Good thread.

just a couple of meanderings from me. Mainly my experience with new insurance checkouts (all of my aircraft purchases have been TW), I've always initially* been required to get a combination of minimum dual (with an instructor) or a "checkout."

When i bought my pacer, i had about 100 hours of mixed 172, citabria, and Super Cub time with a TW endorsement. The pacer required 5 hours of dual with an instructor, which was fair because to be honest it was 3 or 4 hours before i felt like i wasn't going to wad it up on landing! No exaggeration. Also dovetailed with the seller being a CFI that made a checkout of condition of selling; he was retiring and didn't want someone to kill themselves and come after him.

Next planes were all 180's and 185. I had no time in type with the 180, and there was no instructor local that met the "20 hours time in type" requirement. Got the insurance to alternatively qualify a friend of mine that was (is) a current Airforce IP (F-16's) but had 1000 hours plus of 180/185 time and a DC-3 type rating. I just ferried the plane with him and he told me to fly it for the first 20 hours solo, on grass and with no wind. It worked out. For the 2nd 180 and now the 185...it was just an "instructor checkout."

For the Ag-wagon, it was essentially a self checkout. Funny thing was, they wanted an "hour of instruction"...which we took to mean ground since there are no (or none that i know of) two hole-er Ag wagons. First flight is always solo, it was a non-issue on grass and light wind. Sweet flying airplane.

Lastly, the insurance requirements seem like they are erratic or silly sometimes...but insurance is based on statistics in large part. The fatality/major damage/incident rates on 180's/185's and Maules are several times that of there tri-cycle cousins. There's something to it. Comparing now to the 1950's...I can only guess. Similar to what MTV has said, the demographic and skill set has changed. Also the hull value has dramatically increased sine the 1980's. A late model, used 180 went for 20 something in the mid 80s. Not so now. Also, in the 1950's, 60's and even 70's it would be hard to find an instructor that didn't start in champ, cub, etc.

Interesting side note; my primary flight instructor was a retired fighter guy (among other things) and commanded a sky raider squadron in Viet Nam. He stated that they lost more sky raiders to ground handling incidents than to enemy fire. At that time, many of the new Air force guys were training in the T-37 and had not been exposed to any significant TW training. He was eventually tasked with checking out/re-training newcomers in various smaller TW airplanes to work them up to the skyraider. That's in stark contrast to the previous generation that went from Stearman (day one), to T-6 to fighter. Or the Navy guys that were carrier qualifying corsairs/hellcats at 200 hours total time. Different skill set. Just getting a Stearman checkout nowadays is pretty daunting!

Bill

Good discussion. Insurance requirements can often be interesting. The night before picking up my 205, I was surprised with the "oh, and you'll need an hour checkout". Nothing had been mentioned about it and the plane was at a lonely, frozen airport high in the front range with no FBO or instructors to be had. The owner wouldn't be there and wasn't a CFI anyway. I had about 5 hours in type with 3 of them being in the previous couple of weeks. None of the previous sellers I had flown with were CFIs either. So, with some pushing, they decided I was ok. (BTW, AOPAIA really went to bat for me.). All this because it is, on paper, a 210.

But then another issue arose. It's at 8,000' in the MOUNTAINS! Granted, they don't know me from Adam, so I can see it from their perspective. I didn't know if I'd be shooting myself in the foot, but to curb their concerns, I offered to send them some pics of me at various places in the Idaho back country. Shortly after receiving the pics, I got the ok to go get the plane. So, it's worth trying to negotiate and see if they will budge.

hotrod180 wrote:IMHO someone who for example has some 182 time and some 170 time doesn't really need a checkout to fly a 180.
And someone with 180 time doesn't need a 185 checkout, other than the quirks of the injection system.
All aircraft have some quirks, but to some extent "an airplane is an airplane".

I've always chuckled at the idea of a multi-thousand-hour pilot getting a BFR from a 300-hour CFI--
in that situation, who's really teaching who?
And as far as having a fool for a student, some people are fools no matter how much dual instruction they've gotten -- or given!

In my younger days, I was flying as an observer on waterfowl surveys in northern CA. The pilot I was flying with realized that he was in need of a Flight Review, the requirement for which had come into being two years previous.

We landed in Klamath Falls, OR, and Ray went in to the FBO, which also had a flight school. He asked if there was an instructor available to do a BFR (they were initially called biennial flight reviews, before the "biennial" was dropped.). The owner introduced us to a young CFI, and we sat down with him for the ground portion, then we got in the 206 and did the flight. The CFI was very professional and thorough, pointing out some things Ray could do to polish up his flying.

To put this in context, Ray flew P-38s early in WW II, completed a tour in Europe, rotated back to the states, then trained in P-61s, and deployed to the Pacific a few months before the end of hostilities.

So, upon completion of the BFR, the CFI opened Ray's logbook, and was very quiet for a long time as he read a few pages. Then he stood and apologized to Ray for having been so presumptious as to assume that a young, inexperienced instructor could teach someone like Ray anything about flying.

