PFT Pro/Con question
 

Let me ask the question that.......why is it that it seems that so many people that participate in this forum hate or for of a better term dislike the PFT programs? It would seem to me that no matter what route one would take, whether CFI or PFT, one would still have to fly to the standard. Right?

So...if this is the case, what is the total percentage of actual PFT flying in the 91, 121, 135 world and what is its impact? It would seem that the percentage would be negligibe. Yet and still, I witness some of the most vehemently disdain for the PFT training. Why is that?

Forget the argument that it drives down the industry because if the total impact is negligible on total flying that is done for hire, then its impact is insignificant?!!? Right? Which leads me to believe that there is something up the sleeves of those who strongly discourage those from participating in PFT's other than their arm. I know those who are in it and it works for them. I'm a third party looking at all the alternatives.

Now...before some of you get your tighty whiteys caught up in the crack of your a$$, leave your personal persuasions, insights, and thoughts out of this. Been there...done that. Sarcastic posts...leave them out...PLEASE. I have studied "current trends & problems" of the aviation industry for at least 15+ years. The PFT programs are a way to adapt to the changing times/industry demand. What are your thoughts?

I'm looking for comments (posts) that have substance & content. SkyHigh, ryane946, TomGoodman, ctd57, SWApilot, rickair7777, CalCapt, N6274G (frat), Jetjock16, and even RedEye (from Cargo) and all the old heads.......I'm looking to hear from YOU!!! Even LAFrequentFlyer.......if the Moderator will allow him to post a comment and all those who feel that they have something to contribute to this thread.



atp

"Now...before some of you get your tighty whiteys caught up in the crack of your a$$, leave your personal persuasions, insights, and thoughts out of this"

Sounds like you want to hear only from people who agree you. Good luck with that. I'm guessing that's not going to go over here too well. In fact, I don't believe I've ever heard such an absurd "thread setup" before at this site.

But I'll help you get this started.

Would you like to define PFT? Are we talking Gulfstream? Are we talking Eagle Jet? Are we talking ATP RJ course? Are we talking PFT from the early 90's? It makes a difference.

de727ups:

Man...I forgot about you!!!!:eek:

No disrespect though. Believe you me.

Actually, I'm talking about all PFT programs. Obviously, the industry had to come up with a way to "fill" all of the pilot vacancies due to this "shortage."

Now granted...by no means am I saying that I'm the final word and expert in the field. I just want to get some sound feedback. Whether or not if someone agrees with me...you should know by now that I'm not completely phased by the comments posted here. They do make their impact though. I will not through the baby out with the water so to speak.

Someone pointed out to me that if a person goes the CFI route or even takes the PFT route...then either way the pilot still has to fly the standard. Period. If they don't...PINK SLIP! Am I right? In addition, if I'm not mistaken, most PFT programs have the right to refuse one employment for any reason...even after the PFT portion.

Like most of you, I have a very good background in Mathematics. I'm presenting a basic algerbraic equation. I'm solving for either one or two unknowns...b/c I know what the resultant (outcome) is.

Let's talk. :D

Identify your variables. P.S. ----getting late; gotta go to fraternity mtg in the morning. See you guys in the AM. Good night.


atp

PFT programs are bull****. You will not be respected by the majority out there that took the high road. It could even cost you a job later in life if you had a guy like me or others that despise PFT on the hiring board.

The PFT programs are a way to adapt to the changing times/industry demand.

This can be a good or bad thing. One of my main concerns with such programs is that you learn too quickly. I had the pleasure of doing a few lessons with a very senior member of the aviation community during my PPL. This guy said your PPL should span at least 6-9 months, just so that you get to experience varying wx scenarios with an instructor. While I think that 9 months is a bit much, he raises a valid point.

Why zip through everything in as few calendar days as possible, and possibly miss the chance to go over some stuff with the instructor? There's a LOT to learn, and you haven't touched the tip of the iceberg with 250 hours.

I'm told that some graduates from these programs leave with a false sense of confidence in themselves. Don't know why this is so, but I don't think egos have any place in a cockpit. Leave that in the parking lot. One must have confidence, but over-confidence can be bad for one's health.

Standards are there for a reason, and I don't think that people who go the PFT route are any better or any worse. In addition to all of that, I've found that you save a lot of money by not getting into these programs- they're way overpriced. Not that they don't have their uses though. Individuals will find that such programs are ideal. However, it seems unreasonable to ask mommy and daddy to shell out another $30k to go through this program right after they've spent $160k on college.

As for the ones that make you pay to fly their planes...ugh. I mean come on guys. It's slavery when you work for no pay. What is it called when you pay to go to work? Doesn't that seem a bit illogical? Don't you see that all you're doing is ruining the future of the prefession?

Cadet Programs
 

Cadet style programs will be the future for most flight training. It is a fast and efficient way to get trained by instructors who are proficient and current. The aircraft tend to be newer and well maintained.

Even now and in the past airlines have used similar factory style training approaches to flight training. To me the military has had the longest cadet training program of them all. The majors used them back in the 1960's to get pilots trained up in the shortest amount of time. I have never been asked where I got my flight training and have never thought to ask others either. Even as a totally green 250 hour pilot six months after you have been on the line at any regional the topic will not be brought up again.

The product of traditional part 61 methods might have a stronger sense a self reliance and be more capable in the solo operation of small airplanes but if you are preparing yourself for a career in the airlines then the factory style is what is needed in order to blend into the machine called airline operations. It was also been said that pilots who went through pay to fly programs in the 1990's will loose jobs and be shunned. No one cares.

Where you get your flight training might upset those who spent two years to get their commercial at a mom and pop outfit, but it really does not make a difference. I got my private pilot from a guy in a champ at an old abandoned airport in the mountains and my commercial instrument from a farmer who operated out of a dirt road on his farm. I gained a lot of confidence from had propping and digging out of the mud and those skills served me well during my years in Alaska but they are a detriment to an airline career. Today I would definitely aim for a factory flight school.

SkyHigh

I gained a lot of confidence from had propping and digging out of the mud and those skills served me well during my years in Alaska but they are a detriment to an airline career.

I can see where you would say those skills don't help you in an airline career, but how are they detrimental?

So what exactly are you looking for again?

Detrimental
 

I would say that it raised my expectations and taught me to be self reliant. Neither of those skills are a benefit to an airline career.

As an airline pilot you need to fit into the mold and conform to the program. If you face a problem you refer to the manual or to the next guy up. It is extremely dissatisfying to be a self reliant problem solver in a corporate system such as the airlines.

In a pilot factory you are in a similar environment to airline flying. If you have a problem you reach out to others. You are closely watched and must conform to the program in order to advance. Standardization and conformity is the rule of law.

I think it is better to start out with those expectations and mind set.

SKyHigh

I'm not yet at an airline, and I don't know if you are, but I disagree. I think that one should be able to manage a task independently. That most certainly is a good trait. At the same time you should know when to refer the problem to somebody else. If all you want is somebody that will always fit into the mold and conform, I don't think that person will be able to think in an unusual situation. Not saying that we should all be radicals, but if you want everybody to come out of a mold, then it's better to just let a computer do the job.