Coaching Scheme

[Brian Hope]

The GASCo Stall Spin Study showed that the climbing turn carries a greater statistical risk:

Unfortunately Jon, not many pilots ever got to read the GASCo Stall Spin Report because you had to buy it, and the vast majority didn't. Every time I meet up with GASCo at an event we discuss the possibility of putting the report into the public domain now that it is no longer likely to generate sales, and each time I get an interested response, but still it remains gathering dust when it could be out there offering information and advice. I've also suggested that we publish extracts of particular interest in Light Aviation. Not their fault I don't doubt, they've never been flush with funding and have plenty of other stuff to get on with, but it does highlight the general malaise in safety related information reaching GA pilots compared to a few years ago when it regularly dropped through your letterbox. Do we really take it seriously these days or simply pay it lip service? Answers on the back of an AAIB 'Red Top' please.
Rgds, Brian.

[Trevor Harvey]

Improving the PCS to the extent of having a qualified Coach/CRI attached to every local Strut would be a very big improvement, progressively familiarising himself with the strut fleet, in my opinion. Such an improvement could well save lives, trying not be melodramatic about it, but I have personally seen such a need. Lack of anonymity prevents me from saying more.
Spending LAA funds by buying, maintaining, insuring a LAA training fleet I think would empty the coffers in quick time, and only benefit a very few members.
Well over 1000 hits on this topic would indicate considerable interest in the subject.

[Cookie]

Every time I meet up with GASCo at an event we discuss the possibility of putting the report into the public domain now that it is no longer likely to generate sales

Brian, you will know that I'm involved with GASCo as one of their Regional Safety Officers and presenters of GASCo Safety Evenings delivered on behalf of the CAA. I agree that the information from this study should be readily available to LAA members, and would be happy to discuss with yourself and Mike O'Donoghue (GASCo) how to best achieve this. I'm at the annual event where we develop the content for next season's GASCo Safety Evenings soon, so will ensure the issue is discussed then.

Improving the PCS to the extent of having a qualified Coach/CRI attached to every local Strut would be a very big improvement

Trevor, many thanks for this suggestion. We looked into this a while back, and I do encourage coaches to do this. I will resurrect the associated paperwork and would be happy for this to be actioned. Better still, if you're interested in actively helping the association to achieve an effective coach-strut link, do get in touch via e-mail, via LAA Head Office, or come along and have a chat at one of the events where I'm in attendance.

ATB Jon

[P5151]

Unfortunately a disappointing response from Jon which amounts to everything is fine despite a number of complaints from different areas of the country.


I have deliberately refused to insult or point fingers because I as I have said appreciate those who help voluntarily. I would ask that no one post anything that could be construed as such. However I do understand the frustration of members who have complained when they get such a response.

I will be writing something for the Magazine when the referendum is over. It seems several complaints and 1000 hits has not stopped inertia

[Chris Martyr]

[quote="Cookie"] Repeatedly insulting the significant effort which goes on behind the scenes to support the LAA and it’s members is of no benefit to your argument or this debate.

Jon, nobody is insulting anyone here ! This is actually quite a civilised debate ! "The Emperors New Flight Academy" is merely a tongue in cheek remark . I'm sure that all of the contributors here are pretty experienced people ! The content of CSL 3.1.1 does only require PCS applicants to have "somewhere in the region of" 1,000hrs , but even so , the requirements do seem to be inordinately high for an organisation whose members are probably pretty experienced anyway.
So if anyone is insulting anyone,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Anyway, getting back to the original mindset that led up this posting . Why do LAA members , who have probably spent many hours being trained to fly aeroplanes in a flying school environment and who are probably very conversant with PPL/CPL/ and even ATPL syllabi being treated like zero hours candidates ?
The OP was mostly concerned about the amount of people who were by-passing the PCS ! The unfortunate answer to this is : Because they can !

[Trevor Harvey]

You are right Steve.
In answer to Jon, I would love to be more involved, if I thought I were capable. However I have other domestic duties in my lifestyle that have to take priority. I get a spare day, or part of one once a week to play at aviation if I'm lucky, and can plan it well enough. Otherwise I'm up to my ears in nursing, housework and splitting logs.
What seems to be coming across here is, "we are doing fine just the way it is, be grateful for us." Well, we are grateful to all those who give their time and expertise. We are however, standing on the outside and can sometimes see possible improvements, some of these ideas may be impractical, impossible even. Nevertheless, whether the PCS was presented to us completely free of charge at the expense of the provider solely for our benefit, or forced on us at our vast expense, we are entitled to opinions without being seen as some form of ungrateful troublemakers.
Personally I feel I have been told, don't insult anyone, and either put up or shut up.
Sorry if that all seems a bit heavy.
The bad thing about discussion forums is the reader has no knowledge of the writer or what they really are trying to say if a word offends them.
Back to topic.
Would the well experienced and competent pilots but not "Rated" as such, be prepared to advertise their services as Safety Pilots to current PPL holders? Would that be bending the rules too far?

[Trevor Harvey]

I seem to have been overtaken by Chris

[P5151]

So here is a question, why are we bothering to have a coaching scheme at all if other membersa are doing it for each other outside the scheme? If Jom is going to continue to refuse to acknowledge the legitimate concerns of members and try to find ways of incorporating these helpers into the scheme where do we go from here?

[Chris Martyr]

Upwards my son ,, ...Upwards !

