Flight training theory versus reality
A flight instructor asked me to evaluate his new student. This student had acquired a private pilot certificate and completed most of the instrument rating's flight training requirements at another school. He said that the student's performance was inconsistent, his self-imposed workload was ridiculous, and he had little if any self-confidence.
According to his logbook, he soloed in 15 hours, but logged 100 hours before private pilot certification occurred. After soloing, he was introduced to advanced maneuvers-360-degree steep turns, short-field and soft-field takeoffs and landings-and then received three lessons on basic instruments followed by several lessons on instrument approaches. That training occurred without proper instruction on instrument scan, interpretation, and aircraft control-or training on radio navigation orientation, intercepts, and tracking. Ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous! This kid was hoodwinked, thwarted, and robbed.
His workload was insane because he was taught to use two-pilot crew procedures that have no place in a single-pilot cockpit. He was constantly making callouts that the pilot not flying makes in a two-pilot crew. That unacceptable distraction will compromise any single pilot's flying skills. As a former airline check airman, I assure you that if given a pilot who is competent with single-pilot procedures and skills, I can teach him to be a co-pilot in less than 30 minutes.
Good, basic single-pilot skills are the prerequisites for advanced levels of aviation. What goes on at those levels, however, is seldom if ever applicable at the basic level.
My comments regarding the student's training did not make him happy, so I said that it was not uncommon for students to discover that their training had been substandard. I related my own experience.
I was 20 years old when I started flying, and for several years I poured every dime I made into aviation. I was a flight instructor while in college, which fattened my wallet at the impressive rate of $6 an hour. Then, very proud of the certificates and ratings I possessed, I started flight training in the Army. On my fourth hour in an Army Bird Dog-a tandem-seat Cessna 180 taildragger-the Air Force contract instructor told me things that I cannot put in print. I was shocked. Was my previous training and knowledge that bad? Needless to say, I paid attention and learned to fly all over again-a humbling experience for which I am forever grateful.
The student then agreed that he and his instructor would go back to basics and remedy the errors and omissions of the past. There was no doubt in my mind that he would be successful-and that has been the case, according to his instructor.
I have read about some schools that are attempting to combine visual and instrument flight training. If this approach is plausible, why has it not been done in the past? Why did one university recently abandon the effort? And why has the military never trained in that manner? Because it doesn't work.
If I knew exactly what would occur on an FAA practical test, I could probably train students for that test knowing they'll pass. My conscience, however, would never let me do that, and I know that they would not have the proper level of self-confidence. I must train students until they develop the proper mental and physical habit patterns for visual flight. That's how self-confidence is developed, and that takes time-70 flight hours is the national average. Only then could I start formal instrument training, and personally, I much prefer a student who has gained some practical experience prior to starting instrument training. Those who think they can circumvent proven training procedures are dreamers with insufficient practical experience.
Ralph Butcher, a retired United Airlines captain, is the chief flight instructor at a California flight school. He has been flying since 1959 and has 25,000 hours in fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft. Visit his Web site.
Related Articles
