my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Flying Lessons (questions) (Page 1)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Flying Lessons (questions) Jason Black Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1723 From: Myrtle Beach, SC, USA Registered: Nov 2000 posted 09-17-2007 10:55 PM                        A call to any pilots we have onboard.. I'm consindering taking flying lessons sometime next year. ar ethere any special things I should look for in looking for a school? There are a few places locally (MYR) that offer lessons.. Just not sure what the certifications I shoudl look for would be. Also, what are the typical requirements, ground time, air time, etc, for one to obtain a recreational (non commercial) license? There are a few of us at work who are interested in lessons. Knowing them as well as I do, if a few of us actually got into this and enjoyed it, they'd look at Pipers or Cessna's to buy as a group. It would be a tax write off for them anyway... Just curious as to what I should begin to look for, and any questions I should ask. I've also always "heard" that lessons are EXPENSIVE... Any truth to this? Thanks for any input..  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 09-17-2007 11:39 PM                        1. Look for a school not on the brink of bankruptcy. 2. Check to see how many of the plane wrecks behind the local AME's hanger are registered to the school/instructors. Seriously. The cost of training will depend primarily on two factors, (i) your ability and (ii) how hard up for cash the school and/or instructors are.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 09-18-2007 12:06 AM                     ..and learn in a LINK's trainer, not by computer method. Learn how to do flight plans the old fashioned way by filling the forms out, not by computer method. Also, when getting behind the stick, learn on the "tail draggers" first in as well as using instruments. Yea, plan on hitting the books, for you have to really know weather-inside and out, yearly physicals, different classes of licenses - from experimental to passenger...and the expenditures required for flying. My father has his own plane (an 1946 Ercoupe) and has had it for years besides building planes for others. He's 81 and can still pass physicals but just maintains an experimental licence due his occasional cloudhopping. He wanted to fly in the war, but couldn't since they didn't need pilots just infantrymen. When he got out, he immediately got his license to fly..where later on, he got on with the FAA to be in Flight Station (a degree below the tower operators-mainly handling light and twin engine aircraft.not the commercial aircraft department) and retired from the FAA as well. We both shake our heads when we see aircraft accidents and near misses due to these new 'crackerjack' pilots who's received their licence in such items and think they know everything. BUT, when you leave mother earth, you're at the mercy of the weather and her elements. For she's not too friendly with man powered flight at times. Learn as much of her as you can and do your best at it. She's a bit tempermental at times, but if you know all of the ropes, you can control yourself around her ire. If you would like more help, please PM, or email me and I can ask my father on any hints he can send your way .. good luck-Monte  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 09-18-2007 12:44 AM                  quote: Monte L Fullmer ..and learn in a LINK's trainer ... learn on the "tail draggers" first... Holy Smokes Monte, get with modern times! That stuff went out with the carbon arc lamphouse. I got my license in the 60's in a Cessna 150 with a tricycle landing gear. Jason, don't forget to pick out a ground school that teaches mechanical dead reckoning as a backup to GPS...we all know how unreliable electronics are...  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 09-18-2007 01:44 AM                        Tricycles are for children Phil... Real pilots (as opposed to reel pilots) fly conventional gear - none of that newfangled sissy tricycle junk. Me? Soloed in 1974 in a Bellanca 7ECA Citabria then stopped due to lack of $$$. Soloed again in 1977 in a 1947 Cessna 140. Finally got my PPL in 1978. I remember Jason asking about this a couple of years ago. Private pilots? You're finally ready to give it a try Jason? Great! As for me, I just can't get over what it costs just to stay day VFR current in a single these days, based on what my students at the college have told me. There are basically two kinds of flight schools - those that operate under FAR Part 141, and those that don't. The Part 141 schools are more rigid in their curriculums and tend to cost more. But the flight experience requirements (the number of hours needed before taking the exam ride) are lower and the training quality is seen by some as being more uniform. I didn't use a Part 141 school when I trained. In the end I feel that it's the quality of the individual instructor(s), and the learning ability of the student, that will have a far greater impact in leading to a successful flight training experience. As to what to look for, hang out at the airport and talk to as many local pilots, students, and instructors as you can. You'll quickly learn what the local reputations are. Look at the planes too. Do they look good or do they look like they've been ridden hard and put away sweaty? Ratty airplanes are a sign the school is struggling too much financially. All flight schools struggle financially, but there is a line. Same with the instructors. Is your potential CFI really interested in teaching or is s/he just building time towards a flying job? The time builder will drop you and his/her other students like hot rocks as soon as a flying job comes up. Generally it's the older guys that make the better instructors - they've been around a while.