Hood requirements for Private Pilots license...

Jeff Szlauko

Jeff Szlauko

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
146
Display Name
Display name:
ChopperJeff
My first CFI at some point went into a bit of a rant about a CFI at another flying business that had the private pilot student during the hood time to fly via VOR navigation. He thought that was totally out of line, as one only needs enough training under the hood to basically get turned around and out of the IMC they got in to. He said it was crazy that the CFI was having the student pilot do VOR navigation while under the hood.
Is he right?
I ask, as I am now taking lessons with the CFI he was mocking.
So, does the hood time really involve just having the pilot get turned around out of IMC, or does it involve more, such as what this other CFI has one do, and use VOR navigation during IMC?
 
The three hours of flight training (not instrument training) in controlling the airplane solely by instrument reference is, as you note, intended only to equip the applicant with the tools necessary to get out a situation that s/he shouldn't have gotten into in the first place. The CFI in question was out of line, in my opinion.

Bob Gardner
 
VOR navigation (or some other type of electronic navigation) is required, 3 hours of hood time is required, what else are you going to do? Practice "turning around" for 3 hours?

The Private Pilot Airman Certification Standards (ACS) states "selecting proper communications frequencies, identifying the appropriate facility, and managing navigation equipment", and doing so "during flight solely by reference to instruments", is a required task.
Jeff Szlauko said:
He said it was crazy that the CFI was having the student pilot do VOR navigation while under the hood.
Click to expand...

Because he teaches to the test and it's crazy to teach any skill not required for the test? Oh wait a second, by golly it IS required for the test. Confront him with this information and his head might explode.

I think the CFI who thought the CFI was out of line for teaching VORs under the hood was out of line. It doesn't even make sense to hold such an opinion.
 
Last edited:
we don't know all the details. with just what u provided, the dude who called the other dude crazy, is crazy.
 
Sometimes when teaching VOR's, you have the trouble of PPL students already having enough experience to be able to fly visually right to the VOR. Putting them under the hood ensures that they understand how to bracket headings in, and read the instrument, perhaps when over a cloud deck or elsewhere.

It isn't out of line, but it isn't technically required per the PTS either. If they can't do it though, I'd question their actual knowledge of VOR's though.

I like to do a lot of VOR work (not the introduction), on at least 1 or 2 legs of the dual XC. If they are familiar I have no problem putting them under the hood for part of it, if necessary to make sure that they "get" it. Of course plenty is done visual as well.

3 hours of unusual attitudes, 180 turns and steep/normal turns under the hood is a long time for a lot of them. Not enough for others :)

It Depends.
 
3 hours of hood time, I like to set the bar high. Stalls, steep turns, slow flight, VOR navigation, unusually attitudes. Why just do the minimum?
 
And Spirals, got to do the Spirals.
 
One of my first students did very well on his PP oral, flew all the maneuvers to the satisfaction of the examiner, but at the very end of his checkride, he couldn't remember how to navigate direct to a VOR while under the hood.
The examiner already had his temporary certificate in his pocket, but had to discontinue the ride until the next day to let him get his act together. I flew with him the next morning and he did it perfectly. The continuation of his checkride took five minutes and he passed easily. Being able to orient yourself with a VOR after an inadvertent IMC encounter is a survival skill and non-instrument rated pilots are the most likely to get into that situation.
Those few hours of hood work need to contain every task possible to give that student pilot the best chance of surviving an IMC encounter!
 
There is no requirement in the ACS to track a VOR under the hood. What is required is maintaining control of the aircraft while communicating, tuning, and identifying. Nor is there a standard for maximum CDI deviation while tracking VOR under basic instrument maneuvers.
 
Subpart E—Private Pilots
...
§61.109 Aeronautical experience
...
(3) 3 hours of flight training in a single-engine airplane on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments, including straight and level flight, constant airspeed climbs and descents, turns to a heading, recovery from unusual flight attitudes, radio communications, and the use of navigation systems/facilities and radar services appropriate to instrument flight;
 
I would say, that our first ground discussion involves.

A. Does your Radio and transponder work
B. were you using flight following....


So if that is the case, wouldn't just getting headings be a lot easier?
 
IK04 said:
One of my first students did very well on his PP oral, flew all the maneuvers to the satisfaction of the examiner, but at the very end of his checkride, he couldn't remember how to navigate direct to a VOR while under the hood.
The examiner already had his temporary certificate in his pocket, but had to discontinue the ride until the next day to let him get his act together. I flew with him the next morning and he did it perfectly. The continuation of his checkride took five minutes and he passed easily. Being able to orient yourself with a VOR after an inadvertent IMC encounter is a survival skill and non-instrument rated pilots are the most likely to get into that situation.
Those few hours of hood work need to contain every task possible to give that student pilot the best chance of surviving an IMC encounter!
Click to expand...
That ∆ When I resume my PPL training I want to have as many tools as possible available!
 
