Workshop

Report
SUMMARY
INSTRUCTORS 3
COORDINATION AND SUPERVISION 3
MEDIATES 3
PARTICIPANTS 3
PROGRESS 3
Weather conditions 5
EVALUATIONS 6
APPROVAL AND CONDITIONS 11

INSTRUCTORS

COORDINATION AND SUPERVISION
Ricardo Maciel APPI 12999

MEDIATES

Alexandre Lourenço Amaral Barbosa – APPI 16277
Alan Braga – APPI 21855

PARTICIPANTS

Marlon aparecido da Cruz – APPI 45297
Rogério de Jesus Ferreira – APPI 45296
Henrique ventura Silva – APPI 45295
Marlon Coutinho Silva – APPI 21987
Leandro Tadeu de Aguiar – APPI 17877

PROGRESS

The Workshop began with online events. On August 31, 2023, we conducted our first Telepresential Meeting. During this session, we introduced the APPI, provided a brief overview of the methodology following the guidelines provided by the book, showcased the APPI website, engaged in discussions about the Workshop's operation, and concluded by inviting participants to share their personal stories.
Participants of the first meeting: Henrique Ventura, Rogerio Ferreira and Leandro Aguiar.
On September 5, 2023, we held our second telepresential meeting, where we introduced the first four lectures of APPI. We emphasized that these lectures would be assigned to them for presentation during the Workshop.
Lectures: Theory of Flight, Basic Meteorology, Pre-Solo Flight and Advanced Meteorology.
Participants of the second meeting: Henrique Ventura, Rogerio Ferreira, Leandro Aguiar and Marlon Cruz.

On September 12, 2023, we provided a class on the forces of the motor on the wing as an example of how to prepare a lesson. Following that, we presented the lectures on flight planning and general information about paragliding.
Participants of the third meeting: Henrique Ventura, Rogerio Ferreira, Leandro Aguiar, Marlon Cruz and Marlon Coutinho.

START OF THE IN-PERSON PHASE:

On September 14th, we initiated our activities around 10:00 a.m., taking advantage of favourable weather conditions. We established a pilot skills check flight, asking everyone to take off, perform a low pass, and land.
All participants performed satisfactorily except for pilot Marlon Cruz, who had significant difficulty with reverse launch.
Next, we focused on the book and manual, discussing EDICT and KISS principles, and began a portion of experimental training, which included:
Introduction to the wing and harness, connection for the forward launch and the reverse launch, 6-point check (Actually, we updated our discussion to include the '7-point check,' which covers checking both legs, one ventral connection, two carabiners, one chest strap, and the helmet's chin strap).
We took a break for lunch, and afterwards, weather conditions did not permit further practice.
We reviewed the manual, covering topics up to the section on hand towing. We also discussed EDICT, KISS, types of students, and the importance of cultivating good habits while eliminating bad ones. We provided practical examples for context.
Following the book's guidance, we demonstrated the line's untangling procedure.
We concluded the day's activities with each participant signing off on the completed stages in the book. We also randomly selected topics for the upcoming theoretical lectures.
On September 15th, we asked the candidates to instruct us using the concepts presented. We requested that they follow the book, covering topics such as Wing and harness presentation, Wing handling and line untangling, forward and reverse launch connections, 7-point check and control handles.
On the afternoon of September 15, 2023,
We conducted kite control training, where each candidate served as an instructor and a student.
Afterwards, Alexandre played the role of a student, simulating common errors related to hand positioning and looking at the wing.
Next, we conducted hand-towing training, with everyone taking turns as instructors for towing the kite and the student.
We used a 40-meter cable folded in half (20/20) for the training.
On the morning of September 16, 2023,
We conducted a skills check, which included forward launch, reverse launch, and wing control.
Additionally, we provided training for wearing the motor on the back and taking it off. Moreover, we offered training on checking and deploying the rescue.
On the afternoon of September 16, 2023,
We reviewed the motor safety checklist, discussed safe procedures for starting the motor, and practised taxiing with the motor on one's back without the wing.
We also conducted a suspended simulation.
Following these activities, the candidates presented their lectures.
On the morning of September 17, 2023,
We conducted a lesson on air regulations, RBAC 103, and auxiliary rules regarding airspace.
We also held a pre-solo flight briefing.
Following this, we simulated solo flights with various scenarios involving critical points that the instructors had to demonstrate. This exercise emphasized attention, composure, effective communication, clear guidance, and contingency actions.
A theoretical exam was administered, consisting of 20 multiple-choice questions and 9 essay questions.
We provided collective feedback as well as individual feedback.
The Workshop concludes at 4:00 PM.

Weather conditions

The weather conditions allowed for field training for most of the Workshop, although there were periods of extreme winds, which necessitated some adjustments to the order in the book. We communicated to the candidates that the sequence was being altered to make the best use of the weather conditions.