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 09-18-2007 01:48 AM                  Paul... I bet you like the DC3 over the DC6? (I've flown in both!)  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 09-18-2007 02:19 AM                        Never flown either unfortunately. Did have a chance once to add a DC-3 type rating to my ticket, back when I was made of $$$. These days my favorite sky chariot is the MD-82/83/87/88. Once in a while I help with taxiing ours between our gates and the maintenance pads. Lately I've been thinking about getting my ATP off ice and applying to fly for my present employer. After 12 years on the ground it would be an extremely long shot and I still can't quite figure out how I would pay for that process. Money matters have never been my strong point. For Jason, figure a budget around $6500 or so for a PPL, somewhat less than that for a recreational certificate. Many places offer block time reduced hourly rates if you can pay up front. Otherwise it's just pay-as-you-go. Used to be around 200 hours per year was the justification level for owning an airplane. Don't know what the number is these days. Partnerships certainly help, so do leasebacks. There can be many issues with both, as is the case anytime you tie yourself financially to other people. Do your homework carefully.  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 09-18-2007 05:10 AM                        quote: Paul Mayer These days my favorite sky chariot is the MD-82/83/87/88. Once in a while I help with taxiing ours between our gates and the maintenance pads. Lately I've been thinking about getting my ATP off ice and applying to fly for my present employer. <bad taste joke> Looks like a couple of vacancies have just been created for MD-88 pilots in Thailand... </bad taste joke> An 'expert' on the radio this morning speculated that the big increase in relatively inexperienced pilots flying for low-cost airlines could be part of the reason behind that incident, coupled with the fact that (so he said) the MD-88 is a particularly difficult aircraft to handle in high winds. I suppose that makes sense: low-cost airlines in my part of the world have grown like mad over the last few years, far more quickly than it's possible to get new pilots qualified and racking up significant numbers of flying hours would be my guess. That having been said, they must be doing something right because the low-cost airlines don't seem to have a higher accident rate than the traditional ones. In fact, I can't recall a single report of a major accident involving Ryanair or Easyjet (the two biggest ones in Britain).  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 09-18-2007 08:15 AM                        You have about 3 possibilities: 1. If you are going to fly professionally, go to an approved school like ATP academies and get that commuter job this year. 2. If the getting-of-the-license is your hobby, fly with any reasonable local instructor. 3. If you want to buy a plane and travel reasonably soon, then do the same as #2 but become more picky on instructors. Most only fly one hour at a time. I find this unduly limiting, making the progress slow. On th other hand, it consumes money to fly 2-4 hours at a time. I would not avoid the time-building instructors. Usually they are the well motivated who will get a student finished well and in a faster time. Later they will invite you to work at their airline. Email me off line if you have any questions. My daughter is flying for Republic/Chatatqua/U.S. Air with Embrarer 175's. She is 24 with 1800 hours.(1100 jet in airline service) Louis  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 09-18-2007 02:03 PM                        In my experience T-tailed aircraft don't handle as well as those that have the tail where it belongs. I don't have any time in MD-80s other than in a simulator but have talked with a lot of pilots that do, and the general consensus is that the MD-80 is a bit 'squirrelly' when in the approach configuration. It's certainly not alone in that characteristic - heck, the Twin Otter can be a handful in a gusting crosswind. But any certified design has to have control response that any reasonably qualified pilot can handle, and the MD-80 most certainly does. Windshear is a problem in any aircraft, but especially with large aircraft due the weight and momentum involved. Big airplanes just can't react a quickly as smaller ones can, and so things like early windshear detection and proper response to it become critical. It'll be interesting to see what happened with One Two Go at Phuket. Despite some airlines crying "pilot shortage" there is no such