Just thinking

[Dep676]

I have been asked and wondered myself. How come we can instruct with 250 hrs but can't even fly a piston twin for hire without instructing in it? For that matter fly anything for corporate or airlines. Especially in these times after September 11th. Everybodies min's go up. I have people ask me that all the time that aren't related to aviation but other professional fields like medicine, etc. You know they don't take a doctor fresh out of med school and give them a teaching position. They let them get a little experience first then teach. Why is it in our profession it's the other way around? Even talking some co-workers or other people around the FBO's I always hear the bigger equipment is easier to fly. I know they are faster and you have to think faster but there are usually 2 pilots. Usually they are watching each other and help out if one screws up. I know from my experience I had a contract job in Conquest when I had 500 hrs. I learned more from that than I ever did instructing. I liked instructing but 90% of my students were primary and that burned me out. Just a question I always wondered. Any comments or thoughts from the board?

 

[cvsfly]

Like they say, "It's not the money. IT'S THE MONEY". Yes it would be preferrable to have the most experienced, or at least significantly experienced, pilots teaching the new ones. In this business we reward experience with better equipment and money (at least most of the time). I believe it is harder and requires more attention and dedication to teach flight students all day than it is to fly a jet 1-2 hours somewhere, wait 5 hrs, then come home. But the industry will never and the students will never be able to pay an experienced flight instructor what he is really worth. Student pilots beware!