Part 61 - Number of CFI's

[Clip4]

Quite frankly, yes. I am not exactly the brightest person in the room and I didn't have any exposure to aviation before I started, but even I was perfectly capable of reading and understanding the ACS before taking my first flight lesson. I may not have understood what it would feel like to hold an altitude +/- 200ft or even what the gauge would look like that would tell me how high I was, but I knew I would need to be able to do it. Perhaps I am just so used to learning things on my own that my viewpoint is skewed on this, but why wouldn't/shouldn't a student be able to judge his progress, even in the early stages, by the ACS? I am not saying he has to perform to ACS standards the first time he does a maneuver, but for me, it was very satisfying to watch myself get better and very motivating when I was able to perform within standards (and know it in real time) on my second or third attempt at something. It also enabled me to ask better questions when I was struggling with understanding something. Knowing more leads to better questions which leads to better understanding which leads to better flying.

Also, I am glad my instructor chose a more encompassing approach for my flight lessons than you are describing. If I struggled with something, we were able to move on and go back to it later. For example, I struggled with righthand steep turns for most of my training. I would nail a lefthand one and immediately flunk the righthand one. Instead of spending the next twelve lessons hammering at that until I got it perfect so we could move on according to the syllabus, we moved on to other things. After four or five lessons doing other things, we returned to steep turns and I was able to perform both directions quite well. If you're switching CFIs all the time, I guess I can understand why you can't allow the students that flexibility - but to me, that flexibility is one of the perks of going to a part 61 flight school or an independent CFI.

I have been doing this stuff for over 30 years. Done it the way you think is best, done it the way the FAA requires in a 141 school. Part 61 or 141, the best teaching method involves a syllabus the student receives and contains the lessons / standards and utilizes a training record. You are a good example.

Steep turns are a performance maneuver not required pre-solo in Part 61.87(d). Typically though, steep turns are introduced on Lesson 4 and reviewed in Lesson 7. Instructors don’t expect students to be proficient doing a maneuver once and we don’t keep doing steep turns until perfected - actually far from it.

The pre-solo performance standard 141 is to simply establish, perform and recover from steep turns - a rather low standard with no specific performance standards for altitude, airspeed or heading . The student is expected to be safe performing this maneuver.

If you thought you were expected to do steep turns “quite well” at this phase of your training, you set a false expectation for yourself from relying on the ACS. A syllabus provides the standard for the phase of training. There are specific performance standards for maneuvers in the syllabus and those standards change as the student progresses in training. A student doesn’t progress if they fail the specific performance standards and the student remains in that lesson until the standard is met.

The reason is simple, if you don’t have the core prerequisite skills for the CFI to intro a new task, the CFI can’t introduce the task. This is why we don’t teach landings lesson 2 and work on basic aircraft control first.

An active student in Phase I training will complete pre-solo training in 9 lessons and solo on Lesson 10 (~15 hours instruction). If you are the “average” student and able to fly 3 days a week, you will solo in less than a month. If you desire flexibility, it will cost you more time and money.

 

[dmspilot]

I have been doing this stuff for over 30 years. Done it the way you think is best, done it the way the FAA requires in a 141 school. Part 61 or 141, the best teaching method involves a syllabus the student receives and contains the lessons / standards and utilizes a training record. You are a good example.

Steep turns are a performance maneuver not required pre-solo in Part 61.87(d). Typically though, steep turns are introduced on Lesson 4 and reviewed in Lesson 7. Instructors don’t expect students to be proficient doing a maneuver once and we don’t keep doing steep turns until perfected - actually far from it.

The pre-solo performance standard 141 is to simply establish, perform and recover from steep turns - a rather low standard with no specific performance standards for altitude, airspeed or heading . The student is expected to be safe performing this maneuver.

If you thought you were expected to do steep turns “quite well” at this phase of your training, you set a false expectation for yourself from relying on the ACS. A syllabus provides the standard for the phase of training. There are specific performance standards for maneuvers in the syllabus and those standards change as the student progresses in training. A student doesn’t progress if they fail the specific performance standards and the student remains in that lesson until the standard is met.

The reason is simple, if you don’t have the core prerequisite skills for the CFI to intro a new task, the CFI can’t introduce the task. This is why we don’t teach landings lesson 2 and work on basic aircraft control first.

An active student in Phase I training will complete pre-solo training in 9 lessons and solo on Lesson 10 (~15 hours instruction). If you are the “average” student and able to fly 3 days a week, you will solo in less than a month. If you desire flexibility, it will cost you more time and money.

