Good instructor or school for IR near Chino, CA

[Lukon]

Love my Mooney, and I’ve been flying it regularly since I got it this past Fall.  I got through the first annual without breaking the bank, so I’m feeling pretty good about that. I’ve got about 300 hours total over the course of more decades than I’d like to admit. I’ve put about 75 on the Mooney so far. I never really thought I’d need an Instrument Rating, but the weather has been unusually cloudy here in SoCal, and I’ve had to cancel a couple trips as a result. Had I an IR, I could have punched through a low layer and flown VFR on top.

Can anyone recommend a good instructor, school or program to get this done in my area? Plane is based at KCNO.

Edited June 28, 2019 by Lukon

[Skates97]

If you are looking for a school, I did all of my PPL at DuBois there are KCNO. That was three years ago so I'm sure that the instructors aren't the same but the owner is great and I have nothing but good things to say about the school.

If you are looking for an individual instructor there is Mike Jesch out of KFUL and then @kortopates down in San Diego. Not a long hop to him in the Mooney.

Weather here is always like this in the mornings from around May-June.

[ilovecornfields]

@kortopates is awesome. I did my BFR/IPC with him last year as part of the MAPA PPP and have flown with him a few other times. Hard to beat his knowledge and patience. 

If you want someone to come out to you, Michael Phillips at CMA is also a great instrument instructor. He has a place at CMA with a simulator but is also willing to travel. He made me sweat in the middle of winter, so he’ll definitely make you earn that rating. Barry Schiff wrote about doing an IPC with him in one of the flying magazines last year.

https://aviationinstruction.biz/

I don’t know what @donkaye is up to but he was great as well. Can’t go wrong with any of those guys!

It makes me happy every time someone gets an instrument rating. Can’t think of anything else in aviation that compares to the instrument rating in terms of reducing your risk of a fatal accident. No surprise insurance companies give you a significant discount for having one.

[DustinNwind]

I got my PPL and IR with Andre Bennett out of Santa Monica. He has been instructing for 30+ years and is a career CFI. He also flies jets and have a couple thousand hours in Mooneys. Andre came recommend to me by many pilots in Los Angeles, and is considered one of the be on the west coast. Let him know Dustin sent you. 

 

Andre Bennet: 310-392-0121

[kortopates]

Lukon, you are much better off getting the instrument written done with a good score before starting instrument flight instruction. Although not required, i personally recommend training in a IFR GPS equipped panel since these days instrument flying is 90% RNAV based.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited June 30, 2019 by kortopates

[mike_elliott]

Highly recommend Paul Kortopates. You will get more than what you pay for in an education to keep you safe.

[Andy95W]

2 hours ago, kortopates said:

Lukon, you are much better off grtting the instrument written done with a good score before starting instrument flight instruction. 

No offense, but I've always disagreed with this method, especially with the instrument rating, as it turns the written into a rote memorization exercise instead of an actual learning experience.  I've had much better results by addressing both simultaneously in the first 10-15 hours of instruction because the two will complement each other and the student can ask questions more readily while studying for the written.

If you were teaching someone to overhaul an engine, would you tell them to read a bunch of books and boring FARs before you let them touch a wrench?  No, you'd start with engine disassembly and then guide their home study efforts. 

I do admit the problem with my method is that it is difficult to keep the student from procrastinating about the written until the last minute.  For a disciplined student, however, it is more efficient in terms if time and effort.

[kortopates]

3 minutes ago, Andy95W said:

No offense, but I've always disagreed with this method, especially with the instrument rating, as it turns the written into a rote memorization exercise instead of an actual learning experience.  I've had much better results by addressing both simultaneously in the first 10-15 hours of instruction because the two will complement each other and the student can ask questions more readily while studying for the written.

If you were teaching someone to overhaul an engine, would you tell them to read a bunch of books and boring FARs before you let them touch a wrench?  No, you'd start with engine disassembly and then guide their home study efforts. 

I do admit the problem with my method is that it is difficult to keep the student from procrastinating about the written until the last minute.  For a disciplined student, however, it is more efficient in terms if time and effort.

