Different Planes While Training

[HerrGruyere]

I just love flying! I'm not racing anybody to the finish line here. I'll eventually try to make a career out of it, but I'm enjoying the ride to that goal.

 

[EdFred]

You quoted MY response where i was generalizing.

I never once said that it cant be done and that it doesnt affect some peoples experience. All i said is that its all a case by scenerio....i have no idea why you pick apart my comments as if they are directly at you personally.

It still stands that for most of the student population consistency will be helpful, i dont see how you can argue that.

Hell why dont we have them fly with a different instructor and to a different airport every lesson. Why not throw in a learjet, seaplane and the space shuttle into their training there since aparently everything after 20 hours is just checkride prep.

I don't know of any places that do training in a lear jet. Sea plane rating was actually easy, I honestly don't know why it's not just an endorsement.

 

[CJones]

Identical story for me. Once you know the basics -- pull back = go up / pull back too far = go down fast, it's just a matter of learning little nuances between planes.

And keep in mind you are flying these other airplanes with instructors, and doing "supervised" solo's in them. I highly doubt that the people that are saying they fly 3,4,5 types of airplanes before their checkride really have spent the time to go through the systems and numbers in detail on all of them. And if you did, then that lengthened your training.

All my training through solo (~9hrs) was in a 152. After solo, the time with the instructor got somewhat tedious, so we decided to try out other planes. That got me into the 172 and PA28-180 pre-checkride (40.1 hrs). I'm not saying it's typical, and I'm not saying you're not a good pilot if you didn't take the same track I did, but I threw out my personal experience because it *can* happen.

 

[EdFred]

All my training through solo (~9hrs) was in a 152. After solo, the time with the instructor got somewhat tedious, so we decided to try out other planes. That got me into the 172 and PA28-180 pre-checkride (40.1 hrs). I'm not saying it's typical, and I'm not saying you're not a good pilot if you didn't take the same track I did, but I threw out my personal experience because it *can* happen.

Noooooooooooooooo. If you switch planes it will triple your training time!!!!

Z0MG!!!!!!!!!

 

[lr60plt]

Yeah 152s are no spacious...sometimes i look at them and wonder how i spent so much time in one with another person.

Despite what ive said here, i too jumped around in different airplanes. I was lucky in that i worked at the flight school while doing my pvt->comm and then for a few years after so i got to fly a lot of different types on the field, which was fun for sure.

 

[lr60plt]

Noooooooooooooooo. If you switch planes it will triple your training time!!!!

Z0MG!!!!!!!!!

Just out of curiosity, are you still instructing / in the flight school world or are you involved in another type of flying?

 

[EdFred]

Just out of curiosity, are you still instructing / in the flight school world or are you involved in another type of flying?

I was never in the flight school world. I don't advertise my services (under state law if I advertise, I need to register as a business, and all the crap that goes along with that) and all my primary students have been people I've known or brought to me by someone I know. All of my non-instruction flying now is personal/charitable. My instructional flying is mostly reviews/transition.

 

[darrell]

I am the average PPL student.

I started in a Cessna 172F ( T-41A ).

Then I moved to a "high performance" Cessna R172E ( T-41B ).

Then I moved to a Piper Archer II.

Now I'm back in the Cessna 172F.

The 172F and the Archer were not terribly different, at least not nearly as different as switching to the 210HP, constant-prop R172E.

Anyway, I have just a couple more flights before my checkride (barring any unexpected regression on my part) and assuming my flights times are as-expected, I'll take my checkride with 62 hours. I soloed at 24 hours (which I felt was much later than it should have been, for a couple of reasons). All-in-all, I think I "should" have been ready for my checkride at 50 hours, and I'd say that flying the R172E is responsible for about 6 of my "extra" hours.

EDIT: Bright side: The 6 hours I have in the R172E means I only have 4 more hours before the club's insurance will allow me to rent it, so I guess there is that side benefit.

 

[Meanee]

Started in PA28. Soloed in C152. Checkride in 180hp C172S.

Probably added 1-2 hours per plane to get more or less used to it. Stay consistent if you can.

 

[Bob Noel]

I just love flying! I'm not racing anybody to the finish line here. [snip]

BINGO

It's not a race.

Soloing at 8 hours and passing the checkride at 40 hours means exactly Richard.

