As we acquire and tweak the elements of a maneuver or technique, we improve. Iterations are required to improve the various techniques involved in getting around the pattern to demonstrate the ability to safely takeoff and land. Students learn best by doing, not watching. The nice thing about how we used to do this in a week or so was that every day in every way they got better and better. In days, not weeks our students went out solo to assemble and articulate newly learned techniques. They were allowed to put together some iterations without ol contact pointing things out, demanding actions, and talking, talking, talking. About seven days and six to ten hours is the most anyone should have to take of that much concentration of instruction for such a simple undertaking. The two or three hours the seller of the Cub taught the buyer was a bit thin, but you get the picture. It is not rocket science.

Yes,regulations have increased a bit for solo, but not so much has changed as the flight test. Insurance may be a bit more demanding, but if we teach well so as to have confident pilots, all have gained. If flight school operators see tremendous gain in delay of solo, they haven't evaluated the loss. The psychological dampening of normal early progress defeats the effort to make solo safe. Extra instruction on everything that an airline pilot might confront is not relevant pre-solo. Learning to leave ground effect with maneuvering airspeed, to turn without any load factor, and to decelerate to land slowly and softly near the beginning of the runway would help the insurance provider, the operator, and especially the customer. Would stall recovery technique or just turning in a way that stall is not possible be more relevant here where there is insufficient vertical space to recover from a stall? Teaching and learning these simple and safe techniques are easier than a complicated pre-solo program that burns lots of hours without mostly hands on learning. Where else in our capitalistic economy is the customer so always wrong?

Instructors, remove the distraction of yourself while still witnessing steady progress. Don't grind away into the learning plateau trying to make your student an airline pilot so early in the game. Teach well and test them on what they know, not on what they don't know. Their enthusiasm and confidence is at stake. It is not safer, in my opinion, to delay until student confidence is deteriorating. They believe you when you say, by not getting out, they are not ready. Are you sure they are not ready or are there other considerations? Would you teach a basketball or football player to hesitate until absolutely sure of success?

Instructors milking students for as much cash as possible is a problem here too, IMO.

Decades ago I wanted to rent a 7GCBC and had 50 hours in type and 1000+ hours of tailwheel time already. The club rules required a checkout by one of their instructors.

During the 1 hour check out with a very young CFI that I contacted from their list, I was able to do whatever he asked without issue. I easily demonstrated full stall and wheel landings. The main gear was crooked on the airframe and you had to hold about 3 degrees nose left during landing so that it would roll straight. 15k jour airframe that was beat up as a banner tow plane for decades.

After we landed, the instructor said "we can come back for a couple hours of dual and he'll sign me off to go rent solo."

Without hesitation I said "F You, I will write you a check and you will never be sitting in another aircraft we me ever again."

He profusely apologized and asked why I was upset. He said he just "thought I'd enjoy some more dual with him and that "I was such a good pilot and took direction so easily he was interested in doing more work together."

Basically he wanted to see if I was a grape he could squeeze to get as much juice as possible. I later found out this newly minted CFI had only 100 hours tailwheel time and had a reputation for milking people since he was broke.

I harbor no ill will against young and poor CFIs having been there at one time. They do need the experience but should be up front about it. Another issue with all instructors is that they get, or in my opinion should get, little actual stick time. The reason I started this thread is that I realized that Shiv, my local young and poor instructor, was tutored enough on maneuvering flight techniques but needed some quality alone time with fully him iterations. I buy block time at ten hours each block. I had $169.00 left on this block last week, he needed the solo iterations, I called Justin and said I was giving Shiv the money for some solo.

We are all in this together. The FAA and the system has done well addressing safety issues generally, but some very basic lapses have occurred.

Thanks Aryana for your comments.

