schmookeeg
En-Route
Well that bit of delicious prose worked, and someone snatched it before I could inquire further while under your hypnotic spell.
Time builder
- Thread starter Cloudbase
- Start date
Well that bit of delicious prose worked, and someone snatched it before I could inquire further while under your hypnotic spell.
texasclouds
En-Route
Well that bit of delicious prose worked, and someone snatched it before I could inquire further while under your hypnotic spell.
View attachment 115784
Sale pending to some brass balled real pilot with style…
MarkH
Line Up and Wait
What is your end goal? What is your timeline to commercial?
If you can afford a $250K plane, and your priority is to get commercial as fast as possible, there are better ways to spend your money.
I purchased a plane right after getting my PPL. I regret selling it more than I regret buying it but I would have obtained my instrument and commercial faster by renting. When a rental goes down for maintenance or repair, you book another plane. When your plane goes down for maintenance or repair, your job is to manage the work.
This problem is 100x worse when you are training. If you stop flying for a month to fix your plane while building time, you lost a month but you just have to get back in the habit. During training, not only have you lost a month, but you also had a month to lose the proficiency gains that you made toward your check ride, so you lose another 2 weeks getting back to where you were before the plane broke.
If I were to do it again, with a budget that allowed for a $250K plane, I would have purchased a VFR plane (maybe a taildragger to get some time toward flying banner work for a low time commercial job) and parked it on a field with a well respected shop and a well managed flight school or training club with multiple, identical IFR trainers and plenty of availability. I would fly my plane as much as I can, and when I train for my IFR, go to the school/club so I know I always I have a plane ready when I schedule a lesson.
Pinecone
En-Route
It may take someone longer to get there, but no reason you could not get your PPL in an Aerostar.
The USAF takes people with no flying time at all and starts then off in jets (in the past) or SE turboprop (currently) and into faster jets will less than 100 hours.
Yes, I know who many people fly. That is because either their instructor did not emphasize precision or they have gotten sloppy.
If I have an airplane available I can get my instruments and commercial by the end of this year, maybe early next year. Otherwise it will take a couple of years or more at the rate I am currently going.
Thoughts to ponder:
Buy once for time building and capable of IFR aircraft.
Fixed gear, fixed prop - Warrior or Archer for example. You are not in a hurry to get anywhere. You are building time and experience.
Whatever your budget or affordability. Cut it in half. You will have plenty to spend on annuals and maintenance. Planes are a money sink unless the business pays for it. It’s still a money sink but tax deductible and somewhat to actually cost effective.
Buy once for time building and capable of IFR aircraft.
Fixed gear, fixed prop - Warrior or Archer for example. You are not in a hurry to get anywhere. You are building time and experience.
Whatever your budget or affordability. Cut it in half. You will have plenty to spend on annuals and maintenance. Planes are a money sink unless the business pays for it. It’s still a money sink but tax deductible and somewhat to actually cost effective.
Dan Thomas
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2008
- Messages
- 10,758
- Display Name
Display name:
Dan Thomas
The USAF starts students off in singles, not twins. And it does indeed take twice the time to get a ticket that way. And that's with being in training all day, all week, for a few months. Lots and lots of groundschool. How many PPL students have that sort of time and the money to fund it?
A fast twin increases the time enormously. The airplane is so far ahead of the student for so many hours that it takes his mind a long time to catch up. That's why the best, sensible approach is to start with the basics and move up from there.
The Canadian Flight Instructor Guide covers the Seven Learning Factors in detail. One of them is Relationship:
RELATIONSHIP - Present lessons in the logical sequence of known to unknown, simple to complex, easy to difficult.
(a) This particular learning factor emphasizes the necessity for your student to understand relationships between new and old facts, or between ideas and skills if learning is to take place. During flight training, students must understand not only why they are learning a particular exercise, but how that exercise combines with previous ones and where it fits into the overall syllabus. Giving students the relationship at the start of the lesson provides preparation for learning. Continuing the process throughout the lesson helps to maintain the desire to learn.
Examples: Compare or relate cross-wind take-offs and landings to normal take-offs and landings; show how a forced landing is really a type of circuit procedure.
(b) Suggestions:
- Present lessons in a logical sequence:
- known to unknown;
- easy to difficult;
- concrete to abstract;
- simple to complex;
- familiar to unfamiliar.
3. Present new material in stages, confirming that students have mastered one stage before proceeding to the next. The length of time for each stage would depend on the complexity of the material covered.
4. Reinforce students' learning of new facts or ideas by frequently summarizing the major points of your lesson.
5. Use examples and comparisons to show how the new material being learned is really not much different from that already known by your students. The examples you use may be real or imaginary as the main purpose of an example is to paint a verbal picture so students can visualize relationships between the new material and things that have happened before. This is called using verbal aids for your instruction.
Putting a newbie in an Aerostar is a good way to discourage him real quick. The learning curve is way too steep.
Canada runs its military pilot applicants through a basic PPL-type course in piston singles. Once they pass that, they move into turbine singles, some into turbine twins. Relationship. Simple to complex. Even when this is done, the washout rate is significant. Starting them off in a twin jet would wash out 99% of them.
https://www.canada.ca/en/air-force/services/training-education/3-flying-training-school.html
Pinecone
En-Route
Realize, that in most cases it costs more to own a plane than to rent one. Fixed costs drive the per hour rate higher than a rental plane flying more.
What owning does for you is makes that plane available on your schedule. And it allows you to take trips without artificial minimum daily hours.
Pinecone
En-Route
Now they do. In the past they started people in the T-37, which is a multiengine jet. Most times they did do initial training in the T-41 (C-172) but at times tried skipping that (they do not seem to learn). There were some in my class that had no time prior to the T-37, and Gil mentioned the same in his UPT class. Now days, primary is in a single engine turbo prop.
I guess Canadians are not as smart as Americans, as there was nowhere near 99% washout starting with multi engine jets. Yes, they took more hours that those with piston single time, but similar washout rates (and, I was JOKING about Canadians not being as smart).