CFI without a medical

vintage cessna

vintage cessna

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
1,076
Display Name
Display name:
retro
Came across an interesting topic on another board. The debate boils down to three questions.

1. Can a CFI without a medical (certified under Subpart H of regs) give instruction for Private Pilot in an LSA?

2. Can a DPE without a medical give a check ride for Private Pilot in an LSA?

3. Can a Sport Pilot applying for a Private Pilot certificate count hours of instruction received from a CFI (Subpart H) without a medical towards the requirements for Private Pilot?

Should add that the DPE and Instructor in question have expired medicals and are otherwise qualified to be PIC of an LSA.
 
Last edited:
vintage cessna said:
1. Can a CFI without a medical (certified under Subpart H of regs) give instruction for Private Pilot in an LSA?
Click to expand...
Yes, provided the CFI involved has a valid US driver's license, no restrictions on that license preventing the operation, and does not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make him/her unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner.

2. Can a DPE without a medical give a check ride for Private Pilot in an LSA?
Click to expand...
No. A DPE with Private Pilot authorization must hold a medical certificate. From FAA Order 8900.2:
b. Medical Certificate. For designations requiring a medical certificate, the examiner must maintain at least a third-class medical certificate throughout the duration of the designation, except in the case of a designation limited to examining in balloons, gliders, or simulators for which no medical certificate is required.
Click to expand...
Note that one requirement for a PP-Airplane practical test is hood work, and that means the DPE must act as a safety pilot. Since safety pilot is a PP privilege, the DPE must hold a medical certificate to exercise that privilege.

3. Can a Sport Pilot applying for a Private Pilot certificate count hours of instruction received from a CFI (Subpart H) without a medical towards the requirements for Private Pilot?
Click to expand...
Yes. The relevant regulation only talks about the Flight Instructor certificate ratings, not the CFI's medical status. Note, however, that this CFI cannot complete all the training for PP-Airplane or sign that practical test endorsement since there is hood work involved in that, and the no-medical CFI involved must act as a safety pilot to do that -- and that requires a medical.​
​
And lest anyone bring up the idea of having a qualified safety pilot in the other control seat while the CFI instructs from the back, remember that LSA's only have two seats.​
 
Ron Levy said:
Yes, provided the CFI involved has a valid US driver's license, no restrictions on that license preventing the operation, and does not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make him/her unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner.

No. A DPE with Private Pilot authorization must hold a medical certificate. From FAA Order 8900.2:
Note that one requirement for a PP-Airplane practical test is hood work, and that means the DPE must act as a safety pilot. Since safety pilot is a PP privilege, the DPE must hold a medical certificate to exercise that privilege.

Yes. The relevant regulation only talks about the Flight Instructor certificate ratings, not the CFI's medical status. Note, however, that this CFI cannot complete all the training for PP-Airplane or sign that practical test endorsement since there is hood work involved in that, and the no-medical CFI involved must act as a safety pilot to do that -- and that requires a medical.


And lest anyone bring up the idea of having a qualified safety pilot in the other control seat while the CFI instructs from the back, remember that LSA's only have two seats.​
Click to expand...
Here's a question I've had for awhile. Is a subpart H CFI without a medical allowed to give the 3 hours of flight training by ref. to flight instruments required for the private in an LSA? I'm thinking the answer is no due to the fact that a medical is required to act as a safety pilot and one would think that a CFI giving instruction to someone under the hood would have to meet the same requirements.
 
GCA319 said:
Here's a question I've had for awhile. Is a subpart H CFI without a medical allowed to give the 3 hours of flight training by ref. to flight instruments required for the private in an LSA? I'm thinking the answer is no due to the fact that a medical is required to act as a safety pilot and one would think that a CFI giving instruction to someone under the hood would have to meet the same requirements.
Click to expand...
You're thinking correctly.
 
bbchien said:
61.23 (b)7 specifically does not exempt the LSA check airman, as it does balloon and glider.

...that's what about.
Click to expand...

