Maybe Sport Pilot??

zaitcev said:
Interesting question. The FBO that rents LSA nearby never re-fuel again. I think in part it is because autogas is easy to utilize: it just ends in the truck of the school's owner. Unfortunately, dumping 100LL into a car is going to ruin the catalitic converter.
Click to expand...

One of the schools I used to rent from had a dedicated "100LL ONLY!" gas can for this very purpose. They'd pour it back in after the flight, or immediately use that fuel in a different plane.
 
Last edited:
flightwriter said:
I haven't flown either one, but the consensus I've heard is that the longer fuselage and new main gear on the CTLS made that airplane a lot more appropriate for student training. That was also the message Flight Design repeated ad nauseum when the LS was introduced.
Click to expand...
Nonetheless, Flight Design produce an aluminum trainer airplane that is not related to CT series, called "MC".
 
Old Geek said:
Like a silly fool, I bought a new CTSW and then started Sport Pilot lessons. The quality of instruction was not good and the DPE was also the owner of the flight school, leading me to believe that he had a financial incentive to drag out the lessons as long as possible. It did not work out. My hangermate, who is also a CFII and a Southwest captain said that if I passed the medical, passed the knowledge test and installed an HSI, he would get me through my PP oral and checkride. He did and I did. He's now on my "free charts and electronics repair for life" program.

Anyway, Sport Pilot was not for me, even though I fly a sport pilot plane. I occasionally enjoy the extra privileges and I think there was no comparison with the training.

Finally, the CTSW is not a good trainer. It is a wonderful aircraft, but landing it on hot gusty days is a handful, especially flying solo. Figure an extra 10 hours instruction over what a more docile aircraft will take.
Click to expand...

There is no difference between quality of instruction between sport and private. It's the instructor that matters. One can just as easily have a fantastic instructor for sport and a horrible one for private. Both instructors I've flown with for sport have been absolutely stellar and I'm going back to them for private.
 
EppyGA said:
I would bet most flight schools with LSA never fill the tanks. :wink2:
Click to expand...

We do pretty often at Chesapeake Sport Pilot! Depends what instructor and what student is flying, but with around 400 lbs (ish) full fuel payload, you can put plenty of student and instructor in. Take out a quarter of that fuel and you have about 430 pounds.
 
Once you have your Sport Pilot Certificate can you count the hours flown towards the Private? (cross-country hours, etc)
 
Dean said:
Once you have your Sport Pilot Certificate can you count the hours flown towards the Private? (cross-country hours, etc)
Click to expand...

Yes. Time spent flying solo as a SP counts toward your solo experience requirement for PP. Time spent flying dual counts toward PPL IF your instructor is a CFI. Time spent flying dual does not count toward PPL if your instructor is a SPI.

As a caveat to this, from all the discussions I've heard, it really shouldn't make much difference if you take instruction from a CFI or a SPI should you continue to PP, because the additional dual requirements (night, instrument, XC, etc) are generally going to be enough to meet the dual requirements for PPL, even if you had an SPI for your SP.
 
flightwriter said:
When the LSA category was approved, the CTSW became a trainer by default as it was one of the few models that was readily available. It is NOT optimized for that role, but is a great plane in the hands of a skilled pilot.

I haven't flown either one,
Click to expand...
If you haven't flown it, how do you know it's a "great plane"?
 
Dean said:
Once you have your Sport Pilot Certificate can you count the hours flown towards the Private? (cross-country hours, etc)
Click to expand...
Sure -- as long as those XC's meet the PP requirement of including a landing more than 50nm from the original point of departure.
 
hopmedic said:
As a caveat to this, from all the discussions I've heard, it really shouldn't make much difference if you take instruction from a CFI or a SPI should you continue to PP, because the additional dual requirements (night, instrument, XC, etc) are generally going to be enough to meet the dual requirements for PPL, even if you had an SPI for your SP.
Click to expand...
That would require 20 more hours of training with a CFI-ASE to meet the PP-ASEL requirements. Some folks might need that to prepare for the PP test, but many others might need only 10 hours or so. I'll stick with my recommendation that if you think there's any chance you'll go beyond Sport Pilot, you get all your training from a CFI-A rather than a CFI-SP.
 
Jeremy,
I am going the SPL route. I just did not have enough money put aside to go the entire PPL route. I do plan on going for my PPL, which I hope I can start towards the end of summer. I have a lot of fun in the Piper Sport I have been learning in.

