Time to earn license for professionals

Larry Dighera:
1. JFK Jr. chose a similar course of instruction for similar
reasons. His case bears grim testament to it's effectiveness.

I agree with all about hit-and-miss training, but JFK Jr's grim story
is not a testament to the effectiveness of his course of instruction.
If he'd gotten his ticket in 3 months and 60 hours of consistent
training,
that wouldn't have necessarily made him, or *anyone*, any more or
less apt to make better decisions, as evidenced by people with far
more consistent training and ratings than JFK Jr that have suffered
equally grim results from such decisions.

Dudley Henriques wrote in news:h62dnYU0n_
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
news
Bob Moore wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote
The first thing new instructors have to be taught as they
become
instructors is that there are base differences between
teaching
in
a
classroom that isn't moving and teaching in a classroom that
is
moving at 100 mph plus.
This is what is wrong with most flight instruction. A
professional
Flight Instructor does not teach in a 100 mph classroom. Done
properly, ALL instruction is done in the classroom (briefing
room)
and then the student is allowed to practice in the airplane.

My qualifications...first, the US Navy sent me to a two month
"How
to
Instruct" course. I would then teach that course for two years.
Second, I received my FAA Flight Instructor Certificate in a
professional Part 141 Training Center. Third, I completed an
FAA
approved Part 121 Airline Flight Instructor Training Program. I
would
later, as Mgr Flightcrew Training, be responsible for
developing
and
implementing such programs at other airlines. Fourth, I did
manage
a
staff of about 8 instructors in the Jet Training Division of
the
old
Burnside-Ott Flight Training Center at Opaloca Airport in
Miami.

Bob Moore
Is there anything about the following sentence taken from an
earlier
post of mine in this thread that you are having trouble
understanding?
Dudley Henriques wrote;
"Many instructors in my opinion make a HUGE mistake by trying to
teach
everything about everything while the student is flying the
airplane.
"

Of COURSE a flight instructor teaches in a 100mph plus
classroom,
and
in even faster classrooms in higher performance aircraft. This
in
no
way should be construed as you have attempted to do here into
meaning
that a flight instructor should use the time in the aircraft to
teach
what should have been covered on the ground both during the
preflight
and post flight phases of a dual session.
There is a place for detailed instruction and that is NOT while
the
student is under the stress of flying the aircraft.
Your premise that ALL instruction is done in the classroom and
allowing the student to "practice" in the aircraft is not
exactly
correct. It is more correct that theory and procedure are taught
on
the ground and closely monitored and corrected practice with the
student is done in the air. To say that no instruction is
performed
in
the air is incorrect. It is however correct to say that all
instruction in the air be restricted to it's simplest common
denominator, allowing the student to error and correct with
verbal
guidance. It is during the post flight debrief that the more
detailed
instruction should take place. To address your basic premise, I
believe you might want to re-read what I have said in this
thread
about what constitutes proper flight instruction technique. With
a
few
minor changes, we are not that far apart, but make no mistake,
flight
instruction does indeed take place in a moving classroom. Ground
instruction takes place in a classroom.



Ever heard the one about the three blind men examining an
elephant?


Bertie
Hi Bertie; howgozit? Hope you're well these days.
not too bad, thanks.
I agree. Much of it is in perspective. I think all of us are
approaching
the basic premise from different directions. The macro is intact
but
the
micros are in flux :-)

Well, exactly. I agree with your stance though. The airplane is a
classroom in itself. A good airplane is a better instructor than
the
instructor is. but the point i think you are trying to make is that
while the student is practicing whatever, you gotta shout some
additional instruction his way. Otherwise dual would be pointless.
after all, if he goes out and practices it all wrong after his
thorough
classroom briefing what's he learned?


