flying with different instructors

Chief flight instructor and my primary instructor are both gone for the
week, so I've been flying with whatever low-time, newly-minted Cessna-jockey
greenhorn flight instructor that answers the phone when I call to schedule.
I've flown with four different instructors in the last two weeks.

I wholeheartedly recommend this. Each instructor has his own way of
explaining and demonstrating things, (working on complex rating and
commercial, part 141) as well as slight variations of technique and
procedure. The result is that I've been able to choose the methods which
work best and with which I'm most comfortable, AND check these things
against other instructors to make sure it's right.

The newer guys have a great sense of enthusiasm, and since the boss is out
of the shop, they've got great information about what it's REALLY like
flying as a CFI out of that FBO and things like, how many hours one might
expect to accumulate over the summer flying season.

I've had one instructor who's a Major in the Air Force and learned at the
academy, one who is a retired Marine and learned in the '60s, one who is an
Embry Riddle graduate and one who earned his CFI wings from two of the
others and has only been instructing for a year. The four different
perspectives have made every flight not just practice, but a new learning
experience. My primary instructor is excellent, but I wish I'd have been
doing this to some degree all along!

-c

As a CFI, I think that this can work for advanced instruction
(Instrument, Commercial, and above), but I think it is generally quite
a bad idea for primary students.

The very thing you seem to like about it ("The result is that I've been
able to choose the methods which work best...") can be a major problem
with primary students. By the time you get to the Commercial-student
level, you are a fairly accomplished aviator. You likely feel quite at
home in an airplane, and definionally have hundreds of hours in an
airplane.

Try to think back to when you were a 15-hour primary student. The stuff
that we take for granted is often a major difficulty. It was for me. I
remember being a 15-hour students and trying to remember all the stuff
you had to do before landing, and sometimes looking up and feeling
completely baffled. I know I'm not alone in this.

When I work with primary students, I generally try to teach them one
coherent way of doing things. "Downwind- power to 2000 RPM, abeam the
touchdown point, power to 1500 RPM, pitch for 80 knots. When TD point
is 45 degrees behind, turn base, one notch flaps...pitch for 80....". I
have had students who have flown with different CFIs while I was
working with them. These other CFIs (one was a CFI in training) are
certainly very competent pilots and likely skilled instructors.
However,they do things differently...they teach things differently. And
what seems to often happen is that instead of focusing on the task at
hand and using a technique they know and have learned to trust, noow
the student is thinking "Was it 1500 RPM? No....that was Dave. Jeff
likes power all the way out...wait...."

When I start work with a primary student, I structure my syllabus and
training program to lead from one concept and maneuver naturally to
another...I envision the entire training process that I expect to
perform with that student. I know what each student I have knows...and
what he doesn. I know what he is good at, and what he isn't. And I can
use these things to help him become a better pilot. I think that
continuity is very important...and having multiple CFIs gets in the way
of that.

By the time you are working on your CFI or your commercial, you pretty
much already know how to fly...you are perfecting and advancing your
technique...but you already know how to do all the basics. I think that
it is probably reasonable to work with different CFIs at that level.
but not when you're starting out.

Cheers,


Cap




gatt wrote:
Chief flight instructor and my primary instructor are both gone for
the
week, so I've been flying with whatever low-time, newly-minted
Cessna-jockey
greenhorn flight instructor that answers the phone when I call to
schedule.
I've flown with four different instructors in the last two weeks.

I wholeheartedly recommend this. Each instructor has his own way of
explaining and demonstrating things, (working on complex rating and
commercial, part 141) as well as slight variations of technique and
procedure. The result is that I've been able to choose the methods
which
work best and with which I'm most comfortable, AND check these things
against other instructors to make sure it's right.

The newer guys have a great sense of enthusiasm, and since the boss
is out
of the shop, they've got great information about what it's REALLY
like
flying as a CFI out of that FBO and things like, how many hours one
might
expect to accumulate over the summer flying season.

