Why do CFI's Discourage Sport Pilot

[James331]

I just don't agree with you. I believe sport is better for some people, even without the medical issues.

What if you were in a situation where you had an LSA and a private airstrip and with an SPL you could cheaply and easily build hundreds of solo hours without ever needing that utility and be much better prepared if you later did decide to get it?

If no one can see that in my case it makes sense, then so be it.

The only one who needs to see it is me.

By the way, are you in favor of removing the class 3 medical for PPL?

Yes I am in favor of removing the class III

And the above example student still would be better off taking that LSA and getting his PPL from my experience as a higher time CFI, for the reasons I stated earlier.

If you REALLY want a sport, go for it man! Enjoy the sky, but I'd wager $5 that, presuming you can pass a medical, you'll be back in a year or two for your PPL

 

[James331]

On the subject of the class III medical, just a plug, but if you guys haven't already, do so now


Sign

http://govt.eaa.org/17422/support-pilots-bill-rights-2/

 

[jimson]

but I'd wager $5 that, presuming you can pass a medical, you'll be back in a year or two for your PPL

And if so, I'm OK with that because like someone else said I won't regret more training and in the meantime I'll be flying.

 

[mtuomi]

Not everyone has airports exactly where they need to be to make that happen and not everyone wants to go up and do a 3 hour flight all at once..

And this is why it takes the "average" of 60 hours to get a PPL.

And that is why using 60 hours as the "comparison" number for hours is just not right when comparing the price between SP and PP. Anyone with at least some aptitude can learn to fly to PTS in 40 hours, if they would fly often enough, at least 3-4 times a week.
I did mine in 40.0 and 16 days from zero (including doing the written) and I consider myself an average student, but I was committed and wanted to get it done. This way we never had to repeat a lesson, and with proper planning we didn't waste hours on extra flights.

 

[poadeleted21]

Good for you. Not the case in my neck of the woods though.





I don't agree. I don't believe it usually is, but I do believe it often is the the best fit.

My CFI also does PPL so the upgrade won't be an issue if I choose to go that route some day.

By the way, are you in favor of removing the class 3 medical for PPL?

Yep. I'm in favor of removing the class 3 medical. that's why I think SPL is a disservice to GA. There is ZERO demand for LSA aircraft if the third class medical goes away. The LSA manufacturers will not like it, and those $150,000 mini SR22's won't be worth much.

 

[jimson]

Yep. I'm in favor of removing the class 3 medical. that's why I think SPL is a disservice to GA. There is ZERO demand for LSA aircraft if the third class medical goes away. The LSA manufacturers will not like it, and those $150,000 mini SR22's won't be worth much.

That doesn't make sense to me since if medical reform passes we have SPL to thank for the proof it's safe to do so.

 

[drotto]

That doesn't make sense to me since if medical reform passes we have SPL to thank for the proof it's safe to do so.

You are 100% correct, but I still think if the 3rd class goes away, that SP rating will be hurt. I know there is also the rumor that third class will only bw lifted to gross weights up to 6000 (or 6500) then third would again be needed to get up to the existing 12500 limitation on the standard PPL.

 

[jimson]

And this is why it takes the "average" of 60 hours to get a PPL.

And that is why using 60 hours as the "comparison" number for hours is just not right when comparing the price between SP and PP. Anyone with at least some aptitude can learn to fly to PTS in 40 hours, if they would fly often enough, at least 3-4 times a week.
I did mine in 40.0 and 16 days from zero (including doing the written) and I consider myself an average student, but I was committed and wanted to get it done. This way we never had to repeat a lesson, and with proper planning we didn't waste hours on extra flights.

By the same token, if you are removing 5 hours solo, 3 hours XC, hood time, etc, it is not an insignificant amount of time and money saved by going the SPL route.

If you later decide to upgrade to PPL so what? You get to stretch out the financial and time commitment.

 

[bflynn]

That's very, very unusual.

A 152 is going to cost you around $90 an hour wet unless it's some exception out in the sticks somewhere. Freeway has some in this area and they charge $97 an hour. There's a 150 up in Baltimore for $85 an hour I think.

Most places use 172s and those are typically $120-$150 wet. My parents live in MS and the Warrior I found to rent there is $125 an hour.

