"Staggering" Pilot Shortage?

[jspilot]

They have a year waiting time because of the pre-orders. Try ordering 400'000 Bolts and see how long GM will take to deliver that. Heck, for that matter if you order 400'000 extra F150's, you'll put the Ford assembly line out by a year as well.

I'm not saying Tesla can necessarily deliver that. They still have to prove they can built anywhere close to 10'000 vehicles per week. But it's not really valid to criticize them for having pre-orders.

I'm not sure it's entirely just because they have pre-orders( which they've had for a long time.) My understanding is that if you order a car now the earliest you can expect to get it is a year from now. That will significantly reduce the amount of cars people will buy from this point forward. They can't deliver on their orders in a timely manner. That's on them!

 

[eetrojan]

They have nearly 300 mph trains in the very very earthquake prone Japan now, and have had for a long while. The tunnels hold up well.

300 mph trains in Japan? I think the speed might be in kilometers per hour which is about 186 mph. Just as fast as the high-speed rail in Taiwan.

The railed high-speed Shinkansen trains in Japan have a max speed of about 320 kph (~200 mph).

According to this article, however, the maglev train system that Japan has been developing for decades and commercially constructing since 2014 (Chuo Shinkansen) runs at a max speed of 500 kph (~311 mph).

https://www.thenational.ae/business/japan-bites-bullet-with-maglev-trains-1.86709

 

[Datadriver]

With 400'000 people placing pre-orders for vehicles that will not have the tax credit going forward?

To date, Tesla has lost money. Their business model requires thousands of dollars per vehicle from the government. If you gave them $1000 for a car, you are years away from delivery and it will cost you over $40k.

 

[deonb]

I'm not sure it's entirely just because they have pre-orders( which they've had for a long time.) My understanding is that if you order a car now the earliest you can expect to get it is a year from now. That will significantly reduce the amount of cars people will buy from this point forward. They can't deliver on their orders in a timely manner. That's on them!

That's not correct. If you order a Model S or X today it has a 30 to 60 day wait. The only one with a year+ wait is if you place a new order on the Model 3, since it has a 400'000 car backlog and they literally only started delivering them last night.

To date, Tesla has lost money. Their business model requires thousands of dollars per vehicle from the government.

Their Business model requires no such thing. Tesla makes 27.4% gross profit on their current vehicles right now. That's between $20000 and $40000 per vehicle profit, depending on the options. Even if they lower their prices by the entire federal tax subsidy they would still have the highest gross profit margin of any US manufacturer today. (And they would only need to lower the price on about half of their vehicles, as the rest are exports, which don't have the subsidy).

If all Tesla wanted was to remain a niche manufacturer they could have done that. But they of course decided to reinvest in themselves and expand their production capacity by 10-fold to produce the Model 3. There isn't a vehicle manufacturer on the planet that can expand their manufacturing facilities by 10-fold and be profitable during the time that they do that.

Elon also published his exact Roadster -> Model S -> Model 3 plan back in 2006 - here:
https://www.tesla.com/en_CA/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-just-between-you-and-me?redirect=no

This is a full 3 years before the ARRA was passed that created the EV subsidy. It's not something that Tesla ever planned for or really depended on - people who buy $100'000 vehicles don't care THAT much about a $7500 subsidy. Yes, I'm sure it sped things up, but to say that it is their business model is disingenuous.

If you gave them $1000 for a car, you are years away from delivery and it will cost you over $40k.

No on both accounts. I gave them $1000 for a car, and here is my price ($35k) and delivery estimates:

 

[MooneyDriver78]

Then why does it take 1500 hours + to learn which button to push when the "system" turns a red light on?

If I remember correctly the Colgan pilots did not turn oh deicing despite reading it off the checklist, despite have more than 1500 hours.

 

[Jimmy cooper]

You don't remember correctly. You might re read exactly what these two did that caus ed the accident plus the pic and his troubles passing check rides. How he used the de icers entered into the disaster. Good reading.

 

[Sundancer]

Wow, all over the place!

