1975

[SierraPoppa]

and could probably write a book on it...if I could write..

I'd probably read it if I could stay on task for longer than thirty seconds...oh look a butterfly.

Great thread everyone.

1975 I was into my first full year as a controller at CYBW. As most have said a very different time compared to today.

[Beefitarian]

The good ol' days. When there was no radar there to tattle on guys calling in to report "over Cochrane lake" when they're crossing Ghost lake huh SP?

[bandaid]

It was not my intention to sound negative.

I was only relating how it was when I learned to fly and my questions regarding why the time to get a license today averages more than twice as long was a genuine question.

If I come across as negative that was not my intent.

Not to worry Cat. When I was a lad all it took for me to start my paramedic career was to be home. Those were the days when the Lions club ran the service and my dad was one of the "Drivers". If he couldn't find someone to go with him then he took me. I was around 14-15, to young to drive so I was stuck in the back with the sick people. Now it takes roughly 18 -24 months to get the highest level of training as a paramedic. I do however think that in this instance, it is a good thing.

[Prairie Chicken]

Hey Doc, I agree with you too! Those days of flying were FUN! The hangar flying was FUN! The folks were friendly; the a/c simpler. Yes, the pie & sticky buns were worth the trip! Less regulation; less Big Brother. I don't regret those days one bit.

But things do change & I'm not sure if we're being nostalgic for the bad old days, or just for youth. Given a choice, I'd take GPS over VOR & ADF. I'd certainly take headsets (and hearing) over shouting in the cockpit & the hand mike.

On the other hand, and unlike Hedley, I did like to talk to FSS. Friendly folk, FSS, and in those days they shared not only the METARs & TAFs but their own unique read on their local wx too.

As far as going back to 1975 ... tough one ... youth vs wisdom. Hmmm ....

[Shiny Side Up]

It was not my intention to sound negative.

I was only relating how it was when I learned to fly and my questions regarding why the time to get a license today averages more than twice as long was a genuine question.

And we've been through the discussion before. The assumption being that its purely because instructors are of worse quality. Did you have anything else to add to that? If you feel it needs to be discussed further I would suggest starting another thrread on the topic, or reviving one of the many previous ones. Personally I don't think there's much point in arguing it anymore, no one is to be swayed either way. Certainly sounds like a negatively loaded question to me, but then what do I know, I'm only one of those poor quality instructors.

Ahhhhhhh the deHavilland Chipmunk. A nice, cute, slender lovely little flying aeroplane. It's the closest 99% of us will get to flying a spitfire.

It really was a shame that they didn't try to somehow continue with the Chipmunk's lineage to keep producing suitable military trainers. An updated engine and new instruments/avionics would seem like a slam-dunk for even today's standards. The airframe really seemed to fit the bill, especially since its successor in Canada for its role didn't seem nearly as tough for the role (don't get me wrong, the musketeer is a fun little GA airplane and good for what it was designed for, but apparently not as tough of a bird for what the military asked of it).

It wasn't all better. We didn't have a lot of stuff we take for granted today:

True, I was talking more in just a general attitude towards general aviation back then. It seemed more positive. You're right that we didn't have all the toys we have today, and you're right, even the "new" planes then seem crude by today's standard. The new feeling was that all these toys that we enjoy today was on the horizon at the time, very exciting to see them all coming. Warbirds and such were much more plentiful, and not as much relegated to museum status. New models of airplane always around the corner - keep in mind this was when Ol' Sideburns would have been in his heyday shaking it up, aviation as a whole was in the middle of a big leap ahead almost as big of a leap as the very close pre-war days. Very exciting stuff.

On the toys side of things I'll say that I rarely use most of them - though I will concede that the intercomm and headset are a godsend, especially for teaching. I still mostly navigate by map and compass, and most times I long to be able to ditch the radio and just wear earplugs and go do my thing. I despise cel phones, I think that everytime one rings in a small plane it might as well be Satan laughing, and if I wasn't certain there would be a huge backlash about it I've been tempted to put up a large PHONES OFF signs around the airport's lounge area.

The internet has certainly been a double edged sword - I can appreciate getting current updated weather and arguing with you fellows, but I certainly miss talking with people in person. Less people are inclined to get together to get their aviation fix - the local flying clubs do a fair ammount of organization through the expedient of e-mail rather than getting together to talk and I miss being able to always walk into the FSS to chat with the meteorologist, and usually run into other pilots.