Bertie



Exactly! I think the main point if you were to reduce everything
down
to
it's lowest common denominator would be that there are actually two
teaching personas that the CFI has to master; the first is the
teacher
who covers what needs to be covered on the ground in the manner best
suited for that scenario (this would be the classroom approach).
The second is a teaching personna that knows how to simplify,
observe
,direct and correct with minimal interference while the airplane is
in
motion. This second teaching personna is what we usually have to
"teach"
people coming into the flight instruction business from a formal
professional teaching background. It's usually a quick transition if
the
"teacher" is amenable and able to adjust to this added dimension
required of a good flight instructor.
I totally agree with you that the airplane itself is the best flight
instructor a pilot will ever have.


Well, unless t's a cherokee!

Bertie

Well...there's always room for a "driving instructor". :-))))


Unfortunately, we're living with the Cherokee's children now.
Having said that, it was the best workhouse of that bunch, and it was
damn near bulletproof. You must have know Albie Cornell. I flew a few of
his for a while. He had the highest time PA 28 in the world at the time.
(I think it was 4625L) Damn thing would lift anything you could squeeze
into it out of a 1500 foot strip and hardly ever needed fixing..

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in news:h62dnYU0n_
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
news
Bob Moore wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote
The first thing new instructors have to be taught as they
become
instructors is that there are base differences between
teaching
in
a
classroom that isn't moving and teaching in a classroom that
is
moving at 100 mph plus.
This is what is wrong with most flight instruction. A
professional
Flight Instructor does not teach in a 100 mph classroom. Done
properly, ALL instruction is done in the classroom (briefing
room)
and then the student is allowed to practice in the airplane.

My qualifications...first, the US Navy sent me to a two month
"How
to
Instruct" course. I would then teach that course for two years.
Second, I received my FAA Flight Instructor Certificate in a
professional Part 141 Training Center. Third, I completed an
FAA
approved Part 121 Airline Flight Instructor Training Program. I
would
later, as Mgr Flightcrew Training, be responsible for
developing
and
implementing such programs at other airlines. Fourth, I did
manage
a
staff of about 8 instructors in the Jet Training Division of
the
old
Burnside-Ott Flight Training Center at Opaloca Airport in
Miami.
Bob Moore
Is there anything about the following sentence taken from an
earlier
post of mine in this thread that you are having trouble
understanding?
Dudley Henriques wrote;
"Many instructors in my opinion make a HUGE mistake by trying to
teach
everything about everything while the student is flying the
airplane.
"

Of COURSE a flight instructor teaches in a 100mph plus
classroom,
and
in even faster classrooms in higher performance aircraft. This
in
no
way should be construed as you have attempted to do here into
meaning
that a flight instructor should use the time in the aircraft to
teach
what should have been covered on the ground both during the
preflight
and post flight phases of a dual session.
There is a place for detailed instruction and that is NOT while
the
student is under the stress of flying the aircraft.
Your premise that ALL instruction is done in the classroom and
allowing the student to "practice" in the aircraft is not
exactly
correct. It is more correct that theory and procedure are taught
on
the ground and closely monitored and corrected practice with the
student is done in the air. To say that no instruction is
performed
in
the air is incorrect. It is however correct to say that all
instruction in the air be restricted to it's simplest common
denominator, allowing the student to error and correct with
verbal
guidance. It is during the post flight debrief that the more
detailed
instruction should take place. To address your basic premise, I
believe you might want to re-read what I have said in this
thread
about what constitutes proper flight instruction technique. With
a
few
minor changes, we are not that far apart, but make no mistake,
flight
instruction does indeed take place in a moving classroom. Ground
instruction takes place in a classroom.



Ever heard the one about the three blind men examining an
elephant?

Bertie
Hi Bertie; howgozit? Hope you're well these days.
not too bad, thanks.
I agree. Much of it is in perspective. I think all of us are
approaching
the basic premise from different directions. The macro is intact
but
the
micros are in flux :-)

Well, exactly. I agree with your stance though. The airplane is a
classroom in itself. A good airplane is a better instructor than
the
instructor is. but the point i think you are trying to make is that
while the student is practicing whatever, you gotta shout some
additional instruction his way. Otherwise dual would be pointless.
after all, if he goes out and practices it all wrong after his
thorough
classroom briefing what's he learned?


