Pilot in training update. 3.2 hours so far!

bobmrg said:
The ad hoc approach works, but it takes more time and money than the tried-and-true building block system that is part and parcel of a syllabus.

Bob
Click to expand...
Hey there, Bob! Wanted to say that I found your syllabus through the ASA site.... I'm just starting my ramp up for the CFI-A and gotta say... liking that syllabus. Good example as I'm learning how to build/use lesson plans.
 
I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I think training the way you'll fly makes a lot of sense. And if you'll be using an ipad w/ FF, you should train with it. You can still learn dead reckoning, pilotage, tracking VOR etc. Learning those skills aren't reserved for use with paper charts only. You can even turn the location off if you think knowing your location is "cheating." There are lot of opinions out there, I'm just adding one more of them.
 
Josh Parker said:
I've heard arguments both ways. I personally am a fan of having a true syllabus, but training to standard, not to time. If I master something in .5 hours that says 1 hour, why not move on and build where that mastered maneuver will be repeated anyway once you build to next lesson? If that "check on learning" proves that .5 wasnt enough, then go back and revisit.
Click to expand...

I agree 150%. That's one thing I hate about 141 training..the tyranny of the clock. By all means, train to proficiency (or at least until there is a firm foundation for the next building block). I don't care if it takes 15 minutes or two hours. It is the sequence that counts, not the clock.

Bob
 
AggieMike88 said:
I've started my ground schooling for CFI-A.

One of my thoughts when I do start teaching is to remain with paper charts throughout much of the training. In my opinion, the student needs to have a firm footing in the foundational material presented on paper sectionals and their use before moving up to electronic solutions.

My primary instructors were big fans of basic pilotage skills. And being taught this way has served me well ever since.
Click to expand...

I used to have these opinions and teach that way. In the last year I have changed tunes and now teach what the student will fly. I don't want hem fumbling around in the cockpit their first time with family trying to figure out foreflight. Yeah, they will learn enough paper to be safe if it comes to it, but ultimately I think it is safer to teach how they will fly.
 
Z06_Mir said:
I used to have these opinions and teach that way. In the last year I have changed tunes and now teach what the student will fly. I don't want hem fumbling around in the cockpit their first time with family trying to figure out foreflight. Yeah, they will learn enough paper to be safe if it comes to it, but ultimately I think it is safer to teach how they will fly.
Click to expand...
Oh, I do plan to include an EFB into the mix before their checkride, but only at the appropriate time and after they learn the old school magic that the EFB is automating.
 
AggieMike88 said:
Oh, I do plan to include an EFB into the mix before their checkride, but only at the appropriate time and after they learn the old school magic that the EFB is automating.
Click to expand...

Serious question - do people really have a hard time with "old school magic?" It all seemed really simple to me - Distance = rate x time. Maybe some simple trig if you're getting super crazy, but nothing one doesn't learn in junior high.
 
Cici said:
Serious question - do people really have a hard time with "old school magic?" It all seemed really simple to me - Distance = rate x time. Maybe some simple trig if you're getting super crazy, but nothing one doesn't learn in junior high.
Click to expand...
I've seen with a lot of younger people that any form of calculation is not desired when an app or screen will do it for them. I want to learn both.
 
Josh Parker said:
I've seen with a lot of younger people that any form of calculation is not desired when an app or screen will do it for them. I want to learn both.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you seem to have misinterpreted the intent of my question. More than likely, I poorly communicated it. I'm a "young" person, I like conveniences. But what I'm really asking is, can't one know the underlying "old school magic" AND learn using an EFB? Can someone only learn calculations with a paper chart?

I actually know the answer, since I've never bought a single paper chart in my life. Ironically, my old crusty DPE didn't care to see the "old school magic" behind a W&B (which I had spent a few minutes at the copy machine and done out long hand for him before we sat down for the oral), rather he went to the "app" which "did it for us." He also didn't care to see the VFR xc planning I had done on the form I had spent time filling out, rather we looked on foreflight. Was my DPE just "ahead of the times" or are some people just behind the times? I can't seem to figure it out.
 
Cici said:
Sorry, you seem to have misinterpreted the intent of my question. More than likely, I poorly communicated it. I'm a "young" person, I like conveniences. But what I'm really asking is, can't one know the underlying "old school magic" AND learn using an EFB? Can someone only learn calculations with a paper chart?

I actually know the answer, since I've never bought a single paper chart in my life. Ironically, my old crusty DPE didn't care to see the "old school magic" behind a W&B (which I had spent a few minutes at the copy machine and done out long hand for him before we sat down for the oral), rather he went to the "app" which "did it for us." He also didn't care to see the VFR xc planning I had done on the form I had spent time filling out, rather we looked on foreflight. Was my DPE just "ahead of the times" or are some people just behind the times? I can't seem to figure it out.
Click to expand...
I think it depends. If you use a W&B app, do you know why you are/aren’t in CG limits? Do you know how to calculate moment? If you take out 50 pounds of baggage, do you know you will make it back into CG limits. Most of the apps are garbage in, garbage out. I think it’s good to know the theory behind the calculations rather than just plugging in numbers and the app giving you a green light saying you’re good to go. Same thing with flight planning apps. It’s all the about the WHY. Remember, correlation is the highest form of learning. Anyone can spit numbers out and have no idea what or why they have these numbers in the first place.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_51
Click to expand...

Years ago a retired UAL 747 pilot and I were discussing myself getting on with an airline. Told him I didn’t have but 500+ ME hours, and he says put some P-51 time in yer logbook. I said I’ve never flown a P-51, and he says nooooooo, Parker 51. Laughed but said I couldn’t do that, and I didn’t.
 
Cici said:
Sorry, you seem to have misinterpreted the intent of my question. More than likely, I poorly communicated it. I'm a "young" person, I like conveniences. But what I'm really asking is, can't one know the underlying "old school magic" AND learn using an EFB? Can someone only learn calculations with a paper chart?

I actually know the answer, since I've never bought a single paper chart in my life. Ironically, my old crusty DPE didn't care to see the "old school magic" behind a W&B (which I had spent a few minutes at the copy machine and done out long hand for him before we sat down for the oral), rather he went to the "app" which "did it for us." He also didn't care to see the VFR xc planning I had done on the form I had spent time filling out, rather we looked on foreflight. Was my DPE just "ahead of the times" or are some people just behind the times? I can't seem to figure it out.
Click to expand...
He seems to be with the times, but I wouldn't call anyone who doesn't use foreflight or apps behind the times. My DPE asked why I didn't use electronic planning. I told paper doesn't usually fail unless you get it wet. I think I remember mine also double checking my work using the computer rather than him try to check by reworking all the calculations on paper.
 
jaymark6655 said:
He seems to be with the times, but I wouldn't call anyone who doesn't use foreflight or apps behind the times. My DPE asked why I didn't use electronic planning. I told paper doesn't usually fail unless you get it wet. I think I remember mine also double checking my work using the computer rather than him try to check by reworking all the calculations on paper.
Click to expand...

The airplanes I'm flying now have charts and pretty much all the info you need in the avionics. Foreflight is my backup. But if that were not the case, I would keep current paper with me. FF makes planning and filing so much easier than paper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top