Spins

[Diana]

IME, during the spin you will see between several mph below Vs to as much as 20 mph above Vs during the actual spin (prior to breaking out of the stall and spin) depending on the pitot location and the direction of spin.

Speaking of direction of spin, I find that I can be more precise in a one-turn competition spin if I do it to the right.

 

[PittsDriver]

Speaking of direction of spin, I find that I can be more precise in a one-turn competition spin if I do it to the right.

Yeah, but do you know why?

 

[dmccormack]

Yeah, but do you know why?

The same reason it's nigh impossible to enter a spin to the right in a C172?

 

[PittsDriver]

The same reason it's nigh impossible to enter a spin to the right in a C172?

Indeed.

 

[Diana]

Yeah, but do you know why?

Because the gyroscopic forces of the prop (in my airplane), even an idling prop, will help the recovery of the spin be nose-low, so I won't have to push the nose down as far to establish the vertical downline.

Actually, I first read this in Rob Holland's article. That's where I got the idea when I started working on the Primary Sequence.

 

[TMetzinger]

There is a separate CFI-SP ground school and knowledge test - Sport Instructor Airplane (SIA), instead of Flight Instructor Airplane (FIA). You need SIA to take the CFI-SP checkride. There are a very few things different between the two, and FIA will not work for CFI-SP.

As for ground instructor ratings (BGI or AGI), those allow you to give ground instruction and endorsements for sport as well as private. There is no separate sport pilot ground instructor rating.

But, a CFI-A can teach SP, right?

 

[KennyFlys]

Because the gyroscopic forces of the prop (in my airplane), even an idling prop, will help the recovery of the spin be nose-low, so I won't have to push the nose down as far to establish the vertical downline.

Actually, I first read this in Rob Holland's article. That's where I got the idea when I started working on the Primary Sequence.

It would be interesting to see a simultaneous video showing rudder control along with the movement of the airplane to better demonstrate it "outside the airplane." At the apex of a stall, it's sometimes difficult getting students to realize they need only reduce right rudder, not suddenly stomp on the left.

For some, it doesn't really sink in until we're doing crosswind landings and are able to switch runways to see the difference between a left crosswind and a right crosswind.

 

[jmaynard]

But, a CFI-A can teach SP, right?

Yes. Any flight instructor can exercise the full privileges for CFI-SP in any aircraft for which he has category and class ratings. This includes signoffs for additional category and class privileges on a sport pilot certificate. See 61.429.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

But, a CFI-A can teach SP, right?

Near as I can tell (in terms of who can do what)

A SP instuctor can only instruct in a SP. No restrictions on Airplane.

A SP instructor can only send a student for a SP check ride. No restrictions on A.

So a "regular" ;-) instructor can teach a student in either type of airplane (assuming they have a medical and/or use a SP aircraft for solo) and send them to get either a PP or SP ticket depending on what seems to be appropriate at the time.

And, if a student is a little late getting a medical, for whatever reason, either a SP or A instructor can sign them off for solo as long as a SP aircraft is available.

We return you now to your regularly scheduled thread.

 

[stingray]

There is a separate CFI-SP ground school and knowledge test - Sport Instructor Airplane (SIA), instead of Flight Instructor Airplane (FIA). You need SIA to take the CFI-SP checkride. There are a very few things different between the two, and FIA will not work for CFI-SP.

As for ground instructor ratings (BGI or AGI), those allow you to give ground instruction and endorsements for sport as well as private. There is no separate sport pilot ground instructor rating.

That is so sad, You learn the same thing and more but because of a couple of extra questions on the Knowlege test you have to take a whole other test to get the check ride. I find it hard to believe that those extra questions could not be answered during the oral part of the checkride. Then you have a CFI teaching SP without those extra questions, go figure.

Dan

 

[stingray]

Near as I can tell (in terms of who can do what)

A SP instuctor can only instruct in a SP. No restrictions on Airplane.

A SP instructor can only send a student for a SP check ride. No restrictions on A.

So a "regular" ;-) instructor can teach a student in either type of airplane (assuming they have a medical and/or use a SP aircraft for solo) and send them to get either a PP or SP ticket depending on what seems to be appropriate at the time.

And, if a student is a little late getting a medical, for whatever reason, either a SP or A instructor can sign them off for solo as long as a SP aircraft is available.

We return you now to your regularly scheduled thread.

That is going to totally depend on what the CFI SP is certificated at. You can be a CFI SP with only a SP certificate. This would limit you to a LSA. As a PPL You could use a 150 but the student would still need a LSA to solo and take the test. They still need dual in the LSA before solo for each make and model they use.

