CFII that does not renew Medical.

[bluesideup]

Hi everyone.
Comprehensive list what they can charge for.
Is there an article, or comprehensive document that outlines what a current CFI can charge for without a medical, and what the applicable regulations / limitations / required documents are.
As an example, can they still do Discovery flights, can it be logged, at what point they have to get the paper work done to show that they are giving training (TSA), / require that the individual present proof of citizen ship, etc. Ignoring the non citizen students, only US citizens for simplicity.
Demo flights for anew aircraft etc.?
All information assumes that an SLSA being used.
Add to that what type of Insurance is recommended for a SLSA that the CFI may fly for others, or heir own aircraft. TV

 

[poadeleted20]

Hi everyone.
Comprehensive list what they can charge for.
Is there an article, or comprehensive document that outlines what a current CFI can charge for without a medical, and what the applicable regulations / limitations / required documents are.

Not really. Basically, they cannot act in any capacity requiring a medical. This would include acting as PIC in any operation requiring a medical (i.e., anything other than a balloon, glider, or LSA under Sport Pilot limitations), acting as a safety pilot, or acting as a required co-pilot (e.g., giving training from the right seat of a DC-3 or Learjet).

As an example, can they still do Discovery flights,

Only in a glider, balloon, or LSA. Anything else would require at least a Third Class medical as they'd be acting as PIC.

can it be logged, at what point they have to get the paper work done to show that they are giving training (TSA), / require that the individual present proof of citizen ship, etc. Ignoring the non citizen students, only US citizens for simplicity.

Again, if it's a no-medical operation (LSA with valid DL, balloon, or glider) yes, it's fine, but not otherwise.

Demo flights for anew aircraft etc.?

Not if they're getting paid to do it. Even the aircraft salesman exception requires PP privileges, and that means having a medical.

All information assumes that an SLSA being used.

Thanks for putting that in. Then yes, a discovery flight or any other flight training (including new-owner checkouts) that does not involve putting a vision restricting device would be fine, but giving demo flights to sales prospects would not. However, giving sales demonstrations the same as giving training, and that would require a medical.

Add to that what type of Insurance is recommended for a SLSA that the CFI may fly for others, or heir own aircraft. TV

If it's not your aircraft, and all you are providing is instruction, you want to be an additional insured (not just "named pilot") on the owner's policy and/or have your own instructional/non-owned policy. If you're doing this in your own aircraft, you'll need a Limited Commercial policy. BTW, any insurer involved may have their own views on whether or not they want to cover such a deal if you don't have a medical, or perhaps a higher premium for a no-medical CFI -- just mentioning a theoretical possibility, not saying it's actually going to happen that way.

 

[James331]

As long as they don't need to act as PIC they can still give, and you can log, dual.

Ie a CFII could do your entire instrument rating provided, its in a plane you can act as PIC in (even if for VFR), you don't go into IMC.

A CFI could do a BFR provided yours hadn't expired yet.

A CFI could do all of your CPL training, provided you can act as PIC in that plane without him

A CFI could NOT give you multi training if you arnt already licensed to fly a multi
Or a Tailwheel endorsment

Etc.

 

[poadeleted20]

Ie a CFII could do your entire instrument rating provided, its in a plane you can act as PIC in (even if for VFR), you don't go into IMC.

How can the trainee log instrument time that way unless the instructor is in the back seat while someone else acts as safety pilot (and PIC for the required IFR XC) in the right seat? And since this is an S-LSA, there's no back seat in which to do that.

 

[Gerald]

As long as they don't need to act as PIC they can still give, and you can log, dual.

Ie a CFII could do your entire instrument rating provided, its in a plane you can act as PIC in (even if for VFR), you don't go into IMC.


Etc.

That wouldnt work. You need a medical when acting as safety pilot when someone is using a hood. Cant get an inst rating without logging inst time

 

[mrkbbd]

How can the trainee log instrument time that way unless the instructor is in the back seat while someone else acts as safety pilot (and PIC for the required IFR XC) in the right seat? And since this is an S-LSA, there's no back seat in which to do that.

