Instructor Screening for New Student

James,

I agree with almost everything you said but maybe one...

...I bought a beautiful old '57 C172, scratched my nuts, and then mumbled to myself "gee, guess I ought to learn how to fly, huh?"

Owning my own plane allowed and encouraged me to fly far more during my training than I would have if I had rented a plane. Once I soloed, there were a couple of airports within the 24NM distance and I was signed off by my instructor for repeat XC flights to them. I flew short "round robin" cross country flights to these fields often. I could also go flying on a moment's notice when the mood struck me...no scheduling issues to worry about.

It was also far cheaper (mentally) to fly my own plane because the only expense I saw that day was gas...at that time about $20/hr...which is a far cry from $100+/hr. Yeah, I know, that's not the real cost, but I played that mental game with myself...most of the remainder of the cost would be there whether I flew or not...so that was the only add'l cost for flying.

I had 108.4 hours in my book when I took my PP check ride. Of that 47.6 hours was just boon-tooling around and playing (learning) because I could!

If you plan to buy a plane anyway and if you know what you want, then I don't see any reason why you shouldn't find your plane and learning to fly in it. It worked out well for me and I had a blast during the process.

I was great to get done mowing the grass, go grab a beer, sit down on the back patio, look at the sky, feel the cool evening air, forgo the beer, and go flying instead! And I did that often since the airport was only 5 minutes from my house at the time.
 
If they are a CFI the FAA says they are qualified. Are you saying you know better? Are you saying having a CFI means they are incompetent to teach aviation? What are you saying?
I can't speak for timwinters, but what I would say is that the FAA has indicated that the individual is minimally qualified and while not incompetent, certainly the newly-minted CFI has not been anointed an expert. The space between incompetent and expert is a long continuum and all the FAA is saying is that the CFI is at least at the barely competent end of the continuum.

To be a CFI I would recommend to a new student, a CFI will have real flying experience in the system, over significant distances, and will also have experience teaching multiple students. I don't know any CFIs who aren't also CFIIs, but that would be a requirement too. A consequence of that is that the CFI's hours will certainly be a 4- or even 5-digit number.
 
The FAA inspector who passed my on my first try at CFI should be taken out and hung (if he is still alive). I knew the answers for the written and I knew the maneuvers for the checkride. Did I know how to teach? Questionable. He was taking me on faith.

I had done quite a bit of classroom teaching in the Coast Guard, but that did not necessarily transfer to the right seat of a 150. Nine out of my first ten students passed on the first go-around, so I must have been doing something right.

New CFIs take awhile before they become competent teachers, regardless of what the FAA puts on a piece of paper.

Bob Gardner

Its the examiners fault you feel you are not qualified? Sure, sure...
 
Last edited:
I can't speak for timwinters, but what I would say is that the FAA has indicated that the individual is minimally qualified and while not incompetent, certainly the newly-minted CFI has not been anointed an expert. The space between incompetent and expert is a long continuum and all the FAA is saying is that the CFI is at least at the barely competent end of the continuum.

To be a CFI I would recommend to a new student, a CFI will have real flying experience in the system, over significant distances, and will also have experience teaching multiple students. I don't know any CFIs who aren't also CFIIs, but that would be a requirement too. A consequence of that is that the CFI's hours will certainly be a 4- or even 5-digit number.

Listen to yourselves. If certification is bogus, then no one should be in the air. All of us have a certification.

By definition either you accept certification as meaning something, or you don't and each time you go up you think you don't belong there. Which?
 
By definition either you accept certification as meaning something, or you don't ... Which?
Agreed. I accept that it means something. It means that an authorized examiner has concluded that the examinee is at least marginally qualified to perform the function for which he is certified. I don't know why this concept is so hard for you to grasp.

NB, it is also possible for the examiner's conclusion to be incorrect. Maybe the examiner was even incorrect in Bob's personal example, but as Bob has demonstrated it is still possible for the examinee to attain mastery. It is also possible for the newly-certificated pilot to kill himself, in which case one might speculate that the examiner's determination was incorrect. (http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20091119X15513&ntsbno=CEN10LA055&akey=1)
 
Listen to yourselves. If certification is bogus, then no one should be in the air. All of us have a certification.

By definition either you accept certification as meaning something, or you don't and each time you go up you think you don't belong there. Which?

And a plane well past TBO with compressions of 61 on each cylinder is just as airworthy for pt 61 as a fresh overhauled plane with 79 on each cylinder. Guess which demands a higher price?

Same deal with CFIs, yeah he's legally qualified, but I'd rather have a ATP/gold seal CFI, who teaches on the side because he loves it. Better bang for the buck.

So CTLSi, are you a CFI??
 
Do you have any idea who Bob is? Surely you must not or you wouldn't have made this comment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't care if he is the head of the FAA. If he is wrong, he is wrong.
 
Back
Top