Let's see. . . Lockheed's C-141A had "autoland" half a century ago (I think it was called AWLS or something similar), down to some very low or zero minimums, flared itself, etc. As a technical/engineering challenge, we could have had autonomous airliners in the 60s or 70s - just no good reason to do so, as it's basically a bone-headed idea anyway. Back then it would have cost more than it was worth; analog avionics were already on the way out back then, but the modern stuff, software based, isn't any more trustworthy. The state of the art in software platforms is still too primitive, at least in terms of economically viable systems.

Truth is, all software sucks, including machine learning and AI applications; we still have some way to go to develop software that can handle the outlier situations well enough to launch a several hundred people well up above most of the Earth's atmosphere, at a large percentage of the speed of sound, and get 'em home, without a human pilot overseeing the endeavor.

We have great processors now, great networking; but they are, essentially, just refinements of stuff invented before most of us were born. In an IT career spanning a LOT of decades, I'm not seeing regular, shocking advancements in the complete platforms - we get some great applied science stuff, like the Internet and ubiquitous wireless connectivity, sure thing - but the building of applications just isn't that different, or more efficient, or more reliable than it was when I had more, and darker hair.

So, while autonomous airline flight is technically feasible now, for sure, it's just not a smart thing to do - it'll come along a little at a time, slowly, probably more slowly than we would imagine

 

[bkspero]

H1B visas are the documents companies use to import foreign workers when they claim that they cannot find a sufficient number of qualified US workers for the job.

 

[sourdough44]

H1B visas are the documents companies use to import foreign workers when they claim that they cannot find a sufficient number of qualified US workers for the job.

A while back I talked to a DE doing checkrides in FL. He said the pipeline has plenty of international students that will piloting planes down the road. His inference included U.S. Airlines. FWIW.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

You can't swing a dead cat without hitting a international student here in Florida. American students with aspirations of becoming airline pilots are rare.
Others have said it, airlines like have surplus pilots to drive down wages. Fake news sponsored by ...

 

[CC268]

Wow, all over the place!

Let's see. . . Lockheed's C-141A had "autoland" half a century ago (I think it was called AWLS or something similar), down to some very low or zero minimums, flared itself, etc. As a technical/engineering challenge, we could have had autonomous airliners in the 60s or 70s - just no good reason to do so, as it's basically a bone-headed idea anyway. Back then it would have cost more than it was worth; analog avionics were already on the way out back then, but the modern stuff, software based, isn't any more trustworthy. The state of the art in software platforms is still too primitive, at least in terms of economically viable systems.

Truth is, all software sucks, including machine learning and AI applications; we still have some way to go to develop software that can handle the outlier situations well enough to launch a several hundred people well up above most of the Earth's atmosphere, at a large percentage of the speed of sound, and get 'em home, without a human pilot overseeing the endeavor.

We have great processors now, great networking; but they are, essentially, just refinements of stuff invented before most of us were born. In an IT career spanning a LOT of decades, I'm not seeing regular, shocking advancements in the complete platforms - we get some great applied science stuff, like the Internet and ubiquitous wireless connectivity, sure thing - but the building of applications just isn't that different, or more efficient, or more reliable than it was when I had more, and darker hair.

So, while autonomous airline flight is technically feasible now, for sure, it's just not a smart thing to do - it'll come along a little at a time, slowly, probably more slowly than we would imagine

Thanks for the well thought out and informative post.

 

[Datadriver]

Their Business model requires no such thing. Tesla makes 27.4% gross profit on their current vehicles right now.
View attachment 55253

Tesla isn't making a profit on anything. They lost $675 million last year. See https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/05/tesla-keeps-losing-money-so-why-is-it-worth-more-than-ford.html

There just isn't any track record of meeting production estimates or breaking even. I'm not pulling against them, and hope you get a car when they promised you.

 

[mtuomi]

Tesla isn't making a profit on anything. They lost $675 million last year. See https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/05/tesla-keeps-losing-money-so-why-is-it-worth-more-than-ford.html

There just isn't any track record of meeting production estimates or breaking even. I'm not pulling against them, and hope you get a car when they promised you.