Bertie



Exactly! I think the main point if you were to reduce everything
down
to
it's lowest common denominator would be that there are actually two
teaching personas that the CFI has to master; the first is the
teacher
who covers what needs to be covered on the ground in the manner best
suited for that scenario (this would be the classroom approach).
The second is a teaching personna that knows how to simplify,
observe
,direct and correct with minimal interference while the airplane is
in
motion. This second teaching personna is what we usually have to
"teach"
people coming into the flight instruction business from a formal
professional teaching background. It's usually a quick transition if
the
"teacher" is amenable and able to adjust to this added dimension
required of a good flight instructor.
I totally agree with you that the airplane itself is the best flight
instructor a pilot will ever have.

Well, unless t's a cherokee!

Bertie

Well...there's always room for a "driving instructor". :-))))


Unfortunately, we're living with the Cherokee's children now.
Having said that, it was the best workhouse of that bunch, and it was
damn near bulletproof. You must have know Albie Cornell. I flew a few of
his for a while. He had the highest time PA 28 in the world at the time.
(I think it was 4625L) Damn thing would lift anything you could squeeze
into it out of a 1500 foot strip and hardly ever needed fixing..

Bertie



I used to have fits "reteaching" people who learned to fly in Cherokees
when they came in to us for checkouts in our tail wheel airplanes. Even
checking out someone in a 150 required some degree of "rudder rehab" :-)
I vaguely recall Albie Cornell but for the life of me I can't associate
it with one of our surrounding fields. I take it he operated a small
strip? I'm thinking New Jersey but not at all sure.
You're right about the 28's lifting capacity, especially the pre-Warrior
Hershey Bars. We had several on the line but I always favored the
150/152 for primary instruction for the reasons we have been discussing.
:-)

--
Dudley Henriques

"Gig 601XL Builder":
On top of that I'll bet (and I have nothing to back this up) the drop out
rate for pilots that spread training over a long period of time is probably
higher. And God knows we hate to loose somebody that wants to fly
bad enough to start the process.

Our flight school encouraged people to fly often/consistently and
complete their goal(s), and counseled people who spread flights
apart by more than a week -- aside from skill/proficiency, many
CFIs don't stay at these schools more than a few months (they
build the hours they need and then they're gone). But few such
endeavors have a 100% completion rate, and dropouts are not
always a failure on anyone's part. Sometimes as the training
progresses, it just becomes clear that it's going to take more time,
dedication and money than the person initially thought, and he/she
realizes it isn't something they want or need that bad or is cut out
to
do. Sometimes it's a common sense, realistic, prudent decision.

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in news:h62dnYU0n_
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
news
Bob Moore wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote
The first thing new instructors have to be taught as they
become
instructors is that there are base differences between
teaching
in
a
classroom that isn't moving and teaching in a classroom that
is
moving at 100 mph plus.
This is what is wrong with most flight instruction. A
professional
Flight Instructor does not teach in a 100 mph classroom. Done
properly, ALL instruction is done in the classroom (briefing
room)
and then the student is allowed to practice in the airplane.

My qualifications...first, the US Navy sent me to a two month
"How
to
Instruct" course. I would then teach that course for two
years. Second, I received my FAA Flight Instructor
Certificate in a professional Part 141 Training Center.
Third, I completed an
FAA
approved Part 121 Airline Flight Instructor Training Program.
I
would
later, as Mgr Flightcrew Training, be responsible for
developing
and
implementing such programs at other airlines. Fourth, I did
manage
a
staff of about 8 instructors in the Jet Training Division of
the
old
Burnside-Ott Flight Training Center at Opaloca Airport in
Miami.
Bob Moore
Is there anything about the following sentence taken from an
earlier
post of mine in this thread that you are having trouble
understanding?
Dudley Henriques wrote;
"Many instructors in my opinion make a HUGE mistake by trying
to
teach
everything about everything while the student is flying the
airplane.
"