Where did she say she was expected to master steep turns prior to first solo?

 

[SkyChaser]

I have been doing this stuff for over 30 years. Done it the way you think is best, done it the way the FAA requires in a 141 school. Part 61 or 141, the best teaching method involves a syllabus the student receives and contains the lessons / standards and utilizes a training record. You are a good example.

Had a syllabus. Called the ACS. And a training record. Called my logbook.

Steep turns are a performance maneuver not required pre-solo in Part 61.87(d). Typically though, steep turns are introduced on Lesson 4 and reviewed in Lesson 7. Instructors don’t expect students to be proficient doing a maneuver once and we don’t keep doing steep turns until perfected - actually far from it.

The pre-solo performance standard 141 is to simply establish, perform and recover from steep turns - a rather low standard with no specific performance standards for altitude, airspeed or heading . The student is expected to be safe performing this maneuver.

If you thought you were expected to do steep turns “quite well” at this phase of your training, you set a false expectation for yourself from relying on the ACS. A syllabus provides the standard for the phase of training. There are specific performance standards for maneuvers in the syllabus and those standards change as the student progresses in training. A student doesn’t progress if they fail the specific performance standards and the student remains in that lesson until the standard is met.

I never said it was pre-solo and I don't know where you got that from??

The reason is simple, if you don’t have the core prerequisite skills for the CFI to intro a new task, the CFI can’t introduce the task. This is why we don’t teach landings lesson 2 and work on basic aircraft control first.

An active student in Phase I training will complete pre-solo training in 9 lessons and solo on Lesson 10 (~15 hours instruction). If you are the “average” student and able to fly 3 days a week, you will solo in less than a month. If you desire flexibility, it will cost you more time and money.

I get that stuff is introduced in a certain order and that there are many good reasons for it especially in the beginning. I totally understand and agree, for instance, that basic aircraft control should be taught long before landing (and that's how I was taught as well). I was talking about some flexibility in later stages of training, like doing dual cross-country training before the lessons on crosswind landings are finished if the student is struggling with those and needs a mental break - not teaching students how to do pylons-on-8s before they learn how to hold altitude.

I'd like to think that it was because I wasn't what you call an "average student", in that I was working full time instead of flying during the week, but truth is, I am not a talented pilot. I think I'm a fair pilot *now*, but it came through stubbornness and not natural grace. When you're not naturally good at flying, being able to switch things up a bit when frustrations reach critical levels is very relieving and helps the learning process a lot. Maybe I am the only one who ever experiences that, but when I was a student going through training, I was very, very glad that my instructor was willing to play a little loose with her expected lesson sequence some days.

 

[Clip4]

Where did she say she was expected to master steep turns prior to first solo?

He didn’t, but his accusation was there was no flexibility in a syllabus to allow a task to be improved later. Steep turns aren’t required to meet specific standards until stage 3 in any 141 syllabus I have used. They aren’t even a maneuver on the Phase II stage check.

 

[Clip4]

Had a syllabus. Called the ACS. And a training record. Called my logbook.

I never said it was pre-solo and I don't know where you got that from??

I get that stuff is introduced in a certain order and that there are many good reasons for it especially in the beginning. I totally understand and agree, for instance, that basic aircraft control should be taught long before landing (and that's how I was taught as well). I was talking about some flexibility in later stages of training, like doing dual cross-country training before the lessons on crosswind landings are finished if the student is struggling with those and needs a mental break - not teaching students how to do pylons-on-8s before they learn how to hold altitude.

I'd like to think that it was because I wasn't what you call an "average student", in that I was working full time instead of flying during the week, but truth is, I am not a talented pilot. I think I'm a fair pilot *now*, but it came through stubbornness and not natural grace. When you're not naturally good at flying, being able to switch things up a bit when frustrations reach critical levels is very relieving and helps the learning process a lot. Maybe I am the only one who ever experiences that, but when I was a student going through training, I was very, very glad that my instructor was willing to play a little loose with her expected lesson sequence some days.

Do you mind posting a photo shot of your logbook showing where your CFI graded your performance?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Do you mind posting a photo shot of your logbook showing where your CFI graded your performance?

Maybe @SkyChaser self-graded. That would fit with an "all I need is the ACS" viewpoint.

 

[Clip4]

Maybe @SkyChaser self-graded.

