Quote:
Originally Posted by meritflyer  Well, it's obvious which route you went.
Signed,
CFI, CFII, MEI and proud of it. |
My comment to Hawker Driver was in jest. And I think that's how he took them...I have nothing but respect for CFI's and he sounds like one who cares.
So, are you of the school of thought that a person , who hates to teach, that would have just gone that route to build time vs. actually taking an active interest in a student's development and flight education should do so anyway? So they might somehow..."pay their dues" as that was the route you went? That a pilot just can never be as good as a pilot unless they endure a kind of flying that they absolutely would hate to do?
I scoff at this mentality if that indeed is what you are preaching. It's why we have so many lousy pilots. The CFI, CFII, MEI ratings should be the elite ratings. They should have an ATP or at least 1200hrs tt as pre-requisite as I believe that only those who truly enjoy teaching and have a respectable level of experience should do so.
I've had many instructors and the ones who were doing it just to build time till they could go onto something else were obvious. And I rarely learned anything from them.
I chose not to take this route because I had no desire to inflict my disinterest in being an instructor to any student as I worked in a flight school as an office manager. I saw the frustration on some of our students and felt it myself when they wound up with one of our "time builders" vs an instructor that enjoyed what they did.
One should not go the CFI route unless it's something they really want to do. And though the respectful amount of aviation academic knowledge that comes with becoming an instructor gives one an edge in the area of aerodynamics, FAR's, etc...What does it do for you during an engine failure in a transport category aircraft? I've had two and did just fine....