Brainwashing at UND!!!

[FlyingToIST]

I have interviewed a UND graduate for a CFI position recently. This is the third one that I have interviewed and I cannot believe how successfuly the school brain washed them all..

Flying is supposed to be fun, without a comprimise from safety. Here are the things I heard by these poor souls:

- Do I have to request permission to transition through Class B air space from the chief flight instructor?
- Where are your SOP manuals?
- (When outside of Class D airspace) do I have to ask for a permission to change frequencies/do I need to contact approac?/Do I need to call XYZ?
- (While doing a low pass over a public grass field) Is this legal?
- (while landing and taking off on a short field of 2700 feet) Is this legal?
- (After we come back from the flight) Don't I have to do a post flight checks (the same thing as pre flight). Do I get yelled at if I don't do a post flight check?
- (While trying to work with KX170Bs and KX155s) I have never used these before. I am used to G430s.. These are complicated..

I am sorry, but flying is not this.. Looks like they are brain washing you with all these "procedural" stuff that is not that important to my eyes, except to show off..

I am so glad that I got my ratings through local FBOs.. You people need to relax little bit and discover that flying is a lot of fun.

 

[moxiepilot]

i find it happens at a number of big name schools, not to say they're all bad. But I'd have to agree with you here, the best training I ever got was at a mom & pop FBO where the instructors asked real world questions to get you to THINK about the regs and apply them.

For example, since Key West is farther than 12 nm of the coast and south of latitude 25*04'00, what airspace is at 18,500 feet? hmmmm.

 

[Doc Holiday]

I would have to disagree. Procedure is important and enhances safety, that is why professional flying incorporates procedure into almost everything. The challenge is to be able to combine procedure with the real world so that the operation is as seamless as possible. This contributes greatly to accomplishing everyday operations safely, legally, and efficiently. This applies to Part 61 instruction and recreational flying as well. It may not need to be on the level professional flight crews use, but little procedures (simple flows, for example) helps any operation. A good CFI can provide structure like that without 'browbeating' a student, and that structure will make the student a better pilot in the end.

I think you are being a little tough on what seem like some harmless questions (i.e. postflight, permission from the CP, GPS). Other questions I think a CFI should definitely know (the Class D frequency). Either way, you have to realize where these applicants are coming from - a highly structured environment with much oversight and guidance. This very well could have been their first time flying an airplane that wasn't owned and operated by UND. Given a chance to grow and make more operational decisions on their own, a qualified applicant would quickly turn into an asset at a flight school.

 

[Cutlass1287]

I have interviewed a UND graduate for a CFI position recently. This is the third one that I have interviewed and I cannot believe how successfuly the school brain washed them all..

Flying is supposed to be fun, without a comprimise from safety. Here are the things I heard by these poor souls:

- Do I have to request permission to transition through Class B air space from the chief flight instructor?
- Where are your SOP manuals?
- (When outside of Class D airspace) do I have to ask for a permission to change frequencies/do I need to contact approac?/Do I need to call XYZ?
- (While doing a low pass over a public grass field) Is this legal?
- (while landing and taking off on a short field of 2700 feet) Is this legal?
- (After we come back from the flight) Don't I have to do a post flight checks (the same thing as pre flight). Do I get yelled at if I don't do a post flight check?
- (While trying to work with KX170Bs and KX155s) I have never used these before. I am used to G430s.. These are complicated..

I am sorry, but flying is not this.. Looks like they are brain washing you with all these "procedural" stuff that is not that important to my eyes, except to show off..

I am so glad that I got my ratings through local FBOs.. You people need to relax little bit and discover that flying is a lot of fun.

As a UND student, I suppose I can only speak for myself. I trained and got my private out of a small FBO, and things are more definitely more strict here, and more procedural. However, (at least this is what they tell us), this is the way the airlines do things, so they are just getting us into good habits.

Some of the stuff I find to be good, like the postflight check. This is something I was never used to, but it takes 20 seconds, and this way you know if something is screwy, and you can give a heads up the the next pilot, or mx.

As far as the first couple of questions you posted, those are stupid questions. The regs clearly state things the way they are, and any CFI worth his epaulettes should know the answers.

I guess there are some people like that around here, but we also do plenty of flying into short, grass strips, and as far as I know, we dont need any specail permission, other than that the strip has to be on the UND approved list. Almost all the airports around here are on the list, except a select few that UND decided it does not want to take the risk on.