If you have a deal where you can rent a 152 for $65 an hour, take advantage of it and build a bunch of time if you need it. Because that's almost unbelievably cheap.

It's the difference between a non-for-profit club that just wants people to fly vs a commercial operation. Also the difference between renting a new $100,000 airplane and renting a 40 year old $20,000 airplane.

I believe the private would be much cheaper if you owned your own 152, barring major mechanical work.

 

[jimson]

You are 100% correct, but I still think if the 3rd class goes away, that SP rating will be hurt.

Probably, but it will have served a purpose and there will be cheaper light planes available.

Has anyone ever considered that SPL allows pilots to become safer and more experienced than a newly minted PPL BEFORE they start taking up whole families?

I know I don't need to justify my choice to anyone but I guess it's just human nature to debate.

Medical is one part of my choice, but only one part. I know I am not likely to just be penciled through on that. I believe I can get special issuance's's but that will raise the cost and hassle factor significantly, and if I'm wrong and I fail? I'm screwed from SP as well.

Not worth it to me since my mission is sport flying.

I'll just consider it an introductory license with which I can build hours and be a safer pilot before I start risking any passengers lives.

 

[drotto]

It's the difference between a non-for-profit club that just wants people to fly vs a commercial operation. Also the difference between renting a new $100,000 airplane and renting a 40 year old $20,000 airplane.

I believe the private would be much cheaper if you owned your own 152, barring major mechanical work.

The school I use is selling one of their Warriors (PA28-151) for $25000. It is a little beat up with about 8500 hours on it, but flies well and has been well maintained (for an instructional use plane) Take a 2 year loan out on that plane for roughly 1100 per month. Heck, do a 5 year and pay like $500 per month. Say another 3000 a year in annuals, maintenance, tie down etc., buy fuel and then an instructor at $45 per hour. Provided the market does not crap out, I bet you can get at least $23000 on it after training if you decide to step up.

Say 1 year to get your PPL with the 5 year loan. So $6000 for the plane (remember if you sell you will get most of this back), $2025 for CFI (at $45 per hour 45 hours), $3000 for full year plane costs (likely too high unless something really goes boom), about about $2500 in fuel. That gives you about $7500 to train to PPL with realistic numbers, assuming you sell the plane when you finish. I think these are fairly realist real world numbers, and I have flown that plane.

 

[drotto]

Probably, but it will have served a purpose and there will be cheaper light planes available.

Has anyone ever considered that SPL allows pilots to become safer and more experienced than a newly minted PPL BEFORE they start taking up whole families?

I know I don't need to justify my choice to anyone but I guess it's just human nature to debate.

Medical is one part of my choice, but only one part. I know I am not likely to just be penciled through on that. I believe I can get special issuance's's but that will raise the cost and hassle factor significantly, and if I'm wrong and I fail? I'm screwed from SP as well.

Not worth it to me since my mission is sport flying.

I'll just consider it an introductory license with which I can build hours and be a safer pilot before I start risking any passengers lives.

Again I have my PPL about 6 weeks now, and have not taken up my family alone yet. I am not sure I am ready. Instead, I have started transition training, and am doing the HP and Complex ratings.

 

[PPC1052]

By the same token, if you are removing 5 hours solo, 3 hours XC, hood time, etc, it is not an insignificant amount of time and money saved by going the SPL route.

Your assumption that just because you remove those requirements for taking the check ride that the student will be ready an equal number of hours fewer does not necessarily follow. Most students take more time to be ready than the minimum prerequisites require. In short, it takes the student what ever time it takes to be ready.

 

[jimson]

Your assumption that just because you remove those requirements for taking the check ride that the student will be ready an equal number of hours fewer does not necessarily follow. Most students take more time to be ready than the minimum prerequisites require. In short, it takes the student what ever time it takes to be ready.

Maybe, but if you only remove that that doesn't fit the sport pilot mission it's still significant time and money for some people. A thousand bucks or so means more to some than others.

 

[PPC1052]

Maybe, but if you only remove that that doesn't fit the sport pilot mission it's still significant time and money for some people. A thousand bucks or so means more to some than others.