61.23 doesn't exempt Subpart H instructors either. Under operations requiring a medical it says Instructors must have a medical if acting as PIC.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I agree with you. But what do you consider to be the "relevant regulation."
Click to expand...
First, let me clarify that I'm speaking to the idea of a Sport Pilot taking training from a no-medical CFI-ASE in an LSA. Clearly, they can't do that in a Standard category airplane, since neither of them is legal to be PIC.

Beyond that, the language to which I refer is in 61.109 -- "an authorized instructor", which is defined for this purpose in 1.1 as "(ii) A person who holds a flight instructor certificate issued under part 61 of this chapter and is in compliance with Sec. 61.197, when conducting ground training or flight training in accordance with the privileges and limitations of his or her flight instructor certificate..." That definition says nothing about medical certificates, 61.197 says nothing at all relevant (I suspect they really meant 61.193, regarding "the limitations of that person's flight instructor certificate and ratings" which again does not mention the person's medical certificate), and 61.23 does not require a medical for giving training unless acting as a required pilot crewmember.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
What about 61.23? What language in that section do you think would prohibit a no-medical CFI-ASE from giving PP training to a Sport Pilot in an LSA airplane in which that Sport Pilot as privileges?
Click to expand...

61.23 requires an Instructor to have a third class if acting as PIC. An instructor giving instruction to a student in an LSA would be PIC, correct?

61.23 further says that an Instructor may use a drivers license for exercising the privileges of a Sport Instructor.

If a CFI (Subpart H) with out a medical can only exercise the privileges of a Sport Instructor, how can he instruct for Private?
 
vintage cessna said:
61.23 doesn't exempt Subpart H instructors either. Under operations requiring a medical it says Instructors must have a medical if acting as PIC.
Click to expand...
If operating as PIC of an aircraft requiring a medical of the PIC.
I see no limitations to providing hood training under sport pilot instructors 61.415
 
Ron Levy said:
What about 61.23? What language in that section do you think would prohibit a no-medical CFI-ASE from giving PP training to a Sport Pilot in an LSA airplane in which that Sport Pilot as privileges?
Click to expand...

To a Sport Pilot yes, because the Sport Pilot can act as PIC, but what if the instruction for Private is given (by an instructor without a medical, in an LSA ) to someone who only has a student pilot certificate?

IOW, can an Instructor without a medical give instruction for the Private Pilot rating in an LSA to someone who only has a student pilot certificate?
 
Last edited:
vintage cessna said:
61.23 requires an Instructor to have a third class if acting as PIC.
Click to expand...
...but only when the PIC is required to have a medical. For LSA, it's either medical or DL.

An instructor giving instruction to a student in an LSA would be PIC, correct?
Click to expand...
If the trainee is not qualified as PIC, yes, the instructor would have to act as PIC. But one does not need a medical to act as PIC of an LSA if one has a US DL.

61.23 further says that an Instructor may use a drivers license for exercising the privileges of a Sport Instructor.
Click to expand...
Again, that's not exactly what 61.23 says.
 
nosehair said:
I see no limitations to providing hood training under sport pilot instructors 61.415
Click to expand...
Me, neither, as long as the CFI-SP has a medical certificate, which is necessary to act as safety pilot since that means exercising PP privileges. No medical, no safety piloting, no hood training. Of course, a CFI can give instrument training without a medical as long as the other control seat is occupied by a qualified safety pilot, and the CFI instructs from the jump or back seat. Unfortunately, LSA's only have at most two seats, and that's one seat too few to do this in an LSA.
 
vintage cessna said:
To a Sport Pilot yes, because the Sport Pilot can act as PIC, but what if the instruction for Private is given (by an instructor without a medical, in an LSA ) to someone who only has a student pilot certificate?

IOW, can an Instructor without a medical give instruction for the Private Pilot rating in an LSA to someone who only has a student pilot certificate?
Click to expand...
Yes, as long as the CFI-ASE has a valid US driver's license, since that's all he needs to act as PIC of a LSA. This CFI cannot give the required instrument work, since this CFI cannot act as safety pilot, but s/he can give almost all the necessary training. Without either the DL or medical, then no, this CFI cannot give training to a Student Pilot in an LSA, since then s/he is not qualified to act as PIC.
 