Typically, we have about 3 1/2 hours of fuel on board. I do not think it has ever been filled up all the way. Just make sure your instructor is not just a SPL instructor, so all your time will count towards the PPL. Your instructor can train you in B,C, and D airspace for that endorsement. When I do my Solo XC, I am just going to do one long enough to fulfill my Day PPL XC requirements. Once, you are licensed, you will have the SPL privileges to fly on your terms. Once in a while, you can squeeze in the extra training you need for your private.

In the end do what you want to do. PPL or SPL, I guarantee your going to love it either way.
 
Ron Levy said:
If you haven't flown it, how do you know it's a "great plane"?
Click to expand...

Touche. I should have said, "owners and others with time in the plane tell me they really enjoy flying it, and that it's very comfortable and economical."
 
Ron Levy said:
Not all of them -- you need additional endorsements for Class B and Class C if the towered airport where you did that training is only Class D.
Click to expand...

I am willing to be educated, but I thought the endorsement was for B, C AND D. IOW, one endorsement covered them all.

Having said that, I wouldn't want to send a student to a C or B without additional training if all they ever saw was a D.

But I also don't think one trip into any of them is worthy of that endorsement.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I am willing to be educated, but I thought the endorsement was for B, C AND D. IOW, one endorsement covered them all.

Having said that, I wouldn't want to send a student to a C or B without additional training if all they ever saw was a D.

But I also don't think one trip into any of them is worthy of that endorsement.
Click to expand...

What training for B and C airspace does a PPL student receive?
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I am willing to be educated, but I thought the endorsement was for B, C AND D. IOW, one endorsement covered them all.

Having said that, I wouldn't want to send a student to a C or B without additional training if all they ever saw was a D.

But I also don't think one trip into any of them is worthy of that endorsement.
Click to expand...

Nope...the Class D endorsement in the back of my logbook reads:

I certify that [Name] has received the required training of sections 61.94(a)(1) and 61.325. I have determined he/she is proficient to conduct operations to, from, through, or in Class D airspace or an airport in class E or G airspace with an operational control tower.
Click to expand...
 
hopmedic said:
As a caveat to this, from all the discussions I've heard, it really shouldn't make much difference if you take instruction from a CFI or a SPI should you continue to PP, because the additional dual requirements (night, instrument, XC, etc) are generally going to be enough to meet the dual requirements for PPL, even if you had an SPI for your SP.
Click to expand...

Ron Levy said:
That would require 20 more hours of training with a CFI-ASE to meet the PP-ASEL requirements. Some folks might need that to prepare for the PP test, but many others might need only 10 hours or so. I'll stick with my recommendation that if you think there's any chance you'll go beyond Sport Pilot, you get all your training from a CFI-A rather than a CFI-SP.
Click to expand...

Not swearing it as gospel - just repeating what I've heard. I didn't realize that PP required 20 hours of dual, so what you say makes more sense. I'm not sure why someone would think that a PP candidate would need that many more hours, if they were proficient as a SP, just to add the night/instrument requirements.

SP is the only cert that I've really studied the requirements of, because of my situation.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I am willing to be educated, but I thought the endorsement was for B, C AND D. IOW, one endorsement covered them all.
Click to expand...
Depends how the instructor writes it.

Having said that, I wouldn't want to send a student to a C or B without additional training if all they ever saw was a D.
Click to expand...
'Zackly. If a Sport Pilot comes to me, they'll only be endorsed for the highest level airspace in which we fly together (satisfactorily).

But I also don't think one trip into any of them is worthy of that endorsement.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
vintage cessna said:
What training for B and C airspace does a PPL student receive?
Click to expand...
Perhaps only what's required in the regulations, which doesn't include flight training.

However, there is, IMO, a big difference between a pilot who's received all the required training from a CFI and been passed by a DPE, thus receiving implicit permission to fly in B/C airspace, and a Sport Pilot who must receive a specific, explicit endorsement from a CFI with no "second opinion." I'll pass on doing that without actually flying with them in each type of airspace for which I endorse them.
 
hopmedic said:
Not swearing it as gospel - just repeating what I've heard. I didn't realize that PP required 20 hours of dual, so what you say makes more sense. I'm not sure why someone would think that a PP candidate would need that many more hours,
Click to expand...
This issue is currently under review by the FAA thanks to an EAA initiative. I believe they are considering a proposal to drop the minimum requirement to 10 additional hours with a CFI-ASE for those already holding a Sport Pilot certificate.

if they were proficient as a SP, just to add the night/instrument requirements.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the longer XC requirements, too.

SP is the only cert that I've really studied the requirements of, because of my situation.
Click to expand...
61.109 is available for your perusal.
 
Ron Levy said:
Perhaps only what's required in the regulations, which doesn't include flight training.

