xhercdriver
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 80
I'd say if you are an FTU instructor pilot, you are probably doing the kind of instructing that would satisfy the feds. Certainly if you are a UPT instructor, you meet "the intent" of the reg.
If you're in Stan-Eval, and routinely give instrument/qual checkrides, you could probably make a case as well.
If you're "just" a line instructor pilot in the squadron, even if that squadron is the Weapons School, it'd probably be hard to make a case that you're doing "basic" flight instruction, since everyone you're training is already qualified in the plane you're flying.
P.S. rcb's post read to me like "scolding," or "finger pointing" too. "Communication" is a two-sided phenomenon, and when you are "taken the wrong way," especially in print, it's almost never a case of that being solely due to the READER's "oversensitivity." (The little blue frowny guy at the bottom by itself is enough to make you come off as "lecturing an unruly schoolboy")
My technique: any time I write something that's "combative" or "accusatory," I always read it through a couple times before I hit "submit." I end up deleting more of those messages than I actually post...
If you're in Stan-Eval, and routinely give instrument/qual checkrides, you could probably make a case as well.
If you're "just" a line instructor pilot in the squadron, even if that squadron is the Weapons School, it'd probably be hard to make a case that you're doing "basic" flight instruction, since everyone you're training is already qualified in the plane you're flying.
P.S. rcb's post read to me like "scolding," or "finger pointing" too. "Communication" is a two-sided phenomenon, and when you are "taken the wrong way," especially in print, it's almost never a case of that being solely due to the READER's "oversensitivity." (The little blue frowny guy at the bottom by itself is enough to make you come off as "lecturing an unruly schoolboy")