The result was the only time I ever heard Ray speak sternly to someone. He said "Don't you EVER apologize for trying to improve someone else's flying, when they need some improvement. Like anyone, I've gotten a bit lax in some things, and you pointed out some things I need to pay attention to. That was a good learning experience, so don't apologize."

We got back in the 206 and headed out for our next transect, and I asked Ray what he actually thought about the BFR concept, and he told me that he thought that CFI did a great job of waking Ray up to the fact that he'd let his flight discipline slip some, and he really appreciated it. All in all, he thought the BFR was a good idea.

Many years later, I took ten hours of dual in a Pitts S-2C with a 19 year old CFI. That young man, with a few hundred hours in his logbook, was probably the best CFI I've ever flown with, partially because he let me fly the plane, and let me go farther than I would have without getting on the controls. He offered great advice on getting the best performance out of that little hot rod, and polishing up my rather sloppy flying.........and for almost thirty years, I took checkrides twice a year or more.
And I've always remembered Ray's attitude.

Some of those checkrides were better than others, but I've honestly never flown with someone where I didn't learn something from them....not always good, but those bad ones can be wake ups as well.

An old friend used to say "If you don't learn something every time you fly, you weren't paying attention. That definitely applies to flying with someone else.

MTV

Awesome post Mike!!

Grassstrippilot wrote:.... Granted, they don't know me from Adam.....

Good one! (intentional or not!)

I'm enjoying this thread.

MTV, I wasn't trying to make a point. That was a genuine question that I had been thinking about for a while. Your probably right about the type of training airplanes of the '40s and '50s along with the multitude of TW instructors. I've been looking for a stick and rudder type of CFI with a TW airplane to help get me proficient and ready to fly the Bearhawk. Options are slim to nonexistent.

I've had to do a number of insurance checkouts over the years, in addition to BFRs and IPCs, and I've never failed to learn something from each one of them--and I learn from each flight even by myself. None of us is so good that we can't be better.

Cary

whee wrote:I'm enjoying this thread.

MTV, I wasn't trying to make a point. That was a genuine question that I had been thinking about for a while. Your probably right about the type of training airplanes of the '40s and '50s along with the multitude of TW instructors. I've been looking for a stick and rudder type of CFI with a TW airplane to help get me proficient and ready to fly the Bearhawk. Options are slim to nonexistent.

You are oh so right, and there are several reasons for that. For many years, I offered flight training in my 170....floats in summer, wheels and skis in winter. Insurance cost an arm and a leg, and that was for liability only...no hull. So, if we rolled it up, I'd have eaten it. Now, this was Alaska as well, which seriously inflates insurance cost, but....

Finding a "qualified" instructor is a challenge. Hanging onto one is even harder. At the school, the folks who leased us the Top Cub wanted to do CFI check outs in it. Of course, that requires a "qualified CFI" to conduct the check out. I flew with a couple of them, and provided feedback that they would require a good bit of dual till I'd sign them off. So, they put one of their tailwheels CFIs in the back seat, and put it on its back on the second landing. Rebuilt it, and they did same-same again later.

In your neighborhood, the go to guy used to be Bob Jones. I'd be talking to Bob Hoff for ideas if Jones is no longer around.

MTV

hotrod180 wrote:

Grassstrippilot wrote:.... Granted, they don't know me from Adam.....

Good one! (intentional or not!)

[emoji12]. Didn't think of that!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Good thread.

I'm nobody special but can certainly help folks get current or familiar with a TW aircraft. Having flown a number of different type tailwheel aircraft I would love to help. Just throwing it out there. Your Bearhawk will be a dream to fly Whee!

AKT

You back down in Truckee? I need a BFR pretty soon.

aktahoe1 wrote:Your Bearhawk will be a dream to fly Whee!

I hope your right!

Still not having much luck finding a local CFI that has a TW plane and it willing to use it to get me current again. Found a couple options will work but would require a couple nights in a hotel room. Maybe I'll just wait and drive to HSF 2017 and see if I can convince someone to give me a BFR while there[emoji16]...but in reality that's a pretty terrible idea[emoji57]

whee wrote:

aktahoe1 wrote:Your Bearhawk will be a dream to fly Whee!

I hope your right!

Still not having much luck finding a local CFI that has a TW plane and it willing to use it to get me current again. Found a couple options will work but would require a couple nights in a hotel room. Maybe I'll just wait and drive to HSF 2017 and see if I can convince someone to give me a BFR while there[emoji16]...but in reality that's a pretty terrible idea[emoji57]

Just come see me. We will get you current.

CFOT- I will be back in Truckee on April 25th. Lets make it happen!

AKT

hotrod180 wrote:I've always chuckled at the idea of a multi-thousand-hour pilot getting a BFR from a 300-hour CFI--
in that situation, who's really teaching who?

A lot of times the 300 hour CFI, but only if the high time pilot is willing to listen. I am old (and lucky) enough that I fit into the multi-thousand category, but if I went to get checked out in a Cirrus it would be a learning curve for me - and I would ask for the lowest time CFI just to help him get hours.