Because the instructor can be PIC of a SLSA

 

[poadeleted20]

Because the instructor can be PIC of a SLSA

Doesn't matter -- the safety pilot while pilot flying is wearing a vision restricting device is exercising Private Pilot privileges, and when exercising Private Pilot privileges you must have a medical. 91.109(c) and 61.23. So, no vision restricting device on the person flying even in an S-LSA unless the person in the other seat has at least a PP and has a valid medical, and that means no simulated instrument time.

 

[Brad Z]

I'm waiting for someone to suggest the instrument student only fly on dark moonless nights over sparsely populated areas or over water so that the student can log flight by reference to instruments in VMC conditions, thus logging instrument time without a safety pilot.

 

[poadeleted20]

I'm waiting for someone to suggest the instrument student only fly on dark moonless nights over sparsely populated areas or over water so that the student can log flight by reference to instruments in VMC conditions, thus logging instrument time without a safety pilot.

I suppose that's theoretically possible as long as the trainee is at least a PP with medical so there's someone legal to act as PIC at night, although it still won't get the required IFR XC done, since the CFI would have to be PIC under IFR to do that. And I fear for the applicant's success on the practical test if the applicant has never before flown under the hood. But, I suppose you could do some of the required training that way.

 

[mrkbbd]

Doesn't matter -- the safety pilot while pilot flying is wearing a vision restricting device is exercising Private Pilot privileges, and when exercising Private Pilot privileges you must have a medical. 91.109(c) and 61.23. So, no vision restricting device on the person flying even in an S-LSA unless the person in the other seat has at least a PP and has a valid medical, and that means no simulated instrument time.

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.

You can have a private pilot certificate without a medical...I don't see in 91.109 where it says you need a medical - in 61.23 it is talking about privileges...which I don't think is the same as acting as a safety pilot

It says "When exercising the privileges of a flight instructor certificate and acting as the pilot in command"

While you can log it as PIC time, I don't think you are acting as PIC in this situation

 

[flyingron]

You can have a private pilot certificate without a medical...I don't see in 91.109 where it says you need a medical

It doesn't anything about medicals anywhere in Part 91. You need to look at Part 61, specifically 61.23 which says:

(a) Operations requiring a medical certificate. Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a person—
(3) Must hold at least a third-class medical certificate—
(i) When exercising the privileges of a private pilot certificate;​

91.109(c) requires a private pilot certificate, hence 61.23 requires a medical. None of the exceptions apply in this case.

 

[mrkbbd]

It doesn't anything about medicals anywhere in Part 91. You need to look at Part 61, specifically 61.23 which says:

(a) Operations requiring a medical certificate. Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a person—
(3) Must hold at least a third-class medical certificate—
(i) When exercising the privileges of a private pilot certificate;​

91.109(c) requires a private pilot certificate, hence 61.23 requires a medical. None of the exceptions apply in this case.

The question is 61.23 as applied to CFIs not just PPL, the CFI isn't renewing

 

[midlifeflyer]

The question is 61.23 as applied to CFIs not just PPL, the CFI isn't renewing

Sorry, Mark. The wording of the regs and a fairly long line of FAA interpretations (I'm not going to review them all here) tells us that

• the 91.109(c) safety pilot is a required crewmember exercising a private pilot privilege
• a pilot of any kind exercising a private pilot privilege requires a medical certificate
• a CFI is still a pilot and, when a student is under the hood, the CFI is acting as a safety pilot
• a CFI who is acting as a required crewmember in an operation that requires a medical certificate is required to have a medical certificate.

There has been some concerns in LSA circles about this and the unfortunate effect it has in precluding sport pilot students from having instruction in emergency flight solely by reference to instruments unless instructed by a "full" CFI with the ability to act as safety pilot. You'll notice the tasks for sport pilot certification does not include this task; I'm pretty sure this is one of the reasons.

