Stoked27

I've had instructors touch controls to speak me through things (i.e., making sure I hold back pressure long enough to feel the stall), but it's usually followed with a verbal indication. The time I'm referring to was very egregious and might have initially started with the intention of making a minor correction without any verbal communication. It happened multiple times throughout the flight. Simulated engine failure, I want to go to a field on my right, but the instructor knew of a field below us that we just flew over to our left. I try turning to the right and he is literally pushing against me without saying anything. That's not teaching or good CRM. Maybe the field behind us was better, but the best method isn't to stay silent while fighting for control. Same reason examiners want students to speak out loud through their actions - mind reading tends to be a difficult thing to do.

The culmination was on our final landing rollout when the plane started veering in a direction off centerline. I make a correction, but the instructor was apparently also trying to correct the direction with rudder inputs without saying anything. In my mind, I'm thinking we have crazy winds, a blown tire, etc so I make stronger corrective inputs. He corrected even harder without saying anything, then I start losing control more and fight the rudders more. It was a zigzag landing rollout that was completely unnecessary if the instructor would have either said 'my controls' or 'let me help get us back on centerline' or just wasn't so anal retentive and allowed me to correct. (I had just passed my PPL weeks before and was getting checked out to rent that flight school's aircraft). I find it hard to believe that my basic flying coordination atrophied so badly over a month since passing in front of an examiner. The instructor was paranoid maybe?
Maybe he was a newly minted instructor not used to allowing someone else to be at the controls? I don't know. I told him to take control on rollout after I realized he was fighting my inputs and then I asked him why he did that without saying anything. He denied it vehemently until he connected the dots of why I told him to take the flight controls.

Instructors might nudge the controls a bit without saying anything, but it should never get to the point that the two people are fighting each other with near full deflection inputs. That goes way beyond a nudge. At that point, something verbal needs to happen and/or if its that serious the instructor should just say "my controls" and debrief afterward. Scared me? Yes, but I'd get over it. Lying about it? Unacceptable, bad frame of mind so I won't voluntarily fly with that person again.

Therefore back to your original question - I don't take for granted the importance of verbal communication anymore. CRM is real even at the lowly PPL level.

November Seven

That is freaky. That's not merely scary. You said scary. That's beyond scary. That's freaky territory. That's like walking into an elevator with someone, where you push the 27th floor and they immediately press each button from 1 to 26 while smiling at you in the process. You get 'vectored' to every floor in the meantime. Freaky. I'd get off that elevator at the very next floor and head to another shaft. In a 27 story building, there had better be another shaft.


Strange. I read something very similar to this. Two pilots, both with good experience under their belts respectively. One pilot (right seat) feels like he's got just a tad bit more experience than the pilot in the left seat. PIC in the left seat flies the approach and lands the airplane. Pilot in the right seat starts applying left rudder. PIC applies right rudder and can't understand why the aircraft is veering left. PIC applies more right rudder but airplane continues to veer left. Airplane goes off the runway and into the infield, bounces around a bit but never hits anything. PIC now standing on the right rudder causes airplane to rip back to the right onto the runway again. Suddenly, PIC has control of the airplane and they taxi off without incident.

Turns out that the more "experienced" pilot in the right seat was also much larger and stronger. He was applying left rudder the entire time that the PIC, who was much smaller could not overcome. The more "experienced" pilot released his left rudder monopoly after the airplane ran off the runway into infield, leaving nothing but maximum right rudder of the PIC, causing the airplane to whip back onto the runway.

Apparently, you were not alone in this "struggle" for control of an aircraft with two pilots on-board. I guess this just lends more weight for the need to have more certified Single Pilots!


Double scary.


LOL, Voluntarily. That's an interesting way to put it. I guess they'll have to march you in front of a firing squad before you fly with him again. Wow.


Thanks for sharing that scary experience. A bit too freaky for me. I would end the student/instructor relationship as well. You can't learn anything in that kind of environment because you are too busy cleaning your underwear in the flight club's restroom after the flight - given how you badly stained them on the last rollout. Wet pants after a flight lesson does not seem like something to look forward to during your next meeting.