Of COURSE a flight instructor teaches in a 100mph plus
classroom,
and
in even faster classrooms in higher performance aircraft. This
in
no
way should be construed as you have attempted to do here into
meaning
that a flight instructor should use the time in the aircraft
to
teach
what should have been covered on the ground both during the
preflight
and post flight phases of a dual session.
There is a place for detailed instruction and that is NOT
while
the
student is under the stress of flying the aircraft.
Your premise that ALL instruction is done in the classroom and
allowing the student to "practice" in the aircraft is not
exactly
correct. It is more correct that theory and procedure are
taught
on
the ground and closely monitored and corrected practice with
the student is done in the air. To say that no instruction is
performed
in
the air is incorrect. It is however correct to say that all
instruction in the air be restricted to it's simplest common
denominator, allowing the student to error and correct with
verbal
guidance. It is during the post flight debrief that the more
detailed
instruction should take place. To address your basic premise,
I believe you might want to re-read what I have said in this
thread
about what constitutes proper flight instruction technique.
With
a
few
minor changes, we are not that far apart, but make no mistake,
flight
instruction does indeed take place in a moving classroom.
Ground instruction takes place in a classroom.



Ever heard the one about the three blind men examining an
elephant?

Bertie
Hi Bertie; howgozit? Hope you're well these days.
not too bad, thanks.
I agree. Much of it is in perspective. I think all of us are
approaching
the basic premise from different directions. The macro is intact
but
the
micros are in flux :-)

Well, exactly. I agree with your stance though. The airplane is a
classroom in itself. A good airplane is a better instructor than
the
instructor is. but the point i think you are trying to make is
that while the student is practicing whatever, you gotta shout
some additional instruction his way. Otherwise dual would be
pointless. after all, if he goes out and practices it all wrong
after his
thorough
classroom briefing what's he learned?


Bertie



Exactly! I think the main point if you were to reduce everything
down
to
it's lowest common denominator would be that there are actually
two teaching personas that the CFI has to master; the first is the
teacher
who covers what needs to be covered on the ground in the manner
best suited for that scenario (this would be the classroom
approach). The second is a teaching personna that knows how to
simplify,
observe
,direct and correct with minimal interference while the airplane
is
in
motion. This second teaching personna is what we usually have to
"teach"
people coming into the flight instruction business from a formal
professional teaching background. It's usually a quick transition
if
the
"teacher" is amenable and able to adjust to this added dimension
required of a good flight instructor.
I totally agree with you that the airplane itself is the best
flight instructor a pilot will ever have.

Well, unless t's a cherokee!

Bertie

Well...there's always room for a "driving instructor". :-))))


Unfortunately, we're living with the Cherokee's children now.
Having said that, it was the best workhouse of that bunch, and it was
damn near bulletproof. You must have know Albie Cornell. I flew a few
of his for a while. He had the highest time PA 28 in the world at the
time. (I think it was 4625L) Damn thing would lift anything you could
squeeze into it out of a 1500 foot strip and hardly ever needed
fixing..

Bertie



I used to have fits "reteaching" people who learned to fly in
Cherokees when they came in to us for checkouts in our tail wheel
airplanes. Even checking out someone in a 150 required some degree of
"rudder rehab" :-) I vaguely recall Albie Cornell but for the life of
me I can't associate it with one of our surrounding fields. I take it
he operated a small strip? I'm thinking New Jersey but not at all
sure. You're right about the 28's lifting capacity, especially the
pre-Warrior Hershey Bars. We had several on the line but I always
favored the 150/152 for primary instruction for the reasons we have
been discussing.
:-)

Yeah, the Cessnas were at least a bit better. Albie's field was
Warrington PA, just north of Willow Grove NAS. He was there for a
loooong time. The field is gone now, but if oyu look at a low level
instrument chart, you'll find Albie intersection where it used to be..

