First ever CFI interview WITH Flight Test

[flhrci]

So far, I have had two interviews for CFI either by phone or in person without a flight test. Today was the first with a flight test. It was kind of strange to me in how the Chief CFI is acting.

So, this one was kind of hard to read.

First off, I am one of 2-3 CFI candidates to interview this week for the Sinclair Community College flight program, but I am still in the running for now. Secondly, the Chief CFI told me he let a CFI go about two weeks ago for being a really bad instructor and the guy only worked for two weeks. So, that didn't make me feel real comfortable right away. He also told me in a round about way he wants his CFI's to teach at a college level so that the CFI's teach for example, 100% of the knowledge knowing that the student will leave with 80% of the knowledge as some is always lost, and not teach 80% and have the student retain 60% of the knowledge. He also does not want an instructor causing the student to go any time over the quoted program cost and time for each rating. The cost can only go up if the student has an issue. So, it sounds to me he is looking for a prodigy type of CFI that knows it all. This was all after he was about 30 minutes late for the interview due to a doctor's appointment gone long.

Anyway, he asked me a lot of questions about myself and my training, failed check rides and then wanted me to teach how an airplane turns and about adverse yaw. It took me a bit to get myself together on the turn portion and he let me look up the definition of skid and slip as I thought I had them mixed up. Anyways, I had a little difficulty teaching that after so long, but got through it and got more nervous. The last teaching I did for the CFI ride was back in February.

Was supposed to fly the 172RG but as it was so late, he put us in the 5 year old 172SP. It is a nice plane. Had me taxi and fly from the right seat. I just assumed the rudder pedals were nearly useless for steering and did the differential braking method as needed in all the other Cessna's I have flown. Upon takeoff roll, I immediately felt a lot of rudder authority. Turns out that the yoke and rudder pedals feel tight like the Pipers I am used to so that I had to get used to.

Anyways, the takeoff was pretty good, and my turn east that he wanted me to do was pretty good. He had me set us up for a steep turn. The first to the left was uneventful and within PTS standards. On the right one, he noticed that I did not catch that the airspeed was too high but all else was good except for some abrupt altitude changes which seemed to be more turbulence than me. He decided to do one and it was worse than mine.

Then he had me do a lazy 8. I did it the way I was taught here in Columbus which was lazy and slow and did not have major altitude ( more than 200 feet) gains or losses. He decided to show me his way. He takes the plane to near stall speed in the lazy 8 with a large altitude change and a corresponding descent to finish it up. I have never heard of any one taking a lazy 8 to a stall before. I do not think he was right, but I did not say anything other than I did it the way I was taught.

Then chandelles. I think I did that fine to his liking as he said he wanted to go back for a few touch n go's.

Well, he thought i was going too slow on downwind. I was actually hunting for a good power setting. There was also a crosswind component of around 6 knots or so. I forgot to put in the third notch of flaps on final and he questioned me about it. Should not have been a big deal. Landing was a little skewed, but not too bad. Still getting used to the plane. Second takeoff was good. Still hunting for power setting in the downwind leg. Had a little gustiness of crosswind, land and the plane tracks off to the right unexpectedly, not real bad, jsut a slow track to the right. My fault, not enough left rudder pedal to keep her straight.

Then he tells me to takeoff again, fly the pattern and he will demonstrate a landing how he likes it done. He brings power to 2200 rpm on downwind and says he likes to go fast on downwind. Adds 10 degrees of flaps below 110 knots IAS. At the thousand foot bars, brings power back to 1400 rpm. Then he says "always land with power. Make a stabilized approach with power." He trims for 85 knots before turning base and adds 10 degrees flaps. I tell him I was taught as a Private to always land power off and to bring it to idle before turning base. Turns base, adds 10 degrees and trims for 70-75 knots. Adds last 10 degrees of flaps prior to turning final, keeps power at 1400 rpm. He slipped it down cause he was too high, and I think he landed on the spot he wanted to, not sure.

Then he has me do one more his way. It was about the same as the others and did not feel right having power up. I floated it a little too long. I think we went around once more but not sure.

So, basically, I am not sure what he wants and I am not sure whether or not I was bad or it was just not being used to the plane or what. I think this could go either way. The whole thing lasted just over 2.5 hours for the whole interview, 1.0 for the flight. All I know about pay and benefits is $19 per hour, whether it is ground and flight both, dunno. Did not have enough time to discuss anything else as he had a potential customer waiting for him.

