dublinpilot wrote:
She commented that he used to call her “Love” and constantly reassured her that she was doing great.
Must have been a long time ago, today he’d be “meetwooed” in no time with that sort of behaviour. The “can’t take a joke, shouldn’t have joined” unfortunatley went out when the PC crowd moved in… shame really.
dublinpilot wrote:
It also makes a big difference why you are flying with the instructor.
And it makes a big difference why an instructor flies as an instructor. Is he really interested in teaching or does he just want to collect hours for the big job and is bored out of his wits while trying to teach groundhogs to be airdales? Is he there in order to pay back his ATPL credits after the airlines (rightly) refused him and now he compensates his lack of a captain’s job by treating the student with the benevolence of Caligula? Not to forget the characters who took their flying lessons the way the unforgettable Gerd Froebe did in the “magnificent men”… “A German Officer can do everything!! Now rtfm and get on with it!”
I’ve been very lucky with the guys I had. Most of them were airline pilots or at least commercial (one flew a King Air for a living) and they instructed because they wanted to share what they had learnt themselfs. Best way really. Beats the crap out of some disillusioned Pay to Fly rejects.
I think instructing style is very individualistic.
I remember reading a long time ago, about a female pilot who was praising her instructor. She’d commented that her first instructor put her off flying but her second one helped her to get her PPL. She commented that he used to call her “Love” and constantly reassured her that she was doing great. She was really grateful for his style and attributed attaining her PPL to his support. I remember reading that and thinking I’d find such a style condesending and I’d not be able to stick it for even one flight. So everyone must be different.
It also makes a big difference why you are flying with the instructor. If you are flying as part of a course to develop a new skill, that is very different than from doing a checkout or some refresher training.
When I did my PPL, I had number of different instructors. The one that I found most useful, was one that pushed me very hard. He’d teach me a new skill on the lesson, and just as I was starting to get that under control, he’d make it more difficult, and continue as such. By the end of the lesson, I’d feel worn out somewhat incompetent (having never really got fully comfortable with the new skill on the lesson). Then in the debrief he’d explain that I wouldn’t be expected to do half of that on the skill test, that he’d pushed me way further than was needed, just to see how far I could manage. Next week, that skill seemed very easy. I found this pushing me to my limits (but rarely beyond) a very useful leaning style.
I had some other instructors who wanted to spend too much time ‘demonstrating’ which I felt was little more than them getting the opportunity to fly some circuits while I pay for it. I learnt almost nothing from these instructors and avoided them as best I could.
When it comes to a checkout or recurrent training, I don’t think this “push to the limit” style is appropriate. You’re supposed to already have the skill, and your task is to demonstrate that, or for the instructor to make some tips. If you’re competent, then on a checkout the instructor shouldn’t have much to add during the flight and maybe just a few small tips in the debrief.
I’ve come across instructors who simply want to change the way you fly to their way, with each instructor in the school/club having a different way (so you have to adjust your flying style depending on which instructor you were with today). That I found totally inappropriate and didn’t hang around long there. Instructors in a club/school should have a standarised approach, and checkout should be just about making sure that you are safe and competent.
What people usually don’t think about, is how vastly different the students are
Very much so; I posted that in the link I posted earlier. I think a common failing in flight instruction is a failure to assess the personality of the customer. And the older ones are usually harder, for a variety of reasons.
I suspect it is easier in the military, because you get kicked out at various stages, plus the students are young. Whereas in PPL training you don’t ever need to leave; there are loads of 100hr students, and not all of them are “slow”… some just enjoy the experience.
And for sure I have known some who didn’t really ever want to fly alone. Two old ladies, prob99 with an inheritance, at Shoreham in the 1990s, come to mind; at way past 100hrs they did say how they enjoyed the company of the young and virile instructors, and it is way better than a care home where they stuff you with Citalopram and sit you in a chair, and at their age they would have been relatively safe from advances 
I’m a microlight instructor now, and from the seminar we had, about 15 people, I would say there are 100 different “styles” The seminar was several days with role playing, learning to communicate. Funny experience, a bunch of middle aged men sitting on a chair with a broomstick in their hand yelling at each other
I don’t know about “style”, I think this depends. One clue is to be precise and to the point. If the student do well, pinpoint exactly what he has done right, and if he does something wrong, pinpoint that as well. Elaborate this on the ground, use the time in the air for flying.
