mistake set him off and cost me $250. CFIs would drop students at a chance the right seat anything twin or turbine. That was at one of the 6 schools I went through.

CFIs are garbage and and 80%+ drop out rate prives my point.

CFIs are garbage because their goal is not instructing... but 1500 hrs.

CFIs are garbage because FSDOs don't do jack about complaints.

To the 20% that survive the cesspool of flight training, flight schools and CFIs we are the lucky one with more money and brains that most.

Most CFIs are garbage and I can prove it any day of the week.
Click to expand...
I agree with 80% of each of those statements, and been subject to them. As for the next to last, I’ve always said I got to check ride only due to my checkbook and stubbornness, not any smarts, and before POA and similar resources.
 
pfarber said:
I've seen garbage CFIs yell at a young woman for God know what. CFI wouldn't sign off my long XC because he had a bad IFR student before me and was ****ed... one small not even mistake set him off and cost me $250. CFIs would drop students at a chance the right seat anything twin or turbine. That was at one of the 6 schools I went through.

CFIs are garbage and and 80%+ drop out rate prives my point.

CFIs are garbage because their goal is not instructing... but 1500 hrs.

CFIs are garbage because FSDOs don't do jack about complaints.

To the 20% that survive the cesspool of flight training, flight schools and CFIs we are the lucky one with more money and brains that most.

Most CFIs are garbage and I can prove it any day of the week.
Click to expand...
So how far along are you on getting your CFI?
 
MauleSkinner said:
With “both pilots logging PIC” I wouldn’t expect much proficiency regardless. The goal at that point has nothing to do with proficiency.
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

It builds proficiency similarly, if not more, than an airline FO logging time in cruise at FLs.

If both pilots are actively involved in tasks like reading weather and navigating, not just licking the window, I don’t see an issue.

From a CFI perspective, I always thought that if I ran a business with a team mostly made up of CFIs—especially since there’s no PRIA for them—I’d speak with the school owner and ask for the five most recent students they flew with. I'd want to know if the CFI left a student before completing their training, took on a student knowing they couldn’t finish them, or displayed other poor behavior. If they did any of that, I’d expect the same level of disrespect towards my company.

Back when I was a full-time CFI, before leaving, I made sure to notify my boss, stopped taking on new students, and worked with both my new boss and existing students to finish their training. It just felt like the right thing to do.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
So don’t let ‘em be airline FOs, either.

but that would assume proficiency is the goal.
Click to expand...

Everyone I have flown with that was the goal.

Why else would they fly, I mean at that point might as well just pencil whip the whole thing and at that point just become a office worker
 
Roller said:
Everyone I have flown with that was the goal.

Why else would they fly, I mean at that point might as well just pencil whip the whole thing and at that point just become a office worker
Click to expand...
Not everyone I’ve worked with has that goal. Or if they did, they had no idea what proficiency actually meant. Mostly the goal was hours in the logbook.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Not everyone I’ve worked with has that goal. Or if they did, they had no idea what proficiency actually meant. Mostly the goal was hours in the logbook.
Click to expand...

I see it similarly when I come across senior pilots at the company who have an ATP, MEL, CPL SEL, and their CFI is long expired and they don’t engage in general aviation. They seem to be just in it for the paycheck, the “work to live, not live to work” mentality. I feel bad for them, but I also tend to keep a closer eye on them.
 
pfarber said:
Sadly I need one every two years.

I've given up on flying clubs as checkouts from 'approved' CFIs are not to FAA standards, but whatever they think is acceptable and their fee is whatever they want (not set by the club). No thanks.
Click to expand...
So you’re happy with the status quo.
 
As with all professions, there are good and bad ones. You need to take the time to find a good one. Doctor, dentist, accountant, lawyer, CFI, all the same situation.

But remember, many CFIs are young and have maybe 300 hours total time themselves. That is less than 8 weeks full time employment experience.
 
MauleSkinner said:
So how far along are you on getting your CFI?
Click to expand...
That would be interesting.