I've had one instructor who's a Major in the Air Force and learned at
the
academy, one who is a retired Marine and learned in the '60s, one who
is an
Embry Riddle graduate and one who earned his CFI wings from two of
the
others and has only been instructing for a year. The four different
perspectives have made every flight not just practice, but a new
learning
experience. My primary instructor is excellent, but I wish I'd have
been
doing this to some degree all along!

-c

wrote:

As a CFI, I think that this can work for advanced instruction
(Instrument, Commercial, and above), but I think it is generally quite
a bad idea for primary students.
....
When I work with primary students, I generally try to teach them one
coherent way of doing things. "Downwind- power to 2000 RPM, abeam the
touchdown point, power to 1500 RPM, pitch for 80 knots. When TD point
....

When I've learnt to fly, I had several instructors from day one.
Speaking strictly for myself, I loved that. Every instructor told some
different rules. Comparing them, I found out very quickly what the
reason was behind those rules, and not surprisingly, all those different
rules boilt down essentially to the same. I preferred this a lot over
learning a rule by heart without really understanding it.

Stefan

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 21:53:26 +0100, Stefan
wrote:

wrote:

As a CFI, I think that this can work for advanced instruction
(Instrument, Commercial, and above), but I think it is generally quite
a bad idea for primary students.
...
When I work with primary students, I generally try to teach them one
coherent way of doing things. "Downwind- power to 2000 RPM, abeam the
touchdown point, power to 1500 RPM, pitch for 80 knots. When TD point
...

When I've learnt to fly, I had several instructors from day one.
Speaking strictly for myself, I loved that. Every instructor told some
different rules. Comparing them, I found out very quickly what the
reason was behind those rules, and not surprisingly, all those different
rules boilt down essentially to the same. I preferred this a lot over
learning a rule by heart without really understanding it.


Likewise I had several instructors throughout my primary training.
They did communicate and coordinate, still I had to prove to each what
the other said.

It's been a while, but I do remember being taught the stabilized
pattern and then moving on to more flexible/varied patterns.

In my situation, I was glad for the multiple instructors.
OTOH I don't think it's something that would work well for all
students.

Stefan
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

If your student mistakenly sets the power at 1700 instead of 1800, I hope
you don't get on his case and develop in him a case of
head-in-the-cockpit-itis. I'd rather have the student remember the position
of the tach needle relative to straight up (one o'clock, two o'clock, etc)
and let it go at that. Precise power setting ain't all that important, yet
some students will devote ten long seconds to massaging the tach to get an
exact number because that's what their instructor told them (if you think
ten seconds is a short time, I will gladly stick my finger in your eye and
hold it there for....heck, two seconds be enough to make my point?).

Bob Gardner

wrote in message
oups.com...
As a CFI, I think that this can work for advanced instruction
(Instrument, Commercial, and above), but I think it is generally quite
a bad idea for primary students.

The very thing you seem to like about it ("The result is that I've been
able to choose the methods which work best...") can be a major problem
with primary students. By the time you get to the Commercial-student
level, you are a fairly accomplished aviator. You likely feel quite at
home in an airplane, and definionally have hundreds of hours in an
airplane.

Try to think back to when you were a 15-hour primary student. The stuff
that we take for granted is often a major difficulty. It was for me. I
remember being a 15-hour students and trying to remember all the stuff
you had to do before landing, and sometimes looking up and feeling
completely baffled. I know I'm not alone in this.

When I work with primary students, I generally try to teach them one
coherent way of doing things. "Downwind- power to 2000 RPM, abeam the
touchdown point, power to 1500 RPM, pitch for 80 knots. When TD point
is 45 degrees behind, turn base, one notch flaps...pitch for 80....". I
have had students who have flown with different CFIs while I was
working with them. These other CFIs (one was a CFI in training) are
certainly very competent pilots and likely skilled instructors.
However,they do things differently...they teach things differently. And
what seems to often happen is that instead of focusing on the task at
hand and using a technique they know and have learned to trust, noow
the student is thinking "Was it 1500 RPM? No....that was Dave. Jeff
likes power all the way out...wait...."