Maybe he had an instructor said nothing and just figured it out. He did have the ACS.

 

[Salty]

Just remember you're talking to a guy that will fire you as a student for pretty much anything he feels like.

 

[dmspilot]

Just remember you're talking to a guy that will fire you as a student for pretty much anything he feels like.

He has a lot of mixed up ideas about things. In this thread he insisted there is no such thing as "solo flight training." I asked why the FARs (Part 61 and 141) use the phrase "solo flight training" dozens of times. Never answered.

 

[SkyChaser]

Do you mind posting a photo shot of your logbook showing where your CFI graded your performance?

You said it was training record, not a gradebook. My logbook is a training record. Grading was discussed in flight when necessary and in post-flight briefings and did not need to be written down as both my instructor and I possessed brains with functioning hippocampi.

Maybe @SkyChaser self-graded. That would fit with an "all I need is the ACS" viewpoint.

I did "self-grade" a lot, but not exclusively. After we landed for the last time in a flight, my instructor would ask me what I thought I did well and what I thought I did poorly during the lesson, and then we'd talk about it and she would tell me what she thought of my performance. I think it helped me really internalize and comprehend a lot of stuff that I might not have otherwise really paid attention to, and because I had read the ACS (and the AFH, PHAK, POH, etc), I could do some self-analysis and self-correction. That's what worked for me. I don't think there is an issue with instructors using syllabi, but I do hold to my idea that they are not strictly necessary if both instructor and student know what is in the ACS.

He didn’t, but his accusation was there was no flexibility in a syllabus to allow a task to be improved later. Steep turns aren’t required to meet specific standards until stage 3 in any 141 syllabus I have used. They aren’t even a maneuver on the Phase II stage check.

Maybe he had an instructor said nothing and just figured it out. He did have the ACS.

I assume these quotes are directed at me, but since I don't have the biological capacity to grow a beard, I am a little unsure. If they are, my accusation of no wiggle room in the syllabus came from this assertion of yours:

A syllabus provides the standard for the phase of training. There are specific performance standards for maneuvers in the syllabus and those standards change as the student progresses in training. A student doesn’t progress if they fail the specific performance standards and the student remains in that lesson until the standard is met.

I read that as you must fulfill a lesson, no matter what, before being able to move on, even if the student would be better served to take a breather and come back after lessons on a different subject for a short time. If I read that wrong, or if those posts weren't aimed at me, I apologize.

 

[Salty]

to my knowledge there is no such thing as a grade. You meet the standard or you do not meet the standard.

 

[MauleSkinner]

to my knowledge there is no such thing as a grade. You meet the standard or you do not meet the standard.

A training program can assign a grading system. Where I work, we have 4 grades we can give that range from “meets standard” down to basically “go home and don’t come back.”

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

to my knowledge there is no such thing as a grade. You meet the standard or you do not meet the standard.

We grade each part of a lesson as follows: A - exceeds standards. B - meets standards. C - needs improvement. If a maneuver is demonstrated, we mark it as a D. In addition to the grade, we usually make notes explaining the reason for anything that needs improvement.

 

[Salty]

A training program can assign a grading system. Where I work, we have 4 grades we can give that range from “meets standard” down to basically “go home and don’t come back.”

Sure, but skychaser wasn’t in that program.

 

[Clip4]

to my knowledge there is no such thing as a grade. You meet the standard or you do not meet the standard.

Depending on the record used, an overall grade of 1-5 provided for the lesson. Each task is graded as demonstrated, attempted (practiced), safe, PTS standard.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Depending on the record used, an overall grade of 1-5 provided for the lesson. Each task is graded as demonstrated, attempted (practiced), safe, PTS standard.

I hope “safe” is a higher grade than “PTS Standard.”

 

[Clip4]

I hope “safe” is a higher grade than “PTS Standard.”

Safe means the student is approved to practice the maneuver solo.

 

[pfarber]

Exactly how does a student, who doesn’t know what he is supposed to learn or the standards, hold the instructor accountable? What’s next? Asking the student to sign a form acknowledging he was properly trained?

If you're going to spend $10k+ on a hobby, or as training for a job, you really need to do your own research. The CFI is an Instructor, but you, the one with the money, is the one responsible for the outcome.

People spend weeks researching a $100 earbud purchase or phone or laptop... but $10k for flight training? NAW, just show up and hope for the best.

Granted, most people at the younger end of the spectrum are not going to question an authority figure as that's what's been beaten into them for the entirety of their education. But its quite easy to simple google flight training and find the exact advice I am giving.

