Sport Pilot Talk

Fellow CFIs,
We're all familiar with the accelerated training programs offered by some schools, in which the students live, eat, drink, and breathe flight training 24 hours a day for some minimal period of time. Some claim you can go from zero to license in just a week. I've always questioned the instructional validity of such saturation training, as material learned under such pressure is seldom retained. (In fact, I have been known to call these offerings "crash courses"!)
On the other hand, many students want to move more quickly than the traditional 2 or 3 lessons per week allows. And, there is a marketing advantage to emphasizing the light at the end of the tunnel. So, what is a good compromise?
I'm trying an experiment, which I call "Three Weeks, Rain or Shine," in which the dedicated student can realistically expect to go from zero to first solo in the stated time period, without burning out. I have details up on my website, http://AvSport.org (just scroll down below the pictures and price box, and click on the obvious link). This may or may not work; I'll let you all know -- but I'm offering my first such intensive course in the Spring (with Summer and Autumn classes to follow, if this isn't a dismal failure). Take a look, and let me know what you think. I'm always open to suggestions from my fellow instructors.
Safe skies,
Paul

Good luck with that. I wanted to do something similar when I started way back in '08. I had a few setbacks (airport closure for repairs, plane being out for an extended service and weather) that caused me to loose probably a total of four months since 11/08, but even then, with steady attendance it's taken me up until (hopefully) a week from tomorrow to take my check-ride.

Brian

ibgarrett wrote:(hopefully) a week from tomorrow to take my check-ride.

Good luck with that check-ride, Brian. Don't be nervous; think of it as a chance to show off your piloting skills!

Thanks Paul... I went through the ASA Sport Pilot Checkride DVD last night (again) and their checklist... I feel a little bit better about it.... although I'm sure I'll be plenty nervous enough come the hold short line.

ibgarrett wrote: I went through the ASA Sport Pilot Checkride DVD last night (again) and their checklist.

Isn't that the Paul Hamilton DVD? He does a good job simplifying things. You should do great.

Yeah - that's the guy. I find it really hard to believe that the one guy who showed up for his checkride not even knowing the limitations of the Sport Pilot license was real.... I mean, I'm sure there's been the odd-case of something like that happening, but seriously, that guy shouldn't even be allowed to drive a car much less fly a plane...

If I May:

eah - that's the guy. I find it really hard to believe that the one guy who showed up for his checkride not even knowing the limitations of the Sport Pilot license was real.

Remember it's a teaching movie/DVD.
What do you suppose happened to the instructor who signed him off !

I understand too many student failures and the instructor talks to Uncle FAA !

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Murrell

Oh - I definitely take the caricature of the student with a grain of salt. I can't see this guy being signed off by anyone to get that far unless he somehow or another managed to scam his way to that point. At which point the system worked as it should.

Besides - if someone did make it that far that wasn't serious about anything other than getting "permission" to fly a plane, I doubt he would have taken the time to even get a license. He'd probably just think to himself, "screw the rules, I can do it"... but of course he would've missed the training part of stinkin' thinkin'.

He certainly wouldn't be flying for very long before the Darwin effect would've kicked in.

Brian

I have in the past done PPL in 21 days and IFR in 12.

I've also had students think that they could take such a pace
and burned out.

We offered "accelerated programs", but it was the standard
program made to fit an individuals schedule. No corner cutting on materials or standards.

I would always say up front that this type of training is not for everyone, and in our case, there was no guarantee of
outcome.

If I were in the SP training biz today, I think that I would offer a 10 to 14 day course. Even a 2 week course would only require about 2-3 flight hours per day plus ground study. A three week course should be easily doable.

Of course there is always the dislaimer of how well prepared someone is before coming to your facility. We used to do a lot of finish ups in the winter here in PHX.

Like me, maybe a good course of action would be to offer training as quickly as a student can comfortably handle it.

We offer a two week program though students need to study ahead of time to get the most out of it. We have also graduated several students in 3 week programs, which I prefer because students tend to enjoy it more. Accelerated programs do work, as our students are consistently finishing with fewer hours than those only flying once or twice a week. I've seen some schools advertise 10 day programs, but I can't understand how the student is getting a well-rounded program in that short a period of time. And they MUST be burnt out afterwards.

Skyraider Aviation in Denver has just announced a 12-day accelerated Sport Pilot training program. We'll be running our students through 20 hours of dual and 5 hours of solo for a flat rate of $3,500. There's a prerequisite for ground school to be completed before arriving for the flight training. We're offering no guarantees of success, but I like the chances. More info is available at: http://www.skyraideraviation.com/accele ... ining.html

cdillis wrote:There's a prerequisite for ground school to be completed before arriving for the flight training.

I approve - that's an excellent indicator of student commitment. Thanks for the info, Christopher.

Each student learns and absorbs differently. You put them through the paces, through repetition, day in day out and eventually they will fly by rote.

The mechanics of doing the necessary routines to get the craft up, around, and back down in good shape takes more than 20 hours of practice, as far as sport ticket goes, more like 30-40. For the added rigors of the PPL, double that.

Sure after 2 or 3 weeks most people will get the routine down pat. But most will be burned, confused, and need to lick their wounds. Off course if they are young, the wounds heal fast.

However, like a good steak, most people need to "marinate" for a while, need to mentally review "what they hell I've just done" and sort of chew on the actual reason why such and such maneuver was made.

From an older student's perspective, learning to fly competently with understanding of essential aspects is a process that can only come with time.

As for accelerated training, if the student can handle it, go for it, if not, then slow it down and let them know. Most probably can't, too much to absorb.
yozz

The military has been in the Cram-Course Pilot Factory business for better than seven decades!
Their historically documented successful program has set the "SATURATION" point at 1.3 hours per flight lesson, with a max of 1 lesson in the AM and 1 lesson in the PM.

The advantage of military training is that it is done in groups, and groups tend to bunk together, drill together and work like a team where each part carries the other. The total effort put out by the team, is actually larger than the sum of it's parts. They get up in groups, eat in groups, and do the training in groups and attempt to keep that can do attitude.

The military knows this quite well, that is why they emphasize "the team"

Being part of a team for most is quite uplifting and builds up morale and a postive mental attitude as compared to the individual who is not in such environment and being without support has other things on his mind, such as payments, loans, work, family, and other miscellany.

Civilian training and military training are from 2 different worlds. Apples and coconuts.
yozz