Tesla stock prices reflect the fact that they COULD make a lot of profit with their current vehicles, but they have invested a lot of those profits into building an exclusive Apple-style supply chain - something worth its weight in gold if (and when) electric cars become mainstream.

 

[Lindberg]

As much as I'm a fan of Elon Musk I just don't get how the Hyperloop is gonna work in earthquake prone areas, especially the underground portions. I can't imagine much worse than zipping along at 500 plus mph in an underground tube during an earthquake. The overland portions would be equally vulnerable just not as scary as being buried alive.

No worries. You wouldn't likely be alive, given the forces and acceleration involved.

 

[deonb]

Tesla isn't making a profit on anything. They lost $675 million last year. See https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/05/tesla-keeps-losing-money-so-why-is-it-worth-more-than-ford.html

There just isn't any track record of meeting production estimates or breaking even. I'm not pulling against them, and hope you get a car when they promised you.

Like I mentioned - they're massively expanding. They're currently about half of Porche's size. If they were happy to just grow gradually to Porche-side over a few decades, they could have called it a day and started paying dividends. They're obviously not satisfied with that, and that takes massive investment. They're taking all of their Model S + X profit, plus stock market capital, plus bonds that they've issued, and investing it. So sure, they're running an overall loss - by choice.

I received my current Tesla Model S just over 4.5 years ago and they delivered it 3 months before it was promised (actually took me by surprise - I had to scramble to buy it). So they do have at least some history of making production deadlines. They just screwed up on the Model X. But the first Model 3's again hit the deadline to the exact day, so I have a fair amount of confidence that they can deliver the rest of them on time.

 

[denverpilot]

Why hasn't that already happened?

Because start classes are still full. There's no shortage of pilots.

Actually the regionals starting pay is not bad these days.

Yeas but most of it goes towards bonuses, not base pay. When they get enough pilots, watch that disappear quickly.

With bonuses, but @mscard88 covered that.

Any one of those regionals gets into trouble or more likely, a world economic "event" happens, those will disappear not just "quickly" but "immediately".

There's also some other game afoot going on. Some of the regionals have been cancelling flights saying it's due to lack of crews, but those same regionals aren't hiring and aren't opening more training. Someone wants this "pilot shortage" message to resonate with the public, when there isn't one.

The majors hired 6000 people last year. Boeing made a splash last week and said the majors will hire 6000 more for the next three years. But they then made up huge numbers out into 2032 for their next "prediction". Note the large gap between 2020 and 2032. Makes it easy to switch from probable numbers to fiction by jumping that far.

There's 500,000 active pilots in the States as of two years ago (latest data).
150,000 of those are ATPs.
100,000 of those are CFIs.

Still, a great time to chase the airlines if that's your thing. Do hurry though, days literally can mean success or disaster when it comes to seniority.

The really interesting thing about the 1500 hour rule is that it probably takes a typical civilian pilot about 5 years to get that done. If the airlines suck up half of the instructor pool (100,000 - 6,000) per YEAR ...

You have a training disaster coming. Fast.

When I started flying there were 800,000 active pilots and the pilot to instructor ratio was 13:1.

Now it's 5:1. There's a TON more people with CFI ratings than had them in the early 90s.

But the vast majority of younger pilots I talk to have lost an instructor to a better job somewhere in their ratings and some have lost four or five.

I don't know what all of those numbers mean, but every CFI I know who is NOT planning on doing anything but teaching is begging me to come help them because they're sick of picking up all the leftover and left behind students the time builders are dropping.

And the airline guys are all whining these folks show up unprepared in the cockpit. Can we get a big fat DUH, for that one? LOL.

So then you think... yeah, I should just quit IT and teach full time. And realize it'd be a 2/3 or more pay cut. Zero bennies. And lots more hours. Hmmm. I love it, but not sure I love it THAT much.

There's GOING to be a shortage, but it hasn't hit hard yet. I think instructor pay at primary level is fairly inelastic. Private pilots can't afford much more than their paying. But watch out. Advanced ratings may skyrocket in price. We're already at $1000/checkride and probably climbing, just for the DPE.