CFI's are trash, flight schools are trash, and unless you are going to hold THEM to a high standard of training the 1500 hour chasing CFI doesn't give a rip about you. All they need to do is keep their pass rate high and keep booking hours.

Learning to fly is not some romantic endeavor... its a business. Getting the most value out of your money is the goal so you get the certificate with as little investment and hassle as possible.

The fact that you actually think "who doesn’t know what he is supposed to learn or the standards" show me that you havent read the ACS. It tells you EXACTLY what you need to know and to what standard you need to know them. Its why so many people are posting READ THE ACS. It literally the questions AND answers to the test!!

 

[Clip4]

If you're going to spend $10k+ on a hobby, or as training for a job, you really need to do your own research. The CFI is an Instructor, but you, the one with the money, is the one responsible for the outcome.

People spend weeks researching a $100 earbud purchase or phone or laptop... but $10k for flight training? NAW, just show up and hope for the best.

Granted, most people at the younger end of the spectrum are not going to question an authority figure as that's what's been beaten into them for the entirety of their education. But its quite easy to simple google flight training and find the exact advice I am giving.

CFI's are trash, flight schools are trash, and unless you are going to hold THEM to a high standard of training the 1500 hour chasing CFI doesn't give a rip about you. All they need to do is keep their pass rate high and keep booking hours.

Learning to fly is not some romantic endeavor... it’s a business. Getting the most value out of your money is the goal so you get the certificate with as little investment and hassle as possible.

if it were only that easy…

 

[pfarber]

We grade each part of a lesson as follows: A - exceeds standards. B - meets standards. C - needs improvement. If a maneuver is demonstrated, we mark it as a D. In addition to the grade, we usually make notes explaining the reason for anything that needs improvement.

A - crap, they know what they are doing, can't bill for additional lessons
B - crap, they know what they are doing, can't bill for additional lessons
C - complete BS to bill for more lessons. In a steep turn did the student: "Maintain the entry altitude ±100 feet, airspeed ±10 knots, bank ±5°, and roll out on the entry heading ±10°." Or not.

Seriously, this is not hard. All its doing is showing that schools are trash and so are CFIs.

How do you 'Exceed' the standard vs 'Meets'?

 

[pfarber]

if it were only that easy…

At my age and level of already have been screwed over by garbage flight schools and garbage CGI's it IS easy. But I can see how a young adult, who's only ever known high school won't have that wisdom. THat's why we should have open and honest conversations on how to improve the system and ensure students are well prepared.

The FAA surely doesn't care. I kinda do... like 12%

I deal with new AnPs all the time. They are honestly shocked when I tell them I wouldn't sign that off no matter what management says. Its kinda sad that they don't realize the gravity of what they are doing. But they have no idea as they went from high school to anp school to a shop. No one has taken the time to explain how the world works and that its not all roses and cupcakes out there.

 

[Clip4]

A - crap, they know what they are doing, can't bill for additional lessons
B - crap, they know what they are doing, can't bill for additional lessons
C - complete BS to bill for more lessons. In a steep turn did the student: "Maintain the entry altitude ±100 feet, airspeed ±10 knots, bank ±5°, and roll out on the entry heading ±10°." Or not.

Seriously, this is not hard. All its doing is showing that schools are trash and so are CFIs.

How do you 'Exceed' the standard vs 'Meets'?

You can’t exceed the ACS standard, but you can exceed or fall behind the expected progression. Each maneuver is scored, progression is scored. It advises the student on what needs improvement and how they are progressing before they spend several thousand dollars and figure out they aren’t getting it.

As a student, you take vacations, have health issues, have family crisis ect. So does your CFI. Unless you want to sit on the ground with your acquired skills perishing until your CFI is back, the pitch CFI needs to know what where you are in training, your performance, and what need to be done next. Logbook entries, no syllabus, no training records doesn’t get it.

 

[pfarber]

Honestly I really can't agree with a tiered grading system when the goal of the training is cut and dry:

Did you throw the bean bag into the hole or not? If they can do a steep turn a few times within ACS standards then they understand the maneuver, understand the limits and do it safely. Honestly it doesn't matter if you are +/-99 feet during the maneuver because the standard gives you that tolerance. Now you can say that 'we want our students to be within +/-10 feet'. That's a great goal.A.. but since that's NOT the ACS standard you should let them practice FOR FREE becuase you are now substituting YOUR GOAL not the ACS.