TiredSoul

See, you’re over analyzing it again.
Instructor tells - Instructor does
Instructor tells - student does
Student tells - student does ( it helps)
Student does - instructor monitors.

And occasional nudge or ‘pedal-check’ or other non verbal reminder is perfectly normal.
I don’t always have time to tell you, especially close to the ground or obstacles. If you’re going to have an issue every time I touch the controls we are going to have a problem.

Now MIND YOU, that is completely different from an insecure instructor with ( literally) control issues that is always ‘feeling’ with you.
You seem to have a hard time finding a middle ground in your reasonings.
Anything we mention goes straight into outer space.
Keep in mind you look at this with no (virtually) experience and we look at this with a lot of experience and it just gives you a viewpoint which is “off”.
I’ve said it before, nothing wrong with planning but your trying to build a nuclear reactor and you should be rubbing two sticks together.
Remember there is a gigantic unknown in all your mental planning excercises.....what your actual performance will be and how it will affect your progress and your carefully scripted plan.

November Seven

I'm a Visual/Kinesthetic split. Do you know what that means relative to how I learn best? In the model for instruction you just posted, my brain would get jammed much like electronic countermeasures warfare. My learning would be de-optimized and the information coming from the Instructor would not seat correctly inside my brain. He/She would eventually get frustrated with mu increasingly detailed questions about things he/she has already covered and I would sense that frustration and back-off from asking the very questions I would need to continue my training. See where this is headed?

This is a branch of the Neurosciences. Ask a V/K split, my brain works optimally for recall when the initial input is Visual (first) followed up immediately with a Kinesthetic (second) input and then rounded off with an Audible (third) input. In that sequence, is my sweet spot for learning new subject matter - no matter the subject, or the matter. I earned my PhD this way.

I need an Instructor who can understand this and use the communications channels that are best suited to establishing rapid total recall in my brain. I can explain this to an Instructor in about 15 minutes. They can then decide whether or not they can communicate in such a manner.

If the Instructor tries to (first) "Tell" me something, then they are sending the first input through my Auditory Channel and that literally guarantees that I'm already at a disadvantage for learning what's they are attempting to communicate. This is backwards for me and its like sending a jamming signal to a box with a transceiver. Not optimal. When I got to the "Student Tells" phase of the learning cycle, my reply would be so screwed up and so muted, that the Instructor would no doubt feel as though they are "not getting through to me." This cycle of abusing and wasting time would continue until one of us threw in the towel.

Often times, people do not know or understand why they are learning something so slowly. This is precisely why. They are either jamming themselves and don't know it, or they are being jammed by an Educator and are unaware of how or why its happening because both Educator and Student are completely clueless about how their brains have been wired for optimal communications. This is a direct function of Early Childhood Development and a myriad of different environmental inputs that shaped the brain for filtering the world around it.

I'm trying to avoid being jammed by my Flight Instructor who does not understand why or how they are jamming me.

- First: Show me (Visual Cortex)
- Second: Involve me physically (Kinesthetic - Neurons and Motor Neurons)
- Third: Tell me about it (Auditory Cortex - Reinforces 1st & 2nd inputs)

In this mode, I can learn anything - rapidly, securely and with maximal total recall on the fly - day or night. I could not forget things learned in this way even if I wanted to. This is how my brain is wired. I need an Instructor who can understand this and map to it. I would become a competent pilot and the instructor would be a brilliant teacher.


The very first (and last) Instructor I flew with who taught Pitch-Power-Trim, Roll-Power-Trim, Slow Flight, Stalls and Spins in slightly over an hour, also touched the controls. However, he always warned me that he was about to do and always told me why he was doing it and what he wanted me to correct as a result of doing it.


I know how my brain works and have taken time to study the neuroscience that governs learning. So, I know the communications channels best suited for me to absorb new a subjects optimally. There would be no need for middle ground, if I had an Instructor who understood this - as there would never be any push-back from me. The reason is because, I'd be too engaged in optimal learning of everything my Instructor was teaching - as opposed to having to rationalize everything being communicated through the wrong channels, because my brain was being jammed without the Instructor knowing that they are doing it.