If I had to guess, that's going to be the breakpoint. Chasing the dream? Alright... hourly rate goes up. Anybody see any economic reason that won't happen? You already have non-frugal or poor-planning dream chasers exiting flight training at $100,000 or more in debt. It doesn't seem to worry them much.

What is it about tech billionaires and losing touch with reality. Musk is trying to build a hyperloop while colonizing other planets. Zuckerberg thinks robots are going to take all our jerbs and we'll be living in a VR world. Bezos is eating large beetles, building robots and going to space.

Dunno but John McAfee got stabbed by someone and his wife tweeted that he was still alive afterward and that he was coming for them.

LOL. Crazy bastard.

 

[Art VanDelay]

Because start classes are still full. There's no shortage of pilots.





With bonuses, but @mscard88 covered that.

Any one of those regionals gets into trouble or more likely, a world economic "event" happens, those will disappear not just "quickly" but "immediately".

There's also some other game afoot going on. Some of the regionals have been cancelling flights saying it's due to lack of crews, but those same regionals aren't hiring and aren't opening more training. Someone wants this "pilot shortage" message to resonate with the public, when there isn't one.

The majors hired 6000 people last year. Boeing made a splash last week and said the majors will hire 6000 more for the next three years. But they then made up huge numbers out into 2032 for their next "prediction". Note the large gap between 2020 and 2032. Makes it easy to switch from probable numbers to fiction by jumping that far.

There's 500,000 active pilots in the States as of two years ago (latest data).
150,000 of those are ATPs.
100,000 of those are CFIs.

Still, a great time to chase the airlines if that's your thing. Do hurry though, days literally can mean success or disaster when it comes to seniority.

The really interesting thing about the 1500 hour rule is that it probably takes a typical civilian pilot about 5 years to get that done. If the airlines suck up half of the instructor pool (100,000 - 6,000) per YEAR ...

You have a training disaster coming. Fast.

When I started flying there were 800,000 active pilots and the pilot to instructor ratio was 13:1.

Now it's 5:1. There's a TON more people with CFI ratings than had them in the early 90s.

But the vast majority of younger pilots I talk to have lost an instructor to a better job somewhere in their ratings and some have lost four or five.

I don't know what all of those numbers mean, but every CFI I know who is NOT planning on doing anything but teaching is begging me to come help them because they're sick of picking up all the leftover and left behind students the time builders are dropping.

And the airline guys are all whining these folks show up unprepared in the cockpit. Can we get a big fat DUH, for that one? LOL.

So then you think... yeah, I should just quit IT and teach full time. And realize it'd be a 2/3 or more pay cut. Zero bennies. And lots more hours. Hmmm. I love it, but not sure I love it THAT much.

There's GOING to be a shortage, but it hasn't hit hard yet. I think instructor pay at primary level is fairly inelastic. Private pilots can't afford much more than their paying. But watch out. Advanced ratings may skyrocket in price. We're already at $1000/checkride and probably climbing, just for the DPE.

If I had to guess, that's going to be the breakpoint. Chasing the dream? Alright... hourly rate goes up. Anybody see any economic reason that won't happen? You already have non-frugal or poor-planning dream chasers exiting flight training at $100,000 or more in debt. It doesn't seem to worry them much.



Dunno but John McAfee got stabbed by someone and his wife tweeted that he was still alive afterward and that he was coming for them.

LOL. Crazy bastard.

Sounds like you're just miffed that you can't make decent money as a CFI. A lot of that is all in the way a CFI decides to work. If you're going to work for somebody else like an FBO or a flight school than you probably aren't going to make too great of a living. But if you market yourself right you could potentially do pretty good if you're in an area with high net worth individuals.

I know a CFI here in Florida that does just that. He doesn't have an hourly fee. He charges $1000 a day and gives you an eight hour day, if you want that much. That covers both ground and flight instruction. He specializes in high end owner operated aircraft like Cirrus, PC-12 and TBM just to name a few. He's also willing to travel - so long as the client picks up those expenses. His further specialty is making complex avionics easier. Last year alone he showed me 150 billable days in his schedule book. Now that's not IT pay but it's not sitting in a cubicle or cooped up in a home office all day either.

