Pinecone
En-Route
Different world.
You had lesson plans and a syllabus that was developed for you. Then you were taught those lesson plans.
Military flying doesn't free form like civilian does.
Working on CFI - Advice?
- Thread starter RyanB
- Start date
You had lesson plans and a syllabus that was developed for you. Then you were taught those lesson plans.
Military flying doesn't free form like civilian does.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
What bunk. The us military is considered the best pilot training in the world. Each IP is highly trained.
Every training sortie you flew had an IP who strictly followed the training tasks provided to him and there were standards to progress in the program that you were required to meet. If the IP didn’t follow those plans, they would be relieved of duty.
Pinecone
En-Route
His point was not if they used them, but if at any point they actually wrote one.
And the answer is, for most instructors, no, they did not. Only if the worked in the training command and were revising the training program.
But their training is much more structured.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
The reason they don’t have to write them is because they never will have need to use them vs the civilian world where a CFI cannot anticipate the requirements of every lesson and will need to write and use their own lesson plans.
If they are an independent CFI, they also need to know how to write a syllabus.
Tools
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2020
- Messages
- 1,944
- Display Name
Display name:
Tools
Even guys in the administrative offices didn’t write syllabus, that was left to professional syllabus writers. We may help validate them at some point…
As an independent CFI myself I find it very easy to find syllabi to use rather than develop my own. My efforts are better spent analyzing my student than reinventing the wheel.
As a guy who set up a 141 from scratch, I found it a better use of my time to use predeveloped materials for my maneuver guide, syllabus, TCO and SOP.
I still contend it is not necessary to develop a plan from scratch to be a really good instructor. Unless you consider tailoring making one from scratch.
As an independent CFI myself I find it very easy to find syllabi to use rather than develop my own. My efforts are better spent analyzing my student than reinventing the wheel.
As a guy who set up a 141 from scratch, I found it a better use of my time to use predeveloped materials for my maneuver guide, syllabus, TCO and SOP.
I still contend it is not necessary to develop a plan from scratch to be a really good instructor. Unless you consider tailoring making one from scratch.
My complex/HP transition, flight review, IPC, and avionics transition training lesson plans were all written from scratch. (They also don’t look like the formal FAA ones because they are meant for use by me and no one else). I haven’t seen too many out there to cover all the variations and levels of prior pilot experience.
Not everything is for initial certificate/rating certification.
RussR
En-Route
@Tools, this is exactly my point. You set up a 141 school, and using a Jepp/etc. syllabus makes sense there. But here's a real world example of mine from a few years ago.
Former F-15 pilot (retired 20 years ago) buying into a Cessna 340 partnership. Has not flown much GA. Has not flown much pistons. Has not flown a glass panel. Has not flown GPS approaches. I think he said the F-15 didn't even have ILS at the time, it was all TACAN and PAR in his flying. I don't think he'd ever flown a turbocharged engine. He's Commercial Multi rated, of course, so we're not training for a checkride. But he does need a good thorough checkout over several flights.
You won't find a ready-made syllabus or lesson plans for something like that. How are you going to structure the training? What are you going to focus on first? How will you know he's ready for the next step? Those are things that a CFI really needs to think through, and come up with a plan.
There is no question you need a plan for someone like that. But, I think there's a distinction between having a well thought out plan and having a formal FAA lesson plan like you see in the Instructor's Handbook. I don't think anyone is advocating not having a plan of action for a
When I think of a FAA lesson plan, this is what I think of, which is complete overkill IMO. I don't think you need to write a complete set of these plans for a CFI checkride either.
Last edited:
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
Ok, what syllabus are you using for a 65 year old instrument rated private pilot who has been inactive for 10 years?
Tools
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2020
- Messages
- 1,944
- Display Name
Display name:
Tools
That would be Bob. Only he’s in his 80s and was inactive for 48 years.
Didn’t write a syllabus, but somehow got him soloed successfully. He was happy, I was happy, we’ve become the very best of friends.
Wasn’t real fond of a couple other instructors… so wasn’t a slam dunk thing. So besides me, there’s at least one other person on this planet that doesn’t think it’s NECESSARY to write a syllabus from scratch for every possible situation, and STILL be a decent instructor.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
The average Part 141 instructor applicant today is 21 years old, about 300 hours total time, no real life flying ot life experience and no teaching experience. They were taught by a 23 year old CFI with not much more experience than they have.
They need the exercise of preparing lesson plans for all the private and commercial maneuvers.
Gilbert Buettner
Line Up and Wait
One day I was talking to my T-37 IP and told him maybe I would like to become an instructor. He said, "Are you crazy?! Every day I let you guys take me up there and try to kill me! My job is to let it go as far as possible before I save our asses."
...and yet the FAA has determined they are fit to instruct.