Your perspective is welcome and I doubt you are alone. My perspective is that I find there is very little overlap between the written exam and learning how to fly on instruments. It may be a little boring to digest, but the IR isn't nearly as hard for a person that has been flying around 100 hrs or more, talking to ATC on VFR flight following. Plus there are many different avenues to pursue for the written beyond studying test questions, including community college course work, where I teach an advanced IFR ground school that includes simulator time on the redbirds. My point is, it can be hard to understand how to apply the material if ground school consist chiefly of Gleim like study questions. But many other video based training classes I believe solve most of this issue. Especially the community college classes do in an environment where the student can learn from shared experienced from other students as well;  but not everyone has access to that. My class even includes a TRACON tour. My approach to instrument training isn't focused on passing the exam, but how to use all your IFR resources to survive when things don't go as expected. If the written isn't done it becomes a distraction very quickly.

The other aspect, IMO, is that the only students that have failed to complete instrument training are those that didn't or wouldn't complete the exam. Its frustrating for them when they're getting out to the end and we should be concentrating on the oral but they still haven't gotten the written done and their seeing how inefficient this translate directly to their pocket book and schedule.  Its been a real problem for some. The only other significant problem is unique to owner aircraft. Owners suffer from another problem of their own making when they can't quite afford to maintain their own aircraft as in being able to present an airworthy aircraft to the examiner (e.g., either fix broken avionics or rip them out or properly disable and placard - hard to let go of capability you want to fix rather than lose but can't quite afford to fix properly).    

[ilovecornfields]

5 hours ago, Andy95W said:

No offense, but I've always disagreed with this method, especially with the instrument rating, as it turns the written into a rote memorization exercise instead of an actual learning experience.  I've had much better results by addressing both simultaneously in the first 10-15 hours of instruction because the two will complement each other and the student can ask questions more readily while studying for the written.

If you were teaching someone to overhaul an engine, would you tell them to read a bunch of books and boring FARs before you let them touch a wrench?  No, you'd start with engine disassembly and then guide their home study efforts. 

I do admit the problem with my method is that it is difficult to keep the student from procrastinating about the written until the last minute.  For a disciplined student, however, it is more efficient in terms if time and effort.

I don’t think there’s a “one size fits all” approach to learning, but I used @kortopates‘s method for my commercial and it was really nice to get the written out of the way before doing the flying. It seems that I get more out of the lessons not having to worry about the written and it makes the oral exam prep easier.

I used the King videos for my private, instrument and commercial and they all prepared me well for the written. 

[Andy95W]

16 hours ago, kortopates said:

 I teach an advanced IFR ground school that includes simulator time on the redbirds. My point is, it can be hard to understand how to apply the material if ground school consist chiefly of Gleim like study questions. But many other video based training classes I believe solve most of this issue. Especially the community college classes do in an environment where the student can learn from shared experienced from other students as well;  but not everyone has access to that. My class even includes a TRACON tour. 

++++1!

I really like that approach, and is exactly what I was getting at in my post!  My only disagreement before was about letting the student fend for themselves with boring material when instead the ground school and "lab" work could go hand in hand to complement each other.

When I was actively instructing Part 61 students, I had none of those resources available with the exception of a tower tour.  My "lab" work could only consist of flying the airplane.  Thanks for posting/explaining.

[Andy95W]

11 hours ago, ilovecornfields said:

I don’t think there’s a “one size fits all” approach to learning, but I used @kortopates‘s method for my commercial and it was really nice to get the written out of the way before doing the flying. It seems that I get more out of the lessons not having to worry about the written and it makes the oral exam prep easier.

I used the King videos for my private, instrument and commercial and they all prepared me well for the written. 

I agree- Commercial and higher the student is on their own for the most part.  By that level, they've been doing it long enough that they can find answers on their own or know how to ask for help.

IMO, Private/Instrument students need more guidance and one-on-one explanations, if they're not using good quality videos like you did.

(I used the King videos to learn how to do crosswind landings.  The fact that I still screw them up occasionally is my fault, not John and Martha's!)