I would like to comment on the articles about bringing lapsed pilots back to the sky in recent issues. I was a lapsed private pilot myself, single engine land, with only 184.6 hours total time at the controls in 1977. My pilot logbook shows a gaping lapse of flying fun and exhilaration between 1977 and 2007.
My excuse was that I got married and my mind was on other things—among them a new mortgage that didn’t make a lot of room for a lot of other discretionary expenses. Playing with my new wife was more important than flying. Happy wife, happy life, right?
I took up flying again in 2007. I began with taking a few flying lessons with an instructor to test the water. The instructor felt that I could become current again in about five to 10 hours of flight time combined with a mini written exam to test my theoretical skills.
To me it sounded reasonable and something worth pursuing. After 5.2 hours of daylight flight instruction, and one hour night flight instruction, and passing the mini written exam with almost clean flying colors, he signed me off to carry passengers on my own. I felt also that I was competent at the controls and was ready to go it on my own without endangering man or machine. Since that time I have passed the annuals with different instructors and have am regarded as a competent pilot. I also passed the instrument ground course, but decided not to pursue an instrument rating because of the expense, but it was a good theoretical supplement because I was not up to speed on the new regs and weather technology.
Based on my own experience I will take issue with your assessment of currency estimations for lapsed pilots. My 30-year lapse would have meant that I would require 30 hours of flight instruction. This is far in excess of what the FAA requires for a first-time pilot and does not seem reasonable at all for pilots who have had a good flying record in the past. I strongly encourage a lapsed pilot to test the waters with a not-for-profit instructor and make his/her own decision based on his/her judgment.
Svend Strandbygaard
Falmouth, Maine
I’m a lowly CFI-S trying to make a business out of providing flight training for the sport pilot certificate. I’m getting worn out by the articles on “how do we grow general aviation?” This deal is a huge failure and it is not the general public’s fault and it is not the CFI’s fault. It is the FAA and the insurance companies and, yes, I include AOPA itself in the failure system. First off, the gross weight is too low to include the Cessna 150, 120, 140, 152, and all of the other training aircraft that we have. Next the FAA got rid of the Experimental LSA exemption waiver, which doesn’t leave us many options for training aircraft that are affordable. But the single biggest problem is the insurance companies. If we CFIs cannot buy liability insurance on our operations and our aircraft, you for darn sure are going to see a drop in the available lower-cost entry level flight training.
Wolf Emonds
Portland, Oregon
I must be in the minority but I would love to see an article geared towards new “older” pilots and what careers are available to us. I didn’t realize my dream of flight until I was 48 and would love to explore possible careers, but it seems the vast majority of information is only for younger pilots. Is a second career even possible for my age group? Many in my age group had to give up our dreams in our teens and twenties because of financial constraints, et cetera, only to return later in life. I don’t see any opportunities for my age group; most won’t hire us because of age. Are we stuck only to enjoy aviation recreationally or are there opportunities out there for us also?
Tim Goke
Waupaca, Wisconsin
Erratum
In the December 2013 “Flight Lesson: IFR or VFR?” author Stephen Crimaudo’s name was misspelled. Flight Training regrets the error.
Related Articles
