Cross-Country Definition

[KennyFlys]

Kenny,

We're not bashing YOU. But, you are the one who brought these policies up, and you seem to think they're a good idea (though I haven't figured that out for sure, because as soon as they came under fire you ran and hid).

This is a DISCUSSION board. If you agree with the policies, why? If not, why are you posting them, and more importantly, why are you patronizing such a school?

First, it would have been kinder for some to make their remarks in PM. It seems I can address one post which may be somewhat off original topic with adapted local policies but that's a "no no." I got tired of it and responded in a very PO'd attitude. Please accept my apologies.

The impression I get is CFI's should just sign off the student and then let them run off on that solo XC or whatever practice session. No one in their right mind would adapt this as a standard policy. I chose this school for several reasons.

One, the airline captain/owner of my old school taught multi for this man some twenty years ago. He knows him well and his reputation.

Two, they turn out a lot of professional pilots. Not as many as ATP but they aren't a ticket mill. They deal with quality of instruction and performance standards. The PTS is stressed as the bible with a few further restrictions for training.

Last, they produce the most CFI's of any school in Atlanta. Again, they aren't ticket mills. Another school advertises a CFI for $2995 in thirty days. I would have rather gone to another guy who charges $5200 for fourteen days and you have his undivided attention that entire period. That plan isn't for everyone but it does work. He also had the best reputation with that FSDO for sending very well prepared CFI candidates. I still needed to work and the funds were no longer available do I took the slower and local route. But, as a result I'll have a job there with a business going stronger than pre-9/11. This particular school has the same reputation with the FSDO and works closely with two DPEs who handle the CFI candidates.

As to the foreign students, not just our school but several around the country are training Indian students. India has a huge shortage of pilots. The majority of air crews on India Air flights are Americans. Schools in India hire Americans to come there and teach but are soon picked up by the airline. So, students are coming here. They go through an incredible TSA nightmare to make it into training showing they are motivated. The process is repeated with new fees for every ticket (PP, IR, ME, Comm, CFI).

But, they come with their traditions and customs. You have to work with that as well as train them to adapt to situations that will work for the safety of flight. Oddly, the only student who was ever an issue and terminated was from England (But was not of English descent, I'll leave the rest for your interpretation). But, why does a school do this? Last I understood, flight school owners do this for two basic reasons: They love the job of teaching and running a school; and, they are in it to make money. These Indian students bring with them a substantial revenue source. There are other foreign students but Indians are larger numbers. There are about twenty foreign students at any given time. In all, there's probably about forty students at varying degrees of training with most of them being professional pilot students on a consistent pace.

The school has high standards and strict requirements as this helps insure they will stay in business. As a high-volume Part 141 school it's under a lot of scrutiny but it also has a lot of assistance from the FSDO. The school has its certificate to protect. The CFI's have their certificates to protect. They want to produce professional pilot candidates who will leave with the same high standards. If you think a CFI holding the hand of the student while the student is off on a solo XC is too much, look into the communications between airline dispatchers and the aircrews aloft. The communication never stops and it shouldn't.

I could ramble on for sometime here even though my experience is extremely limited for the short time I've been around these schools. I see these things because of the background and experience of those who run these schools. If you don't want to stipulate to these high standards, be selective of what school you go to. But, also be careful of your quality of training.

 

[bbchien]

My most recent PVT ASEL grad, whose graduation video is here, was told on XC solo, to call me whenver he got down, and we reviewed the weather (just takes a cellphone).

Not that I didn't trust him. He understood he was flying on MY TICKET. And that was that.

 

[poadeleted20]

I'm not as concerned as you are with the need to document such a phone consultation,

If your logbook endorsement calls for such a consultation, the trainee would need a way to prove to the FAA that it occurred and possibly what was said) in case something went wrong on the subsequent leg.

but if I did, here are some options (this is 2007 after all)

cell phone record showing that some conversation took place.
email or fax - a lot of FBOs have them.
text messaging

The cell phone record would show only that a conversation took place, not who was talking or what was said. OTOH, email, fax, and/or text messaging might be able to cover the requirement. However, as I said above, I think it's easier just to come to an understanding with the student that the call will be made, and there will be serious non-FAA consequences if it isn't.

Frankly, don't really don't have a personal problem as a CFI with okaying the return of, say, the student pilot who makes the good decision to divert due to weather and lands at a location that was not part of the original endorsement

If the Student Pilot diverts, there is no way you can fill the regulatory requirement for the logbook endorsement with signature via phone, text message, or (absent some electronic signature mechanism) email, although I suppose a faxed endorsement could be pasted in the log (if a fax is available where the student ended up).

As I said earlier, I have provided that endorsement to student pilots who have for whatever reason ended up at my airport instead of where they were supposed to be, but only after telephonic consultation with his/her home-'drome instructor. That would definitely be my preferred method if one of my students ended up somewhere other than originally intended, as I can imagine situations in which I would want that student to wait for me to come get him/her rather than returning home solo.

or the one who has lunch at a destination.