Dan

 

[jmaynard]

That is going to totally depend on what the CFI SP is certificated at. You can be a CFI SP with only a SP certificate. This would limit you to a LSA. As a PPL You could use a 150 but the student would still need a LSA to solo and take the test.

This is not correct. A CFI-SP can only instruct in an LSA, no matter what his certificate. This isn't as clearly worded as I'd expected, but 61.415(e) implies it:

Sec. 61.415

What are the limits of a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating?
[...]
(e) You may not provide flight training in an aircraft unless you have at least 5 hours of flight time in a make and model of light-sport aircraft within the same set of aircraft as the aircraft in which you are providing training.

A "set" of aircraft is only defined for those meeting the LSA definition, and is based on its category, class, Vh, and landing gear configuration. A 150 is not in any set of aircraft.

 

[stingray]

This is not correct. A CFI-SP can only instruct in an LSA, no matter what his certificate. This isn't as clearly worded as I'd expected, but 61.415(e) implies it:


A "set" of aircraft is only defined for those meeting the LSA definition, and is based on its category, class, Vh, and landing gear configuration. A 150 is not in any set of aircraft.

I take that to mean that you cannot train someone in a tailwheel if you do not have tailwheel time. This goes to the same thing as being a SP you need an endorsement to fly different make and models to train someone you need time in each before attempting to train.

According to the wording it needs to be a LSA. A Taylorcraft, Champ, J3, are not a LSA they are certified planes that can be flown under the LSA rules. You could take that to mean that if you use a LSA you need to have 5 hrs of flight time in make and model before training in it. I know you are right but I would argue the point with the examiner just for fun.

Dan

 

[john smith]

It would be interesting to see a simultaneous video showing rudder control along with the movement of the airplane to better demonstrate it "outside the airplane." At the apex of a stall, it's sometimes difficult getting students to realize they need only reduce right rudder, not suddenly stomp on the left.
For some, it doesn't really sink in until we're doing crosswind landings and are able to switch runways to see the difference between a left crosswind and a right crosswind.

Which is why you have the student practice the "falling leaf" maneuver.
Push too hard one direction and around you go. Press lightly to center the nose and you get a nice descent.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I take that to mean that you cannot train someone in a tailwheel if you do not have tailwheel time. This goes to the same thing as being a SP you need an endorsement to fly different make and models to train someone you need time in each before attempting to train.

Dan,

Do you really think that someone with CFI-SP can give instruction in a 150?

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Dan,

Do you really think that someone with CFI-SP can give instruction in a 150?

Where did you get the idea that Dan was saying that?

 

[jmaynard]

Do you really think that someone with CFI-SP can give instruction in a 150?

Where did you get the idea that Dan was saying that?

That's how I read Dan's comment as well.

That said, I'm of two minds about this. That the FAA didn't specifically say that a CFI-SP can only instruct in an LSA argues for the idea that they didn't mean to limit it in that manner; if the CFI-SP has a Private ticket or higher (maybe even a Recreational, but let's not open that particular can of worms) and a current medical, he is able to act as PIC in the 150, satisfying that requirement.

OTOH, it just doesn't make a lot of sense to have an explicitly sport pilot rating be able to be used in a non-LSA.

Yet another gray area....

 

[Greg Bockelman]

That's how I read Dan's comment as well.

Are you talking about the post Kent quoted? I don't see it.

That said, I'm of two minds about this. That the FAA didn't specifically say that a CFI-SP can only instruct in an LSA argues for the idea that they didn't mean to limit it in that manner; if the CFI-SP has a Private ticket or higher (maybe even a Recreational, but let's not open that particular can of worms) and a current medical, he is able to act as PIC in the 150, satisfying that requirement.

Instruct for what rating? Are you suggesting he may be able to instruct for a PPL? Don't think so.

OTOH, it just doesn't make a lot of sense to have an explicitly sport pilot rating be able to be used in a non-LSA.

I would bet that isn't the case. An SP CFI, I would BET you, could not give dual outside the limits of his CFI. A regular CFI can't.

Yet another gray area....

Personally, I don't think it is that gray.

 

[jmaynard]

Are you talking about the post Kent quoted? I don't see it.

No. I'm referring to this post:

That is going to totally depend on what the CFI SP is certificated at. You can be a CFI SP with only a SP certificate. This would limit you to a LSA. As a PPL You could use a 150 but the student would still need a LSA to solo and take the test. They still need dual in the LSA before solo for each make and model they use.

