PHOENIX — AeroGuard Flight Training Center has introduced its new FAA-approved Reduced Hours Commercial Pilot Course.
The new course, developed in-house at AeroGuard by its team of flight instructors, has been specially reviewed and approved by the FAA, according to company officials, who note the new course meets “the same high-quality standards in a lower number of flight hours than is typically necessary for a commercially rated pilot.”
As part of Commercial Pilot training, the FAA sets certain flight-hour requirements, and for students training in a Part 61 setting, which is typically less structured, this is 250 hours of total flight and simulator time. In a more structured Part 141 environment, these hours are decreased to 220.
AeroGuard’s new Reduced Hours course has been approved at 165 total hours, according to company officials.
The new course is available for students who join with zero flight experience at one of AeroGuard Flight Training Center’s four campuses in Arizona, Texas, and Florida.
Learn more at FlyAeroGuard.com.
The inherent capability of the student is absolutely the biggest determining factor in whether they will be an average pilot or better than, or worse than, an average pilot.
If the ACS does not change to make it easier for the 165 hr pilot,
then this new lower hourly requirement makes sense.
If the ACS is “dumbed down” as so many things have been in the last ten years, then it will produce “dumbed down” pilots.
Fact is some people are better at task and comprehension in 2 weeks than others in 20 years. Comprehension being a key element.
Next is the trainer’s ability to recognize those abilities.
It may seem that this program set up is something new. Maybe before some who might read this were born, I completed such a program in 1971 at National Aviation Academy in St. Petersburg, FL using the GI Bill and went on to a career in avionics. The school no longer offers flight training, now concentrating on graduating A & P’s. Points made about hours, experience and learning pace being based on individual development are relevant. What is to be remembered is that just about every student ‘runs over’ the minimum time established by some amount. Training advances individually, and multiple “phase checks” are included in the syllabus, sort of like mini-check rides. Anyone making comments based solely on hours is uninformed on how this works. It’s not a rubber stamp at 165 hrs.
Search EAA.org for an article titled
“What Are We Not Teaching Student Pilots Today?” by long-time CFI Steve Krog. I read it today and found sobering commentary on how ill-prepared some
students are on their PPL check rides. A comment from two former Part 141 instructors (now airline pilots) was that “We just trained the students to check the boxes for the check ride.” There are no good outcomes when a flight school becomes the equivalent of a “diploma mill.”
That is not what they said.
165 hours on top of a private pilot syllabus and then an instrument rating IF taken in order is still quite a few hours. Probably at least 250; likely more. At that point, no one is going to get a job as an airline pilot or even a serious corporate copilot. They’d have to additionally earn a cfi and then start working their way up the food chain. So a pilot’s TT would still be about 300 or more hours at that point. And all that concentrated concurrent training has to be good vs. piece meal spread out training in a Part 61 school?
As the product of a Part 141 military aero club environment — with additional oversight still — I don’t see anything wrong with this. The ‘system’ will see to it that additional experience is provided before anyone gets into a serious cockpit (or is it crew position?). If on the one hand we’re moaning that we need pilots and on the other hand moaning about the colgan rule, there has to be some happy medium position in there somewhere? Between whatever a time a pilot product trained this way has and the min 1,000 hours for an ATP, LOT’s of experience will occur.
I have a hard time with this. You don’t gain experience through a syllabus. Odds are this school generates their own instructors. The only experience they have is flying the prescribed course, and that is what they teach. You don’t know what you don’t know. I’m not knocking the new CFIs. All of us were there once: new ticket, first student. I learned more from my first student than he did from me! I’ll take the 250 hour pilot over the 165 hour pilot all day. You can’t give someone 85 hours of experience in a classroom.
So, if I were attempt to summarize the U.S. Federal Government’s position on pilot experience as a determining factor in aviation safety, might it be fair to summarize that position as: “Flight hours logged is an important key to identifying safe, qualified pilots. Except when it’s not. We’ll let you know when it’s not. Or, rather, DC lobbyists will ensure Congress is aware of these wonderful programs that can create safe pilots with fewer hours. Then, the members of Congress that approve our budget will let us know. Then, we’ll let you know. Oh, and just so you understand, safe, low-time pilots are ONLY generated if one has never been near an aircraft before starting one of these programs. So, don’t go thinking you can go to one of these schools AFTER you’ve had a lesson, much less earned an actual pilot certificate, because you can’t, because that won’t work. Ever. Okay? Thanks, bye!”
I’m sure you’ve read articles on accidents where the pilot had a ton of hours and had flown many years. So I’m not too sure that flight hours has necessarily anything to do with safety and qualifications. Unless something has changed, you can enroll in approved courses regardless of experience. You have to complete all of the requirements of the course. For a beginner, that minimizes the hours. But if you have prior experience, you may find that you can complete all requirements for the Commercial in less than 165 hours so Part 61 may be the best option.
I’ve (probably obviously) never been through one of these programs and the description of all the ones I’ve read about, universally, give (me, anyway) the impression that one must start from zero. But, I freely admit that your explanation makes much more sense. So, thanks for the clarification on that.
However, I think my (attempt at a) point about hour requirements being arbitrary stands. I make the point because the FAA increased the hour requirements following Colgan Air 4307, with the implication that it was about improving safety (even though the new requirements would have made no difference in that accident). Since then, at least a few studies I’ve seen indicate that requiring more hours didn’t lead to improved safety. Then, as we are constantly reminded of the looming pilot shortage, these reduced-hour training programs seem to be increasingly common.
My concern is that we are creating an environment where schools compete to have the most condensed training program out there that will pass FAA muster, so that they can attract more students AND strengthen their relationships with the airlines. In my mind, that is simply creating a new, even-higher pressure environment that is focused on faster training, effectively institutionalizing get-there-it is. The obvious catch here is that, eventually, faster training will come at the expense of better training; you could wind up with waves of new pilots that have been drilled into check-ride-passing machines that are lacking in their ability to think, apply, adapt, and overcome in the real world. That, in my experience, invites all kinds of unpleasant and unintended consequences.
My point is that the FAA is indirectly acknowledging that hours of experience are less of a factor than the quality of the experience and, very possibility, the inherent capability of the individual. That being the case, might we be better off lowering the hour requirements to some universal standard while focusing more on allowing the industry to honestly evaluate the actual skills and quality of the pilots (AND the training methods, AND the instructors) so that “natural” selection can work its magic? In my mind this would probably open up the pool of applicants, to include those promising pilots that simply can’t (currently) rationalize the time and money investment required to entertain a career as a pilot. It might also allow us to find ways to improve the quality of the training while reducing the costs and, at the end, it might help us avoid situations like Atlas Air 3591. Plus, as an added bonus, it might be good for the environment since you might not have so many pilots spending hundreds of hours in the air doing nothing but burning fuel and logging hours.
Well, you know that the time and hours required varies enormously for each individual. The lower required hours in these approved courses doesn’t necessarily mean that all enrollees will finish at that specific hour. The testing standards haven’t changed so no one finishes until they have the proper knowledge and skill. These approved courses, however, do allow the exceptional students to finish in a shorter amount of hours. Why not? Who would you rather see in the cockpit – someone born to fly, made 100% on the written, and passed the checkride with flying colors at minimum time, or someone who was average – i.e. made 80% on the written (I don’t really know what the average is) and passed their PVT checkride with 70 total hours (which is about the average – Part 61 minimum is 40 hrs).