When I start work with a primary student, I structure my syllabus and
training program to lead from one concept and maneuver naturally to
another...I envision the entire training process that I expect to
perform with that student. I know what each student I have knows...and
what he doesn. I know what he is good at, and what he isn't. And I can
use these things to help him become a better pilot. I think that
continuity is very important...and having multiple CFIs gets in the way
of that.

By the time you are working on your CFI or your commercial, you pretty
much already know how to fly...you are perfecting and advancing your
technique...but you already know how to do all the basics. I think that
it is probably reasonable to work with different CFIs at that level.
but not when you're starting out.

Cheers,


Cap




gatt wrote:
Chief flight instructor and my primary instructor are both gone for
the
week, so I've been flying with whatever low-time, newly-minted
Cessna-jockey
greenhorn flight instructor that answers the phone when I call to
schedule.
I've flown with four different instructors in the last two weeks.

I wholeheartedly recommend this. Each instructor has his own way of
explaining and demonstrating things, (working on complex rating and
commercial, part 141) as well as slight variations of technique and
procedure. The result is that I've been able to choose the methods
which
work best and with which I'm most comfortable, AND check these things
against other instructors to make sure it's right.

The newer guys have a great sense of enthusiasm, and since the boss
is out
of the shop, they've got great information about what it's REALLY
like
flying as a CFI out of that FBO and things like, how many hours one
might
expect to accumulate over the summer flying season.

I've had one instructor who's a Major in the Air Force and learned at
the
academy, one who is a retired Marine and learned in the '60s, one who
is an
Embry Riddle graduate and one who earned his CFI wings from two of
the
others and has only been instructing for a year. The four different
perspectives have made every flight not just practice, but a new
learning
experience. My primary instructor is excellent, but I wish I'd have
been
doing this to some degree all along!

-c

you can leave your finger where it is, thank you. as a recent graduate
from airplane kindergarten to first grade, i've got really fresh
experience. overall, i think having one MAIN instructor thru to the
checkride is probably best but going up with someone else once in a
while is really beneficial too. i know a lot of schools have the chief
pilot or whatever do a ride every once in a while and usually before
solo or checkride. just try to stay away from the guy who thinks you're
not a student but a voice operated autopilot.

dan

Bob Gardner wrote:
If your student mistakenly sets the power at 1700 instead of 1800, I
hope
you don't get on his case and develop in him a case of
head-in-the-cockpit-itis. I'd rather have the student remember the
position
of the tach needle relative to straight up (one o'clock, two o'clock,
etc)
and let it go at that. Precise power setting ain't all that
important, yet
some students will devote ten long seconds to massaging the tach to
get an
exact number because that's what their instructor told them (if you
think
ten seconds is a short time, I will gladly stick my finger in your
eye and
hold it there for....heck, two seconds be enough to make my point?).

Bob Gardner


Nah. I generally avoid 'getting on his case' about anything if I can
avoid it; generally there are better ways of fixing problems. And I am
generally less of a fan of the FAAs emphasis on 'integrated
instruction' for primary students than many other CFIs seem to be. If a
VFR student is looking inside the cockpit for *anything* for 10 seconds
at a time (power control or anything else) then we've got something we
need to work on (generally).

What I try to teach are 'rules of thumb' that the student can use so
that he *can* focus outside on the task at hand. 2000 RPM on the
downwind isn't really going to be much different from 1900 or 2100. But
2000 RPM generally produces the speed that works well on downwind (with
the correct pitch), and is easy to remember. I like things that are
easy to remember; things that 'come back to you' when you need it. Just
as much as I think teaching precise v-speeds is really
counterproductive (of course most DEs ask for the 'precise' speeds')
because in a situation where the v-speed is important (Vg in an engine
out, Vy after takeoff, Vref down the pipe) there are usually much more
important things to be focused on. If my student's engine croaks, I
really don't want him worrying about whether Vg was 87 knots, or 84.