So that's about it on that. Tomorrow I have interview #2 with the owner of Centennial Park Harley-Davidson for a detailer job, so I can get some cash flow. If I pass that there is a drug test and a hire date. Hopefully I will get it so I can get some money rolling in before I completely run out of money and can't afford to fly any more or to move some where.

David

 

[redcloud]

David,

Why not just find a place and get some real experience. I thought you were hired at Delaware; and you are already looking for another opportunity?

 

[flhrci]

David,

Why not just find a place and get some real experience. I thought you were hired at Delaware; and you are already looking for another opportunity?

I was hired at Delaware and still technically am a CFI there, but no students. So, I am trying to find something else where I can at least teach some one and start working. The economy seems to be a problem.

David

 

[gismo]

Then he has me do one more his way. It was about the same as the others and did not feel right having power up. I floated it a little too long. I think we went around once more but not sure.

Power on (not dragging it in, but having enough power on that you can adjust the sink with power) is the FAA endorsed method and has been for many years. A power off approach is also a good skill to practice but IMO not for SOP.

And perhaps this guy was at least as interested in your ability to adapt to his standards as he was in your flying skills.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Then he had me do a lazy 8. I did it the way I was taught here in Columbus which was lazy and slow and did not have major altitude ( more than 200 feet) gains or losses. He decided to show me his way. He takes the plane to near stall speed in the lazy 8 with a large altitude change and a corresponding descent to finish it up. I have never heard of any one taking a lazy 8 to a stall before. I do not think he was right, but I did not say anything other than I did it the way I was taught.

I have never heard of "right" or "wrong" standards for a lazy-8 with regard to specific speed or altitude targets for the maneuver. The only requirement is that the speeds and altitudes match at the proper points in the maneuver.

"Old timers" tend to use a lot more pitch than younger pilots. I think this maneuver developed from a pair of wingovers back to back. It's not called a "lazy 8" because it's a lazy maneuver. "This maneuver derives it's name from the manner in which the extended longitudinal axis of the airplane is made to trace a flight pattern in the form of a figure 8 lying on its side (a lazy 8)."--FAA-H-8083-3 (may not be the current version, but it's been in every one so far )

Good luck, and fly safe!

David

 

[KennyFlys]

I can deal with a maneuver being somewhat off; not that a stall at peak of a Lazy Eight is really acceptable; but, I'd work around it with my own students.

The part that bugs me more there is forcing the cost into a box. If you attempt to tailor every single student so they don't pay more than X then there's either going to be some extra profit on the well-adapted student who studies well and chair flies. Or, there's going to be some loss on the student who has a difficult time learning. That loss won't be in terms of money but in safety.

Program costs should include a minimum amount of flight time with very clear terms on reasons why it may exceed the published costs. To do otherwise is an unsafe operation in my opinion.

 

[gprellwitz]

I can deal with a maneuver being somewhat off; not that a stall at peak of a Lazy Eight is really acceptable; but, I'd work around it with my own students.

The part that bugs me more there is forcing the cost into a box. If you attempt to tailor every single student so they don't pay more than X then there's either going to be some extra profit on the well-adapted student who studies well and chair flies. Or, there's going to be some loss on the student who has a difficult time learning. That loss won't be in terms of money but in safety.

Program costs should include a minimum amount of flight time with very clear terms on reasons why it may exceed the published costs. To do otherwise is an unsafe operation in my opinion.

Amen. That got me to a-worrying!

 

[dmccormack]

I have never heard of "right" or "wrong" standards for a lazy-8 with regard to specific speed or altitude targets for the maneuver. The only requirement is that the speeds and altitudes match at the proper points in the maneuver.

The Airplane Flying Handbook has a lengthy description of each maneuver, but the key Lazy 8 measures are: "When the airplane completes 90° of the turn, the bank should be at the maximum angle (approximately 30°), the airspeed should be at its minimum (5 to 10 knots above stall speed), and the airplane pitch attitude should be passing through level flight."

Since the 90 degree point bank angle is not to exceed 30 degrees, and the 45 degree point is limited to 15 degrees, each degree of turn is limited to a 0.333 degree roll rate (90/3) -- a "lazy" maneuver if there ever was one!