Back to my original point: I don't see the need for a logbook entry mandating a difficult-to-document phone call home before the second leg -- just a good understanding between student and instructor that the call will be made.

 

[midlifeflyer]

If your logbook endorsement calls for such a consultation, the trainee would need a way to prove to the FAA that it occurred and possibly what was said) in case something went wrong on the subsequent leg.

I'm not sure I understand. He says it happened. I say it happened. So, exactly who's providing the =evidence= to show that more likely than not, it didn't happen?

BTW, I'm not suggesting the mandatory consultation, unless something about the flight calls for it, like that lunch at the destination is planned and changes in weather are a realistic potential.

On the other stuff, as I said, I =personally= have no problem with, say, the diverting student. It may be because of the way I see rules and regulations in general or because I was a "diverting student" on two of my student solo cross countries. But I don't insist or expect others to follow my lead.

 

[SkyHog]

Hmm - so then what if I, as a student pilot, divert to an unattended airport with no CFIs present to give an endorsement, say, due to unexpected weather?

I had almost that exact situation occur when I was a student. I'm curious how it would be dealt with (lets also say there is no cell phone coverage at this airport and it is in the middle of nowhere).

For example, lets say it happened at Questa Municipal Airport #2, in New Mexico. No cell phone, no city, no buildings, nothing. That is why I think I'd prefer this to not be an issue.

 

[poadeleted20]

Hmm - so then what if I, as a student pilot, divert to an unattended airport with no CFIs present to give an endorsement, say, due to unexpected weather?

I had almost that exact situation occur when I was a student. I'm curious how it would be dealt with (lets also say there is no cell phone coverage at this airport and it is in the middle of nowhere).

For example, lets say it happened at Questa Municipal Airport #2, in New Mexico. No cell phone, no city, no buildings, nothing. That is why I think I'd prefer this to not be an issue.

I think the regulations are clear -- since you are no longer on the planned and endorsed flight, your new flight planning for the previously unplanned leg must be checked by a CFI who endorses your logbook accordingly. IOW, by the regs, you're stuck until a CFI arrives on scene.

That said, if you, a Student Pilot on a solo XC, really find yourself unexpectedly at an airport where there is absolutely no means of communicating with the outside world, since you cannot obtain updated weather/NOTAM information, I think you're better off waiting for someone to find you unless you truly have no other option, in which case it amounts to an emergency situation in which you would fly to the nearest airport with weather and communication facilities and then call your instructor for direction.

 

[poadeleted20]

I'm not sure I understand. He says it happened. I say it happened. So, exactly who's providing the =evidence= to show that more likely than not, it didn't happen?

BTW, I'm not suggesting the mandatory consultation, unless something about the flight calls for it, like that lunch at the destination is planned and changes in weather are a realistic potential.

Exactly -- why lay a legal trap for yourself and your student by writing such a requirement into the XC endorsement? It's just plain pointless. If you don't trust the student to make the call without putting this nonrequired action in the endorsement (thus raising the eyebrows of any FAA Inspector who later comes to read it), you probably can't trust the student to be out of your sight in the first place and shouldn't be turning him/her loose on a solo XC under any circumstances.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Hmm - so then what if I, as a student pilot, divert to an unattended airport with no CFIs present to give an endorsement, say, due to unexpected weather?

I had almost that exact situation occur when I was a student. I'm curious how it would be dealt with (lets also say there is no cell phone coverage at this airport and it is in the middle of nowhere).

For example, lets say it happened at Questa Municipal Airport #2, in New Mexico. No cell phone, no city, no buildings, nothing. That is why I think I'd prefer this to not be an issue.

I'd prefer it were not an issue also. One of the reasons is reflected in the way some of the discussion is going.

Problem is that it is an issue. The words of the regulations don't seem to give a lot of leeway. And there will be quite differencing opinions on how much leeway beyond the words of the regulations is acceptable - a very personal decision that reflects one's background, philosophy, training, etc.

If I were that student in your hypothetical, I would simply do what I felt needed to be done and accept whatever consequences there would be. We have choices and all choices have consequences. Understand that if things don't turn out okay, chances are that the decision will be reviewed and examined, perhaps even dissected.

 

[Everskyward]

I'm glad that Kenny has found a school that works for him and so has Kent. Some people enjoy and do better in a very structured environment and some don't. This probably has to do with both the student's background as well as their personality. I don't think there is any right or wrong as long as the regs are met. Personally I am more of an unstructured person who has been forced into being accountable. What do you mean I have to call before I take off, after I land, when I get to the hotel...

I don't remember ever calling my CFI from some intermediate stop on a student cross country, nor did I ask my students to do so. However, this was way before the era of cell phones. We still used smoke signals. Really, I think that because of new technology and attitudes these days people keep a much tighter leash on everyone around them even in their personal lives. Whether this is a positive or negative development can be debated.

