Part 61 Revisions are Here

midlifeflyer

midlifeflyer

Touchdown! Greaser!
PoA Supporter
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
18,478
Location
KTTA, North Carolina
Display Name
Display name:
Fly
We've been discussing this one for two years. From my Facebook post this morning.

The long awaited changes to Part 61 are here! Today's (6/27/2018) Federal Register contains the FAA's Final Rule making changes to Part 61. A brief bullet-point summary of some significant ones:

o A CFI is no longer required to be present in order to log Instrument tasks for currency in a training device.
o Pilots may fulfill the complex training requirements for the commercial certificate in a Technicality Advanced Aircraft (TAA, defined in revised §61.1) instead of or along with a complex or turbine airplane.
o CFI who has a CFI-I but not a CFI-A can give instrument flight training (again).
o More training received by sport pilot trainees can be credited to private certificate requirements.
o Sport CFIs may give their sport pilot students training under the hood.
o Pilots in 135 operation will be able to log SIC time in some operations not requiring more than one pilot.

The full text of the rule changes and the FAA's explanation is available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-06-27/pdf/2018-12800.pdf
 
So what would be the minimum home setup ATD?
 
I'd rather they have made it so that you don't need a safety pilot to log approaches.
 
dmspilot said:
You want to wear a hood with no safety pilot?
Click to expand...

Why not? Everyone else is looking down at their iPads while flying anyway.

I'd like it if it didn't *have* to be (at least) a private pilot.
 
midlifeflyer said:
No. #1 deals with ground devices, not aircraft. You need a safety pilot to log approaches in simulated instrument flight in an aircraft. That's not changing.
Click to expand...
Ed said he didn't want a safety pilot presumably to log approaches. I didn't take it to mean that it had to be in an airplane as opposed to a sim
 
EdFred said:
I'd rather they have made it so that you don't need a safety pilot to log approaches.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Ya only need to be under the hood from the FAF in. That’s what we have Towers for. Don’t need no stinking Safety Pilot
 
luvflyin said:
Yeah. Ya only need to be under the hood from the FAF in. That’s what we have Towers for. Don’t need no stinking Safety Pilot
Click to expand...
With TIS-B and syn vis, who needs tower? ;)
 
For some reason, most of the "wink" smileys are not showing up on my screen. Must be a new Forum bug. ;)
 
The effective dates of various sections are quite a maze:

This rule is effective July 27, 2018, except for the amendments to 61.31(e)(2) and (f)(2), 61.129(a)(3)(ii), (b)(3)(ii) and (j), 61.197, 61.199, 61.412, 61.415, 91.109, and appendix D to part 141, which are effective August 27, 2018; the amendments to 61.1 (amendatory instruction 10 revising the definition of Pilot time), 61.39, 61.51(e) and (f), 61.57(c), 61.159(a), (c), (d), (e), and (f), 61.161(c), (d), and (e), 135.99, and 141.5(d) which are effective November 26, 2018; and the amendments to  61.3, 63.3, 63.16, 91.313, 91.1015, 121.383, and 135.95, which are effective December 24, 2018.​
 
asicer said:
I predict sim sales are going to rise significantly.
Click to expand...

So someone can now just get on a sim, power it on and then look at Facebook for an hour. And they are magically current.
 
TommyG said:
So someone can now just get on a sim, power it on and then look at Facebook for an hour. And they are magically current.
Click to expand...
Just like they could fly around sight seeing in an airplane, log approaches that they didn't actually fly, and be magically current.

The punishment for faking instrument currency is the death penalty. It's hard to imagine a more effective incentive.
 
Palmpilot said:
Just like they could fly around sight seeing in an airplane, log approaches that they didn't actually fly, and be magically current.

The punishment for faking instrument currency is the death penalty. It's hard to imagine a more effective incentive.
Click to expand...

Well that flying around costs a lot more money than a simulator. There are a lot of BS pilots that are using a lot of ink on imaginary flights. The no CFII make it easier.
 
TommyG said:
Well that flying around costs a lot more money than a simulator. There are a lot of BS pilots that are using a lot of ink on imaginary flights. The no CFII make it easier.
Click to expand...
If they are going to lie in their logbook why would they log fake approaches in a sim? If I was going to falsify time in my logbook I would log that I flew approaches in my plane with a safety pilot even though the plane never left the hangar. If I’m falsifying documents to get currency why wouldn’t I get fake flight time to add to my totals at the same time? Dishonest people will cheat the system whether they have to lie about flying sim approaches or actual flight time.
 
TommyG said:
So someone can now just get on a sim, power it on and then look at Facebook for an hour. And they are magically current.
Click to expand...
Well you still need to fly and log a number of approaches. However, what constitutes an approach in the Sim remains to be seen.
 
TommyG said:
Well that flying around costs a lot more money than a simulator. There are a lot of BS pilots that are using a lot of ink on imaginary flights. The no CFII make it easier.
Click to expand...
The same type of person who would falsely log that they met the IFR currency requirements with a simulator could just as easily log that they met the requirements in an airplane when they didn't even take off.
 
I know that an ATD is certified and has requirements. Anybody have a link to what constitutes a “flight simulator” that satisfies the requirements for use in maintaining currency?
 
jason said:
I know that an ATD is certified and has requirements. Anybody have a link to what constitutes a “flight simulator” that satisfies the requirements for use in maintaining currency?
Click to expand...
Do these help?

