Is 1st half of private pilot course good for SP

[rezaf_2000]

Greetings everyone,

This is my first post here. After many years of dreaming and reading about learning to fly, I have been presented with an oppurtunity, which I'd like to get your opinions about. Answering my questions below might take 5-10 minutes of your time, which I greatly appreciate, and will go a long way towards fulfilling a long-standing dream for me.

First some background: I'm not interested in a private pilot license. A sport pilot license seems to be all I'll need for the sort of recreational flying I have in mind. Unfortunately, where I live (central IL, in middle of cornfields) there is no sports pilot training option in a 100 miles radius around me. Finally, I'm 31, and I'm pretty sure I can get a third class medical.

Here's the oppurtunity I mentioned earlier: The local University's aviation department at my own town, only 10 minutes driving distance from my home, has a two semester course (9 months) towards private pilot. I can enroll in only the first of the two courses($4300), and (possibly?) learn most of what is needed for the sport pilot from this course. Later on, take a few more hours of training somewhere else with a light sport instructor and take the sport pilot license exam there.

The course, being the first part of the two courses towards private pilot, includes 30 hours of ground school, 23 hours of dual instruction, 2 hours of solo, 1.5 hours of simulator training and 1 dual hour of night flight. They use Piper PA-28R-201 Archer III aircraft for training. The details of the ground and flight syllabus can be found here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zq78xw4qh30z2gf/101%20ground%20summer%202004.pdf
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zhrqr4jekzm1mo6/101%20tco%202009-2010.pdf

Unfortunately they do not know (and are not interested to learn) any details about the sports pilot license requirements, and how this course might overlap with it, which is why I'm asking for your help. I know that the 24 hour dual time will cover the 15 hours requirements of the SP, and the solo time is 3 hours short. As I said, I do expect to take a total of 5-6 additional hours of light sport training after finishing this course ( perhaps travel to some other town/city for a few days).

What I would like to ask you guys is the details. Could you please take a look at the syllabus linked above and tell me if it does cover what is needed for a sports pilot license? Which areas is it lacking? In general, do you think this is a sound plan?

Thanks a lot for lending a helping hand!

[Jim Stewart]

I've taken (and passed) both the light sport and pp knowledge tests. There are considerable differences, some that will be a distraction and some that will be useful. The pp test covers weather to a much greater degree. Something that will come in handy when you're flying and will not confuse things when you take the light sport test. Also covered in the pp test are types of navigation equipment that you almost never see in a light sport aircraft like VOR. Probably not any harm, but of not much use. Finally, the regulations covered are quite different and learning the pp stuff and then learning the light sport stuff will be confusing.

To be honest, all you really have to do is buy the ASA Light Sport test prep kit, study, and take the test when you get to the point that you're only missing one or two questions every time you take a practice test. Worked for me and my wife.

[3Dreaming]

I'm not quite 100 miles away and I do provide sport pilot training, but it is still a 2 hour drive one way. All of the flight time will be good. The ground school like Jim said will cover some things that are not needed for the sport pilot, but the extra information is always good. There are a few differences with the part 43 and 61 regulations, but everything else should be OK. The extra 5-6 hours in the light sport you talked about will likely be almost double what you have figured to get you to the checkride stage. Tom

[rezaf_2000]

Thanks Jim and Tom for your information.

To be honest I'm not very concerned about the ground school, and the differences in the required material for the written test. I'm a quick study and will study the sport pilot knowledge myself. What I am most concerned about is the flight section. How does the schedule for this course differ from what I would need to pilot a LSA, and what is missing? this last point is what I need your help with.

I can identify some of the extra material covered in the course. For instance, they have 1 hour of night dual flight (lesson 10, page 12). Or it seems they have a few hours of basic IFR (pages 13 & 14). It also seems they cover a bit of tower communication (pages 4,5, 13).

But I can't identify what is missing. Well, there is only 2 hours of solo (page 15), which doesn't include cross-country. But are there manuevers required for sport pilot that is not covered in this course? What else is missing?

