Need recommendation on accelerated IFR courses

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
wrote:

Sometimes the most
experienced IFR pilots have the mindset and judgment to question ATC
rather than accept whatever is given and sometimes that is essential
for safe IFR flight.

One of the reasons I chose the CFII I did, back when I did, was his comfort
with ATC. It was the start of my education regarding the advantages of a
"well seasoned" CFI. I've since become quite a bigot on that topic, in
fact laugh.

One of the "real world" concepts he taught, in addition to the small matter
of IFR flying, was dealing with ATC. I've found far more seasoned pilots
surprised at my negotiation style, and I owe it all to that instructor.


Hello Andrew,

I am interested in this. Are there any other aspects of this style that you would care to share? Or is it
just basically as said above, "don't blindly accept what is given to you by ATC".


Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

John Clonts wrote:

I am interested in this. Are there any other aspects of this style that
you would care to share? Or is it just basically as said above, "don't
blindly accept what is given to you by ATC".

Hmm. I am *not* this CFII (or any CFI {8^), so I'm not sure I can give
"this style" adequate coverage. But from this one student's perspective...

It involves first a recognition that the people behind the ATC microphone
are just that: people. Once that's internalized, a lot of "mic fright"
goes away.

Listening in for a while also helps that. Even the heavy iron drivers make
mistakes too, as do controllers. And that relates to part of our job.
"Communication" and operating under ATC control (ie. IFR, in a class B,
etc.) doesn't mean giving up PIC status.

I just heard a story a couple of evenings ago about a pilot that had a
mishap on a T&G. He actually ran off the runway into the grass, dented the
plane on something (a taxi light?), and then returned to the air.

When he was asked his intentions by the tower, his response was one which
indicated complete abdication. Bad Move. ATC is not there to fly the
plane.

Another aspect is that ATC and pilot are working cooperatively towards a
goal, with that working sometimes overly well defined by the rules. A
contact approach is one example where the controller is precluded from
doing something that might otherwise be helpful (though I've heard funny
stories of 'hints' given {8^).

But within those limits, it's certainly a team approach. We're on the same
side. If you're unhappy with an instruction or a reply, and assuming
conditions permit, you can work together to find an alternative.

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:

Another aspect is that ATC and pilot are working cooperatively towards a
goal, with that working sometimes overly well defined by the rules. A
contact approach is one example where the controller is precluded from
doing something that might otherwise be helpful (though I've heard funny
stories of 'hints' given {8^).

- Andrew

Lots of stories like that, but I'll relate one:

Was stuck at Albany NY with light snow falling. Started up and got the
ATIS which was reporting 2 1/2 miles... beacon was on... called Ground,
and they reported it appeared clearer to the West (our direction of
flight). Sat at the runup pad for many minutes, calling for the
official visibility two or three times. Finally asked if I could get a
"special VFR" out of their. Response from the tower was "We thought
you'd NEVER ask!" Was on my way in minutes.

Rich

I recently did one of those courses.

The best I can say about it is that I am now a genuine US government
certified instrument pilot. I can also say that the procedure cost
me less than others have spent to get the same rating.

The course cut a lot of corners. They sort of, arguably, did
meet the minimum legal standards for such training. To say the
course prepares one to fly IFR would be more than a stretch.
It would be absurd.


Sanjay Kumar wrote:
Folks !

I am planing to get my IFR ticket. preferably in one of accelerated programs.
I have read about a few but I am still looking for one where they take you
on a cross-country ride to say west-coast or Alaska (I am in east) and you
don't shoot same approach twice. AT the end of the trip you take your
checkride. Do you know of such a course ? How do they compare to ones
that remain local ?

thank you,

-Sanjay Kumar

Xxx,

well, since you're the first to really come down hard on these courses
from personal experience, I'd be very interested in WHICH you took.
Could you post this or at least e-mail me the information? Thanks!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

In article ,
says...


Xxx,

well, since you're the first to really come down hard on these courses
from personal experience, I'd be very interested in WHICH you took.
Could you post this or at least e-mail me the information? Thanks!

--


Also - you took one of "what" - accelerated or X-country.
As Thomas Borchert points out above, the two are far from synonymous -
and perhaps contradictory. The most famous accelerated course
advertises that the instructor comes to you (some actually put him up in
their homes) and they make it sound like you almost don't leave your
living room!Yet most graduates of this course do seem to fel they got
adequate training.

G Faris

What I took was an intensive 10-day instrument rating course at
one of the schools that advertises in aviation publications.

I do not want to publicly name the school for a few reasons:

1. The owners and key personnel are really nice. I like them as
individuals. They work hard to accommodate students' schedules
and individual preferences.