You're describing the business model at major universities. They offer courses taught by 23 year olds and younger with no teaching or life experience. I can almost guarantee anyone who has taken freshman calculus, chemistry, or physics had a teaching assistant who has had absolutely no training whatsoever. I doubt the professors lecturing have had any instructional training either.
That makes CFIs light years ahead.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
When I think of FAA lesson plans, that would be at least 3 separate ones.
Except the “don’t need” comments in this thread have been referring to “lesson plans,” and “knowing how to write a lesson plan,” not, “fitting exactly into the FAA‘s template for lesson plans.”
So, if y’all want to change those comments, we can probably all agree.
OTOH, sorry, but if you are not thinking in terms of objectives, content, and standards for a lesson, you are just riding along.
Pinecone
En-Route
I disagree that they don't use them.
No, they do not check them every time after some experience, but each lesson has a plan of what is taught and how it is taught.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2013
- Messages
- 6,383
- Display Name
Display name:
3G
I’ll just add my two cents on the .mil IP/ lesson plans because I think a lot of stuff has been missed.
What a primary CFI and a primary .mil IP have in common is producing a student capable of passing an FAA oral and practical exam. How each of them get there students there is largely formulaic, given the existence of the PTS and ACS for however long that regime has been around. Likely 3/4s of the history of manned flight.
There’s literally nothing new under the sun in that arena.
What the independent, non-primary CFI and the IPs in the line squadrons have in common is the variety of things they have to do. Everything from executing a syllabus-driven upgrade to bringing somebody back to proficient after a period of time out of the cockpit, to remedial instruction for a busted check ride or other observed deficiency.
That variety means either has to have the skills to identify the gaps that need to be closed, designing a plan to do that, and then execute it. How each gets there and the level of corporate support available to each is a matter of structure, not ability. But when it comes to executing the plan, both should be designing a mission profile that when executed enables the underlying objectives to be accomplished and I’d hazard the line squadron .mil IP is as proficient, if not more so in doing that than the average FAA CFI.
What a primary CFI and a primary .mil IP have in common is producing a student capable of passing an FAA oral and practical exam. How each of them get there students there is largely formulaic, given the existence of the PTS and ACS for however long that regime has been around. Likely 3/4s of the history of manned flight.
There’s literally nothing new under the sun in that arena.
What the independent, non-primary CFI and the IPs in the line squadrons have in common is the variety of things they have to do. Everything from executing a syllabus-driven upgrade to bringing somebody back to proficient after a period of time out of the cockpit, to remedial instruction for a busted check ride or other observed deficiency.
That variety means either has to have the skills to identify the gaps that need to be closed, designing a plan to do that, and then execute it. How each gets there and the level of corporate support available to each is a matter of structure, not ability. But when it comes to executing the plan, both should be designing a mission profile that when executed enables the underlying objectives to be accomplished and I’d hazard the line squadron .mil IP is as proficient, if not more so in doing that than the average FAA CFI.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
I suppose the bottom line is the FAA provides guidance the CFI applicant write their own lesson plans. Like many topics published by the FAA, you are not required to follow their guidance. If you aren’t going to follow their guidance on becoming arguably the most influential certificate the FAA issues, what other guidance are you willing to discard because it is difficult?
When a CFI applicant asks me to work with them for the CFI, I advise them I require completion of a notebook. The notebook includes complete lesson plans for all the private, commercial tasks, flight review and ground training tasks such as aerodynamics, W&B, XC planning. Altimetry, aircraft performance and VORs. I also require them to compile a library of handbooks, ACs and other study materials. I require the applicant to develop a private pilot syllabus from their lesson plans. They will probably never use the syllabus, but it makes the applicant consider the order and the building blocks of the process.
This is the tried and true old school way of producing high quality instructors because it forces the applicant to get to the correlation level of learning. It is also how ALL the instructors I respect today did it. The rest are just CFI certificate holders with rather narrow knowledge and not very good instructors IMO.
If you want to be a professional, train like one and take the high road. Last post in this thread for me,
When a CFI applicant asks me to work with them for the CFI, I advise them I require completion of a notebook. The notebook includes complete lesson plans for all the private, commercial tasks, flight review and ground training tasks such as aerodynamics, W&B, XC planning. Altimetry, aircraft performance and VORs. I also require them to compile a library of handbooks, ACs and other study materials. I require the applicant to develop a private pilot syllabus from their lesson plans. They will probably never use the syllabus, but it makes the applicant consider the order and the building blocks of the process.
This is the tried and true old school way of producing high quality instructors because it forces the applicant to get to the correlation level of learning. It is also how ALL the instructors I respect today did it. The rest are just CFI certificate holders with rather narrow knowledge and not very good instructors IMO.