At the end of the day all that matters is did the applicant MEET ACS STANDARDS, NOT YOURS.

This is a perfect example why I believe CFI's and flight schools and the current system is trash.

Let me just ask this: if a student is meeting ACS standards, and knows it, but the CFI/school want's a higher tolerance, who's in the right? The student is screwed because the CFI cannot be forced to sign off and there is no recourse for them. FSDO ain't gonna care.

 

[Clip4]

He has a lot of mixed up ideas about things. In this thread he insisted there is no such thing as "solo flight training." I asked why the FARs (Part 61 and 141) use the phrase "solo flight training" dozens of times. Never answered.

There is no such thing as solo flight training. Solo flight time is experience and no where in the regs does it allow a student to log solo as flight training.

FAR 1.1

Flight time means:
(1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest after landing;

Flight training means that training, other than ground training, received from an authorized instructor in flight in an aircraft.

61.51 Pilot logbooks.

(a) Training time and aeronautical experience. Each person must document and record the following time in a manner acceptable to the Administrator:

(1) Training and aeronautical experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review of this part.


(b)(2) Type of pilot experience or training—

(i) Solo.

(ii) Pilot in command.

(iii) Second in command.

(iv) Flight and ground training received from an authorized instructor.

(v) Training received in a full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device from an authorized instructor.

(d) Logging of solo flight time. Except for a student pilot performing the duties of pilot in command of an airship requiring more than one pilot flight crewmember, a pilot may log as solo flight time only that flight time when the pilot is the sole occupant of the aircraft.




61.87 Solo requirements for student pilots.
(a) General. A student pilot may not operate an aircraft in solo flight unless that student has met the requirements of this section. The term “solo flight” as used in this subpart means that flight time during which a student pilot is the sole occupant of the aircraft or that flight time during which the student performs the duties of a pilot in command of a gas balloon or an airshiprequiring more than one pilot flight crewmember.


Likewise, completing a King ground school isn’t instruction either. It’s a home (self) study course.

 

[Mikey52]

I think he means training to solo.

 

[dmspilot]

If you find in the regs where the FAA recognizes solo as training, please post it.

61.89(5)
61.109(a)
61.109(b)
61.109(c)
61.109(d)
61.109(e)
61.109(i)
61.109(j)
61.313(a)(1)
61.313(b)(1)
61.313(c)(1)
61.313(d)(1)
61.313(g)(1)
61.313(h)(1)
141 Appendix A 4. a.
141 Appendix A 5.
141 Appendix B 5.
141 Appendix B 5. a.
141 Appendix B 5. c.
141 Appendix B 5. d.
141 Appendix B 5. e.
141 Appendix D 5.
141 Appendix M 5.

 

[Clip4]

61.89(5)
61.109(a)
61.109(b)
61.109(c)
61.109(d)
61.109(e)
61.109(i)
61.109(j)
61.313(a)(1)
61.313(b)(1)
61.313(c)(1)
61.313(d)(1)
61.313(g)(1)
61.313(h)(1)
141 Appendix A 4. a.
141 Appendix A 5.
141 Appendix B 5.
141 Appendix B 5. a.
141 Appendix B 5. c.
141 Appendix B 5. d.
141 Appendix B 5. e.
141 Appendix D 5.
141 Appendix M 5.

Nice list, I will take 61.89 for $500 DMS. Show me the word solo in this reg and a reference to solo flight training.

§ 61.89 General limitations.
(a) A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft:

(1) That is carrying a passenger;

(2) That is carrying property for compensation or hire;

(3) For compensation or hire;

(4) In furtherance of a business;

(5) On an international flight, except that a student pilot may make solo training flights from Haines, Gustavus, or Juneau, Alaska, to White Horse, Yukon, Canada, and return over the province of British Columbia;

(6) With a flight or surface visibility of less than 3 statute miles during daylight hours or 5 statute miles at night;

(7) When the flight cannot be made with visual reference to the surface; or

(8) In a manner contrary to any limitations placed in the pilot's logbook by an authorized instructor.

(b) A student pilot may not act as a required pilot flight crewmember on any aircraft for which more than one pilot is required by the type certificate of the aircraft or regulations under which the flight is conducted, except when from an authorized instructor on board an airship, and no person other than a required flight crewmember is carried on the aircraft.