However, there is, IMO, a big difference between a pilot who's received all the required training from a CFI and been passed by a DPE, thus receiving implicit permission to fly in B/C airspace, and a Sport Pilot who must receive a specific, explicit endorsement from a CFI with no "second opinion." I'll pass on doing that without actually flying with them in each type of airspace for which I endorse them.
Click to expand...

So a PPL student will do book study of B and C airspace, may have a few questions on the FAA written concerning B and C (could miss all the questions and still pass) may be quizzed by a DPE on B and C but receives no flight training in B and C.

But a Sport Pilot, to receive B and C privileges has to go beyond what a PPL does for the same privileges.

Interesting what requirements instructors will come up with when the regulations don't tell them specifically what to do.
 
Ron Levy said:
Perhaps only what's required in the regulations, which doesn't include flight training.

However, there is, IMO, a big difference between a pilot who's received all the required training from a CFI and been passed by a DPE, thus receiving implicit permission to fly in B/C airspace, and a Sport Pilot who must receive a specific, explicit endorsement from a CFI with no "second opinion." I'll pass on doing that without actually flying with them in each type of airspace for which I endorse them.
Click to expand...

If you were to fly with a Sport Pilot to B airspace and were denied entry into B, would that be the end of your flight training requirement, or would you have to come back and try again?
 
vintage cessna said:
So a PPL student will do book study of B and C airspace, may have a few questions on the FAA written concerning B and C (could miss all the questions and still pass) may be quizzed by a DPE on B and C but receives no flight training in B and C.

But a Sport Pilot, to receive B and C privileges has to go beyond what a PPL does for the same privileges.
Click to expand...
That's what the FAA requires.

Interesting what requirements instructors will come up with when the regulations don't tell them specifically what to do.
Click to expand...
The regulations aren't the only concern here. As an instructor, I have liability for the consequences of what I authorize a pilot to do. When my authorization is buffered by the intervening approval of a DPE, I have less to worry about. When mine is the only signature approving the operation, I don't authorize them to do anything I haven't seen them do.
 
vintage cessna said:
If you were to fly with a Sport Pilot to B airspace and were denied entry into B, would that be the end of your flight training requirement, or would you have to come back and try again?
Click to expand...
Try again. As I said, I will see them do it before I authorize them to do it by themselves.
 
Thanks everyone for all the input. I am pretty sure I am going down this road. Financially I am trying to balance school for me and my wife...paying off some credit card debt, house payment, two car payments...and my desire to fly. Looks like sport might be the way to go. With the hours I already have logged, it won't take much more to finish with sport. Then when I and my wife are finished with school and have the credit card debt paid, I can proceed to the PPL. Alas, it still looks like it will be next year before I can start.:(
So in the meantime...any of you local guys that want to give rides to an Airport Bum...feel free:D :shamelessbegging:
 
vintage cessna said:
So a PPL student will do book study of B and C airspace, may have a few questions on the FAA written concerning B and C (could miss all the questions and still pass) may be quizzed by a DPE on B and C but receives no flight training in B and C.

But a Sport Pilot, to receive B and C privileges has to go beyond what a PPL does for the same privileges.

Interesting what requirements instructors will come up with when the regulations don't tell them specifically what to do.
Click to expand...

Or, you could have received your PP before "Class B" was even invented and rely on whatever you picked up along the way.
 
Ron Levy said:
Try again. As I said, I will see them do it before I authorize them to do it by themselves.
Click to expand...

Let me see if I have this correct. For a PPL to have B and C privileges, there are suitable methods to determine if the student has sufficient knowledge and understanding of B and C without actually having to fly in those airspaces for the PPL to have those privileges.

For a Sport Pilot those methods used for PPL for B and C airspace privileges are not sufficient. And they are not sufficient not because of a regulatory requirement but that is your opinion.

Your endorsement for B and C would be quite expensive.
 
Ron Levy said:
Depends how the instructor writes it.

'Zackly. If a Sport Pilot comes to me, they'll only be endorsed for the highest level airspace in which we fly together (satisfactorily).

Agreed.
Click to expand...

Ron, let me ask you a follow up. If you worked with a student on a Class B endorsement, would that suffice for a Class C in your view? How about a Class D?
 
Ron Levy said:
That's what the FAA requires.

The regulations aren't the only concern here. As an instructor, I have liability for the consequences of what I authorize a pilot to do. When my authorization is buffered by the intervening approval of a DPE, I have less to worry about. When mine is the only signature approving the operation, I don't authorize them to do anything I haven't seen them do.
Click to expand...