 

[Dwight B. Van Zanen]

One more option. When I was a student I had a solo sign-off for flights within 50NM and between a couple different airports. Gave me some options in case of weather problems, as well as the ability to relocate to where the instructor happened to be that day. The school was at one airport. The plane I was using for training was at another airport. Worked ok. On the long XC, the sign-off was for the entire flight as planned, with an understanding that I would call when on the ground at the most distant airport before the return leg. Nothing in the endorsement about that, but he clearly wanted to know I got where I was going, and would have an opportunity to give me additional instuctions if he saw that the weather had changed.

 

[skyflyer8]

If there's anything I've learned in 34 years of flight instructing, it's that students are always finding new ways to surprise their instructors.

I won't comment other than to say Ron, I agree with the above quote and it only took me two years to learn it in a way that directly relates to this thread!

 

[midlifeflyer]

I don't remember ever calling my CFI from some intermediate stop on a student cross country, nor did I ask my students to do so. However, this was way before the era of cell phones. We still used smoke signals.

What about Flight Service? I ask my solo students to make position reports as they do their route - but that's more to teach them that it can be done, and it is something we actually do on mountain flights where radar coverage can be very iffy.

 

[tonycondon]

The regulations do not make allowances for a "faxed" endorsement.

why??

 

[tonycondon]

if the endorsement is permanently affixed is it OK? example: endorsement is faxed to student and student pastes endorsement into logbook?

or is every endorsement supposed to be permanently written in pen into the logbook?

 

[Everskyward]

What about Flight Service?

I wonder how well that works these days.

 

[poadeleted20]

if the endorsement is permanently affixed is it OK? example: endorsement is faxed to student and student pastes endorsement into logbook?

The FAA permits instructor endorsements to be pasted into logbooks -- it's done all the time. The issue would be whether the faxed signature is as good as an original signature on the paste-in, and that's a question I've not seen answered or even asked. As the instructor involved, I'd keep the original of the fax handy for FAA examination if the issue came up, and give it to the student on his/her return. That should satisfy all FAA requirements.

 

[tonycondon]

The FAA permits instructor endorsements to be pasted into logbooks -- it's done all the time. The issue would be whether the faxed signature is as good as an original signature on the paste-in, and that's a question I've not seen answered or even asked. As the instructor involved, I'd keep the original of the fax handy for FAA examination if the issue came up, and give it to the student on his/her return. That should satisfy all FAA requirements.

ah Ron, I wasnt thinking about the signature not being original. Thanks for the insight. Ive never been in this kind of situation but I suppose its good to know.

 

[poadeleted20]

ah Ron, I wasnt thinking about the signature not being original. Thanks for the insight. Ive never been in this kind of situation but I suppose its good to know.

And in all my years of instructing, I've never heard of a situation in which a Student Pilot on a solo XC wound up at an unplanned airport where there was nobody at the divert field who could re-endorse his log for the trip home and no way to get help from the home instructor. I suppose it probably has happened somewhere, sometime, but it's an awfully unlikely situation, and not one I'm really worried about. I'd consider this a "stump the chump" question on a CFI oral -- one asked only when the examiner has really run out of appropriate questions and is just playing with the CFI applicant.

 

[SkyHog]

And in all my years of instructing, I've never heard of a situation in which a Student Pilot on a solo XC wound up at an unplanned airport where there was nobody at the divert field who could re-endorse his log for the trip home and no way to get help from the home instructor. I suppose it probably has happened somewhere, sometime, but it's an awfully unlikely situation, and not one I'm really worried about. I'd consider this a "stump the chump" question on a CFI oral -- one asked only when the examiner has really run out of appropriate questions and is just playing with the CFI applicant.

The airport in Belen, NM is usually very dead. You actually helped me regain confidence in my decision here, back on the Yellow Board. This was my first attempt at a solo cross country, and the following is verbatim from my post n the old Yellow Board.

Today was the day for my first solo cross country!! My intention was to fly from Double eagle, in Albuquerque, to Socorro Municipal Airport. The weather was kind of sketchy, but it looked like the majority of the thunderstorms and clouds would be staying well west of my route. Of course, in real life, weather forecasts are not gospel.

I started off on course, hitting the Albuquerque VOR (Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range - basically a fancy radio navaid for pilots) exactly at the time I had planned for. I turned direct to the Belen airport, and hit that at the exact right time, also. This was looking to be an awesome trip, but the storms to the west were a lot closer than I thought they'd be. I continued my trip southward, keeping an eye on the storms. Within about 5 minutes, the storms that were supposed to stay to the west were now blocking my way to Socorro. I decided that now would be the time to turn around and consider this a botched attempt at my solo cross country.