Scrolling ahead to the 2000s and we're still living under the spectre of the Arabs doing something to hinder aviation. In that respect some things haven't really changed.

I don't think I'd go back there, but it would have been nice if we could have brought a few things with us along the way.

Pilots these days have extremely narrow skill sets, IMHO. They only fly one (at most two) different types, and two is a real mental stretch. To be trained to fly a new type requires that they fly to some exotic locale to the type gurus who administer weeks of ground and flight training on the new and mysterious type with hitherto-unknown characteristics and systems.

Contrary to popular belief, its always been this way, or at least in 1975 it was. That old mag had some of the same articles as we see in ones today regarding the same pilots, same skill issues. Note Cliff's problem selling Grummans because the rest of the pilot community thinking they're a "hot ship". Funnier when one considers that there would be a higher percentage of pilots flying taildraggers at the time, many learning on them, but considering the little Grumman hard to land. People put up obstacles in their minds and fear differences and change. Same old, same old.

Less regulation; less Big Brother.

Its not as much Big Brother sometimes as it is little brother. Thre was much more room for aviation those days. The general populace had a much more positive view of GA those days, if only because it was largely out of sight, out of mind. Aviation almost had a mythical quality in Canada - which also as a downside contributed to the populace's general apathy about it to affect it today - but gave it a positive influence at the time.

[SierraPoppa]

The good ol' days. When there was no radar there to tattle on guys calling in to report "over Cochrane lake" when they're crossing Ghost lake huh SP?

Yup, I'm old school I think radar at YBW is used far too much. They should go back to looking out the window.

[Beefitarian]

I agree with the FSS remark, there was sometimes you'd meet a grouch but most of them were really helpfull if you wanted/needed help.

I hate Met and appreciated being able to have someone that liked it tell me what was going on. I went to the coast with another green pilot in 1996 or 7, I wouldn't have known to avoid hope slide without what I considered valuable local FSS knowledge at Abbotsford. I don't know maybe they would tell you about it over the phone. I just found it helpfull to have had a guy with a map point and tell me how the terrain there worked with the Wx to hurt airplanes.

I'm wondering, has anyone crossed the boarder this year in a private plane? It must be better than going commercial still isn't it?

I'm sure happy I flew into washington national when you still could. They were pretty serious there though, still a little leary about that goof that landed on the national mall.

[Hedley]

has anyone crossed the boarder this year in a private plane?

Of course!

It must be better than going commercial still isn't it?

Anything is better than flying commercial. Driving, hitchhiking, pack mule, skateboard holding on to the back of a bus, you name it.

Crossing the Cdn/US border is no big deal. Buy a decal online (you don't need to have it, just the number), do EAPIS, phone US customs at the arrival airport, file a flight plan, get a squawk code from US ATC. That's it. Like an enema, it may feel a bit strange the first time, but you will get used to it.

[Doc]

Don't even get me started on FSS! Back in 1975, there was SERVICE! Today, it's..."That's not MY job....."
The airport can be 50 and an eight, but all you get UNLESS YOU SPECIFICALLY ASK, are the winds and altimeter! (I guess everywhere should have an ATIS freq?)
Back in 1975, we used to share coffee with these people.....WHAT THE F%*K HAPPENED??? I'll tell you what happened...politics, unions and manops/mandates. And the "I only do what I'm required to do.."mentality.
This is one aspect of the business, that if you don't think it was better in 1975, you're a &*%$#*(%!!!!

[Hedley]

if you don't think it was better in 1975

In 1975, sitting at home (or anywhere else), I couldn't instantaneous pull up current observations and terminal and area forecasts and wind alofts and graphical surface analysis and radar animation for anywhere in the world. I have done that several times today.

Anyone here remember those horrid text FA's that we used to have to draw out for the instrument rating written test? I sure as hell don't miss those.

Things change, Doc, and yeah, I know, sometimes that sucks. Some stuff gets worse, and some stuff gets a whole lot better.

If nothing else, having incredibly cheap gigahertz multi-core processors with gigabytes of ram and flash and massively powerful graphic asics for pennies and megabits worth of internet bandwidth everywhere, has led to incredible productivity and convenience improvements. I bought a 8GB USB stick for eight bucks. I bought a one terabyte sata hard disk recently for $100. Mindblowing.