(just in case, the document I'm talking about is stored here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/zhrqr4jekzm1mo6/101%20tco%202009-2010.pdf)


The second question I have is that in your opinion, how hard is the transition from a piper archer iii to an LSA? Tom mentioned that I would need 10-12 hours of extra training in an LSA? If that's so, wouldn't this whole course not be worth the hassle? The whole sport pilot license requires 20 hours of flight, and if I need to repeat 12 hours of it again, I might as well not do this private pilot course?

[3Dreaming]

For the flight training everything they list except the night is OK for sport pilot, and the night time wouldn't hurt anything. There are no extra manuevers you need to learn for sport pilot either. The 20 hours required by the FAA is the minimum, and most see closer to 35. The reason I said an additional 10-12 is not because you are learning anything new, but because you are learning how to fly a different airplane. The light sport airplane is going to fly very different than the Archer III, and it will take a while to get used to the differences. Also most of the modern light sport airplanes are more complex than the Archer. If you don't have a problem with getting a medical I think I would look at doing the complete private pilot program, since it is in your back yard so to speek. You can still do the flying you want to do with the private ticket, and no extra road time to get it done.

[drseti]

how hard is the transition from a piper archer iii to an LSA? Tom mentioned that I would need 10-12 hours of extra training in an LSA?

First off (and I know this is difficult, especially when you are doing flight training on a budget), you need to put aside all concern about number of hours. Your goal should be competence, becoming the best and safest pilot you can be, regardless of the number of hours it takes to accomplish that. FAA requirements mean nothing -- perhaps they used to be an approximation of the number of flight hours a reasonably competent person might take to reach a certain skill level, but that no longer seems to be the case. So, if you transition to an LSA, is it going to take you 5 hours? 10? 2? Some folks may never get there in 100 hours!

OK, so what's reasonable, and why? The Archer has considerably higher wing loading than an LSA. It exhibits much higher inertia, which translates to stability. In other words, it's easier to fly. LSAs take more effort to learn to fly well, because they are low wing loading, low inertia aircraft. It takes a while to get the feel of them, and that shouldn't be rushed. But, no matter what type of license you have or seek, the act of gaining those skills makes you a better pilot.

I do a lot of transition training, often of highly qualified pilots (Private, Commercial, even ATP) with many thousands of hours of experience, who have never flown an LSA. I'm lucky, because I get the good ones -- those pilots who seek transition training are the ones that realize they need to tap into a completely different skill set when flying LSAs. Legally, they are under no requirement to get any training at all. A person with a PPL that says ASEL can legally get into any LSA airplane, and fly it, with no additional instruction whatever. And many -- too many -- do just that. Read the accident reports. The vast majority of LSA accidents occur to highly experienced pilots who haven't sought transition training!

I've put together a three-day transition course (see http://avsport.org/about/downsize.htm) which should make any current, reasonably competent pilot comfortable flying an LSA. If you were to train in an Archer to the point of solo, such a course would make the transition reasonably seamless. In those three days, you would be getting about five hours of dual (coincidentally just about what most insurance companies require for a licensed pilot transitioning to LSA), plus five hours of individualized ground instruction to teach you the peculiarities of the LSA rules, plus a bunch of reading assignments to make you comfortable doing flight planning and XC preparation in such an aircraft.

If you did the PPL course up to and including first solo, and were reasonably well prepared for the PPL knowledge test, this course would get you to the point of being prepared for the SP knowledge test, doing supervised solos in an LSA, and ready to do your XC training (including the solo XC flight requirement, during which you would have met all your required solo hours). After doing your solo XC, it would be just a matter of a couple more hours of dual in preparation for the checkride, followed by a practice checkride with my adjunct instructor -- followed by the FAA practical test. None of the hours in the Archer would be wasted; the night flying is always interesting (even though not required), and the VOR navigation and communication experience will make you a far better Sport Pilot. You might even choose to use the VOR in my plane on your solo XC flying, instead of (or, ideally, in addition to) the GPS moving map.