There is a requirement that the 90 degree point be -- "5 to 10 knots above stall speed."

The other implied limitation is entry speed -- Va. Since most flight tests are not at gross, you're usually 10 KIAS or so below book Va.

In a C172 the speed will vary from 105 to 50-55 -- not a radical change, by any measure. In a Bonanza A36, the speeds vary from 125 to 60 -- also not exactly radical.

 

[Everskyward]

And perhaps this guy was at least as interested in your ability to adapt to his standards as he was in your flying skills.

I agree with this. Since it seems as if he is running a program with many students and instructors there needs to some standardization of technique. There are lots of different ways to accomplish the same thing and I think he was just trying to show you his way. Granted, he should have been able to give a better demonstration than he apparently did. Since he would be your boss he gets to set the way he wants things done even if it's not the way you have done things in the past. Even if he offers you the job you will need to decide whether you can adapt to his way and the way the school does things or else move on.

He also does not want an instructor causing the student to go any time over the quoted program cost and time for each rating.

This statement would put some question marks in my mind...

 

[MauleSkinner]

The Airplane Flying Handbook has a lengthy description of each maneuver, but the key Lazy 8 measures are: "When the airplane completes 90° of the turn, the bank should be at the maximum angle (approximately 30°), the airspeed should be at its minimum (5 to 10 knots above stall speed), and the airplane pitch attitude should be passing through level flight."

Oops! Guess I shoulda' read more That's what happens when you rely on your memory.

Since the 90 degree point bank angle is not to exceed 30 degrees, and the 45 degree point is limited to 15 degrees, each degree of turn is limited to a 0.333 degree roll rate (90/3) -- a "lazy" maneuver if there ever was one!

Still depends on your definition of "lazy", I guess...in my Maule, this would then result in airspeed variations from about 120 mph at the entry/exit points to about 50 mph at the 90-degree points. That's darn near acrobatic pitch changes. I'd go with the AFH's reasoning for the name.

Fly safe!

David

 

[dmccormack]

Oops! Guess I shoulda' read more That's what happens when you rely on your memory.


Still depends on your definition of "lazy", I guess...in my Maule, this would then result in airspeed variations from about 120 mph at the entry/exit points to about 50 mph at the 90-degree points. That's darn near acrobatic pitch changes. I'd go with the AFH's reasoning for the name.

Fly safe!

David

In the A36 you're still pitching up about 15 degrees the first 45 degrees of turn, which feels unusual, and so does the pitch down of 15 degrees.

The other limiting factor is the airplane's power and drag. If you have too much power going in, you gain altitude during the maneuver -- too little, you lose.

The A36 gains speed VERY quickly at 15 degrees nose down -- so after lots of experiments I finally found the ideal combination of pitch and power (call it two hours of Lazy 8s!).

The real benefit/test of this maneuver is that there is no point where some control force isn't changing. I think the key is keeping the ball centered, rolling in and out predictably all the while changing pitch.

It's a rub-your-belly-pat-your-head exercise.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Personally, I like to deal with it in terms of static and dynamic stability...it's an excellent demonstration of those characteristics.

Fly safe!

David

 

[RMCN172RG]

I did almost all of my private training in an SP and was taught a very simple method for controlling power and speed in the pattern.

Trim for 80-85 at 2000 RPM and leave the trim alone.

Abeam the numbers 1500 and one notch of flaps hold level. The plane slows 75 to 80 and starts down.

Turn to base roll 30 pull for 70.

On roll out look right for traffic second notch of flaps spped 65-70.

Shallow turn to final and you are all set up.

Normally land with just the 20 degrees of flaps. WHY?
1) good set up for x-wind, little fast.
2) goods set up for a go around flaps already at 20 and trim ~VY
3) You can add the flaps if needed to get down, i.e. too high
"Full flaps, hold 60, it will come down."

In the 172R's I did my IFR in basically the same pattern settings except they always added the final flaps once the landing was assured.

BASIC TENENT - stable approach limit the number of things you are changing.

 

[dmccormack]

Normally land with just the 20 degrees of flaps. WHY?
1) good set up for x-wind, little fast.
2) goods set up for a go around flaps already at 20 and trim ~VY
3) You can add the flaps if needed to get down, i.e. too high
"Full flaps, hold 60, it will come down."