Overall, the UND program does have the potential to make flying a lot less fun, but nonetheless, it is still possible to comply with their rules and procedures, and still have fun with it. Its really up to the pilot.

 

[avbug]

If your postflight takes twenty seconds, you're not doing a postflight inspection.

Do your preflights take twenty seconds?

A postflight should be every bit as thorough.

 

[414Flyer]

As a UND student, I suppose I can only speak for myself. I trained and got my private out of a small FBO, and things are more definitely more strict here, and more procedural. However, (at least this is what they tell us), this is the way the airlines do things, so they are just getting us into good habits.

There is heck of a lot more to aviation than the airlines. And just because its how airlines do it, doesnt mean thats how everything should work.

One of my friends who instructed had similar comments regarding UND, and how structured it was. He said, someone jokingly but not all the way, that a cloud in the sky grounded everything. Also a comments on how a lot of students were there on daddys money, and not really terribly motivated, especially compared to pt 61, where people are there because they want to be.

Dont get so caught up in the hurry-up-andgetotheairlinesrightnow mentality that you forget to enjoy aviation and have fun. Most people I know at the airlines, dont exactly thing it is a fun job.

Too many here get to caught up in the destination, that they forget about the journey there.

 

[Cutlass1287]

We have a postflight checklist that we follow, its fairly thourough.

The program here at UND is an airline pilot training program. Sure, you don't have to go into the airlines just because you train here. In fact, I don't think I want to fly for an airline, quite frankly, I havent heard good things about them! The point is, you should know how this stuff works, and how to follow the rules. There is no reason why you can't follow the rules and still have fun.

I havent yet had a problem with cancelling for weather, however it is kind of annoying that they have one guy sitting at a desk making the go no go decision for you. I was taught in primary training that it was up to me to learn how to make that decision, and I certainly don't wait around for the SOF to make it for me. Obviously I am not going if UND is "no fly," but im not necesarily going just because UND says its ok.

 

[Art Vandalay]

any CFI worth his epaulettes should know the answers.

HAHAHA!

FYI: Most flight schools DO NOT force their instructors to wear these silly uniforms. Also, the instructor that does this voluntarily is a complete tool.

Learning to fly should be fun, not such a procedural hassle. We can save all the flows, SOP's, FOM, etc for later in life. Trust me, you'll do plenty of it when the time comes.


Art V,

 

[PDTGIMP]

I have interviewed a UND graduate for a CFI position recently. This is the third one that I have interviewed and I cannot believe how successfuly the school brain washed them all..

Flying is supposed to be fun, without a comprimise from safety. Here are the things I heard by these poor souls:

- Do I have to request permission to transition through Class B air space from the chief flight instructor?
- Where are your SOP manuals?
- (When outside of Class D airspace) do I have to ask for a permission to change frequencies/do I need to contact approac?/Do I need to call XYZ?
- (While doing a low pass over a public grass field) Is this legal?
- (while landing and taking off on a short field of 2700 feet) Is this legal?
- (After we come back from the flight) Don't I have to do a post flight checks (the same thing as pre flight). Do I get yelled at if I don't do a post flight check?
- (While trying to work with KX170Bs and KX155s) I have never used these before. I am used to G430s.. These are complicated..

I am sorry, but flying is not this.. Looks like they are brain washing you with all these "procedural" stuff that is not that important to my eyes, except to show off..

I am so glad that I got my ratings through local FBOs.. You people need to relax little bit and discover that flying is a lot of fun.

Yes,

It must be just UND. This is the only school that has dorks that have never flown anywhere but UND.

Dude, this statement proves that you don't get out much. With more experience you'll discover these people are everywhere, from every school.

Brainwashing! Think about it: 20 something kids, in college, flying airplanes..and we should not have SOP's. That makes tons of sense.

Yes, they don't have real world experience...teach them..don't complain about it...could be much worse.

FYI: "porcedural" things that are not important to you equates to washing out at any Part 121 airline if you try. They are not showing off, they are prepared for the airline enviroment, where 90% are trying to get to.

 

[Cutlass1287]

HAHAHA!

FYI: Most flight schools DO NOT force their instructors to wear these silly uniforms. Also, the instructor that does this voluntarily is a complete tool.

Learning to fly should be fun, not such a procedural hassle. We can save all the flows, SOP's, FOM, etc for later in life. Trust me, you'll do plenty of it when the time comes.