I had 9 hours total time on my first solo. I definitely did not feel ready as my instructor kicked himself out of the airplane. He said, " I like to solo my students early - it builds confidence." I guess it got me used to the idea of flying without an instructor but I really wasn't ready to solo. I developed a lot of bad habits early in my training. A few years later I started flying tailwheels with an incredible instructor who endorsed me through CFI. First thing he said to me when we went flying - " you got a lot of bad habits you need to unlearn." I don't do a lot of primary instruction anymore but I don't think I have ever signed someone off to solo with less than 15 hours. I would say 15-20 hours is about average but there have been some students who take lessons every 2-3 weeks and they need a lot more time. There is also the litigious nature of our society that make me feel giving a little more dual is prudent. I know under part 61 you only need 40 hours total for the PPL but seems like most students complete it in 60-75.


Josh

Thanks for your comments, Josh. Yours concerns are the consensus generally. I have had the opportunity to cherry pick a bit, as Ag students and farmers tend to have good mechanical backgrounds. Ten hours without about 9.5 manipulating the controls is not best. My experience with all kinds of machines has born that out. There are many reasons people choose to learn to fly, but some amount of risk taking attitude is common. Not that it is inherently dangerous, but is perceived to be.

So long as the student is OK with delay and not just giving in to expectations, more time is valid. Generally, students meet our expectations, but not always. I had one student simply veto my instruction for her to solo. She was older than I and a Bureau of Indian Affairs school administrator. I expect she had issues with being a woman in an administrative position. Anyway I did not leave the airplane anyway and let her solo or taxi back. I caved. It took her 40 hours to solo. She was absolutely ready that day and made a mistake. I also made a mistake. I got older and wiser and didn't make that mistake again.

Anyway, it is a tough issue. Delay in solo is a psychological issue that the Army chose not to deal with. If you didn't solo in ten hours, you were washed out. And that was when the Army needed a lot of pilots. That is not to say those who struggle at around ten hours cannot solo later with good outcome. It is just a factor that makes it tougher.

Again, teaching safe maneuvering flight techniques is necessary, I think, for early solo. The many other things taught in the ACS can be picked up later. The ACS techniques do no make early solo as safe. Justification for the extra training would have to be a student decision, but in my experience it did not delay PPL in the 40 hours. Yes, all that other stuff had to be covered to pass the flight test.

Anyway, thanks for the comments. As I say so often to other instructors and pilots, you are probably right.

I soloed at 16 with 4.2 hours after taking official lessons with a CFI. As a teen I worked as a ramper for a 135 outfit in DLG Alaska and had the great fortune of those pilots and the boss that took me on trips, let me fly and school me in their ways. One pilot in particular had me climb way high and do gliding maneuvers as well as stalls and recovery’s while gliding. Changing airspeeds and all sorts of stuff power off. He said before you get to use the engine, you need to learn how to glide.

Some (but not all) of those pilots were pretty harsh and abrasive. But I tried my best to absorb everything aviation wise as I could no mater how unsavory the character. Seemed like there was something to learn or take away from everyone. One of coolest times in my life was a pilot by the name of John B. who taught and let me do some touch and goes in the 207. It was special cause after all that informal training over the years he didn’t say anything except “Don't taxi so f#$kin fast.”

Month later I went to the lower 48 stayed with my grand parents to take official lessons. The CFI during the first flight already figured I had some time. So my logbook says 4.2..........I had waaaaaay more time than that thanks to those airtaxi pilots who let a kid drive those big Cessna’s on back hauls.

My situation flying with Mr. Press Maxwell was similar. By the time I was old enough to reach the rudder pedals, however, the airplanes were too big for good training. I started in C-180 at nine, Comanche, Twin Comanche, and then Aztec. He had flown B-24 during WWII so that was logical. Finally old enough to solo with Mom's sign off. Six hours in six days with Ken Hoffman in the 90 hp SuperCub at Kensair at Jeffco.

The ability to concentrate just on the elements of taking off and landing safely was a major benefit in those days in early solo. I expect some of my students had some prior unofficial stick time, but operating any kind of machinery was also beneficial. Autos give us lots of iterations of slowing to an intersection using the apparent brisk walk rate of closure approach. Binders and then combines give us the same dynamic proactive sickle height control as dynamic proactive elevator to stay level in low ground effect. Dynamic proactive dozer blade, scraper blade, and bucket blade on loader and backhoe control give the same dynamic proactive control. Bicycles give us the same dynamic proactive bracketing the desired longitudinal alignment that rudder pedals and anti-torque pedals give us.

