Exce$$ive ground briefings

[trey kule]

Ok. From the posts, non of you posting here has every milked a student or caused death by briefing.

So who are these milkers of students? Who are these instructors who are instructing 80:hr ppls.

I would find it refreshing to read a post that says...” yeah, I milked my students for every penny I could. Flew 12 hours a day and slept in the cockpit when I should have been instructing...oh wait....not the last one as several instructors have come on this site and bragged how they fell asleep on a student, so I guess that does not count.

Refreshing, because it would at least be honest.

[digits_]

Ok. From the posts, non of you posting here has every milked a student or caused death by briefing.

So who are these milkers of students? Who are these instructors who are instructing 80:hr ppls.

I would find it refreshing to read a post that says...” yeah, I milked my students for every penny I could. Flew 12 hours a day and slept in the cockpit when I should have been instructing...oh wait....not the last one as several instructors have come on this site and bragged how they fell asleep on a student, so I guess that does not count.

Refreshing, because it would at least be honest.

Just because no "milker" has posted here, does not mean that all the other instructors are lying. Maybe the "milkers" are a bit ashamed and don't post in this topic? Or they are not aware they were milking and were mainly concerned about the student's progress/skill level.

[trey kule]

Now there is an interesting thought; Maybe the milkers do not know they are milking students!

I think I posted this before but in auditing some FAA flight schools, and the auditor sitting in on ground briefings and reading student surveys afterwards, it seems that when an auditor was in the briefing, more teaching aids were used, briefings were shorter (verified from records that this was accurate) and more to the point , and with fewer “war stories.”

Now , the sense I got was not that instructors were intentionally milking the students, but were just being lazy and unprofessional....all those notes they took for their instructor rating....pretty much ignored. Lesson plans? Made on the fly (excuse the pun). Right before the lesson , and not always after consulting the equivalent of a TC PTR.

In short, poor instructors really did not know they were poor instructors. Now relate that to Canada’s 80hr ppl, which is almost universally blamed on the student, and you have to wonder. TCs monitoring of flight test results does not accurately reflect the level of instruction, although I do understand in some cases they do look at an FTUs overall training times. Someone with TC would have to verify that claim.

Which brings us back to exactly what is excessive. Students and instructors might not agree on this, and I think there might be errors on both sides. From the instructor side however, a good honest CFI can tell if one of there instructors is briefing excessively as they can look at all their students and all their instructors...

I wonder how many CFIs do that. And how many FTUs have a Ops Q&A person.

[Squaretail]

Personally I have encountered only one instructor in all my time who I would say was knowingly milking his students both for flight and briefing time. Many instructors have been somewhat guilty of death by briefing, though a majority of those have been reluctant to charge for such time. If they charge at all. One must keep in mind that if instructors are going to “milk” students, it’s usually going to be on flight time, since that is where their log booking benefits. For the most part one must remember that instructors (and students) both want to get into the plane since flight time is always viewed as more desirable.

I will say that TC does not encourage efficiency when it comes to ground time, and there is a tendency of class ones to prioritize the “ don’t miss anything” method of briefing to the expense of all other concerns. This results in wretched inefficiencies in the process, which are often deemed acceptable.

That said, the 80 hour ppls blame is still the burden of the students population by large. I don’t absolve schools and instructors entirely, but the fact is the forces that drive how flight training is conducted result in what we have. Students are attracted to bigger and busier airports. They are attracted to bigger schools, and frequently ones that are geared for mass production of pilots, “airline style”. The latter of which is frequently a poor fit for the recreationally minded pilot. RPPs for example, get treated the same as a PPL since schools don’t cater to that need. All of this leads to great inefficiency in the conduct of initial training.

Lastly, and bizarrely I have seen many students stick with training they know is bad, and that they are unhappy with, for convenience, or more often because even though they don’t feel they are getting good instruction, that they like their instructor.

[photofly]

TC doesn’t measure efficiency of training, and as far as I know its inspectors don’t sit in on briefings or teaching while conducting audits.

If you don’t measure efficiency of training then you cannot prioritize it even if you wanted to. I think that the government’s priority is to make sure that the end result of training is to an adequate standard, which they do by looking at pass rates. I imagine that the minister would say as long as what comes out of training meets the minimum standards for safety it’s up to the consumer, in the marketplace, and via the mechanism of competition between providers, to drive up efficiency.

