I admit, I am stupid sometimes.

**** happens. I'm not sure I get it though. You made some poor choices and almost killed yourself by doing so. None of this is the fault of Cirrus. You'd have been just as screwed in many other GA airplanes whom also market their products.

Seriously man--if you're wanting to enjoy this community--perhaps you should just get to know people instead of launching off tons of threads about the Evil Cirrus. Very few of us own one--very few of us care--and it's rather annoying.
 
Sooner or later, we all have some experience that shapes our opinions. I've been there. It was over twenty-five years ago but I still remember it all too well.
 
Jesse, it's not just Cirrus who does this stuff. They're just the latest in the mix. As has been pointed out in other threads, just about every manufacturer has made claims at one point along the way that seem a bit more hopeful than they should.
 
KennyFlys said:
Jesse, it's not just Cirrus who does this stuff. They're just the latest in the mix. As has been pointed out in other threads, just about every manufacturer has made claims at one point along the way that seem a bit more hopeful than they should.
Click to expand...
Uh--I know Kenny--my point exactly.. So why attack Cirrus so much. It just gets WAY old.
 
jesse said:
Uh--I know Kenny--my point exactly.. So why attack Cirrus so much. It just gets WAY old.
Click to expand...
That's the current subject. If it happens with another manufacturer, I'm sure it will happen again under that name.
 
Which Cirrus almost killed you back then?

KennyFlys said:
Sooner or later, we all have some experience that shapes our opinions. I've been there. It was over twenty-five years ago but I still remember it all too well.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Which Cirrus almost killed you back then?
Click to expand...
Cirrus nor Cessna nor any other party had anything to do with it. It was my own inexperience that nearly killed me and my family. I came out of it alive. Years later, it has shaped how I teach and what I demand of my students that goes well beyond PTS.
 
n3089n said:
Here's proof:
http://www.idpcessna.com/download/AOPA Pilot - A Trace is Ice.pdf

As published in AOPA Pilot, April 2006, it's the story on an icing encounter that happened on an aircraft delivery flight from Sioux Falls, South Dakota, to Boston.
Click to expand...
I guess you learned something.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt- and not simply assume that this is another anti-Cirrus thread. This was 2-3 or more years ago- Cirrus wasn't advertising FIKI back then.

This should really go into the "Never Again" board as this is the section were we tell our friends "don't do that"...
 
We all have experiences in life's crucible that have helped change a path we were on. The worse that experience, the more pivotal that point.

My most memorable was when put in the wrong spot behind enemy lines in a place we never purportedly were. Couldn't find our location on the small map we had been provided. Overhead air support aircraft gave our position to us three times; I pointed out terrain features on the map that just didn't match. That support aircraft had directed our ships into that landing zone. For years, I focused on improving my my reading skills, blaming myself for not being able to get oriented on the ground.

Second tour, I won several bets: a couple with locals, that I could find our location on the map better than them---I never lost a bet, actually. Confirmed the location by putting an artillery round on an agreed to spot.

I found out years later, the support aircraft had inserted us on the wrong mountain range. In that location, there would be a few peaks in one place; then a few in another. Another team had gone on another recon mission months later on a different little range and found bodies from our team.

I dramatically over compensated; became highly proficient in the skill I had thought I was deficient in.

Welcome to the club.

Best,

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
My most memorable was when put in the wrong spot behind enemy lines in a place we never purportedly were.
Click to expand...


Laos or Cambodia???


Welcome to the club.
Click to expand...


No sir. You are in a very highly regarded club which many of us owe you a huge debt of gratitude.
 
bbchien said:
Even from the P3 we could never tell.
Click to expand...


"Saigon.......I'm still in Saigon. They gave me a mission and when it was over, I'd never want another one."
 
The "man" didn't get you low enough to see?