As I turned around, I noticed that the storms had also blocked my route back to Albuquerque. I started to panic, but luckily, I had Belen's airport directly beneath me. I quickly dropped my altitude down to 500 feet above the pattern altitude and flew over the airport to check the windsock. As I looked down, I saw something painted across the runway, making what looked like chevrons across the first half of runway 21. I struggled to remember what that meant. To be safe (and later, I found out, correct) I made sure that I touched down after the chevrons. As I got closer, I saw that the chevrons were actually painted sandbags. Boy, its a good thing I didn't try to land on them!

As I parked the plane and walked around the ramp, I light a cigarette and stared up to the sky watching the storm come over. I walked to the terminal building and talked to some guy who said he was the airport manager. He informed me that the airport was closed, and there was a NOTAM (Notice to Airmen, a communication tool that gives pilots info such as this) in place that stated so as well. I explained that I was a student pilot and told him the story. He told me not to worry about being reported because he would have done the same thing as me. He then let me know that Mid Valley Airport (in Los Lunas) was about 6 miles away, and I should have landed there. Oops.

I walked back out onto the ramp and looked skyward and saw a beautiful opening direct to Albuquerque. I departed and requested flight following (a service provided by air traffic controllers to help provide separation between aircraft) back to Double Eagle. Aside from the controller trying to put me into a cloud a few times, I made it back to Double Eagle just as the nice corridor I was flying through collapsed behind me. I was never so glad to be back on the ground at home.

So let me ask you guys, what would you have done? Should I file a NASA form for landing at a closed airport? What about not having an instructor endorsement to fly back home?

BTW - that's not verbatim, I guess, because I can't imagine I added stuff like explanations of Flight Following or VORs on an Aviation Website, so that must have been added in afterwards.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

First, it would have been kinder for some to make their remarks in PM. It seems I can address one post which may be somewhat off original topic with adapted local policies but that's a "no no."

No, it's because the question was about the FARs, and you answered with your school's local policy.

The impression I get is CFI's should just sign off the student and then let them run off on that solo XC or whatever practice session. No one in their right mind would adapt this as a standard policy.

One could also say that noone in their right mind should send a student on a solo cross country if they couldn't trust them to make it there and back without further assistance.

They want to produce professional pilot candidates who will leave with the same high standards. If you think a CFI holding the hand of the student while the student is off on a solo XC is too much, look into the communications between airline dispatchers and the aircrews aloft. The communication never stops and it shouldn't.

And that's all well and good, if all you're training is future airline pilots. If they're never going to be out of that environment with multi-crew plus dispatchers and such, it's good for them to learn that from the start. I still have my doubts that said people will make good captains if they've never had to make final decisions on their own.

However, for people who are going to be GA, recreational, single pilots who have to make decisions on their own and won't have the luxury of dispatchers and other crewmembers, I don't think handholding is going to make them into good pilots at all.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

As I alluded to above, foreign students often bring with them considerably different attitudes and outlooks. In many cases, they will consider deteriorating conditions either a challenge to be met or something over which they have no control, and continue a flight which should be terminated.

Ah, good point. I shoulda thought of that. The guy who I trained from Guinea was a handful, and one of the more frustrating experiences I've ever had. One of their cultural things: Men never admit to not understanding something. I'm surprised I had any hair left after that.

 

[KennyFlys]

No, it's because the question was about the FARs, and you answered with your school's local policy.

Actually, I did. Since I deleted the post I can't go back and review it to explain it. Did I give a precise FAR? No. However, as I recall, I was more responding to another post about circumstances, not the original post.

One could also say that no one in their right mind should send a student on a solo cross country if they couldn't trust them to make it there and back without further assistance.

I wouldn't send a student unless they are prepared and proved them self capable. But, I'm not going to give them a blank check by which to hang them self and me to follow. As Ronald Reagan said, "Trust but verify." How is this method of overseeing a student's actions any different?

We fly out of a very busy GA airport. PDK is pretty high up there, somewhere close under VNY and TEB. I don't know the exact numbers. We lay underneath the second north shelf for Atlanta Class B; the busiest airport in the world according to 2006 statistics. There is a lot going on between PDK and other controlled airports in the immediate fifteen mile radius; including heavy jets making approaches to Dobbins AFB from right over the top of PDK.

Even when students are turned loose solo for just practice maneuvers, they must transition out of the area by some 25-30 miles. The practice area to the west takes them over FTY and just to the south of Dobbins. Communications for transition is a must. It's not much less busy to the north or east.

I don't know how well you performed when you were turned loose solo. But, most students have all the confidence in the world while the CFI is still in the right seat. Once they go off on their own, they often lose that and begin to wander in both their procedures and overall performance. I remember my first solo flight in 1981. I did fine in the end but I had my doubts along the way at first. I also remember calling the flight school at Navy Jax from Waycross, Georgia and telling them where I am. I called again from Tampa before heading back. Those calls told them I was on time, where I needed to be and my flight was progressing safely. I recall being aware of expected rain when crossing Florida back to Jacksonville and informing them of such.

