dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
61.413(a)(6) does not say "a pilot exercising sport pilot privileges". A sport instructor cannot give a flight review to an ATP.
Can a sport pilot instructor...
- Thread starter EdFred
- Start date
61.413(a)(6) does not say "a pilot exercising sport pilot privileges". A sport instructor cannot give a flight review to an ATP.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
So if I want to fly as a Sport Pilot, I still have to get a flight review from a “conventional” instructor unless I surrender all certificates/ratings above the Sport Pilot level?
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
Without a letter of interpretation I would assume so.
Sport instructors operate in their own special bubble, you can't apply the same logic that you are used to. Remember we faced a similar problem with sport pilots wanting to upgrade to private — if they originally used a sport instructor they essentially had to start over. That "problem" was solved by the FAA with a new regulation that specifically allowed crediting sport training toward recreational and private training requirements (see 61.99(b) and 61.109(l)).
Last edited:
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
Who said someone had to surrender their certificates to get training? Maule and I were talking about what kinds of flight reviews a sport instructor can give. Way to totally butcher what I wrote and take it way out of context.
Yes it does and I explained why in Post 17 — 61.193(a)(2) allows a regular CFI to give instruction toward a sport pilot certificate, because it is a kind of pilot certificate.
YOU are being obtuse, either on purpose or because your lead-poisoned brain can't comprehend what I've written.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,507
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
That’s silly. Stoping making up rules.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
What rule did I make up?
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,507
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
I quoted what I was referring to in the conversation.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
You quoted two different paragraphs, neither of which involved me making anything up.
Here I stated that I would assume the most conservative interpretation of 61.413(a)(6).
Here I gave a history lesson on why training from sport instructors used to not count toward other certificates and what the FAA did to correct it.
Chief Counsel interpretation from 2009 that explained why instruction from a sport instructor couldn't be credited toward higher certificates:
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_or...s/2009/Kern_INK_2009_Legal_Interpretation.pdf
Final Rule from 2018 that allowed the transfer of hours:
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...fication-training-and-pilot-schools-and-other
Last edited:
bflynn
Final Approach
to provide training and endorsements that are required for
if you’re training for a sport certificate in a tail wheel aircraft, a tail wheel endorsement is required. You could already be a private pilot, trying to add on a sport certificate or sport instructor. If you never finished there might be some fuss that you were gaming the regulations, but that’s the path.
Actually, the Brown Shoes are more like the Skimmers and the USAF is like the Submariners when it comes to the -1. OTOH, “What’s a rule book” might be appropriate for most pilots of any type, intentionally or not (Like the plane swapping Red Bull guys or Martha Stewart).
Cheers
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
You claimed that my argument means a regular instructor can't give sport pilot instruction, when I clearly stated why they can. Proof you don't understand the argument and aren't capable of understanding. Not sure if it's the 100LL or the Flint water you've been drinking.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
I said sport INSTRUCTORS were and that was an analogy and I went on to explain what I meant. You can't even quote me right, how is there any hope you could understand an argument?
You're done and yet you came back and added another paragraph to your post.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,507
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
I pushed the reply button once. Yes you did.
nothing else to see here. Just a thirsty horse standing beside a water trough.
"Why would it be valid? 61.56 requires a flight review from an authorized instructor. 61.413 only authorizes sport instructors to give flight reviews to sport pilots."
But it's moot on the question of a ppl certificate holder switching to exercising sport pilot privileges when moving to LSA aircraft, essentially becoming a sport pilot. After all, the BFR for the ppl moving to sport has to be in the type/category of aircraft he'll be operating. Finding CFIIs who have access as well as category experience & currency to give BFRs in LSA's would be problematic.
But it's moot on the question of a ppl certificate holder switching to exercising sport pilot privileges when moving to LSA aircraft, essentially becoming a sport pilot. After all, the BFR for the ppl moving to sport has to be in the type/category of aircraft he'll be operating. Finding CFIIs who have access as well as category experience & currency to give BFRs in LSA's would be problematic.
