Let's talk Part 61 verses Part 141 Training Programs

[UndauntedFlyer]

Part 141 programs are fine for most people and they do guarantee a certain minimum level of training standards but there is nothing magical in such a program. Any well run locally operated part 61 program can be just as good as any part 141 program. And a well run structured part 61 program will often times be better not just because it provides more hours for the commercial, but also because of the options for a tailor made program that will exactly meet their student's training needs.

It is interesting that some University programs (Purdue and others) have switched to a “University Approved” Part 61 program rather than the “FAA approved” programs. In my opinion the 141 approval is only necessary to reassure the public of a minimum standard of safety and curriculum that has been approved by the FAA. At a college or a university, however, such a reassurance shouldn’t be necessary and the school’s curriculum approval should rest on the laurels of the university and the faculty’s development of the program.

Today’s Part 61 training for the Private Pilot certificate is much better than it was 50 years ago. This is because the FAA has continually increased the CFI’s responsibility for supervision of part 61 training to be almost equal to that of a part 141 program.

To me the only real advantage that a part 141 program has is the ability of that school to receive “examining authority.” With examining authority a student going through the program from zero time to their commercial certificate can not receive a Notice of Disapproval (pink slip) from an examiner. Considering the concern people have (too much) with regard to the “pilot’s record act,” examining authority is an advantage here. However, if a large part 61 program has as good working relationship with a local DPE and maintains a high level of communication regarding applicant performance and expectations, then their pass rate will also be very high.

In my opinion, a pilot trained in a controlled Part 61 Commercial Pilot program as compared to a part 141 program will be more capable as a pilot because he/she has 250-flight hours of experience instead of the part 141 minimum of only 190-hours. It just makes no sense that a 190-hour pilot (60 less hours) will be equal, everything else being the same. In aviation there is nothing like real (behind the wheel) EXPERIENCE. And at the lower levels (less than 500-hours) experience, more training and more practice mean proportionally more proficiency.

Training is always a pilot’s best investment in safety. Praise the Administrator!

Just think how proficient the Part 141 pilots would be if he/she had 60 more hours of training; but, isn’t that the definition of a CONTROLLED part 61 program. Today’s pilot school graduates need multiengine/instrument training to ATP standards, Garmin 1000 “Glass Cockpit” training tailwheel training and basic acrobatic training to really become the master of their profession. More training ALWAYS means more PROFICIENCY.

Your comments or Questions are welcome……

 

[Tonala2k]

I'd like to compare it again to a restaurant. You've got Ma&Pa's around the corner, and that big fancy one downtown. They both have the potential of being either the best, or worst place you have ever eaten.

Back to 61vs.141
I think any 141 school could do just as well as a part 61 school. So why not just do it, and not spend resources on the 141 certification. I think we need to train new students on how to judge a school by its fruits, and not be sold by the sizzle. I've been told that as a CFI I have a certain need to always be selling myself. I am thankful to those who were first interested in me and gave my direction to make my own decision. I pay the interest on that eternal debt by doing the same when a new students wants to learn to fly.

 

[Lazy8]

From a flight school viewpoint 141 is simply a marketing tool. It is a requirement for VA benefits, military flight screening contracts, and certain kinds of lower APR financial aid. In a nutshell, it opens up more opportunity for the business.

Academically I see no rhyme or reason why 141 should be considered any better than 61. Standardization is key and can be implemented into either type.

g

 

[gkrangers]

I have around 260 hours...all Part 61 except for about 4-5 Part 141 instrument flights...which was enough for me to drop it and go 61.

I have 150 hours of XC time. Thats the best experience I have....

I don't think you'll get that in a Part 141 program...

 

[kf4amu]

I did Private under 61, but I did commercial and instrument under 141. In between them, and for about 100 hours since, I did a fair amount of pleasure flying to various cities visiting friends, going to concerts, flying friends home from college for the weekend to party, dinner, picking up people from major airports so I didnt have to drive etc. I think the mix of structured 141 and 61 was good for me. I got real world experience in how things are ACTUALLY done in 61 vs the structure of 141. I'd recommend people do a mix of both to get the best of both worlds.

 

[NuGuy]

Heyas,

I was part of an effort to re-do a slightly-larger-than mom-n-pop school's (say 20 aircraft or so) 141 program a while ago.

We were using the "141 in a box" Jeppesen program at the time, when just about every other 141 program was using the same program.