[Alan Kilbride]

I can't speak on Jon's behalf, but I help quite a lot with Pilots who have recently acquired a tailwheel rating and have bought one for them selves.
Quite often they have no other skills with a taildragger than being able to land in a straight line with little or no wind, across or otherwise. Many instructors at clubs have only gone through differences training enough to be able to do the same.
This sounds absolutely ripe for the LAA PCS to come forward and offer assistance, but and there is always a but isn't there? I doubt very much that the CAA would allow the LAA to start their own training program allowing unqualified pilots to jump in and help. The basic minimum "instructor" qualification as I understand it, is that of a CRI and if you think the CAA or FTOs would just allow us to jump in with a newly qualified pilot and teach them Short field, Crosswind, Farm strip skills etc without some sort of formal training then I stand to be corrected.
What would happen if a serious accident occurred at a 400m Farm strip in a 10kt Xwind with a 2 hour tailwheel pilot being mentored by a 400 hour tailwheel pilot who has no other qualification?... "He said it would be OK" ...being a statement made to the AAIB or insurance company would nip my sphincter. Where would the line be drawn when the only way to check the skills of the mentor is by word of mouth?
I have in the past and still to some extent do mentor pilots in more than handling skills (Cross country and across the Channel etc) but now limit my help to helping with the skills they should have already as opposed to teaching new ones.
At the moment we are where we are and I think the posts on here are in agreement that this should be looked at and reviewed at senior level.
We have the Rally in September, why not as a small group ask for a meeting with some of the hierarchy to discuss it over an early morning Coffee?
Might I suggest any one who thinks they have something to offer, offer to fly a senior Instructor who would be able to asses suitability for the CRI course. Maybe a weekend for several to get together for a little mentoring themselves?

Alan
G-BJOT

[P5151]

Alan,

What you are saying seems sensible to me, but I should point out that there are no senior instructors only coaches, and given the negative response from the top I think that anyone would think that the dice will be weighed against them from the start.

However, your reply brings out exactly a point I have been making, we have been trying to obtain coaching in circumstances that you describe. Jon has offered to do some training in my RV4 but he would be in exactly the same position as I am in now as it is not dual controlled. He also said he would contact other coaches who possibly have access to dual controlled RV, since then silence!

This is why I suggested an LAA owned taildragger so coaches could access it for coaching in this area, given we have so much in the bank it seems a small price to pay to help members, and possibly prevent a damaged aircraft or injury.

[Cookie]

Steve,

Two of our coaches (1)(2) are CAA Senior Examiners and Flight Instructor Examiners who have extensive experience of training and testing instructors and examiners, so we are well placed to make such an assessment. Where a pilot applies to become a coach and already holds an instructor certificate, a short standardisation sortie is completed; for those without an instructor certificate, continuous assessment is achieved during the CRI course.

For your friend with the RV4, this is part of the message I sent in response to his enquiry to use my RV6 on 15th May 2016:

Many thanks for your call and e-mail. I have forwarded it to Will Greenwood to deal with - he will distribute a request to any LAA coaches who own similar types.

I had already explained that I no longer own a RV6. If I can be of further assistance, he is welcome to get in touch - I'm also at Wellesbourne a couple of days this week if he or you would like to meet for a cuppa and a chat.

Regards, Jon

[P5151]

Jon

The only reason I raised the RV4 is because it illustrates the problem or at least part of the problem. I do not want that to become a discussion point but the fact is since that contact we have heard nothing from Mr Greenwood. Again illustrating the point that requests are not responded to.

I accept that you personally tried to help and have always responded positively. However, your responses which amount to there is nothing wrong with the system make me feel a meeting and chat over tea will achieve nothing. Unless you are willing to open your mind to the possibility of change things will stay as they are.

So I think the position is that I and others will just have to continue the fight to hopefully get you to rethink things.

[Chris Martyr]

I've also suggested that we publish extracts of particular interest in Light Aviation.

That's a very good idea. Especially as GASIL doesn't drop through the front door anymore . Why not have a column for flying related matters - I.E. Pilot Safety and related maters , in a kind of similar vein to Malcolm McBride's brilliantly orchestrated Engineering Matters column. Mr J. Brady Esq. springs to mind as probably being a really good candidate for this as he is known and respected by the many and also has an easy style of writing which folk can connect with .
[ I apologise if John's re-action to this is "Don't you bloody lot think I've got enough to do already" ]

But if such a column were to offer a service whereby [for example] people who have undergone tailwheel training , but would like to fly and compare notes with others who may just be a little more experienced , wouldn't that serve to share a lot of what the LAA is about ? Nothing would need a "sign-off" as the pilot/owner would be P1 .
A list of CRI's would also be a good thing , they don't even need to be LAA members. But if they are willing to assist with BFR renewals etc and are conveniently located to where the recipient lives , then it would probably be a great help and save a lot of headaches at BFR renewal time .
So there : I think I've expended enough creative juices for today. I'm off to Deanland to kiss and hug my VP-1 !

[Brian Hope]

Hi Chris, I've made a number of attempts to get operational safety material into the magazine, you really wouldn't believe how difficult that is.
After several false starts we now have a safety committee and I am hopeful that operational issues will now get a better airing and I agree, a light, chatty article along the lines of Safety Spot would be great.
If anybody out there has any ideas on the subject, please let me know.
Like me Chris, you see the CRIs as part of the solution. It is a route to passing on skills in an approved manner and should be embraced by PCS to a much larger extent.
LAA is planning to look at our educational, courses and training offering some time soon and I hope all interested parties can sit around the table and have a meaningful discussion.
Rgds, Brian