Which goes back to my teaching philosophy and why I prefer students to
fly with only me as a CFI during their primary training. I have decided
upon upon Einstein's Dictum ("Everything should be as simple as
possible, but no simpler") as a major component of primary training.
For instance, while I teach students the various necessary speeds, I
teach an additional 'critical speed' that seems to exist for most light
training planes. This speed (while different for each kind of plane) is
an easily memorable speed that can be used as a 'multipurpose' speed if
a student can't remember a speed or has a situation arise where he
needs to focus elsewhere for a while. In the Cessna 172N, I teach
students that the 'critical speed' is 65 knots. You can use this speed
for climb (it's halfway between Vx and Vy), you can use it for
approach, both flaps up and down, you can use it for best glide...and
remembering this one speed *might* help in an emergency...just pitch it
for 65 knots, regardless of what you are doing. Simple...easy to
remember, and it works.

But I know other CFIs who are *very* focused on speed control. If you
aren't at Vy on climbout, you're wrong. That's a reasonable
approach...teaching that as a method of flight discipline from the very
beginning, but it isn't very compatible with my training philosophy.

As I have said, at the higher levels, it is probably fine to use more
than one CFI. But primary training (IMO) is qualitatively different,
and I strongly advise my students to do as *I* teach them. It's fine
to fly with other pilots if they want, but when they are taking
instruction, I'd really prefer it if they only take it from me. or from
somebody else. But not both.

Cheers,

Cap

wrote:

But primary training (IMO) is qualitatively different,
and I strongly advise my students to do as *I* teach them.

As I said, I had more than one instructor right from day one. (I guess
about seven or eight.) Every one of them strongly advised me to do as
*he* tought me. And I very quickly learnt to do so - with every
instructor! This made me flexible on a very early stage, understanding
that there are many ways to do the right thing. Maybe I needed a couple
of hours more to the check ride than others, but I'm convinced that this
gave me a much wider view, making me a better pilot at the end. Again,
I'm speaking strictly for myself.

Stefan

While 100 rpm is not a big deal, developing a routine in the early stage
of training is very important. An experienced pilot can handle a large
number of variables. He can fly the approach at any RPM, airspeed and
flap setting. But a new student needs a more limited set of variables.
So we need to fix a few parameters such as RPM, airspeed and flaps etc
and only leave a few others as variables such as altitudes to float.
With practice they will be able to develop the experience to handle all
variables at once. From personal experience, all my students soloed in
less than 20 hours. The ones who exceeded 30 hours flew with multiple
instructors.





"Bob Gardner" wrote in
:

If your student mistakenly sets the power at 1700 instead of 1800, I
hope you don't get on his case and develop in him a case of
head-in-the-cockpit-itis. I'd rather have the student remember the
position of the tach needle relative to straight up (one o'clock, two
o'clock, etc) and let it go at that. Precise power setting ain't all
that important, yet some students will devote ten long seconds to
massaging the tach to get an exact number because that's what their
instructor told them (if you think ten seconds is a short time, I will
gladly stick my finger in your eye and hold it there for....heck, two
seconds be enough to make my point?).

Bob Gardner

wrote in message
oups.com...
As a CFI, I think that this can work for advanced instruction
(Instrument, Commercial, and above), but I think it is generally
quite a bad idea for primary students.

The very thing you seem to like about it ("The result is that I've
been able to choose the methods which work best...") can be a major
problem with primary students. By the time you get to the
Commercial-student level, you are a fairly accomplished aviator. You
likely feel quite at home in an airplane, and definionally have
hundreds of hours in an airplane.

Try to think back to when you were a 15-hour primary student. The
stuff that we take for granted is often a major difficulty. It was
for me. I remember being a 15-hour students and trying to remember
all the stuff you had to do before landing, and sometimes looking up
and feeling completely baffled. I know I'm not alone in this.

