In a perfect world I agree. But like mandatory spin training IMO it's just not practical to implement safely and cost effectively. Too few qualified airplanes and instructors. I credit the OP for being interested and doing it. And for the naysayers, do it while you have the time, money, and inspiration. You never know. The OP will for sure not end up like so many pilots who are scared of stalls, spins, "steep" bank angles, and who skid base to final turns, and just fearfully operate in a very narrow performance zone because of their limited experience and fear the unknown.
I need some advice...
- Thread starter Mavalathon
- Start date
In a perfect world I agree. But like mandatory spin training IMO it's just not practical to implement safely and cost effectively. Too few qualified airplanes and instructors. I credit the OP for being interested and doing it. And for the naysayers, do it while you have the time, money, and inspiration. You never know. The OP will for sure not end up like so many pilots who are scared of stalls, spins, "steep" bank angles, and who skid base to final turns, and just fearfully operate in a very narrow performance zone because of their limited experience and fear the unknown.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
My neighbor's son is a relatively new F 18 pilot for the Navy. He was top of his class in high school, needed a congressman's recommendation to get into the academy. Finished the academy at or near the top of his class. Got into flight training, passed all the physical requirements, finished his flight training in the top two of that class. Now he flies those magnificent machines. But my point is he went through a lot to get there, is super intelligent and in top physical and mental shape. They absolutely weed out weaker candidates. Personally, I don't think flight schools should work to this level. Safe and competent is the standard they should use.
Roscoe T, you continue to ignore the context of the original post, which either intentionally or unintentionally implied that the OP was flying only once every 4 to 5 weeks due to financial constraints. She is talking about stuff that will not help her attain her goal of becoming private pilot. Someone, who, at least from the context of the OP before it was edited, had limited resources. Telling her to forget that stuff until after was good advice for her situation.
Furthermore, implying that pilots who did not get spin training and aerobatic training before their ppl are lacking in skills is utter BS. A competent pilot candidate will not be afraid of stalls, does not skid through turns or fear the unknown. I actually believe it to be the opposite. There are people doing their training in high performance GA airplanes where it is more difficult for a student to explore edges of the envelope. In the case of the SR22, recovery from a spin is pull the chute immediately. That is in the back of the instructor's head when instructing stalls. Things like managing a $60,000 engine get in the way of doing some maneuvers. Coming over the fence at 80 knots instead of 55 knots give a lot less time learn the flare, resulting in more repetitions required. There are so many unnecessary impediments. If you have the money and want to do it that way, have at it.
I stand by my advice to her. Get your private pilot certificate first, tailwheel or training wheel up front, doesn't really matter. But focus on the PP, after you get the certificate, do an aerobatic training course right away.
We lose too many candidates who get discouraged at the time and investment required to get the pp certificate. Giving them advice to streamline that process is not 'naysaying'.
Last edited:
Not ignoring anything. I just happen to actually have a lot of perspective on aerobatic training and it just doesn't take very long. You can also choose how far you want to take it. Slipping in some acro time here and there isn't going to make any difference, which is what YOU are ignoring.
Too much mother hen patrolling going on here. Nobody NEEDS a PPL. It's all for fun and experience. I'd bet if the OP was attempting the most economical and fast track to a flying job, she'd be taking a different route.
I did not say nor mean to imply that it should be done before the PPL. But it's not BS to say that this training addresses the issues I described.
Last edited:
Pinecone
En-Route
Pinecone
En-Route
Sorry, but I disagree. Most pilots DO lack a lot of flying skills. Just like most drivers lack a lot of driving skills.
For 99.9% of flying or driving, that is not a big deal. But at times it is a big deal.
A friend of mine is alive because of the skills I taught him that included basic aerobatics. I am alive due to being taught those same skills not long after my PPL.
I also teach high performance driving at a local track. And see similar things.
For 99.9% of flying or driving, that is not a big deal. But at times it is a big deal.
A friend of mine is alive because of the skills I taught him that included basic aerobatics. I am alive due to being taught those same skills not long after my PPL.
I also teach high performance driving at a local track. And see similar things.
Ed Haywood
En-Route
Perfectly put.
A couple hours of acro during PPL is a great thing. Will make you a much better pilot in so many ways. But there are diminishing returns, and you run the risk of being distracted from the training tasks needed to complete your ticket. Now that the OP has scratched that itch, IMO better to focus on PPL, get that in the bag, then do the fun stuff.
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2016
- Messages
- 4,903
- Display Name
Display name:
Ari
You have too many goals and not enough resources. That’s true of most humans. You just need to prioritize how you allocate the resources to accomplish the goals.
Goal 1: Get your PPL. Having the certificate will free up a lot of your resources (time, mind, and money) for your other goals.