(c) A student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate must comply with the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section and may not act as pilot in command—

(1) Of an aircraft other than a light-sport aircraft;

(2) At night;

(3) At an altitude of more than 10,000 feet MSL or 2,000 feet AGL, whichever is higher;

(4) In Class B, C, and D airspace, at an airport located in Class B, C, or D airspace, and to, from, through, or on an airport having an operational control tower without having received the ground and flight trainingspecified in § 61.94 and an endorsement from an authorized instructor;

(5) Of a light-sport aircraft without having received the applicable ground training, flight training, and instructor

endorsements specified in § 61.327(a) and (b).

(d) The holder of a student pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft without holding a medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter provided the student pilot holds a valid U.S. driver's license, meets the requirements of § 61.23(c)(3), and the operation is conducted consistent with the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section and the conditions of § 61.113(i). Where the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section conflict with § 61.113(i), a student pilot must comply with paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.

#2 on you list is titled 61.109 Aeronautical experience and the student is required to have 5) 10 hours of solo flight time in a single-engine airplane, consisting of at least—

You should write the FAA chief council and let him explain to you solo isn’t instruction.

 

[Clip4]

I think he means training to solo.

The FAA means a student is in a program of training, not solo time is training.

 

[dmspilot]

Nice list, I will take 61.89 for $500 DMS. Show me the word solo in this reg and a reference to solo flight training.

§ 61.89 General limitations.
(a) A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft:

(1) That is carrying a passenger;

(2) That is carrying property for compensation or hire;

(3) For compensation or hire;

(4) In furtherance of a business;

(5) On an international flight, except that a student pilot may make solo training flights

Did you even bother to read what you copied and pasted?

Where is my $500?

endorsements specified in § 61.327(a) and (b).

I didn't say anything about endorsements.

#2 on you list is titled 61.109 Aeronautical experience and the student is required to have 5) 10 hours of solo flight time in a single-engine airplane, consisting of at least—

Try reading the subparagraphs I cited, instead of quoting different ones and telling me it's not there. That's not how this works.

You should write the FAA chief council and let him explain to you solo isn’t instruction.

What are you even talking about? Why would I do that? The stuff you read on beer night.

 

[Clip4]

Did you even bother to read what you copied and pasted?


What are you even talking about? The stuff you read on beer night.

I did, did you? There nothing in Part 61 that allows solo to be logged as flight training. It’s either flight time (experience) or flight training obtained with a CFI in the plane.

 

[dmspilot]

I did, did you?

No, you didn't, because it clearly uses the term "solo training", which you said does not exist.

There nothing in Part 61 that allows solo to be logged as flight training. It’s either flight time (experience) or flight training obtained with a CFI in the plane.

I did not say solo could "be logged as flight training." Don't strawman the argument in an attempt to look right when you're not.

61.109(a) requires "10 hours of solo flight training." You say solo flight training doesn't exist. Yet it's right there. The term is also used in Part 141. Yet it doesn't exist. There is no such thing. Even though the FAA uses the term dozens of times over and over.

 

[Clip4]

No, you didn't, because it clearly uses the term "solo training", which you said does not exist.


I did not say solo could "be logged as flight training." Don't strawman the argument in an attempt to look right when you're not.

61.109(a) requires "10 hours of solo flight training." You say solo flight training doesn't exist. Yet it's right there. The term is also used in Part 141. Yet it doesn't exist. There is no such thing. Even though the FAA uses the term dozens of times over and over.

Write the Chief council and ask. They will advise you they mean the solo experience portion of a training course, not solo is training. If the FAA considered solo as training, the would have included it in the definitions of training.

Absent an FAA definition, training is defined as the action of teaching a person or animal a particular skill or type of behavior. You can’t train yourself. You can learn from experiance.

If it is solo training time and solo training time is required, the student can’t log it.

h) Logging training time.

(1) A person may log training time when that person receives training from an authorized instructor in an aircraft, full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device.

(2) The training time must be logged in a logbook and must:

(i) Be endorsed in a legible manner by the authorized instructor; and

(ii) Include a description of the training given, the length of the training lesson, and the authorized instructor's signature, certificate number, and certificate expiration date.

 

[dmspilot]

Write the Chief council and ask.

Ask what? I do not have any questions. Your cognitive dissonance is not a reason for me to write to the CC.

 

[Clip4]

Ask what? I do not have any questions. Your cognitive dissonance is not a reason for me to write to the CC.

I think you do because you don’t understand how regulations are written.. see if this helps..