I used to always land with partial flaps -- until I started flying with Pete preparing for the commercial. He has a lot of T210 time. His father -- a former Naval Aviator -- taught him to fly.

We exchanged quite a few emails and discussed the topic before, during, and after, flights but his argument finally won me over:

• Nothing can hurt me until I'm close to the ground, and speed close to the ground is Bad.
• If I always land in the shortest place possible, I increase my options when forced to land.
• "Short runways" are no limitation.
• A 10% increase in airspeed increases landing distance 21%.

So I tried it -- and stuck to it. Unless I must increase speed due to wind gusts, every final is flown at 1.3 Vso, full flaps (76-78 KIAS, depending on weight). ILS Approaches are flown at 90 KIAS, partial flaps.

The A36 is down and completely stopped in less than 1800 feet of runway, no wind (50' obstacle approach). The V tail lands in less than distance than a C172N, and the 172E (40 degrees of flaps) -- well, I can probably land that in the K-Mart parking lot.

One of the Big Problems in GA is landing fast and long.

Last week I watched a 152 landing 2000' down the 4500' runway on each circuit!

Find a CFI who's comfortable flying on the slow edge of the airplane's envelope and practice some short field landings. Your airplane will thank you!

 

[flhrci]

I am so mad right now.

I called this guy yesterday and left a message about the CFI position. I emailed him about an hour ago and finally got a response. This is it:

"At this point we are not looking for a CFI but this is something that changes weekly so please keep in touch and maybe we can work something out in the near future."

I hope this doesn't keep happening. Other than the hour of flight time, I wasted about 7 hours of my life and gas money to go for an interview for what I thought was an actual job. I do not know what to think about it.

David

 

[ScottM]

Other than the hour of flight time, I wasted about 7 hours of my life and gas money to go for an interview for what I thought was an actual job. I do not know what to think about it.

David

Well you also got more practice interviewing, saw how a different operation is set up, which means you learned something, and you got to fly. Does not sound like a waste of time to me.

Look on the bright side.

 

[skyflyer8]

I am so mad right now.

I called this guy yesterday and left a message about the CFI position. I emailed him about an hour ago and finally got a response. This is it:

"At this point we are not looking for a CFI but this is something that changes weekly so please keep in touch and maybe we can work something out in the near future."

I hope this doesn't keep happening. Other than the hour of flight time, I wasted about 7 hours of my life and gas money to go for an interview for what I thought was an actual job. I do not know what to think about it.

David

Dude he's probably right. At the rate places are losing CFIs these days you'll probably have a job waiting for you in a month or less! That is, unless the boss reads this board... Try to stay positive, OK? Just when I thought there was no job out there for me, a really great opportunity fell into my lap. Hopefully that will happen for you too.

 

[KennyFlys]

I am so mad right now.

I called this guy yesterday and left a message about the CFI position. I emailed him about an hour ago and finally got a response. This is it:

"At this point we are not looking for a CFI but this is something that changes weekly so please keep in touch and maybe we can work something out in the near future."

I hope this doesn't keep happening. Other than the hour of flight time, I wasted about 7 hours of my life and gas money to go for an interview for what I thought was an actual job. I do not know what to think about it.

David

I came across several schools who indicated they were desperate in their ads for just CFIs. But, when you call they say they want a II. They aren't set up for a career instructor even though they have problems keeping anyone for a period of time. They don't want to pay anything.

I had a couple who would be glad to have me and keep me around but would pay next to nothing as an incentive; as little as $15 per hour. When you look at the rate structure on their web site, they are charging upward of $49 per hour. I know there's a need to make a profit but there's also a need to draw and keep the required components to run the school. To do that, you have to pay the person better than the average.

I also so saw a difference between who you talked to at the same school. One was ready to take me on with just CFI and get my II right away to be more useful. When I called back, they said no deal until I had the II. So much for setting uniform criteria for what you're hiring.

The situation I'm in now, I got by no more than my resume and several chats over the phone. In the three weeks I've been here, it's worked out very well. I couldn't ask for a nicer boss or a better set of folks to work for. I did ruffle a couple feathers when I suggested a couple changes and the owner adopted them. I've got a great set of students and we are attracting more from other schools as it appears; four so far. I can't imagine finding this kind of situation again all that easily. I'm blessed to have landed here.