Experience is internalized and referenced internally. Knowledge Transfer is a completely different subject. I'm referring to the way in which an Instructor communicates to their Student and the neuroscience behind it. If both parties understood that, the instruction would flow a billion times more smoothly.

No doubt the Instructor has Students where he feels they learned very quickly and with minimal retracement of subject matter. In that case, the Instructor landed a Student whose dominant neurological processors where stacked in same order as the Instructor was delivering instruction. Then the Instructor lands Students who seem to need special hand-holding, a high number or repetitions and large doses of subject matter retracement on a regular basis. That's because the Instructor landed a Student whose dominant processing filters were not in alignment with the Instructors mode of communication.

If this were implemented correctly in our public school systems throughout the country, we'd be ranked Number #1 in every subject matter across the board world wide. Today, our public school systems are a mess. Not because the Students have a hard time finding middle ground, but because The System does not take into consideration the neuroscience that creates Visual, Auditory and Kinesthetic neural network paths in the brain as a direct result of early childhood development and other environmental factors.

You can take an Auditory and try to "Show Him" something until you turn blue in the face. You will then declare that because he still has questions, or because his questions take on a certain form or shape, that he's having a hard time finding middle ground with your ideas. Wrong. Dead wrong. That person is not trying to intentionally fight with you. That person is being jammed at the neurological level by the one equally trying hard to instruct them correctly. They are both trying hard. They just don't understand the neurological disconnect that keeps them from communicating at an optimal level - at all times during the instruction phase.

Like I said, if I wanted to jam you intentionally to obtain an upper hand in some ulterior motive I might have, I know exactly how to do that because I can detect your dominant filters in a matter of seconds after meeting you. I can start jamming you from the word go and you'd never know the difference until it was too late and you signed a contract that was not optimal for you. You would later find that out, but it would be too late then. I do not do this because I find it highly unethical and even immoral. But, I'm explaining this to you because it is a central part behind why some Students have difficulty in our mostly Auditory driven educational systems here in the US. There are a lot of Kinesthetics and Visuals out there who suffer because of it.

- Show me
- Involve me
- Then tell me the reason behind it

- Visual
- Kinesthetic
- Auditory

In that order. The order is vitally important. There would be no need to seek middle ground. I would simply absorb what you have to teach like a sponge. You would think I was your absolute best student, ever. You'd be saying to your other CFI friends: "Wow! This guy gets it quickly. I never have to continually repeat myself with this guy. I go through it one time with him and boom, he picks it up. Best student I've ever had, hands down."

Show. Involve. Explain later. What do most programs do?

- Explain, first
- Show, second
- Involve, dead last

That's not how my brain works. And, yes. I would be going through a lot of unnecessary internal interpolation and transformation of ideas, concepts and information, for the sole purpose of making internal reformulations of what you just instructed, so that the information sequences as: Visual/ Kinesthetic/Auditory in my head. That internal transformation at the neurological level takes time and energy. Only those who are aware of it, can make the internal transformation more efficient - so they get by. However, it will never be optimal for them.

They would have to rewire their entire brain, just to conform to the Instructor's communication mode. Now, you tell me which one is easier. Having the Instructor map communications to the Students dominant processing filters. Or, having the Student completely or partially rewire their brain?


The goal is to create a Structured and Flexible program that integrates Training with Time Building for a specific aircraft Type & Category. The opposite would be winging it and generalizing both processes while hoping for optimal results. The underlying goal my be fixed and rigid. But, I'm wide open and flexible with the internal paths taken to reach that fixed goal. I simply need an Instructor who understands this and able/willing to map their communication and teaching modes to my dominant processing filters - once they become aware of them and why they are important long term.