I guess. But what confuses me is if your mission is just to burn holes in the sky, you are doing that regardless of whether there is a CFI in the other seat or not. So your marginal cost for the enjoyment of that time is just the CFI's hourly rate. Seems like a small price to pay for the added safety and increased utility when you finish.

Just my .02. Not saying this is true for you. I'm just talking in general terms for most people as to why the recommendations are generally against the SP.

 

[mtuomi]

By the same token, if you are removing 5 hours solo, 3 hours XC, hood time, etc, it is not an insignificant amount of time and money saved by going the SPL route.

If you later decide to upgrade to PPL so what? You get to stretch out the financial and time commitment.

Let's say that you need 40 hours to be proficient enough to pass a checkride. I would say you are not ready for a checkride at the minimum SP hours unless you hit a really lenient DPE, or whoever does the checkrides for SPs.

The XC, hood time, night flying etc all build your experience and proficiency, way more than the normal pattern work you do for SP. Night/hood flying really builds your skills on precision flying.

So I would say - It is easier to get PP at 40 hours than it is to get a SP in 20 hours.

The only reason - fact - to get a SP over PP is the medical. Arguing otherwise is simply bs'ing yourself.

Stretching the cost is another pseudoargument. The difference is a rounding error. If you need to plan for the 1k or so, maybe flying is not the right hobby because you'll end up being a pilot who doesn't fly enough to maintain proficiency.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Of the half million or whatever private pilots what about the ones that got their ticket in cubs and such back in the fourties and fifties? They didn't have hood time, many of them didn't have night either(there was a restriction option on the pp) were they as unsafe as modern sport pilots? U gots no logicals people

 

[mtuomi]

Of the half million or whatever private pilots what about the ones that got their ticket in cubs and such back in the fourties and fifties? They didn't have hood time, many of them didn't have night either(there was a restriction option on the pp) were they as unsafe as modern sport pilots? U gots no logicals people

Yes they were unsafe. U gots no point.

 

[ClimbnSink]

And modern private pilots are safe?

 

[mtuomi]

And modern private pilots are safe?

Much, much, much safer than the pilots in the 1930s.

 

[ClimbnSink]

What about the 40's 50's trained pilots? Maybe pilot certificates should expire after 40 years. Make sure old pilots are up to snuff.

 

[ralarcon]

Yep. I'm in favor of removing the class 3 medical. that's why I think SPL is a disservice to GA. There is ZERO demand for LSA aircraft if the third class medical goes away. The LSA manufacturers will not like it, and those $150,000 mini SR22's won't be worth much.

Completely inaccurate statement. My example, I own a Light Sport Aircraft that uses between 4.5 and 5 gal an Hr of LL or Mogas. . Holds 34 gallons of fuel, flies at between 105 and 120 Knots GS, depending on prevailing winds. Will fly my wife and me, with luggage anywhere we want to go. Do not want to fly, in the clouds , at night, in weather, or internationally. Certified for class D airports, not interested in the landing fees of typical Class B or class C airports, not interested in mixing it up with B 777's or Airbus 320's. Not interested in buying or piloting a bigger airplane. Last annual service , total of $750.00. Why ,in heavens name, would I be interested in upgrading my SPL ? I have 370 + hrs flying my aircraft.

Cheers

 

[OkieAviator]

Of the half million or whatever private pilots what about the ones that got their ticket in cubs and such back in the fourties and fifties? They didn't have hood time, many of them didn't have night either(there was a restriction option on the pp) were they as unsafe as modern sport pilots? U gots no logicals people

The FAA estimates are 'active' pilots. I can make the 'logical' assumption that those that trained in the 40's 50's don't actively fly due to not being able to hold a medical in their senior years pushing 80 or 90. If they are, they're probably flying LSA

And modern private pilots are safe?

Based on an individual. The environment is much safer with fancy things like radar, gps, paved runways and Ipads to name a few.

What about the 40's 50's trained pilots? Maybe pilot certificates should expire after 40 years. Make sure old pilots are up to snuff.

They expired when the pilot stopped flying and ran out of currency. If they're flying and staying current then they're up to snuff. Again not sure if I know any pilots in their 80s that are actively flying but I know quite a few in their 70s with medicals flying.