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 16,021
- Location
- DXO124009
- Display Name
Display name:
Light and Sporty Guy
So, get flight reviewed in a 172. Single Engine Land, just like a Cub.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
That is one possible interpretation, but like I stated in my reply to Maule, without a CC letter I would not assume it's correct. 61.301(c) and 61.303 does not make a private pilot "turn into" a sport pilot, just like a second class medical doesn't actually "turn into" a third class medical after 12 months, even though we often think of it that way.
It's not problematic. You only have to get the flight review in an aircraft you're rated for. Get it from a regular CFI in 172 and you can keep flying your LSA seaplane under sport pilot rules. For the reasons I've explained, the reverse does not seem to be possible.
I tried that. according to two CFIs I tried, if you're flying as a PPL exercising Sport Pilot privileges, you must take the BFR in an LSA. It is not enough to take the review in a "sport-like" aircraft like a cub or Taylorcraft.
This whole business is compounded by the fact that I'm buying a Bushcat LSA, which will be delivered soon. If I were to apply for a 3rd class to get a BFR in a 172 as a PPL, OKC is so backed up that I'd never get the common but required SIs out of OKC within an acceptable time frame.
Since I don't need a medical for the LSA anyway, I'm not going to try (plus at this point in the purchase and at 70 yrs old, it is an unnecessary risk to apply for a 3rd class and be banned for life if I fail. then I'd be stuck with a new airplane and no legal way to fly it).
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
That is BS.
Why would you need a medical to receive a flight review? You only need a medical to act as PIC. If you needed to act as PIC on a BFR, every person who ever let their previous BFR expire would never be able to get a new one.
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 16,021
- Location
- DXO124009
- Display Name
Display name:
Light and Sporty Guy
First of all. A medical is not required for a flight review. So the fact that you don't have one at the moment is irrelevant. The fact that you plan to fly under the sport rules in the future is irrelevant.
Second. A Cub or Taylorcraft is not a '"sport-like" aircraft - they 100%, flat out, for real, meet the definition of LSA in FAR 1.1 (Definitions). They are "Light Sport Aircraft". The method of certification for the aircraft (standard, E-AB, S-LSA, E-LSA, what forking ever) is not found in the definition of LSA. And they can be flown under the Sport pilot rules. Don't confuse aircraft certification with pilot privileges and limitations.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-1/section-1.1
Light-sport aircraft means an aircraft, other than a helicopter or powered-lift that, since its original certification, has continued to meet the following:
(1) A maximum takeoff weight of not more than -
(i) 1,320 pounds (600 kilograms) for aircraft not intended for operation on water; or
(ii) 1,430 pounds (650 kilograms) for an aircraft intended for operation on water.
(2) A maximum airspeed in level flight with maximum continuous power (VH) of not more than 120 knots CAS under standard atmospheric conditions at sea level.
(3) A maximum never-exceed speed (VNE) of not more than 120 knots CAS for a glider.
(4) A maximum stalling speed or minimum steady flight speed without the use of lift-enhancing devices (VS1) of not more than 45 knots CAS at the aircraft's maximum certificated takeoff weight and most critical center of gravity.
(5) A maximum seating capacity of no more than two persons, including the pilot.
(6) A single, reciprocating engine, if powered.
(7) A fixed or ground-adjustable propeller if a powered aircraft other than a powered glider.
(8) A fixed or feathering propeller system if a powered glider.
(9) A fixed-pitch, semi-rigid, teetering, two-blade rotor system, if a gyroplane.
(10) A nonpressurized cabin, if equipped with a cabin.
(11) Fixed landing gear, except for an aircraft intended for operation on water or a glider.
(12) Fixed or retractable landing gear, or a hull, for an aircraft intended for operation on water.
(13) Fixed or retractable landing gear for a glider.
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 16,021
- Location
- DXO124009
- Display Name
Display name:
Light and Sporty Guy
Forgot to mention, according to the two CFI's that gave me flight reviews in other than LSA aircraft (Cessna 150 (lowest cost option around at the time), Cessna 172 (just for the fun of it) ) it's a non issue.
But usually I get my reviews from a third CFI in my E-AB aircraft that fits under the LSA definition. Also not an issue.
Well, it's been an interesting discussion. Some instructors may have "understanding" but a common interpretation is not widespread.
1. Three different local schools declined to involve themselves in my BFR because they didn't have an LSA onhand and they "claimed" I couldn't get a BFR in a 172 without one. The logic was that they were endorsing me for PIC in a 172.