Incidentally, I've had students transition the other way -- do their pre-solo training in an LSA, and then move up to a Cherokee for all post-solo training, including XC and night flying, all the way up to the PPL. The transition from LSA to the Cherokee is actually easier than going the other way, just as it's easier to go from driving a stick shift to an automatic transition, than the reverse. Plus, just as those who start out driving a stick end up being better all-around drivers, I believe the same holds true for those pilots who start out in an LSA. But maybe I only think that because, like most of my generation, I started out in an Aeronca Champ! (OK, there were those in my day who didn't train in a Champ. They started out instead in a Cub...)

Bottom line, if you want to be a Sport Pilot: that PPL course in the Archer isn't a bad way to start. After that, take a vacation, come out to Lock Haven and spend a couple of weeks with me, and I'll have you ready for your checkride in a beautiful Evektor SportStar Max. That plane is better equipped than most Archers, very responsive, and rather fun to fly.

And isn't fun what Sport Flying is supposed to be all about?

[rezaf_2000]

For the flight training everything they list except the night is OK for sport pilot, and the night time wouldn't hurt anything. There are no extra manuevers you need to learn for sport pilot either. The 20 hours required by the FAA is the minimum, and most see closer to 35.

I see, well I didn't know that. In that case, the 27 hours of this course plus an additional 10-12 hours of LSA would add up to 37-39 hours, which is still close to the average. That would be acceptable to me.

The reason I said an additional 10-12 is not because you are learning anything new, but because you are learning how to fly a different airplane. The light sport airplane is going to fly very different than the Archer III, and it will take a while to get used to the differences. Also most of the modern light sport airplanes are more complex than the Archer.

When changing aircraft, Is it common to spend some hours training with the new aircraft? If so, how many hours is common? Of course I realize being a novice, the required hours for transitioning from a piper to an LSA would be more than the average. But I'd like to know what is the average for already licensed pilots.

If you don't have a problem with getting a medical I think I would look at doing the complete private pilot program, since it is in your back yard so to speek. You can still do the flying you want to do with the private ticket, and no extra road time to get it done.

Well there are a few reasons.
1. The second course is even more expensive at $5600, and takes an extra 4-5 months. In contrast, the first course which I'm interested in is a summer course, taking only 7 weeks.
2. It is very probable that I move to California this coming Fall for a new job. I thought I might pull the trigger and learn to fly before I get involved with the new job, while I have more free time, hence thinking about this course. But I probably won't be around for the second course.
3. Well, if all I want for now is the sport license, why should I spend more money and time to get the private license if I won't be using it?

Having said that, if I don't move out this Fall, I might as well enroll in the second course to get the private. It's in my own town anyway, so at least the commute won't be bad. And I can rent el-cheapo cessna 150s

But the main question is that: assuming I can only attend the first course, would it help my cause towards a private pilot license? Based on your comments, I'd think the answer is yes. I might need to spend a week later with an LSA and fly 10-12 hours (cost: ~$1500?), but this course does in fact get me much closer to the license. Is my understanding correct?

[drseti]

I might need to spend a week later with an LSA and fly 10-12 hours (cost: ~$1500?), but this course does in fact get me much closer to the license. Is my understanding correct?

Well, of course everyone progresses at his or her own rate, but if you're average, and assuming that you are successful in that Archer course (and retain everything you learned), it would probably be more like two weeks with somebody like me, at a cost of, let's say, $2000 for the aircraft and instructor. Then, you have to budget the additional cost of the written test (typically $150, depends on the testing center), the DPE (they charge about $500, again depending upon the examiner), and another two hours of aircraft rental for the checkride (at maybe $120 an hour wet). So, it could go as high as $3k to get you licensed in an LSA, after you do that college course. That's roughly half of what it would cost you to do the PPL with the second college course - except that, of course, I don't know whether the $5600 college tuition includes the written, checkride fee, and aircraft rental... I would guess it doesn't. So, this could indeed be a cost-effective way to go from zero to SP.

[jnmeade]

You should go ahead and buy an LSA equivalent airplane (like a Champ) for $25,000 and hire a local CFI to teach you to fly it. He'll charge $50/hr or less. For probably $27,000 you could get your Sport Pilot license or put in another $1000 for CFI time and get a private. (Then sell the airplane for what you have in it, if you need to.)