Art V,

I was kind of poking fun at the whole uniform issue with my comment, I assure you I wasn't serious. CFIs don't get paid enough to be stuffed into an airline uniform (then again, neither do airline pilots).

I kind of agree with you as far as the flows and SOPs, for people who truly are learning to fly just for the fun of it, and dont plan to persue it as a profession. However, here at UND, people are spending a lot of money, and a lot of time to learn how to be career pilots. Plus, as stated above, we are young, college types, and we aren't exactly known for our maturity or perfectness. I think the SOPs do help, to a certain extent, maintain order and safety. However, when it gets to the point where you don't even need to think anymore, I see a problem. I don't allow myself to operate like that. I make my own decisions, and think about a problem before I mindlessly follow a checklist. There are a few checklist items that I simply disagree with, and would not choose to execute in an emergency. I learn them and recite them back to make the authorities happy, but I know that when the $h!t hits the fan, I am going to do whatever it takes to cope with the emergency, and if that means following the checklist to the T, so be it, and if that means deviating from the checklist when I feel that there is a better course of action, well, then so be it.

 

[FlyingToIST]

Before you try to sell me "procedure is the king" I am a flight school operator. I have my own SOPs such as not sending any student pilots up with a crosswind component more than 5 kts in solo flight. This is something out of safety..

On the other hand, we never ask for an engine start from tower, we never call V1, Vr, V2 speeds in a freaking Warrior..

UND, looks like is just producing sheep that are there to be hearded. Another example of their stupidity is what I was told by another CFI "We are not supposed to practice engine outs outside of an airport" .. So all the engine outs are done with a landing to an airport.. Give me a break..

One thing that I don't get is how , even a 20 year old one, could be brainwashed this way.. Take my advice , when you have 40 years before you to enjoy the airline career , this thing gets dry.. Go up in a tail dragger, get your float rating.. Aviation is way much more than following flows that flowing off your ass.

To each its own, but a training that I am getting from a good local FBO, will be worth much more than a UND training I will be getting where a Warrior checklist is 30 pages..

Lastly let me tell you that this is not a UND bashing subject. Any flight training place that act like this will be the same in my eyes.. I just happen to meet a lot of UND graduates..

 

[Cutlass1287]

Before you try to sell me "procedure is the king" I am a flight school operator. I have my own SOPs such as not sending any student pilots up with a crosswind component more than 5 kts in solo flight. This is something out of safety..

On the other hand, we never ask for an engine start from tower, we never call V1, Vr, V2 speeds in a freaking Warrior..

UND, looks like is just producing sheep that are there to be hearded. Another example of their stupidity is what I was told by another CFI "We are not supposed to practice engine outs outside of an airport" .. So all the engine outs are done with a landing to an airport.. Give me a break..

One thing that I don't get is how , even a 20 year old one, could be brainwashed this way.. Take my advice , when you have 40 years before you to enjoy the airline career , this thing gets dry.. Go up in a tail dragger, get your float rating.. Aviation is way much more than following flows that flowing off your ass.

To each its own, but a training that I am getting from a good local FBO, will be worth much more than a UND training I will be getting where a Warrior checklist is 30 pages..

Lastly let me tell you that this is not a UND bashing subject. Any flight training place that act like this will be the same in my eyes.. I just happen to meet a lot of UND graduates..

I can assure you, we do not have to get clearance from anyone to start our engines, and on the roll in the warrior, yes, they do make us call out "40 knots, engine instruments green, 48 knots (or whatever our calculated rotation speed is), and rotate. I agree with you on the takeoffs- its laughable, there just isn't enough time to do all of this safely on a takeoff roll in a warrior. Students should have their eyes outside IMO, and be able to feel when the aircraft is ready to lift off. This is one area where I do happen to disagree with UND procedure. I can also assure you that we do in fact practice engine outs in the practice area, just like at any normal flight school. Maybe you are just seeing the weirdos?

 

[propilot]

Food for thought...maybe your small mom and pop school doesn't need SOP's and all the procedural stuff that UND has...Odds are you also don't operate a fleet of over 120 aircraft with some 2000 students, 150(give or take) instructors, and something like 100,000 flight hours a year, virtually accident free...The program couldn't be as successful as it is without those rules. As far as clouds keeping aircraft on the ground, I don't recall that ever being an issue when I was there, as a student or an instructor....Ice in the clouds, well that's another story. Hopefully you have enough common sense to stay on the ground at that point. As far as some of the things that a "UND instructor" told you (engine starts with tower, no engine failures away from airport, etc.)...I tend to thing you may be overstating just a bit...