2. The language one regular CFII told me to utter if ever ramp checked, is that I was a PPL exercising "Sport Pilot privileges." To clarify expectations and roles.
3. On my BFR endorsement from a CFII while flying an LSA (same model of the plane I'm buying) the instructor asked to inspect my PPL certificate and my 3rd Class Medical. On the BFR endorsement using ForeFlight inserted "sport pilot" into the boilerplate:
and then her CFII info. The outfit's Chief Pilot and head CFII checked over the work.
So now, I've got CFIs in two different parts of the country telling me the same thing, but exactly opposite of what some on this list are saying.
1. Three different local schools declined to involve themselves in my BFR because they didn't have an LSA onhand and they "claimed" I couldn't get a BFR in a 172 without one. The logic was that they were endorsing me for PIC in a 172.
2. The language one regular CFII told me to utter if ever ramp checked, is that I was a PPL exercising "Sport Pilot privileges." To clarify expectations and roles.
3. On my BFR endorsement from a CFII while flying an LSA (same model of the plane I'm buying) the instructor asked to inspect my PPL certificate and my 3rd Class Medical. On the BFR endorsement using ForeFlight inserted "sport pilot" into the boilerplate:
Completion of a Flight Review
I certify that [my name], sport pilot, #[my PPl certificate number---weird, right?] has completed a flight review of sec 61.56 (a) on [date].
I certify that [my name], sport pilot, #[my PPl certificate number---weird, right?] has completed a flight review of sec 61.56 (a) on [date].
and then her CFII info. The outfit's Chief Pilot and head CFII checked over the work.
So now, I've got CFIs in two different parts of the country telling me the same thing, but exactly opposite of what some on this list are saying.
As to whether a cub or taylorcraft qualify as light sport, only part of the regs were quoted previously.
A cub would need to be manufactured "new" and never certified in any other category before to qualify as a LS aircraft. (I assume, to prevent everyone from converting their Cubs and T-Crafts to LSA and taking advantage of their different inspection and repair regimes). Also, note that LSAs are built to ASTM standards (3rd bullet point: the applicable consensus standard).
It was pointed out to me by my local FSDO that this part of the Airworthiness Certification wording scotched my plans to by a Aeronca Champ (which otherwise qualifies as a LSA).
https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/airworthiness_certification/sp_awcert/light_sport/
"A Light-sport Aircraft (LSA) category special airworthiness certificate is issued to operate an aircraft that:
A cub would need to be manufactured "new" and never certified in any other category before to qualify as a LS aircraft. (I assume, to prevent everyone from converting their Cubs and T-Crafts to LSA and taking advantage of their different inspection and repair regimes). Also, note that LSAs are built to ASTM standards (3rd bullet point: the applicable consensus standard).
It was pointed out to me by my local FSDO that this part of the Airworthiness Certification wording scotched my plans to by a Aeronca Champ (which otherwise qualifies as a LSA).
https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/airworthiness_certification/sp_awcert/light_sport/
"A Light-sport Aircraft (LSA) category special airworthiness certificate is issued to operate an aircraft that:
- Has not been previously issued an airworthiness certificate or an equivalent airworthiness certificate issued by the U.S. or a foreign civil aviation authority,
- Is in a condition for safe operation,
- Was built and tested to the applicable consensus standards by the aircraft’s manufacturer, and
- Possesses the manufacturer’s statement of compliance."
If I'm wrong, show me where. Also, in re-reading the Flight Review regs, the regulations do not make any distinctions: it merely says "Instructor." Certainly, categories would apply. But I don't see anything from a SEL Comm pilot getting a BFR from a Sport Pilot instructor, flying an LSA.
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 16,021
- Location
- DXO124009
- Display Name
Display name:
Light and Sporty Guy
Without a medical?
So they didn't know didilly poop about the sport pilot rules.
If you had "only a sport pilot certificate", then, yea, you have to do it in an LSA. But if you are a private pilot who just doesn't happen to have a medical, then you are still a private pilot, can still log PIC (even if you can't act) and can get a flight review. The AC linked also does not have the language about a "sport pilot" review...
The next thing that someone will tell you is that if you don't "qualify" for a third class medical you can't fly under the Sport Pilot rules.