 

[Henning]

+1 on all this.

If you want to do it for fun, then go ahead...but it will detract from your normal lesson thus lengthening your training.

I don't accept this as a truth, I used almost every aircraft Rainbow Air had outside of the Seneca and 421. I had 40.0 when I took off on my check ride, 41.5 when I passed. Most large schools operate where you fly the whole fleet.

 

[Henning]

BINGO

It's not a race.

Soloing at 8 hours and passing the checkride at 40 hours means exactly Richard.

Maybe for you, for the kid who is training for a career it may mean the difference between being able to finish and not. They gotta get this grap cracked out for minimum$$$.

 

[zaitcev]

I don't accept this as a truth, I used almost every aircraft Rainbow Air had outside of the Seneca and 421. I had 40.0 when I took off on my check ride, 41.5 when I passed. Most large schools operate where you fly the whole fleet.

That's a smooth way to brag, bravo. But didn't you have a freaking gazillion hours in Quicksilver by that time?

 

[lr60plt]

I don't accept this as a truth.

Oh jesus....not this again. Please read all of my other posts. I worked at a flight school for a long time and am still involved in instructing, i definitely have seen what does and does not work for most people. People keep taking everything i say as if im saying it directly to them as an induvidual...for that last time im saying what seems to be case for the majority of new flight school students. If you did it better/differently, then great!

Moral of this thread:

-Training in other aircraft can be fun and can offer you different experiences.
-For the average student, its advisable to focus on one type of airplane.
-For the average student, switching from different airplanes may result in some "lag". Which might have an impact on those financially concerned.
-The idea is to have fun, so do whatever it takes to make that happen.
-Do not join POA if you had over 40.9 hours when you took your ppl checkride.

 

[denverpilot]

I'll avoid the "hours" portion of the topic, but add a thought that came to mind today...

If you had unlimited funds and you paid instructors to go fly a whole bunch of really interesting types before you buckled down and finished your PPL... did you have FUN?

Pretty much that's all that counts, if you're doing it recreationally. Too many "pros" try to convince the recreational folk that the goal is the ticket or to hammer through everything like they had to, in order to survive the process financially.

I'd take an extra 10 hours in a Pitts prior to my PPL in my logbook if I were doing it over again today... if I felt like it. Even if I never got good at landing the darn thing, it'd still be more fun than doing a Part 141 style grind.

At some point you'd get motivated to kick the instructors out of the airplanes... and you'd get 'er done. But let's face it, training aircraft really are boring. They're designed to be.

 

[Henning]

That's a smooth way to brag, bravo. But didn't you have a freaking gazillion hours in Quicksilver by that time?

I had 2 summers use of a Quicksilver, but that would only serve against your point as it means that the learning in one craft carries to the next; very different craft as well as it was straight up weight shift. It did however teach me about energy management in 3 dimensions and that is the same in every aircraft in existence.

Every data point issued that does not agree with your datapoint is not bragging, it's just showing that other people experience things differently and that there is no consistency to life. It's just giving people more data on other approaches to a task.

You believe that flight training is done most efficiently in a single plane. I believe this to be false. I believe it may be faster to get a PP, but that in and of itself is not a guaranty either. If you learn how to fly all in one plane then you learn to fly one plane, you learn how to fly in 10 planes and you learn how to fly and recognize the differences between them and understand how those differences effect how the handle. I also was checked out in the entire fleet for rental when I got mt PP and I never sat one lesson day on the ground because "my plane" or " my instructor" wasn't available, I flew everything with anyone that was available. I only had 2 days a week to head OT and fly, I didn't have time to waste sitting around scared I might waste $100. Time is the only unreplacable thing in life.

 

[Theboys]

 

[HerrGruyere]

I can see how for a student with no prior flight experience may have a difficult time transitioning to a new plane. That coupled with a pressing need to get finished quickly for career advancement or in keeping with a Part 141 syllabus would stifle progress.

On the other hand, I don't think a XC one day in a different plane is gonna bog someone down more than thirty minutes. I feel it's more a matter of "Find the switch/button" than anything.

Granted, everyone is different! I'm just looking for a taste of something else. The seats in that Archer look mighty comfortable and not that I don't love the 172, but I wanna try something different. Kind of like beer: I love pilsners and lagers, but once in a while I gotta have a dark brew. I think it would broaden my experiences with different aircraft and give me an idea of how a low winged plane handles versus a high winged plane.

