![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , crwdog69
@hotmail.com says... Sean Tucker and Wayne Handley might disagree. Neither have "the proper ratings." The insurance companies and the FAA cares not even a whit. Excellent point. These people actually charge money for instruction. They consider the flight instructor certificate basically irrelevant. As the holder of a flight instructor certificate, I must agree. These are not the kind of people I am concerned about. I don't know them, but apparently, they are experienced instructors and the people getting the instruction know that, know that they are students (and not passengers) and have knowingly accepted the extra risk that is involved. Obviously, Sean and Wayne have the Commercial rating and the experience and skills it takes to get it. The people I am concerned about, and that Michael talked about in the post that started this, are NOT commercial pilots, are NOT experienced instructors, and are taking people up as passengers with NO ground school or other training. Some people can teach. Some cannot. Some can fly safely. Some cannot. A piece of paper changes this little. The astonishing variance in standards enforced by different paid CFIs and DPEs will make this true for the forseeable future. The reality is that it's even worse. Training to be a flight instructor really doesn't include any training in how to recover from student errors in critical flight situations. It probably should, but it's not in the PTS, so for the forseeable future it's not going to. I agree, and even though it doesn't, someone training to be a CFIG is likely to learn about this from the CFIG giving him instruction. Most CFIGs have been "surprised" by a student occasionally, and are eager to pass this on. snip PIC is PIC. Exactly right. Regardless of who is manipulating the controls, the PIC retains absolute authority and total responsibility for the flight. Letting someone else manipulate the controls doesn't change that one bit. It doesn't change the legal situation, of course, but it can drastically alter the outcome of the flight. That is why I suggested everyone that thinks letting people without any training in instruction, and limited flight experience (less than a Commercial rating, say), teach "passengers" how to do landings and aerotows is a good idea, should read the "Accident/incident summaries" section in a few Sailplane & Gliding magazines. -- == change the decimal.point in my address to . to reply directly -- == change the decimal.point in my address to . to reply directly |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Logging approaches | Ron Garrison | Instrument Flight Rules | 109 | March 2nd 04 05:54 PM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
FAA letter on flight into known icing | C J Campbell | Instrument Flight Rules | 78 | December 22nd 03 07:44 PM |
Sim time loggable? | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | December 6th 03 07:47 AM |