The more I look into it, though, the more I think the problem of consumer ignorance distorts the market. If the consumer doesn’t know what efficient training is then there’s no way they can seek out providers who offer it in preference to others.

[Conflicting Traffic]

The more I look into it, though, the more I think the problem of consumer ignorance distorts the market. If the consumer doesn’t know what efficient training is then there’s no way they can seek out providers who offer it in preference to others.

+1. This is information asymmetry. The flight training market is a mess because of it. I'm not sure how the problem can be solved. Warranties are a widely used solution for physical products. But I'm not sure how you could warranty a product like education, which depends at least partly on the performance of the customer.

There are ways to change the licensing standard to resolve it. For example, instead of having a 200 h TT requirement for the CPL, the requirement could be 150 h after the issuance of the PPL. This would create a market preference for schools that can finish the PPL in a sensible amount of time - suggesting efficient training. Unfortunately, this requires action from the regulator, which is not something that can ever be counted on.

[photofly]

I would like to see the government forced to publish flight schools performance data, such as pass rate, hours at first solo and hours at flight test pass.

I know this is open to creating other obvious distortions but it would be a start.

I have made A2I requests for some of this data but it was withheld under the "commercial advantage" exemption.

[Squaretail]

I’m not so sure one can dismiss it all as consumer ignorance though. Especially given the tools the consumer has at hand to research how efficient flight training should be conducted, and what may be markers of where it may be found. This site alone would be a treasure trove of information. But besides that anyone reasonably inquisitive can find out regulatory standards, and compare training that is offered to them. The internet also offers a multitude of student testimony.

I will continue to contend that quality and efficiency of training is simply far down the list of what the consumer of flight training is looking for. Like many things, I would say convenience tops the list. A successful flight school is all about location after all. Secondly they shop on superficial qualities. New airplanes, well dressed instructors, the pageantry of what they consider aviation is about. Learning at busy controlled airports also sells. As I recall, when AOPA publishes its list of top flight schools, quality of training doesn’t make the list of why those schools are considered “top”.

[photofly]

Learning at busy controlled airports doesn’t mean training has to be inefficient.

And you’re quite right yet some students don’t prioritize efficiency. But for those that want to, hard information on which to base a decision isn’t available. Every flight school will always say “yeah, 50 to 60 hours is average” but they don’t record what their own training times are and they mislead students in this respect.

[Aviatard]

Every flight school will always say “yeah, 50 to 60 hours is average” but they don’t record what their own training times are and they mislead students in this respect.

I think this is true at a lot of schools. I know what our PPL average time to license is. It’s 68 hours, going back to 2009 which is the earliest year we have records for. Of course there are always outliers, like the guy who finished in 46 and the guy who took 197 hours.

We quote costs based on this number, although I am getting tired of explaining how we really aren’t more expensive than other places because they use 45 hours as a basis. I’d rather be up front with people. Still we get called crooks. Go figure.

[Squaretail]

Pound for pound though and all other factors being equal, you can train more efficiently at an quiet uncontrolled airport than you can at a busy controlled one. But that’s not the only factor. When you stack inefficiencies, they of course become cumulative. If we were to make a list of things to do to maximize efficiency in training...

1. Train often. All in all if you want to maximize how quickly you’re going to learn, do lessons as frequently as you can. Find a school and an instructor that can accommodate.

2. Start young.

3. Find the best instructor you can.

4. Dedicate as much not at airport time as you can to study and review.

One should point out that 1. Is well within the realms of being able to find out about a school or instructor. What kind of schedule can you book? Now this may be tough to pair with point 3. , I would say if the first best guy can’t help you, don’t wait for him, find the next best guy. Having . Yeager for your instructor does you no good if you don’t get to fly with him. It also goes without saying that the busier the place you’re trying to fly out of, the less stick time you’re getting per dollar.

Of these 3.is the toughest to do. The good news, is you don’t need . Yeager to teach you the basics of flying. Contrary to popular belief, and dogma in aviation circles, instructors don’t need “industry experience”, airline indoctrination, crew resource management training, turbine time, combat kills or any other such nonsense. They just need to be able to fly a little airplane well and be enthusiastic about it, with the patience that comes with said enthusiasm. Also not to be full of too much bullshit. That I should say isn’ t too hard either if one is willing to spend even the smallest fraction of time shopping. And by shopping I don’t mean perusing websites, but taking time to meet them. This is something I have seen but only the smallest minority of customers do.