Dave, all you can do is keep looking. Don't settle for mediocre responses. See how much they are willing to invest and what they really want from you in return. I was willing to give a lot more than asked of. That's still there and I'm getting more than I even expected.

I wish the best in the search.

 

[flhrci]

Well you also got more practice interviewing, saw how a different operation is set up, which means you learned something, and you got to fly. Does not sound like a waste of time to me.

Look on the bright side.

Scott,

I appreciate your objectiveness. You have a good point that there is in fact a positive side to this. Point taken.

Thanks,

David

 

[flhrci]

Dude he's probably right. At the rate places are losing CFIs these days you'll probably have a job waiting for you in a month or less! That is, unless the boss reads this board... Try to stay positive, OK? Just when I thought there was no job out there for me, a really great opportunity fell into my lap. Hopefully that will happen for you too.

Thanks for the encouragement Kate. I am trying my best to stay positive and am over this latest hiccup already. There are still plenty more places for me to apply to and someone out there will give me a chance some time.

David

 

[flhrci]

I came across several schools who indicated they were desperate in their ads for just CFIs. But, when you call they say they want a II. They aren't set up for a career instructor even though they have problems keeping anyone for a period of time. They don't want to pay anything.

I had a couple who would be glad to have me and keep me around but would pay next to nothing as an incentive; as little as $15 per hour. When you look at the rate structure on their web site, they are charging upward of $49 per hour. I know there's a need to make a profit but there's also a need to draw and keep the required components to run the school. To do that, you have to pay the person better than the average.

I also so saw a difference between who you talked to at the same school. One was ready to take me on with just CFI and get my II right away to be more useful. When I called back, they said no deal until I had the II. So much for setting uniform criteria for what you're hiring.

The situation I'm in now, I got by no more than my resume and several chats over the phone. In the three weeks I've been here, it's worked out very well. I couldn't ask for a nicer boss or a better set of folks to work for. I did ruffle a couple feathers when I suggested a couple changes and the owner adopted them. I've got a great set of students and we are attracting more from other schools as it appears; four so far. I can't imagine finding this kind of situation again all that easily. I'm blessed to have landed here.

Dave, all you can do is keep looking. Don't settle for mediocre responses. See how much they are willing to invest and what they really want from you in return. I was willing to give a lot more than asked of. That's still there and I'm getting more than I even expected.

I wish the best in the search.

Thanks for the good advice Kenny. Its good to hear that things are going well for you at least and it gives me hope that something will come out of all this some time. Maybe I overreacted to the message today, but it was just the whole situation. Had he at least said he hired someone else, I would have felt better about it.

I have run into several ads that say MUST have CFII so I have steered clear of those. If it just says preferred or less, then I will go after it.

I am trying to avoid the pilot mills, but there are a few that actually sound pretty good now.

I will keep working at it.

David

 

[TMetzinger]

I used to always land with partial flaps -- until I started flying with Pete preparing for the commercial. He has a lot of T210 time. His father -- a former Naval Aviator -- taught him to fly.

We exchanged quite a few emails and discussed the topic before, during, and after, flights but his argument finally won me over:

• Nothing can hurt me until I'm close to the ground, and speed close to the ground is Bad.

I always remember basic physics - Kinetic Energy is 1/2 the mass times the velocity squared. That Kinetic Energy is what the airframe and your body get to absorb in an impact. Since the energy increases as the square of your velocity, a small change in velocity is a BIG change in energy.

Thus, always keep your energy to the minimum safe level near the ground.

 

[dmccormack]

[/list]I always remember basic physics - Kinetic Energy is 1/2 the mass times the velocity squared. That Kinetic Energy is what the airframe and your body get to absorb in an impact. Since the energy increases as the square of your velocity, a small change in velocity is a BIG change in energy.

Thus, always keep your energy to the minimum safe level near the ground.

Yep -- now let's go convince that percentage of the GA population that thinks "A little extra speed" is "safer."

 

[Everskyward]

Sorry to hear that D3, but you are probably better off not working for that guy anyway. Like others have pointed out it's good experience to interview and see how different places operate. Hopefully you'll find somewhere that suits you.

 

[Mongoose]

As if it wasn't hard enough to wait until I save up more cash to start training next summer, now I have to see people around me being CFI's and posting and such. It's much easier when they're posting from Texas or something.