on my Jabiru 3-4 knotsHow much difference do pants make in airspeed?
on my Jabiru 3-4 knotsHow much difference do pants make in airspeed?
Cessna put out a Service Bulletin telling people to knock that off quite some time ago. As I recall, FAA followed up with "Don't do that unless the breaker is rated for it."
Yeah, but it turns out the breakers Cessna uses are rated for as many cycles as the switches by the same manufacturer. So, dunno where that pile o' BS came from.
And do I really want the 50 hour wonder experiencing his first grass runway in my airplane without an instructor? No, I probably don't.
FAA. There's even a SAFO on it. Go ask them, I didn't write it. They at least couched it and said, "If the manufacturer approves..." Cessna however... "Doesn't approve." Thank their lawyers. ;-)
FAA. There's even a SAFO on it. Go ask them, I didn't write it. They at least couched it and said, "If the manufacturer approves..." Cessna however... "Doesn't approve." Thank their lawyers. ;-)
83 ht TT and instrument rated? How did you do that?
Do you want that 50 hour wonder's first grass landing to be the time the engine stops? Do you want them to try to stretch it to a paved stretch of road where they're more likely to end up in power lines and hurting other people, or do you want them to be comfortable putting it down in a nice wide open field?
For me, I specifically trained at an FBO that allowed non-paved fields for those exact reasons... And if I had a flight school, I'd want the same thing. In fact, I would mandate that my students be given instruction at an unpaved field, and a few other things too (like how to fuel an airplane from a self-serve pump so they don't try stretching the tanks late at night...)
Sometimes, in the name of "safety", we actually make things less safe.
Agree with you there, but the insurance companies rule that game for the most part. I haven't found a club anywhere in the metro here that's pushed back on that nor has any coverage once the wheels don't roll on "improved surfaces".
The new rental rules say that as a private pilot I can only travel a maximum distance of 100nm away (wtf) and can only fly a XC if the ceiling is at least 4000 feet and visibility is 8nm (wtf2). As an instrument rated pilot I can fly a whopping (gasp) 150nm with a minimum ceiling of 800 feet.
I call BS! Our club's insurance merely states that landings must be at an airport recognized by the FAA or the authority of the country it's in. Paved or not, public or not, matters not.
I would love one of our flight school owners like @Z06_Mir to post the part of their insurance policy that forbids off-paved landings. Insurance is frequently used as an excuse... But things get interesting when you ask to see the policy. I have literally never seen a policy that requires landings to be at a paved airport. I don't believe it exists.
Well as a newbie CFI somewhat shopping the local clubs to figure out what I can train people in, I'll be demanding to see actual insurance policies as part of that process. I'll let y'all know what I find out. Seeing those will not be optional.
Do you want that 50 hour wonder's first grass landing to be the time the engine stops? Do you want them to try to stretch it to a paved stretch of road where they're more likely to end up in power lines and hurting other people, or do you want them to be comfortable putting it down in a nice wide open field?
For me, I specifically trained at an FBO that allowed non-paved fields for those exact reasons... And if I had a flight school, I'd want the same thing. In fact, I would mandate that my students be given instruction at an unpaved field, and a few other things too (like how to fuel an airplane from a self-serve pump so they don't try stretching the tanks late at night...)
Sometimes, in the name of "safety", we actually make things less safe.
So, I guess in a way there was? There have been two incidents lately, one of which involved a student pilot somehow taxiing into not one, not two, but three civil air patrol aircraft destroying one of my schools planes and 2 CAP planes (the third seriously damaged) in the process. Don't ask, I have no idea how that is possible and the new rules wouldn't have stopped that from happening.
The other, which really wasn't an incident but just an inconvenience, was another private pilot who is in my instrument class now (good guy, knows his stuff) went up to NYC to get some food, took off and had a CO2 warning go off in the plane so he turned around to land and get it checked out, by the time it was able to get looked at weather rolled in and the AC had to remain in Teterboro overnight. The owner was pretty ****ed about that and I'm not exactly sure why as he certainly made the right call in turning back AND remaining there instead of trying to take off in marginal conditions at night.
I have seen worse - There is a place near me that requires *any* pilot going on *any* cross country flight to have their flight plan approved by a CFI. Also, when you're instrument rated, they don't allow you to shoot approaches! You're allowed to punch up through a deck, cruise in the clear, and descend through a deck but the bases have to be at least 3000 feet AGL! Finally, if you have the plane for 4 hours, you have to pay for at least 3 hours of flight time.
So, I voted with my wallet and went elsewhere, and I hope you do the same. Places with policies like this are killing GA.
Whether there is training on a grass runway given or not, most people's first off airport landing will be in an emergency. I don't personally think landing on a nice, groomed grass runway is terribly representative of what it is like to land on a road or in a field of some sort.
If a flight school has instructors they trust I would definitely advocate landing on grass during training, or maybe even off airport. What I wouldn't be enthused about is having renter pilots taking my airplane wherever they feel like without prior discussion and maybe some pilot evaluation.
Havingan open insurance policy and no rental rules restricting such use is almosta flight school or an airplane on leaseback is a guarantee that you're going to be picking your airplane up from out of a remote airport or repairing unwanted damage at some point.
FWIW, getting a bit OT here - Don't expect much. You'll likely need your own instructor policy. Our club covers our members as named insured, but the policy excludes them if they're giving instruction. I've gone back and forth with the insurance company about this - Wouldn't it be better if our members were being instructed by people who actually know these airplanes?!? - but they're adamant that there's no way we can cover instruction, even though the instructor is otherwise covered as a pilot and even though they're likely the best instructors because of that. They either need to bill through the FBO and be covered by the FBO's insurance, or they need their own policy.