 

[denverpilot]

Sounds like you're just miffed that you can't make decent money as a CFI. A lot of that is all in the way a CFI decides to work. If you're going to work for somebody else like an FBO or a flight school than you probably aren't going to make too great of a living. But if you market yourself right you could potentially do pretty good if you're in an area with high net worth individuals.

I know a CFI here in Florida that does just that. He doesn't have an hourly fee. He charges $1000 a day and gives you an eight hour day, if you want that much. That covers both ground and flight instruction. He specializes in high end owner operated aircraft like Cirrus, PC-12 and TBM just to name a few. He's also willing to travel - so long as the client picks up those expenses. His further specialty is making complex avionics easier. Last year alone he showed me 150 billable days in his schedule book. Now that's not IT pay but it's not sitting in a cubicle or cooped up in a home office all day either.

I'm not miffed. Not by a long shot. I'm just telling it like it is.

I don't see any of my 40-something friends interested in flying, let alone teaching. They weren't twenty years ago either, so that's no surprise.

The ONE who's doing it is the one begging for help and has five cast off students and is pretty ****ed at the time builders dumping them on him, since he's a part timer. (He also works in IT for his "real job" with pay and bennies. But being he's single, the bennies keep him there full time.) He's also getting pretty salty already.

That Archer crash I posted earlier is operated by his employer and he's pretty sure that was a dual flight. He's noticing he's already getting a pretty skeptical skin for all the excuses every time an airplane gets broken. (It was also his favorite airplane and he had a personal trip scheduled later this year in it, so he's extra mad about it.)

Pretty impressive to bust the main gear off an Archer doing laps with a CFI on board. If that turns out to be what happened. If that CFI survives having the accident on record, they're probably headed for your right seat in a couple of years.

Enjoy! LOL. I don't know any nicer way to say that. Your level of the biz is GOING to hire that guy or gal. They won't have any choice if the shortage is real.

All the 30-somethings I knew who were CFIs, even one who said he wanted to do it for life, bailed to "real flying jobs". Can't blame 'em. Both were pulling well more than 12 hour days and getting paid nothing anywhere near what they should have for that sort of effort. I'm glad them moved on.

Instructing isn't a career unless you do exactly as you said and get away from primary students or specialize in some way. And those regular non-specialized students get what? Other people who were students last week. That's not so bad this year. See what it looks like in three if hiring keeps up a the current level. That's over 50% turnover in the instructor ranks forecast in three years.

Industry is in for a world of changes about how it goes about training in the next twenty years or so, if the big predictions of big shortages are true. Ain't gonna be anyone interested in doing it if it stays where it's at now.

And sucking 6000 a year out of a pool of 100,000 -- well, quality of instruction is going to go right to hell. There's no numerical way around that.

Not many people willing to spend the time and money to teach who want to stay teaching and go broke doing it. That's just the facts.

The only good news is that it's unlikely I'll be bored on weekends, ever. I don't mind. I'm debt-free with a house and through odd circumstance, four vehicles and an airplane. I can afford to teach. Even cash flowed my way through a mostly useless (for now) MEI.

Very few take the no-debt path and can afford it. I'm about $20,000 in the hole. I don't care. I went out of my way to find a specialist instructor, too.

But the only thing that'll keep that all working for most people is student loans. And the mills and the aviation colleges have sucking wallets dry down to a science. It ain't pretty. Not for the kids anyway. If they don't just some butt and have other jobs paying for one of those places, they're well beyond dead broke when they come out.

So they happily sign on the dotted line and work for ANY price. Usually as a CFI. Not always because they want to, and many don't even like teaching. That's going to snowball rapidly into a real problem in the next few years.