 

[midlifeflyer]

The question is 61.23 as applied to CFIs not just PPL, the CFI isn't renewing

Then read the parts of 61.23 that do apply to CFIs, like

==============================
(a) Operations requiring a medical certificate. Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a person--
***
(3) Must hold at least a third-class medical certificate -
***
(iv) When exercising the privileges of a flight instructor certificate and acting as the pilot in command;
(v) When exercising the privileges of a flight instructor certificate and serving as a required pilot flight crewmember;
==============================
and
==============================
(b) Operations not requiring a medical certificate. A person is not required to hold a medical certificate--
***
(5) 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;
==============================

 

[flyingron]

The question is 61.23 as applied to CFIs not just PPL, the CFI isn't renewing

We were talking about him needing to be safety pilot. A CFI has no authority to be a safety pilot. You have to hold a private (or better) PILOT certificate and as pointed out, in addition 61.23 also has the statement about CFIs as required crewmembers as well.

 

[mrkbbd]

Sorry, Mark. The wording of the regs and a fairly long line of FAA interpretations (I'm not going to review them all here) tells us that

• the 91.109(c) safety pilot is a required crewmember exercising a private pilot privilege
• a pilot of any kind exercising a private pilot privilege requires a medical certificate
• a CFI is still a pilot and, when a student is under the hood, the CFI is acting as a safety pilot
• a CFI who is acting as a required crewmember in an operation that requires a medical certificate is required to have a medical certificate.

There has been some concerns in LSA circles about this and the unfortunate effect it has in precluding sport pilot students from having instruction in emergency flight solely by reference to instruments unless instructed by a "full" CFI with the ability to act as safety pilot. You'll notice the tasks for sport pilot certification does not include this task; I'm pretty sure this is one of the reasons.

Very interesting - I missed the part about "required crewmember" - is there a way to give instrument instruction without the use of the hood? The below article from AOPA says you don't need a recent biennial or recent experience in order to be a safety pilot, but do need the medical, which I find very backwards...

http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2013/August/1/Pilot-Counsel-Safety-pilot

 

[mrkbbd]

We were talking about him needing to be safety pilot. A CFI has no authority to be a safety pilot. You have to hold a private (or better) PILOT certificate and as pointed out, in addition 61.23 also has the statement about CFIs as required crewmembers as well.

My issue is the definition of "privilege" - is acting as a safety pilot a privilege of a pilot certificate? I don't think so because in 61.113 it doesn't mention safety pilot. Furthermore, 61.57 says you can't exercise the privileges of your certificate without recency...however the AOPA article above says you can act as a safety pilot w/o recency of experience

 

[flyingron]

My issue is the definition of "privilege" - is acting as a safety pilot a privilege of a pilot certificate? I don't think so because in 61.113 it doesn't mention safety pilot. Furthermore, 61.57 says you can't exercise the privileges of your certificate without recency...however the AOPA article above says you can act as a safety pilot w/o recency of experience

If you need a the pilot certificate to perform an act, a reasonable person would argue you are exercising the privileges of the certificate when you do so. 61.113 pretty much is all LIMITATIONS on the privilege. For instance, no where in 61.113 does it say you're private pilot certificate gives you the privilege of being pilot in command, just tells you a bunch of things you can't do (particularly being compensated) while doing it.

 

[poadeleted20]

Very interesting - I missed the part about "required crewmember" - is there a way to give instrument instruction without the use of the hood?

Yes, but it's very limited. You'd have to be in actual instrument conditions without being in IMC (where you'd have to be operating IFR, in which case the instructor would have to be PIC under IFR, which requires a medical because IFR requires at least Private Pilot). That's the "black night" situation BradZ described a few posts up.
Further, another instrument instructor with a valid medical would have to be the instructor for the one required IFR XC flight since that must be flown under IFR.