The way the course was structured just didn't work for us...for instance, it had a HUGE block of instrument training right before a BIG block of VFR solo cross country work. By the time the students got done with the solo work, they'd lost all the IFR proficiency.

So we tried to fix that, and what started out as some tinkering led to an effort to certify our own program outside the Jeppesen syllibus. We had some very experienced CFIs at the time, and we had a monster amount of good input and experience to putting together a program that worked well for us.

It was a HUGE effort to get FAA on board with it. Unless it had a "big" name attatched to it or came in a box marked "Jeppesen-Sanderson", they didn't wan't to put their signature on anything.

Finally, after being buried with paper, we finally got the first program approved, and it was fairly easy after that.

My point is that unless you are doing anything but a 141-in-the-box program, be prepared for a lot of work.

Nu

 

[Doozer]

My $0.02.

A lot of your choice depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

I'm former military, so I had a lot of the hourly requirement gates met when I decided to convert to FAA ratings and privileges. That made Part 61 a whole lot more viable for me.

Even though I used Part 61 for a lot of my civilian ratings, due to weather and finances, I failed to attain my ratings goals before I left active duty, and I used V.A. benefits to gain additional instructor ratings, requiring the use of a 141 facility in order to use my V.A. benefits.

I was fortunate to have a 141 school and an instructor who both demonstrated more concern about customer service than milking students for every dollar possible -- and they recommended that I train under Part 141 (for reimbursement purposes) and "step out of the syllabus" and test under Part 61 when I had demonstrated proficiency.

This worked real well for me -- but I really doubt that many 141 outfits are as accomodating for the customer.

Having laid that background, my recommendation is, regardless of which Part you train under, find an instructor that instructs because he likes teaching and who has no plans to go anywhere else.

Usually, this will mean some older guy in a flying club who's been a professional aviator and has a good job outside of instructing who isn't chomping at the bit to get to the next aeronatical stepping stone on his way to Fed Ex., AA or wherever.

He may be demanding, opinionated and not as fun to be around as someone nearer your own age but you'll always know where you stand with him, and he'll teach you a whole lot of practical information about being PIC that you won't get from someone who hasn't yet been a professional aviator -- and you won't have to transition through two or more instructors during your training because he'll be around to take you as far as you want to go.

Having said this, be prepared to pay more per hour for this type of instuctor. These people are humble, yet they know what their skills are worth -- and don't be surprised if they have a waiting list.

 

[desertdog71]

A Part 61 program in my opinion is the better option. The part 141 programs while thorough, I feel they are too structured. The flexibility of Part 61 as well as the additional hour requirements in my opinion make it a superior choice. I was surprised to see how little solo time and cross country time is allowed for in Part 141 programs. I feel that you do the most learning when you are flying solo cross country, and going to different airports all the time. After getting my private license, I was instructed to fly the next 40 hours solo cross country into Class C and B airports in the area, use flight following to get accustomed to using the ATC system, and this really prepared me for instrument training.

To be trained as a PIC, you need the opportunity to act as PIC, and I don't mean watching for traffic while someone else is flying under the hood. With all the structure, safety pilot scams and other things going on at the larger Part 141 schools, I think the obvious choice is to find an excellent instructor that enjoys teaching at a smaller Part 61 school.

This may not work for everybody, but I am confident that I made the right decision by going this route. I currently have 132 hours and 83.3 is PIC cross country, I feel these flights have been the most valuable to me as a pilot. There is no substitute for actual experience. Flying with your instructor or with another student all the time does not allow the growth as a PIC that will be very valuable to you in the future.

Take this however you like, with my limited experience I am sure someone will disagree on that basis alone.

 

[timeoff]

With all the structure, safety pilot scams and other things going on at the larger Part 141 schools, I think the obvious choice is to find an excellent instructor that enjoys teaching at a smaller Part 61 school.

The safety pilot thing mostly takes place at part 61 schools, not 141 because those programs are too structured to require "timebuilding" flights. The 200hr to 250hr gap is where most part 61 guys do it (including myself). If someone is qualified to pass the commercial checkride today, but only has 200 hours, splitting IFR cross countries makes perfect sense.

The beauty of part 61 is being able to work on your commercial and your cfi simultaneously, while chipping away at your multi all on your own schedule.

 

[wrxpilot]

I have around 260 hours...all Part 61 except for about 4-5 Part 141 instrument flights...which was enough for me to drop it and go 61.

I have 150 hours of XC time. Thats the best experience I have....

