fishnuts

I'm new to the forums and I searched around trying to find a similar situation, but couldn't.

I'm active duty and I'm about to finish my PPL from a Part 61 school. There is a part 141 school a little further and I wanted to use them to obtain my instrument rating and receive reimbursement under the Post-9/11. It was my understanding from everything I've read that they will cover ratings beyond PPL from a part 141 school. The school I will be attending is a vocational flight school and is not degree-awarding. The VA website states it will reimburse up to ~$11,000 per academic year. I thought, "Perfect! This will cover my IFR rating." But, not so fast...

I spoke with the flight school and they stated the VA would only cover an instrument rating if it were attached to a commercial rating training program. As we all know, this just about triples the cost since it's 141 and I'm not bringing over very many hours. This was the first I've ever heard of this requirement. I was bit skeptical, so I called the VA directly. (sidenote: this was the most painful, frustrating phone call I've made in a long time, my friends.) After about 30-40 minutes of her not being able to read English (her primary language), she confirmed what the school said. The only way to receive reimbursement for an Instrument rating from a part 141 vocational flight school is for it to be in conjunction with a commercial rating program.

Does anyone know why it is this way? Is this just another awesome way for the VA to make using their benefits for flight training just that much more difficult?

I do have friends that are getting everything paid for by attending a degree-granting program. I've looked into that as well, but there are no schools like that here in NC. (to my knowledge)

Toonces

The basic reason is because getting an IR without working towards a commercial license does not a career make. The GI bill is intended for education and job training.

This isn't such a bad thing. Once you have your PPL, take a break from "school" and just knock out some of the commercial flight time requirements by flying for fun. You will then be able to more efficiently use your GI bill towards your IR and CPL.

JamesNoBrakes

Yep, it's vocational training, although I wasn't aware that the IR was not available separately. That sounds like a ploy by the 141 school to make more money, which unfortunately they can do in a free-market economy. Courses do have to be under a 141 school to be reimbursable by the GI Bill, I did my MEI as a stand-alone at a 141.

rickair7777

It's always been this way, and I can see the point too. Otherwise many vets (especially officers who usually already have a BS and MS) would use their GI Bill to obtain PPL and/or IR just for recreational purposes.

racer847

Time it with the academic year, new one starts this fall. Should be able to get instrument and commercial for under $22k if timed to avoid waiting for a new academic year

Yoda2

I have an idea how this might have happened, or at least contributed. Basically somebody ruins it for everybody type of deal... For instance, in the Mid 70's many guys were getting typed in Lears, typically 24D's, using the GI Bill. (It was about a 6K deal with a 10% Co pay as I recall) A portion of those folks only had Private cetificates that rendered the ratings practically useless. For that segment, who also had little interest in persuing a flying career, it was essentially a cheap joyride at significant taxpayer expense.

Jetjok

Yeah, I know what you mean. Those guys coming back from Vietnam had no business at all using their GI bill benefits, even though they earned it. Of course a lot of them never got to use those benefits, because, well, they died, fighting a stupid war, in a far away land, and for what? To be spit on when they returned? If you think that they had no right to use their benefits as they saw fit, then you really need to have your head examined. As for someone screwing it up for the rest, I raise the BS flag. It would take hundreds and hundreds of guys, doing the exact same thing wrong, before the VA or the government changed anything. As well, and more to the point, it seems perfectly reasonable to me that they would want one to get some real flying under their belt before they undertook an instrument rating. I mean, seriously, what are you going to do with a private pilot license and an instrument rating? Fly your C-152 in clouds? How about icing? Yeah, that would look good on an aviation resume.

As a final thought, when I got back from Vietnam, I took some college courses, one of which was a gym class (to fill in a space between other classes), and you know what, I didn't then, nor do I now, feel that I wasn't entitled to take that class, even though I never became a gym teacher.

Yoda2

Apparently my post was grossly misinterpreted... To clarify, in that particular instance, the intent of the program was for vocational training and did waste taxpayers money. However I also believe that most of our warfighters are grossly underpaid and under appreciated. Additionally I do what I can including welcoming home our returning troops at a local base and other associated duties. I also nearly always offer and often insist that those in uniform go ahead of me when waiting in lines, Etc. I could go on but I won't. BTW, I only missed out on Vietnam by about 3 Mos. or I would have been right there with you...

rickair7777

No, Yoda is right. The GI Bill was intended to further the education, financial, and career prospects of veterans. It was never intended to subsidize anyone's expensive hobby.

If you had a gym class which was part of a college curriculum, that's well within the intent of the program.

Nothing against veteran's hobbies (I am one, and have a few) but that was never what the GI Bill was for. If you want to fly for fun, use your military base pay or retirement to pay for it.

Jetjok

I'd agree with his basic premiss, if and only if he had actually done the research or follow-up on the guys he said: "For that segment, who also had little interest in persuing a flying career, it was essentially a cheap joyride at significant taxpayer expense." From where is he getting this information? I'm not saying it didn't happen, just that that broad-brush approach may be invalid. As well, there were (and still are) many guys who did the full Monty, as for educational benefits, that never used those hard earned degrees. Does that make them wrong to have taken advantage of benefits that they had earned? I don't think so. I used every penny that was available to me through the GI Bill, and after three full careers, I can say that probably about half of the benefits that the "taxpayer paid for" were of value in the final analysis, while the rest was just water under the dam.