What would you do? Part 61 or 141

T

Trcpilot

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jan 7, 2021
Messages
82
Display Name
Display name:
Cjayfly1
Instrument Training:

A. Would you fly Part 141-35 dual (21/14) hours for $10,000 at a towered airport?

B. would you fly Part 61- 25 dual hours and 20 hours xc safety pilot $10,000 at a non-towered airport?


I’m torn between experience at a towered airport or the higher amount of hours for the 250 hour mark!

Thoughts? Pros and Cons!
 
Trcpilot said:
Instrument Training:

A. Would you fly Part 141-35 dual (21/14) hours for $10,000 at a towered airport?

B. would you fly Part 61- 25 dual hours and 20 hours xc safety pilot $10,000 at a non-towered airport?


I’m torn between experience at a towered airport or the higher amount of hours for the 250 hour mark!

Thoughts? Pros and Cons!
Click to expand...
Generally speaking, you’re much more likely to convert that $10k into an instrument rating in scenario #1.
 
Brad Z said:
Generally speaking, you’re much more likely to convert that $10k into an instrument rating in scenario #1.
Click to expand...

But (and I think this is what you mean, but I don’t want to put words in your mouth Brad), that’s not because of Part 61 vs 141, it’s because of the scenario, hours, and cost structure posed. In the scenario posed, $10000 gets you either 35 hours of instruction, or 25 hours of instruction and 20 hours of free form practice. Given that, the first scenario is more likely to be successful.

Planning for 20 hours with a safety pilot as part of the estimate doesn’t seem like a good estimate to me. Most commonly, I see instrument students taking right around 40 hours WITH an instructor.

Part 61 vs 141 as a sole criteria is largely irrelevant. Part 61 can be just as structured as 141, it depends on the school and the CFI.
 
I'm struggling to understand your pricing dynamic. When I did it, it was more like 40 hours dual pt61 for about 10 grand vs 35 (in theory) pt141 for almost 20.

I also seriously doubt I could've done it in 35. The cfiii I used is a check Airman for the 141 school, and teaches pt61 on the side, and it took me 38 hours with him to be ready. Had I gone through the flight school, would the freshly minted cfii I likely would've gotten been as effective a teacher?
 
The type of airport is irrelevant except that you are likely to spend more time in the ramp ticking down those 35 hrs, which means less time in the air actually developing proficiency.

As far at the 61/141 conundrum, there is no magic syllabus the guarantees you’ll be proficient in the minimum hours necessary.

The only place I really see an advantage to 141 is the deleted 50hrs XC PIC experience requirement and the increased allowance for approved full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device.
 
RussR said:
But (and I think this is what you mean, but I don’t want to put words in your mouth Brad), that’s not because of Part 61 vs 141, it’s because of the scenario, hours, and cost structure posed. In the scenario posed, $10000 gets you either 35 hours of instruction, or 25 hours of instruction and 20 hours of free form practice. Given that, the first scenario is more likely to be successful.

Planning for 20 hours with a safety pilot as part of the estimate doesn’t seem like a good estimate to me. Most commonly, I see instrument students taking right around 40 hours WITH an instructor.

Part 61 vs 141 as a sole criteria is largely irrelevant. Part 61 can be just as structured as 141, it depends on the school and the CFI.
Click to expand...
Exactly. There's nothing to stop a part 61 training program from using a 141 syllabus. I just can't imagine a instrument training regiment that relies on 20 hours of flying with a safety pilot.

Usually the biggest determinant of 61 versus 141 is GI Bill benefits or a university program.
 
Ha! I know a airline that’s relying on FIVE HUNDRED safety pilot hours…. Wow!

Edit: Brad hit the nail on the head. Follow the money.
 
^This. I got my instrument, commercial and initial CFI at a 61/141 school. The only difference was that with 61 you don't have to follow the syllabus sequentially, so if weather, MX, scheduling issues arise you can just do a different lesson. In other words I flew more often than those on the GI bill.
And as pointed out above it was 40 hours dual with a CFII. No safety pilot time
 
I'm about 40% through the instrument training, and I'd take the 40 hrs dual vs the 25/20 arrangement in a heartbeat. Safety pilot hours are likely to be buzzing around shooting approaches as your own pace. A good CFI-I will continue to challenge you with scenarios, instrument failures, etc.
 
Trcpilot said:
Instrument Training:

A. Would you fly Part 141-35 dual (21/14) hours for $10,000 at a towered airport?

B. would you fly Part 61- 25 dual hours and 20 hours xc safety pilot $10,000 at a non-towered airport?


I’m torn between experience at a towered airport or the higher amount of hours for the 250 hour mark!

Thoughts? Pros and Cons!
Click to expand...

I don't understand the question. Does B somehow prohibit you from flying at a towered airport?
 
RussR said:
Most commonly, I see instrument students taking right around 40 hours WITH an instructor.
Click to expand...

That's what I've seen too. I'm sure there are some aces out there who have passed a checkride with the part 61 training minimums but I sure haven't seen them.

TCABM said:
The type of airport is irrelevant
Click to expand...

I disagree, to an extent. The training environment does matter, at least in the sense that many of the students I've seen that have received a large chunk of their instrument training at nontowered airports seem to lack an understanding of how ATC works and the expected interactions with them. A lot of instructors seem to just fly around with students and do approach after approach without ever talking to anyone, rather than showing the student the bigger picture and how they fit into it. On the other hand, the same thing could happen if a student and instructor is flying out of a towered airport and not using any radar advisories.
 
Except for the first few flights (maybe) fly in the system, VFR and IFR. A good instructor should be comfortable with you in actual after a certain period of instruction.

Start with VOR and ILS approaches - they are harder. Finish with WAAS, they are easy.
 
I think as long as the untowered airport had a VHF way to receive clearances (RCO or some frequency you can successfully get apch/center on) -- then I'd think them equivalent and favor A for the better value.

If the untowered airport has some dude on a cellphone trying to bluetooth to his headset and get a void time because it's in podunk, I would definitely favor A in that scenario.

...for my vote, all roads point to the towered offering with full instructor time. You start "in the system" at the tower, and can go play void times somewhere else when you like. The value proposition is another bonus, as safety pilot quality is quite varied. You could pick up bad habits from a poor safety pilot if they decided to play instructor with you or provide some hot tips.

Part 61/141 doesn't really matter unless your funding source is improved -- and it most likely only improves in scenario A. I see a trend here. :)
 
What I'm not seeing in either scenario is simulator time. Well-used sim time during instrument training can be 2-3x as effective as the same number of hours in the plane.
 
I’ll put in my contrary view about towers. You should absolutely learn how to get a clearance and fly IFR to and from towered airports. But you should also get (arguably more) experience with the alternative ways to start and end an IFR flight, including at airports when the tower is closed.

If the first time you call on the phone for a void time or to cancel is at the end of a 5-hour solo trip to Podunk USA, you will wish you had trained for it at least a little. If you don’t have experience calling for a clearance in the air and finding that you can’t quite reach center before hitting the cloud ceiling, you won’t have any basis to judge when to call for a void time before taking off.

You may even inconvenience others. At my home airport, center has become very impatient of late and called the airport manager to see if I had made it in or not, before I even taxied to the ramp. We think that they must block approaches at a nearby uncontrolled field with airline service until arrivals at our field cancel.

So choose the training option that you think is best for you. But don’t go to the check ride without having obtained and canceled a clearance at least once each by phone, from an RCO, and in the air. Flying IFR to and from an airport with an operating control tower is easy simply because it’s always the same once you figure out which frequency handles clearance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top