How many students do you think make it up there on a solo XC and suddenly freeze, lose track of position or get confused in communication? I don't have an answer to that, actually. I'll learn a lot more when I start teaching. Everything I've learned thus far is second hand from an experienced instructor. The solution is establish a set of rules so it doesn't happen. These would be communication and flight following is a must. Calls back verifying progress and changes in weather tell the CFI the student is checking up on circumstances and aware of their situation along the route of flight. All of these rules set by the school and the CFI which are followed are a good indicator if the student will follow those which are mandatory by regulations. They become part of many indicators whether the student will be ready for a checkride.

And that's all well and good, if all you're training is future airline pilots. If they're never going to be out of that environment with multi-crew plus dispatchers and such, it's good for them to learn that from the start. I still have my doubts that said people will make good captains if they've never had to make final decisions on their own.

I'm puzzled by that one. You have doubt if this establishes a pattern of following procedures? This would include procedures established by the airline, the aircraft manufacturer and the FAA. I've never seen the procedures book for any airliner. But, I have seen just the checklist book for an S-3 Viking. It's about the size of a book of approach plates and that's only for the pilot and copilot. The NATOPS manual was three or four volumes if I recall; each about four inches thick. Flying is about having fun but the serious business side is all about procedures for doing things the right way.

You speak of the pilot's final decision. Yes, he's final authority for that flight. But, he better have done everything by the book when it's all said and done. While he may survive an in-flight emergency, he next has to survive the many reviews to follow by various agencies.

However, for people who are going to be GA, recreational, single pilots who have to make decisions on their own and won't have the luxury of dispatchers and other crewmembers, I don't think handholding is going to make them into good pilots at all.

For the guy who will never fly more than a lower-powered, fixed-gear, fixed-prop airplane, there may be some truth to that. But, burning in the skill of using procedures and troubleshooting emergencies or any issue per procedures will make that person a safer pilot. And, you're not hand-holding the entire time. Like anyone in a training program, you wean them as you see them handling the matter with more and more "professionalism," for lack of a better word.

If it's a small school with one or two CFIs and a handful of students each, operating out of a non-towered, small airport out away from large cities... well, you don't need much. But, come to Atlanta or outside of Denver or Chicago and things change drastically. Even more so if that student wants a career with the airlines.

Mari said something to the effect of maybe I operate better with structure. That's part of it. I also like operating under pressure. Oddly, when I'm doing courier work, I perform much better when I have several runs with a very tight time on each package than I do when I've got several hours on just a few. Now, I'll be teaching in a structured environment where there is pressure to perform. I'll enjoy that.

 

[midlifeflyer]

At least one "district" will not reconignize a faxed student endorsement under any circumstances. That "policy" has the full support of the Regional Council.

Which district and do you have a reference to anything in writing, official or unofficial, coming out of either the FSDO or the Regional Counsel's office?

 

[poadeleted20]

In answering your question, Mine, Yes and Yes.

Since you have something in writing, would you be kind enough to share it, with the identity of the cognizant FSDO and Region? It would be very interesting reading for those of us working with FAA HQ Flight Standards personnel to ensure that FSDO's and Regions are all sending the same message. Given the number of variables and things beyond the Student Pilot's control that can go awry, I would find it quite disturbing if a FSDO acted on the supposition that "The preflight planning for the original crosscountry is suspect if the flight could not be completed as planned."

 

[midlifeflyer]

Since you have something in writing, would you be kind enough to share it, with the identity of the cognizant FSDO and Region? It would be very interesting reading for those of us working with FAA HQ Flight Standards personnel to ensure that FSDO's and Regions are all sending the same message. Given the number of variables and things beyond the Student Pilot's control that can go awry, I would find it quite disturbing if a FSDO acted on the supposition that "The preflight planning for the original crosscountry is suspect if the flight could not be completed as planned."

An answer that consists of "In answering your question, Mine, Yes and Yes," coupled with the admonition to not learn from the Internet and the stilted language in which it was written makes the entire post sound suspiciously like one that was made up to begin with.

 

[poadeleted20]

An answer that consists of "In answering your question, Mine, Yes and Yes," coupled with the admonition to not learn from the Internet and the stilted language in which it was written makes the entire post sound suspiciously like one that was made up to begin with.

Well, that was the thought that had crossed my mind, but I wasn't going to be that blunt about it, and wanted to give Boo-Boo a chance to prove my suspicious nature wrong.

 

[midlifeflyer]

That's an awful lot of defensiveness to a simple request for verification from official or quasi-official sources, don't you think?

You're new to participation in this group. I don't know if you spent any time lurking and browsing around, but I suggest you take the opportunity to browse through the regulatory discussions here. You'll find that, by far, most of them involve citations to regulations, ACs, FAA Chief Counsel opinions, NTSB case law, and the usual group of quasi-official FAA pronouncements (some right and some ultimately wrong), with a minimum (and minimal acceptance) of "I know, so believe what I say."