Daleandee
Final Approach
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2020
- Messages
- 6,878
- Display Name
Display name:
Dale Andee
True. I had to find an instructor to do my review in my plane as there wasn't a LSA available and my experimental meets the criteria. There's at least one sport pilot near my neck of the woods that said he got his review in a Cessna 150. I tried to explain to him and the instructor that he couldn't do it that way as it was not an aircraft for which a sport pilot can be rated. Got a fingers in ears response.
The whole driver's license & 3rd class thing needs to go away. If one is used in lieu of the other it would seem that the same privileges should be allowed but the FAA must think someone is less medically fit if you didn't jump through their hoops for a 3rd class. Planes falling out of the sky for medical reasons are a pretty rare occurrence. Sport pilot and basic med have shown that.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
No, this is all completely wrong. A sport pilot can operate a light-sport aircraft as it is defined in 14 CFR 1.1:
14 CFR 1.1 said:
There is no "conversion" necessary for a sport pilot to fly an airplane that meets the above definition. It either meets the definition or it doesn't.
The regulations you quoted pertaining to obtaining a special airworthiness certificate in the LSA category is for the aircraft. Nothing in 14 CFR Part 1 or Part 61 require the airplane you fly to have any specific type of airworthiness certificate. It simply must have an airworthiness certificate to comply with 14 CFR 91.203. The requirements for an aircraft to receive a particular type of airworthiness certificate have absolutely nothing to do with which aircraft you fly.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
The instructor must be an authorized instructor. The authorizations of a sport-only instructor are listed in 61.413.
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 16,021
- Location
- DXO124009
- Display Name
Display name:
Light and Sporty Guy
A legacy Champ does not have nor can it ever be issued an S-LSA or E-LSA type certificate. So what?
NOWHERE in the regulations does it say that a Sport Pilot is limited to aircraft with those certificates. Nowhere. A sport pilot may fly a "light sport aircraft". Not "Aircraft with a special light sport certificate". And, "Light Sport Aircraft" is as defined in the previous post and includes the proverbial Champ.
You are confusing aircraft certification methods with pilot privileges.
Nope. Wrong. Here is the FAA's own list of certificated aircraft that qualify as LSAs:
https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/light_sport/media/ExistingModels.pdf
Any plane meeting the requirements (weight, airspeed, fixed prop and gear, etc.) for light sport aircraft is an LSA. If the LSA has a "Special" airworthiness certificate it is an S-LSA. If it's an experimental, it's an E-LSA.
There are lots and lots of Pipers and Ercoupes and Luscombes around that are LSAs and are being flown by Sport Pilots or by Private Pilots under SP rules.
Brad Z
Final Approach
Yes, a sport pilot instructor may give a tail wheel endorsement to a private/commercial/ATP in a light sport aircraft. That endorsement, however, is not limited to light sport aircraft.
Does the sport pilot instructor have authority to give the training?
Yes. Under 61.413, a sport pilot instructor you are "authorized, within the limits of your certificate and rating, to provide training and endorsements that are required for, and relate to [...] A sport pilot certificate [and] Sport pilot privileges. Since 61.31(i) specifies that "no person may act as pilot in command of a tailwheel airplane unless that person has received and logged flight training from an authorized instructor in a tailwheel airplane and received an endorsement in the person's logbook from an authorized instructor who found the person proficient in the operation of a tailwheel airplane", a tail wheel endorsement is required for a student pilot to train and obtain their sport pilot certificate in a light sport aircraft with a tail wheel. Accordingly, a sport pilot flight instructor has authority to give the endorsement.
Is the sport pilot flight instructor only permitted to give the tail wheel endorsement to persons training for or holding a sport pilot certificate?
No. A sport pilot may give instruction to anyone exercising the privileges of a sport pilot certificate. When a private/commercial/ATP is operating a light sport aircraft within the confines of 61.315 and 61.303, he or she is exercising sport pilot privileges, regardless of the certificate they hold.
Is a tail wheel endorsement from a sport pilot instructor limited only to sport pilot privileges?
