Just getting done with a training event, thought about this


At a basic level many think it’s all the students effort, this is wrong

Having CFIed a good deal, including getting from other CFIs the “maybe have the try golf conversation” and finding the student a great pilot, the instructor is SUCH a huge factor, I’d say 75%

My two recent rides

One

Did a add on, first time 141, and my instructor, well turned out it was her FIRST recommend, she hit waaaaay above her 3 figure hours pay grade, she gave a fuck and she put in the work, I let her and the school know this too


Two

Just got done training at a very large international training center
Instructor had been a ex mil pilot, was in his golden years, dude could only teach rote, when asked “why do I want to do XYZ” he just would repeat himself on his prior rote answer
Training event was a nightmare, despite this guy having oodles of hours


I think sometimes we don’t pull the eject handle when we should, and sadly in some situations you realistically just have to make the best with what you have, but for anyone paying out of pocket 141/61 if it doesn’t feel right fire the guy yesterday, doesn’t matter how good you are or how hard you try, it’s the same as taking off with a misfiring engine, maybe you’ll get there, but why stack the deck against you

Your first answer is normally right, and your gut is along those same lines


To the CFIs, I’m one and I don’t claim to be perfect, man, if you ain’t ready to put the work and heart in, just say you ain’t teaching today

We learn by doing. Thus the instructor who manipulates the controls most is the instructor who teaches least. Language is less important than communication. When idea in mind A begins to grow in mind B, communication has happened. We recommend aviate, navigate, and communicate in that order for safe flying. We need to first teach flying, the aviate part, the student manipulating the controls enough to learn what they do and how they can change and even mess up what the airplane wants to do. The airplane is a simple and easy to control machine. Once they have learned to fly, navigation and communication can gain more prominence in the training program.

The student can't learn to fly in ten hours if we insist he knows everything and talks like a seasoned controller from day one. And solo in ten hours is doable and really important. Yes, even in tailwheel.

I don't think there is any area where having an instructor is more important than in aviation. Many things can be self taught. Flying is definitely not one of them. Bad instruction leads to things that eventually need to be relearned which is often really difficult due to the law of primacy. Communication is the key and unfortunately everyone communicates and learns differently making instructing so challenging. My first instructor was relatively average but I didn't know any better and I completed my Private and instrument tickets with him not really having anything for comparison. I later found an incredible instructor who taught me tailwheel flying. His voice and lessons are still with me today. He had a true passion for teaching and it left a lasting impression on me.



Josh

contactflying wrote:We learn by doing. Thus the instructor who manipulates the controls most is the instructor who teaches least. Language is less important than communication. When idea in mind A begins to grow in mind B, communication has happened. We recommend aviate, navigate, and communicate in that order for safe flying. We need to first teach flying, the aviate part, the student manipulating the controls enough to learn what they do and how they can change and even mess up what the airplane wants to do. The airplane is a simple and easy to control machine. Once they have learned to fly, navigation and communication can gain more prominence in the training program.

The student can't learn to fly in ten hours if we insist he knows everything and talks like a seasoned controller from day one. And solo in ten hours is doable and really important. Yes, even in tailwheel.

The guy who wasn’t good, I don’t think he does much flying these days, full time instructor guessing no medical

I also wonder how rote he is, back in the Robbie training there was a warning that fixed wing transitioning pilots might put the stick/cyclic forward in the event of a engine failure, I couldn’t figure this out, it’s just a wing, and during a stall it’s all about lowering the AOA and taking the work off the wing

In the helicopter that’s more to do with collective compared to pushing the nose over like in a fixed wing, but you’re doing the same thing to the “wing”

If the person initially (law of primacy) only understood recovering from a stall as lower the nose, vs lower the AOA and take the load off the wing, I could see how they might nose over the helicopter, but if you first learned WHY you do what you do, later those chickens come home to roost even in rotor wing


If that makes sense

Teaching rote level off the bat you’re setting students up for issues later on

It is useful to transfer technique learned in one machine to another machine in those areas of similarity. The major difference between airplane and helicopter, however, is that the design of the former is to fly. It cannot stall itself. The design of the latter is miraculous, yet it will come unglued immediately without constant pilot control input.

The explanation of stall as exceeding the critical angle of attack relative to the relative wind only covers the why if we first explain that the airplane cannot do that to itself. With respect to the helicopter, exceeding collective pitch available angle of attack results in rotor decay which we call rotor RPM bleed or losing turns. When we lose turns we sink. We can also settle with power by getting too slow out of ground effect or by trying to cyclic zoom climb with insufficient zoom reserve airspeed and already max torque.

As always, we need to know why we choose to move the controls the way we choose to move the controls.

I appreciate that you brought up the CFI concerns, NineThreeKilo, and I appreciate Zane putting up with too much technique talk. There was a site out of Phoenix, The International Association of Flight Training Professionals, that considered any technique so long as we followed their format which was fairly extensive. Most were airline pilots, but they were willing to entertain any suggestion. We learn more, I think, by at least considering new ideas.

Anyway, the guy running IAFTP died young of a heart attack and none of the rest of us were as smart as him or Zane having all the computer skills necessary to run a site.