FTU-OC

[C.W.E.]

i have a difficult time believing you do not know why a TC employee is not allowed to respond on a social media forum, or why the government employees are not allowed to post information on social media. It also applies to the policy of many corporations.

So why did he post information in this forum today?

Another question maybe you can answer if TC can not.

I did all my training and my ground and flight tests for two separate commercial rotary wing licenses in the USA done by flight instructors not working through a flight school.

Why did TC issue me two separate Canadian Licenses based on my FAA licenses if the FAA's rules are inferior to Canadian rules?

You mentioned you are going to start instructing again. Great to hear.

That was my intention when I got a new medical to renew my Canadian pilots licenses, it has been almost two months since I did the medical and I have no idea if I passed the medical or not as I have not heard anything from TC yet, without knowing if I passed it is useless to start going through the process of renewing the old license that has lapsed.

[trey kule]

I am not certain that the FAA regulations are inferior. Different yes, and My opinion is that they are both better and inferior in different areas. But the countries are different and what may work in one may not be suitablefor the other. But that is just opinion, and not fact.
As to BPF, you were the one who suggested he might be with TC. I was very careful to say “if” he was. Besides other than entertainment there is little to be accomplished with responding to leading questions. I do
Not think it is any secret that our present flight training systems has some serious problems. What we need is practical solutions, not baiting questions based on rather nebulous claims. I personally do not think there is an easy solution, but we all coppuld be offering practical positive suggestions. And as I cannot think of any right at the moment, I will adjourn from further posting on this thread.

[C.W.E.]

but we all could be offering practical positive suggestions

Which is what this thread is all about.

My suggestion is to allow properly licensed flight instructors to teach any student for the PPL outside a FTU.

[photofly]

In any aircraft.

[C.W.E.]

In any aircraft.

Yes, in any aircraft.

I take it we are in agreement on this issue photofly?

[photofly]

yes

[C.W.E.]

Great!!!

I understand you instruct at the Toronto Island Airport, I did my first solo there on Aug 13 1953 in a Fleet Canuck.

I am really getting old.

And....


As I have said on many occasions teaching others is the highest level a pilot can aspire to.

Unfortunately teaching in a TC approved flight school is one of the poorest paying jobs in society.

But...


If you can teach outside the FTU-OC system you can be in control of your earning ability and over time make good living teaching, I did and was able to retire in comfort.

[C.W.E.]

It would be interesting to see a poll of flight instructors to find out what percentage would like to see TC adopt the same rule as the FAA allowing teaching the PPL independent of a flight school.

[Squaretail]

First I'll start by saying that I think the change to match the FAA's rules would be a good idea, in terms of letting instructors be able to teach on their own aircraft.

With that out of the way though, I think it would make very little difference to how flight training is conducted in Canada. The amount of people who would benefit from such a change would be extremely small. As a matter of change to improve training and GA in general its pretty low on the list of priorities. Its nice to think of, but gets little return, at least if one was weighing it against the possible effort it would take to make regulatory change.

First of all one must consider that the prime beneficiaries are two very small groups of people, who also then need to connect together to actually benefit. The first is instructors with airplanes. Last I looked, this was a very small number, since instructors don't make a lot of money. Those that fall into this category (like myself) have alternate means of making a living and thus frequently don't have the time to deliver enough training, and certainly not enough to fulfil the needs of a license seeking pilot. That's assuming they would want to do such a thing in the first place. I should say that even if I was inclined to engage in such an enterprise, I certainly wouldn't be the most cost effective, since I don't work for free. I did some thinking about this a while back and I'm needing to see around $500/hr for that plane to make it worth my while, and that actually even seems small when I start thinking about some of the logistics. And that's for a single Cessna.

Which then brings us to the second point, the pool of people seeking training. We're talking about a group of people that have enough money to buy flight training, but not enough to purchase their own aircraft to learn on, and also to whom a existing flight school can't or doesn't serve their particular needs. This is a difficult customer to serve. It usually means they don't have money, or particular needs or requirements of flight training are some what onerous to satisfy. Oddly enough, the pool of agreeable and well funded, whose primary purpose in seeking training outside a FTU is quality incredibly small. I will say that in the U.S. that number of people is somewhat larger, so this set up becomes more beneficial. Coupled with the costs of flying being cheaper and a far more positive attitude towards aviation by the general populace.

