DocRon Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 While I didn't mean for this title to sound so provocative I mean it completely. I love our plane and want her to fly it independently as well, but not from the start. I spent my first 35 years of flying in aircraft with a mixture control and round instruments. It took me about 50 hours before I felt completely comfortable in the CTLS because of the glass panel, speed management, and for a lack of a better term, it lands different. Now that my wife is ready to start flying I told her that I really wanted her to start her training in a C-150/2 or a C-172. Her initial flight training will create habits and patterns that will stay with her forever (as they should.) I believe it is very important to initially learn to use a mixture control, navigate with VOR receivers, transmit and receive via the NAV/COM radios on VORs and VORTACs, and to fly with round instruments. In addition, these above mentioned aircraft are nearly ideal training aircraft for take-off and landing practice. Finally, they are capable of something our CTs are not: spin training. I'm well aware that spins and spin recovery are no longer required for a Sport Pilot or Private Pilot license. But I (nearly) insist that she experience and learn to deal with this manuver. Like me, perhaps you remember your first practice spin. I remember it as both frightening and hypnotic. By the third one I was comfortable with it and could recover in about one turn. I want her to know how to recover from a spin. It only takes one stall/spin on base turning final to kill you. I disagree with the government in removing that training from the curriculum. In a C-150 she can learn it. Ideally I think she should train in a C-150 for at least the first 100 hours of flight. After that time and degree of familiarity it would be time to begin transition to the CTLS...and start learning all over again. If she were to learn to fly in our CTLS and obtain her private license that way she could then walk over to a C-172 and fly away. As a scenario it might be a bit of a stretch, but as both planes are "Airplane: Single-engine Land" its perfectly legal, I believe. From the perspective of a new, low-time pilot I think this would be particularly dangerous. I say all this from a non-CFI perspective. I do have an Advanced Ground Instructor rating as well as my doctoral training in adult learning and Aviation & Space Education. But, I would appreciate hearing from experienced CFIs to either validate or challenge my perspective on this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kentuckynet Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 My wife wanted to learn to fly, i taught her in our remos g3, she solo'd for me in it and then she got her license....i think that solo was the most scared i had ever been!!!! She now flies out ctsw, she liked the remos better but i like the ctsw better! nuff said........ If i can be of any help let me know, she could talk with my wife... mack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Ron, Well, I'm sure you'll receive lots of opinions and that's all I offer - an opinion which I'm sure will be different than what others offer. Here's my background, take and my reasoning. I have a CFI-I, MEI, CFI-G. I have about 1200 hours of instruction given. About 600 hours is in C150s, another 300 in C172 and the rest spread around between other ASEL, some MEI, some glider. I have about 800 hours of primary training given and the rest was split between IFR and advanced training. I have not been doing much training the last few years. I taught my one daughter to her PPL and the other to her PPL and IFR. Most of my training given was with round gauges. My flying is something over 3,000 hours, about 2/3 ASEL and most of the rest ME, mostly jet, with a little seaplane and glider flying. Up until recently, I flew extensively in the IFR system. I have about 100 hours in a CTSW (and I see that in a few places below I've mixed up CTSW and CTLS). I think you are right about the rule of primacy - a lot of what your wife learns early she will carry with her or have to relearn later. For that reason, in my opinion it is good to have an old, experienced CFI who has flown in the system and knows how the parts fit into the big picture. In my opinion, it makes a world of difference for a CFI to know not just how to do something which seems like just a silly rule and to know how this rule may be important when flying a twin in bad weather. Not that she will, but she is learning from someone with a richer perspective. Granted, some old CFIs are sloppy and many young ones are superb. The deal is, does the person know enough of the big picture to know what it is important to teach and explain why some things are important that don't seem so.. About instrumentation. I share your worry about relying totally on GPS and appreciate the value of VOR. I even like ADF. But, the trend is overwhelmingly toward GPS. ADF is about a forgotten art, VOR is schedule to be phased out. You will have to learn enough about ADF and VOR to pass the written, but only you can decide whether it is important enough to be able to fly either. I wouldn't make it a critical issue. In my opinion only, many of us who learned on round gauges are more comfortable with them when it comes to reading a panel when things get tense. I'm not sure that is the best way, and I would be very interested in having a student fully conversant with glass panels as a basic skill and round gauges well enough to fly them if needed. I'd prefer to teach in a glass panel airplane and really explore the system in depth. As far as flying characteristics are concerned, my CTSW is much more responsive to the rudder and throttle than is a C150 even (which is eons more responsive than Pipers) and I would teach in the CTSW. A light, less stable airplane like the CTLS will teach her respect for these inputs right away and she'll carry that lesson forward. Spin training and tail wheel training can be gained in other aircraft. Both are valuable but not critical. I think a few dual glider rides would be good preparation for CTLS training, also. They have low wing loading. For what it is worth, I'd start her in the CTLS. Most of the initial flying is going to be in the pattern or at low cruising altitudes. Let's be honest, we CFIs in the midwest have uniformly done less than a stellar job of teaching mixture use and unless you make a big deal of it, she will only get to use it later when she is cruising at over 3,000'. Proper mixture use, like flying a constant speed prop, retractable gear, spoilers and other items can be learned as a part of a step up to a bigger system. No doubt, it is important and is poorly understood, but we don't usually teach how to feather a prop in a twin as the first lesson, so mixture control can be taught later. Your concern about learning in a CTLS and then getting in a C172 and flying away is not well founded, in my opinion. First, you know enough to caution her against that. Secondly, she should get an aircraft checkout before renting one and the insurance may (should) require one if you buy. So, I think this is under your control. OK, this was my opinion only. If you