What people usually don’t think about, is how vastly different the students are. Some just got it in them, and learn in no time, others never learn, and never will. Some must be petted and encouraged, others must be “put in place” some times. I guess you could say this requires different “styles” ?
Demonstrate, teach, practice is of course what it’s all about also for microlights.
But I’m rather new at this. I have only one finished with his license, several others in the loop.
Balliol wrote:
Demonstrate – Teach – Practice.
This is new age method, and the best IMO. I had a full lunatic for the first part of my PPL, who is still floating about, and I was put off flying for a number of years. We cross the road when we see each other. Last year I trained as a CRI. I had an instructor who was teaching me how to instruct. She was a disaster. I refused to fly with her on the second flight, and asked the CFI for my money back. CFI took over my final flights and training.
The problem is that we have not moved forward in the twenty years from my first experience to the my last experience. Fully laid back instruction with little or no feedback is of no use to the student. Full on Top Gun is obviously dangerous. As most things in life, balance is the key. A novel idea, a full and concise brief prior to the flight??
I rarely see one given, and if it is, it is generally delivered poorly.
Instructor demonstrates in flight, student carries out shown method, then it is practised. On to the next stage building as you go. I also like to make any instruction fun and to be enjoyed. There are some instructors out there who are ’’good’’, but you really have to search them out.
Great post from Balliol and I suspect we are seeing the difference between the military (who need to produce competent pilots to eventually fly some very expensive hardware) and the civilian.
I flew with a wide variety of instructors, a few of whom were basically totally out of order if not certifiably mad, and one of them was an IR FE (now retired thankfully). The best one (in terms of teaching me effectively) was also pretty eccentric, as well as being easily tempted by very young girl students and that was a part of his eventual downfall
I’ve thought of all the FIs I know and I can’t put them into categories. But some I know I will never fly with them again.
What I noticed is that most are pretty directive for the first preflight/startup/take off, and when you show them you know your stuff, they relax a lot. That tells you how much confident they are in our training système :)
So an instructor that doesn’t talk much is a good sign abiut your level but he won’t teach you much.
Did you do real post flight analysis ?
From the approx 10 FIs I know, maybe 1 or 2 are really knowledgeable and 2 or 3 are good teachers. I belive it is the general ratio.
Then, as I don’t have a infinite choice of FIs, I choose mine according to what I want from them, specifically every time. Look for their strong points and use them.
We need more FIs like Balliol !
How FIs are trained could be a long and interesting thread :)
Remember back to school how few teachers were really inspiring? Maybe one, out of all of them, one that you remember fondly. I had one that was brilliant – but just one. Most were uninspiring and just went through the motions. I’d imagine it’s the same ratio with flight instructors.
Instruction should be Demonstrate – Teach – Practice. The balance will vary for level of instructing – in the immediate run up to skills test the student should be managing and running most of the flight unaided, things like night flying and Instrument instruction will also require lesser levels of demonstrate and teach and more student practice. However far too many instructors at ab initio stages do not properly demonstrate and teach and think students will miraculously learn new skills by being dumped straight in hand on. Witness the poor students hammering the circuit for hours on end trying to land when what they need is the approach and landing retaught potentially a number of times.
I think this is just a style preference. I am a technical engineer and a self learner; for any given lesson I had probably covered 95% of it before we went flying. As a result, I am pretty sure that my instructor had the controls for 20 minutes total in the time it took me to get my license. I would have been very irritated if my instructor was constantly barraging me with crap.
Fortunately, my instructor was laid back but precise, patient, and very good at setting the challenge just right. Rather than critiquing me endlessly he would just set a challenge commensurate with my developing skill. When I later did my night rating with him (in Canada you have to fly a night cross country and a bunch of other hours) we did gusty crosswind landings in the rain at night. A challenge yes, but it let me see my limits with an instructor in the other seat. All very good for learning. When we debriefed, I would self critic and he would add whatever I missed.
I like this style, but there can be traps. For example, because I knew most of the material, he barely had to tell me anything; however, how does he know what I don’t know? We had a few very technical sessions before my flight exam just to make sure the ground had been covered.
What I want from instructors is not a load of critique, I can already see if I am off altitude, etc.. I want to learn what the next level of finesse is… however, this is probably for after you get your license. At the begining, you just need to be safe.