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in news:h62dnYU0n_
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
news
Bob Moore wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote
The first thing new instructors have to be taught as they
become
instructors is that there are base differences between
teaching
in
a
classroom that isn't moving and teaching in a classroom that
is
moving at 100 mph plus.
This is what is wrong with most flight instruction. A
professional
Flight Instructor does not teach in a 100 mph classroom. Done
properly, ALL instruction is done in the classroom (briefing
room)
and then the student is allowed to practice in the airplane.

My qualifications...first, the US Navy sent me to a two month
"How
to
Instruct" course. I would then teach that course for two
years. Second, I received my FAA Flight Instructor
Certificate in a professional Part 141 Training Center.
Third, I completed an
FAA
approved Part 121 Airline Flight Instructor Training Program.
I
would
later, as Mgr Flightcrew Training, be responsible for
developing
and
implementing such programs at other airlines. Fourth, I did
manage
a
staff of about 8 instructors in the Jet Training Division of
the
old
Burnside-Ott Flight Training Center at Opaloca Airport in
Miami.
Bob Moore
Is there anything about the following sentence taken from an
earlier
post of mine in this thread that you are having trouble
understanding?
Dudley Henriques wrote;
"Many instructors in my opinion make a HUGE mistake by trying
to
teach
everything about everything while the student is flying the
airplane.
"

Of COURSE a flight instructor teaches in a 100mph plus
classroom,
and
in even faster classrooms in higher performance aircraft. This
in
no
way should be construed as you have attempted to do here into
meaning
that a flight instructor should use the time in the aircraft
to
teach
what should have been covered on the ground both during the
preflight
and post flight phases of a dual session.
There is a place for detailed instruction and that is NOT
while
the
student is under the stress of flying the aircraft.
Your premise that ALL instruction is done in the classroom and
allowing the student to "practice" in the aircraft is not
exactly
correct. It is more correct that theory and procedure are
taught
on
the ground and closely monitored and corrected practice with
the student is done in the air. To say that no instruction is
performed
in
the air is incorrect. It is however correct to say that all
instruction in the air be restricted to it's simplest common
denominator, allowing the student to error and correct with
verbal
guidance. It is during the post flight debrief that the more
detailed
instruction should take place. To address your basic premise,
I believe you might want to re-read what I have said in this
thread
about what constitutes proper flight instruction technique.
With
a
few
minor changes, we are not that far apart, but make no mistake,
flight
instruction does indeed take place in a moving classroom.
Ground instruction takes place in a classroom.



Ever heard the one about the three blind men examining an
elephant?
Bertie
Hi Bertie; howgozit? Hope you're well these days.
not too bad, thanks.
I agree. Much of it is in perspective. I think all of us are
approaching
the basic premise from different directions. The macro is intact
but
the
micros are in flux :-)

Well, exactly. I agree with your stance though. The airplane is a
classroom in itself. A good airplane is a better instructor than
the
instructor is. but the point i think you are trying to make is
that while the student is practicing whatever, you gotta shout
some additional instruction his way. Otherwise dual would be
pointless. after all, if he goes out and practices it all wrong
after his
thorough
classroom briefing what's he learned?


Bertie



Exactly! I think the main point if you were to reduce everything
down
to
it's lowest common denominator would be that there are actually
two teaching personas that the CFI has to master; the first is the
teacher
who covers what needs to be covered on the ground in the manner
best suited for that scenario (this would be the classroom
approach). The second is a teaching personna that knows how to
simplify,
observe
,direct and correct with minimal interference while the airplane
is
in
motion. This second teaching personna is what we usually have to
"teach"
people coming into the flight instruction business from a formal
professional teaching background. It's usually a quick transition
if
the
"teacher" is amenable and able to adjust to this added dimension
required of a good flight instructor.
I totally agree with you that the airplane itself is the best
flight instructor a pilot will ever have.

Well, unless t's a cherokee!