 

[I.P. Freley]

FYI: "porcedural" things that are not important to you equates to washing out at any Part 121 airline if you try. They are not showing off, they are prepared for the airline enviroment, where 90% are trying to get to.

I wouldn't go so far as to say "no procedural training prior to your first 121 job equates to washing out", it is true that programs geared towards making future airline pilots do well by their students to teach this way.

Having said that, some of the alleged problems that the thread-starter had with these new CFI's is probably just a product of the relative inexperience of the pilots in question. I graduated from a 141 school with the multi-commercial and CFII at around 230TT (having gotten my PPL at an outside flight school), at which juncture NOONE has a REAL idea of what they're doing, IMHO. I know it's a hackneyed phrase, but a CFI will learn more in their first 100hrs of teaching than they did up to the time they teach their first lesson... And that's when it really all falls together. Yes, pilots at the large university flight programs are perhaps taught in a more airline-oriented way than they would elsewhere, but it doesn't make for a lower-quality instructor, just one that needs to be weaned off the college flight line. A month out in the "real world" and these CFI's will usually end up teaching a desirable combination of the strictness they were subjected to in their own training and the relative "looseness" of the usual FBO school.

At the flight school where I taught, all students did three "prog checks" while getting their PPL (like most 141 schools), and for the last year I was teaching, I was the primary administrator of those prog checks. Sometimes I didn't even need to know who their primary instructor was to figure out what kind of background their CFI had... Let's just say that the ones who did NOT come from a structured background produced students who were in more obvious need of additional training by the time they got to ME. One instructor, in particular, was the relentlessly "flying is fun" guy who never seemed to actually FIX anything his students did wrong, just made sure everyone was all happiness and light, and I came to loathe getting his students as they had a greater-than-even chance of getting sent back for more training.

I dunno, if you'd prefer to hire CFI's who don't think post-flights are necessary and therefore don't teach their STUDENTS that a post-flight is necessary, then have at it... Seems like that is a problem waiting to happen. Just because you get a couple of sheltered instructors interviewing with you doesn't mean that UND makes bad pilots or CFI's, just naiive ones who need a little real-world experience. It's your insurance policy that will pay for the results if your students aren't taught well, right?

 

[RSixer]

Procedure, procedure.

I agree with some of these schools that teach strict procedure, even in a C-150. People that attend schools like ER, UND, etc, typically have thier sights set on the Airlines, and let me tell you strict adherance to procedure is priority #1 at any airline, period. Learning this at hour 1 in your trianing will make it that much easier for that person to adapt. On the other hand learning to fly should be fun, some of the schools have really dropped the ball on this.

 

[DC8 Flyer]

UGHHH! I gotta stop feeding the trolls.

 

[Almerick07]

Man, I feel sorry for people that will fly their entire lives in such a stringent strict procedure filled envirnoment. I go to a large 4 year university with a recognized aviation program and I love the fact that at a seconds notice I can take off and go anywhere I please without worrying about rules fit for monkeys. Dont get me wrong we have our rules and procedures but most of those are in place to keep student pilots alive, once youve established yourself as a pilot they trust you to make the decisions. Just makes me happy where I am....

 

[414Flyer]

Oh god, speaking of mindlessly following a checklist, I could easily go off into another rant about low time Indian pilots.

I had a couple that had never been outside of a highly structured environment and were completely checklist slaves. I am not criticizing checklist usage, so dont flame me. I am however criticizing using a checklist and absolutely turning ones brain off when using it, which I had one that was exactly that way.

Sometimes he would just go slow, and I already had engines turning, and here he starts with the engine start portion of the checklist. Hello, dont you hear them turning.

and then he always mention such things as "passenger briefing" and "no smoking light" for the cabin, when its a cloud seeding aircraft, we dont have any passengers to brief, or to operate the no smoking light for.

I would ask him why he would say such things that absolutely did not apply to us, and his response is "Well its on the checklist" My reply was to the effect of well think about it. If it does not apply to us at all, then dont waste time on it. Think about things you are doing, do not just turn your brain off and mindlessly read something.

Some of them just had a hard time thinking in the cockpit, because their environment was so structured, they never had to.

 

[check6]

I must say, everyone posting here has some good arguments.