Recall, my target goal is consistent and reliable competence as VLJ single pilot starting from zero. I'm not interested in sounding off about a rating or two as a cocktail party conversation piece. I'm interested in safety, skill, knowledge, expertise and relevant experience leading to reliable IFR/IMC competence day or night, rain or shine. Developing solid decision making ability and solid corrective skills upon detection of error - any time and any where. A good, solid, competent problem solver if/when the time comes. That's all. Nothing more than that. Juts a rock solid Aviator.

Pony Express

As a former instructor I figured I'd chime in to hopefully give some perspective as to why you might be frustrated with your difficulty finding a suitable instructor.

"In the model for instruction you just posted, my brain would get jammed much like electronic countermeasures warfare"

The model for instructions he/she referenced is what is taught in nearly every extant CFI training program. In fact, it's what the FAA FOI textbook demands. While this may not suit your needs, this is why a huge majoriry of instructors will teach in this manner.

A fresh instructor tends to not be very effective because it can be hard to get comfortable with "flying crooked." But as they gain experience and get more comfortable with a students improper tecinque (which is by no means a slight against the student, but a manifestation of their developing skills), such as departing centerline during the landing roll, they will let the situation progress until intervention becomes necessary. Their experience will tell them that verbally saying "right rudder, you're leaving centerline" and then waiting for the student to (maybe) hear this, process it, and implement corrective action, may not be an appropriate response to prevent a runway excursion, especially if it is a student new to landing practice. At times its best for the instructor to apply a quick band aid to the landing, so the student can focus on one or two things to improve on instead of twelve. Once they've got one through eleven down, let them focus on number twelve.

However once the student reaches that level and can be "taught" in this high-stress moment (referred to as the "cognitive stage of learning"), that's when a little wiggle down the runway is likely to be dealt with verbally instead of nudging the pedal.

I've wandered a bit from my initial point, I admit. This is just my own personal experience and very similar to the experience of many of my fellow instructors.

For your purposes, I think you will be able to achieve your goals, however personally I think your best bet is to find a highly experienced, career instructor. Because your learning style is dissimilar to many, this may take some time and you will likely pay instructor rates higher than what the local FBO charges. I think you would probably have some luck browsing ads or posting one of your own on barnstormers.com or trade a plane or the like. There are also great resources from AOPA (they have a "find a flight school" tool, or if you're a member just call them and see if they have recommendations).

I wish you the best of luck in your pursuit!

November Seven

I actually have not yet begun the actual process signing up with an Instructor - so I'm not having difficulty finding one just yet. However, I'm nearly 100% positive that it will take me a while. I'm still figuring out how best to go about doing that.

When I read your post, I immediately thought of these two videos I studied recently. Here are two great examples of why I'm going through all this stuff up front.

Integrated Instruction:



Disintegrated Instruction:



In the first video, the Instructor lead, engaged and explained. He strategically connected dots by always showing why and how what was previously explained and experienced by the student was connected to the current topic or sub-topic. This progressively moved the student along and provided continuity of experience along the way. This first Instructor was able to filter out the noise and focus the student's attention on the primary objective of Lesson #1.

The first Instructor was personable and professional, kept things focused in the cockpit and caused the student to feel comfortable through successful accomplishment of assigned tasks.

The First instructor remained connected to what the student was actually accomplishing and tailored his forthcoming instructions based on how well the student did with previous instructions.

In the second video, the Instructor used out of context gotcha questions having nothing to do with the current topic or sub-topic being taught to the student. The purpose behind doing that is still unknown to me. This second Instructor threw minutia to the wind and populated the student's brain with secondary information that was far afield from the actual primary objective of Lesson #1 (an easy way to overload a brand new student on a first lesson).

The second Instructor was very personable, kept things light and airy in the cockpit and kept the student laughing, smiling and feeling comfortable.

The second Instructor abruptly broke the students focus while engaged in a learning task (taxiing to the run-up area), by taking over the controls and doing something with the aircraft the Instructor could have allowed the student to do on his own with guidance. This interrupted the learning flow of the student forcing him to now segregate partial experiences in the cockpit for later intellectual assimilation. This is no small matter when it comes to learning new tasks - regardless of what those tasks happen to be. An accumulation of these broken chains of progress can cause mis-registration of the information in the brain, further causing problems with instant recall in the future. This is how the human brain works.