The regulation governing the Sport Pilot endorsement for B,C and D operating privileges only requires flight training at a Towered airport, not for B or C. Essentially the same standard as for Private Pilot.

You are free to require whatever you want, but any Sport Pilot should know other instructors may be happy to just do what is required by regulation.

A Sport Pilot seeking an endorsement from you would probably spend at least ( fill in the blank for best case scenario) in rental and instructor fees, with no definable upper limit since multiple attempts may be needed to gain entry into B/C airspace.
 
Last edited:
vintage cessna said:
Let me see if I have this correct. For a PPL to have B and C privileges, there are suitable methods to determine if the student has sufficient knowledge and understanding of B and C without actually having to fly in those airspaces for the PPL to have those privileges.
Click to expand...
I didn't say that. I only described the FAA's regulatory standards without commenting on whether or not those are "suitable."

For a Sport Pilot those methods used for PPL for B and C airspace privileges are not sufficient.
Click to expand...
That is correct.
And they are not sufficient not because of a regulatory requirement but that is your opinion.
Click to expand...
No, they are not sufficient because the FAA says in 61.325 that they are not sufficient.

Your endorsement for B and C would be quite expensive.
Click to expand...
Perhaps so, but that should not be a concern of the CFI giving the endorsement. My only concern is that I am reasonably certain the person receiving the endorsement can actually do the things I am certifying that s/he can do. When it comes to B/C airspace, it takes actual flight in such airspace to give me that assurance. Perhaps you, as a CFI (you do hold a current CFI-ASE certificate, right?), are willing to sign endorsements without that level of assurance, and if so, that's your choice, but I'm not, and that's my choice.
 
Last edited:
While the student may want to get to SPL or PPL in the least amount of dollars. An instructor should not have those dollars on their mind. The attitude of the instructor should be to ensure the student pilot is safe and capable to be up in the sky without an instructor, and capable of all airspace.

Even if my trips through Class D several times may qualify me for an endorsement for the SPL. Even I would feel better getting some experience in Class B. I do not think communication to the tower, with a denial into the airspace is satisfactory completion of that training. If you have to go at it several occasions for entry, that is how it is going to be.

I was in the pattern several days ago on downwind. Another student pilot was entering the pattern. He was at pattern altitude, flying directly at my left on Right hand pattern. He never saw me. I then had to extend downwind for another aircraft, when I turned base, the same student was turning base cutting me off. If you ask me, I think his instructor has failed in training him in proper scanning techniques for collision avoidance. I'm not an instructor, but I wouldn't want my name endorsing someone for XC Solos if they are a danger to other pilots.
 
MDeitch1976 said:
While the student may want to get to SPL or PPL in the least amount of dollars. An instructor should not have those dollars on their mind. The attitude of the instructor should be to ensure the student pilot is safe and capable to be up in the sky without an instructor, and capable of all airspace.

Even if my trips through Class D several times may qualify me for an endorsement for the SPL. Even I would feel better getting some experience in Class B. I do not think communication to the tower, with a denial into the airspace is satisfactory completion of that training. If you have to go at it several occasions for entry, that is how it is going to be.

I was in the pattern several days ago on downwind. Another student pilot was entering the pattern. He was at pattern altitude, flying directly at my left on Right hand pattern. He never saw me. I then had to extend downwind for another aircraft, when I turned base, the same student was turning base cutting me off. If you ask me, I think his instructor has failed in training him in proper scanning techniques for collision avoidance. I'm not an instructor, but I wouldn't want my name endorsing someone for XC Solos if they are a danger to other pilots.
Click to expand...

An instructor should keep the students costs in mind and not require unneccessary flight training that could amount to thousands of dollars. But if the CFI has a misunderstanding of regulations or applies his own arbritrary standards then the student is screwed.
 
Ron Levy said:
I didn't say that. I only described the FAA's regulatory standards without commenting on whether or not those are "suitable."

That is correct.
No, they are not sufficient because the FAA says in 61.325 that they are not sufficient.

Perhaps so, but that should not be a concern of the CFI giving the endorsement. My only concern is that I am reasonably certain the person receiving the endorsement can actually do the things I am certifying that s/he can do. When it comes to B/C airspace, it takes actual flight in such airspace to give me that assurance. Perhaps you, as a CFI (you do hold a current CFI-ASE certificate, right?), are willing to sign endorsements without that level of assurance, and if so, that's your choice, but I'm not, and that's my choice.
Click to expand...