I think its crazy (and lazy) not to teach it.

The main goal is to be a good and safe pilot...not just get a piece of paper.
 
dmspilot said:
Subpart E—Private Pilots
...
§61.109 Aeronautical experience
...
(3) 3 hours of flight training in a single-engine airplane on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments, including straight and level flight, constant airspeed climbs and descents, turns to a heading, recovery from unusual flight attitudes, radio communications, and the use of navigation systems/facilities and radar services appropriate to instrument flight;
Click to expand...
Amazing what one learns from reading the requirements.
eman1200 said:
we don't know all the details. with just what u provided, the dude who called the other dude crazy, is crazy.
Click to expand...
Sounds just about right.
 
Just keep the little plane on the GPS wings level and follow the magenta line while under the hood. Isn't that how it works? :)
 
That 1st instructor wouldn't have liked the guy who taught me for my private. He had me doing more than VOR navigation under the hood. He handed the plane to me straight and level but inverted under the hood. He said your airplane with the plane in a spin under the hood too.
 
I do believe that the time is meant to help one keep the top side on top, but I also remember that on my private checkride I had to show him that I could track a VOR.
 
One of my favorite under-the-hood lessons: unusual attitudes, on a moonless night, over and over. Finally, my CFI said, “Now, find the nearest airport, take us there. When you think we are there, let me know and you can take off the hood to see how close you got.”

I triangulated a couple VOR radials to an airport. When I got there I turned on the PCL and took off the hood. There was no airport in sight (no GPS). It took a moment to realize it was right below me.
 
Matthew said:
One of my favorite under-the-hood lessons: unusual attitudes, on a moonless night, over and over. Finally, my CFI said, “Now, find the nearest airport, take us there. When you think we are there, let me know and you can take off the hood to see how close you got.”

I triangulated a couple VOR radials to an airport. When I got there I turned on the PCL and took off the hood. There was no airport in sight (no GPS). It took a moment to realize it was right below me.
Click to expand...
And that's when you impress the CFI by pulling the chute and landing at the airport.
 
My instructor walked me thru a vor approach to local airport, headings and altitudes, tracking a radial. Just like ATC would if I got stuck/lost
 
As I near the end of my IR training I'm glad I took my instructors' advice of "just don't do it" concerning vmc into imc. Instrument skills are very perishable To maintain minimum currency an instrument pilot needs to do 6 approaches under real or simulated conditions in 6 months. Proficiency requires more than that I'm told. So 3 hours under the hood for PP training is nothing and not even close to being proficient to fly under the hood and especially IMC. If you find yourself flying into IMC while VFR something has seriously gone wrong. Either the forecast failed, or your ADM failed. If this ever happens to me, rather than thinking about a VOR or vectors, I'll make a 180 and get back to visual conditions, then get on the ground.
 
In my experience, inadvertent entry into clouds is most likely at night, but even in the daytime, one's distance from clouds can be hard to judge. However I do agree that making a 180 is usually the best solution. My feeling is that the instrument training that private-pilot students receive is adequate for simple tasks, but the more complexity you add, the more likely it is that a non-IFR pilot will have trouble.
 
As we all know, a 180 will always get you to better weather. :rolleyes:

Since the FAA discontinued DF approaches, you’re probably going to have to track something if the 180 doesnt work.
 
MauleSkinner said:
As we all know, a 180 will always get you to better weather. :rolleyes:

Since the FAA discontinued DF approaches, you’re probably going to have to track something if the 180 doesnt work.
Click to expand...

If it doesn't then you have seriously F'd up, time to call for help rather than futz with a vor.
 
Palmpilot said:
What's so bad about being outside a major metro area?
Click to expand...

I believe he is referring to the possibility you will have to contact Center. A few problems present themselves.

1. Finding the frequency to call Center.
2. Being below an altitude for Center to hear the call.
3. Being below an altitude Center can see you on radar.
4. Limited radar vectoring.
 
Palmpilot said:
What's so bad about being outside a major metro area?
Click to expand...
I didn’t say it was bad (in fact I prefer it), but as @Clip4 indicated, ATC’s ability to provide assistance is going to be significantly more limited.
PaulS said:
Not sure, but in that case, you really, really, really f'd up.
Click to expand...
And deserve to die because the FAA doesn’t require that you be trained to track something?
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
I didn’t say it was bad (in fact I prefer it), but as @Clip4 indicated, ATC’s ability to provide assistance is going to be significantly more limited.