Bertie

Well...there's always room for a "driving instructor". :-))))

Unfortunately, we're living with the Cherokee's children now.
Having said that, it was the best workhouse of that bunch, and it was
damn near bulletproof. You must have know Albie Cornell. I flew a few
of his for a while. He had the highest time PA 28 in the world at the
time. (I think it was 4625L) Damn thing would lift anything you could
squeeze into it out of a 1500 foot strip and hardly ever needed
fixing..

Bertie



I used to have fits "reteaching" people who learned to fly in
Cherokees when they came in to us for checkouts in our tail wheel
airplanes. Even checking out someone in a 150 required some degree of
"rudder rehab" :-) I vaguely recall Albie Cornell but for the life of
me I can't associate it with one of our surrounding fields. I take it
he operated a small strip? I'm thinking New Jersey but not at all
sure. You're right about the 28's lifting capacity, especially the
pre-Warrior Hershey Bars. We had several on the line but I always
favored the 150/152 for primary instruction for the reasons we have
been discussing.
:-)

Yeah, the Cessnas were at least a bit better. Albie's field was
Warrington PA, just north of Willow Grove NAS. He was there for a
loooong time. The field is gone now, but if oyu look at a low level
instrument chart, you'll find Albie intersection where it used to be..

Bertie

I think I remember him vaguely. I managed Hi Line Airport for Ed Size
for a while. We were right next door to Art Turner's place.

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in news:h62dnYU0n_
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
news
Bob Moore wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote
The first thing new instructors have to be taught as they
become
instructors is that there are base differences between
teaching
in
a
classroom that isn't moving and teaching in a classroom
that
is
moving at 100 mph plus.
This is what is wrong with most flight instruction. A
professional
Flight Instructor does not teach in a 100 mph classroom.
Done
properly, ALL instruction is done in the classroom
(briefing
room)
and then the student is allowed to practice in the
airplane.

My qualifications...first, the US Navy sent me to a two
month
"How
to
Instruct" course. I would then teach that course for two
years. Second, I received my FAA Flight Instructor
Certificate in a professional Part 141 Training Center.
Third, I completed an
FAA
approved Part 121 Airline Flight Instructor Training
Program.
I
would
later, as Mgr Flightcrew Training, be responsible for
developing
and
implementing such programs at other airlines. Fourth, I did
manage
a
staff of about 8 instructors in the Jet Training Division
of
the
old
Burnside-Ott Flight Training Center at Opaloca Airport in
Miami.
Bob Moore
Is there anything about the following sentence taken from an
earlier
post of mine in this thread that you are having trouble
understanding?
Dudley Henriques wrote;
"Many instructors in my opinion make a HUGE mistake by
trying
to
teach
everything about everything while the student is flying the
airplane.
"

Of COURSE a flight instructor teaches in a 100mph plus
classroom,
and
in even faster classrooms in higher performance aircraft.
This
in
no
way should be construed as you have attempted to do here
into
meaning
that a flight instructor should use the time in the aircraft
to
teach
what should have been covered on the ground both during the
preflight
and post flight phases of a dual session.
There is a place for detailed instruction and that is NOT
while
the
student is under the stress of flying the aircraft.
Your premise that ALL instruction is done in the classroom
and
allowing the student to "practice" in the aircraft is not
exactly
correct. It is more correct that theory and procedure are
taught
on
the ground and closely monitored and corrected practice with
the student is done in the air. To say that no instruction
is
performed
in
the air is incorrect. It is however correct to say that all
instruction in the air be restricted to it's simplest common
denominator, allowing the student to error and correct with
verbal
guidance. It is during the post flight debrief that the more
detailed
instruction should take place. To address your basic
premise,
I believe you might want to re-read what I have said in this
thread
about what constitutes proper flight instruction technique.
With
a
few
minor changes, we are not that far apart, but make no
mistake,
flight
instruction does indeed take place in a moving classroom.
Ground instruction takes place in a classroom.