But then, if quality is the prime purpose, then that doesn't match the idea of new instructors buying airplanes and offering them up as trainers, supposing that guys are going to come up with such an idea to "build hours".

One should also say that in terms of freelancers for people who have their own airplanes, the current system seems to provide more than enough of them. While I would suggest a change that would allow new instructors (class 4s) to be able to work outside the supervision of a FTU, it seems that more than enough of them seem to be able to stick out however long of time it is to get those 3 recommends. Its been my experience that most small airports seem to have enough freelancers to service their needs. Given the mass production of pilots these days, its easier than ever to get to that class 3 upgrade, if you were really bent on engaging in such an enterprise.

I would also note that even should such a change in regulation come about, using an airplane for such training, would be somewhat cost prohibitive, assuming you could even get an insurance broker to talk to you about it. Part of how I arrived that the enormous hourly rate number above.

You might also want to conduct a poll of instructors who own their own aircraft who would want to teach licenses on said aircraft.

[C.W.E.]

Thanks for the reply squaretail.

However I do not recall mentioning any instructor using their own airplane.

And I am having difficulty figuring out how a privately owned airplane can be more expensive to operate than a commercially operated airplane.

[Squaretail]

However I do not recall mentioning any instructor using their own airplane.

Is that not the main difference between TC and FAA that this is regarding? The requirement for holding a FTU OC is so an instructor can own the airplane that he is providing the teaching on?

And I am having difficulty figuring out how a privately owned airplane can be more expensive to operate than a commercially operated airplane.

Its not. I specified that number is "to make it worth my time". That is to say for me to make the time to be accommodating enough to usefully teach students towards licenses, additionally to the costs of me providing the airplane and my time, its got to make up for what I would lose in giving up what I usually do. The problem with being a one man show, is that it would take all your time, to be of any useful capacity, so I'd have to charge a rate that covers down time due to weather and maintenance as well as the fact that I wouldn't have all of the other revenue sources a FTU can draw upon. Typically when it comes to freelancing, I find that customers can only be relied upon to pay for flying time, so the hourly rates would reflect that as well. I'll also admit that some of that would be to deter all but the most dedicated students.

At the end of it, if say you had a cub and the regs permitted it, would you want to be teaching private licenses with it? If so what would you be charging? Its all well and good to say that other people would do this is the rules were different, but if you wouldn't (and I know I wouldn't) why would someone else?

[C.W.E.]

At the end of it, if say you had a cub and the regs permitted it, would you want to be teaching private licenses with it? If so what would you be charging?

Actually if the regs. permitted it the Cub would be my first choice for teaching basic flying to the PPL level.


As to what I would charge for the training I would probably charge at least one hundred dollars an hour for my time plus the cost of operating the Cub.

[Squaretail]

Let me get this straight. a) you don't feel that you're worth more than $30/hour more than a line instructor at a FTU and b) You've be giving away time at cost on your own airplane? Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought part of the point of being able to own and operate your own plane in such an enterprise would be to profit from the transaction.

[C.W.E.]

Let me get this straight. a) you don't feel that you're worth more than $30/hour more than a line instructor at a FTU

When did FTU's start paying instructors $70.00 an hour?

and b) You've be giving away time at cost on your own airplane? Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought part of the point of being able to own and operate your own plane in such an enterprise would be to profit from the transaction.

I would charge the airplane cost out based on what it costs to operate and pay for it.

Taking into consideration the hourly rate I was payed during the last decade or so of my teaching career ( 250.00 Euro per. hour for my time in their airplane, plus all travel and living expenses. )

I would make sure I ended up with enough money for my time or I would not do it.

What would you charge if you decided to do it?

[Squaretail]

When did FTU's start paying instructors $70.00 an hour?