If you don't buy an airplane, the course your considering seems pretty good. It's not bad value for as far as it goes. Frankly, I personally would strongly consider taking the first phase and then going to a local CFI and finishing up that way. Figure another 20 hours would be @$3000.

I put most of my students through to their private in less than 50 hours. I sent two down who got their 40 hours completed enroute to the examiner. All passed the first time. In my opinion, much of the extra time needed to get a license in some areas has to do with learning complicated airspace. If you were learning at DuPage, no one would turn you loose without a lot of dual in the Chicago Class B. At my airport, we didn't have any Class B. Your home doesn't, either.

I think you could do the summer course and then finish on your own before your move, but you'd want to feel comfortable that the instructor and plane and you could make it happen.

[rezaf_2000]

Thanks a lot Paul for your very thorough answer. It did in fact answer all my questions at this point.

... you need to put aside all concern about number of hours. Your goal should be competence, becoming the best and safest pilot you can be, regardless of the number of hours it takes to accomplish that.

I totally agree on your point about targeting for competence. As much as they sound convenient, I do not believe in the accelerated crash courses. There are a number of them offering two-week SP courses, but in an activity that a single error can kill you, I'd prefer to go the slow and steady route. This is in fact how I learned to ride a motorcycle, taking the motorcycle safety course twice before I felt confident enough to go ride. I checked out some of the courses on your website, and I wholeheartedly agree with your suggestions and assessments. Your "accelerated" training takes 10 weeks, while the Floridans try to cram it (and I'm pretty sure they physically cannot cover everything) in 2 weeks.

The PPL course I intend to take this summer seems to target both a full syllabus and intensive training at the same time. It's 7 weeks, and there is a flight session scheduled 6-days a week! In total, 4-5 hours of daily class (half ground, half flight) for almost two months. Because of this, I hope by the end of this course I am prepared for solo. (The course itself includes 2 hours of solo).

None of the hours in the Archer would be wasted; the night flying is always interesting (even though not required), and the VOR navigation and communication experience will make you a far better Sport Pilot. You might even choose to use the VOR in my plane on your solo XC flying, instead of (or, ideally, in addition to) the GPS moving map. ....... Bottom line, if you want to be a Sport Pilot: that PPL course in the Archer isn't a bad way to start.

This is very encouraging, and exactly the answer to my original question. I think I'll go on an enroll.

I might need to spend a week later with an LSA and fly 10-12 hours (cost: ~$1500?), but this course does in fact get me much closer to the license. Is my understanding correct?

... it could go as high as $3k to get you licensed in an LSA, after you do that college course. ... that's roughly half of what it would cost you to do the PPL with the second college course - except that, of course, I don't know whether the $5600 college tuition includes the written, checkride fee, and aircraft rental... I would guess it doesn't. So, this could indeed be a cost-effective way to go from zero to SP.

Well, here's why I used the word "opportunity" in my original post. I'm a postdoctoral researcher at this university, and therefore I won't need to pay the course tuition itself. So the $4400 and $5600 are only the flight fees, which I'd guess cover the aircraft rental and gas. The rest comes out free for me. So if I were to do the second course, there won't be extra fees for checkride, written, DPE, etc. I'll double check this with them on Monday to make sure.


Well, I think I'm probably better off not speculating about what can happen after the course, let's take things step by step. The important thing now is that this course would be helpful in any case. After its completion, if I stay here, I can go on and get my PPL. If not, as you have confirmed, the hours are not wasted. Maybe a bit of extra material, but even they could be helpful. And with something like your 3-day transition course ($1k), I'm back on track to finish my SPL. If or when I move to a different state, 1-2 weeks of time commitment to finish it would be much easier to handle than starting from the scratch.

[rezaf_2000]

You should go ahead and buy an LSA equivalent airplane (like a Champ) for $25,000 and hire a local CFI to teach you to fly it. He'll charge $50/hr or less. For probably $27,000 you could get your Sport Pilot license or put in another $1000 for CFI time and get a private. (Then sell the airplane for what you have in it, if you need to.)