And deserve to die because the FAA doesn’t require that you be trained to track something?
Click to expand...

Deserve to die??????? That's f'd up too, I never said that, I said, don't get yourself into the situation. If you really want to be able to extricate yourself from that situation you should train for it regularly. Or better yet, get your IFR ticket, then you can fly on most of those marginal VFR days IFR without worrying about clouds.

Many pilots every year get themselves into this situation VMC into IMC, some live to talk about it, some don't. I'm sure all flew under the hood for their private pilot license and declared "trained" at that time.
 
PaulS said:
Deserve to die??????? That's f'd up too, I never said that, I said, don't get yourself into the situation.
Click to expand...
Another training tactic that's failed miserably. See your comments below.
If you really want to be able to extricate yourself from that situation you should train for it regularly. Or better yet, get your IFR ticket, then you can fly on most of those marginal VFR days IFR without worrying about clouds.
Click to expand...
Assuming your airplane is so equipped.

Besides, IFR is definitely not a one size fits all answer...on the personal flying side, an IFR flight plan has been advantageous exactly once, and I still required a SVFR clearance to get to my destination.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I didn’t say it was bad (in fact I prefer it), but as @Clip4 indicated, ATC’s ability to provide assistance is going to be significantly more limited.

And deserve to die because the FAA doesn’t require that you be trained to track something?
Click to expand...

If you are VFR embedded in IMC tracking a VOR won’t be the reason you are going to die. It will be because you didn’t listen to you CFI about weather minimums, continued or initiated flight into crap weather and lost control. The NTSB will not comment on how well you were tracking a radial before you spiraled in.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Another training tactic that's failed miserably. See your comments below.

Assuming your airplane is so equipped.

Besides, IFR is definitely not a one size fits all answer...on the personal flying side, an IFR flight plan has been advantageous exactly once, and I still required a SVFR clearance to get to my destination.
Click to expand...

Damn, I'm still training and I've lost count of the number of flights that would have been cancelled were it not for IFR. I'm a slow learner, lol, but really, many flights, IMC, good times.
 
PaulS said:
Damn, I'm still training and I've lost count of the number of flights that would have been cancelled were it not for IFR. I'm a slow learner, lol, but really, many flights, IMC, good times.
Click to expand...
As I said, one size doesn't fit all.
 
PaulS said:
As I near the end of my IR training I'm glad I took my instructors' advice of "just don't do it" concerning vmc into imc. Instrument skills are very perishable To maintain minimum currency an instrument pilot needs to do 6 approaches under real or simulated conditions in 6 months. Proficiency requires more than that I'm told. So 3 hours under the hood for PP training is nothing and not even close to being proficient to fly under the hood and especially IMC. If you find yourself flying into IMC while VFR something has seriously gone wrong. Either the forecast failed, or your ADM failed. If this ever happens to me, rather than thinking about a VOR or vectors, I'll make a 180 and get back to visual conditions, then get on the ground.
Click to expand...

I've had to rely on instruments in VMC conditions. On a dark night over unpopulated terrain, there can be unlimited visibility below a solid cloud deck where a vfr pilot can be perfectly legal and still kill himself if he doesn't have at least a basic skill level in keeping the aircraft on track and upright. He might not be proficient enough to shoot an approach to mins under other circumstances but he should at least be able to track a course under the hood or perhaps private pilots should not be allowed to fly at night without an instrument ratinge like some countries require.
 
Witmo said:
I've had to rely on instruments in VMC conditions. On a dark night over unpopulated terrain, there can be unlimited visibility below a solid cloud deck where a vfr pilot can be perfectly legal and still kill himself if he doesn't have at least a basic skill level in keeping the aircraft on track and upright. He might not be proficient enough to shoot an approach to mins under other circumstances but he should at least be able to track a course under the hood or perhaps private pilots should not be allowed to fly at night without an instrument ratinge like some countries require.
Click to expand...

Sure, let's restrict everybody to the same level as the lowest achiever . . . . . :crazy: :frown2: :mad2:
 
Kritchlow said:
Anyone else somewhat lost trying to follow this thread??
I’ll reread tomorrow after good sleep and clear booze head.
Click to expand...
Oh, it seems pretty straightforward to me.
There's a camp that says we should train people to Do More Things, Just In Case It's Needed.
And then there's a camp that says we shouldn't, because we should train people to Make Sure It's Never Needed instead.

Tale as old as time, no? (see: spin recovery!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top