Now of those 4things above, the customer has a majority of the control in selection and modulation. When folks like to say that they don’t have control of it, it’s usually because they won’t admit their prime objective is to train at their convenience . Whether they’ll admit that or not.

[trey kule]

There are ways to change the licensing standard to resolve it. For example, instead of having a 200 h TT requirement for the CPL, the requirement could be 150 h after the issuance of the PPL. This would create a market preference for schools that can finish the PPL in a sensible amount of time - suggest

This is really a great idea..

Not so much with the suggestion to find the best instructor you can...

How exactly does a new PPL student do that?

Overthe decades I have had no choice in who my instructor was. And I was surprised that some I just clicked with. They taught the same way I learn. on theother hand I have had some very personable types who were literally all talk. Useless as instructors. Granted this was type, initial, or recurrent training, but the point was in decades of flying I never really was able to predetermine who was a good instructor. Makes me wonder how someone with zero flying experience would be able to make that determination.

Hours to pass standards would be a good start.
That should be available to students. Instructors can get their own from TC ( I think) and then share it.

Look at a class 4. How many potential new students walking into an FTU know that a class 4 can not solo them or recommend for a flight test before another instructor flies with the student,,, and the student, in most cases will pay extra for.....because, you know, even though it is the class 4s work that is being evaluated, the student is going to learn something so they should pay for it. Adds a few hundred to the price of your license,

[photofly]

There are ways to change the licensing standard to resolve it. For example, instead of having a 200 h TT requirement for the CPL, the requirement could be 150 h after the issuance of the PPL. This would create a market preference for schools that can finish the PPL in a sensible amount of time - suggesting efficient training.

I don’t understand your point. the vast majority of (inefficient) training in Canada is for people who only want a PPL, so tinkering with CPL licensing requirements will have no effect on them.

And until the government releases accurate data on FTUs training time, how will a customer who cares know which is the faster training environment?

[photofly]

Look at a class 4. How many potential new students walking into an FTU know that a class 4 can not solo them or recommend for a flight test before another instructor flies with the student,,, and the student, in most cases will pay extra for.....because, you know, even though it is the class 4s work that is being evaluated, the student is going to learn something so they should pay for it. Adds a few hundred to the price of your license,

We’re not talking about three or four extra hours. We have a decade of work to do before a couple of extra supervisory flights is the easiest “inefficiency” to fix.

No: right now we’re talking about students passing their PPL flight test with 120 hours (and still not knowing this is not something to be proud of). And students, unexceptionally, with 70 hours dual who still haven’t reached a standard to make their first solo.

per Louis Brandeis, who pointed out “Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.” - a good start would be forced openness of training results and times.

[Squaretail]

Not so much with the suggestion to find the best instructor you can...

How exactly does a new PPL student do that?

By actually talking to instructors and students for starters. In my experience a majority of new students show up at flight schools, way too often put money down and never question or deviate from their assigned instructor, even to absurd points of dissatisfaction.

Overthe decades I have had no choice in who my instructor was.

Did you do decades of training towards your PPL? Instructing quality matters less after you’re in the know, and less the more experience you have. Chances are if you’re working on your PPL and somewhat as well the CPL you’re still a customer who can exercise your demands as one. Even for the layman, there are things to spot with instructors that one could readily gauge from a single into flight.

How informative and efficient was the briefing on what was to come?
We’re your questions answered satisfactorily?
How much stick time did you get?
Did the instructor make clear who was doing what and when?
Did you start the lesson with clear goals to learn before the flight started?
Did the instructor repeat demonstrations?
Did they provide a satisfactory debriefing at the end?

Now if you only have time on the ground, and a bit of time to chat. My advice will be to make sure you have a list of questions prepared, but some things to look for:

How detailed is the breakdown of lessons and approximate times required?
Again, are your questions answered satisfactorily? (Pay attention if you feel your bullshit detector is being set off)
If you’re dealing with a junior instructor, does he/she involve their supervisor?
How accessible to you is their supervising instructor? What about the Chief Flight Instructor?
Do they inform you of the need to keep records for this procedure?

