...

[3Dreaming]

And Cecil.

Yep, him too.

[HAPPYDAN]

I guess he didn't like my advice. I didn't mean to piss him off, but to say he missed 52 questions, am I ready, didn't make much sense.

So if I remember right, there are 40 questions on the Sport Pilot test and 60 on the PPL. Right? Your response may have been appropriate. Last August I went for another Sport Pilot test, and the proctor had entered info for the drone (unmanned aircraft) test. I was not a happy camper, and I'm sure I would have failed that miserably, if I had not caught the error.

[HAPPYDAN]

Edit to previous post: If that was just one of those online practice test, then no big deal. Sometimes they do mix in PPL questions on practice SPL tests. Stuff regarding complex aircraft, VOR navigation, night flight, etc. are not on the SPL test.

[drseti]

Hey, does anybody happen to know the subject of this thread? The topic line merely says "...".

[drseti]

I would not take the test until I knew the material and was confident I would make a good grade, not just barely passing.

I won't sign off a student for a knowledge test until we're both sure the student is going to ace it. My reason: any subject area in which the applicant has missed a question on the written is fair game for the DPE to hammer the student on during the oral.

BTW, by being selective with my knowledge test signoffs, I get to boast that, in my fifth decade of teaching, I've still never had a student fail a written.

[Half Fast]

BTW, by being selective with my knowledge test signoffs, I get to boast that, in my fifth decade of teaching, I've still never had a student fail a written.

And to which home study course do you attribute that?

[drseti]

And to which home study course do you attribute that?

Actually, to a combination of the Gleim study materials (which are a bit dry, but very thorough) and the hour of one-on-one tutorial ground instruction which is integral to each of my flight lessons. Not everybody is able to schedule integrated curriculum, but it has the advantage of correlating the knowledge test subjects to actual in-flight scenarios, so the two aspects of pilot training actually complement each other.

(Note that when I started teaching, neither the Gleim, Sportys, or King home study courses existed.)

[Half Fast]

Just yanking your chain a bit, Paul. I know you run a thorough and somewhat formal curriculum.

I didn't use a formal home study program; just studied the PHAK and FAR/AIM, but used ASA's "Test Prep" question compilation and Sporty's practice tests to quiz myself.

There's so much stuff available for free these days, between FAA book downloads and YouTube videos, that it's not really necessary to buy Gleim or similar. I'm sure they're very good, and probably a good idea for students that need help organizing and learning material, but a good student can do fine without them.

[drseti]

it's not really necessary to buy Gleim or similar. I'm sure they're very good, and probably a good idea for students that need help organizing and learning material, but a good student can do fine without them.

I agree completely. But the crutch is a great confidence builder for students who aren't so sure of themselves.

[Half Fast]

it's not really necessary to buy Gleim or similar. I'm sure they're very good, and probably a good idea for students that need help organizing and learning material, but a good student can do fine without them.

I agree completely. But the crutch is a great confidence builder for students who aren't so sure of themselves.

I'm sure that's true, but you require ALL your students to use the crutch, right? Were I one of your students, I'd be unhappy having to spend money for the Gleim materials and for an hour of ground school at each flight lesson.

But that's why there are different schools and different instructors. And your system seems to work well.

[3Dreaming]

Why quote me and call me names? I wasn't talking about you. The forum member I was speaking of was banned from the forum for inappropriate behavior, like what you just exhibited.

I see I have gotten the same response from you in the past over on the other board. I was right after all.

I guess I was talking about you if you rejoined the forum using a different user name after being permanently banned.

[drseti]

Were I one of your students, I'd be unhappy having to spend money for the Gleim materials and for an hour of ground school at each flight lesson.

That would be a valid gripe if I actually charged extra for the books and the ground instruction. But that's not my business model. I charge flat-rate tuition for an academic quarter, and only enroll four students per term. That way, the student gets as much time and attention as he or she needs, with no extra charge for however much ground time may be required. Remember, I was a college professor for four decades, and never quite caught on to the idea of charging by the hour for my time.

[Half Fast]

Makes sense. I paid my CFI by the hour, not a flat fee.

At what college did you profess?

Lockheed pays me a straight salary, yet bills out my time by the hour. Thus profits are made.

[drseti]

At what college did you profess?

I started out at a couple of California colleges, spent the bulk of my career in the California and Pensylvania State systems, and then wrapped up at Lycoming College in Williamsport PA, from which I retired in 2007.

Lockheed pays me a straight salary, yet bills out my time by the hour. Thus profits are made.

I was briefly at Lockheed after I got out of the Air Force in 1969, and was also salaried. I never begrudged them their profits. Actually, that's where I really started my teaching career. They made me an engineering instructor, and turnover in aerospace being what it is, within two years I was their senior enginering Instructor (whereupon I left).

[Half Fast]

I was briefly at Lockheed after I got out of the Air Force in 1969, and was also salaried. I never begrudged them their profits. Actually, that's where I really started my teaching career. They made me an engineering instructor, and turnover in aerospace being what it is, within two years I was their senior enginering Instructor (whereupon I left).

Oh, I don't begrudge profits at all! My 401k has been going like gangbusters all year, riding LockMart stock.

I do a fair amount of instructing at LM, along with other duties. I plan and develop training in analog circuit design, recruit instructors, and teach some personally. That's all just a hobby, though, on top of my regular jobs.

I have to run quite a bit of training for our new-hires because they seem to to come out of college without learning some critical things. Today's EE curricula leave out too much, IMHO, and our new EEs usually don't know how an electric motor works, what power factor is, can't design a simple 2-pole LPF, etc. Most of the undergrad emphasis is on microprocessors, FPGAs, and firmware.

Engineering really needs to go to a 5 or 6 year curriculum for the first professional degree. There's just too much information these days to try to cram it all into 4, as we've traditionally done.