 

[Henning]

Primacy does not only relate to what we learn, but the learning process as well. While it may add difficulty and a small expense to add the experience of learning to switch between planes during the primacy period, that small extra expense in the beginning pays off later in spades in ability to do check outs quickly in situations where hourly costs have a much higher differentials, could also mean the difference in getting that job or not.

What I find is that people who have trouble moving from plane to plane didn't ever learn how to 'fly'; they learned how to follow the directions strictly enough to be safe.

 

[Jaybird180]

I don't accept this as a truth, I used almost every aircraft Rainbow Air had outside of the Seneca and 421. I had 40.0 when I took off on my check ride, 41.5 when I passed. Most large schools operate where you fly the whole fleet.

The whole fleet of similar airframes

That's a smooth way to brag, bravo. But didn't you have a freaking gazillion hours in Quicksilver by that time?

I think the insinuation is that you had more than 40.0 because you had something that most other students don't and that is practical experience. Basically, you spiked the results of our informal study.

 

[zaitcev]

I think the insinuation is that you had more than 40.0 because you had something that most other students don't and that is practical experience. Basically, you spiked the results of our informal study.

Henning may be a naturally gifted pilot, too. Kind of tough to split that hair postfactum now.

BTW, this sort of thing happens. I knew a student who whooshed through the school while I was working on my Private. He flew his parents' 172 somewhere in Texas since he was 14. In his early 30s he decided to go legal and he was flying a 172 like wearing a glove, only needed to learn the airspace and weather, 40 logged hours to checkride.

 

[Bob Noel]

Henning may be a naturally gifted pilot, too. Kind of tough to split that hair postfactum now.

BTW, this sort of thing happens. I knew a student who whooshed through the school while I was working on my Private. He flew his parents' 172 somewhere in Texas since he was 14. In his early 30s he decided to go legal and he was flying a 172 like wearing a glove, only needed to learn the airspace and weather, 40 logged hours to checkride.

another way to minimize the time required for an average pilot:

Fly relatively short lessons, 45 minutes or so
Fly two to three times a week, sometimes more (I had one week where I flew 5 times)
Also useful to have a practice area close by, and to have a relatively quiet field.

After passing the written and getting my medical, my first lesson was 25 April back in <mumble>, I passed the checkride 10 October the same year.

 

[CJones]

Fly two to three times a week, sometimes more (I had one week where I flew 5 times)
Also useful to have a practice area close by, and to have a relatively quiet field.

That is a (?the?) major key to success. At the time of my PP training, I was working a decent paying full-time internship and every penny made went to pay for flying. I was able to fly 3 times/week (if not more a few times) which helped increase retention between lessons. I also had a bit of luck with very few flights being cancelled due to crummy weather. On top of that, the practice area was ~10 minutes (@152 speeds) south of the field.

It was the 'perfect storm' for a quick progression through checkride and, to bring it back to the OP, allowed me to change planes throughout training without adding overall training time.

 

[Everskyward]

I'd take an extra 10 hours in a Pitts prior to my PPL in my logbook if I were doing it over again today... if I felt like it. Even if I never got good at landing the darn thing, it'd still be more fun than doing a Part 141 style grind.

I agree with you. I'm probably in the minority that I was more interested in the process of training than I was inspired to finish. I ended up doing many thing that would not be on any private pilot syllabus although I basically only used one type of airplane (Cessna 150). My CFI pretty much had to push me to take both the written and the practical test. I took it at 70 hours which isn't a huge amount but probably above average for back then. I went through all my other ratings pretty slowly too, spread out by years. It was only after I got a job where training was paid for by my employer that I learned the quick method, and that was a major culture shock.

 

[Henning]

I think the insinuation is that you had more than 40.0 because you had something that most other students don't and that is practical experience. Basically, you spiked the results of our informal study.

People can believe that to make themselves feel better if they have to, I don't care, but I'm tired of the insinuation that it is some miraculous achievement to get a PPL in 40, where/when I learned it was standard.

If you don't make it in 40 it means one thing and one thing alone to you of any importance; you need to be extra carefully and study harder going forward than minimum standard because you aren't quite that good. If you are unable to accept the realities of your own abilities and their limitations, well, you'll never be safe in an airplane. Airplanes require an utmost honesty with yourself.