I won't analyze both videos to their respective conclusions, but this same theme is recognized throughout each video. Two different Instructors with two different approaches. One seamlessly ties the previous concept to the current concept, while another delivers instruction in a very choppy manner that limits the students ability to progressively and smoothly connect dots in their own mind.

The type of Instructor I will be looking for is found in the first video. That's much closer to the model of instruction that I know will benefit me the most long term. It is fluid, connected and highly in-tune with what the student is actually accomplishing correctly.



So, I've been told previously. Which is why I need an Instructor who understands both and can tailor their communications model to fit my dominant filters, while delivering the exact same information the FAA requires. It is merely a matter of reordering the Visual, Auditory and Kinesthetic aspects upon initial instruction. The student cannot do that for themselves. If the student is aware of their own dominant filter stacking order, the only thing they can do is interpolate, transform and reorder internally until what they are encountered with makes sense to them.

I can learn at an optimal level (through the correct stacking order), or I can learn at levels that are below optimal (interpolation and transformation required). Everyone has this problem one way or another whether they are aware of it or not. Sometimes the information you receive is Visual when you need it to be Kinesthetic. Sometimes is Audible when you need it to be Visual. Sometimes is Auditory then Visual, when you need it to be Visual then Kinesthetic. It depends on the individual.

Some people have unknowingly developed brilliant Interpolation & Transformation processes where they can receive input that is not through an optimal channel and reconfigure that input to work rapidly for them. It typically depends on their early childhood family environment, the ratio of Visual, Kinesthetic and Auditory types and the amount of communication they had with each one respectively on a regular basis. This is a huge part of how our brain get wired at a very young age and it determines how we interpret the world around us to a very large degree later in life.


I would hope that anything negatively affecting Safety Of Flight, would cause the Instructor to immediately intervene. Makes sense to me.

What I'm referring to is the process and model of communication used by the Instructor before the landing took place. If that student was an Auditory, then "telling" the student to apply right rudder would be most optimal for that particular student. In that case, there probably would be no need for the Instructor to intervene as the student's response would be rapid/optimized.

But, if that student were Visual or Kinesthetic, waiting until after the landing and then "telling" them to add right rudder, would immediately trigger internal dialogue to interpolate what the instructor is "saying" into a Transformed Visual Concept in the student's brain they can then act upon. Thus, the delay in the student's response, causing the aircraft to wander off center line and the instructor to intervene.

That delay comes either as a direct result of initially misplaced information in the student's brain (initial instruction never seated correctly for one reason or another), or as a direct result of the time it took for them to work out the interpolation and transformation of the "Audible" instruction from their Instructor inside their own head and in real-time.

It is not that the Visual cannot respond to the verbal instruction: "add right rudder." It is that the moment you "say" add right rudder, their brain automatically begins figuring out what adding right rudder looks like when executed. They respond, but in a delayed fashion.

For the Visual:

Here, let me show you what right rudder looks like. Let's visualize the roll-out together.

For the Kinesthetic:

Here, I want you to feel the difference in rolling out with and without right rudder. I want you to get a sense of what both should feel like.

For the Auditory:

Just use right rudder.

Same exact information being delivered in three completely different ways making all the difference in the world to the student receiving that information. No interpolation or transformation necessary, when the Instructor delivers that information through the optimal channel for the student.



I really think you are right about that. I think their depth as a career instructor will give them more flexibility and bandwidth for understanding and tailoring their communication style and approach to what's best for me as the student. I think their experience would enable them to worry less about the physical act of 'instructing (they've done so much of it that it comes very naturally to them) and spend more time figuring out how to tailor or stack their communications. It least I'm hoping this will be the case.


Yes, according to statistics, I am a rare bird in that regard. I'm a V/K split which is uncommon. I can do rapid interpolation and transformation. However, I don't want to have that burden as well as the burden of becoming a proficient pilot at the same time. Later, after my ratings, I'll have piloting skills and this won't be so much of an issue. But, going into this right off the bat, I want to clean up the communications channel between Instructor/Student and optimize it from the word go. That's something the Instructor will have to agree to. Well, first they will have to understand it, then agree to it.