By the way, are you in favor of removing the class 3 medical for PPL?

Yes.. Most pilots are. Will it kill the Sport License market? Who knows but it will allow those that want to fly things larger than an LSA and have a PPL to do so.

 

[James331]

Completely inaccurate statement. My example, I own a Light Sport Aircraft that uses between 4.5 and 5 gal an Hr of LL or Mogas. . Holds 34 gallons of fuel, flies at between 105 and 120 Knots GS, depending on prevailing winds. Will fly my wife and me, with luggage anywhere we want to go. Do not want to fly, in the clouds , at night, in weather, or internationally. Certified for class D airports, not interested in the landing fees of typical Class B or class C airports, not interested in mixing it up with B 777's or Airbus 320's. Not interested in buying or piloting a bigger airplane. Last annual service , total of $750.00. Why ,in heavens name, would I be interested in upgrading my SPL ? I have 370 + hrs flying my aircraft.

Cheers

Aside from me being a working pilot.

Not having a IACO license is a killer, I'm by Canada and not being able to go up there is a big deal.

Not being able to pull a IFR when needed is also a pain

Being limited to low HP and low weight would not allow me to fly my 185

Not being able to fly at night WILL suck, just give it time


Not being able to transition B and C will become a PITA given enough flight hours.

Also the last annual for my 300HP 185 amphib was less then yours
All about owner assist and keeping on top of things.

 

[Jim Logajan]

There is ZERO demand for LSA aircraft if the third class medical goes away.

Completely inaccurate statement.

That is putting it mildly. Since there were dozens of aircraft models (certificated and experimental) that met LSA aircraft standards decades before anyone had dreamed up the concept, there will be plenty of market left open for existing LSA models if the third class medical goes away. Some descendents of LSA models may grow in weight or speed, but that's to be expected.

Among those of us who understand the need to buy "right sized" aircraft for our needs (in my case 1 or 2 seats max) the LSA will still fill a need. I like low stall speeds for a number of utility reasons. I understand that high lifting capacity comes at a price in acquisition and operating costs even when it isn't being utilized, so that is a consideration that favors aircraft designed to meet LSA specs. I don't think I'm alone in this sort of thinking.

 

[poadeleted21]

That is putting it mildly. Since there were dozens of aircraft models (certificated and experimental) that met LSA aircraft standards decades before anyone had dreamed up the concept, there will be plenty of market left open for existing LSA models if the third class medical goes away. Some descendents of LSA models may grow in weight or speed, but that's to be expected.

Among those of us who understand the need to buy "right sized" aircraft for our needs (in my case 1 or 2 seats max) the LSA will still fill a need. I like low stall speeds for a number of utility reasons. I understand that high lifting capacity comes at a price in acquisition and operating costs even when it isn't being utilized, so that is a consideration that favors aircraft designed to meet LSA specs. I don't think I'm alone in this sort of thinking.

Those 2 seaters were really flying off the shelves, the C152, Tomahawk, Skipper. New ones were selling like hot cakes I tell you. Especially the ones that have artificial gross weight and speed limitations for no other reason than mandated by law.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Those 2 seaters were really flying off the shelves, the C152, Tomahawk, Skipper. New ones were selling like hot cakes I tell you. Especially the ones that have artificial gross weight and speed limitations for no other reason than mandated by law.

Are the new non-LSA 4 seat (and greater) Cessna and Pipers still selling like the proverbial hot cakes?

By the way - for a lot of 2 and 4 seat aircraft the LSA 120 kt speed limitation appears to be redundant. But that is a matter of the physics of the situation since at around that speed is something of a knee in the power/drag requirements.

As to artificially lowered gross weight - I can think of only a few experimental models that applies to. Aircraft like, say, the CH-701 or Kitfox and their kin naturally met the gross weight requirement a decade or more before LSA was proposed.

Lastly, a suggestion - you might want to be more careful before making hard and absolute claims on the Internet so that you don't have to resort to rhetorical sneers as follow-up when presented with facts that indicate your absolutist claims don't match observable reality.

 

[jimson]

Let's say that you need 40 hours to be proficient enough to pass a checkride. I would say you are not ready for a checkride at the minimum SP hours unless you hit a really lenient DPE, or whoever does the checkrides for SPs.