 

[Everskyward]

People can believe that to make themselves feel better if they have to, I don't care, but I'm tired of the insinuation that it is some miraculous achievement to get a PPL in 40, where/when I learned it was standard.

Why do you think it matters? For many people it isn't a competition, even though others would like to make it one.

 

[DaleB]

If you don't make it in 40 it means one thing and one thing alone to you of any importance; you need to be extra carefully and study harder going forward than minimum standard because you aren't quite that good. If you are unable to accept the realities of your own abilities and their limitations, well, you'll never be safe in an airplane. Airplanes require an utmost honesty with yourself.

There you have it -- if you take more than 40.0 to pass your checkride, you'll never be quite as good a pilot as Henning, no matter how hard you try. You're just not that smart. Don't feel badly, though; no one is as good as Henning. No one ever could be; he's the Chuck Norris of aviation. Just accept it and move on.

I spent 6 or 7 extra hours with a CFI who I later found out had never signed off a student to solo before and was apparently unsure of how and when to do so. Had I known at the time I was his first student I'd have done things differently, but I didn't -- it was a new flight school, new FBO, new airport. Too soon old, too late smart. There is a huge degree of variation in learning styles, instructor quality, instructor standards, DPE standards and so on. If you have a quick learning student (or one who has flown before in ultralights), a good and experienced instructor who teaches well and doesn't insist on absolute perfection before solo signoff, favorable conditions and everything goes well, sure, you can do it in 40 hours. Throw a lousy instructor, or crap weather, or someone who starts out with zero familiarity with airplanes into the mix, and you're probably going to exceed that.

But you'll still never be as good a pilot, or as smart, or as good looking as Henning.

 

[lr60plt]

If you don't make it in 40 it means one thing and one thing alone to you of any importance; you need to be extra carefully and study harder going forward than minimum standard because you aren't quite that good.

Wow....

 

[EdFred]

There you have it -- if you take more than 40.0 to pass your checkride, you'll never be quite as good a pilot as Henning, no matter how hard you try. You're just not that smart. Don't feel badly, though; no one is as good as Henning. No one ever could be; he's the Chuck Norris of aviation. Just accept it and move on.

I spent 6 or 7 extra hours with a CFI who I later found out had never signed off a student to solo before and was apparently unsure of how and when to do so. Had I known at the time I was his first student I'd have done things differently, but I didn't -- it was a new flight school, new FBO, new airport. Too soon old, too late smart. There is a huge degree of variation in learning styles, instructor quality, instructor standards, DPE standards and so on. If you have a quick learning student (or one who has flown before in ultralights), a good and experienced instructor who teaches well and doesn't insist on absolute perfection before solo signoff, favorable conditions and everything goes well, sure, you can do it in 40 hours. Throw a lousy instructor, or crap weather, or someone who starts out with zero familiarity with airplanes into the mix, and you're probably going to exceed that.

But you'll still never be as good a pilot, or as smart, or as good looking as Henning.

I was my instructors first student as well. He didn't solo me right away. He said he I could have solo'd at 5 hours, but I had to wait until I had as much time as he did when he solo'd - around 13. I still think I'm the only student he signed off. He was a missionary pilot in Central America and was back for the summer/fall and instructed me and did A&P work during that time. Sounds like you just had a bad instructor. Mine was great, and we went beyond just the PTS.

 

[DaleB]

Sounds like you just had a bad instructor.

I wouldn't say he's a bad instructor -- I'd say he's very inexperienced and needs some development. I didn't realize just how green he was and gave him more credit than I should have -- had I known, I'd have had a chat with the head instructor a lot sooner. I expected an hour or two to show him what I had learned with my previous flight school. I was even OK with the next hour or so getting used to a new airport, narrower runway, etc. But in retrospect, I should not have gone along with the next two weeks of non-stop pattern work.

 

[EdFred]

I wouldn't say he's a bad instructor -- I'd say he's very inexperienced and needs some development. I didn't realize just how green he was and gave him more credit than I should have -- had I known, I'd have had a chat with the head instructor a lot sooner. I expected an hour or two to show him what I had learned with my previous flight school. I was even OK with the next hour or so getting used to a new airport, narrower runway, etc. But in retrospect, I should not have gone along with the next two weeks of non-stop pattern work.

