shags_j Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 So we are having monthly articles by professor avius on fligth training for instructors. My questions is this. If this person is giving advice to instructors, should we at least know who it is or at the very least what makes he/she qualified to give advice to instructors? Just a thought. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 FW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Fair Question. What sort of person would this group advocate to give advice to instructors? We can assume that instructors, like all of us, could need, and would not be above receiving advice. I would have more faith in a review by peers, and a concensus or summary of that being promulgated. Would knowing who it is take some of the fun out of it?. I certainly would not offer for such a job. I have always had a suspicion of " experts", in matters where there can be many approaches to the same outcome. The physics applying to a flying situation should be in general agreement, though there is still a wide difference of opinion of how the airflow around a wing generates lift. Whatever principle you think works, it is not likely to stand in the way of you being able to pilot an aeroplane effectively.. If air is deflected , lift is generated. It's that simple.. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guernsey Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 I totally agree with shags-j. Alan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest davidh10 Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 So we are having monthly articles by professor avius on fligth training for instructors. My questions is this. If this person is giving advice to instructors, should we at least know who it is or at the very least what makes he/she qualified to give advice to instructors?Just a thought. Your misinterpretation of the purpose of the "Prof Avius" column is what has upset some people. It is a "Forum for Instructors". ie. the Prof writes something provocative and instructors are supposed to chime in with their thoughts and opinions. It certainly isn't advice for instructors, some of whom have a very low opinion of the articles. Instead, readers are interpreting it as "guru advice". As an example, he was advocating not teaching "touch and go" until the advanced stage in the student's course and to concentrate on full stop landings. Question. What does the student do on first solo when s/he mucks up the landing and needs to do a go-around? Oh, yes, he has to do much the same as a touch and go, except without touching! I responded to the first issue and said specifically that I was not an instructor, but that bit got edited out, so readers could have mistakenly thought my opinion was that of an instructor. I've recently written to the editor suggesting it was a good idea that has failed and should be discontinued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shags_j Posted October 20, 2011 Author Share Posted October 20, 2011 Did anyone notice there were two aircraft incidents involving students in fist or second solo in this months Pilot Mag. Sorry, back on topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 The article is titled," Flight Instructor`s Forum ", therefore, is Professor Avius giving advice to instructors, or, is he/she simply pointing out some facts and expressing an opinion,so as to create debate among instructors? I`m more interested in what Professor Avias is saying than who is writing the article! Is there anything to be gained by knowing who the writer is? Frank 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sain Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 It lets us know who not to waste our money learning to fly with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 It lets us know who not to waste our money learning to fly with. Not a valid comment for several reasons,but mainly!....To my knowledge, there is no indication that professor Avius is instructing. Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shags_j Posted October 21, 2011 Author Share Posted October 21, 2011 If he's giving advice to instructors, surely he is an instructor. Just one more thing we don't know about prov avius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest davidh10 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Prof Avius is an active instructor. I know Avius' identity, but since that was derived from my research based on the reply I received to my email, I do not feel it appropriate to publish any identifying information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sain Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Not a valid comment for several reasons,but mainly!....To my knowledge, there is no indication that professor Avius is instructing.Frank. Okay, maybe I should have gone into a little more detail. What irritated me about the full-stops-not-touch-and-goes article is it implied that instructors don't have enough common sense to adapt their training to the student. Does avius really think any instructor worth their salt wouldn't do full stops if they thought their student needed it? The other side of that implication is that avius doesn't readily adapt/adjust from his or her planned lesson. Would you really want to fly with an instructor who wouldn't change their lesson plan to do some remedial work with you if it was required? I certainly wouldn't, so avius wouldn't get my money. simple as that. I'll point out that my instructor (Teraya @ Goulburn aviation) certainly had me coming to a complete stop on my touch and goes when I was having trouble early on in the piece, and it really helped me with my ground handling. It didn't require many for me to get the hang of it, and so we moved on. The point is that she used her judgement about what her student required. I wish they'd stop printing avius's drivel and print something useful instead. even another couple of pages of ads would be better. If he or she would put the effort into articles for the vast majority of the audience (i.e the bulk of the ra-aus membership, which is non-instructors) then I'd feel differently. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 sain, it's obvious that this series is not hitting it with you. I don't know if it was designed to bring out other opinions ( from instructors) and "kick it all around", and that could be a good thing.., so I will reserve judgement at the moment. It should not be assumed that instructors are the peak of knowledge per se in the aeronautical field, but they are supposed to set a high standard and have a good knowledgebase to do their job effectively. Plenty of very experienced aviators don't particularly like instructing. I have had a few say they wouldn't have the patience. That may well be the case. There should be no monopoly on knowledge so if "less experienced" pilots/students want to listen in, it shouldn't be a problem. I don't think the Prof. would be allowed to get away with much without it being pointed out, so what is lost by running it? Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Okay, maybe I should have gone into a little more detail.. Not realy!... The original question of this post is,"If this person is giving advice to instructors,should we at least know who it is, or at the very least what makes he/she qualified to give advice to instructors?" Analising Professor Avius is off topic and another issue! Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 It's not you is it Franco? I'm in agreement with your sentiments. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Couldn't be Frank, he would at least know how to perform a proper 'touch and go' (crash and dash !) if a wallaby ran out in front of him, as they are apt to do on occasions. Like many other things we aviators should be capable of (sideslipping etc), a touch and go is a valuable manouver that when performed well is completely safe, and can be the best decision at times. I recall my first landing back at the home field during my PPL license check-ride, at San Carlos airport south of San Francisco. The airman examiner Dave Morrse had me set up for a short-field, full-stop landing, which was normally no drama, and I had practised them well the day before.(Cessna 152 and 172). Just before the fence when I was sure I had the license in the bag, he keyed the mike and said 'lets make this a quick touch and go, with a straight out departure, shall we !" Well talk about throwing the cat amoungst the pigeons !. Plant the mains with the full flap selected, keep up the speed and keep it straight while getting the flaps back up to ten degres, quick 'going around' radio call to the tower, and away we go, doing my best to track the runway center line on climb out, while maintaining the correct climb-out airspeed. 'Good quick decision making' was his only comment. We followed with a normal full-stop landing and he was happy to hand me my 'Temporary airmans' certificate' after we parked, which is as good as the real thing over there with all the privilages instantly applicable. I flew another solo 1 hour 'de-stress' flight that arvo in the 172, and three enjoyable rides the following day......Touch and goes, planned or unplanned = great fun !....................................................Maj... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guernsey Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Sorry to be off topic but I just wanted this thread to lighten up a bit. In my young courting days I found it very difficult to make any sort of good landing, I always ended up with very quick ' Touch and go's '. Touchy Alan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 That's certainly as technically correct as any of the "Profs" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 More of a "docking" operation than aeronaughtical. You need the right approach. (So I'm told)...Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 We don't need to know who Prof Avius is. We read what he says and can see what sense he is talking or if it is all stupid. Sometimes it doesn't hurt to listen to oddball ideas, we don't have to agree with them, but they can make us think a bit deeper about the subject. Just because someone in authority writes something doesn't mean that it is sensible and conversely some things an idiot says can be sensible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 You'll tend to learn more from an expert who makes the odd mistake than an idiot who gets lucky now and again though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Not necessarily!....Oopps!..Off topic Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest davidh10 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 We don't need to know who Prof Avius is. We read what he says and can see what sense he is talking or if it is all stupid. Sometimes it doesn't hurt to listen to oddball ideas, we don't have to agree with them, but they can make us think a bit deeper about the subject. Just because someone in authority writes something doesn't mean that it is sensible and conversely some things an idiot says can be sensible. The issue is that Avius' advice is put forward as having "guru" status, and because the magazine is the official organ of RAA there is also the implied authority of the organisation. If it was just called "one instructor's opinion", then it wouldn't be so controversial as everyone knows there are good and bad instructors out there, in every field, not just flying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farri Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Good point, David! Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pudestcon Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 We don't need to know who Prof Avius is. We read what he says and can see what sense he is talking or if it is all stupid. Sometimes it doesn't hurt to listen to oddball ideas, we don't have to agree with them, but they can make us think a bit deeper about the subject. Just because someone in authority writes something doesn't mean that it is sensible and conversely some things an idiot says can be sensible. A bit like some statements on this forum I think - they make you think. Forget who he is, digest the statement, vomit it up if you don't like it, or sit on the toilet bowl if it affects you that way. For mine, it's another prompt to think about situations and how I react, or my knowledge on the subject, and have some internal dialogue about that - or external dialogue, which is probably the purpose of the article eh? Pud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now