The XC, hood time, night flying etc all build your experience and proficiency, way more than the normal pattern work you do for SP. Night/hood flying really builds your skills on precision flying.

So I would say - It is easier to get PP at 40 hours than it is to get a SP in 20 hours.

The only reason - fact - to get a SP over PP is the medical. Arguing otherwise is simply bs'ing yourself.

Stretching the cost is another pseudoargument. The difference is a rounding error. If you need to plan for the 1k or so, maybe flying is not the right hobby because you'll end up being a pilot who doesn't fly enough to maintain proficiency.

OK then, we have to agree to disagree.

 

[jimson]

I guess. But what confuses me is if your mission is just to burn holes in the sky, you are doing that regardless of whether there is a CFI in the other seat or not. So your marginal cost for the enjoyment of that time is just the CFI's hourly rate. Seems like a small price to pay for the added safety and increased utility when you finish.

In my case no. I won't have to rent and I'll have a single place.

 

[jasstech]

Let's say that you need 40 hours to be proficient enough to pass a checkride. I would say you are not ready for a checkride at the minimum SP hours unless you hit a really lenient DPE, or whoever does the checkrides for SPs.

The XC, hood time, night flying etc all build your experience and proficiency, way more than the normal pattern work you do for SP. Night/hood flying really builds your skills on precision flying.

So I would say - It is easier to get PP at 40 hours than it is to get a SP in 20 hours.

The only reason - fact - to get a SP over PP is the medical. Arguing otherwise is simply bs'ing yourself.

Stretching the cost is another pseudoargument. The difference is a rounding error. If you need to plan for the 1k or so, maybe flying is not the right hobby because you'll end up being a pilot who doesn't fly enough to maintain proficiency.

For many people the time commitment is a huge barrier to getting the PPL. Right now my wife is working towards hers. Between work, kids activities, and the wonderful Ohio weather she is lucky to get a flight or two a week. If we didn't have a 172 the SPL would make complete sense. It doesn't matter if it only shaved 10 hours off. She would have the cert quicker and be able to enjoy it before continuing with the PPL. It is hard to keep her from getting burnt out and throwing in the towel. That's why I wish the SPL was promoted more. It would be interesting to see if the completion rate is higher. I would think it should be.

 

[ClimbnSink]

For GAs long term health putting completed tickets in people's pockets is key. I'd guess few pilots fly continuously post certificate. Having a ticket(even a limited one) makes it easier and more likely they would return in the future.

 

[ralarcon]

Aside from me being a working pilot.

Not having a IACO license is a killer, I'm by Canada and not being able to go up there is a big deal.

Not being able to pull a IFR when needed is also a pain

Being limited to low HP and low weight would not allow me to fly my 185

Not being able to fly at night WILL suck, just give it time


Not being able to transition B and C will become a PITA given enough flight hours.

Also the last annual for my 300HP 185 amphib was less then yours
All about owner assist and keeping on top of things.

Whatever works for you, curious about the fuel consumption of your 300 hp aircraft ?

PS. I often fly under Class B, and C airspace at 900 feet with minimal if any deviation on my route. and definitely not interested in flying at night !

Cheers

 

[jimson]

Those 2 seaters were really flying off the shelves, the C152, Tomahawk, Skipper. New ones were selling like hot cakes I tell you. Especially the ones that have artificial gross weight and speed limitations for no other reason than mandated by law.

We don't really have an accurate indication of the market potential because the economy took a major dump shortly after the advent of SP. One thing changed in that before SP, you could buy an LSA compliant Ercoupe for less than 8k, so I guess those were selling like hot cakes.

 

[poadeleted21]

We don't really have an accurate indication of the market potential because the economy took a major dump shortly after the advent of SP. One thing changed in that before SP, you could buy an LSA compliant Ercoupe for less than 8k, so I guess those were selling like hot cakes.

Correct. it was 8K because nobody wanted them. Drop the medical requirement for PPL and Ercoupe's are 8K (or less) again.

The Skipper was discontinued in 1981, the 152 in 1985 and the Tomahawk in 1982. I don't think the recent economy had much to do with it.