61.23(c) Operations requiring either a medical or a U.S. Driver's License.
(iii) A flight instructor with a sport pilot rating while acting as PIC or serving as required flight remember of a light sport aircraft .
 
nosehair said:
61.23(c) Operations requiring either a medical or a U.S. Driver's License.
(iii) A flight instructor with a sport pilot rating while acting as PIC or serving as required flight remember of a light sport aircraft .
Click to expand...
The Chief Counsel has already discussed this. When acting as a safety pilot, you are exercising Private Pilot privileges, not instructor privileges. No medical, no safety pilot, no simulated instrument. If you disagree, argue with the Chief Counsel, not me.
 
If free flying without a medical is the goal, plenty of seat time available for glider CFIs.
 
IOW, can an Instructor without a medical give instruction for the Private Pilot rating in an LSA to someone who only has a student pilot certificate?
Click to expand...
Ron Levy said:
Yes, as long as the CFI-ASE has a valid US driver's license, since that's all he needs to act as PIC of a LSA. This CFI cannot give the required instrument work, since this CFI cannot act as safety pilot...
Click to expand...

Ron Levy said:
The Chief Counsel has already discussed this. When acting as a safety pilot, you are exercising Private Pilot privileges, not instructor privileges. No medical, no safety pilot, no simulated instrument. If you disagree, argue with the Chief Counsel, not me.
Click to expand...
YGBSM. A CFI can be PIC, but not when the student is under the hood? :rolleyes:

dtuuri
 
dtuuri said:
YGBSM. A CFI can be PIC, but not when the student is under the hood? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
No, I'm not [kidding] you. See the Sport Pilot rules prohibiting acting as a required pilot crewmember when more than one pilot is required (and more than one pilot is required when the pilot flying is hooded), 91.109(c) which says you need Private privileges to act as a safety pilot, and 61.23 which says exercise of Private privileges in an airplane requires a medical. That means a CFI with no medical certificate cannot exercise Private privileges even if acting as PIC while instructing in an LSA using a DL for medical qualification -- and that means no acting as safety pilot under 91.109(c).

I would note that EAA has asked the FAA to consider changing the rules to allow a CFI flying on a DL to act as a safety pilot in a LSA, but it hasn't happened so far, and I have no information on the status of that request.
 
Ron Levy said:
First, let me clarify that I'm speaking to the idea of a Sport Pilot taking training from a no-medical CFI-ASE in an LSA. Clearly, they can't do that in a Standard category airplane, since neither of them is legal to be PIC.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

How about this for an off-the-wall interpretation:

  • 61.23(b)(4) and (5) require a CFI exercising SubPart H privileges to have a medical certificate if acting as PIC or required crew.
  • A Sub-H CFI who is providing primary flight training in an LSA without a medical is only exercising Sub-K privileges, not Sub-H privileges.
  • Since the CFI is only exercising Sub-K privileges, the instruction doesn't count toward the private certificate.

FAR 61.23(b)(5) should really say

==============================
When exercising the privileges of a flight instructor certificate if the person is not acting as pilot in command or serving as a required pilot flight crewmember in an aircraft that requires a pilot in command or required pilot flight crewmember to hold a medical certificate;
==============================

Like I said, a bit off-the-wall. Unfortunately one of the strict-language type of interpretations we know the Chief Counsel's office is capable of, when it wants to.

Ron, are you aware of any guidance from Flight Standards?
 
Last edited:
dtuuri said:
If I were a lawyer, I think I'd be embarrassed.

dtuuri
Click to expand...
The safety pilot rules as a whole are filled with holes in legal analysis. For example, in reality (even legal reality), a simulated instrument flight in which the non-hooded pilot is acting as PIC is not a flight requiring two pilot crewmembers.

