Rod Machado's New PPL Manual

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:47:35 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

GA was never meant for test pilots and engineers alone. If GA is to
flourish in the future, it will have to attract more "average" people
into it's ranks.

Isn't that the philosophy of NASA's Free Flight concept?

Sounds more to me like NASA coming up with another excuse for spending a
ton of our tax dollars :-)

What I have in mind is a bit more achievable; manuals written so that
they don't intimidate the section of the market that doesn't respond
positively to an " engineering approach" to ground school, and CFI's who
come to realize the value of learning how to project complicated
subjects in a manner that makes a housewife as comfortable in the
learning process as an engineer.



--
Dudley Henriques

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:39:20 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:47:35 -0400, Dudley Henriques
wrote:

GA was never meant for test pilots and engineers alone. If GA is to
flourish in the future, it will have to attract more "average" people
into it's ranks.

Isn't that the philosophy of NASA's Free Flight concept?

Sounds more to me like NASA coming up with another excuse for spending a
ton of our tax dollars :-)


Given the failure of NASA's Free Flight concept to produce tangible
results, I'd have to agree.

What I have in mind is a bit more achievable; manuals written so that
they don't intimidate the section of the market that doesn't respond
positively to an " engineering approach" to ground school, and CFI's who
come to realize the value of learning how to project complicated
subjects in a manner that makes a housewife as comfortable in the
learning process as an engineer.

I understand your reasoning for that opinion, but I believe it
overlooks a few salient facts. The NAS is, by design, an engineered
system. Those who are uncomfortable dealing with the specifics and
absolutes of engineering and engineered systems are probably
unqualified to operate in that environment, and shouldn't get involved
with it. The dedication and commitment required to remain current,
and the fundamental change in attitude necessary to responsibly
command a flight demand a certain "fire in the belly" toward being an
airman. The financial, time commitment, and negative marketing
obstacles serve to test that desire, and weed out those would be
flight students who lack the required commitment to succeed at
becoming a competent pilot, not merely a certificate holder.

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:39:20 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

manuals written so that
they don't intimidate the section of the market that doesn't respond
positively to an " engineering approach" to ground school, and CFI's who
come to realize the value of learning how to project complicated
subjects in a manner that makes a housewife as comfortable in the
learning process as an engineer.

--
Dudley Henriques

How about a few of these multi-billion $$ aircraft mfgs getting
education and exposure to the elementary-college level kids and young
adults? Where is Cessna, et al with conspicuousness at the local
municipal airport, someone you could talk to or ask questions while
(always) waiting for your (late) flight, handout a damn brochure FCS?
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:47:35 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

I have believed for many moons that there exists in General Aviation a
totally unnecessary trend toward the macho image for the GA pilot. It's
this very self envisioned image that drives away many "average people"
who would otherwise give aviation a try.

Machado addresses this issue head on with his books. Although not overly
simplified, his free wheeling style addresses the flying issues in a
manner that tends NOT to intimidate the reader. I personally find great
value in this, as it fills a gap in GA that desperately needs to be
filled if GA is to progress into the future.

I don't think that I have ever seen a hobby, pleasure sport or job field
that appears to go out of its way to place barriers, hurdles and
hoop-jumping as GA. My novitiate guess is that this must stem from a
post-War mentality when pilots were trained and coming into GA ready to
fly in gobs.

Personally, if not for the cost and convenience justifications
(work/travel), as much as I am enjoying my re-entry into to GA, I'd punt
this effort in a heartbeat. Nearly everything is an uphill climb.

WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:47:35 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

I have believed for many moons that there exists in General Aviation a
totally unnecessary trend toward the macho image for the GA pilot. It's
this very self envisioned image that drives away many "average people"
who would otherwise give aviation a try.

Machado addresses this issue head on with his books. Although not overly
simplified, his free wheeling style addresses the flying issues in a
manner that tends NOT to intimidate the reader. I personally find great
value in this, as it fills a gap in GA that desperately needs to be
filled if GA is to progress into the future.

I don't think that I have ever seen a hobby, pleasure sport or job field
that appears to go out of its way to place barriers, hurdles and
hoop-jumping as GA. My novitiate guess is that this must stem from a
post-War mentality when pilots were trained and coming into GA ready to
fly in gobs.

There is indeed a "macho mystique" associated with pilots in general
that attracts a specific demographic to flying and discourages the rest
of a potential market. Not a good business model at all.



Personally, if not for the cost and convenience justifications
(work/travel), as much as I am enjoying my re-entry into to GA, I'd punt
this effort in a heartbeat. Nearly everything is an uphill climb.

It's not an easy road for sure :-)


--
Dudley Henriques

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:18:44 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

I don't think that I have ever seen a hobby, pleasure sport or job field
that appears to go out of its way to place barriers, hurdles and
hoop-jumping as GA. My novitiate guess is that this must stem from a
post-War mentality when pilots were trained and coming into GA ready to
fly in gobs.

There is indeed a "macho mystique" associated with pilots in general
that attracts a specific demographic to flying and discourages the rest
of a potential market. Not a good business model at all.

This is a fundamental failure that has to be laid at the feet of the
Cessnas of the world. Unless I missed it (surely could have), where is
the consolidation of the major mfgs efforts (monies) to promote GA? Not
to promote Piper, to promote GA?