4) A student pilot may log pilot-in-command time only when the student pilot—

(i) Is the sole occupant of the aircraft or is performing the duties of pilot of command of an airship requiring more than one pilot flight crewmember;

(ii) Has a solo flight endorsement as required under § 61.87 of this part; and

(iii) Is undergoing training for a pilot certificate or rating.

The holder of a student pilot certificate must be undergoing training for the certificate to act as PIC, it’s not solo flight training.

 

[dmspilot]

I think you do because you don’t understand how regulations are written.. see if this helps..

I understand them perfectly. Let's review:

There is no such thing as solo flight training

solo training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo flight training

solo training

solo flight training

The FAA sure uses the term an awful lot.

I am not the one that backed myself into a corner trying to explain how the FAA requires something that doesn't exist. Someone is confused and it's not me.

 

[Clip4]

I understand them perfectly. Let's review:


























The FAA sure uses the term an awful lot.

I am not the one that backed myself into a corner trying to explain how the FAA requires something that doesn't exist. Someone is confused and it's not me.

Your issue is you don’t understand the regs are administrative rules. If solo is not part of a flight training program with the end goal of a pilot certificate, a student may not act as PIC. That’s why it is referred to as solo flight training. The solo flight is flight time / experience not training.

 

[dmspilot]

Your issue is you don’t understand the regs are administrative rules.

a student may not act as PIC.

The fact that regulations are "administrative rules" and who may or may not act as PIC has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. Can't admit you made an easily disproven false statement.

 

[Lance F]

Just for fun I Googled rating flight instructors. BoldMethod has a page listing the top 10 qualities they say the best instructors have several or all of. Here’s the link

The Best Flight Instructors Always...

Think about the best flight instructor you've ever had. They probably have several (or all) of these qualities.

www.boldmethod.com

I know I sure strive for all of these. But notice what’s not on the list…something like the ability to use a syllabus and keep a graded student record.
I will state clearly again that I have nothing against syllabi and records. If these are required for 141 schools, so be it. But they are not the end all for good instruction. The instructor is what counts.

 

[Clip4]

If the CFI was not trained using a syllabus, there is a good chance they won’t use it to train their learners. It’s like growing plants without fertilizer. It can be done and the plants don’t know the difference.

Instructor Tips

A fundamental characteristic of a quality flight-training course is a well-organized, comprehensive syllabus.

Got syllabus?

Of the many lessons that came from AOPA's research report "The Flight Training Experience," perhaps the most surprising gap between expectation and performance was in the use of a proper syllabus.

www.aopa.org

Instructor Report: The magic of lesson plans

Students learn best when they have a logical and easily understood process for earning their pilot’s certificate. Required areas of aeronautical knowledge and flight proficiency—i.e., the curriculum—are prescribed in federal aviation regulations for the certificate sought.

www.aopa.org

Use A Syllabus

Would you pay thousands of dollars for a class and invest hundreds of hours if you didn’t know what material was going to be covered?

www.flyingmag.com

Would you pay thousands of dollars for a class and invest hundreds of hours if you didn’t know what material was going to be covered, or when the quizzes and tests were, and what was considered a passing grade? Most people wouldn’t, yet every day hundreds of people essentially do this when they show up for flight training and it is conducted without the benefit of a syllabus.

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/aviation_instructors_handbook/11_aih_chapter_9.pdf

Just as it is important to have objectives for ground instruction, it is equally important that the flight instruction have objectives and a syllabus paired with previous instruction given on the ground (to include academic training).

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/aviation_instructors_handbook/09_aih_chapter_7.pdf

A well-constructed syllabus already contains much of the essential information that is required in a lesson plan, including objectives, content, and completion ...

 

[Clip4]

For the CFIs who don’t think they need a training record, an independent CFI acquaintance had a flying club student on a first solo have a landing accident. Basically the student rounded out high, bounced, put the plane in a PIO, and collapsed the nose gear and wrinkled the fire wall. Luckily the student wasn’t injured.

The FSDO investigated because the local flight school got ****ed the runway was closed a couple hours.

The FSDO did the standard student logbook, solo test, and CFI record review. The CFI also provided a training record showing each 61.87 task instructed and graded with the student progression from 1st flight to solo.

Makes it difficult to argue a CFI didn’t provide the instruction and determine the student is prepared to conduct the solo flight safely (61.195) when each lesson has an evaluation and signature.

But you boys do what you want to do.