You have misinterpreted 61.325. Any Sport Pilot seeking the airspace endorsement should call the FAA Sport Branch in OKC for guidance on the regulation before hiring a CFI.
 
vintage cessna said:
An instructor should keep the students costs in mind and not require unneccessary flight training that could amount to thousands of dollars. But if the CFI has a misunderstanding of regulations or applies his own arbritrary standards then the student is screwed.
Click to expand...
I gather from your responses that you aren't a CFI. Otherwise, you'd realize that an instructor's professional standards need not be reduced to the lowest common denominator, and that mere compliance with the minimum required by Federal regulations is not sufficient as a defense against a claim of negligence.
 
Last edited:
vintage cessna said:
An instructor should keep the students costs in mind and not require unneccessary flight training that could amount to thousands of dollars. But if the CFI has a misunderstanding of regulations or applies his own arbritrary standards then the student is screwed.
Click to expand...

I can agree with that.
Can a tower deny someone entry for not communicating properly?
 
Ron Levy said:
I gather from your responses that you aren't a CFI. Otherwise, you'd realize that an instructor's professional standards need not be reduced to the lowest common denominator, and that mere compliance with the minimum required by Federal regulations is not sufficient as a defense against a claim of negligence.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what I am. You hold yourself out as a regulation "maven", yet you consistently add bizarre twists to your interpretations.

And I for one would not be willing to add thousands of dollars to my training tab to compensate for a CFI's unreasonable CYA philosophy.
 
So let's imagine I have Commercial certificate. Rotorcraft Helicopter and Instrument Helicopter. Let's also imagine that I have never flown a starch wing. While we're in the land of make believe, let's imagine that I haven't flown since 1994. The last time I flew, therefore, in the USA all of the alphabet classes of airspace weren't in use. There were things like TCA, ARSA, and ATAs.

If I understand the regs (which admittedly I haven't looked into that much) I can get the required instruction to basically to drive the airplane, not take a written, pass a checkride and I'm off to the races. Go out and but an aircraft that is sport eligable, and as long as I fly under sport rules (not at night, above 10k, etc) I can fly into class b,c, or d without an endorsement. Also, I don't need any of the speed endorsements because I have a Commercial Certificate, even though I have had no formal training in any of the alphabet airspace.

By the way I've made several posts before, mainly about non serious topics, so this is my first foray into a real aviation related topic. My name is Roger. I'm in the Atlanta area. Have enjoyed lurking for the past several months.
 
If you compare 61.325 to the Private Pilot requirements, you will find they are about the same when it comes to airspace. Neither Private or Sport require actual flight in B or C airspace.

I don't hear anyone clamoring for Private Pilot students to be required to train in B or C airspace.

The best resource for Sport Pilots, as for understanding the Sport FAR 's, is "ask the expert" at www.eaa.org. Listen to what they say not Internet regulation "mavens".
 
vintage cessna said:
It doesn't matter what I am. You hold yourself out as a regulation "maven", yet you consistently add bizarre twists to your interpretations.
Click to expand...
You keep saying that I'm giving my interpretation of a regulation despite the fact that I've said several times that I'm not. I guess my saying again that I'm merely giving you my personal standards for signing endorsements will not fix that problem.

And I for one would not be willing to add thousands of dollars to my training tab to compensate for a CFI's unreasonable CYA philosophy.
Click to expand...
No doubt you're one of those folks who wants a flat-rate flight review with guaranteed results in no more than one hour of ground and one hour of flight. No need to worry about spending thousands of dollars with me -- I wouldn't accept you as a client, because I wouldn't want my signature in your logbook.
 
Last edited:
Nsconductor said:
So let's imagine I have Commercial certificate. Rotorcraft Helicopter and Instrument Helicopter. Let's also imagine that I have never flown a starch wing. While we're in the land of make believe, let's imagine that I haven't flown since 1994. The last time I flew, therefore, in the USA all of the alphabet classes of airspace weren't in use. There were things like TCA, ARSA, and ATAs.

If I understand the regs (which admittedly I haven't looked into that much) I can get the required instruction to basically to drive the airplane, not take a written, pass a checkride and I'm off to the races. Go out and but an aircraft that is sport eligable, and as long as I fly under sport rules (not at night, above 10k, etc) I can fly into class b,c, or d without an endorsement. Also, I don't need any of the speed endorsements because I have a Commercial Certificate, even though I have had no formal training in any of the alphabet airspace.
Click to expand...
I might say that the training required for an additional airplane category rating is a bit more than learning to "basically to drive the airplane," and you'll need a CFI's endorsement before you can take that checkride, but you aren't far from the regulatory requirements. Of course, as I've said in the past, what is legal isn't necessarily safe or smart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top