I attended and graduated UND and currently am teaching at a part 61 school with very little supervision. Again, this is my first instructing job and the thought of having no one to turn to when I had a question scared me at first(unlike UND). The policies and procedures at UND, as well as the standards at UND, have prepared me to "make up" some of my own and survive.

I don't force my students to think about legal versus illegal. I teach them between good judgment versus bad judgment, right versus wrong, etc. You know, the real world stuff.

Reading some of the things we had to do brings back memories though. Here in the real world of flying, my students and I make the go/no go decision. We do have Garmin 430's, which we are lucky to have, but our planes are not new by any means. Things break and there are no MELs, not everyone has money or as much motivation. Students in the real world are not all 18-23 year-olds with minds like sponges.

In conclusion, I've learned a hell of a lot more in the real world, but UND prepared me to deal with the change. As for the UND instructors who started to fly at UND, instruct at UND, and go to an airline job from UND, I feel sorry for you. The funny thing is I fly in a much more challenging environment and I fly more than a UND instructor does.

 

[check6]

One other thing. . .

Given a chance to grow and make more operational decisions on their own, a qualified applicant would quickly turn into an asset at a flight school.

An addendum to my last post. . . .


In a nutshell, this statement describes me.

 

[Fuzzy_is_Hungry]

HAHAHA!

FYI: Most flight schools DO NOT force their instructors to wear these silly uniforms. Also, the instructor that does this voluntarily is a complete tool.

Learning to fly should be fun, not such a procedural hassle. We can save all the flows, SOP's, FOM, etc for later in life. Trust me, you'll do plenty of it when the time comes.


Art V,

No CFI should be wearing epaulets. Its a kick in the nuts to anyone who has actually earned them. Until you are in a 135 or 121 role, you should not be wearing an aviator shirt.

 

[NoPax]

.....

 

[avbug]

No CFI should be wearing epaulets. Its a kick in the nuts to anyone who has actually earned them. Until you are in a 135 or 121 role, you should not be wearing an aviator shirt.

Good gravy, that was arrogant. I mean ARROGANT!!!

Earned them? As in cleaned the lavs with your toothbrush and recited the pledge of allegiance until your throat ran hoarse? Or perhaps flew back and forth under powerlines until you were the only one alive to crawl to the pulpit in your classroom and accept those hard earned stripes? Get a clue, brightspark.

It's not kick in my genetalia if someone wears epaulets and they don't work for a 121 or 135 operation. I've flown various corporate, freight, and other jobs that involved wearing epaulets...I wear them now for a carrier, but SO WHAT? Are you really so arrogant as to believe that there's something about flying for an air carrier that legitimizes wearing a pilot shirt, or that makes one a real pilot? What an utterly sickening belief. Really.

You might not have noticed this, so you might wanna sit up and pay attention. A flight instructor is required to hold a commercial airman certificate. That's right, kiddo...flight instructors are real pilots, too. I don't get to instruct very often, but I relish the opportunity, and don't see instructing as doing anything any different than any other flying job...It's a working role for a working aviator, and if the company policy involves wearing a uniform, then so be it.

You really believe that the only true aviators are those working for air carriers? Crikey. You're in for a rude awakening.

 

[hydroflyer]

Does UND allow "fun" flights outside of the training schedule? How about the other big name schools like ERAU and Comair? Just curious because I thought I heard something like that and it would be a shame if it was true.

And for fun....

I've got over 5,000 epaulet free flying hours.

 

[wxman13]

As mentioned in an earlier post, is it true that UND (and maybe other 141 schools for all I know?) have a person OTHER than the instructor or pilot flying PIC making the go/no-go decision? Cuz that is just a little scary. Talk about learning how to work in the real world, I think developing the judgment to make that decision is one of the more crucial parts of learning to fly. Right up there with landing.

Peter

 

[DC8 Flyer]

Dangit! Fell for the little troll again. I need a hobby!

 

[gkrangers]

Does UND allow "fun" flights outside of the training schedule? How about the other big name schools like ERAU and Comair? Just curious because I thought I heard something like that and it would be a shame if it was true.

And for fun....

I've got over 5,000 epaulet free flying hours.

I go to ERAU, in Daytona...I'm not in the flight program, tho. I fly off campus, Part 61..not gonna subject me to all that 172 simulator crap!

As far as I know, students can rent 172s for "fun", but can get kicked off the schedule if the aircraft is needed for a "lesson".