There is more alike than different in the various models of tractor engine mounted airplanes. But there is more alike than different in the control of most machines. Bracketing is more common than coordination of controls. We just need to look about us for ways to teach students of various backgrounds how similar flying is to the control of various machines in their background. We needn't make our craft out to be so foreign and time consuming.

Much of flying will, actually already has evolved into management of the computers that fly the airplane. Some contact flying will survive, however. Backcountry flying is one area that will. Ag, pipeline patrol, and firefighting are other areas. Big schools and the ACS are already oriented toward the management of the computer. Some of us need to orient toward contact flying. Early solo was common in contact flying and could well be again. Light sport was headed that way but bureaucracy, by its very nature, crushes all non-standard concepts,

Anyway instructors, there is some slack in the ACS. Use the + or - to get closer to the safer and quicker way to learn to fly. Use the slack still in solo requirements to work around some of the arbitrary muchness. Imprint some safe maneuvering flight techniques for safety early. They will not cause them to go over the already too high time to completion of PPL. In my experience, they complete quicker after a short aside to just learn to fly first.

I suspect every student pilot is different. My road to becoming a Sport Pilot was all tailwheel training. I am a sponge and flew 3-4 days a week, 1 1/2 to 2 hours per lesson. I solo’ed at 11.5 hours and got my certificate at 31.5 hours. My buddy who started the same day flying the same plane (Rans S-20) took over 60 hours to get his certificate.

I had watched 1000’s of hours of youtube, read everything I could, and passed my written prior to my first lesson.

I think it is hard to say you can only solo after X number of hours, as long as you have fulfilled the FAA requirements and are competent it is unfair to hold someone back. Students in every endeavor learn at different speeds.

Yes, we do learn at somewhat different rates within a generational basket. In public school education Individual Educational Programs are developed for those with special needs, including giftedness. Yet, even there, the school solution prevails. In my time, Vietnam War, the Army was just becoming high tech and more individualistic. I still liked the slogan, "Be all you can be." better than, "An Army of One."

As yes, as students, we have to look about us for opportunities to be all we can be.

As instructors, on the other hand, we are morally obligated to give them what they individually need to progress and move on as rapidly or as slowly as they are able an that they wish. As operators, we need to give instructors opportunity, and paid for solo time, to develop their own expertise in order to better teach without using student control manipulation time. And as the Administrator, we need to administrate in a way both safest an most beneficial to the student.

Just one plug: turns that increase load factor and thus danger of stall are not as safe as 1 g turns that do not create any load factor and by allowing the nose to go down as designed, prevent stall in the turn. I don't expect I moved the bar for the Administrator, who controls such to some extent. Again, instructors, work around the +or- 5 knots as much as will increase safety. Yours is not the reason why. Yours is but to do and die.

I feel like "when I solo'd" is the go-to pissing contest amongst new and student pilots. In my opinion, early solos are as much a CFI issue as an ego issue with students.

I have always been very skeptical about early aptitude being any indicator of how good you end up at anything. I actually think that for many to whom it comes hard they work way harder at getting good, and learn more. Being instantly confident is often not a good thing, especially in aviation.

The ten thousand hour theory pretty much covers this. But I think in flying it depends how those hours are spent. Are you doing the same thing all the time, or going to new places, getting checked out in different planes, challenging yourself? Look at those 1,000 hr military pilots who have spent all of that time actually training. Briefing, debriefing, planning, flying missions.

It's why it is so much fun for me, and I am very aware that as a new (10 year) pilot at an old age keeping current and paying attention when I fly are really important.

CParker wrote:I feel like "when I solo'd" is the go-to pissing contest amongst new and student pilots. In my opinion, early solos are as much a CFI issue as an ego issue with students.

I personally felt I was ready about 3 hours earlier, but my post was not meant to be a ego post, merely to point out that not every student is the same.

daedaluscan wrote:I have always been very skeptical about early aptitude being any indicator of how good you end up at anything. I actually think that for many to whom it comes hard they work way harder at getting good, and learn more. Being instantly confident is often not a good thing, especially in aviation.