:smile:

Side note to Dr. Bruce: Physical exam. done; awaiting blood analysis; think I'm in love with the phlebotomist, 'cept she's young and engaged to a Navy pilot. :rolleyes:

HR
 

Attachments

  • NASB 081408_596.jpg
    NASB 081408_596.jpg
    228.1 KB · Views: 11
  • NASB 081408_1.jpg
    NASB 081408_1.jpg
    341.8 KB · Views: 8
  • NASB 081408_2.jpg
    NASB 081408_2.jpg
    297.2 KB · Views: 9
  • NASB 081408_3.jpg
    NASB 081408_3.jpg
    305.9 KB · Views: 14
Last edited:
We launched out of a place in Phu Bai up to Quang Tri. Flown west from there over the abandoned Khe Sahn base into Laos. We were to try to get in clandestinely with binoculars, tape recorders and a camera to observe enemy troop movements, tap their phone lines and photograph what we could. Unfortunately, we were detected upon insertion and wound up getting ambushed at last light. Hid through the night and managed to get a mirror on a helicopter late the next morning to get us extracted.

Sorry, don't want to get off topic on this thread.

My point was, we all do things that aren't the smartest at different times in our lives. Those that live, compensate and either avoid that same expeience in the future, or learn how to deal with the same circumstances more proficiently.

Best,

Dave
 
What are the top five (or ten) things you think are so important that PTS standards aren't sufficient for the rating being sought? What additional training do you provide? To what standards must your students perform? How do you explain the logic and extra training to the student? Do they have a choice?


KennyFlys said:
Cirrus nor Cessna nor any other party had anything to do with it. It was my own inexperience that nearly killed me and my family. I came out of it alive. Years later, it has shaped how I teach and what I demand of my students that goes well beyond PTS.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
What are the top five (or ten) things you think are so important that PTS standards aren't sufficient for the rating being sought? What additional training do you provide? To what standards must your students perform? How do you explain the logic and extra training to the student? Do they have a choice?
Click to expand...
It's not just the PTS but also the experience requirements.
  1. Before solo is even considered, the student will demonstrate a clear understanding of aerodynamics, systems and instrumentation. This actually came from my time at a ticket mill were instructors were more interested in flying than teaching ground (time builders).
  2. Tolerances will be +/-50 feet on altitude, +/-5 degrees on heading.
  3. They will accumulate 5-6 hours of hood time or actual instrument conditions to include a cross-country on VORs only.
  4. Night flight will be substantially more than the required three hours and ten landings.
  5. Dual cross-country will include short cross-country followed by a longer, three-legged flight of about five hours with the last leg being more of a test without the instructor's input. The entire flight will represent a realistic scenario rather than simply completion of experience requirements.
  6. Substantial time is given to extreme crosswind conditions and downwind landings.
It's explained as tools to better prepare them to be safe and proficient pilots. I make it clear the PTS is bare bones minimum for passing the practical but by no means the limit for what they can and should accomplish.

Do they have a choice? Certainly. As I said, my own ticket and livelihood is on the line so it's either go with these recommendations or a sign-off won't come as easy or possibly at all. I don't have to make such threats and anyone who wants to do the bare minimum shouldn't be there in the first place. It's that attitude that kills pilots, particularly in IMC.
 
That drill should produce a more capable pilot, no doubt we need more good ones. Do they take the ATP ride the following day? :p What do you figure the extra hours/$ will be, compared to the guy in the next cubicle? How does it sell? Do you find a different type of student (compared to the gum-chompers with their ball-caps on backwards) is attracted to your approach?

KennyFlys said:
It's not just the PTS but also the experience requirements.
  1. Before solo is even considered, the student will demonstrate a clear understanding of aerodynamics, systems and instrumentation. This actually came from my time at a ticket mill were instructors were more interested in flying than teaching ground (time builders).
  2. Tolerances will be +/-50 feet on altitude, +/-5 degrees on heading.
  3. They will accumulate 5-6 hours of hood time or actual instrument conditions to include a cross-country on VORs only.
  4. Night flight will be substantially more than the required three hours and ten landings.
  5. Dual cross-country will include short cross-country followed by a longer, three-legged flight of about five hours with the last leg being more of a test without the instructor's input. The entire flight will represent a realistic scenario rather than simply completion of experience requirements.
  6. Substantial time is given to extreme crosswind conditions and downwind landings.
It's explained as tools to better prepare them to be safe and proficient pilots. I make it clear the PTS is bare bones minimum for passing the practical but by no means the limit for what they can and should accomplish.