On POA we constantly hear how awful instructors are or can be. Students are full of criticisms of their instructors. What they do not know is that instructors are faced with a wide variety of student attitudes and behaviors, and they have to deal with those. It is not easy at all, and sometimes instructors just get fed up with the job. They, like dentists, are not appreciated. Sure, there are jerk instructors, but there are also jerk students.

From the Canadian Flight Instructor Guide:

Meeting the Differences​

12. You must be cognizant of the differences in aptitude, personality, and emotions among your students, and understand the necessity to treat students as individuals. When you have analyzed the situation and determined the differences, seek assistance from more experienced instructors or supervisors when it is necessary. You will attempt to equalize the different levels of understanding, ideally raising the level of some without retarding the progress of others. Coping with differences among students is perhaps the greatest challenge of instructing, and finding the correct approach for each student is essential.

13. Some traits and faults of students are fairly common and can be recognized easily. These are discussed in the following paragraphs, together with suggested corrective actions. (Refer to Table 2 below)

  1. NERVOUS OR UNDERCONFIDENT. Nervousness or underconfidence in a student is a trait which may or may not disappear. Instruction may be too rapid and material may not be absorbed. Repeating the fundamentals and ensuring mastery will often alleviate this condition. You must ensure that this type of student receives deserved praise whenever possible. Harsh rebukes should be avoided. Patience is very necessary when dealing with a student of this nature. The student must be aware that you are trying to help. Nervous students may be so apprehensive that they may not be suitable for pilot training. You should avoid manoeuvres involving high G and extreme aircraft attitudes, unless they are essential to the lesson being taught. Take the time to build the student up to exercises involving high G loads or extreme attitudes.
  2. OVER-CONFIDENT OR CONCEITED. You must first ensure that this type of student has the ability to match the confidence and, if so, set more difficult tasks that require greater accuracy. More criticism of imperfections is advisable. If the student has little ability, counselling may be required. Any signs of familiarity must be discouraged.
  3. FORGETFUL OF INSTRUCTION. At the beginning of training, students may forget previous instruction. Students with this problem require a great deal of patience and probably need more review than the average student. Extra time spent in briefing and debriefing, and more study on the student's part should be rewarding for all concerned.
  4. INCONSISTENT. Many students, at one time or another throughout the course, appear to lack consistency in flying proficiency. There are many reasons for this and you must try to find the one that fits a particular student. You must look at yourself and your attitude towards the student. Most of us have good days and bad days, but when a student shows large fluctuations in proficiency the instructor must look closely at the teaching activities. A change in approach or even a change in instructors may be called for.
  5. SLOW STARTERS. Slow starters may be students who find difficulty doing more than one thing at a time. Again, patience is mandatory. Progress may be slow, but encouragement will help.
  6. FAST STARTERS. Fast starters are usually students with previous exposure to flight training who quickly grasp the initial air exercises. You should not omit anything from the briefings. Watch for signs of weakness when new work is introduced. This type of student usually slows down to the level of the others shortly after going solo. A high degree of proficiency throughout the course should not be anticipated unless the student has above average ability.
  7. IMMATURE. You must not be too harsh with students who appear immature. You will find that within a short time in the flying training environment, the students will attain a greater degree of maturity. Your attitude is of prime importance in setting an example. You must encourage and assist these students whenever possible.
  8. AIRSICKNESS. Some students may suffer from airsickness induced by motion, negative G, apprehension, claustrophobia, tensions or excitement. You must attempt to determine what affects the student. When signs of airsickness show up, try methods of prevention such as letting the student fly straight and level, stopping instruction, inducing relaxation, making conversation about something else, or whatever will keep a particular student from becoming airsick.
 
Dan Thomas said:
That would be interesting.

On POA we constantly hear how awful instructors are or can be. Students are full of criticisms of their instructors. What they do not know is that instructors are faced with a wide variety of student attitudes and behaviors, and they have to deal with those. It is not easy at all, and sometimes instructors just get fed up with the job. They, like dentists, are not appreciated. Sure, there are jerk instructors, but there are also jerk students.