Interesting. Never thought of posting an AD. Thanks for the creative thought process. I had planned to pick several career Instructors, ask them to agree to a single "First Lesson" as a working interview. Then, evaluate which Instructor's communication style fit best and their other Instructor qualifications. Explain my needs in terms of communications. Then select the one able/willing to tweak their communications a bit to fit what I need. Hopefully, that works out.


Thanks very much. You got me to think about a couple things I had not considered before, which is why I came here.

Stoked27

I really respect the level of research that you're putting in since you're clearly willing to put in a lot of your own time and effort, but I am thinking you will learn so much more if you just go take a few lessons. I'm not a CFI, but I've been a student who has had multiple CFIs over the years (started/stopped training over a few years). I don't see any issues from a student perspective with the second instructor. I watched the whole taxi portion of video #2 that you commented on and various segments of both for about 30 minutes. Not going to spend more time watching those - my gut check was fine with both of them.

From your other post about the VLJ purchase, if you're not hurting on money, then the money spent will be more valuable than the amount of time you're spending reading. Just take an intro flight at a few different schools and explain that you'd like to be taught as if you're a full-fledged student on day 1 (not just a joy ride). Considering you're still at the proverbial "starting line" for your training, I think you'll be surprised at the rate that you'll begin to understand the big picture (not just learn, but understand). Much of the intangible info you're researching should start coming together within a couple weeks if you just go take a few flights at different schools.

The portion I quoted you on above is a fairly valid point from a book-perspective of learning in a classroom with a teacher who will only teach it for the one class session (a static environment), but flying is much more dynamic. You'll need to learn how to deal with something breaking your attention constantly in flying. Even if you're experienced and have learned what you need to know, you'll be trying to hear various radio calls while passengers are interrupting you, while you're rubbing your belly and patting your head at the same time. Constant learning of the current situation - even if you know regulations and how to fly the plane. You'll need to get used to operating in a dynamic environment with CONSTANT variables pulling you away from your thought process. Human factors to the minute detail that you're pointing out will be something pilots will likely work under until the day flying is 100% automated.

Time is money and you're spending a lot of unbalanced time on reading when you'll learn so much more by taking a few lessons. Loosen up/get some air about you (I mean this politely because I think it'll help you see the bigger picture) and train under Part 61 so you can repeat a lesson easily if little things like that cause only a 70% information retention rate when you wished you had 100%.

I really do wish you the best of luck in your training. Now just go do it.

November Seven

I really do appreciate your thoughts, opinions and points of view! In fact, I wish more non-Instructor pilots would post here as well, because I want opinions and viewpoints from across the board, so I can aggregate them and properly place them where they belong in the pantheon of expressed opinion. So, thanks.

Had 4-5 hours of instruction more than 20 years ago. Lost track of that Pilot many years ago. If I knew where he was, I would probably not be here, because he was able to get me doing meaningful things with the airplane almost instantly. He had a real knack for Training and Teaching.

I'm approaching things a bit different this time by lining up a number of Instructors and paying each one for Flight Lesson Number #1. I will then eliminate one or more Instructors and then pay for Flight Lesson Number #2. Go through the process of elimination again and pay for Flight Lesson Number #3. I don't mind repeating the early lessons in this way because it also gives me exposure to different teaching approaches, attitudes in the cockpit and it reinforces early lessons concretely.

In addition, that experience of rotating through multiple Instructors until I find the best Instructor for me at the time, will also give me experience in selecting a future Mentor Pilot (someone I can trust) for both the Time Building Conquest II and the VLJ itself. In other words, evaluating the pilot's skill, demeanor, willingness to engage, etc., won't be new to me because I will have gone through that process already. It may seem like a not so normal selection process. However, I understand that what I'm trying to accomplish is not so 'normal' either.

