User Profile Header
Cary
,
CO
Comments
Displaying 1-5 of 7
Stop Loss
from Cary
wrote 2 years 7 weeks ago
Lots of good comments here. But there aren't any easy answers to the basic issue.
I instructed back in the 80s (CFII), and I think the camaraderie aspect makes a big difference. The FBO where I instructed had regular social events so that students could mingle with experienced pilots, and to which spouses and SOs were invited. Same thing when I learned to fly at the Elmendorf AFB Aero Club. That all adds to the real fun of flying.
But we do tend to mislead prospective students. They learned to drive pretty easily, sometimes very informally, and my observation is that they expect not only quality instruction and camaraderie, but they expect it to be easy! And it's not. Not that any of us are supermen or superwomen, but getting from start to finish takes lots of work! And we need for them to know that, from the very beginning. Then we need to encourage them to work, to study, to practice what they've learned--to be thoroughly involved in their flying education.
I was blessed with terrific instructors all through my learning process, and I tried to emulate them when I was teaching. I have a terrific instructor now, for my flight reviews and IPCs. But I also experienced the complaints of others, when I tried to get my ME--instructor "had to take" a charter twice, airplane was down once--and I didn't learn about any of that until I arrived for my lesson after driving for an hour (our FBO didn't have a trainer twin, so I had to go elsewhere). I had signed the contract, paid the upfront fee, and after that 3rd time, I told them to give me my money back and forget it--and they wondered why! If I had had that experience when I was first starting, I might have said to heck with any of it.
So there is no easy answer, and there are actually multiple issues--and unfortunately no way to regulate the industry in a way that isn't overbearing governmentese, beyond what regulations already exist. The FAA already regulates 141 schools and individual instructors, but it's impossible to regulate good business practices, friendship, and camaraderie.
Cary
Shrinking Margins
from Cary
wrote 1 year 18 weeks ago
Years ago, I made many long cross countries (more than 1000 miles one way) via piston singles of varying kinds and varying speeds, from a 182 (130 knots) to a T210 (170 knots). Now the longest I usually make is the annual trip to OSH, which for me is about 750 miles one way, in my hot rod 172 (115 knots), although I have had one trip in it to Killeen, TX and return the same day, which was over 1300 miles, a 11 1/2 flight hour day (Angel Flight HSEATS flight). Like your experience in the much faster SR22, I have always found that the route one direction can be significantly different from the return route, even if you follow the same airways and stop at the same refueling stops. That can happen with shorter flights, but certainly with long ones. If they're extra long, such as a 1500 mile flight in my poky little airplane, with 3 stops for fuel and rest, I completely recheck the weather at the far end during the 2nd stop, as well as keep an eye on it enroute.
Our training scenarios are seldom very realistic, because they're all too short. That's why I often say to new pilots, "you now have a license to learn", because it's after getting the certificate that the real learning begins.
Cessna 172
from Cary
wrote 1 year 17 weeks ago
As a proud owner of a near pristine hotrodded 1963 P172D, I certainly agree with many of the article's comments--not enough, though, to think about trading. Mine is old, but it's mine, it's paid for, and in informal testing, it can outrun a late model SP.
I think Cessna could materially reduce the cost of the new ones if it went back to a 6-pack, because I see very little utility for an airplane of the 172 class to have such sophisticated avionics as a G1000. A 172 can only handle moderate IFR, certainly without any icing other than the slightest of rime, so there is no way the advanced features of a G1000 could be used. Any reasonably competent IFR rated/proficient pilot with a basic 6-pack can handle more than a 172 can handle .
Other current upgrades, I certainly agree with. The only way my pilot seat became as comfortable as it is, occurred with a complete rebuild by Oregon Aero. The single lap belts it had were replaced with much better BAS harnesses, which are on a par with the AmSafe airbags of the new ones. I've otherwise improved the interior somewhat, but at not just a little cost, and unfortunately there's still Royalite galore in it. Mine's nice, but the upgraded interior of the new ones is much more attractive than the older models had.
No doubt, the new 172 is a great little airplane, but I'll be keeping mine, thank you.
Cary
Flying the Alaska Highway
from Cary
wrote 1 year 7 weeks ago
Outstanding, Jeff, like all of your articles. I keep thinking I should be doing that same trip in my Cessna P172D before I get too old to do it. Like your Dad, I'm an adventurer at heart, but sometimes life (and finances) gets in the way.
Cary
The Human Factor: Avoiding Groupthink
from Cary
wrote 1 year 2 weeks ago
I guess I'm really fortunate, that the other pilots I fly with have pretty much the same feelings about risk as I do. Since it's my airplane, I'm PIC and I ultimately decide, but the discussions are open. I think I generally I fall somewhere in the middle between those 2 extremes. After some 39+ years and more than a couple thousand hours, I am willing to take some weather risks, fly in the mountains, etc., but I think I know my own limitations and my airplane's limitations, and I don't push those. I have known others who are at the 2 extremes, either overly risk tolerant or overly risk adverse, but that doesn't describe any of my usual passengers.
Cary
- 1 of 2
- ››
Newsletter Signup
Marketplace
Find great Products & Services!
Partner Pages