From the Canadian Flight Instructor Guide:

Meeting the Differences​

12. You must be cognizant of the differences in aptitude, personality, and emotions among your students, and understand the necessity to treat students as individuals. When you have analyzed the situation and determined the differences, seek assistance from more experienced instructors or supervisors when it is necessary. You will attempt to equalize the different levels of understanding, ideally raising the level of some without retarding the progress of others. Coping with differences among students is perhaps the greatest challenge of instructing, and finding the correct approach for each student is essential.

13. Some traits and faults of students are fairly common and can be recognized easily. These are discussed in the following paragraphs, together with suggested corrective actions. (Refer to Table 2 below)

  1. NERVOUS OR UNDERCONFIDENT. Nervousness or underconfidence in a student is a trait which may or may not disappear. Instruction may be too rapid and material may not be absorbed. Repeating the fundamentals and ensuring mastery will often alleviate this condition. You must ensure that this type of student receives deserved praise whenever possible. Harsh rebukes should be avoided. Patience is very necessary when dealing with a student of this nature. The student must be aware that you are trying to help. Nervous students may be so apprehensive that they may not be suitable for pilot training. You should avoid manoeuvres involving high G and extreme aircraft attitudes, unless they are essential to the lesson being taught. Take the time to build the student up to exercises involving high G loads or extreme attitudes.
  2. OVER-CONFIDENT OR CONCEITED. You must first ensure that this type of student has the ability to match the confidence and, if so, set more difficult tasks that require greater accuracy. More criticism of imperfections is advisable. If the student has little ability, counselling may be required. Any signs of familiarity must be discouraged.
  3. FORGETFUL OF INSTRUCTION. At the beginning of training, students may forget previous instruction. Students with this problem require a great deal of patience and probably need more review than the average student. Extra time spent in briefing and debriefing, and more study on the student's part should be rewarding for all concerned.
  4. INCONSISTENT. Many students, at one time or another throughout the course, appear to lack consistency in flying proficiency. There are many reasons for this and you must try to find the one that fits a particular student. You must look at yourself and your attitude towards the student. Most of us have good days and bad days, but when a student shows large fluctuations in proficiency the instructor must look closely at the teaching activities. A change in approach or even a change in instructors may be called for.
  5. SLOW STARTERS. Slow starters may be students who find difficulty doing more than one thing at a time. Again, patience is mandatory. Progress may be slow, but encouragement will help.
  6. FAST STARTERS. Fast starters are usually students with previous exposure to flight training who quickly grasp the initial air exercises. You should not omit anything from the briefings. Watch for signs of weakness when new work is introduced. This type of student usually slows down to the level of the others shortly after going solo. A high degree of proficiency throughout the course should not be anticipated unless the student has above average ability.
  7. IMMATURE. You must not be too harsh with students who appear immature. You will find that within a short time in the flying training environment, the students will attain a greater degree of maturity. Your attitude is of prime importance in setting an example. You must encourage and assist these students whenever possible.
  8. AIRSICKNESS. Some students may suffer from airsickness induced by motion, negative G, apprehension, claustrophobia, tensions or excitement. You must attempt to determine what affects the student. When signs of airsickness show up, try methods of prevention such as letting the student fly straight and level, stopping instruction, inducing relaxation, making conversation about something else, or whatever will keep a particular student from becoming airsick.
Click to expand...

Back when I was instructing regularly, I had some great self-driven, motivated students. There were some that honestly I wondered what was I providing to them as a CFI, because I almost felt they were teaching me!

Then I had the others. The ones that would ghost you for months, then show up and demand to be signed off for solo because they hit 10 hours and that is when their buddy soloed. The ones that would cancel at the last minute because something came up, but you began to not mind. The ones that wouldn't crack a book or prepare for the written. The ones that would show up for their lesson so distracted, you had to make sure they got in the right airplane! And I will say, there are certain types of people that just shouldn't be pilots, or probably even drive a car, they just don't have the aptitude for operating anything more than a tricycle.