But on this one, there's a good basis. 91.109 makes simulated instrument flight an activity that requires a safety pilot and a safety pilot is exercising private privileges and therefore the safety pilot needs a medical. Being a CFI doesn't change that, unless you're comfortable with the idea of a legally-blind CFI giving a hooded student training or want to get to work on a new reg that will define what illnesses and physical incapacitates are acceptable and which are not for 91.109 purposes.

The LSA situation is a bit different since the PIC and "required flight crewmembers" are not required to have a medical certificate to begin with. There's nothing inherently problematic about a rule that allows a safety pilot in an aircraft where the PIC is not required to have a medical certificate to begin with to act as safety pilot.

Come to think of it, maybe my off-the-wall interpretation of 61.23 isn't so off-the-wall at all. And the language I suggest would take care of the hood training in LSAs also.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Exactly.

How about this for an off-the-wall interpretation:

  • 61.23(b)(4) and (5) require a CFI exercising SubPart H privileges to have a medical certificate if acting as PIC or required crew.
  • A Sub-H CFI who is providing primary flight training in an LSA without a medical is only exercising Sub-K privileges, not Sub-H privileges.
  • Since the CFI is only exercising Sub-K privileges, the instruction doesn't count toward the private certificate.
Click to expand...
My thinking is that the exercise of the instructor privileges and pilot privileges are separate issues. The CFI is only exercising Sport privileges to act as PIC in that aircraft, and that requires only a DL. No medical is required to exercise his/her CFI-A instructor privileges.

And no, I've not seen anything about this from AFS, but EAA's Sport Pilot team probably has the answer at their fingertips.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Come to think of it, maybe my off-the-wall interpretation of 61.23 isn't so off-the-wall at all. And the language I suggest would take care of the hood training in LSAs also.
Click to expand...
No, it wouldn't. 91.109(c) specifically says that safety pilot is a Private privilege, so a medical is required, and the other regs do not waive the 91.109 requirement for acting as a safety pilot while instructing.
 
Ron Levy said:
No, it wouldn't. 91.109(c) specifically says that safety pilot is a Private privilege, so a medical is required, and the other regs do not waive the 91.109 requirement for acting as a safety pilot while instructing.
Click to expand...
Yeah. You'd have to change 91.109 as well. Too bad.
 
midlifeflyer said:
There's nothing inherently problematic about a rule that allows a safety pilot in an aircraft where the PIC is not required to have a medical certificate to begin with to act as safety pilot.
Click to expand...
I'd have thought decent lawyers could have written such a rule, don't you?

Anyway, the safety pilot rule says no person may "operate a civil aircraft" it doesn't say "may operate the controls of a civil aircraft":

§91.109 Flight instruction; Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests.

(c) No person may operate a civil aircraft in simulated instrument flight unless—

(1) The other control seat is occupied by a safety pilot who possesses at least a private pilot certificate with category and class ratings appropriate to the aircraft being flown.

(2)...​
Part 1 defines "operate" in a way that describes a CFI providing flight instruction more than it describes a student, IMO, my emphasis:
Operate, with respect to aircraft, means use, cause to use or authorize to use aircraft, for the purpose (except as provided in §91.13 of this chapter) of air navigation including the piloting of aircraft, with or without the right of legal control (as owner, lessee, or otherwise).​
The person engaged in "piloting of aircraft", IMO, is the person responsible for the flight--the PIC:
Pilot in command means the person who:
(1) Has final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight;
(2) Has been designated as pilot in command before or during the flight; and
(3) Holds the appropriate category, class, and type rating, if appropriate, for the conduct of the flight.​
In other words, the CFI. Especially if the "student" hasn't even yet applied for a student license.