2. I've no reason at all (quite the contrary) to think the other
ones are any different. Publicly steering students away from
this school and implicitly to another, which would be no better,
would be a petulant and foolish thing to do.

3. They are reasonably up-front about the syllabus and what they
don't do.

4. What they provide is a rating course. Again, they are open and
honest about this. A true instrument course takes a lot longer and
costs a lot more.

5. Their price is good, even considering how they cut corners.
Others seem to provide no more training but charge more for what
they do.


Greg Farris wrote:
In article ,
says...


Xxx,

well, since you're the first to really come down hard on these courses
from personal experience, I'd be very interested in WHICH you took.
Could you post this or at least e-mail me the information? Thanks!

--


Also - you took one of "what" - accelerated or X-country.
As Thomas Borchert points out above, the two are far from synonymous -
and perhaps contradictory. The most famous accelerated course
advertises that the instructor comes to you (some actually put him up in
their homes) and they make it sound like you almost don't leave your
living room!Yet most graduates of this course do seem to fel they got
adequate training.

G Faris

What I took was an intensive 10-day instrument rating course...
I've no reason at all (quite the contrary) to think the other
ones are any different.

Based on what you described, I can very comfortably state that your did
NOT do your training with PIC. That's because PIC is different. At
PIC you get an experienced instructor who is himself an experienced
instrument pilot, and thus you learn enough about actually flying IFR
in IMC to have a reasonable chance of continuing to learn on your own
reasonably safely.

Are there other good options besides PIC? I'm sure there must be. All
you really need to make the training work is an experienced instrument
pilot who knows how to teach effectively and a low end sim - PC based
is fine. I just happen to know that PIC does it, if not right, at
least as well as it can be done if you want to get it done in 10 days.

And then there's the course you took. In your own words:

To say the
course prepares one to fly IFR would be more than a stretch.
It would be absurd.

So there's definitely a difference. Of course PIC isn't cheap, but it
does a reasonable job of preparing you to fly IFR. So what's the
difference?

Basically, it's most likely the instruction. I know quite a few
instructors who would be well qualified to teach such a course, and
would make it far more than a minimum-standards rating course. Some of
them actually do teach instruments part time. None of them are
available to teach 10 solid days in a row because they have jobs that
are either high-paying already (these tend to be the pilot owners) or
jobs that they expect will lead to high paying jobs (freight dogs and
such). If you want to fly with them, you work around their schedule.
They are mostly not interested in quitting their jobs to instruct full
time as independent contractors.

The economics of independent contracting by the day works like this -
unless your REALLY hustle, you are lucky get 200 billable days a year
(and you will spend at least 50 days working that are not billable -
dealing with accounts and taxes, networking, marketing, etc.). Also,
by the time you cover expenses, self-employment taxes, insurance, and
other such costs an employee doesn't worry about, you need to make
about double in gross revenue to match what you would get from a salary
in an 8-5 job. So really those billable days must be AT LEAST
$600/day. That's $6000 for that 10-day course, not including aircraft.

I bet you didn't pay half of that. I'll also bet that had you paid the
premium for PIC, you would feel differently about there being no
difference.

You may not get what you pay for, but you sure will pay for what you
get.
Good, Fast, Cheap. Pick any two.

Michael

Sanjay Kumar wrote:

I am planing to get my IFR ticket. preferably in one of accelerated
programs.
I have read about a few but I am still looking for one where they take you
on a cross-country ride to say west-coast or Alaska (I am in east) and you
don't shoot same approach twice. AT the end of the trip you take your
checkride. Do you know of such a course ? How do they compare to ones
that remain local ?

Sanjay, if you can't find an institutionalized course that meets your desires,
how about asking some local instrument instructor if he/she'd like to put
together a curriculum to your specifications? I'd think there must be some
instructors around who'd like to take a cross-country adventure at your expense.

Dave

Sanjay, if you can't find an institutionalized course that meets your
desires,
how about asking some local instrument instructor if he/she'd like to put
together a curriculum to your specifications? I'd think there must be some
instructors around who'd like to take a cross-country adventure at your
expense.

Dave

That's exactly what I've been working on offering. I'm an independent
instrument flight instructor (instrument instruction is my specialty) in
Central Virginia and I have been marketing this concept as a service to
flying clubs, partnerships, etc. I have put together an east coast
instrument cross country curriculum that essentially compacts the last 1/2
to 2/3 of a traditional instrument training syllabus into a cross-country
"adventure". Prior to the cross country, the initial training can be
accelerated or done at the traditional pace.

Brad Zeigler