As for the cost, inflation is not a blanket rate across all things and industries. It is driven by many factors, some specific to certain products and services. General Aviation has suffered greatly in this regard. The cost of a new 172 has soared well above average inflation. Insurance and liability are major factors in aviation, which is part of what has driven that cost. The % of the population participating in General Aviation has slowly declined, which is leading to higher costs as well. When I started flying in the late 90s, I was renting a well traveled Cessna 150 for $40 wet/$50 with instructor. It costs me more than $40 an hour in gas alone in my airplane today.
 
Dan Thomas said:
That would be interesting.

On POA we constantly hear how awful instructors are or can be. Students are full of criticisms of their instructors. What they do not know is that instructors are faced with a wide variety of student attitudes and behaviors, and they have to deal with those. It is not easy at all, and sometimes instructors just get fed up with the job. They, like dentists, are not appreciated. Sure, there are jerk instructors, but there are also jerk students.

From the Canadian Flight Instructor Guide:

Meeting the Differences​

12. You must be cognizant of the differences in aptitude, personality, and emotions among your students, and understand the necessity to treat students as individuals. When you have analyzed the situation and determined the differences, seek assistance from more experienced instructors or supervisors when it is necessary. You will attempt to equalize the different levels of understanding, ideally raising the level of some without retarding the progress of others. Coping with differences among students is perhaps the greatest challenge of instructing, and finding the correct approach for each student is essential.

13. Some traits and faults of students are fairly common and can be recognized easily. These are discussed in the following paragraphs, together with suggested corrective actions. (Refer to Table 2 below)

  1. NERVOUS OR UNDERCONFIDENT. Nervousness or underconfidence in a student is a trait which may or may not disappear. Instruction may be too rapid and material may not be absorbed. Repeating the fundamentals and ensuring mastery will often alleviate this condition. You must ensure that this type of student receives deserved praise whenever possible. Harsh rebukes should be avoided. Patience is very necessary when dealing with a student of this nature. The student must be aware that you are trying to help. Nervous students may be so apprehensive that they may not be suitable for pilot training. You should avoid manoeuvres involving high G and extreme aircraft attitudes, unless they are essential to the lesson being taught. Take the time to build the student up to exercises involving high G loads or extreme attitudes.
  2. OVER-CONFIDENT OR CONCEITED. You must first ensure that this type of student has the ability to match the confidence and, if so, set more difficult tasks that require greater accuracy. More criticism of imperfections is advisable. If the student has little ability, counselling may be required. Any signs of familiarity must be discouraged.
  3. FORGETFUL OF INSTRUCTION. At the beginning of training, students may forget previous instruction. Students with this problem require a great deal of patience and probably need more review than the average student. Extra time spent in briefing and debriefing, and more study on the student's part should be rewarding for all concerned.
  4. INCONSISTENT. Many students, at one time or another throughout the course, appear to lack consistency in flying proficiency. There are many reasons for this and you must try to find the one that fits a particular student. You must look at yourself and your attitude towards the student. Most of us have good days and bad days, but when a student shows large fluctuations in proficiency the instructor must look closely at the teaching activities. A change in approach or even a change in instructors may be called for.
  5. SLOW STARTERS. Slow starters may be students who find difficulty doing more than one thing at a time. Again, patience is mandatory. Progress may be slow, but encouragement will help.
  6. FAST STARTERS. Fast starters are usually students with previous exposure to flight training who quickly grasp the initial air exercises. You should not omit anything from the briefings. Watch for signs of weakness when new work is introduced. This type of student usually slows down to the level of the others shortly after going solo. A high degree of proficiency throughout the course should not be anticipated unless the student has above average ability.
  7. IMMATURE. You must not be too harsh with students who appear immature. You will find that within a short time in the flying training environment, the students will attain a greater degree of maturity. Your attitude is of prime importance in setting an example. You must encourage and assist these students whenever possible.
  8. AIRSICKNESS. Some students may suffer from airsickness induced by motion, negative G, apprehension, claustrophobia, tensions or excitement. You must attempt to determine what affects the student. When signs of airsickness show up, try methods of prevention such as letting the student fly straight and level, stopping instruction, inducing relaxation, making conversation about something else, or whatever will keep a particular student from becoming airsick.
Click to expand...
These and other student traits and the instructor’s attempts to cope with these traits are often what drive a learner’s impression of an instructor.
 