 

[Art VanDelay]

Well, a couple points - if that CFI has an accident in his record it's very unlikely he'll get to my right seat, there's just too many to pick from that don't. As for the wet-behind-the-ears teaching the next group of students it's pretty much the way the military has been doing it forever without too much heartburn. If a guy can pass a CFI ride he/she is no idiot.

As for people having to change instructors- quit whining not only does that happen in the military it's far worse in the Part 121 world. I did my entire 737 type rating with a different instructor for every single sim session - it's just the way it is and actually having exposure to multiple points of view and teaching styles can be good.

So far as student debt is concerned it can be minimized a great deal. Either go through a reserve military component or buy a used airplane and get all your ratings in that airplane. Instruct in that airplane once you become a CFI. The airplane is an actual tangible asset that has value. The money you give to a flight school does not. Going to Riddle is a chump move from a financial standpoint.

And if things in the training arena get worse it will be like I've said before - the regionals and maybe even the majors will have to develop their own training academies.

 

[mscard88]

Nate, you could always buy a twin trainer and specialize in ME training and put your MEI to work. Tax advantages, equity in the plane, income from ME students, etc. There's a fella here locally that teaches seaplane, ME, and helicopter. Another guy I know does accelerated courses. Know another one north of BHM that has his own grass strip and teaches aerobatic courses, upset recovery, and tail wheel. As Art says, one can make more money working for yourself.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Nate, you could always buy a twin trainer and specialize in ME training and put your MEI to work. Tax advantages, equity in the plane, income from ME students, etc. There's a fella here locally that teaches seaplane, ME, and helicopter. Another guy I know does accelerated courses. Know another one north of BHM that has his own grass strip and teaches aerobatic courses, upset recovery, and tail wheel. As Art says, one can make more money working for yourself.

Trouble is, for a freelancer, insurance is a killer. But I suppose there are ways around that.

A friend and I did a preliminary study on this sort of thing and we determined that it would take 3 airplanes flying quite a few hours a year to make it worthwhile.

 

[mscard88]

Trouble is, for a freelancer, insurance is a killer. But I suppose there are ways around that.

A friend and I did a preliminary study on this sort of thing and we determined that it would take 3 airplanes flying quite a few hours a year to make it worthwhile.

Insurance would be factored in to the rate, like the rest of the operating costs. I'm sure you're correct about making it work, but if one specialized in ME training maybe it would. Probably would eventually need 2 planes in case one is down for the count, maintenance etc. I really have no idea though, just throwing it out there.

 

[mtuomi]

There are a few single plane ME-only schools in the US, they seem to make it work. Just need a very streamlined operation with very little extracurricular activity.

 

[denverpilot]

And if things in the training arena get worse it will be like I've said before - the regionals and maybe even the majors will have to develop their own training academies.

I hadn't said it yet, but that's where I think it's headed. There's no way the current Ponzi scheme can support 24,000 hires in four years. It just won't work.

 

[denverpilot]

Trouble is, for a freelancer, insurance is a killer. But I suppose there are ways around that.

A friend and I did a preliminary study on this sort of thing and we determined that it would take 3 airplanes flying quite a few hours a year to make it worthwhile.

Not too ironically, that's what my 35,000 hour plus instructor has. He and another retired airline guy do the bulk of the teaching in a Skyhawk, a Skylane, and the Turbo Seminole. They do accelerated stuff but they don't guarantee any particular speed... if you're prepared, great. If you're not, they'll work with you until you're ready.

They started out long ago with a flat rate thing and the students would magically get "cold feet" when they knew they were ready to go for the rides. "Just a couple more hours in the twin and I'll feel comfortable..." and that was the end of the flat rate.

Aircraft downtime is the killer for them because they'll book someone from out of town in, and an airplane will break. They ultimately make it work by one of them being an IA. That's a big deal right there, but he still farms out larger stuff and hires another A&P to watch over his shoulder.

My offer to be "the guy who lives here so don't worry about scheduling me" turned out to be a big scheduling mistake on my part. Once the schedule gets behind, it's weeks until it has openings again. Especially in summer.