Are we (you guys) saying the Chief Counsel thinks it's illegal for a CFI father, flying on the medical basis of a DL, to put the hood on his 10 year old boy or girl in a LSA and let them steer it around on needle, ball and airspeed and then sign their first logbook as a birthday present? If so, they're even worse than I thought.

dtuuri
 
RotorAndWing said:
It's embarrassing people actually waste time debating this nonsense.
Click to expand...
Well, someone asks a reasonable question and gets an answer based on the regs as the FAA wrote and reads them. Then a bunch of people start weighing in about how that answer is unfair, unwise, unreasonable, silly, or whatever, and how if they were the FAA Administrator they'd change it all so they could do whatever they feel like doing. What can you say? :dunno:
 
Ron Levy said:
Well, someone asks a reasonable question and gets an answer based on the regs as the FAA wrote and reads them. Then a bunch of people start weighing in about how that answer is unfair, unwise, unreasonable, silly, or whatever, and how if they were the FAA Administrator they'd change it all so they could do whatever they feel like doing. What can you say? :dunno:
Click to expand...

Thread delete option? :rolleyes:
 
91.109(c) does not say a safety pilot is exercising a private privilege. It says a safety pilot must possess at least a PP certificate. This rule is for safety pilots, not flight instructors.
I have never considered myself as merely a safety pilot when acting as a flight instructor.
And if you do, that time should not be logged as flight instruction.
 
nosehair said:
I have never considered myself as merely a safety pilot when acting as a flight instructor.
Click to expand...
You might not be merely a safety pilot but you are a safety pilot because the other person is under the hood.
 
nosehair said:
91.109(c) does not say a safety pilot is exercising a private privilege.
Click to expand...
The Chief Counsel disagrees with you -- in writing.

It says a safety pilot must possess at least a PP certificate. This rule is for safety pilots, not flight instructors.
Click to expand...
Really? Where in 91.109(c) are flight instructors exempted?

I have never considered myself as merely a safety pilot when acting as a flight instructor.
Click to expand...
Nobody says otherwise. But they are two distinct roles with distinct and separate qualifications.

And arguing with me won't help you -- you'll have to take it up with the Chief Counsel, because that's who said these rules mean this.
 
Ron Levy said:
And arguing with me won't help you -- you'll have to take it up with the Chief Counsel, because that's who said these rules mean this.
Click to expand...
Ron, sorry if my comments come off as arguing. Did not intend that.
I am working thru this sport pilot instructor rule and trying to understand it.
 
Actually, the character of this inquiry in now becoming more and more of "I cannot believe this is so, I can't believe this is so....so it must not be so....." If I wish it hard enough it must not be so......

The short of the problem is that instrument are just not part of the sport pilot syllabus. So for higher order operations, the FAR is written to the higher PVT ASEL standard.

Heck, you can do it, if you don't log it. But it sounds like what you're actually trying to do is train someone to the PVT pilot syllabus, in an LSA. That does not wash.


sigh.
 
bbchien said:
Heck, you can do it, if you don't log it. But it sounds like what you're actually trying to do is train someone to the PVT pilot syllabus, in an LSA. That does not wash.
Click to expand...
Well, according to the FAA, a lot of LSA instruction is given by subpart H CFIs. In that case, they say the time can count toward a private license,
"...provided the instructor has met all applicable requirements necessary to provide that instruction at the private pilot level."​
Note that it says "has met", as in "past tense". It doesn't say the CFI needs to have a current medical. For that, you'll have to ask Cap'n Ron.

One of the major causes of accidents is inadvertant flight into IMC, so why wouldn't the FAA encourage basic instrument training in an LSA from a higher level CFI?

dtuuri
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
Actually, the character of this inquiry in now becoming more and more of "I cannot believe this is so, I can't believe this is so....so it must not be so....." If I wish it hard enough it must not be so......

The short of the problem is that instrument are just not part of the sport pilot syllabus. So for higher order operations, the FAR is written to the higher PVT ASEL standard.

Heck, you can do it, if you don't log it. But it sounds like what you're actually trying to do is train someone to the PVT pilot syllabus, in an LSA. That does not wash.


sigh.
Click to expand...

While there are no instrument requirements for the issuance of a Sport certificate, there are solo xc requirements and 61.93 clearly requires a little bit of hood time prior to any solo xc by a student pilot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top