My cellphone has a more powerful computer than the Apollo 11. That ain't bad, unless you don't have a cellphone

Fact: the Apollo 11 guidance computer ran at 2 Mhz and had 2k of ram, and 36k of rom.

Late September this year, my kid was flying back the Cornell after the Gatineau airshow. It was 4x as old as he was! I emailed him, asking him where he was, and in flight he fired back a picture he took with his BB torch. You have to admit, that's pretty neat!

[Cat Driver]

And we've been through the discussion before. The assumption being that its purely because instructors are of worse quality. Did you have anything else to add to that?

S.S.U., I have had a very difficult year and decided to start posting here again in the hope it would make life more bearable for me.

As I stated I do not want to get into personal conflicts here again.

My question was quite clear I thought.

All I was asking was why does it taker over twice the time to learn to fly now compared to when I learned.

What is wrong with asking?

[Hedley]

All I was asking was why does it taker over twice the time to learn to fly now compared to when I learned

A very reasonable and interesting question, IMHO.

Several differences come to mind:

1) complexity of airplane. Lord, there's a lot of stuff in a modern trainer, and it takes time to learn about all that equipment, and every flight go through a checklist which is long enough for a B-58. No hood time in the old days. No gyros in the old aircraft. No stacks of (mostly useless) radios, either.

2) runway surface. You might have learned to fly on grass, which is far more forgiving than dry pavement, which is what everyone uses now, and is a very unforgiving surface for a light trainer

3) controlled vs uncontrolled airport - You might not have even had a comm, in the old days. These days ever student pilot wants to learn how to sound like an Air Canada captain with his "uuuhhh ..." and spends hours taxiing and flying to and from the distant practice area

4) zero tolerance. In the old days, people bent airplanes and fixed them. You didn't have to do an engine teardown after a prop strike, and few people did. These days, you nick a prop and out comes the engine, and the TSB investigators, so no longer is the PPL viewed as a "licence to learn".

5) instructor fear of Transport. If he does not maintain a "satisfactory flight test record", his instructor rating is revoked. As a result, esp new instructors train far above the flight test guide standards.

6) instructor milking. Instructors earn the same as 30 years ago. There are many unscrupulous instructors that intentionally fly excessive hours with their students, well, because they need the money.

Given all the above, it's a wonder anyone gets a PPL with less than 100 hours in Canada today.

[Doc]

Cat, there really is a lot more to learn today than there was in the '60's, or in your case, the '50's. (you know me...no insult intended). Today, there is more to learning to fly, than simply learning to fly. I well remember flying around the grass patch in the Champ. Taming the cross winds. Relishing the sound and smell of the fresh mown lawn with ever touch and go. We didn't have a tower. Bet you didn't either. Add ten to twenty minutes for each lesson at a "modern" airport, with one of them "new fangled" tower things. The list could go on, and on. Bottom line, it's way more involved today. Sure, I'm poking sticks at Hedley and everybody about things being better years ago. For sure, some things were better. But, I love my GPS, my cell phone, my MackBook Pro. Ah, but to hear that gear rumble across the grass again...I think we will miss that most of all. Cheers, mate.

[Boreas]

In addition to what Hedley posted, I'll venture a guess that PPL students today are a tad bit older then they were 50 years ago.
Lets face it, on average, a 40 year old will take considerably longer in the circuit then an 18 year old.

[Bushav8er]

I'll venture a guess that PPL students today are a tad bit older then they were 50 years ago.
Lets face it, on average, a 40 year old will take considerably longer in the circuit then an 18 year old.

Yeah, I'm trying to catch my breathe before I even get mid-downwind these days.

Could it be that 1) instructors want hours and 2) schools want revenue? Just sayin'.

[Doc]

I'll venture a guess that PPL students today are a tad bit older then they were 50 years ago.
Lets face it, on average, a 40 year old will take considerably longer in the circuit then an 18 year old.

I'd LOVE to know what you'd base that opinion (sorry, "guess") on. Truth of the matter is.....most 40 year olds can't afford to be PPL students. Most PPL students today are at the aviation colleges, learning to fly on the aforementioned 40 year old's tax dollar.
Lets take it one step further. Where would a 40 year old even take lessons, if he lived in, say Thunder Bay?
The 18 year olds (ie college students) fly every day. The 40 year old takes a lesson when the disorganized, overpriced FTU can bloody well work him in. Or only on pay days, when he can afford to fly the 30 year old piece of shit, the FTU offers as a trainer.
But, I can't see why a 40 year old would take more time than an 18 year old....on a level playing field.