 

[mtuomi]

For many people the time commitment is a huge barrier to getting the PPL. Right now my wife is working towards hers. Between work, kids activities, and the wonderful Ohio weather she is lucky to get a flight or two a week. If we didn't have a 172 the SPL would make complete sense. It doesn't matter if it only shaved 10 hours off. She would have the cert quicker and be able to enjoy it before continuing with the PPL. It is hard to keep her from getting burnt out and throwing in the towel. That's why I wish the SPL was promoted more. It would be interesting to see if the completion rate is higher. I would think it should be.

How much quicker, and how exactly would she enjoy her semi-license? A week, maybe two, based on those hours?

 

[Nsconductor]

I've been sort of lurking and following the conversation. Besides someone making a hard statement that getting a SP certificate shows poor judgement and poor decision making skills, this has been interesting to see the banter.

I think it is an individual decision based solely on the mission at hand. I tend to agree that if one has no issues getting a medical, there is definitely more utility in the PP. on the other hand, not everyone needs that utility.

If and when the 3rd class goes away, the dynamic changes slightly, but the thought that it is a waste of time to be flying before that I just don't understand.

As for the class B,C and D requirement, all it takes is a little more training and an endorsement. You would have this with PP but it is not a showstopper.

The SP or PP are both licenses to learn if you want to get right down to it.

As another data point, here is why I am seeking privileges at the sport level in Airplanes. I have talked with a well respected AME who used to frequent this board and we are as sure as we can be that I can get a SI. The SI will cost me in the neighborhood of $10k to get everything cleared. I hold a CP certificate with an instrument rating in helicopters and am about to take my CP ride in Gliders. I have spent more time flying in crappy weather at night than I can count and really have no desire to do that again for any reason. I'm not in that much of a hurry. So, the fact that I could be boring holes in the sky, or flying from Houston to Atlanta now instead of spending a bunch of money and waiting for who knows how long to get the SI makes sense. At least I will be having fun. And, since I have a CP certificate, I don't need the airspace endorsements nor the Vh endorsements.

That is why it works for me, everyone is different.

And, I know where a sweet Ercoupe 415-C that meets LSA requirements is for just about 30K that I could write a check for

 

[Vance Breese]

I have found good value in every dollar I have spent on dual instruction with a CFI.
Last I looked I have 123.2 hours of dual instruction with 23 CFIs and feel it was all money well spent.
Perhaps I have just been fortunate in the quality of the CFIs I have trained with.
Perhaps it is the quality of the student that makes it seem not worthwhile to some.
Maybe I am just a slow learner.

 

[James331]

Whatever works for you, curious about the fuel consumption of your 300 hp aircraft ?

PS. I often fly under Class B, and C airspace at 900 feet with minimal if any deviation on my route. and definitely not interested in flying at night !

Cheers

Well, rule of thumb

Horse power / 2 = PPH at 100%

From flying a bit, given enough hours you will end up needing to fly at night. And you will end up wishing you didn't have to duck airspace.

But if the medical is a issue for you, that's another story

 

[jimson]

I have talked with a well respected AME who used to frequent this board and we are as sure as we can be that I can get a SI. The SI will cost me in the neighborhood of $10k to get everything cleared.

I have the same issue, but no idea how much it might cost me. I have a name from a pilot friend of a doc who could help me but he is in a different city = even more $$$. Hell, my friend works for the airlines so it's not a lot of money to him I suppose, and was probably a work related tax write off.

All I know is even if 100% sure I can get the SI, it likely puts the cost difference between PPL and SPL into the very significant realm.

So if FAA drops medical before I have my SP ticket then I'll consider switching over. If not, then I will have to upgrade and have another check ride some day. If I really think I need that extra utility, I won't mind doing that

Most likely, I will be flying my little plane, while congress is still fighting this out and I am deciding if I need PPL enough to get the medical.

As someone else said, I think it's full of win for me, although I realize it may not be for most people.

 

[petrolero]

I'm no CFI but I don't know why you'd want a rec or sport pilot certificate if you have the option to just a private. They're too restrictive in my opinion. With the PPL you can limit yourself rather than letting the certificate do it. Given that there are so few rec and sport certificates issued, I'd say few pilots see the point in rec and sport compared to PPL.