Luckily it's not causing me any serious life problems staying "part time" at the day job (I set my hours and take projects and complete them as needed...), but I would have had to bail on them or ask for a hard schedule if my job wasn't as flexible as it's been. They also would have helped figure it out if it had been a problem, no doubt. Neither one is scared of long days and work when needed. You couldn't make a small biz training go without folks willing to drop things and go teach if needed.

I ran some numbers on SE stuff... you know, buy a decent airplane with a decent IFR stack and teach in it... insurance is the killer there. And maintenance. Shops here are good, but spendy. Just did the numbers for fun. Do wish we lived at a little lower altitude. A friend sold a cherry 150 that he was teaching in in another State recently, and the combination of high DA and my butt being fatter than when I started flying, that's a no-go.

Insurance would be factored in to the rate, like the rest of the operating costs. I'm sure you're correct about making it work, but if one specialized in ME training maybe it would. Probably would eventually need 2 planes in case one is down for the count, maintenance etc. I really have no idea though, just throwing it out there.

Two twins would be better than one. One breaks, it becomes a mad scramble and late nights fixing it.

When I left the airport tonight at 10 PM after flying my stuff, my instructor's truck was in front of his hangar, which means he's out getting someone their multi XC time done tonight. Called him on the phone yesterday and he said he's solidly booked for at least ten days. He said the other instructor does have some openings right now, but it's constantly in flux.

Which, is fine by me. I'll holler at one of them once I have the landings down pat in the 182 and do some air work to wake up the brain, and refresh everything in my box of stuff and brain for the oral. Then they can beat me up for ride prep. Then we figure out a DPE date.

Also appreciate the kind words about jumping straight into teaching in the twin, but I think I'll ease into that. Might be selling myself short, but flying with all these guys with a billion hours makes me a little leery of jumping hard into that without a bit more time under my belt.

Judging by the ultra-busy-ness of everyone I know who's teaching around here right now, it won't take too long to rack up some hours doing it and get some feedback from these more experienced folk. But I don't want to be "that guy" who runs a sketchy multi-training thing. We've had a few of those come and go around here over the years, and at least a couple with accidents.

Plus, my airplane co-owner has "dibs" on first lesson. Haha. He wants me to give him a Flight Review just so he can hand me my first $1. And... I'm loathe to use debt to buy things, even business tools if I can possibly avoid it. Wouldn't want to hammer the nest egg hard enough to buy a twin. Ouch.

Realistically I'll be seeing if these guys want any help with anything , and I mean anything... I'll happily sit and teach in their sim or instrument stuff, or help them when stuff gets backed up and a student needs an XC or whatever. If they want that. I have no idea. I've seen other folks using his aircraft but have no idea what the deal is there.

The one thing I do know is he takes VERY good care of his equipment. The Skyhawk needed an engine and he's had a couple of what should have been good quality (well known name) rebuilds that were a total pain to him with temperature and other issues... so he bit the bullet and bought new in the crate from Lycoming. That wasn't cheap. But it's a long way from SOME of the beaters on the rental lineups around here. Not all. But some.

If not helping there, it's probably talk to local clubs and apply to help them. The insurance situation is far better (and I can always add my own on top of that if theirs is weak) and if the job situation can stay the same, weekdays and times when a lot of part time instructors can't teach are more open for me.

And of course, there's always mountain instruction. That's one area I am confident I can teach, since that's pretty much been the lifestyle I've lived here for 20 years... high DA and big rocks are closer to normal than not.

 

[mscard88]

Sounds like a good plan Nate. Maybe you're CFI will bring you in to pick up the slack if they're both that busy. That's how it usually goes. You start doing some work for them here and there, and before you know it you're booked solid yourself. Win win sounds like.

 

[Shepherd]

There seems to be no shortage of staggering pilots.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/02/world/canada-pilot-arrested/index.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/12/30/drunk-pilot-indonesia/96007366/
http://abcnews.go.com/US/allegedly-drunk-pilot-arrested-flight-south-dakota/story?id=43078685
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/two-pilots-arrested-week-allegedly-flying-while-drunk-n701896

Can I volunteer to help with that? I feel it's my civic duty.