PPL In 9 Days!

[Tango01]

Talk about accelerated training!

http://www.tailwheelsetc.com/html/fligh ... lot_s.html

[Tim]

i dont care how good you are, a ppl in 9 days is stupid

i wonder how much he remembers from trip 10 on his 1st day...

[gustind]

Moulding said his student is dedicated and is equally dedicated to his country.

what?

[shannon]

I don't know there's not very much to learn really. As well some of us learn more quickly than others particularly under pressure.

[767]

i dont care how good you are, a ppl in 9 days is stupid

I was waiting for a response like this, i didnt want to be the 1st one to post.. Im glad you said that. I agree.

[AV8R]

Nine days wow...how long is the standard Drivers Ed these days?

[Spokes]

Seen it done in 12 days before. This included a float rating. For the right (very rarely seen) candidate it is not a real big deal.

[beaverbob]

Good for him. I don't see any problem for a person with his self discipline.
Especially if he pre-studied while he was in Iraq.
How can we say that a ppl in 9 days is stupid? Unusual maybe, but not stupid.
Its only 2 hour before lunch and 2 after most days then a couple hours for a flight test and a couple of longer cross countries. No big deal.
Bob

[E-Flyer]

I thought the air cadets 6 week deal was stupid... this is just ...

[jalexb88]

RETARDED, the word youre looking for is retarded

[Hedley]

You could do a PPL in 10 days, assuming the following:

1) the candidate had considerable, unlogged (or unlogable)
flight experience - for example, his PPL father owned a 172,
and he grew up in the right seat.

2) ground school (and written test) was completed

3) perfect VFR Wx each and every day

4) perfect aircraft maintenance

5) 50 hours in 10 days is 5 hours average per day. That's
a lot of flying for a newbie, especially for the first few days.

6) The candidate was young, smart, fast and motivated
as hell, with a bank account to pay for the above.

I can see a flight test on the 10th day. Not common,
but possible, under perfect circumstances.

P.S. People get all wrapped up about logbook hours.
Things are not always what they seem. According to
my first logbook, I soloed after 2.4 hours in a 210 hp
fuel-injected constant-speed prop tailwheel aircraft on
pavement, and that included a flight of required spin
training in a buck fifty. For all I know, that may very
well be a record, but a completely meaningless one,
because I had been flying that particular taildragger
since I was 10 years old, and had hundreds of unloggable
hours by then - my father's civilian flight instructor
rating had lapsed.

Things are not always what they seem.

[fl80]

I thought the air cadets 6 week deal was stupid

You think that because ...?

[Tim]

.....because there are lots of air cadets that pass who shouldn't have?

[fl80]

.....because there are lots of air cadets that pass who shouldn't have?

Really? How many are "lots"? How did you measure that number? And who were their instructors and examiners?

[AUGER9]

.....because there are lots of air cadets that pass who shouldn't have?

Really? How many are "lots"? How did you measure that number? And who were their instructors and examiners?

Any cadet grad I've flown with has been absolutely horrible. 6 weeks seem to be too quick- a couple weeks with no flying and they don't remember a thing. Maybe if they've kept up on it they'd be alright. But I doubt most can afford to at that age.

[5x5]

You're bang on Hedley. It would have to be a prefect situation.

I had been flying that particular taildragger
since I was 10 years old, and had hundreds of unloggable
hours by then

Your story reminded me of a kid who came in one day to hang out. His father was at the hangar getting some interior work done. They'd flown the dad's Caravan in. The kid was 14 and figured he had "a couple hundred hours" flying the 'Van, with a bunch of it on amphibs. He could probably solo after a couple hours 'logged' time as well.

[Wilbur]

The cadets doing the PPL in 6 weeks is not a problem, in my view it's close to ideal. Like learning any new skill, the more frequently you do it the quicker you learn. That said, the cadet program contracts are predicated on students reaching licencing standard at, or very close to, the minimum prescribed time. Some students are not capable, or marginally capable of doing this, but most can. Most already have a glider licence and some familiarization time on light planes, and are highly motivated. If there's a problem with cadets reaching standard in minimum time, it might mostly lie with the ability of some instructors who are accustomed to taking an extra 15 or 20 hours on average.

[robshelle]

The only problem with the cadet program as I see it is that too many cadets get their license, then can not afford to do any more flying unless they are going into it for a career. 17-18 years old, pretty expensive hobby when you are probably looking at post secondary education expenses. So after they get their license, they probably only see 5 hours a year??

My 2 bits.

Robbie Benusic
CYEG Tower

PS. It worked for me until I changed careers!

[Shiny Side Up]

The only problem with the cadet program as I see it is that too many cadets get their license, then can not afford to do any more flying unless they are going into it for a career. 17-18 years old, pretty expensive hobby when you are probably looking at post secondary education expenses. So after they get their license, they probably only see 5 hours a year??

This would be the reason many cadets get a bad rep for being bad pilots, that is to say they get a licence at 17 and after that don't get enough continuation. Any cadet whom I would say skills wise was lacking wasn't because they were taught wrong, but was because they hadn't flown since they had finished their licence for several years.

[Tim]

Really? How many are "lots"? How did you measure that number? And who were their instructors and examiners?

lots, as in a high number, sizable portion, many. take your pick.

i measure that by witnessing 6 years worth of cadet flight training and famil flying at glider sites. i have a cadet GPL and PPL. i was also a staff cadet. and ive been involved with cadet PPLs as a supervisor to class 4 instructors. so this is hardly speculation. it is first hand experience.

im not about to start listing the dozens of instructors and examiners for you.

do you think that every single person that gets pumped through the cadet flying factory all meet the standard?

im not saying everyone, or even most cadets shouldnt get their tickets. but there are plenty (see 'lots') who should not get it.

[Hedley]

N.B. I was never an air cadet. At my advanced age, it
is highly unlikely I will ever be an air cadet. I have never
been involved in any way whatsoever with the air cadet
program - I am completely impartial.

Observation: I have a dark suspicion that the nature of
the criticism of the (power scholarship) air cadet program
tells you more about the critic, than the program.

I suspect the critic, though he doesn't want to admit it,
is angry that the air cadets got their PPL "for free", and
from that source - ie envy - comes the criticism.

However, he doesn't want to admit it that his criticism
is derived from jealousy.

FWIW I do agree that the skills obtained in such a short
period of time, are likely to quickly perish without further
flight time. Personally, I think everyone with less than
1000TT needs to fly as often as they safely can, to develop
their nascent piloting skills into something a little bit
more seasoned.

Remember: every licence, endorsement or rating is
a LICENCE TO LEARN

[square]

Just enough time to be dangerous

[E-Flyer]

I thought the air cadets 6 week deal was stupid

You think that because ...?

Because there's too much material to cover in 6 weeks. I've always believed that everything has a right time limit. Too much of it is stupid, and too little of it is plain stupid.
I think that awarding somebody the privilege to fly a powered airplane, in 6 weeks is a bit too soon. Why? Because if that same candidate was to take 4 months to do his private, he would have 4 months of extra studying and as a result would develop into a smarter pilot. Let's face it, a person being in an airplane for 80 hrs before his private is going to go through 35 more hours of "experience." Even though that may not be much, it may be enough to learn how to deal with some issues in the circle of unknowns. Could be issues where 6 week squeezed orange juice pilot may not be able to handle.

Don't get me wrong, some of the cadets are good pilot's. But as AUGER said, the majority of them walk out as horrible fliers with bad habits because of lack of continuation and currency. So basically what's happening is that TC is giving flying privileges to these guys while they could be potential safety risks due to lack of knowledge !

But then again, the PPL is the license to learn. So I mean I could see how one could take both sides to this argument.

The cadets go through a rigid ground school that basically portrays how to answer the questions on the Private Written Exam. Sure, they pass ground school and scholarship exams before getting there, but at the end of the day, I don't believe they know enough to be a responsible Private Pilot.

That being said though, there are many people out there who aren't responsible Private Pilot's after 4 months of training either.

If you really want to look at the roots of the problem, it's back at the standards. There's no realistic view point of how things should be done. But that's a different topic and there are many minds out there who think that their answer is THE answer.

[square]

I thought the air cadets 6 week deal was stupid

...

if that same candidate was to take 4 months to do his private, he would have 4 months of extra studying and as a result would develop into a smarter pilot.

While it's nice that you're calling a non-profit organization that's trying to help kids stupid, and being snooty about, you don't really give any reason to think so. What makes you think having two and a half months longer means he'll study any more? They both have to learn the same material, review the same material and hear the same material. One just has longer to forget the material and take steps backward.

[E-Flyer]

Square,

Read the rest of the reply where I said that 4 months of studying may not necessarily equate to a better pilot; however, I believe that if a cadet spent 3-4 months studying they would develop better habits and skills simply because they already walk into the power course with flying experience. And no, if a person doesn't actually spend the rest of the 2.5 months to study, then yea, what's the point right? But I was saying if that a person spends a longer time studying, and doing the training, they will most likely pick up more details in their course of study which would ultimately contribute to safer habits in comparison to a 6 week cram. Especially if they are a cadet.

But these are just opinions; whether you find it nice or not that's your opinion and I respect that. I don't mean to bash a non-profit organization. I have had the honor to teach the cadets and it was a pleasure to do so too. And what I picked up was that these guys are very smart kids, but 6 weeks just seemed to be too much.

Anyway, that's what I think.


Tcare and fly safely !