And then there are all the rules and paperwork...so wheres the fun?

I've gotta say, theres a mixed crowd here, probably the same at all the other "aviation universities". There are dorks, and there are normal level headed college students. Some buy into the "I'm better cuz I went to ERAU", some don't. Some are good pilots, some aren't. Some benefit from the strict procedural training environment, some don't...

It goes on and on...but in my opinion, the most important thing to never lose sight of, is that learning to fly is supposed to be enjoyable....and to always have a grasp of what the real world is like outside ERAU and UND, etc... (Ok so thats two things)

Students aren't going from graduation to the airlines...and there should be more emphasis, IMO, on the "real world". It'll make for more well rounded students and less dickheads.

 

[Cutlass1287]

As mentioned in an earlier post, is it true that UND (and maybe other 141 schools for all I know?) have a person OTHER than the instructor or pilot flying PIC making the go/no-go decision? Cuz that is just a little scary. Talk about learning how to work in the real world, I think developing the judgment to make that decision is one of the more crucial parts of learning to fly. Right up there with landing.

Peter

The policy is that anyone in the flight department can cancel a flight when its deemed excessively risky. The PIC, CFI, Student, Supervisor of flight, etc... all have the power to make the NO go decision. When the weather gets worse than what is specified in our safety manual, we go "no fly." You cannot rent an aircraft at this time. Obviously, you dont have to fly just because they say it IS safe. You can cancel your own flight at any point.

And no, you cannot rent an aircraft unless it is for a specific lesson. Even if you have your private, you can't just go up and fly.

 

[100LL... Again!]

A lot of college-program CFIs have decent knowledge and skills, but they often have a stick up their arse and have a "my college's way is the only safe way" mentality.

I personally enjoy deprogramming them a little and opening up their viewpoint.

 

[Night_Flight]

FlyingToIST-

First off, I like your website www.acuwings.com. Is this the school you operate? I bet there is a lot of great flying out in that area!

Since you are a professional pilot and interviewer, I hope that you realize that each prospective employee you interview are different and bring their own traits to the interview.

That's unfortunate that you had a few bad interviews with UND graduates. I'm sure you have had bad interviews with others as well, either from FBO's or other flight schools. As a UND alum and ex "BrainWasher" flight instructor, I assure that as with anywhere, there are very sharp, and skilled pilots and then there are those who just go through the motions and get by. It's not fair to generalize and say "I cannot believe how successfuly the school brain washed them all.. "

Flying is fun! Some fun things I did while at UND was flying XC's into MSP many times, Winnepeg (Int'l expierence), Meigs, DEN...low IFR flying, acrobatic flights and providing many fun expierences for my students to learn from.

I also smirked when I read some of the things you heard. Most graduates from UND or ERAU or Purdue etc... should know most of these things. It is sad that your few pilots are unable to think outside of the box. I assume that they are newer instructors who haven't had many teaching expierences yet. Give it time and with your help, they will form their own good traits and habits.

As mentioned before, all this "procedural" stuff is designed to prepare students for the airlines, and what do you mean "Except to show off?" Not all UND grads are heading for the airlines, but it's procedures are essencial for safety. As you know, their is a vast difference between Part 61 and 141 which I am not about to get into. I've taught both and have issued certs.

Good luck with your school and I hope you have a few better apples from UND and others that help Acu Wings to grow!


Peter-

The main reason that "A person OTHER than the instructor or pilot flying PIC making the go/no-go decision" is that the FSDO and insurance companies usually give go/no-go guidelines for fianical and safety reasons. Would you let a brand new PVT pilot go on a 250nm XC with 3sm and 1000'? Sure it's legal, but what if they were your responsibility and using your aircraft? If a company would allow this, then this would be a "Just a little scary".

"Talk about learning how to work in the real world", well in the real world, airlines and corporate and most company pilots also have others make the go/no-go decision. Dispatch and your company come up with guidelines for operations-just like flight schools and FBO's.

As always, the PIC ALWAYS has the final go/no-go decision. That's one thing you have been tested on during every checkride.

---------
UND, ERAU, Purdue and other schools all have skilled and lacking grads, just like corporate pilots, airline pilots, flight instructors, students...
It's all up to the individual.

As my FAA checkairmen who gave me my Private said, "Your license is a ticket to continue your learning."

Happy Contrails,

-Night_Flight-