Doesn't matter what they're paying them, that's the going rate that commodity is being charged for, hence its market value. Keep in mind that if you work outside the FTU its your job to provide all the stuff that the FTU's cut would normally pay for. Briefing space ain't cheap, neither is stationary, or anything else you might find you need. For example, a freelance buddy of mine recently found out the local airport management wants to charge him $500/month to be selling his services on the field. I'll never understand why so many freelancers undercut what they could and should charge for the service. But then we act as if the FTU's cut from all that is money straight to the owner's pocket, which is far from the case.

What would you charge if you decided to do it?

I already stated my price for doing a PPL if we got said rule change. Now keep in mind that's for if I had to engage in the God-forsaken task of marketing myself to the general public to make a go at delivering such a product. To which you didn't answer my previous question. If you could do this, would you want to do it?

[C.W.E.]

If you could do this, would you want to do it?

Yes I probably would because after 13 years of retirement I am getting bored and I enjoyed teaching.

Trust me I would not undercut the FTU rates.

But my overhead would be way less.

Do you own a FTU or have you ever owned one?

[Cat Driver]

At the end of it, if say you had a cub and the regs permitted it, would you want to be teaching private licenses with it? If so what would you be charging?

Getting back on this subject I will go back to this question and flesh it out a bit more to cover all the training needed as the Cub is lacking some equipment to do all the training required.

I would have a second airplane that can do the rest of the exercises such as instrument training and also can carry four people.

So I would get a Piper Pacer do a complete rebuild and equip it with the needed instruments and modern Nav aids.

As to prices the Cub would be charged out at the same rate as a Cassna 150/52 and the Pacer at the same rate as a Cessna 172.

I would have two training packages.

The first one would be based on the student getting their PPL in fifty hours including the flight test at a flat rate of xxx dollars, somewhere between the cost of fifty hours of training and the usual eighty hours which would mean I make a bit more money per hour with this program.


This package will require the student to do the training in a fixed time frame and really pay attention to the training and put a lot of effort into the program.

If the student demonstrates they are not able to learn in that time frame it will be apparent in the first five hours at the most at which time they would be advised program one is not an option for them.

The second package would be based on the student not being able to do the course in fifty hours and ends up taking the average time most PPL's take to finish in the FTU world, which is probably at least eighty hours.

So anyone here see anything wrong with those thoughts?

[photofly]

If the student demonstrates they are not able to learn in that time frame it will be apparent in the first five hours at the most at which time they would be advised program one is not an option for them.

At the time you break the news to someone they're not a "50-hour" student, how keen do you think they'll be to stick around and become one of your 80-hour students?

Fixed-price training isn't really fixed price training if you cherry-pick only the best students to offer it to. Every flight school in Canada could offer a "50 hour guaranteed" package to only their very best students. And to be honest, those people don't need or want a 50-hour guaranteed package, because they know as well as you do that they'll qualify in 50 hours anyway. So the whole thing isn't more than a marketing gimmick.

Now if you were a truly world-class instructor, you could take every 80 hour student and turn them into a 50 hour student, and offer the fixed price package to everyone Then, it would be impressive.

[Cat Driver]

At the time you break the news to someone they're not a "50-hour" student, how keen do you think they'll be to stick around and become one of your 80-hour students?

Actually I wouldn't want to teach them so they can go to a school.

Remember I would only be doing this because I enjoy training, not because I need the money.

Any idea how many students finish in fifty hours photofly?

[photofly]

I respect that you'd be doing it for fun, and not for money. Every instructor dreams of having only 50 hour students, and if you're prepared to turn away nine out of every ten students who sign up with you, then you too can achieve that dream. The military does it, after all. However, call me a socialist if you want, but providing great training to only the top 10% doesn't advance the great goal of improving overall flight training in Canada. For everyone.

Any idea how many students finish in fifty hours photofly?

I paid my $5 and made an FOI request for that information from Transport Canada. They mucked up the request and didn't give me the data I asked for. Twice. So I gave up. At least I tried, though.