Instruct for what rating? Are you suggesting he may be able to instruct for a PPL? Don't think so.

No, I'm suggesting a CFI-SP may be able to instruct for SP (or CFI-SP) in a 150 if he holds a license and a medical that would allow him to serve as PIC. The rule's not as clear on that as it might be. A non-SP CFI can certainly instruct a SP student in a 150, although the student can only solo in an LSA if he doesn't hold a medical.

Personally, I don't think it is that gray.

Grayer than it should be, IMAO.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Where did you get the idea that Dan was saying that?

I assume from: "As a PPL You could use a 150 but the student would still need a LSA to solo and take the test."

 

[poadeleted20]

No, I'm suggesting a CFI-SP may be able to instruct for SP (or CFI-SP) in a 150 if he holds a license and a medical that would allow him to serve as PIC.

No, s/he can't. The holder of a CFI ticket with only SP rating can instruct legally only in aircraft in which a person with only an SP rating can act as PIC. This does not include the Cessna 150, in which it takes an ASE rating to instruct for anything but instrument training, in which case it takes an IA rating. Ref: 14 CFR 61.195(b)(1), which applies to all CFI's, not just CFI-SP's, and with which all CFI's, including CFI-SP's, should be familiar.

(b) Aircraft ratings. A flight instructor may not conduct flight training in any aircraft for which the flight instructor does not hold:
(1) A pilot certificate and flight instructor certificate with the applicable category and class rating; and
(2) If appropriate, a type rating.

 

[jmaynard]

No, s/he can't. The holder of a CFI ticket with only SP rating can instruct legally only in aircraft in which a person with only an SP rating can act as PIC. This does not include the Cessna 150. Ref: 14 CFR 61.195(b)(1), which applies to all CFI's, not just CFI-SP's.

I'm not entirely sure I buy that, because 61.181, Applicability, excludes CFI-SP from that subpart. I agree that that's the way it should be, but it's possible to read the rules such that it's not excluded.

 

[stingray]

61.415 What are the limits of a flight instructor certificate with a Sport Pilot rating?

(a) you may not provide ground or flight training in any aircraft for which you do not hold:
(1) ... or a pilot certificate with the applicable cat and class rating; and
(2) cat and class priv for your flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating.

I have PPL for airplane cat and SEL class.

I should have A cat and SEL class for my instructor Certificate. The rating is what I am allowed to do with the certificate. sec 61.413 lists my privileges.

How many times have you tried to teach or learn something in a plane that is not well endowed for teaching or learning the particular maneuver. Now teach or learn that same thing in some thing that is better equiped then go back to the other plane. Still not saying I'm right but I have arguments.

Dan

 

[poadeleted20]

61.415 What are the limits of a flight instructor certificate with a Sport Pilot rating?

(a) you may not provide ground or flight training in any aircraft for which you do not hold:
(1) ... or a pilot certificate with the applicable cat and class rating; and
(2) cat and class priv for your flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating.

I have PPL for airplane cat and SEL class.

I should have A cat and SEL class for my instructor Certificate. The rating is what I am allowed to do with the certificate. sec 61.413 lists my privileges.

How many times have you tried to teach or learn something in a plane that is not well endowed for teaching or learning the particular maneuver. Now teach or learn that same thing in some thing that is better equiped then go back to the other plane. Still not saying I'm right but I have arguments.

You can argue all you want about 61.415, but 61.195(b)(1) still applies -- if you don't have ASE on your CFI, you aren't an "authorized instructor" for non-LS airplanes. If you don't believe me, ask the FAA.

 

[jmaynard]

You can argue all you want about 61.415, but 61.195(b)(1) still applies

Not according to 61.181.

The FAA repeated lots of information from Subpart H, Flight Instructors Other Than Flight Instructors with a Sport Pilot Rating, in subpart K, Flight Instructors with a Sport Pilot Rating. If subpart H applies to CFI-SPs (despite 61.181 and the title of the subpart), then why would they do that?

 

[poadeleted20]

Not according to 61.181.

The FAA repeated lots of information from Subpart H, Flight Instructors Other Than Flight Instructors with a Sport Pilot Rating, in subpart K, Flight Instructors with a Sport Pilot Rating. If subpart H applies to CFI-SPs (despite 61.181 and the title of the subpart), then why would they do that?