No, the endorsement issued by a sport pilot instructor under 61.31(i) May be utilized when exercising the privileges of any certificate the recipient of the endorsement holds. Note that 61.31(i) specifies that the training only take place in a tail wheel airplane. It does not distinguish between LSA or non LSA. A piper cub is a tail wheel airplane, even if it happens to qualify as a light sport aircraft.
It's worth noting that the FAA explicitly allows sport pilot instructors to conduct training that can applied towards private pilot training requirements. In the 2018 Final Rule amending certain sections of part 61, the FAA said:
After review of the comments and further analysis, the FAA has decided to allow all training received from a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating to be credited by an applicant seeking a recreational or private pilot certificate. The FAA recognizes that an applicant for a sport pilot certificate must complete flight training on many of the same areas of operation required for a recreational or private pilot certificate. Additionally, as explained in the NPRM, many of the tasks and maneuvers outlined in the practical test standards for a sport pilot are the same as those outlined in the practical test standards for recreational or private pilot. In fact, these areas of operation must be performed to identical proficiency standards. Therefore, the FAA believes that all training received as a sport pilot candidate is relative to the aeronautical experience required for a higher certificate.
Last edited:
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
Yes, it took an amendment to do that, because before they couldn't. Subparagraphs 61.99(b) and 61.109(l) were added to allow it. Without those two subparagraphs, sport instruction from sport instructors would not count toward a recreational or private certificate. If it took an amendment adding a specific regulation to allow it, how can a sport instructor give a tailwheel endorsement to a private (or other non-sport) pilot that would count outside of sport pilot rules?
Last edited:
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
The reg says an LSA CFI may give flight reviews. It doesn’t say flight reviews for only LSA certificate holders. A flight review in a LSA with a sport pilot CFI-S counts as a flight review for a any pilot flying non LSA heavier airplanes.
The reason is a flight review given from an airplane CFI to a pilot with more that one aircraft category rating is valid in all the aircraft categories on that pilots certificate.
The flight review only needs to be accomplished in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated.
Last edited:
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
Read the reg. It says exactly what you say it doesn't say.
Flight instructors other than flight instructors with a sport pilot rating are authorized to give:
Flight instructors with a sport pilot rating are authorized to give:
You guys are reading the same words two different ways, which says it’s poorly written. Consider this:
(6) does not say “A flight review for a sport pilot or operating privileges for a sport pilot.”
Separate the two. The CFI can give a flight review. OR The CFI can give operating privileges for a sport pilot.
(6) does not say “A flight review for a sport pilot or operating privileges for a sport pilot.”
Separate the two. The CFI can give a flight review. OR The CFI can give operating privileges for a sport pilot.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
I considered that it could be read that way, and concluded that you shouldn't. For one, because there are nine authorizations 61.413(a). There is no reason to write them in the same subparagraph if they were meant to be separated like that
I'll admit it's possible, and also that it's possible that a private (or other non-sport) pilot operating under 61.301 and 303 could be considered "a sport pilot" for that purpose. But like I said before, I wouldn't assume so without a letter of interpretation; your level of pilot certification doesn't change just because you are operating under 61.301/303; just like a 2nd class medical doesn't actually change to a 3rd class after 12 months.
The original draft of the regulation appears in the NPRM from 2002. For whatever reason the wording in the final rule appears as you quoted.
What privileges do I have if I hold a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating? You are authorized, within the limitations of your flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, to provide training and logbook endorsements for:
(a) A student pilot certificate to operate light-sport aircraft;
(b) A sport pilot certificate;
(c) A sport pilot privilege;
(d) A flight review for a sport pilot;
(e) A practical test for a sport pilot;
(f) A knowledge test for a sport pilot; and
(g) A proficiency check for an additional category or class and make and model privilege for a sport pilot certificate or flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating.
(b) A sport pilot certificate;
(c) A sport pilot privilege;
(d) A flight review for a sport pilot;
(e) A practical test for a sport pilot;
(f) A knowledge test for a sport pilot; and
(g) A proficiency check for an additional category or class and make and model privilege for a sport pilot certificate or flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
So as an extension of that logic, an ATP may not share expenses while exercising the privileges of a Private Pilot because he is not a Private Pilot?
Well, clearly it’s all a mess.
I got mine. Thx
I got mine. Thx
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
This thread is keeping flies away from a dead horse?