When I work with primary students, I generally try to teach them one
coherent way of doing things. "Downwind- power to 2000 RPM, abeam the
touchdown point, power to 1500 RPM, pitch for 80 knots. When TD point
is 45 degrees behind, turn base, one notch flaps...pitch for 80....".
I have had students who have flown with different CFIs while I was
working with them. These other CFIs (one was a CFI in training) are
certainly very competent pilots and likely skilled instructors.
However,they do things differently...they teach things differently.
And what seems to often happen is that instead of focusing on the
task at hand and using a technique they know and have learned to
trust, noow the student is thinking "Was it 1500 RPM? No....that was
Dave. Jeff likes power all the way out...wait...."

When I start work with a primary student, I structure my syllabus and
training program to lead from one concept and maneuver naturally to
another...I envision the entire training process that I expect to
perform with that student. I know what each student I have
knows...and what he doesn. I know what he is good at, and what he
isn't. And I can use these things to help him become a better pilot.
I think that continuity is very important...and having multiple CFIs
gets in the way of that.

By the time you are working on your CFI or your commercial, you
pretty much already know how to fly...you are perfecting and
advancing your technique...but you already know how to do all the
basics. I think that it is probably reasonable to work with different
CFIs at that level. but not when you're starting out.

Cheers,


Cap




gatt wrote:
Chief flight instructor and my primary instructor are both gone for
the
week, so I've been flying with whatever low-time, newly-minted
Cessna-jockey
greenhorn flight instructor that answers the phone when I call to
schedule.
I've flown with four different instructors in the last two weeks.

I wholeheartedly recommend this. Each instructor has his own way
of explaining and demonstrating things, (working on complex rating
and commercial, part 141) as well as slight variations of technique
and procedure. The result is that I've been able to choose the
methods
which
work best and with which I'm most comfortable, AND check these
things against other instructors to make sure it's right.

The newer guys have a great sense of enthusiasm, and since the boss
is out
of the shop, they've got great information about what it's REALLY
like
flying as a CFI out of that FBO and things like, how many hours one
might
expect to accumulate over the summer flying season.

I've had one instructor who's a Major in the Air Force and learned
at
the
academy, one who is a retired Marine and learned in the '60s, one
who
is an
Embry Riddle graduate and one who earned his CFI wings from two of
the
others and has only been instructing for a year. The four
different perspectives have made every flight not just practice, but
a new
learning
experience. My primary instructor is excellent, but I wish I'd have
been
doing this to some degree all along!

-c

Bob,

You're absoloutly correct, except that I disagree with your specific
example. :-) Setting your power precisely one downwind (or, at the level-off
just prior to the FAF if you're flying an instrument approach) allows you to
trim the airplane properly for approach, and is the one time I want to see
precision from my students. This makes the correct airspeed much easier to
control, and gives you much more time "heads up" during the rest of the
approach to land. You'd be amazed at what a difference a hundred RPM can
make.

Here's an experiment that seems to work on most light singles (and some
light twins). From a reasonable altitude, put in "approach flaps", and trim
the airplane for "approach speed". Then, retract the flaps, and notice the
indicated airspeed. (Usually this is right around the top of the white arc,
but not always. If it's above the top of the white arc, disregard everything
I've said... you'll need to fly the plane :-).) Now, at pattern altitude,
trim the airplane to fly this airspeed while level, and note the required
power setting. Now, bring the power back a bit to start your descent to
land, and put in your approach flaps. Shazam, you'll slow to approach speed
within a couple of knots without much effort, giving you more "look out the
window" time in that part of the pattern where a lot of accidents happen.

In a Warrior-II, 152 or 172P with just an instructor and a student, setting
2100 RPM on downwind, and trimming for hands off flight seems to set the
airplane up for a normal approach speed when using 20-deg of flaps, and the
short-field approach speed with 30-deg of flaps. If you have more people,
add 100 RPM per person. If it's gusty, add about 100 or 200 RPM for the
appropriate speed boost. In an Arrow-II, about 21-inches of manifold
pressure (regardless of RPM) does the same thing. (What is it with "21"?).