pfarber said:
and you prove my point. you are costing students money and increasing the failure/dropout rate because you think you need to go above and beyond. The ACS doesn't have minimums, it has STANDARDS that must be met.

CFI are like the idiot AnP's who thinks they have the power to ground aircraft because they think something is unairworthy. Both are 100% wrong.
Click to expand...

There is so much wrong with this I don’t even know where to start.

Take it you are not a CFI nor a professional pilot?
 
Anyone wanna save money.??

I'll sell ya my private certificate for 50 bucks...
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
I have been speaking with students at my home airport about cost to get a private pilot cert and I was blown away. It seems most were about $15k to $17k with everything. Cheapest I heard was about $10k from local flying club. Some are paying $1500 for just the checkride and almost $200/hr for a beat up vintage c172 that are down awaiting parts or A&P which seem to also be in short supply. One guy told me he went to an accelerated program owned by a DPE so got his check ride fast but paid heavily for it in higher CFI and rental costs but figured it saved him about 3-5 months time awaiting a DPE each rating.

Many of the part 141 cadets here say they have taken loans for the about $125k training costs. I flew with a few of their CFIs in my experimental and wasn’t too impressed.

I get there’s good jobs in their future, but it should not cost this much and other options need be available.

I suggested to a couple of guys wanting to get all their ratings buy an experimental aircraft together, that will cost a fraction to fly…… they ended up with a certified Ercoupe (likely the cheapest certified to own) Initially that they did their private in and built time, then bought a beat up c182 for their IFR and commercial….which they sold right after their rides. Used the Ercoupe to build time and get CFI with both pilots logging PIC at 70 kts.


What other methods of keeping training cost low?
Click to expand...
Hello,
Sometimes FREE is only worth what you paid for it, but that is NOT ALWAYS SO.

The FAA SAFETY TEAM has a government website. The site features Free Safety Seminars in your area, Free Online Courses, as well as Free Webinars that originate from around the country. You can "google" "FAA SAFETY TEAM (FAAST) website" for the URL. The site promotes the FAA WINGS program featuring recurrent training for pilots of all levels. CFIs can even validate their certificates via WINGS. You do not have to be certificated to participate, though you can only get FAA WINGS credit when you are. Pilot resources are provided as well as safety information on almost every topic. Questions? You can use the search function to find an FAA Safety Team volunteer representative in your area (Home Page Bottom Left Window) Phone contacts are listed. Success to you!
Ron
 
MauleSkinner said:
It’s simple…you get +/-100 feet for steep turns, and you must use all of it.
Click to expand...
100, 150. Meet or exceed the specifications. That’s what I learned as an engineer…
 
I got lucky and chose a flight school many years ago where the instructors were all long-tenured and weren't going to the airlines. Had the same CFI for most of my training who taught in what I would consider an old-school manner - very direct to the point of almost corporal punishment when I got too slow on base to final or if I wasn't holding heading / altitude to a margin she was happy with (and to far less tolerances than the ACS :rofl: ). All this was in a clapped out 172M with no navigator, one radio with no flip flop and I think an ADF... The CFI who finished me up was excellent, as well and was not airline-bound. I definately didn't pay over $10k all in for my private, but this was ten years ago or so. And, thanks to the great training and my willingness to put in the effort nights and weekends, I think I did it in a touch over 40 hours... 45 seems to ring a bell. Got really lucky when I was in the market for an airplane post-Private and met up with an amazing partner who is a CFI/II/MEI and when we bought the Arrow, he did my IR for nothing as it lowered our overall insurance considerably. Got the Arrow for an amazing deal right when Covid was kicking off and I'm pretty sure we could actually double our money if we sold it today.