Do they have a choice? Certainly. As I said, my own ticket and livelihood is on the line so it's either go with these recommendations or a sign-off won't come as easy or possibly at all. I don't have to make such threats and anyone who wants to do the bare minimum shouldn't be there in the first place. It's that attitude that kills pilots, particularly in IMC.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
That drill should produce a more capable pilot, no doubt we need more good ones. Do they take the ATP ride the following day? :p What do you figure the extra hours/$ will be, compared to the guy in the next cubicle? How does it sell? Do you find a different type of student (compared to the gum-chompers with their ball-caps on backwards) is attracted to your approach?
Click to expand...
Just about all of my students are professionals in other industries. Most have high expectations of themselves as that is what helped them achieve what they have. I encourage them to relax that expectation with regard to their beginning flight training. The learning curve is quite steep at first and having greater than reasonable expectations can impair their ultimate goal.

I don't think they are quite ready for the ATP ride. But they certainly have a good taste of what instrument training will be like and a healthy respect why they need to obtain it or stay far, far away from those conditions.

In the beginning, I draw a realistic goal of around 55-65 hours. That's the national average. But, I try to build it around some of the extra tasks I want them to accomplish such as added night flights for landing practice, etc. The added XC time includes stops to make it more like the hundred-dollar burger run so many will be making after certificated. Well, it's actually the hundred-dollar brisket run. I've yet to find anyone fight me on that goal. :)

On average, they may pay 2-4 grand more than some schools. I do stress the benefits in the end for being better prepared. The students I have are sold on this. Also, I'm pretty generous with my time when sessions are at the end of the day or there is no student afterward. Giving time I don't charge for brings me credibility when I charge for the time that is scheduled.

I've had only one student think I might be holding them back. The real problem was his relaxing and simply working through situations. He would jump rather than review what is happening and what needs to change such as sudden change in frequencies for comm and nav while losing a known and verified source. He sought out the help of another instructor who had him doing the same thing... slow down, review, make the change then inspect for what is expected. Two weeks later, he passed his checkride. The week before that, he gave me a check for a grand thanking me for getting him to where he was. I was also his final sign-off for the practical.

Do they pay more? Yes. But, they get plenty for what they are paying for. I've been around a ticket mill and will never agree to operating like that. I pride myself on seeing the student prepared and confident to accomplish any given task.
 
Good stuff. Sounds like you work hard at it. I'm not surprised that your students are as you describe. They learned ANFL before they started flying.

KennyFlys said:
Just about all of my students are professionals in other industries. Most have high expectations of themselves as that is what helped them achieve what they have. I encourage them to relax that expectation with regard to their beginning flight training. The learning curve is quite steep at first and having greater than reasonable expectations can impair their ultimate goal.

I don't think they are quite ready for the ATP ride. But they certainly have a good taste of what instrument training will be like and a healthy respect why they need to obtain it or stay far, far away from those conditions.

In the beginning, I draw a realistic goal of around 55-65 hours. That's the national average. But, I try to build it around some of the extra tasks I want them to accomplish such as added night flights for landing practice, etc. The added XC time includes stops to make it more like the hundred-dollar burger run so many will be making after certificated. Well, it's actually the hundred-dollar brisket run. I've yet to find anyone fight me on that goal. :)

On average, they may pay 2-4 grand more than some schools. I do stress the benefits in the end for being better prepared. The students I have are sold on this. Also, I'm pretty generous with my time when sessions are at the end of the day or there is no student afterward. Giving time I don't charge for brings me credibility when I charge for the time that is scheduled.

I've had only one student think I might be holding them back. The real problem was his relaxing and simply working through situations. He would jump rather than review what is happening and what needs to change such as sudden change in frequencies for comm and nav while losing a known and verified source. He sought out the help of another instructor who had him doing the same thing... slow down, review, make the change then inspect for what is expected. Two weeks later, he passed his checkride. The week before that, he gave me a check for a grand thanking me for getting him to where he was. I was also his final sign-off for the practical.

Do they pay more? Yes. But, they get plenty for what they are paying for. I've been around a ticket mill and will never agree to operating like that. I pride myself on seeing the student prepared and confident to accomplish any given task.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top