Just my opinion. :-)

-Rob

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
If your student mistakenly sets the power at 1700 instead of 1800, I hope
you don't get on his case and develop in him a case of
head-in-the-cockpit-itis. I'd rather have the student remember the
position of the tach needle relative to straight up (one o'clock, two
o'clock, etc) and let it go at that. Precise power setting ain't all that
important, yet some students will devote ten long seconds to massaging the
tach to get an exact number because that's what their instructor told them
(if you think ten seconds is a short time, I will gladly stick my finger
in your eye and hold it there for....heck, two seconds be enough to make
my point?).

Bob Gardner

wrote in message
oups.com...
As a CFI, I think that this can work for advanced instruction
(Instrument, Commercial, and above), but I think it is generally quite
a bad idea for primary students.

The very thing you seem to like about it ("The result is that I've been
able to choose the methods which work best...") can be a major problem
with primary students. By the time you get to the Commercial-student
level, you are a fairly accomplished aviator. You likely feel quite at
home in an airplane, and definionally have hundreds of hours in an
airplane.

Try to think back to when you were a 15-hour primary student. The stuff
that we take for granted is often a major difficulty. It was for me. I
remember being a 15-hour students and trying to remember all the stuff
you had to do before landing, and sometimes looking up and feeling
completely baffled. I know I'm not alone in this.

When I work with primary students, I generally try to teach them one
coherent way of doing things. "Downwind- power to 2000 RPM, abeam the
touchdown point, power to 1500 RPM, pitch for 80 knots. When TD point
is 45 degrees behind, turn base, one notch flaps...pitch for 80....". I
have had students who have flown with different CFIs while I was
working with them. These other CFIs (one was a CFI in training) are
certainly very competent pilots and likely skilled instructors.
However,they do things differently...they teach things differently. And
what seems to often happen is that instead of focusing on the task at
hand and using a technique they know and have learned to trust, noow
the student is thinking "Was it 1500 RPM? No....that was Dave. Jeff
likes power all the way out...wait...."

When I start work with a primary student, I structure my syllabus and
training program to lead from one concept and maneuver naturally to
another...I envision the entire training process that I expect to
perform with that student. I know what each student I have knows...and
what he doesn. I know what he is good at, and what he isn't. And I can
use these things to help him become a better pilot. I think that
continuity is very important...and having multiple CFIs gets in the way
of that.

By the time you are working on your CFI or your commercial, you pretty
much already know how to fly...you are perfecting and advancing your
technique...but you already know how to do all the basics. I think that
it is probably reasonable to work with different CFIs at that level.
but not when you're starting out.

Cheers,


Cap




gatt wrote:
Chief flight instructor and my primary instructor are both gone for
the
week, so I've been flying with whatever low-time, newly-minted
Cessna-jockey
greenhorn flight instructor that answers the phone when I call to
schedule.
I've flown with four different instructors in the last two weeks.

I wholeheartedly recommend this. Each instructor has his own way of
explaining and demonstrating things, (working on complex rating and
commercial, part 141) as well as slight variations of technique and
procedure. The result is that I've been able to choose the methods
which
work best and with which I'm most comfortable, AND check these things
against other instructors to make sure it's right.

The newer guys have a great sense of enthusiasm, and since the boss
is out
of the shop, they've got great information about what it's REALLY
like
flying as a CFI out of that FBO and things like, how many hours one
might
expect to accumulate over the summer flying season.

I've had one instructor who's a Major in the Air Force and learned at
the
academy, one who is a retired Marine and learned in the '60s, one who
is an
Embry Riddle graduate and one who earned his CFI wings from two of
the
others and has only been instructing for a year. The four different
perspectives have made every flight not just practice, but a new
learning
experience. My primary instructor is excellent, but I wish I'd have
been
doing this to some degree all along!

-c