have questions I'll be happy to address them, but I'm not writing this with the intention of defending it heavily, as it is, as you have accurately portrayed, a highly individual decision and my offerings are simply grist for your mill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 I'm not an instructor. I'm a PP, Did most of my training in my CTSW, passed my checkride in my CTSW. I'm working on my sport pilot instructor rating. Like Jim M, my wife and probably my son-in-law will learn to fly in my CTSW. My wife already has about 15 hours of training logged in it. I pretty much disagree with all of your reasons except for spin training. I'll be going up in a 150 in a month or two for that and she will be able to do the same. The reasons we will be using the CTSW are that it's *our* plane, that it's both fun and demanding to fly, and that she just wants to fly our plane. I spent 8 rather uncomfortable hours in a 152 and I really didn't enjoy it. The CTSW is a handful for a student, but it's a fun handful. My wife is consistently more coordinated and better at multitasking than me and will undoubtedly make a better pilot than me. There's also the issue of the 3rd class medical, which may be somewhat problematic for her. Flying as a sport pilot is not possible in a 152. The VOR stuff is nice to know, but it's dead-end technology. The FAA would love to scrap it all. There's nothing wrong with compass-chart-GPS. And she will learn how to track a VOR radial with the GPS. So there you go. Like Jim M. I'm not inclined to get in a big argument about it. But it is my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 'did my first 32 hrs, and solo'd, in a 152. 'Didn't really learn to fly until the CT though... Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppercity Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 As a currently active CFII using a CTLS for my school I love the CT's for trainers! I have 3000hrs with over a 1000 teaching in CTs, the rest in over 30 different light aircraft including tailwheels. I like the handling, performance and rudder dependancy of the CTs. I think it teaches you excellant power management, speed management and coordination. Not that the Cessna, and Pipers are bad at all, they are also great trainers, but I can take any of my Sport, or PPL students that got their license in the CT and throw them in a Cessna or Piper and they are rock stars, but you could not say the same going the other way without a few extra hours of teaching them to use their feet. Most of our students have taken their test at just over minimum time, some as low as 41 hrs for PPL and we currently have a 100% pass rate. As far as the VOR and mixture is concerned, we have added a FAA approved Simulator to our school that can mimic a 172, 182 and 182rg with a g1000 and backup analog gauges. With this we cover VOR tracking, use of mixture including the lean assist programs available, operations lean of peak, etc. We also cover the analog gauges and how they display the same information in a different presentation. As far as spins, I agree they are a great thing to go and experience but I dont think its needed until after your certified and really I say that with the mindset of not wanting to scare anyone away from flying. If we focus initially on spin and stall avoidance, ensure the experiences of flying are enjoyable for the average student, then suggest going further into things like upset training etc we are more likely to keep people interested in finishing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 While I didn't mean for this title to sound so provocative I mean it completely. I love our plane and want her to fly it independently as well, but not from the start. I spent my first 35 years of flying in aircraft with a mixture control and round instruments. It took me about 50 hours before I felt completely comfortable in the CTLS because of the glass panel, speed management, and for a lack of a better term, it lands different. Ron, that 50 hours it took you to feel comfortable will go a long way towards her getting her ticket. Starting in the CT will make her a better pilot from the begining, kind of like learning in a tail wheel airplane. Flying the CT will develope the skills to be a good pilot right from the start. The important thing is to make sure you have a CFI that knows the CT well, and is a good at teaching. Tom BTW I am a CFI with about 7500TT and almost 750 in the CT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandpiper Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 As others have stated, I would train her in the CT. The skill set she develops with the CT will make flying spam cans like the C-150-172-182, PA-28, etc a piece of cake. It does not work going the other direction. My back ground for stating this is about 5000 hours in a variety of spam cans on wheels, skiis and floats plus about a thousand hours in the UH-1 series helicopter. I have about 300 hours on my CT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocRon Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Well, Gentlemen. I got just what I aske for: thoughtful and experience-related opinions. I've read each one numerous times over the past two days and I thank you very much for your efforts. I will continue to reflect and evaluate your entries and, along with my wife's input, make a decision in the Spring. Again, my sincere thanks for your time and attention to this. You've given me a lot to think about. Best Regards, Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Baker Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 One thing that I didn't mention is with training in the CT if she get frustrated real easy then maybe the Cessna or Piper would be the way to go. You wouldn't want her to frustrated and quit. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwiflyer Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Ron, I think your comment "It took me 50 hours to feel comfortable" actually says it all. The CTLS, lovely machine that it is, is not all that easy to fly, in the same way that a PA18 Cub is not easy to fly, when compared to a C152. Your wife will probably transition more easily from the CTLS to the 152 than the other way round and, if you own the CTLS, that is most likely what she will spend her time on. I would teach her, or have her taught, in the CTLS, she can then learn the other systems as she progresses to more sophisticated aircraft, which, having flown the CTLS, she will probably find easier to fly. The big thing with learning to fly anything is to get her head in the right place, once you have that, no aircraft is that hard to fly. My mate Bob Jones taught his wife to fly in a 260 hp Comanche! By the way, if you have a VHF radio with a NAV receiver,such as a Garmin GL30, I think many of the current breed of glass cockpits can display VOR anyway. You might need an interface module to do the translating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
207WF Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 I agree. Start her in the CT. It will become "her" airplane, and when she tries something else it will be easy to transition. WF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.