So I consider myself very fortunate to have been able to get these certs/ratings and a great airplane thrown in for much less than most people are paying today. If I had to pay today's prices for certs/ratings and a pretty good traveling airplane - I think I'd just have stuck to golf as my main hobby.... not that that is much cheaper once you factor in all the gear that goes along with that and the lessons and cost to play and the amount of money I lose betting :rofl: :rofl: And I still can't get my handicap into single digits, but that's for another thread :rofl:
 
$4500. Of course, that was in 2000/2001. And I was paying $50/hr wet for a 172 that is now about $120/hr wet. 100LL has gone up and the panel in that 172 is a "bit" more advanced than it was then.
 
Anticipating a lot of ire.:stirpot:. One of the most frustrating things was the student that wanted to take a ride with 40.1 hrs as cheap as possible. Of course the average was 55 hrs or so (old numbers). Even so signing them off at that point was putting their families and friends in real danger. Lower the cost safely; tough!
As I said earlier, driving around the sky solo in an eurcoup/c150 for 25-30 hours does not really gain Competency. I have to share the sky with these people.
I had a new CFI ride along on a trip from KBJC to Nevada because he had never done a real cross-country or any mountain flying. REALLY!
Just getting the cheapest aircraft possible will not make you a pilot not just an aircraft driver.

Here comes the part to flame me. No one should be allowed to take passengers (non pilots) aloft before some real world experience.
Real cross country experience, upset training, solo glider, heaver and hotter (c182?) experience, Real ATC experience (Bravo type). real IMC time. Much, much more.

Does this double the cost of a private? YEA it does. Does it make it safer for family and friends (and me in the same airspace) YEA.
Will it ever happen, NO.

Just figure out a way for me to figure out which drivers earned their PPL looking out the window of a C150.
 
HAWKXP said:
Anticipating a lot of ire.:stirpot:. One of the most frustrating things was the student that wanted to take a ride with 40.1 hrs as cheap as possible. Of course the average was 55 hrs or so (old numbers). Even so signing them off at that point was putting their families and friends in real danger. Lower the cost safely; tough!
As I said earlier, driving around the sky solo in an eurcoup/c150 for 25-30 hours does not really gain Competency. I have to share the sky with these people.
I had a new CFI ride along on a trip from KBJC to Nevada because he had never done a real cross-country or any mountain flying. REALLY!
Just getting the cheapest aircraft possible will not make you a pilot not just an aircraft driver.

Here comes the part to flame me. No one should be allowed to take passengers (non pilots) aloft before some real world experience.
Real cross country experience, upset training, solo glider, heaver and hotter (c182?) experience, Real ATC experience (Bravo type). real IMC time. Much, much more.

Does this double the cost of a private? YEA it does. Does it make it safer for family and friends (and me in the same airspace) YEA.
Will it ever happen, NO.

Just figure out a way for me to figure out which drivers earned their PPL looking out the window of a C150.
Click to expand...
Not flaming you but I don't agree. I do agree that all of those things you mention will increase competency. But the FAA has determined the minimum hours (plus check ride with DPE) to qualify for a private cert. I doubt that statistics would show that low time pilots kill many more people than others. I was very cautious as a new/inexperienced pilot, especially with passengers. Much less so after 200 hrs experience (when solo). I was an instructor in my younger days (CFI/CFII) and had students do stupid stuff after solo and after certifying but it was more dependent on their personalities than their lack of experience.

We don't require 16 year old drivers who have never seen snow to show their skills on a frozen lake before driving in Minnesota... and if we did, the 16 year olds would probably just drive faster. IMO, you can't regulate common sense. And raising the bar even further for entry to GA ... not something I support.
 
edo2000 said:
Not flaming you but I don't agree. I do agree that all of those things you mention will increase competency. But the FAA has determined the minimum hours (plus check ride with DPE) to qualify for a private cert. I doubt that statistics would show that low time pilots kill many more people than others. I was very cautious as a new/inexperienced pilot, especially with passengers. Much less so after 200 hrs experience (when solo). I was an instructor in my younger days (CFI/CFII) and had students do stupid stuff after solo and after certifying but it was more dependent on their personalities than their lack of experience.