The below article from AOPA says you don't need a recent biennial or recent experience in order to be a safety pilot, but do need the medical, which I find very backwards...

As I said some way up this thread, that is all correct as long as you're not also acting as PIC, and it includes 61.31 additional training endorsements like HP and complex, too. All those things are, by regulation, required only for the PIC. The requirement for the medical is discussed above -- you're exercising PP privileges when acting as safety pilot, and that means you need a medical (unless you're in a balloon or glider).

 

[poadeleted20]

If you need a the pilot certificate to perform an act, a reasonable person would argue you are exercising the privileges of the certificate when you do so.

So would the FAA Chief Counsel -- and they already did, which is for all practical purposes the official word on this issue. Whether you consider the Chief Counsel to be a reasonable person or not is another irrelevant story.

 

[cirrusmx]

cfii pay is pretty low as it is. i dont see a reason to hire or pay full market rate for an instructor with incomplete credentials when there's plenty of instructors out there.

 

[midlifeflyer]

The below article from AOPA says you don't need a recent biennial or recent experience in order to be a safety pilot, but do need the medical, which I find very backwards..

Well, if you look at the recency of experience regs, you'll see that such things as landing currency and flight reviews are only required for the person acting a pilot in command of the flight.

In the flying pilot/safety pilot, there is a choice. Either one can act as PIC. If the flying pilot is acting as PIC, the safety pilot does not need to meet PIC recency requirements. If the safety pilot is acting as PIC, then she, of course must meet all PIC requirements.

I'm not sure why you think that's backwards. Consider a Part 91 operation in an aircraft certificated for two pilot operation. Both the PIC and SIC require current medicals because they are both required crewmembers, but only the PIC requires PIC currency. Do you see that as also being backwards - that the SIC needs to have PIC currency but not need a medical?

 

[midlifeflyer]

My issue is the definition of "privilege" - is acting as a safety pilot a privilege of a pilot certificate?

Pretty much defined as a private pilot privilege in the regulation that requires a safety pilot. What else would you take

==============================
91.109(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.
==============================

to mean? What is your interpretation of that language? Are you actually reading the rules or just expressing opinions in a vacuum?

 

[mrkbbd]

I'm not sure why you think that's backwards. Consider a Part 91 operation in an aircraft certificated for two pilot operation. Both the PIC and SIC require current medicals because they are both required crewmembers, but only the PIC requires PIC currency. Do you see that as also being backwards - that the SIC needs to have PIC currency but not need a medical?

Because you could actually have someone who got their certificate 30 years ago and has never flown since act as a safety pilot. That seems to remove the point of a safety pilot.

By backwards I meant baffling - If we go back to "privileges" discussion, which has been decided privilege includes acting as safety pilot...how do you exercise a privilege that expires every 2 years without a BFR to reinstate it? (assuming 2 years have passed) Without a BFR my pilot privileges have been suspended until I meet this qualification?

 

[flyingron]

Because you could actually have someone who got their certificate 30 years ago and has never flown since act as a safety pilot. That seems to remove the point of a safety pilot.

How so? The "point" of the safety pilot is to look out the window to avoid other aircraft (which includes VFR violation of cloud clearance, not because the pilot is incapable of flying in the clouds, but because it renders the safety pilot unable to see other traffic).

If a pilot needs someone in the right seat who needs to provide other skills to keep him safely flying, then that person really needs to be a CFI not a "safety pilot."

 

[poadeleted20]

If we go back to "privileges" discussion, which has been decided privilege includes acting as safety pilot...how do you exercise a privilege that expires every 2 years without a BFR to reinstate it? (assuming 2 years have passed) Without a BFR my pilot privileges have been suspended until I meet this qualification?

That's not correct. Only your privilege to act as PIC is affected by being out of flight review currency -- you still have all other privileges associated with your certificate and ratings (including but not limited to acting as safety pilot for someone who is legal to be PIC).