All good tips for our low time fellow aviator.....

Another option as well: An accelerated program where you can interview with certain regionals upon completion of requisite requirements. Timing is everything after all.

Great subject. Not to steal the thread from the OP but…

There are many things to consider about as far as pros and cons of CFI teaching, both for the pilot concerned and the pilot community. I largely agree with USMC on this, teaching is not for everyone and the FAA system promotes too many mediocre teachers. But the FAA also offers alternative paths.

On the other hand, I have more respect for those who at least attempt to teach at some point along the way. If they say they got their inital CFI and it was an awful experience and they sucked at teaching and quit, ok they tried. But what generally happens is young pilots see a shiny jet on the ramp and they fail to connect being a jet jock with being a solid professional pilot. The latter arguably means teaching to develop the knowledge. Improving yourself to a point that you are solid in both your stick skills and knowledge of the subject that you can give it others requires thorough mastery. Most would rather go right to the jet.

I do not buy the argument you can be a top level pro and at the same time have no ability to explain what it is that makes you a top level pro. That's most of what teaching is, explaining things. For most types of flying, being a good stick is a minor skill and far more important is ability to maintain good safety. The latter does not hinge very much on stick skill, it hinges on knowledge. You can get a high school kid to land a 747, but you will have a lot of trouble getting him to pass the ATP exam.

My attitude or opinion about this issue has always been that most people need to teach. Perhaps 9 out of ten or something like that. It may cost the student a bit more when they get a lame teacher also, but the PTS insures they are trained to proficiency no matter how long it takes.

On the other hand, I went to a speech by a local DPE last night in Greensboro. She said that since the regional airlines have stopped hiring, she has seen a huge increase in the quality of her checkride applicants. The takeaway I think is that with less newbies trying to teach how to fly, those who remain are doing it better. I think it makes a difference to develop teaching skill and that good teachers are not just pilots who failed to make it up the jet ladder. This DPE says her fail rate is way down.

There is another thing to know about this. The airlines are ultra-competitive, and one of the main things they look at in an applicant is how many checkride failures. You can almost tell where someone will end up by how many checkrides they failed. That is not a very good metric, because those pilots may very well be excellent pilots once they get trained. I believe the idea the airlines have is, you can predict how fast a trainee can shuttle through their school house by simply looking at how many checkrides they failed and I am sure that is true. It means they are going to be cheap to train. It's all about the money though; it is not about the quality.

A related consideration for students is, if they want to work for the better airlines they had better not have any checkride failures on their resume. That strongly suggests it would be a good idea to skip teaching because the latter adds lots of extra risk exposure. But skipping teaching on account of the risk is a negative for all concerned, and everyone should attempt it. Only those who are truly not cut out for teaching should skip it, and there are not many that fit that description in my opinion.

Dover AFB Aero club has a steady flow of students and is 141. I've been with them almost 2 yrs but have cut back and doing more part 91 stuff. Instructing is the best route you make enough to pay the bills and get by. I averaged about 500 hrs a year and that's not bad for the east cost. Plus if u want to add a rating you can get it at only the cost of the plane. It is contract through meaning you get a 1099. Anyway just a thought.

Yea im definitely going to look into the cfi program. How good are those cfi accelerated programs at atp school where it gets you the cfi,cfii,and mei in 2 weeks? I feel as if thats not enough time to really know everything.

How about some cargo lines? Not the mainline cargo (ie FedEx, UPS) but smaller ones like AirNet, etc.? Do the smaller cargo lines take low flight time pilots, and how low?

I'm about in the same boat as this thread's creator, I personally, don't think I would be a great teacher, but am concerned about building time. I'm okay with not "starting out on the jets." I completely understand that you must start from somewhere and move up (props to jets, and everything in between.)

Just a concern.

I personally recommend against the "lightspeed" cfi programs. As a career instructor, I feel those programs water down the instructor pool. As mentioned previously, now that the airlines scrutinize pass/fail rates, why would you risk increased risk of failure by attending a course that rushes you through the system?

Just my tarnished two pennies...

Many, if not most of the cargo haulers are single pilot operations. As such they look for pilots who have ATP minimums.

Not quite, they require Part 135 IFR mins, which is 1200 TT and probably some other factors. They usually don't hire right seat guys, however most have the pay to play for right seat.

CFI would be an excellent route. I got lucky and was hired to fly a 172 for an aerial survey company right after graduating and finishing my commercial ratings. It is something you can check out if you want. I flew 1000 hours with them all over the contiguous 48 states and learned a ton. Northern States is based in New York I think.

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/pa...vey-pilot.html

Good luck and keep plugging away.

I taught in accelerated CFI programs years ago so I'll throw my two cents in.

If you walk through the door ready to take the oral exam and have solid flying skills, basically meaning all you really need to learn is how to talk and fly from the right seat, then you have a good chance of being successful. (I saw very few applicants that were at this level although most all of them thought they were.) Otherwise, you'll join the large percentage of initial CFI apps that end up pinking. Accelerated programs allow you very little time to learn things that you should already know.

One advantage though - you'll more than likely work with an instructor that deals with CFI students only so the theory is that they will be more efficient at getting you the experience and knowledge that you need to pass.

If you were my friend asking for my advice, I'd advice you to seek out an experienced instructor in your area who has done a few CFI's in the last year. He/she should be able to tailor a program suited to your specific needs and experience level.

Good luck whichever way you go.