"Where did you get that from?" is the question that marks the difference between a board in which people learn from valuable input and one where it's just a bunch of guys spouting off on the Internet.

So, here you are. A new poster with no track record of reliability, expostulating on a regulatory issue in a forum that has a history of demanding and supplying verification. And the very first time (as far as I can tell) that you are asked for sources, you view it as a unwarranted personal attack.

Just makes one wonder, that's all...

(BTW, I suspect you'd find that there are more a few folks here who will be able to match the knowledge and experience level you pretend to)

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Just makes one wonder, that's all...

Especially when he answers "Yes" to 'do you have it in writing from either the FSDO or Regional Counsel', then admits that he doesn't. Not good.

Boo, I'm glad you're on the board... this is a GREAT group of pilots, and I hope you'll stay.

As Mark said, you are not the only one that gets asked for letters in writing from the FSDO. We LIKE to see it, as it's something we can point to as an authoritative source. I don't see it as stemming from "we don't trust you", but as "how can I defend my position later when discussing this with the guys at the hangar".

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I wouldn't send a student unless they are prepared and proved them self capable. But, I'm not going to give them a blank check by which to hang them self and me to follow. As Ronald Reagan said, "Trust but verify." How is this method of overseeing a student's actions any different?

Well... If I knew you were treating me like a three-year-old by not trusting me to call up for FF when you told me to, I'd be outta there in a heartbeat to a different school.

Communications for transition is a must. It's not much less busy to the north or east.

Again, I have absolutely no problem with requiring students to get flight following. It's the CFI calling the TRACON part that rubs me wrong.

How many students do you think make it up there on a solo XC and suddenly freeze, lose track of position or get confused in communication?

How is making them call at the other end going to help that? Again, they need to be trained well enough prior to signoff that this doesn't occur, or if it does, they know what to do.

I'm puzzled by that one. You have doubt if this establishes a pattern of following procedures?

Following procedures is great... My concern is that someone who has always had their hand held while making decisions may not make the proper decisions on their own.

When I train people (granted, this is driving trucks, not flying), I do it in three stages. At first, I help them through everything. Then, I transition to having them do things on their own, but I will provide some guidance if they plan something that won't work very well. In the final stage, I require them to do everything on their own. In the final stage, if they ask me a question that I think they should know the answer to, I'll answer with "What would you do if I wasn't here?" Sometimes I'll even reply that way for something I haven't necessarily walked them through before, because in the amount of time I have with them, I can't possibly be there the first time they experience every given scenario.

By doing things this way, I can evaluate their decision-making processes. In the final stage, I will also allow them to make poor decisions, get themselves into trouble, etc. to see how they react. Those who "freeze," freak out, etc. do not pass. Those who recognize a bad situation developing and work to get out of it early while remaining calm and making rational decisions tell me through their actions that they are ready for the real world.

I learned quite quickly when I started training people that if I was too helpful throughout the entire process (as in, I didn't let them screw up and I didn't evaluate their thought processes) that I was doing them a disservice, because when they went out on their own they weren't capable of making good decisions. THAT is exactly what I'm afraid of in this scenario.

 

[KennyFlys]

Well... If I knew you were treating me like a three-year-old by not trusting me to call up for FF when you told me to, I'd be outta there in a heartbeat to a different school.

Again, I have absolutely no problem with requiring students to get flight following. It's the CFI calling the TRACON part that rubs me wrong.

I'd address these by comparing what you have at risk as a CFI compared to what you may risk as a driving instructor. As a truck driving instructor, should the student fail to perform as necessary, you may lose that position as a trainer. You won't likely lose your job or ability to drive; and least likely, lose your Class A license.

On the other hand, a CFI, when called into question has his entire ticket on the line. Heck, I flew into IMC and was called on the carpet for it. I got out of it and got down on the ground safely but I was called on it. I requested the help of ZMP but probably so would any pilot in the pre-GPS days over South Dakota at night time. As a result, I was grounded pending a review.

That could be no different for a CFI should a student fail in some measure. He may lose time where he could be teaching. He may lose his CFI ticket or he could possibly be grounded entirely. Of course, it depends on the level of problems involved with the student. But, in the end, that CFI ticket is on the line for every action until and often beyond that student taking the checkride. So, what's more important to you? A student being upset or ticked off he's getting some extra attention until he's proved himself responsible when away from the base? Or, your CFI ticket?

Once you know they are utilizing the resources available and they've shown it, it becomes a non-issue. That's no different than checking off they have performed a maneuver several times to PTS. As the student proves them self, the "hand holding" becomes less and less but you'll never give up entirely.

How is making them call at the other end going to help that? Again, they need to be trained well enough prior to sign-off that this doesn't occur, or if it does, they know what to do.