On that last note, walk away from any school or instructor who seems to not know about how you can review your PTR, or about your right to keep it in your possession.

on theother hand I have had some very personable types who were literally all talk. Useless as instructors... in decades of flying I never really was able to predetermine who was a good instructor.

Actually you have been able to determine one quality that defines a bad instructor, you just maybe should have been trusting your gut more. In my books, being a bullshitter is one of the cardinal sins of instructing. It should also be said that I have yet to meet an obvious bullshitter who has also been a good stick. The purpose of the excessive b.s. is to cover up those deficiencies. Chances are, if an instructor tends to seem too full of himself, they are. Some like to think they are a big fish in a small pond. Avoid these guys like the plague. See? We’re already a step closer to helping the neophytes.

On that thought, it occurs to me that for the new student, avoiding a bad instructor, may be more important and obvious to do, that finding a good instructor, or the best one. Finding the best one may only be the result of much sampling and searching.

Look at a class 4. How many potential new students walking into an FTU know that a class 4 can not solo them or recommend for a flight test before another instructor flies with the student,,, and the student, in most cases will pay extra for.....because, you know, even though it is the class 4s work that is being evaluated, the student is going to learn something so they should pay for it. Adds a few hundred to the price of your license,

I would argue though that information is readily available these days. The internet and all. Not only if you made a search here, but spending time on TC’s website would at the very least reveal a lot of topics one could go to a flight school ready to ask. As above, how the instructors are managed, and supervised is something to ask about. If you have issues with your training that may arise, what are the paths to resolution? I mean with a small bit of research, any new student should know what a syllabus for flight training should roughly contain, and that there are different grades of instructors.

How efficient that process is of supervising should be simple rather than onerous. If it seems the solo and flight test recommend procedure is too long and drawn out, it probably is.

It should be said that being taught by a class 4 isn’t a bad thing. I have known a lot of class 4 instructors over the years, I would have trusted having my friends and family learn from, and some class ones and twos that i wouldn’t.

[Squaretail]

per Louis Brandeis, who pointed out “Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.” - a good start would be forced openness of training results and times.

I would tend to agree, though I would suspect the bad actors in this equation would simply find ways around this issue. Like a lot of extra regulation, I don’t feel the benefit here would outweigh the negative. It would add to the paperwork burdens for the good guys and likely not deter the bad guys. Not unless it was also coupled with substantial oversight by impartial regulators.

[digits_]

No: right now we’re talking about students passing their PPL flight test with 120 hours (and still not knowing this is not something to be proud of). And students, unexceptionally, with 70 hours dual who still haven’t reached a standard to make their first solo.

per Louis Brandeis, who pointed out “Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.” - a good start would be forced openness of training results and times.

Sounds good, but might have some perverse effects. To calculate hours to PPL, you would have to only count people who did their PPL flight test. That might cause some schools to refuse students that are typically slower learners: older students, part time students, ... or refuse to send students with 120 hours to their flight test, as it might make them look bad.

It might also put pressure on instructors to send people to their test after 40 hours, even if they don't feel the student is fully ready. A good instructor won't do that, obviously, but new(er) instructors might give in to the pressure a little bit easier.

[photofly]

Yes, as I said earlier, there are all sorts of distorions that are possible. They're not all bad though: if a student knows that by 120 hours nobody is going to want to teach them that's a huge incentive not to waste their own training time.

Or maybe we have flight schools for quick students and flight schools for students who need remedial measures. As long as it's all open I'm good with it.

Do you have any data to support your assertion that older people and part time students take longer? Or is it just prejudice?

[digits_]

Do you have any data to support your assertion that older people and part time students take longer? Or is it just prejudice?

I have not kept records, but my older students, or students that only flew once a months vs students flying every other day did take longer to achieve the same result. There seems to be a general consensus amongst other instructors in the area that this is the case as well.

[photofly]

Well, if that’s what y’all expect, that’s what y’all will get.

But int his context, that’s fine. An FTU can always explain why it takes their older students longer, or that they have mostly part time students, if they feel that excuses their poor statistics. and putative customers can make up their own minds if that’s acceptable.