15. Amend §61.51 as follows:

a. Effective July 27, 2018, in paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (iv), (b)(2)(v), (b)(3)(iii) and (iv), (k)(1)(ii), and (k)(2)(ii), remove the words “flight simulator” and add in their place the words “full flight simulator”;
​
14 CFR 1.1:

Full flight simulator (FFS) means a replica of a specific type; or make, model, and series aircraft cockpit. It includes the assemblage of equipment and computer programs necessary to represent aircraft operations in ground and flight conditions, a visual system providing an out-of-the-cockpit view, a system that provides cues at least equivalent to those of a three-degree-of-freedom motion system, and has the full range of capabilities of the systems installed in the device as described in part 60 of this chapter and the qualification performance standards (QPS) for a specific FFS qualification level.​
 
jason said:
I know that an ATD is certified and has requirements. Anybody have a link to what constitutes a “flight simulator” that satisfies the requirements for use in maintaining currency?
Click to expand...
My understanding is that FFS's move while ATD's and FTD's don't have to (I.e simulator vs device). Furthermore, FTD's are certified while ATD's are evaluated, qualified and approved through LOA.
 
jason said:
I know that an ATD is certified and has requirements. Anybody have a link to what constitutes a “flight simulator” that satisfies the requirements for use in maintaining currency?
Click to expand...

I did a little research and it seemed to be that the simulator had to be complete enough such that, once you were flying, there was no use of the mouse or keyboard for further input. I don’t think you could cobble something together yourself, you needed to purchase an out of the box solution (certified by faa maybe) which appeared to be $6k for red bird and probably similar for the other (precision flight controls, etc)

My conclusion was that it probably didn’t make sense for a single user to purchase something for the occasional loggable approach at home. But maybe we’ll see more flight schools with these.
 
Palmpilot said:
Do these help?

15. Amend §61.51 as follows:

a. Effective July 27, 2018, in paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (iv), (b)(2)(v), (b)(3)(iii) and (iv), (k)(1)(ii), and (k)(2)(ii), remove the words “flight simulator” and add in their place the words “full flight simulator”;​
Click to expand...

If anyone is wondering what the source is for the above quote, at the top of the government's e-CFR page for 61.51, there's a link labeled, "Link to an amendment published at 83 FR 30277, June 27, 2018." That link will probably expire in the not-too-distant future, so I have attached a PDF below. (I haven't gone through the regulation in detail to see if all of the references to "flight simulator" have been replaced with "full flight simulator" in the relevant sections.)

14 CFR 1.1:

Full flight simulator (FFS) means a replica of a specific type; or make, model, and series aircraft cockpit. It includes the assemblage of equipment and computer programs necessary to represent aircraft operations in ground and flight conditions, a visual system providing an out-of-the-cockpit view, a system that provides cues at least equivalent to those of a three-degree-of-freedom motion system, and has the full range of capabilities of the systems installed in the device as described in part 60 of this chapter and the qualification performance standards (QPS) for a specific FFS qualification level.​
​
Click to expand...
I haven't read part 60, but the above sounds a lot like the full-motion simulators that the airlines use, i.e., big bucks.​
 

Attachments

  • eCFR - 61.51 Amendment.pdf
    28.9 KB · Views: 1
Palmpilot said:
I haven't read part 60, but the above sounds a lot like the full-motion simulators that the airlines use, i.e., big bucks.
Click to expand...
You are correct...Part 60 governs the full-motion simulators that FlightSafety, Simuflite, airlines, etc., use.
 
1RTK1 said:
What is a CFI-A
Click to expand...
A CFI Iis someone who has a flight instructor certificate. A CFI-ASE is a flight instructor with a single engine aircraft rating on the CFI certificate. A CFI-IA is a CFI with an instrument airplane rating in the CFI certificate.

Just like pilot certificates, CFI certificates have ratings. I was using CFI-A to indicate a CFI with an aircraft rating.
 
Thanks, kinda figured that but never had seen it written that way.
Next question, can a CFI-I, sign off/train a instrument student for all his hours now??
 
1RTK1 said:
Thanks, kinda figured that but never had seen it written that way.
Next question, can a CFI-I, sign off/train a instrument student for all his hours now??
Click to expand...
Not unless his CFI certificate also has the applicable aircraft rating.
The new rule does not apply to instrument training in a multi. That will still require both.
 
Well it's about bloody time...

After review of the comments and
further analysis, the FAA has decided to
allow all training received from a flight
instructor with a sport pilot rating to be
credited by an applicant seeking a
recreational or private pilot certificate.
The FAA recognizes that an applicant
for a sport pilot certificate must
complete flight training on many of the
same areas of operation required for a
recreational or private pilot certificate.
99
Additionally, as explained in the
NPRM, many of the tasks and
maneuvers outlined in the practical test
standards for a sport pilot are the same
as those outlined in the practical test
standards for recreational or private
pilot.
100
In fact, these areas of operation
must be performed to identical
proficiency standards.
101
Therefore, the
FAA believes that all training received
as a sport pilot candidate is relative to
the aeronautical experience required for
a higher certificate. Accordingly, the
FAA is not going to limit the sport pilot
training that may be credited toward a
higher certificate to a prescriptive
number of hours.​
 
Question on the SIC change. Could a pilot with airplane SE land, log SIC in a CJ2 during a Part 91 or 135 commercial operation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top