Of course, they get the training they require and more. But, these calls verify how well they have learned. During that call, you're going to have them tell you about changes in the weather, possible changes in the route if not GPS direct, possible NOTAMs in effect or any number of things that can change in a short time. Heck, last year I had a NOTAM for a TFR pop-up near my home because the sheriff had some operation going on at a crime scene. That could have affected a student landing at GVL and continuing south to Atlanta.

You want to know your student is looking for these things. The only way is for those first few flights to have them tell you information you already know and expect to hear. Again, you're verifying they are using available resources for the safety of the flight.

Following procedures is great... My concern is that someone who has always had their hand held while making decisions may not make the proper decisions on their own.

When I train people (granted, this is driving trucks, not flying), I do it in three stages. At first, I help them through everything. Then, I transition to having them do things on their own, but I will provide some guidance if they plan something that won't work very well. In the final stage, I require them to do everything on their own. In the final stage, if they ask me a question that I think they should know the answer to, I'll answer with "What would you do if I wasn't here?" Sometimes I'll even reply that way for something I haven't necessarily walked them through before, because in the amount of time I have with them, I can't possibly be there the first time they experience every given scenario.

By doing things this way, I can evaluate their decision-making processes. In the final stage, I will also allow them to make poor decisions, get themselves into trouble, etc. to see how they react. Those who "freeze," freak out, etc. do not pass. Those who recognize a bad situation developing and work to get out of it early while remaining calm and making rational decisions tell me through their actions that they are ready for the real world.

I learned quite quickly when I started training people that if I was too helpful throughout the entire process (as in, I didn't let them screw up and I didn't evaluate their thought processes) that I was doing them a disservice, because when they went out on their own they weren't capable of making good decisions. THAT is exactly what I'm afraid of in this scenario.

If you read Chapter 9 in the Aviation Instructor's Handbook, you'll see you're already using the most common method and the most-preferred teaching skill by the FAA, "Telling and Doing."

1. Instructor Tells - Instructor Does
2. Student Tells - Instructor Does
3. Student Tells - Student Does
4. Student Does - Instructor Evaluates

The third, probably being your most intense step with it being the most frustrating but also the most growth. That's when they are likely to mess up and err. To an extent, you let them make the errors and learn from the results unless it's become blatantly unsafe. CFIs do that with students. I've heard even DEs do it with CFI candidates. With the DE acting as the "student" he'll push the envelope on some particular maneuver to see when the candidate jumps in and takes control of the airplane. Of course, if it's allowed to reach an unsafe point the candidate is unsatisfactory. The other aspect of it is you're PIC for that flight so when are you going to take control and protect the safety of the flight... possibly along with your ticket?

You mention your evaluation of a decision making process. That's exactly what is happening when the CFI verifies the student has obtained flight following and when when they talk to the student at their other stops.

 

[poadeleted20]

I bow to the experts here.

Please accept my humble apologizes for upsetting the apple cart.

Fly safe

<<<<<-------XXXXXXX

Nobody's asking anyone to bow to anyone else -- if you have this in writing from a FSDO or RC, I really want (need?) to see it so I can conform to the FAA's idea of my CFI responsibilities, which would seem to have changed since I learned them originally.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Nobody's asking anyone to bow to anyone else -- if you have this in writing from a FSDO or RC, I really want (need?) to see it so I can conform to the FAA's idea of my CFI responsibilities, which would seem to have changed since I learned them originally.

Don't bother. The tone of the responses, especially including that one, is simply that we did not immediately acknowledge his expertise (you know, like we did for....... ) and asked for the sources of his statements.

Of course, if he does have something, and manages to gets over the horrible insult of not having his knowledge accepted without question, he might let us play with his ball and show us the writing. I'd be very interested in seeing it as well.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I'd address these by comparing what you have at risk as a CFI compared to what you may risk as a driving instructor. As a truck driving instructor, should the student fail to perform as necessary, you may lose that position as a trainer. You won't likely lose your job or ability to drive; and least likely, lose your Class A license.

On the other hand, a CFI, when called into question has his entire ticket on the line.

I'd be willing to bet large sums of money that you would never lose your CFI ticket for not calling the TRACON to verify your student is on flight following. After all, if they're NOT on flight following, what the heck are you or the TRACON going to do about it anyway? When you sign that student's logbook and medical to allow them to solo, you're putting it in their hands. If they're not deserving of your trust, they're not deserving of that endorsement either. Just MHO.

 

[KennyFlys]

I'd be willing to bet large sums of money that you would never lose your CFI ticket for not calling the TRACON to verify your student is on flight following. After all, if they're NOT on flight following, what the heck are you or the TRACON going to do about it anyway? When you sign that student's logbook and medical to allow them to solo, you're putting it in their hands. If they're not deserving of your trust, they're not deserving of that endorsement either. Just MHO.

To that, I answer with this....