thing, at least at the larger air carriers. My company for example requires a minimum of 3000 hours flight time from its pilot applicants and we get many more applications than we can handle even though we're an LCC with LCC wages. The average guy or gal we hire has anywhere from 4500 to 6000 hours, many of them PIC qualified on regional jets. But at the regional level, things are beginning to get a little tight. Anyone with enough time is bailing out of the regionals to go to the bigger carriers, and it's beginning to look like there's not enough replacement people willing to put up with the lousy pay and working conditions that are the norm at the regional level. The one's that do are desperate, or have working spouses or parents to support them during this 'pay your dues' career phase. They will put up with it, but they generally are low-time CFIs or recent graduates of some airline academy, typically with no more than 200 to 500 hours total time. Such people are fine as co-pilots but they will require several years of seasoning flying with experienced captains before they can move to the left seat. The problem occurs when the captains bail out before their replacements are up to speed. If a carrier can't find enough qualified captains to hire off the street, that's when you see some pretty low time people being asked to step up. Fortunately the vast vast majority of them do just fine with the challenge.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 09-18-2007 03:51 PM                        You're right about the regionals. The entry level hours at Republic is 1100; at PSA (part of U. S. Air it's 250, commercial, multi, instrument if you can pass the tests). I am a "parent supporting". Republic apparently plans to hire 1000+ pilots by end 2008. (More if Captains leave.) Reading the "tea leaves" it looks like 1.5 to 2.0 years upgrade time for the daughter from time of hire. Faster, obviously, if Captains leave for the majors. Louis  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 09-18-2007 04:35 PM                        quote: Paul Mayer In my experience T-tailed aircraft don't handle as well as those that have the tail where it belongs. Interesting. The KLM MME-AMS flight, which I do as a passenger around 5-10 times a year, is sometimes operated by a Fokker 50 (tail where it belongs) and sometimes by a Fokker 70 (looks very similar to a DC-9 to my untrained eyes). If the weather over the North Sea is seriously windy, the Fokker 70 tends to start this weird side-to-side rocking motion that doesn't feel massively violent, but leaves you not wanting to eat or drink anything much for hours after the flight. On the approach to landing, especially a landing from the west at Teesside, the wings often dip and correct significantly, really quite close to the ground, giving the impression that the pilot is finding it hard work to keep the aircraft level. Sorry if this sounds like jumping to conclusions - I just get the feeling that something isn't quite right when the weather gets bad. I never get that worry at the back of my mind in the Fokker 50 - it seems to be able to fly through anything nature can throw at it, completely stable. Would I be right in guessing that the T-shaped tailed aircraft are more efficient at high speed/high altitude cruising, but these aircraft are more difficult to control during take-off/climb and approach/landing phases in bad weather?  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 09-18-2007 06:40 PM                        Leo; many aircraft are difficult/impossible to handle without a working yaw damper. ((controls these oscillations using the rudder only) I was once on a Boeing, prob 737 or 727 that had problems with said damper, tried several times to get it working and then they descended to 29,000 ft as required due to inop equipment. This made the trip somewhat longer and allowed legal "manual control." This was explained by the Captain. Certainly my old Navajo, a twin engine Piper, was hard to endure if seated in the tail if the yaw damper was off. Louis  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 09-18-2007 07:42 PM                     quote: Paul Mayer Windshear is a problem in any aircraft ....just have some massive acreage up there when a shear do hit..and stay away from the mountains when you go spotting for elk, deer and goat.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 09-18-2007 08:55 PM                     Actually time on spent Flight Simulator does apply to some aspects of your license these days. I have 38 hours of lessons that I did back in the 70's in a Piper Tomahawk at Dupage County Airport and countless hours flying around Illinois and Wisconsin with a now deceased friend in his 180. He is now deceased for attempting to do a barrel roll 100 feet off the ground... the legal aerobatic altitude is 1500 feet!. Funny thing is that he made it twice around and went for a third roll and that took him right into the ground. Was witnessed by a close friend. Both of these guys were long time airline pilots. My advice is that if you can't afford the time and money to ultimately achieve instrument rating you're taking your life and anyone elses that flies with you to great risk. Mark  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.