What are the chances?

Finally, a place for sport pilot instructors and/or wannabees to talk about instructing.

Moderator: drseti

mhaleem
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:38 pm

What are the chances?

Postby mhaleem » Tue Dec 04, 2012 6:54 pm

What do you think the chances are that the FAA will make the change to the regs concerning dual time counting from a sport CFI and is the decision light years down the road???
Tuskegee U Alum

jwn57030
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 8:53 am

Re: What are the chances?

Postby jwn57030 » Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:29 pm

I assume your speaking of the hours flown with a sport cfi not counting towards any license but the sport license. I will be hopefully be getting my sports license in a couple weeks and I specifically choose to go with a normal cfi so all my hours would count towards a private license if I eventually choose to get one. It is an interesting point that if I took lessons from a sport cfi that I would be learning all of the same things. After thinking about it though I am not sure they should change it. If the hours did count I could see a lot more career pilots starting with the sport-cfi first to start earning money sooner. I assume for safety the FAA would prefer to have cfi's with more experience and training. I would as well. Does anyone know the rationale behind having a sport-cfi? My best guest would be its intended for smaller more rural airports that may have a lack of CFI's. Also since the sport pilot is just meant strictly for fun they can train people that just want to fly more around the local area and not do much more.

mhaleem
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:38 pm

Re: What are the chances?

Postby mhaleem » Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:48 pm

You may be an exceptional student, but statistics say that most achieve the private pilot rating in the 60-70 hours of training range. I fell into this range when I earned my private. Forty hours represents the FAA minimum. I bring this up because there has been a lot of discussion about dual training from a CFI-Sport not counting towards the private, but if you look at the numbers should a person obtain the sport license at 20 hours, there remains 20 hours minimum to achieve the private anyway. A sport to private transition will require more training hours consisting of basic instrument training, night flying, more cross country flying, practical test prep, etc. When you add these additional hours up your are not far from an additional 20 hours dual and the argument becomes nil.
Tuskegee U Alum

Jack Tyler
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL

Re: What are the chances?

Postby Jack Tyler » Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:00 am

"When you add these additional hours up your are not far from an additional 20 hours dual and the argument becomes nil."

I agree with the math but not the conclusion. As I think the OP's Q meant to imply, if the dual instruction was received with a Sport CFI (sorry Paul, I forgot the right terminology...) and that SP wanted to move up to a PPL, it isn't just the additional subjects that would need to be added for a PPL check ride. As the regs are currently written, ALL the dual hours would need to be repeated with a conventional CFI.

BTW I think Cessna does something very nice WRT this issue. They have replicated their PPL training content (which is web based but coupled with a student DVD) for their SPL training content, minus the PPL-only subject areas. If the SP wants to upgrade to PPL, s/he only has to pay an additional fee (to unlock the add'l PPL-related content) and complete those blocks and fly those hours. To my mind, that's a nice integration that serves the SP well...and of course, Cessna Flight Centers all offer conventional CFI instructors so the beginning SPL student is given the option to preserve that PPL upgrade path at a later date by using Cessna's SPL program.

"...statistics say that most achieve the private pilot rating in the 60-70 hours of training range."

That's true to the same degree that the average American family has 2.2 children. But as has been mentioned multiple times before, depending on the quality of the training (instructor, course materials, other support available to the student and a simulator) and how steady the student's progression through the curriculum (has the time, has the money, has the grit), some students are ready for their PP check rides in less than 40 hrs. Redbird recently demonstrated this with a group of (as memory serves...) 40 recent PP students at their San Marcos facility. And two high school students whose progress I've been following at our rural airport both had to fly off additional hours to reach their mandated 40, after qualifying for their check rides. The 60+ hour 'actual' stats seem to reflect (poorly) on the quality of training and the inability of many students to stick to a regular training regimen moreso than the difficulty of mastering the knowledge and skills required for the test in 40 hrs. And this conclusion is also consistent with what the military experiences in their primary flight training. Strong student motivation, sim training to lock in procedures, regular flying, a well-proven curriculum, skilled instructors and readily available training a/c seem to be the key factors. Despite the high standards, only a small percentage of military student pilots require some additional flight hours beyond those allowed for the curriculum.
Jack
Flying in/out KBZN, Bozeman MT in a Grumman Tiger
Do you fly for recreational purposes? Please visit http://www.theraf.org

User avatar
drseti
Posts: 5224
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: Lock Haven PA
Contact:

Re: What are the chances?

Postby drseti » Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:06 am

jwn57030 wrote:Does anyone know the rationale behind having a sport-cfi?


It was originally included to provide an upgrade path for Ultralight instructors (who did NOT have to be FAA certified). I'm sure the FAA's intent was to bring those folks under their regulatory umbrella, without them having to acquire commercial/instrument ratings. Since many of those original ultralight instructors had many hundreds of hours of instructional experience, the argument that Subpart H CFIs were more experienced didn't necessarily hold then. But with more new SPs now getting their Subpart K instructor ratings, that may be a valid consideration now.
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof. H. Paul Shuch, Ph.D., CFII, LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC, iRMT
AvSport of Lock Haven
fly@AvSport.org
http://AvSport.org
http://facebook.com/SportFlying

Jack Tyler
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL

Hours to Completion

Postby Jack Tyler » Fri Dec 07, 2012 12:35 pm

Re: hours needed to complete the PPL curriculum, Frasca (in the sim business for 50 years now) just authored a report on what works and what doesn't WRT using a simulator in pilot training. An excerpt from their intro:

"The approach has been tested by flight schools for decades. Starting in the 1960's, pilots at Purdue University passed Private and Instrument standards in less than the regulated minimums by applying simulation to reduce flight time. In 2006, ab-initio Pilots at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University passed Private standards in only 28 flight hours with 40 hours flown in Frasca Level 6 FTDs. Middle Tennessee State University, Southern Illinois University, Western Michigan University, University of North Dakota, and others all have had similar results when pairing accurate simulation with specialized curriculum. Today, most collegiate aviation programs in the US are using Frasca simulation and Frasca says their work is adding to the body of evidence."

Once again, we're seeing that modifying the curriculum to accommodate - and to maximize the benefits - of a simulator can have a big impact on reducing the overall cost of obtaining a pilot's license.
Jack
Flying in/out KBZN, Bozeman MT in a Grumman Tiger
Do you fly for recreational purposes? Please visit http://www.theraf.org


Return to “Instructors' Corner”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests