Is it rare for a ppl student to solo with ten hours or less?

[Beefitarian]

I did not want to embarrass the rest of you losers, but when I tried to go for a fam flight I was so good, I had to give the chief instructor a partial fail on an impromptu Commercial license/instrument ride I sprung on her.

Under my expert tutelage she eventually became Canada's number 1 instructor often sending her students solo after fifteen minutes.

[photofly]

I think the military is a very fair comparison.

Then this:

' they do however.....

Yep. You have clearly made your point that they are comparable..exactly the same.

And you have clearly missed the point. Even wiith the most motivated students, and even with the most closely monitored training, 14 hours to solo is considered appropriate. The reason the comparison is valid is the syllabus is the same. There is no reason that civilian training for the motivated student should expect to be either much slower or much faster.

A pilot from the uk I flew with who had done basic training with the RAF told me that they were expected to solo at 9 hours. But that was 9 hours playing follow-my-leader around the circuit and zero hours outside the circuit at that point.

[trey kule]

I think I have a fairly good understanding.

1. the syllabus is not the same.

2. The 14 hours is not a syllabus training time.

In any event, you may have the last word as this is wasted thread drift.

And I stand by my original comment, do required exercises. Skill level to the required standard..Go solo, So many variables, but somehow I never seem to read that instructor competence is one of them.

[photofly]

I do enjoy your "you may have the last say, except for the following things I want to say"

[PilotDAR]

My first first solo was unscheduled, and indeed a shock to me when sprung on me, as it was in a brand new C 152, the very first in Canada, which I only booked out, as I was certain I would not go that day. Good job on the instructor for keeping me on my toes.

My second first solo was scheduled, and I was a bit unhappy about that. I was told the week before it would happen, and had butterflies as I began that lesson. It worked out okay, but I would rather that the judgement to send me be based upon skills demonstrated that lesson, rather than a week earlier. That said, my instructor did know what he was doing.

I really like BPF's observation, more clearly presented than my earlier post. Get the basic skills firmly ingrained, rather than rushing to a premature solo. One of the important things about piloting, is the need to learn patience. So what if you want to go solo, if you're not completely ready, you're not ready. "Get home itis" must be trained out, and this is a good first step. Learn the patience....

[photofly]

Ok, ok, I give in. I tried to keep it in, but I can't. It's worse than toothache. Can someone please please correct the thread title to "...ten hours or fewer"?

[PilotDAR]

Can someone please please correct the thread title to "...ten hours or fewer"?

Yeah, but after we also correct "bring" as a substitute for "take, and "avoid" as a substitute for "prevent"!

Sorry for the thread drift, but I also appreciate grammar with care...

But to close the loop a little, from my personal perspective, poor grammar is an indication to me of how someone might fly my plane. If a person won't put in the effort to use our language properly, are they diligent enough to put in the effort to fly my plane with care? But then, were they taught properly in the first place? [Grammar or piloting]

[makmoco]

If 10hrs is not enough, what do you think that the average of total hours for someone to go solo is? At how many hours guys do you soloed?

[berkutmtl]

Our school trains 400+ Chinese students a year, they go from 0 to CPL/Multi IFR in 12 months and not a day more, quite often they have their first solo at 10-15 hours if the weather permits it.

[AuxBatOn]

Can someone please please correct the thread title to "...ten hours or fewer"?

Yeah, but after we also correct "bring" as a substitute for "take, and "avoid" as a substitute for "prevent"!

Sorry for the thread drift, but I also appreciate grammar with care...

But to close the loop a little, from my personal perspective, poor grammar is an indication to me of how someone might fly my plane. If a person won't put in the effort to use our language properly, are they diligent enough to put in the effort to fly my plane with care? But then, were they taught properly in the first place? [Grammar or piloting]

Don't forget we are a bilingual country. For some people, the subtleties of the English language (and these things are really subtle for someone's who's mothertongue is not English) are not evident. Write a grammatically correct post in French then we can talk.

[PilotDAR]

For some people, the subtleties of the English language (and these things are really subtle for someone's who's mothertongue is not English) are not evident.

Very true, and I adjust my comment in that regard. If a person is posting in English as their second language, power to them, and perfect grammar excused. Indeed, in my work in Europe, I find happily often that people there, with whom I speak, have a better command of English than many of us, and I have to watch my Grammar around them! Please excuse the further thread drift!

[Posthumane]

Ok, ok, I give in. I tried to keep it in, but I can't. It's worse than toothache. Can someone please please correct the thread title to "...ten hours or fewer"?

The title is correct. Although fewer is supposed to be used for discrete countable objects, things like time and distance are exceptions.

However, the expression less than is used in front of a plural noun that denotes a measure of distance, amount, or time.
We will go on vacation in less than four weeks.
She owes him less than $30.
We had less than 25 miles to go but ran out of gas.


Back on topic, I think I had 19 hours in my logbook before I went solo. However, 10+ hours were ultralight time which "didn't count" when I started my PPL training as the instructor used the same syllabus in the same order as he would for any student with no flight time at all. The first few hours were spent outside the circuit doing straight/level flight, turns, climbs, descents, slow flight, stalls, illusions created by drift, etc. before we even started circuit work. I think this was a good way to go.

[photofly]

Ok, ok, I give in. I tried to keep it in, but I can't. It's worse than toothache. Can someone please please correct the thread title to "...ten hours or fewer"?

The title is correct. Although fewer is supposed to be used for discrete countable objects, things like time and distance are exceptions.

However, the expression less than is used in front of a plural noun that denotes a measure of distance, amount, or time.
We will go on vacation in less than four weeks.
She owes him less than $30.
We had less than 25 miles to go but ran out of gas.

No. There is no such exception. All those examples are grammatical errors.

[digits_]

No. There is no such exception. All those examples are grammatical errors.

Do you have a source/reference for that ?

[photofly]

I don't need a reference to know that each one of those is more painful to the ear than fingernails scraping across a chalkboard.

[Posthumane]

Well, you may not like it, but that doesn't make it wrong. I personally find a phrase like "ten hours or fewer" to be much more grating than "ten hours or less."
The oxford dictionary disagrees with you:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/less-or-fewer
As does the blue book of grammar and punctuation:
http://data.grammarbook.com/blog/defini ... er-v-less/
Most importantly though, common useage disagrees with you. The purpose of the fewer/less construct is to remove ambiguity from certain statements such as where a comparison can be applied to a verb or an adverb ("less successful pilots" vs. "fewer successful pilots"). The test of whether a statement is correctly written/spoken or not is whether or not it clearly communicates the intended message. There is no ambiguity in "ten hours or less" and there is no way it could be misunderstood.

[photofly]

Yeah, yeah.

It's still wrong.

[DSoup]

Current RCAF training (provided under contract by civilian instructors to the TC syllabus) has first solo at 14 hours. At least, if you haven't reached the required standard by then you don't get any extra chances.

Aren't the students also doing Aerobatics pre-solo?

So not exactly the same syllabus.

[digits_]

Aren't the students also doing Aerobatics pre-solo?

So not exactly the same syllabus.

Depending on how they fly, some civilian students do aerobatics pre solo as well

[flyingreg38]

Hi,

Students in Southport will solo at 12 hours. Nobody goes solo before or after that (except weather delays but solo happens at the 13 hours mark then). The syllabus is pretty rigid. Either you make it and you solo at that time, or you don't.
0.2 solo time (2 circuits) in the entire course. Final test after 14 hours of flying time.

Students do basic aerobatic starting at 8 hours of flying time (very basic, loop + aileron roll)

The Training Plan has been designed by the RCAF. The focus is basic training/selection of the candidates. Of course basic flying remains the same no matter what: straight & level, climb, descent, turns, steepturns, stalls, slow flight, take-offs, circuits, landings, PFL, EFATO, etc...

We are civilian instructors holding TC regular + aerobatic instructor ratings. We are also maintaining a qualification to teach under military rules. We don't use any TC syllabus in our job.
The hiring requirements are TC class 3 + 500hours of instruction. In reality everyone got hired with slightly more experience than that. I can count the class3 instructors on one hand. Most of them are ex-military qualified instructors. The others are stucked as a class3 because we don't recommend people for a TC test...

Anyway, emphasis on our side is not so much on the solo. Students are more focused on making it onto the next mission/lesson
Solo is always a big step though and a great enjoyable time for them (except maybe in winter with the tub being full of ice )

In summary, it's not the same way of teaching, not the same syllabus, not the same requirements. We cannot compare...

Greg