Part 61 - Number of CFI's

[Gary Ward]

While I training the flight school got 's it's 141 accreditation. They went from ASA stuff to Gleam. I didn't have buy gleam and stayed with ASA for my primary training.
I had about 6 instructors and the first 5 moved to the airlines.
There was about 3 stage checks when I flew with the chief flight instructor which was a good thing because I learned someone from every instructor I flew with.
The last instructor was 69 years old with lot's of hours not looking to go to the airlines. He is the reason I made it through. I was very lucky.

 

[ateamer]

no, 141 schools are supposed to be regimented so that you hit goals. Teachers should get you to those goals. If they cannot then the school has failed. If the school has so many different ways of instruction then how can they offer a consistent product?

Not everyone is cut out to be a pilot. There are students who the best, most experienced, skilled instructors cannot make competent, safe pilots out of. Common sense cannot be taught; study habits are 100% on the student. And some people just will never have the hand-eye coordination or ability to think while maneuvering, and employ what they learned last week. We as a community and industry need to stop pretending that everybody can be a pilot.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

We as a community and industry need to stop pretending that everybody can be a pilot.

I agree with you. I have had to "fire" some student pilots. Fortunately, not very often.

As a student pilot in the U.S. Air Force, the instructors liked to say, "With enough bananas, we can teach a monkey to fly." I guess that was supposed to build our confidence. The failure rate was somewhere around 33%.

 

[ateamer]

I agree with you. I have had to "fire" some student pilots. Fortunately, not very often.

As a student pilot in the U.S. Air Force, the instructors liked to say, "With enough bananas, we can teach a monkey to fly." I guess that was supposed to build our confidence. The failure rate was somewhere around 33%.

And that failure rate was from people who were already vetted four times - high school diploma, four-year degree, OCS/ROTC/Academy, flight school selection. The only vetting we have is for a prospective student’s ability to pay. With the existing selection process, the civilian flight training washout rate should be quite high.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

With the existing selection process, the civilian flight training washout rate should be quite high.

I suspect it is somewhere around 75-80%.

 

[pfarber]

the most common reason cited why people stop PPL training is lack of funds. The 40 hours requirement is bare bones get everything right the first time.

While I am sure there are some good or even great CFIs out there they are the rare exception. Show me a survey where 80%+ of the CFIs don't hate instructing and I might believe that CFIs are not the problem.

Yes some people are not cut out to fly,but that number can't be 80%.

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

Sure, lack of funds is an issue. But we live in a society where rapid gratification is common. TV shows have happy endings in one hour. Commercials are thirty seconds. People who don't like to read a book listen to an audio version while driving. We don't have phone conversations, we text. Some order everything to be delivered.

Now consider the commitment to obtain a pilot certificate. It takes a while, and there will be setbacks or delays because of weather or maintenance. If you fly once a week it is going to be about a year.

I had a student last year who was exuberant after his first solo flight. He belongs to a local club, and that means monthly dues. For whatever reason, he has not flown now for one year, and does not reply to my messages. Not a youngster, in his early 50s, a local business owner who has no obvious financial restraints. He must be paying the club monthly and getting nothing out of it. Looks like he will be one of that 75-80% who drop out.

 

[dmspilot]

The civilian dropout rate has been said to be around 80%, according to AOPA. But dropouts aren't the same as washouts. Some dropouts would have made good pilots if they stuck with it. Some people push through that should have washed out.

 

[MauleSkinner]

the most common reason cited why people stop PPL training is lack of funds.

in reality, it’s probably more lack of interest in spending those funds on something that isn’t turning out the way one envisioned.

 

[Clip4]

Every CFI uses the same syllabus, but just like any other organization there are individuals who are less diligent than others. We have grown a lot in the past couple of years, and some of the newbies are not being monitored closely by management. It's one of my frustrations when I fly with someone else's student and see omissions.

Training folder software and a completion requirement at the end each lesson may be your solution.

The issue with Part 61 programs is no one, including management, is held accountable. The training records in Part 141 schools are audited by the FAA and management is accountable. Any deviations from the syllabus must be approved and documented in the training folders and those deviations are limited to changes of the order of the lessons, not changes to the lessons.

 

[Clip4]

so not only has staff failed, but management has given up on correcting the problems.

There is never a shortage of CFIs and you should be picking the cream of the crop and pay them fairly. But most schools accept that CFI are only there for 1500hrs, pay them crap, and fill the slot with the next 1500 hour wonderkind.... and then say they can't find good instructord.

Never arrived >5 years ago and there are shortages of CFIs in many parts of the US. The average CFI hourly wage across the US is $35-$40 an hour. The community colleges are paying the wonder kids >$40 an hour.