Goal 2: Buy a tail wheel airplane, probably one that is capable of Sportsman or maybe Intermediate aerobatics. You can work on this while you’re training and maybe even take your PPL check ride in your very own airplane. But assuming your primary training is in a more common modern trainer like a 172 or PA-28, you should stick with that if for no other reason than that you will have an easier time getting an examiner to do the check ride in a side-by-side plane than a tandem seating plane.
Goal 3: Learn how to fly aerobatics. Until you have your PPL and plane, this will take resources away from those two goals. I would not dedicate any resources here until you accomplish at least the PPL. This goal will be much easier to accomplish with the PPL and your own plane. You can learn the basics with an instructor in a rental, but you will struggle to get much practice compared with flying your own plane solo.
Goal 1: Get your PPL. Having the certificate will free up a lot of your resources (time, mind, and money) for your other goals.
Goal 2: Buy a tail wheel airplane, probably one that is capable of Sportsman or maybe Intermediate aerobatics. You can work on this while you’re training and maybe even take your PPL check ride in your very own airplane. But assuming your primary training is in a more common modern trainer like a 172 or PA-28, you should stick with that if for no other reason than that you will have an easier time getting an examiner to do the check ride in a side-by-side plane than a tandem seating plane.
Goal 3: Learn how to fly aerobatics. Until you have your PPL and plane, this will take resources away from those two goals. I would not dedicate any resources here until you accomplish at least the PPL. This goal will be much easier to accomplish with the PPL and your own plane. You can learn the basics with an instructor in a rental, but you will struggle to get much practice compared with flying your own plane solo.
YakDrvr
Pre-Flight
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2022
- Messages
- 62
- Display Name
Display name:
YakDrvr
I agree on your prioritization of the goals. Additional food for thought on tandem seat aircraft, if the OP also desires to eventually add an instrument rating, is that very few are setup to allow an instructor to provide instruction from the back seat due to a lack of instrumentation in the back. That said, I personally think there are significant advantages to learning in a tandem seat aircraft since the student will feel more truly “solo” due to the lack of nonverbal feedback from their instructor. The difficulty in finding DPEs who will administer a checkride in a tandem or experimental aircraft is real, but can be overcome.
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2016
- Messages
- 4,903
- Display Name
Display name:
Ari
Well, it's the one where the instructor can't comfortably sit next to the student. In a J-3 Cub, Great Lakes Sport Trainer, and probably some other models, the instructor normally sits in front of the student.
Interesting. The one time I flew a Cub, I think the instructor sat behind me.Well, it's the one where the instructor can't comfortably sit next to the student. In a J-3 Cub, Great Lakes Sport Trainer, and probably some other models, the instructor normally sits in front of the student.
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2016
- Messages
- 4,903
- Display Name
Display name:
Ari
Super Cubs and possibly some other models would have the PIC in front. The J-3 has a placard to solo from the rear seat only. I think it’s due to W&B when the plane is on floats. It works out fine to solo in the front seat other than the fact that no sane person would voluntarily get into the front seat of a J-3 if the back is available.
dbahn
Pattern Altitude
I think even on land with full fuel in the forward tank the CG is too far forward with a solo pilot in the front seat. I've never done the calculation but I suppose with partial fuel and a light pilot it might not matter.
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2016
- Messages
- 4,903
- Display Name
Display name:
Ari
I think that may vary from plane to plane. It's been a long time since I ran the numbers, though. I've flown from the front a few times to accommodate someone in the back and it's just not where I would choose to sit.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2021
- Messages
- 3,888
- Display Name
Display name:
Albany Tom
I've had the privilege of flying about 5 different cubs, and all but two flew a little bit different from each other. At least one didn't have a placard for only solo from back, and I don't know why. Engine size? They ranged from 65 to 85HP, and I think all continentals. I don't know why anyone would choose to fly from the front seat, though, unless they were instructing.
dbahn
Pattern Altitude
If the Cub is fitted with wing tanks the W&B calculations change significantly, including being able to fly solo from the front seat.
I've got a very stock Cub with an A-65 engine and I prefer flying from the rear seat anyway, so I don't generally give it much thought.
I've got a very stock Cub with an A-65 engine and I prefer flying from the rear seat anyway, so I don't generally give it much thought.
Pinecone
En-Route
J-5 Cub and later are front seat solo.
dbahn
Pattern Altitude
Don't all of those carry fuel in the wings?
Lindberg
Final Approach
Yep. Most of my training has been in various tandem aircraft, and for primary training, the student generally sits in the seat that you solo from. That's either the front or the back depending on the aircraft type. That's also generally the seat that has the most instruments. Training for commercial and CFI, that's generally reversed. Of course YMMV.Well, it's the one where the instructor can't comfortably sit next to the student. In a J-3 Cub, Great Lakes Sport Trainer, and probably some other models, the instructor normally sits in front of the student.
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2016
- Messages
- 4,903
- Display Name
Display name:
Ari
The J-3 is an exception to the “most instruments” part of the equation. It’s a great trainer because there aren’t many instruments to distract from flying and the student can’t see most of them around the instructor’s head, anyhow.