You're looking at it backwards. Per Subpart H, you need the applicable cat/class ratings on your CFI ticket to instruct in anything that isn't Light Sport. The fact that you have a CFI-SP doesn't exempt you from that requirement. All a CFI-SP ticket does is allow you to give training for Sport Pilot ratings and privileges in aircraft which qualify as LSA. That's it. See 61.413 for details.

 

[jmaynard]

You're looking at it backwards. Per Subpart H, you need the applicable cat/class ratings on your CFI ticket to instruct in anything that isn't Light Sport. The fact that you have a CFI-SP doesn't exempt you from that requirement. All a CFI-SP ticket does is allow you to give training for Sport Pilot ratings and privileges in aircraft which qualify as LSA. That's it. See 61.413 for details.

If that were the case, 61.413 would list "light sport aircraft" as a requirement. It doesn't. Nowhere in subpart K does it say that. When the subject first came up, I went through it looking for just such a restriction, and it simply isn't there. I agree that that's almost certainly the intent of the regulations, but why didn't the FAA come out and say so explicitly?

 

[Greg Bockelman]

If that were the case, 61.413 would list "light sport aircraft" as a requirement.

Jay, I think the key word in this whole thing is APPLICABLE.

This from 61.415

(1) A sport pilot certificate with applicable category and class privileges and make and model privileges or a pilot certificate with the applicable category and class rating;

I can make the case that since a Cessna 150 cannot qualify as an LSA, then a Cessna 150 is not APPLICABLE to a Light Sport Pilot. Therefore, a CFI with Sport Pilot priviledges only is not qualified to provide Sport Pilot Training in a C-150 because a C-150 is not applicable to Sport Pilot flying.

Hmm. Did that make sense?

HOWEVER, I am not saying that flight training provided in a Cessna 150 by a regular CFI cannot be applied toward Sport pilot requirements.

 

[poadeleted20]

Greg's got it, including training by a CFI-ASE in a C-150 being applicable to Sport Pilot requirements.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Where did you get the idea that Dan was saying that?

Sorry, it's a combo of his two previous posts that led me to the conclusion that's what he meant, so I asked for clarification:

That is going to totally depend on what the CFI SP is certificated at. You can be a CFI SP with only a SP certificate. This would limit you to a LSA. As a PPL You could use a 150 but the student would still need a LSA to solo and take the test.

According to the wording it needs to be a LSA. A Taylorcraft, Champ, J3, are not a LSA they are certified planes that can be flown under the LSA rules.

 

[jmaynard]

can make the case that since a Cessna 150 cannot qualify as an LSA, then a Cessna 150 is not APPLICABLE to a Light Sport Pilot. Therefore, a CFI with Sport Pilot priviledges only is not qualified to provide Sport Pilot Training in a C-150 because a C-150 is not applicable to Sport Pilot flying.

That's a bit of a stretch, too, though it's probably less of a stretch than mine was.

If you look at the rest of 61.415(a), though:

Sec. 61.415
What are the limits of a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating?
If you hold a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, you are subject to the following limits:
(a) You may not provide ground or flight training in any aircraft for which you do not hold:
(1) A sport pilot certificate with applicable category and class privileges and make and model privileges or a pilot certificate with the applicable category and class rating;[...]

If the CFI-SP holds a PP-ASEL, he's met the requirement: he holds a pilot certificate with the applicable category and class rating. A CFI ticket is not a pilot certificate, and so that doesn't get involved in that requirement.

HOWEVER, I am not saying that flight training provided in a Cessna 150 by a regular CFI cannot be applied toward Sport pilot requirements.

I don't think anyone's claiming that.

 

[poadeleted20]

Jay, if you want to argue with the FAA, go ahead, but I'm as certain as I can be without a specific Chief Counsel letter in hand that the FAA won't buy your argument. If you get your CFI-SP, I recommend as strongly as I can that you don't give anyone instruction in an aircraft which can't be flown by a Sport Pilot unless you don't mind being violated by the FAA.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

That's a bit of a stretch, too, though it's probably less of a stretch than mine was.

Actually it's not. There are at least a few instances where the FAA has issued an interpretation based on exactly that sort of thing.

If you look at the rest of 61.415(a), though:

Sec. 61.415
What are the limits of a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating?
If you hold a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, you are subject to the following limits:
(a) You may not provide ground or flight training in any aircraft for which you do not hold:
(1) A sport pilot certificate with applicable category and class privileges and make and model privileges or a pilot certificate with the applicable category and class rating;[...]