The issue isn’t wages, the issue is health insurance and PTO.

 

[Lance F]

I've got to jump in and comment on the Pt 61 bashing. Another independent instructor and I have a C172N that we purchased to provide primary and instrument instruction under pt 61. First, we maintain it meticulously because a) it's mine, b) my a*s is in it a fair amount of time and c) it's the right thing to do. Second, I do not have a written syllabus (OMG) and my students don't have a folder (OMG). My primary students run from young students to my oldest at 76. Does anyone honestly think a standard "FAA audited" and "must be followed" syllabus would work for all of them? I know my students individually. I know where they are in their training. How many 141 schools have "landing on an actual grass strip to demonstrate what a soft field TO and landing really feels like" in their syllabus? All my primary students will do this. How many 141 schools will be sitting on the ground with calm conditions and a 700' overcast up to 6,000'? I look for such days and I'll be flying with mine for those required 3 hours of flight solely by reference to instruments. Which students will be bettered prepared for inadvertent flight from VMC into IMC? I really have no intention to knock 141 schools, but there are weak points to cookie cutter, excuse me, strict syllabus governed curriculum. When we have such trained 121 pilots unable to fly a visual approach (San Francisco), or mush an Airbus into the Atlantic from 36,000' somehow the fundamentals are being missed in the requirement to follow the syllabus.
No training records? What's a properly written log book?
Not accountable to anyone? Certainly accountable to the student who is free to walk any time (I refuse to take any money in advance. Generally 141's require money up front, making it tough to walk.) Certainly accountable to the DPEs doing the practical tests.
I'd better stop now. Flame away if you wish. I'm probably not going to change and neither are the 141 aficionados.

 

[StraightnLevel]

in reality, it’s probably more lack of interest in spending those funds on something that isn’t turning out the way one envisioned.

I can just about guarantee that this is at least partially the case.

A question to the CFIs and school management who may be here: What is your take on keeping student pilots engaged and motivated? How does this factor into your operational practices?

Wonder why people quit? It’s at least in part because of the number of delays that are built into the system, particularly in Part 61.

Here is an example of where the frustration sets in that pushes people to walk away before completion:

I’m in checkride prep - FAA written passed, all prescriptive flight hours complete. A quick glance at my logbook shows that the last time I was able to be in the air was June 25. That’s almost 3 weeks of no flying, for a whole wide variety of reasons, mostly weather and after-effects of Beryl, but also maintenance and plane downtime issues. Not from a lack of scheduling attempts, just myriad things turning scheduled flight time into ground review or sitting at home instead.

Yesterday my CFI told me to book my mock checkride with one of the Sr CFIs. OK, cool. First available window is….July 27. 32 days after my last flight, and that’s IF the weather cooperates. Interestingly, the scheduling system would not let me book the flight as a stage check because of the long delay between flights - which is due to the scheduling system.

You can’t really blame the CFIs for letting their schedules become packed - they need to make a living. When you near the end of a program, though, and you need time with a specific plane/CFI combination for a prescriptive flight (non-FAA), it’s very frustrating and counter-productive.

I’ll end up timing out my solo endorsement before I can get my checkride, and that is with having scheduled 3-4 flights each and every week (most of which don't end up happening for one reason or another), and simply not being able to clear the delays and hurdles that the school puts in place, on top of those caused by weather and maintenance. Cynically, it feels like it is intentional to force students to spend as much money as possible over as long a period as possible, to help the school manage a consistent revenue stream. When the scheduling system forces continual delays, you have no choice but to burn more flight hours in between each step to try to stay current….and that costs money and wears down your enthusiasm. I find myself questioning almost every day whether or not it’s worth it to continue, given the way this process is working.

 

[MauleSkinner]

While I’ll agree with pretty much the rest of it regarding DEmotivation by the school being bad,

What is your take on keeping student pilots engaged and motivated?

This question assumes that it’s the flight school’s responsibility to keep a pilot interested in learning to fly. Adult learners (and yes, I’m including the 14- and 16-year-old Student Pilot Certificate holders) need to be self-motivated. You can have a perfect program with optimum scheduling and outstanding instructors, but if the pilot isn’t self-motivated to learn, it isn’t going to happen.

 

[midlifeflyer]

While I’ll agree with pretty much the rest of it regarding DEmotivation by the school being bad,

This question assumes that it’s the flight school’s responsibility to keep a pilot interested in learning to fly. Adult learners (and yes, I’m including the 14- and 16-year-old Student Pilot Certificate holders) need to be self-motivated. You can have a perfect program with optimum scheduling and outstanding instructors, but if the pilot isn’t self-motivated to learn, it isn’t going to happen.

I don't agree completely.