We don't require 16 year old drivers who have never seen snow to show their skills on a frozen lake before driving in Minnesota... and if we did, the 16 year olds would probably just drive faster. IMO, you can't regulate common sense. And raising the bar even further for entry to GA ... not something I support.
Click to expand...
I think we were both careful as new pilots. We are still here, myself after 60+ years of flying. Old pilots, bold........... You have more faith in CAA (oops FAA) than I do. As far as young drivers; the statistics are alarming. In our state there are laws limiting the age and number of passengers a new driver can carry. Perhaps a learning period with restrictions after PPL would save some of the families lives.
 
HAWKXP said:
…Here comes the part to flame me. No one should be allowed to take passengers (non pilots) aloft before some real world experience...
Click to expand...
Two serious questions.

1. How do you envision this being enforced?
2. How does one prove they’ve gained the experience?
 
Rene said:
I'm just quoting prices I've seen. Wisconsin Aviation (Madison: 800.594.5359, Watertown: 800.657.0761, Dodge County: 800.319.0907) currently has the lowest hourly rates I've seen around here.
Click to expand...
I finished up my PPL and did my checkride with WisAv at KUNU. Great people, easy to work with, and seemed competent from my limited perspective and experience. I would recommend them to anyone looking for training in the area.

As for being low cost.... The PA28 I flew with them had a very "historically accurate" panel. Great for 6-pack PPL and pattern work, but I wouldn't want to attempt an instrument rating in it. You would need to have an unhealthy fascination with DME, raw-data VOR and NDB. I'm sure that helps them keep costs down, and that's a good thing for an average hobbyist looking for PPL training.
 
TCABM said:
Two serious questions.

1. How do you envision this being enforced?
2. How does one prove they’ve gained the experience?
Click to expand...
I suppose that the bottom line is that the 40hr PPL has not trained enough in aviation tasks. There needs to be additional dual instruction requirements and that can not be done in 40 hr. Will that raise the costs, YES. Will be get safer pilots, YES. Will it turn off some people from attempting training, PROBABLY.
What started my rant was the number of people prioritizing cost over competency.
 
I understand and agree that there is experience and training that would likely improve GA passenger safety.

But I oppose changing PPC regs/requirements. We’ve altrady seen a change from an average close to 50-60 total hrs of training to ppc 45 years ago (my non checked educated guesses, hard data correction welcomed) to something closer to 100. See folks not getting signed off to solo at many more hours than before

I aaked for non required training prior to my ppc- had two different cfis take me for a spin, literally. One blidfolded me at night, flew to an unknown spot, at night and had me find where i was on the chart
A good cfi is key to future safety i think, if they are thoughtful as to a particular student’s strengths and weaknesses

The best way to improve passengeris to encourage syetematic checks of weather, weight and balance and healthy caution in an atmosphere where a pilot keeps abreast of current accidents, perhaps.
 
HAWKXP said:
I think we were both careful as new pilots. We are still here, myself after 60+ years of flying. Old pilots, bold........... You have more faith in CAA (oops FAA) than I do. As far as young drivers; the statistics are alarming. In our state there are laws limiting the age and number of passengers a new driver can carry. Perhaps a learning period with restrictions after PPL would save some of the families lives.
Click to expand...
No, honestly, I don't have great faith in the FAA. Or most other large bureaucratic govt agencies. I do believe we have a reasonably safe, world class, air transportation system, which is administered by the FAA. And I hope this system (and our freedom to fly) doesn't change much in the years to come, but I suspect it will.