Ever heard the one about the three blind men examining an
elephant?
Bertie
Hi Bertie; howgozit? Hope you're well these days.
not too bad, thanks.
I agree. Much of it is in perspective. I think all of us are
approaching
the basic premise from different directions. The macro is
intact
but
the
micros are in flux :-)

Well, exactly. I agree with your stance though. The airplane is
a
classroom in itself. A good airplane is a better instructor
than
the
instructor is. but the point i think you are trying to make is
that while the student is practicing whatever, you gotta shout
some additional instruction his way. Otherwise dual would be
pointless. after all, if he goes out and practices it all wrong
after his
thorough
classroom briefing what's he learned?


Bertie



Exactly! I think the main point if you were to reduce everything
down
to
it's lowest common denominator would be that there are actually
two teaching personas that the CFI has to master; the first is
the
teacher
who covers what needs to be covered on the ground in the manner
best suited for that scenario (this would be the classroom
approach). The second is a teaching personna that knows how to
simplify,
observe
,direct and correct with minimal interference while the airplane
is
in
motion. This second teaching personna is what we usually have to
"teach"
people coming into the flight instruction business from a formal
professional teaching background. It's usually a quick
transition
if
the
"teacher" is amenable and able to adjust to this added dimension
required of a good flight instructor.
I totally agree with you that the airplane itself is the best
flight instructor a pilot will ever have.

Well, unless t's a cherokee!

Bertie

Well...there's always room for a "driving instructor". :-))))

Unfortunately, we're living with the Cherokee's children now.
Having said that, it was the best workhouse of that bunch, and it
was
damn near bulletproof. You must have know Albie Cornell. I flew a
few
of his for a while. He had the highest time PA 28 in the world at
the
time. (I think it was 4625L) Damn thing would lift anything you
could
squeeze into it out of a 1500 foot strip and hardly ever needed
fixing..

Bertie



I used to have fits "reteaching" people who learned to fly in
Cherokees when they came in to us for checkouts in our tail wheel
airplanes. Even checking out someone in a 150 required some degree
of
"rudder rehab" :-) I vaguely recall Albie Cornell but for the life
of
me I can't associate it with one of our surrounding fields. I take
it
he operated a small strip? I'm thinking New Jersey but not at all
sure. You're right about the 28's lifting capacity, especially the
pre-Warrior Hershey Bars. We had several on the line but I always
favored the 150/152 for primary instruction for the reasons we have
been discussing.
:-)

Yeah, the Cessnas were at least a bit better. Albie's field was
Warrington PA, just north of Willow Grove NAS. He was there for a
loooong time. The field is gone now, but if oyu look at a low level
instrument chart, you'll find Albie intersection where it used to
be..

Bertie

I think I remember him vaguely. I managed Hi Line Airport for Ed Size
for a while. We were right next door to Art Turner's place.

He was a local fixture for almost fifty years there. He didn't wander
from from the place much himself. He was a noted character and well
thought of. They just don't make 'em like that anymore..


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Yeah, you're right. As these guys die off the world will never see the
likes of them again. I really miss the good ole' common sense people we
had in aviation way back when.





--
Dudley Henriques

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
RST Engineering wrote:
Sorry, Dudley, I got my CFI (airplane) 37 years ago and my CFI (glider)
30 years ago. I have roughly 500 primary students under my belt, so no,
I know for a fact that the classroom on the ground and the classroom in
the air are two totally different things. My point was that I've learned
to adapt to many different learning capabilities in both environments.

Jim


I can see there is absolutely nothing you can learn from me so I'll be
moving along :-))

Or anybody else, apparently.

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
RST Engineering wrote:
Sorry, Dudley, I got my CFI (airplane) 37 years ago and my CFI (glider)
30 years ago. I have roughly 500 primary students under my belt, so no,
I know for a fact that the classroom on the ground and the classroom in
the air are two totally different things. My point was that I've learned
to adapt to many different learning capabilities in both environments.

Jim

I can see there is absolutely nothing you can learn from me so I'll be
moving along :-))

Or anybody else, apparently.


I'm not quite sure I understand this remark. Could you possibly be more
explicit?
Thank you

--
Dudley Henriques