Yes, a student has gotta wanna. But even the best are going to find subjects and tasks that are difficult and hit those frustrating learning plateaus that seem to be tilted more backwards than straight and level. An individual instructor's attitude or flight school culture can help the student though those or provide the DEmotivation to quit.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I don't agree completely.

Yes, a student has gotta wanna. But even the best are going to find subjects and tasks that are difficult and hit those frustrating learning plateaus that seem to be tilted more backwards than straight and level. An individual instructor's attitude or flight school culture can help the student though those or provide the DEmotivation to quit.

Maybe it’s a fine distinction, but I think people can be externally motivated to act, but not to learn.

 

[MauleSkinner]

the most common reason cited why people stop PPL training is lack of funds. The 40 hours requirement is bare bones get everything right the first time.

Also, when you consider that most pilots are told that you can’t make practical use of an airplane without an instrument rating, and that’s another “40 hours,” they’re suddenly looking at massive expense for something they thought would be useful.

 

[Pinecone]

I will say that the planes are well maintained and the syllabus is well thought-out. I just need some continuity with the instructors, and have any changes to my scheduled communicated to me so I'm not blindsided when I walk in and they say "oh we changed your CFI today". As humans not every CFI will teach the same thing the same way - they're not robots, and that's expected. So limiting the number of CFI's make learning much easier.

That is why the USAF limited a student to two different instructors pre-solo. After solo, the better students flew with a lot on instructors to learn those different approaches. Struggling students were still limited to a limited number of instructors.

 

[Clip4]

I agree with you. I have had to "fire" some student pilots. Fortunately, not very often.

As a student pilot in the U.S. Air Force, the instructors liked to say, "With enough bananas, we can teach a monkey to fly." I guess that was supposed to build our confidence. The failure rate was somewhere around 33%.

Were the 33% the ones who grew tired of bananas?

 

[Clip4]

the most common reason cited why people stop PPL training is lack of funds. The 40 hours requirement is bare bones get everything right the first time.

While I am sure there are some good or even great CFIs out there they are the rare exception. Show me a survey where 80%+ of the CFIs don't hate instructing and I might believe that CFIs are not the problem.

Yes some people are not cut out to fly,but that number can't be 80%.

While people identify lack of funds as the primary issue, the reasons people drop out of PPL training is a bit more complex than that. About 25% of those who quit PPL training do so over funding. 75% is for other reasons. It costs too much is an easy excuse to use.

 

[Pinecone]

I agree with you. I have had to "fire" some student pilots. Fortunately, not very often.

As a student pilot in the U.S. Air Force, the instructors liked to say, "With enough bananas, we can teach a monkey to fly." I guess that was supposed to build our confidence. The failure rate was somewhere around 33%.

I only had one student I "fired." And he wasn't a student pilot. A retire Army Major, had his certificate and needed a BFR. But due to fixed income, he would fly a few flights, be getting close, and then would stop for a month. A couple of times, if he was a student pilot I would have soloed him, with a BFR, once I signed, he was free to go and fly for 2 years.

He went to a different field and FBO and found an instructor that convinced him that he could be signed off for supervised solo only, like a student pilot, and did solo him

The USF has it down to an art. The failure rate is right around 33% for every class. Yours was about 12 years before mine, but same % failure.

 

[BMan]

....I think the shop bill probably taught him the lessons of know your systems and not to let external forces negatively affect your decision making.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

Thank you for reinforcing this here. My first CFI drilled me the same way to know the airplane inside-out. The only problem I had was flying a different 172 for every lesson where instruments were in different locations, control-slop varied a LOT, and trim levers functioned in maddeningly different ways.

 

[StraightnLevel]

The only problem I had was flying a different 172 for every lesson where instruments were in different locations, control-slop varied a LOT, and trim levers functioned in maddeningly different ways.

This^^^. Unless you're at a flight school where they are buying identical planes, it seems that each one has different avionics with different capabilities and UI. Even when they're well-maintained and relatively squawk-free, it's one more thing that adds to the effective workload on a student pilot.

 

[MauleSkinner]

This^^^. Unless you're at a flight school where they are buying identical planes, it seems that each one has different avionics with different capabilities and UI. Even when they're well-maintained and relatively squawk-free, it's one more thing that adds to the effective workload on a student pilot.

It also adds to the well-rounded pilot.

 

[RussR]

It also adds to the well-rounded pilot.

I agree. The flight school I trained at had about 6 or 7 Cessna 172s from the 60's and 70's, all different years, with different radios, equipment, etc. For example, some had the old flap lever while some had the newer pre-set one.

I strongly believe it made me a better pilot because I had to understand the differences, and I had to understand what I was actually doing, not just "move this lever". And I don't feel like it extended my training at all.