Competitors in most any underexposed market, when faced with entry level
barriers, have found that it is a strong economic model to *first*
promote their market (GA); let the competition begin...when there are
folks to compete for.

Dudley Henriques wrote:


All of these books are good, each in it's own way.
.............
I have believed for many moons that there exists in General Aviation a
totally unnecessary trend toward the macho image for the GA pilot.

That's an interesting observation. I've read Kerschner, the Jepp books and
Gleim. In the Jepp's for example, I see strong sections on good
aeronautical decision-making.

In both chapter 1 and chapter 10, they discuss "Hazardous Attitudes", and
list (among others):

Anti-authority
Invulnerability
and
Macho.

And discuss them in some depth.

So at least in the initial training (Chapter 1) this sort of attitude is
discouraged.

None of my instructors were of the macho sort. Especially the female ones.
All of them were professional, patient and supportive.

I would never argue that the macho image doesn't exist in GA at all, nor
that there aren't macho instructors or even FBO owners. But I've not seen
it at a level such that it would act as a barrier to people wanting to
learn to fly.

I haven't read Machado's book but I read his articles and Q&A sections in
the AOPA mags and I like his style very much. So I imagine his book is
pretty good. One *can* overdo humor in such a book - some is good but like
anything else one can go overboard. Whether Machado has or not I cannot
say.

As for avoiding highly technical engineering explanations, I see the books
trying hard to do that all along. For example, I have observed that in some
cases the books simplify to the point of telling you what, but not why. In
one case (Jepp - Commercial and Instrument) they will tell you that an
increased AOA on a propeller blade results in an increase of the load on
the engine..but they don't say why.

The best attempt I saw at satisfying the varying complexity level desires of
different folks is "The Compleat Taildragger Pilot". There, they gave the
lighter version in the text. But if you really wanted the heavy vector math
they provided it in the back of the book.

G

Thought I'd poke my head into this post.... Rod's book is a fine one,,,,
and his Instrument Pilot manual (the version intended to fully prepare an
instrument pilot,,, not his first instrument publication which was only
intended as a supplement only to other books and training) are books I don't
hesitate to recommend. He really hangs a little too long with his water
analogy of electricity (i.e., I think at some point he could use his analogy
to transition the reader into a working understanding of electrical
current). Aside from the latter,,, fine book! It's in my library!


--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil E. Chapman

Certificated Flight Instructor
Commercial Pilot, ASEL - Instrument Rated
Reid-Hillview Airport, San Jose, California

Member of:
National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI)
Airplane Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA)
Experimental Pilots Association (EAA)

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
I have just received a copy of Rod Machado's Private Pilot Handbook Second
Edition from the publisher to review.

I haven't had a chance to read all of it yet, but just from what I've seen
thus far, I have no doubt whatsoever that I will be recommending this book
as a study manual to all student pilots.

This hard cover top quality heavyweight glossy paper
manual is the most well written and comprehensive work I have ever seen
done by anyone in the industry.

Throughout my career as a CFI I have always used and recommended Bill
Kershner's fine manuals, and these are still fine books today.
But what Rod has done with his books is absolutely amazing. The
presentation is not only accurate, but done with the "average person" and
"everyday pilot" in mind. Rod takes the most complicated of issues and
presents them intelligently and with a splash of humor that is
unbelievably educational. The drawings and graphics are exceptional.
I can't stress enough my positive opinion of this book.
--
Dudley Henriques

Cecil E. Chapman wrote:
Thought I'd poke my head into this post.... Rod's book is a fine one,,,,
and his Instrument Pilot manual (the version intended to fully prepare an
instrument pilot,,, not his first instrument publication which was only
intended as a supplement only to other books and training) are books I don't
hesitate to recommend. He really hangs a little too long with his water
analogy of electricity (i.e., I think at some point he could use his analogy
to transition the reader into a working understanding of electrical
current).

Ohm my!! Watt did you say? Shocking; simply shocking!! :-))

Explaining electricity to the layman can indeed be a true test of one's
ability to improvise with explanation. Even today, after years of
dealing with this wonder of science, I STILL find electricity
fascinating and interesting.
The water analogy has been around a while for sure. Personally I prefer
the pool balls in the pipe :-))


--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote:
Cecil E. Chapman wrote:

Thought I'd poke my head into this post.... Rod's book is a fine
one,,,, and his Instrument Pilot manual (the version intended to fully
prepare an instrument pilot,,, not his first instrument publication
which was only intended as a supplement only to other books and
training) are books I don't hesitate to recommend. He really hangs a
little too long with his water analogy of electricity (i.e., I think
at some point he could use his analogy to transition the reader into a
working understanding of electrical current).


Ohm my!! Watt did you say? Shocking; simply shocking!! :-))

Explaining electricity to the layman can indeed be a true test of one's
ability to improvise with explanation. Even today, after years of
dealing with this wonder of science, I STILL find electricity
fascinating and interesting.
The water analogy has been around a while for sure. Personally I prefer
the pool balls in the pipe :-))


Funny, Ron tells stories of when he and a friend were in firefighting
training (both EE's) and after a while they looked at each other and
jokingly said "hey, it's just like electricity!".

Margy