Changing the regs to add more requirements will not change the reality that airplanes, like sea going vessels, and motor vehicles, are dependent on the operator to not take their equipment (and any passengers) into situations they are not comfortable dealing with. IMO, the training, signoff, and successful DPE checkride, shows that a pilot can adequately control the airplane, navigate, check for adverse flying weather, and communicate with ATC. Obviously, this does not prepare them for every eventuality, say, ferrying a Bellanca Viking from Chicago to Wasilla, Alaska, in February (a trip I did, back in the 80's). But the added requirements you mention would not have been adequate for this, either. We, as pilots, even new PPLs, know what we don't know and what we haven't practiced enough. That is what our CFI has tried to teach us. If we choose to ignore it, more requirements won't really help. Our passengers depend on us to keep them safe, a huge responsibility.

I was lucky to grow up in a small town in Alaska in the 60s and 70s. There were a lot of pilots. My twin brother and I got our PPLs and became partners on an old tail dragger at 17. I worked as a CFI and cargo pilot in my 20s. At that time, in rural Alaska, I would estimate that 20-30% of the flying was done by folks with no FAA certifications at all. I had a close friend who was a very well known professional fish spotter (flying offshore, SuperCub, low altitude, directing fishing boats, all kinds of weather) who never took a checkride(yes, I know this is illegal... he had no commercial pilot cert). And I am not advocating this at all...I trained and got all of my certs and ratings fairly young. I'm just making the observation that that the non-certified flyers were flying in remote areas, in bad weather, like the rest of us, and didn't necessarily have any higher rate of mishaps.

While I agree with you that requiring more and more documented flight experiences would likely increase competency, it would also accelerate the decline of our already shrinking GA community. You say that it will never happen. I hope you are right.
 
As far as the complaint about transactionalism and lack of quality in the sector, it really becomes a No buck No buck rogers thing, from where I sit. I have found in all three of the environments where I have attempted to make a career as an educator so far, there has always been an open hostility and denigration of the occupation. The pay largely reflects/reflected that.

1) In collegiate academia, it was research grant mining or go home; teaching track was deemed "scutwork" only worthy of adjunct hell austerity/insecurity. So as a teaching track aspirant, I went home.
2) In the civil flying sector it's treated as a stepping stone job and largely underpaid by dilution. The currency is taken to be largely logbook stuffing hours to the 1500 barrier, and nothing more. Quality control is thus atrocious.
3) In the military, similar aspersions are thrown about when it comes to being a career educator, with an exception extended to weapon school instructors. Save you the 19 years of anecdotes for the sake of brevity I already struggle with in this ostensibly gnat-attention spanned medium.

As I've shared before, the only reason I have been able to raise a family and sustain door #3 in spite of the concessionary epithets, is merely the fact my pay is indexed to rank and longevity credits/bonuses, and not occupational code. That's it. Otherwise, I'd be up the creek too. To wit, USAF is currently mulling outsourcing the lion's share of undergraduate pilot training to the 61/141 morass described in #2. That's how little my own leadership thinks of what we do. The caskets won't be on my conscience of course, but that's for another thread.

I'd love to bring my expertise and 25 years of aviation education experience into #2, but it's simply not valued. Would I make a miserable 121 FO? Yeah, probably. But I'm not about to economically martyr my family on account of having to give away my time for free for the sake of occupational purism. They're already taking it on the chin with the latest geobacheloring impositions of my so called "career". So as much as I lament my inability to fully retire out of an occupation I actually believe in, which is to say I have the heart and the receipts for it, I remain unsympathetic to the complaint about low instructor quality given such compensation disparity. No buck. No buck rogers. *shrugs*
 
edo2000 said:
We don't require 16 year old drivers who have never seen snow to show their skills on a frozen lake before driving in Minnesota... and if we did, the 16 year olds would probably just drive faster. IMO, you can't regulate common sense.
Click to expand...
Actually a study done of a teen advanced car control type training found that they do help teen drivers be safer and saner behind the wheel.

I can't find it now, but BSR did a study following two groups of teen drivers. One group attended the 1 day Accident Avoidance class. They followed them for one year.

The group with the track training had significantly less tickets, especially speeding and a LOT less accidents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top