The issue is, someone always has to be the first student. I've seen a lot of people say they would never fly with a new CFI, but if everyone said that we'd run out of available CFIs. Some people just aren't good teachers, regardless of experience.

 

[DaleB]

The issue is, someone always has to be the first student. I've seen a lot of people say they would never fly with a new CFI, but if everyone said that we'd run out of available CFIs.

True. I figure his break-in period just cost me about one extra AMU and a couple of weeks. Right now he's gone competing with his college flying team; yesterday I flew with a club member who is also a pretty active CFI (and flies for a living). I'll most likely finish up with him, IF he's available enough of the time. I need to finish up instrument time, night flying, and X/C.

 

[eMKay]

I did it, didn't have a choice, first plane had to get worked on. Cost a few extra hours of training, Avoid it if you can. Now if you are post solo, and toward the end of your training it won't be a big deal, first time in the Archer would be just like a normal checkout I would think.

 

[Henning]

Why do you think it matters? For many people it isn't a competition, even though others would like to make it one.

I don't think it matters, I'm not the one that makes an issue o it. To me it's a datapoint.

 

[Henning]

There you have it -- if you take more than 40.0 to pass your checkride, you'll never be quite as good a pilot as Henning, no matter how hard you try. You're just not that smart. Don't feel badly, though; no one is as good as Henning. No one ever could be; he's the Chuck Norris of aviation. Just accept it and move on.

I spent 6 or 7 extra hours with a CFI who I later found out had never signed off a student to solo before and was apparently unsure of how and when to do so. Had I known at the time I was his first student I'd have done things differently, but I didn't -- it was a new flight school, new FBO, new airport. Too soon old, too late smart. There is a huge degree of variation in learning styles, instructor quality, instructor standards, DPE standards and so on. If you have a quick learning student (or one who has flown before in ultralights), a good and experienced instructor who teaches well and doesn't insist on absolute perfection before solo signoff, favorable conditions and everything goes well, sure, you can do it in 40 hours. Throw a lousy instructor, or crap weather, or someone who starts out with zero familiarity with airplanes into the mix, and you're probably going to exceed that.

But you'll still never be as good a pilot, or as smart, or as good looking as Henning.

This has nothing to do with me, this has to do with the standards set forth by the FAA. If you do not make those numbers, you need to understand you need to work harder than average to be safe. If you can't accept that logic without getting defensive and projecting on others, that's a separate issue.

 

[RotorAndWing]

This has nothing to do with me, this has to do with the standards set forth by the FAA. If you do not make those numbers, you need to understand you need to work harder than average to be safe.

Total BS.

Using your logic could it be safe to assume that if someone flunked a rating, such as a CFI ride they are considered "unsafe"?


Falsus in uno, Falsus in omnibus.

 

[ChrisK]

Bah. I'm at 52 hours and haven't even taken my written. I'm a busy guy, but I like flying a couple times a week.

I don't think that makes me terribly unsafe.

 

[Everskyward]

I don't think it matters, I'm not the one that makes an issue o it. To me it's a datapoint.

What are you talking about? You're the one who's making it an issue. You posted this...

If you don't make it in 40 it means one thing and one thing alone to you of any importance; you need to be extra carefully and study harder going forward than minimum standard because you aren't quite that good. If you are unable to accept the realities of your own abilities and their limitations, well, you'll never be safe in an airplane. Airplanes require an utmost honesty with yourself.

This has nothing to do with me, this has to do with the standards set forth by the FAA. If you do not make those numbers, you need to understand you need to work harder than average to be safe. If you can't accept that logic without getting defensive and projecting on others, that's a separate issue.

 

[wabower]

Was that wind chimes, or did I just hear the gotcha bell ring?

Total BS.

Using your logic could it be safe to assume that if someone flunked a rating, such as a CFI ride they are considered "unsafe"?


Falsus in uno, Falsus in omnibus.

 

[FlySince9]

when I learned it was standard.

It was never a "Standard" it was (and is) a Minimum based on a Curriculum.

Try doing it in Northern NY where the weather changes can be extreme, season to season. I scored 100% on my written (first time out) and it took me 51 hours to get the PPL. Spent many hours local because weather did not cooperate for solo XC time. So was I incompetent?