EVALUATIONS

Marlon Coutinho Silva – APPI 21987
As a pilot


Presented reasonable ground control, demonstrating mastery of forward launch and reverse launch techniques, good stability and trajectory control in low-level flight following a delimited circuit, and smooth and precise landing.
Attention and absorption of the techniques presented in the Workshop He was attentive throughout and learned quickly, as he already had experience in instructional activities. At some points, he wanted to present his own methods, but later, he accepted and agreed that he was there to learn the APPI method and not to submit his own method for evaluation.
Performance in ground instruction procedures In most procedures, he utilized the EDICT concept. He skipped the demonstration in some simpler methods, such as putting on the harness. Overall, he provided good, simple, objective, and effective instruction, managing to assess and request corrections from the student during the procedures.
Student's pre-first flight check During the initial simulation of a failure, he allowed the student to inflate the wing without a brake handle in hand. Still, after this mistake, he doubled his level of attention and did not allow the pseudo student to make any more mistakes, being attentive to the entire preparation process.
Performance in flight instruction Calm and focused, in constant contact with the student without being excessive, instilled a sense of tranquility, provided accurate and timely commands, and, on several occasions, instructed the student to shake their legs to establish and ensure effective communication.
Theoretical class presentation. Good organization and structuring of the topic, good teaching skills, good public speaking skills, lacks a bit of knowledge which should be supplemented with more study on theoretical concepts; however, has the potential to prepare and deliver a good class.
Written evaluation, multiple-choice questions on theoretical knowledge

89.47% performance
Written discursive evaluation on the topics covered in the Workshop.

80% performance
Personal evaluation by Alan Braga : Very charismatic and communicative, tends to be somewhat lengthy, but nothing that hinders the instruction process.
Personal evaluation by Alexandre Barbosa : A good Instructor with proven experience in some exercises. There remains a doubt as to whether you can apply the method satisfactorily due to the habits you have in the way you currently work.



Leandro Tadeu de Aguiar – APPI 17877
As a pilot


Presented reasonable ground control, demonstrating mastery of forward launch and reverse launch techniques, good stability and trajectory control in low-level flight following a delimited circuit, and smooth and precise landing.
Important note for incorrect adjustments to the torque effect of your engine.
Attention and absorption of the techniques presented in the Workshop : Attentive in class and calm in exercises. He was always asking questions relevant to what was being taught. He had a technical and willing profile, and always gave simple and reasonable explanations precisely as he was told.
Performance in ground instruction procedures In most procedures, the EDICT concept was used. There were a few times when he made minor mistakes about how to get the risers. Overall, he simply performed the task, demonstrating correctly and adequately correcting the student.
Student's pre-first flight check As an instructor, he allowed his monitor not correctly to check the student, and the student inflated the wing without the brake lever in hand. Afterwards, he remained very focused on observing the pilot and the monitor, and the exercise continued without any further problems.
Performance in flight instruction Calm and focused on the exercise and with good practices in keeping the student calm in flight, however, he conducted a slightly imprecise and without references at the beginning of his instruction, even allowing the student to fly the paramotor into the sea. When corrected, he declared good instruction and made an excellent landing for the student.
Theoretical class presentation. Can guide the class topic with good explanations and examples, has good teaching skills and reasonable fluency in the classroom. But he left a little to be desired in structuring his class by citing few examples. Still, he proved to be very capable of teaching suitable classes.
Written evaluation, multiple-choice questions on theoretical knowledge

60% performance
Written discursive evaluation on the topics covered in the Workshop.
94% performance
Personal evaluation by Alan Braga He has good control and piloting skills; however, I observed that he has the habit of looking at the wing by tilting his head upward. He does this not out of necessity for control but as a habit stemming from incorrect learning in the past. This should be corrected to prevent it from being passed on to students. As an instructor, he appears quite centered, calm, and objective, being a person of few words. He has gaps in theoretical knowledge to be filled but demonstrates openness and interest in learning.

Personal evaluation by Alexandre Barbosa Very objective, calm and attentive instructor. Sometimes standing out among the others due to their attention to reproducing the method.


Henrique ventura Silva – APPI 45295
As a pilot


Presented good ground control, demonstrating mastery of forward launch and reverse launch techniques, good stability and trajectory control in low-level flight following a delimited circuit, smooth and precise landing.
Attention and absorption of the techniques presented in the Workshop Attentive and very active student on the course, always the first to apply for exercises. Sometimes he committed excesses, small jokes and side conversations, but overall he was a very proactive student.
Performance in ground instruction procedures Speak a bit more, but stay on topic; forgot to demonstrate some procedures as instructed."
Student's pre-first flight check He paid close attention to the student, ensuring they didn't make any wrong moves. However, he didn't initially check that the accelerator was stuck in the net. He only realized this when he tried to start the engine. Fortunately, it had an electric starter. Otherwise, he might have pulled the line with the accelerator stuck in the net. He tends to talk excessively, explaining procedures, albeit correctly, at the wrong time, which tires the student who is standing with the motor on their back, ready for inflation.
Performance in flight instruction He conducted the instruction calmly and objectively, trying to demonstrate a lot of control. It left the instruction a little without clear references, which was later corrected. Overall, he conducted the exercise well.
Theoretical class presentation. Objective lack of demonstrating knowledge about the topic presented. Needs to absorb more knowledge about classes to be able to improve. His class itself is good, he structured the class well with the help of the board, answered the questions well but needs to improve.
Written evaluation, multiple-choice questions on theoretical knowledge