Hmm, now that's an interesting idea, but I have to pass up on that.
1. I don't think I can make a well-educated decision on what to buy to make sure it doesn't fall out of the sky! yes I know, these things are supposed to be erviced annually, but well, I just don't feel that adventurous. I'm a conservative person by nature, and the thought of flying, even in a recent aircraft like most flying schools makes my heart pound, let alone some old and used lemon that I couldn't recognize how bad it was! I'm sure there are good ones out there, but there's no guarantee that I can find them.
2. An aeronca champ has even less dials and controls than my motorcycle! I'm exaggerating of course, but these machines are as old as my grand parents. I may be paranoid here, but I'd rather decrease the risks in the beginning my flying career.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 40_arp.jpg
3. I don't have $30k lying around at the moment! But also I have to think about financing, insurance, hanger, maintenance, ... I don't think at the moment I want to get involved with all these.

If you don't buy an airplane, the course your considering seems pretty good. It's not bad value for as far as it goes. Frankly, I personally would strongly consider taking the first phase and then going to a local CFI and finishing up that way. Figure another 20 hours would be @$3000.

Yes, after reading your thoughts in this thread, I'm thinking positively about this course.

I put most of my students through to their private in less than 50 hours. I sent two down who got their 40 hours completed enroute to the examiner. All passed the first time. In my opinion, much of the extra time needed to get a license in some areas has to do with learning complicated airspace. If you were learning at DuPage, no one would turn you loose without a lot of dual in the Chicago Class B. At my airport, we didn't have any Class B. Your home doesn't, either.

My town is class C, and that' probably why the course has tower communication components. Well, as Paul said, it's skills that someday, somewhere will help me.

[jnmeade]

2. An aeronca champ has even less dials and controls than my motorcycle! I'm exaggerating of course, but these machines are as old as my grand parents. I may be paranoid here, but I'd rather decrease the risks in the beginning my flying career.

I'll let Paul address this.

My town is class C, and that' probably why the course has tower communication components. Well, as Paul said, it's skills that someday, somewhere will help me.

Any PPL course will have tower communication in it. Class C is very easy, and your controllers will be very familiar with student pilots. You'll most likely stay on approach frequency in the practice area, but in any event all you need is positive communication. Class B is an entirely different animal, especially if you have to transit it. Look at the Los Angeles Class B air space sometime and you'll see what I mean. Also, if you have a lot of special use airspace like MOS, Restricted, Prohibited, etc., you will need a lot more training before they let you go out in that area all the time. (It's not such a big deal if you are doing a cross country and have to contend with an MOA or two and not have to dodge them all the time.)

[rezaf_2000]

My town is class C, and that's probably why the course has tower communication components. Well, as Paul said, it's skills that someday, somewhere will help me.

Any PPL course will have tower communication in it. Class C is very easy, and your controllers will be very familiar with student pilots. You'll most likely stay on approach frequency in the practice area, but in any event all you need is positive communication. Class B is an entirely different animal, especially if you have to transit it. Look at the Los Angeles Class B air space sometime and you'll see what I mean. Also, if you have a lot of special use airspace like MOS, Restricted, Prohibited, etc., you will need a lot more training before they let you go out in that area all the time. (It's not such a big deal if you are doing a cross country and have to contend with an MOA or two and not have to dodge them all the time.)

Does SPL include any sort of tower communication? If someone is living in Chicago for example, they cannot use a SPL?

[jnmeade]

Here are the rules on operating with a SPL in B,C & D airspace.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c= ... 13&idno=14

There is no requirement in SPL training for training in tower or any other communication. You don't even need to know light signals. If a person flies his J3 or Champ or some trike out in the boonies, he may never need to know communications.

However, nearly all modern airplanes have radios, most of us want to fly where radio use is at least recommended even when not required, and some of us want to go into towered airports routinely, so in fact I'd find it rather strange that very many people get an SPL without some communication training.

Having said that there is no communication training required, it behooves us all to know how to respond if an F-15 pulls up beside your bugsmasher and makes funny hand signals to you.

[rezaf_2000]

I wonder if the F-15 can even fly as slow as SLAs without stalling?!

Thank you everyone for answering my questions, and even providing more information about the possible routes after this course. I'm going to sign up for it, wish me luck!