I don't think you'll get that in a Part 141 program...

I agree, the little that I know I've learned on doing long cross countries. I'm way past what I need for my inst rating, but it's been really helpful for figuring out how this stuff works!

 

[xshuttlefa]

My $0.02.



Usually, this will mean some older guy in a flying club who's been a professional aviator and has a good job outside of instructing who isn't chomping at the bit to get to the next aeronatical stepping stone on his way to Fed Ex., AA or wherever.

He may be demanding, opinionated and not as fun to be around as someone nearer your own age but you'll always know where you stand with him, and he'll teach you a whole lot of practical information about being PIC that you won't get from someone who hasn't yet been a professional aviator -- and you won't have to transition through two or more instructors during your training because he'll be around to take you as far as you want to go.

Having said this, be prepared to pay more per hour for this type of instuctor. These people are humble, yet they know what their skills are worth -- and don't be surprised if they have a waiting list.

I take issue with the "ignore the guy teaching to just to build up his time and move on" part of your reply, Doozer. There's not a lot of opportunity for people to build time any other way other then instructing in most areas of the country. Some of the best instructors I had were doing it just to build time, many of which have corporate or airline jobs ( HAD airline jobs...)

I guess the key is to try and be a professional about it. The guy who's doing it JUST to build time AND lets it show is the one to stay away from. And I guess after a few hundred hours of dual given, anyone with higher ambitions would become bored with instructing. We all have bad days, jobs becomes boring,etc. But to discount those CFI who are doing it just to build time makes the pay-for-job shysters that much more appealing.

In this "dues" paying industry, teaching can be one of those "dues". Having just become a CFI myself, I have greater respect for those who did it and have moved on. And even more respect for those who want to continue being a CFI and never think of anything else.

I've been through Part 141 and 61 schools. As long as the instruction is decent, it doesn't matter how you do it. Unfortunately, the gaps in our training system are huge. You can learn something from every one and the old, grizzled veteran can share lots of experience, but they might not be the best, might be put-off by new ways of teaching certain items and confounded by the new avionics out there. And the young guy could be a royal PITA. not know anything ( but thinks he does),etc.

Bottom line: Find an instructor, old or young, new or seasoned, that you like and work well with. Hopefully they know a little something about flying too.

 

[Doozer]

I take issue with the "ignore the guy teaching to just to build up his time and move on" part of your reply

I suppose I would, too, if I were one of those people teaching just to "pay dues" and move on.

The gist of the original post, however, was about producing safe, well-trained pilots in the context of a Part 141 vs. Part 61 comparison. The gist of my response was that experienced, stable instructors will do a better, more consistent job at producing safe, well-trained pilots than inexperienced instructors with little real-world PIC time.

No matter which Part one trains under, it's still a business relationship between student and instructor. In that business relationship, the student -- the customer -- is the boss and we instructors are the employees.

All customers have expectations; some customers' expectations are higher than others. Furthermore, smart customers shop to get the most for their money.

These aviation-related message boards, particularly those catering to flight students, are rife with stories of students going through multiple instructors during their training and their frustration at having to learn things over differently -- and pay through the nose -- with each instructor change.

It's my opinion that an experienced instructor who will be around for a student's entire training evolution is the best use of the customer's resources.

I suppose there are reasons not to choose the best tool for a particular job. I know that I've opted for the Black & Decker circular saw and Craftsman table saw over their DeWalt and Delta counterparts in the past because they were all I could afford at the time. The funny thing is that a few years later I ended up replacing them with the DeWalt and Delta products -- and those products are so far superior I'm almost ashamed.

If I'd been a smarter customer and exercised a little patience and forethought in my tool purchases, I would have produced higher quality projects earlier -- and saved some money in the end.

I see a striking parallel with choosing flight instructors.

 

[Goose Egg]

I suppose I would, too, if I were one of those people teaching just to "pay dues" and move on.

I do hope that you understand that there are those of us who look at our instructing jobs as much more than just "paying dues" even though we may not intend to do this our entire career. I see myself as a professional pilot who is currently tasked with producing safe and well-trained pilots. I don't feel like I'm "paying dues." I'm definitely learning a lot and gaining a lot of experience, but I'm not just "paying dues."

It's my opinion that an experienced instructor who will be around for a student's entire training evolution is the best use of the customer's resources.

That is unquestionably true, in my opinion, and there are those of us in the "time builder" ranks that are striving for that.

-Goose