75% performance
Written discursive evaluation on the topics covered in the Workshop.
88% performance
Personal evaluation by Alan Braga Presented many good results during the Workshop, knows how to speak but talks too much, is verbose in many explanations, is intelligent but somewhat egocentric, has a theoretical limitation due to lack of proper instruction but demonstrated quick learning, questioned individual feedback, I had the impression that he may be a bit arrogant and will conduct instruction his own way due to excessive confidence in his own judgment, knowledge, and abilities.
Personal evaluation by Alexandre Barbosa With a slightly accelerated profile and always showing excess confidence. Even though I performed some tasks with great success, I leave some doubts about the candidate's ability to apply the method with a minimum of quality. Therefore, instructional assistance with tasks to be completed would be a good opportunity for new assessment.

Marlon aparecido da Cruz – APPI 45297
As a pilot


He was unable to perform a clean paramotor takeoff on the first attempt. He informed the Workshop instructors that he was only flying paratrikes at the moment and this greatly interfered with the evaluation. He made a sharp turn before landing and it was possible to assess that his level of paramotor piloting was not advanced.
Attention and absorption of the techniques presented in the Workshop Attentive, punctual and willful student. Always willing to help, focused, without making jokes or comments out of context. However, it is clear that he has little experience with instruction.
Performance in ground instruction procedures By performing the EDICT well, he was able to perform the tasks well.
Student's pre-first flight check He performed the task well, always checking and releasing the student correctly.
Performance in flight instruction He conducted the instruction calmly and objectively, trying to demonstrate a lot of control. It left the instruction a little without clear references, which was later corrected. Overall, he conducted the exercise well.

Theoretical class presentation. Held a theoretical class below the minimum necessary. Shallow explanations without any structure in the framework. It left a lot to be desired in this regard.
Written evaluation, multiple-choice questions on theoretical knowledge

70% performance
Written discursive evaluation on the topics covered in the Workshop.
86% performance
Personal evaluation by Alan Braga Being an experienced paratrike pilot and focusing very little on the paramotor, he had difficulties during takeoff, needs improvement in this aspect. There is a lack of theoretical knowledge, but with a bit of study and training, these deficiencies should be overcome. In the field, he is uninhibited, but he is shy when it comes to giving a formal lesson to a larger group of people. He exhibited certain limitations in public speaking.
Personal evaluation by Alexandre Barbosa When performing the Paratrike check at the end of the Workshop, I observed that Marlon really mastered the tandem flight. I was convinced that the candidate has all the conditions to become a good instructor but that he does not yet have the necessary skills to do so, especially his ability to give theoretical classes and the fact that he is not an advanced pilot. I recommend the instructional assistant with assignments to be submitted for consideration.


Rogério de Jesus Ferreira – APPI 45296
As a pilot


He performed the takeoff and the proposed exercises well. The young pilot collects many hours of flight time and that is clear.
Attention and absorption of the techniques presented in the Workshop Attentive and disciplined student. Whenever requested, he responds to the instructors, trying to stick to what was taught.
Performance in ground instruction procedures Despite knowing what should be done, they couldn't focus, going back and forth in the procedures, and did not provide a logical and objective sequence of instruction.
Student's pre-first flight check He performed the task well, always checking and releasing the student correctly.
Performance in flight instruction Confusing instruction without reference elements, needs to improve in this aspect.
Theoretical class presentation. He was unable to take a theoretical class. He seems to have trouble writing and that created embarrassment at the time.
Written evaluation, multiple-choice questions on theoretical knowledge

50% performance
Written discursive evaluation on the topics covered in the Workshop.
Left blank

Personal evaluation by Alan Braga Has a lot of difficulty with theory, despite demonstrating practical well, struggles to provide explanations, is not very confident, speaks softly, and does not convey much assurance in instruction.
Personal evaluation by Alexandre Barbosa Based on your difficulty in completing the theoretical classes and the test, I recommend that the candidate fails. However, as an advanced pilot and tandem pilot, I recommend that you enable the pilot in these skills in the APPI.



APPROVAL AND CONDITIONS

Marlon Coutinho Silva – APPI 21987

Approved as an instructor, with the requirement to train 2 students within the APPI method, presenting each student's books.


Leandro Tadeu de Aguiar – APPI 17877

Approved as an instructor's assistant.


Henrique ventura Silva – APPI 45295


Approved as an instructor's assistant.


Marlon aparecido da Cruz – APPI 45297

Approved as an instructor's assistant and Tandem Paratrike Flight


Rogério de Jesus Ferreira – APPI 45296

Failed, not suitable to be an instructor or assistant at this time.