If the CFI-SP holds a PP-ASEL, he's met the requirement: he holds a pilot certificate with the applicable category and class rating. A CFI ticket is not a pilot certificate, and so that doesn't get involved in that requirement.

I think you are missing the point. Would you agree that you can be a CFI-SP WITHOUT a sport pilot certificate as long as you have an appropriate pilot certificate with category and class? THAT is what that is saying. It is NOT saying that if you have a regular pilot certificate that you can teach SP in a Cessna 150.

I don't think anyone's claiming that.

That statement was included to ward off the inevitable comment to that effect by certain individuals on this board.

 

[jmaynard]

Jay, if you want to argue with the FAA, go ahead, but I'm as certain as I can be without a specific Chief Counsel letter in hand that the FAA won't buy your argument. If you get your CFI-SP, I recommend as strongly as I can that you don't give anyone instruction in an aircraft which can't be flown by a Sport Pilot unless you don't mind being violated by the FAA.

Ron, I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I agree that CFI-SPs can't give instruction in non-LSAs, even if their pilot ticket is something higher than SP. I agree that that's the intent of the rules. I agree that the FAA would get quite unhappy at a CFI-SP giving instruction in a 150 even if he could legally fly the aircraft as PIC. I have absolutely no intention of doing so. I would have no intention of doing so even if I had a medical to go along with my PP-ASEL.

Where we disagree is that you see something in the rules that I do not. I'm trying to understand how the rules as they are written prohibit doing so. I just don't see it in the plain language of part 61, subpart K. That subpart is what applies to CFI-SPs, and the FAA did a good job of writing it in plain language rather than the legalese of the remainder of the rules. They just didn't include that little detail.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Where we disagree is that you see something in the rules that I do not.

You just have to parse it pretty hard. The way I explained it is how I interpret it. But as a fledgling CFI, it might be a good exercise to ask for a Chief Counsel interpretation on it. If you do, I wish you luck because I have NEVER had any luck when I tried it.

 

[jmaynard]

You just have to parse it pretty hard. The way I explained it is how I interpret it. But as a fledgling CFI, it might be a good exercise to ask for a Chief Counsel interpretation on it. If you do, I wish you luck because I have NEVER had any luck when I tried it.

Heck, it's worth a try. Now, to find out where that process is described...

 

[poadeleted20]

Ron, I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I agree that CFI-SPs can't give instruction in non-LSAs, even if their pilot ticket is something higher than SP. I agree that that's the intent of the rules. I agree that the FAA would get quite unhappy at a CFI-SP giving instruction in a 150 even if he could legally fly the aircraft as PIC. I have absolutely no intention of doing so. I would have no intention of doing so even if I had a medical to go along with my PP-ASEL.

Where we disagree is that you see something in the rules that I do not. I'm trying to understand how the rules as they are written prohibit doing so. I just don't see it in the plain language of part 61, subpart K. That subpart is what applies to CFI-SPs, and the FAA did a good job of writing it in plain language rather than the legalese of the remainder of the rules. They just didn't include that little detail.

Let me see if I understand you. You are saying that you agree that it isn't legal, but you can't see where in the rules it says it isn't legal. Correct? If so, I think we can leave it where it is, since actual conduct is all that really matters in this situation, and this is an aviation class, not a law class.:smile:

 

[jmaynard]

Let me see if I understand you. You are saying that you agree that it isn't legal, but you can't see where in the rules it says it isn't legal. Correct?

Pretty much, yeah. I'm sure that the FAA intends for it not to be legal. I just can't see where the rules would explicitly back them up.

If so, I think we can leave it where it is, since actual conduct is all that really matters in this situation, and this is an aviation class, not a law class.:smile:

Unfortunately, sometimes aviation turns into law...

 

[poadeleted20]

Pretty much, yeah. I'm sure that the FAA intends for it not to be legal. I just can't see where the rules would explicitly back them up.


Unfortunately, sometimes aviation turns into law...

Well, if it does, the FAA will point to the regs that I and others have already mentioned and say that they read them that way, even if you don't, and the US Court of Appeals says that's good enough for them. IOW, "trust me.":wink2:

 

[dmccormack]

Well, if it does, the FAA will point to the regs that I and others have already mentioned and say that they read them that way, even if you don't, and the US Court of Appeals says that's good enough for them. IOW, "trust me.":wink2:

There's the letter, and there's the intent.

Who adjudicates intent?

Won't be the CFI-SP, that's for darn sure.

"Law" ultimately is the decision rendered in a particular jursidiction on a particular case.