For me personally, I thought the first Instructor seems far more intellectually engaged in practical knowledge transfer and in getting the student engaged in learning while understanding how they arrived at new knowledge. I thought that Instructor had a more strategic focus for delivering new knowledge to the student and I felt that he arranged the dots such that the student would naturally connect them on his own with minimal "instruction" from the Instructor. That's a big part of the Model of Instruction I'll be looking for.

The Instructor's communication mode is one thing. Their strategic approach to actively leading the student's engagement in the learning process is a different thing. Arranging appropriate scenarios that help to build the student's knowledge and confidence one successfully learned task after another. Teaching Cause & Effect in a chain of events that share a common purpose. Only the most competent Teachers can do that.



For me right now, it is question of building out an approach plan. In other words, you are a Pilot and it is probably fair to say that you would never attempt a cross country flight without understanding the weather en route, filing a flight plan and then reviewing that flight plan at some point before you called it a "Go." Only then would you go out and execute. Well, that's kind of where I am right now. I already have the dream. I already have the means. What I'm building right now is the Flight Plan. This is going to be a two year to possibly four year long process for me, because I don't bring 20+ years of flight experience to the table already. So, I need to prepare outlines for everything I do along this journey, to prevent me from easily being subjected to flying-by-the-seat-of-pants and spinning my turbines going nowhere, or going in the wrong direction.

This is a Four (4) Phase mission. I've already completed Phases 1 and 2. Phase 3, is figuring out how to develop the Flight Training and Time Building plan that is tailored to my needs. Phase 4, is physically making a safe transition into the VLJ. Phase 1, was developing the means to live out the dream. Phase 2, was figuring out what type of aircraft made the most sense in the fulfillment of that dream. I had to study a lot of different aircraft to arrive at this point in the process. I also had to study and evaluate Fractional Ownership as fulfillment of the dream as well (at this time it is not). My being here on this forum is just one small part of a much larger process of getting myself prepared to be a safe and competent VLJ driver. I'm taking nothing for granted. No stone will be left un-covered, un-studied or un-evaluated. But, I have to ask questions first, to figure out where all the stones are located. I hope that makes sense.


Thank for the insight. I can tell you get it. Regaining focus when broken and knowing when to not allow focus to be broken in the first instance, are things I've had to learn in the development and execution of my business over the course of 17 years. I really do appreciate the need to get good at this in the cockpit - regardless of what I'm flying. I've been training on developing Mental Focus for 30 years. I hope this skill helps me in light of what you suggest.


That's the plan! Hey, thanks for the input - I truly do appreciate varying thoughts from all corners on this. I was hoping for a wide variety of input, so I could better aggregate what's being said and hopefully find trends among pilots on this subject.

PRS Guitars

I hesitate to even reply, because you’ve demonstrated a poor attitude toward critiques of your plan, but I’d be remiss if I didn’t.

After reading your posts, it’s clear to me what you will take for granted. You will take yourself for granted. You’ve somehow convinced yourself that by being super prepared, you can completely reduce the risk. You can’t, you can merely mitigate it. The problem is you’ll think you’re superior to everyone else in that regard and that will be your danger area, you won’t have the flexibility to deal with unexpected issues.

What you want to do, fly your family on your own VLJ, has inherent risks. You need to accept that and think of it that way. When you get in the plane with them, you need to think “this is like riding a motorcycle with my kid on the back seat” because that is probably a pretty close approximation to what you’re doing. You need to approach it with that level of honesty.

I have thousands of hours flying GA as a CFI, training students in a T38, flying the F16 and airline time. Yet...I am hesitant to take the kids flying in GA, I’m willing to do it, but it gives me pause. This coming from a parent that plans to let his kids drive old 60’s/70’s cars as their first car (they’re old school).

Stoked27

What PRSGuitars said x2

Maybe I missed it from another one of your posts if you mentioned your profession, but it seems like you've been stuck in Academia on the professor side as a high income earner. Ph.D. in Psychology?

Get yourself out of that academia mindset. That's not going to happen until you immerse yourself, until you have a Significant Emotional Event, or a combination of both.