The ten thousand hour theory pretty much covers this. But I think in flying it depends how those hours are spent. Are you doing the same thing all the time, or going to new places, getting checked out in different planes, challenging yourself? Look at those 1,000 hr military pilots who have spent all of that time actually training. Briefing, debriefing, planning, flying missions.

It's why it is so much fun for me, and I am very aware that as a new (10 year) pilot at an old age keeping current and paying attention when I fly are really important.

Interesting post about early aptitude. I am more than familiar with the 10,000 hour “rule”, the book Talent Code is a great read btw.

My CFI was surprised at my sponge-like ability to learn. When my buddy thought he was going slow in comparison to me, our CFI told him my learning curve was unusual.

Just a note, I was a professional athlete in an individual sport for 15 years, so my hand eye coordination also happens to be off the chart in comparison to “normal” people. This too is another reason all students needs to be treated individually for their personal learning curve whether it be slower or faster than average. I never liked be held back by the adage that it is supposed to take X amount of time, so you need to put in X amount of time like everyone else. I found several times in my life I was turned off by my progress being slowed down to fit into a mold type of progression.

David Soucie, "Why Airplanes Crash," is the reason the Army added cycles to the recording of flight hours on aircraft. Along with cycles came iterations in the Crew Training Manuel rather than just hours of various flight missions. Iterations, improvement curve, gets to what we do with the ten thousand hours.

While instructors need to pay attention to student ability to learn more quickly or slowly, operators and leaders need to pay attention to the pace of the program they dictate. General Patton said a good plan executed today is far better than an excellent plan executed three days from now. Toffler, in "Future Shock," points out how the speed of change affects us psychologically. Too fast can make us come unglued, a John Boyd term. Too slow can make us lose situational awareness. Consider a conveyor belt with any product moving on it. Hypothetically, we are to count the products on pain of death. Too fast and we lose it. Too slow and we lose it. All humans fall into the Toffler envelope, but some actually thrive on pretty fast. We lose those students with the present arbitrary pace which is pretty slow compared to the way we older pilots progressed before PTS, ACS. They simply lose interest and enter faster moving career tracks.

John Boyd built the best fighter because it was capable of rapid transitions. John Boyd trained the best pilots because they were capable of rapid transitions. There is certainly a need for other than fighter pilots, but they contribute to the overall mission as well. We are all in this together.

Some instructors teach good bomber pilots because they are very organized and teach very precise organization. Some instructors teach good fighter pilots because they are capable of rapid transitions and teach rapid transitions.

Intelligence quotient has nothing to do with intelligence, only with speed. I am not a good test taker because I read slowly and dwell too long on problems. However, I was quick enough in tennis to take the net, yet return anything including a fast lob. I was capable of rapid transitions and capable of teaching rapid transitions. Muscle memory is not from a book and is teachable. Iterations, regardless of hours, have to do with effective muscle memory. We learn it by doing, not by study.

After years in both public education and flight instruction, I found that expectation is both personal and very powerful. No, you can't make the horse drink. Our students come to us with money, perhaps hard to come by, with expectation of success. We instructors need examine our expectations and techniques to be sure that we offer the safest and most efficient training we are capable of.

I can see the benefit of the early solo in that you learn to make your own aeronautical decision making and rely less on the instructor. It is not good to be robot, but I think the way the FAA is structuring their recommendations for training and safety - it just seems hard for anyone other than a student pilot who grew up around airplanes and exposure to flying. 61.87 requires the following before solo:


(d) Maneuvers and procedures for pre-solo flight training in a single-engine airplane. A student pilot who is receiving training for a single-engine airplane rating or privileges must receive and log flight training for the following maneuvers and procedures:

(1) Proper flight preparation procedures, including preflight planning and preparation, powerplant operation, and aircraft systems;

(2) Taxiing or surface operations, including runups;

(3) Takeoffs and landings, including normal and crosswind;

(4) Straight and level flight, and turns in both directions;

(5) Climbs and climbing turns;

(6) Airport traffic patterns, including entry and departure procedures;

(7) Collision avoidance, windshear avoidance, and wake turbulence avoidance;

(8) Descents, with and without turns, using high and low drag configurations;

(9) Flight at various airspeeds from cruise to slow flight;

(10) Stall entries from various flight attitudes and power combinations with recovery initiated at the first indication of a stall, and recovery from a full stall;

(11) Emergency procedures and equipment malfunctions;

(12) Ground reference maneuvers;

(13) Approaches to a landing area with simulated engine malfunctions;

(14) Slips to a landing; and

(15) Go-arounds.