I might. I might not. Depends on how you've impressed me during training, and how I thought your dad might affect your decision-making (could be positive, could be negative). But if I did, there would be a definite understanding (not a log entry) that you'd call me for final approval before leaving Y. Yeah, it's not a legal mandatory, but what I'd do to you if you break my rules would be worse than anything the FAA is permitted to do to you if you break their rules.

 

[jdwatson]

I've always wonder what does a CFI do when a student gets lost on their solo X-C, but finds an airport and lands there but it's not the one the CFI endorsed. What does a CFI do ?

I imagine the call going something like this... "It was real hazy enroute and I flew past Podunk Muni and landed at TinyCounty Regional. What do I do now, Teacher ?"

Presuming, the student didn't break any of your rules what's the next move as an instructor ?

 

[midlifeflyer]

I've always wonder what does a CFI do when a student gets lost on their solo X-C, but finds an airport and lands there but it's not the one the CFI endorsed. What does a CFI do ?

I imagine the call going something like this... "It was real hazy enroute and I flew past Podunk Muni and landed at TinyCounty Regional. What do I do now, Teacher ?"

Presuming, the student didn't break any of your rules what's the next move as an instructor ?

The specific circumstances might make a difference, but if the unauthorized landing was because of the student getting lost (as opposed to, say a diversion due to weather), I'd be pretty conservative and arrange to pick the student up. I'd be concerned about the student's real navigation competence and also with how that kind of event can erode self-confidence, which could lead to additional mistakes on the way back.

 

[poadeleted20]

The specific circumstances might make a difference, but if the unauthorized landing was because of the student getting lost (as opposed to, say a diversion due to weather), I'd be pretty conservative and arrange to pick the student up. I'd be concerned about the student's real navigation competence and also with how that kind of event can erode self-confidence, which could lead to additional mistakes on the way back.

I'd be more likely to approve the trainee going straight home (which the trainee should know pretty well) than to allow the trainee to go somewhere else (which the trainee does not know so well) first. Having been part of this problem (as the instructor on the far end signing off the SP's return flight planning after talking with the SP's regular instructor), I would definitely place great weight on the SP's regular instructor's opinion, especially if that instructor were to say, "Naw, I'll come get him/her."

 

[poadeleted20]

Shouldn't the time to be concerned about a student's real navigation competence be before you signed him/her off for a cross country rather than after?

I think that truth is self-evident.

Do I need to include some proof that the FAA is justified to question the teaching and evaluating skills of such an instructor or will personal/professional experience suffice? The student will most likely not be reprimanded as he/she is a student and just learning, but the instructor on the other hand, is not, and will be sitting in front of me demonstrating/explaining why I should let them continue to exercise the privilege of their Flight Instructor certificate? The first time you see something in writing as to what the "policy" is regarding improper endorsements and/or questionable decision making on the part of an instructor, will likely be in the form of a certified letter from the FSDO requesting a reexamination of your pilot/instructor privileges or letter of investigation for possible enforcement action.

If you state that any time a student pilot lands at the wrong airport, that student's instructor will be called in for re-examination, and the instructors here all know of numerous instances of students landing at wrong airports and the instructor was not sent a 709 letter, yes, I think that some "proof" that such a policy exists would be appropriate if you want folks to believe it, rather than just the word of an anonymous person who hints at, but doesn't state, that s/he is an FAA Inspector.

In addition, if you state (as you did in one of the posts you deleted) that faxed endorsements pasted in into logbooks aren't acceptable under any circumstances because of one line in 14 CFR 61.93 which says the instructor must "make an endorsement in the person's logbook" (note that it does not say "handwrite an endorsement in the person's logbook") when the FAA routinely approves pasted-in entries and endorsements in both pilot and aircraft logbooks, and also accepts faxed documents such as replacement airman and medical certificates and special flight permits, then yes, I think that, too requires more than just the word of an unidentified "Federal Civil Servant." If you're an Inspector or RC, just say so, and tell us where such guidance is written (I certainly can't find it in FAA Order 8700.1, which tells Inspectors how to do their jobs). If not, your credibility for such a statement is extremely weak.

 

[midlifeflyer]

There is more to the job or guidance than is written in the 8700.1 order. How about testimonials from the instructors who have received such letters, and RC's who have supported the action? It is a big world out there and because you can't find it, doesn't mean that it isn't so.

That's certainly true. I would be very surprised to find approval in a written guidance for folks (who at least obliquely claim to be) in a position of authority who apparently get a bit high on a sense of power, enjoy throwing their weight around, and get petulant when asked a legitimate question. But they definitely do exist.

 

[KennyFlys]

That's certainly true. I would be very surprised to find approval in a written guidance for folks (who at least obliquely claim to be) in a position of authority who apparently get a bit high on a sense of power, enjoy throwing their weight around, and get petulant when asked a legitimate question. But they definitely do exist.

The JD Syndrome?