[Big Pistons Forever]

It was not my intention to sound negative.

I was only relating how it was when I learned to fly and my questions regarding why the time to get a license today averages more than twice as long was a genuine question.

And we've been through the discussion before. The assumption being that its purely because instructors are of worse quality. Did you have anything else to add to that? If you feel it needs to be discussed further I would suggest starting another thrread on the topic, or reviving one of the many previous ones. Personally I don't think there's much point in arguing it anymore, no one is to be swayed either way. Certainly sounds like a negatively loaded question to me, but then what do I know, I'm only one of those poor quality instructors.

+ 1 we have been there, done that.........

[Hedley]

I can't see why a 40 year old would take more time than an 18 year old

Gotta disagree with that. Any person will learn new stuff faster at age 18 than they will at 40 or 50.

And I'm not talking about just flying. Let's say you want to learn a new language, learn to play a musical instrument, or learn to swing a bat and hit a 90 mph fastball. Most 40 or 50 yr olds find any of the above a lot harder, than when they were 18.

I'm not saying an older person can't learn to fly. It just doesn't come as easy.

Back to training ... in the mid 90's - not very long ago - when the rec permit came out, I taught a fellow (in his 30's then) to fly on a 152 and he did his rec pilot flight test at 25.0 hours - and this was on pavement, but at an uncontrolled airport. He was a smart guy, and would actually read stuff before a lesson, that I recommended he read, which was probably his biggest advantage. We didn't waste any time.

I hate wasting time. I really like to be efficient with my time, and the students. Most students have a tough time keeping up with me, and that's ok. I was giving tailwheel instruction to a 900 TT nosewheel-only instructor recently, and he said that an hour with me felt like about three, and that's fine with me - he got his money's worth, didn't he?

An older fellow just bought a share in a Mooney. In 60 seconds I told him everything he need to know, to safely fly his Mooney (I have 400 hrs in an M20J). I seriously doubt he "got it"

There are 3 things you need to know to fly an L39.

Etc.

My father has a marvellous expression - stuffing butter up someone's *ss. Civilian instructors stuff butter up the student's *ss, because if you're mean to the student, he won't come back. Military instructor suffer no such inhibitions, trust me. You don't perform, you're CT.

If you want an "easy" instructor, who is your pal, that makes you feel good all the time, odds are you aren't learning as fast as you could.

[Cat Driver]

We didn't have a tower. Bet you didn't either.

Actually we did and it was paved runways at the Toronto Island airport, and the traffic was busy most of the time.

Hedley was right:

No hood time in the old days.

We used two stage amber for instrument flight training, hoods are unorthodox.

[Hedley]

To clarify my point: before 1985 (?) there was no need for 5 hours of instrument time for a ppl.

[Cat Driver]

[Blakey]

If you really want to go back to 1975 flying, fly something with floats under it! My 57' 180 now has fewer radio aids than it did when it came from the factory. I'll admit that I do have a fancy GPS (A Garmin 90!) but it's really just a cross check and a lazy man's groundspeed indicator. I also have a moving map display - to use it you reach into the back seat and move the map into the front seat so the right seater can navigate! When I was a kid and we'd fly in my father's Cub, I had to navigate from the back seat. Now my father gets to run the map! The old G90 is prone to outages and last year it decided not to play when we left my dock in Southern Ontario. We used the map and compass method and 2 hours later, as we were passing abeam North Bay, the GPS started to play again. We were 1/10 mile off course!

I don't need to use a radio to depart home base and there's nobody to talk to at the destinations I fly to. It's funny when I pass a position report or ask for enroute weather and the FSS specialist asks me for point of departure and destination. They always want to know what the identifier for Kesagami Lake is!

How about you Sheephunter. Would you ever know it wasn't 1957 when you're flying to and from the camp?

Your times are what you make them. Whether you know it or not these are the good old days. You'll be talking about them whistfully in another 15 years so you'd better enjoy them now! What exactly, other than visiting a Grumman dealer in Smith Falls, was in that story that you could not do today?

[swordfish]

I miss the the days when flying was dangerous and sex was safe.....

it still is, according to the insurance companies. How often do you get rated for having sex every day...?

But tell 'em you're a pilot, and whoaaa!! 50% add-on.