If you want to be a professional, train like one and take the high road. Last post in this thread for me,
Last edited:
So I’m around a month out from my check ride and I’m starting the flying portion. Flying from the right seat isn’t totally foreign to me, but I wouldn’t say I do it regularly. Anyway, the first hour flight tonight was doing maneuvers. Biggest thing was simply coordination. Steep turns felt weird, albeit were mostly within standard, stalls also felt a little weird, mainly from a coordination standpoint. Any tips? How long did it take y’all to feel fully comfortable flying from the right seat and be check ride ready?
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,881
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
I was not *completely* comfortable until after the checkride, and instructing for a few weeks.
I also never TRULY mastered the crosswind landing technique until I was instructing.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,495
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
Make sure you keep the nerves under control on your first flight with a prospective student. If you inadvertently make left traffic on the right traffic runway they will notice and likely not pick you to be their instructor. At least that’s what I’ve heard.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,153
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
To get comfortable enough, I don't remember a specific number of flights or hours, as I got a right seat "checkout" awhile before I actually started working on my CFI. But it was probably several.
For awhile after, on landing it would occasionally feel like there was a slight crosswind when there wasn't one. I was 95% there by the time I took the CFI checkride, but like Kritchlow, I wasn't >= 100% as proficient in the right seat as the left until after it.
As for tips, think like a student, or how you would want your student to think. Straight and level, compare the wingtips. Left and right steep turns look different from each other, why? How does sitting in the left vs. right seat affect that? Resist the urge to hold the nose up with rudder in a steep turn. Assuming proper rigging, a left steep turn typically requires a tiny amount of left rudder throughout the entire turn to counteract P-factor and torque. A right turn doesn't require any (except roll in and roll out, obviously).
farangutan
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- May 14, 2019
- Messages
- 394
- Display Name
Display name:
farangutan
If you can fly twice a week for 2-3 weeks, flying maneuvers and landings, you will feel at least 90% as good as you are flying from the left seat. I felt safe after a couple flights, not super confident. And maybe approaching equal proficiency at about 20 hours. I'm making numbers up. But the idea is that you get most of the skills quick and then you polish your skills until you feel that flying from either seat is indistinguishable to anyone but yourself.
Larry in TN
En-Route
A strange thing happens when you start spending a number of hours per week sitting the right seat, watching students mess up maneuvers, while doing very little flying yourself. All of a sudden, you can fly better than you ever have before. Something about watching all the mistakes improves your own flying.
A CFI does not have to fly maneuvers perfectly. A CFI needs to be able to identify the mistakes that are producing the undesired results and know how to correct them.
For example, when demonstrating a steep turn, it is not ideal for you to fly a perfect steep turn. If the nose drops you can point that out to the student then show them how the altitude starts to decrease. Bring their attention back to the horizon and show them how you're raising the nose, then back to the altimeter to show how the descent has stopped, then to the horizon to show an increase in pitch to start a climb, then to the airspeed to show it decreasing, then to the power, etc., etc. Neither the student, nor the examiner, knows if your demonstration was intentional or accidental. In either case, it is more useful to the student than watching you fly a perfect steep turn.
Use that technique whenever demonstrating. Make the mistakes they are making, show them the mistake, show the result, then show the correction. They'll be able to see and understand it better with you demonstrating because they aren't overwhelmed from trying to fly the maneuver.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
Maybe not perfectly, but certainly within the ACS standards for the maneuver being demonstrated. Kinda hard to enforce your student remaining inside the tolerances when you can’t
Tools
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2020
- Messages
- 1,944
- Display Name
Display name:
Tools
Well, ultimately that isn’t true! While I think you SHOULD be able to, and honestly just doing what an instructor does you really CANT not do them to standards… the fact remains you don’t even have to know how to fly to teach someone to do it. Case in point is simulators. Instructor sits in a different room!!
Ima not sure many NBA coaches I see on the bench can do ANYTHING I see on the court.
So really, ya just GOTTA be able to save your own life is all.
Ima not sure many NBA coaches I see on the bench can do ANYTHING I see on the court.
So really, ya just GOTTA be able to save your own life is all.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
LOL.
Look John, I realize I can’t show you how to do a Lazy 8, but let me tell you how it’s done.
You will have to explain how to log instruction in a simulator from someone who doesn’t know how to fly in the civilian world.
farangutan
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- May 14, 2019
- Messages
- 394
- Display Name
Display name:
farangutan
A former flight safety instructor told me that technically the minimum requirement is ground instructor certificate to teach in the sims. But good luck getting hired without any relevant flight experience.
Knocked out the oral this morning. 6hrs in total. I was too tired to fly, so I discontinued for today. Overall, not terrible, just long given all of the material to cover. Will post a write up shortly.