Normally I have always seen a clause in the rental agreement that the renter is responsible to cover the expense of retrieving the aircraft. If mechanical and repaired at the FBO expense, I'd make arrangements to fly it back. I'm paying anyway.One issue FBO's have is someone rents the plane, flies it out fairly far away, cannot get back because of weather (or mechanical breakdown) and comes back on a bus or airline because they have to get to work. Now what? Something to think about.
I call BS! Our club's insurance merely states that landings must be at an airport recognized by the FAA or the authority of the country it's in. Paved or not, public or not, matters not.
I would love one of our flight school owners like @Z06_Mir to post the part of their insurance policy that forbids off-paved landings. Insurance is frequently used as an excuse... But things get interesting when you ask to see the policy. I have literally never seen a policy that requires landings to be at a paved airport. I don't believe it exists.
It could be possible in a part 141 school. Not easy, though. Miminums are 35 hours each for private and instrument rating, with no XC requirement.83 ht TT and instrument rated? How did you do that?
Minden is at the foot of the Sierras and S. Lake Tahoe. The area is considered local to that part of Nevada. As a student I would be cautious about climbing and crossing those mountains when you are alone. The rotor and mountain wave winds along that ridge are serious and you can get into real trouble very fast. Also, the air traffic over Lake Tahoe can get congested in the summer and if you are not monitoring or talking to Norcal you may run into trouble.
You may want to consider flying North toward Carson and East toward Silver Spring then North again toward Pyramid practice area and back again. A longer cross country would find you along with many students in that area flying to Hawthorne and landing then back again. Or flying up to Reno to practice controlled airspace radio over to Stead and back again.
Once you get your ticket you will get flight following if flying into CA or down the middle of Nevada toward Vegas. Norcal and Oakland center.
I call BS! Our club's insurance merely states that landings must be at an airport recognized by the FAA or the authority of the country it's in. Paved or not, public or not, matters not.
I would love one of our flight school owners like @Z06_Mir to post the part of their insurance policy that forbids off-paved landings. Insurance is frequently used as an excuse... But things get interesting when you ask to see the policy. I have literally never seen a policy that requires landings to be at a paved airport. I don't believe it exists.
My rental place requires a flight plan to be filed and activated/closed on any flights over 25 miles away. Pain in the rear when 90% of my flying is putting around the local area and $100 burger runs within an 50 miles.
Doesn't work unless your flight is under 30 minutes.1800wxbrief online is your friend. Activate with your smart phone before takeoff and cancel before takeoff. Rule completed.
1800wxbrief online is your friend. Activate with your smart phone before takeoff and cancel before takeoff. Rule completed.
No one says you have to follow your filed route of flight when VFR. It defeats the purpose of a VFR flight plan, but meets the rules, right?The issue is what do I file when I just want to fly 25-50 miles away, do some lazy sightseeing and return at my leisure when I have a plane with 5 hrs of fuel onboard? Like I said, I fly for fun, not go get from point A to point B and back to point A. Tough to follow their rules in that situation, but I do my best.
Not to me. The first place had 3000' and I forget the visibility limit. No distance limit, just 3 hrs / day min; so if gone for 4 days and you flew 10 hrs, you got charged for 12.That all sounds reasonable to me.
He didn't say he was instrument rated, he said he's getting close. Two other things (GI Bill and 190-hour commercial) imply that he's using a Part 141 school. I don't know how quickly you can possibly do the IR in 141 these days, but I believe it was MTSU worked with the FAA to do a combined PP-ASEL-IA course that some students were able to complete both ratings in 65 hours.
100% this.
And I don't allow my aircraft with wheel pants anywhere except pavement. And do I really want the 50 hour wonder experiencing his first grass runway in my airplane without an instructor? No, I probably don't.
Just file a flight plan and put "Sightseeing around area A and area B" put the time for the longest anticipated time you'd be gone. It's just a guide to help someone come find you should you need finding.The issue is what do I file when I just want to fly 25-50 miles away, do some lazy sightseeing and return at my leisure when I have a plane with 5 hrs of fuel onboard? Like I said, I fly for fun, not go get from point A to point B and back to point A. Tough to follow their rules in that situation, but I do my best.
Sigh. This is so classic GA "business owner." Here we've (presumably) got a flight school owner referring to an inexperienced pilot as a "50 hour wonder." You'll all say I'm overreacting and that it was just a term, but it is precisely the attitude that I've seen at flight school after flight school: arrogant owner-operators who treat their students with open contempt and care more about petting their precious airplanes (i.e. decrepit, barely airworthy single-engine trainers) than they do customer service.
That "50 hour wonder" you're so quick to dismiss is a new pilot. That's cool! He (or she) is someone who spent ten grand to learn how to fly and is, literally, the future of GA. That person probably has excelled at some seriously impressive things in life to be able to afford flight training and to have the personality to undertake it. The fact that he wants to go to a grass strip is cool! The fact that he wants to expand his experience is cool!
Instead of being excited to show that new pilot all of the great aspects of aviation (and grass strips are a seriously great aspect of GA), we sneer at the guy. You're a nobody until you've got a (ATP/Commercial/CFI/x thousand hours)---or basically whatever ticket/experience the person making the judgment has. Instead of thinking that here is a person who can learn tons of cool things at your school, you condescend to him and insult his lack of experience as if it's his fault that he's only got fifty hours.
The flight school gene pool is in serious need of some chlorination.
He didn't say he was instrument rated, he said he's getting close. Two other things (GI Bill and 190-hour commercial) imply that he's using a Part 141 school. I don't know how quickly you can possibly do the IR in 141 these days, but I believe it was MTSU worked with the FAA to do a combined PP-ASEL-IA course that some students were able to complete both ratings in 65 hours.