Just seems hard to cover all of these points in less than 10 hours.


Josh

Josh,

Not every situation is ideal, but I worked in one at Ag Flight in Bainbridge, Georgia. We had an entire WWII Air Force base with multiple runways including a grass strip and only an Air Taxi operators besides us on the field. Billy Howell scheduled two zero time students to arrive every other Sunday. I was on the field living in the billets with the students. Most soloed by Wednesday.

(1) Chow prepared by me with student help. Crop dusters need to have skills for the off season in order not to starve. Both students out to the Aeronca 7AC by sunup. 20 tailwheel airplanes were available but I preferred the one 7AC. I briefed on wing lift, control effect, prop, engine, and fluids while doing directing the first pre-flight. They did the next day and thereafter. i double checked fluids and caps.

(2) Taxi was slow and dynamic proactive rudder to the stop initially. Gross first and then finer later. They needed to know where the stop was and they needed to actually see that the distance of control movement did not matter so long as dynamic and proactive. Runup is never very time consuming in a Champ.

(3) Dynamic proactive rudder movement grosser when slow and becoming finer with acceleration. Dynamic proactive stick to bring the tail up and level the fuselage. Gyroscopic precession and P factor take care of themselves with dynamic proactive rudder movement. Climb just over obstruction to retain zoom reserve in the form of airspeed. Turn downwind (if a crosswind) in order to have upwind base to final turn. Allow nose to go down naturally in all turns. All legs within one quarter mile of field and pattern altitude whatever the airplane seems willing to do, usually about 400.' From a quarter mile short final, do not allow the apparent brisk walk rate of closure to speed up as we get closer. Pitch up to slow down will cause sink which will require more power to control the glide angle and rate of descent. This slowing and sinking brings the throttle fully into control which makes a world of difference how easy it is to land on the beginning of the runway. Crosswind was possible usually within a week using one of the several runways.

(4) Dynamic proactive rudder slight movement to keep a distant target exactly on the nose (between toes in side by side.) Lead rudder to turn with coordinated rudder and aileron. No back pressure in turns. Some energy management turns.

(5) Climbs and climbing turns mostly in the pattern.

(6) Traffic pattern.

(7) Steep energy management turns with continuation of rudder in direction of turn beyond 45 degrees. Use of mostly rudder in low airspeed gust or shear and lots of power initially with balloon and then adjust and throttle closed with sink and then adjust.

(8) Spirals and slips.

(9) Gaits.

(10) Stalls. Dump nose. Make sure the Ag student understands he doesn't have enough altitude for stall recovery. Safe maneuvering flight means never stall which means little back pressure on the stick in turns. Use vertical space available. Cash in potential energy of altitude.

(11) Forced landing practice.

(12) Ground reference maneuvers in the pattern using crosswind to decrease groundspeed and diameter of into wind base to final turn. They will be turning to target (energy management turn) and not turning around targets (the kind of maneuvering flight that gives maneuvering flight a bad name.)

(13) Fields available for actual forced landing practice.

(14) Slips to landing. All landings.

(15) Go arounds. Since they will learn to land on the beginning of the runway, go around will have to do with something encroaching the field. Because the entire base is open, go around will usually be push over to fly in ground effect and rudder turn (sorry yaw) away from runway.

Jim

(9) Gaits?

Curious as to meaning.

Best,

Tom

Wolfgang's term. His second chapter in Stick and Rudder, The Airplanes Gaits, covers normal cruise, slow flight, power on and off stalls, load factors, etc.