Pilots helping pilots

View over 100 airline profilesAdd to Google



Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Part 91 and Low Time
Register FAQ Advertising Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Part 91 and Low Time Jump pilots, crop dusting, and other Part 91 jobs

 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums

    Already registered? Login above

OR
 
To take advantage of all the site's features, become a member of
the largest community of airline pilots in the U.S. and beyond.

The advertising to the left will not show if you are a registered user.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-11-2011, 11:38 AM   #31 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
rotorhead1026's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: The Far Side
Posts: 879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darkroomsource View Post
Ramp check includes looking at your log books.
Safety pilot can be legit, but not for splitting the cost.
CFII - not sure he can instruct in an ME without MEI.
You only need one FAA examiner to read this thread and ...
Don't carry your logbook. Problem solved.

IIRC, CFII can technically instruct (instrument only) in category, as long as s/he has a commercial multi. Legal is one thing, though, and qualified is another.

I'm personally not a fan of these safety pilot / PIC "schemes", and I expect a lot of interviewers aren't either. You have to do what you have to do, but there are always consequences - especially for short cuts. Y'all be careful out there ...
rotorhead1026 is offline   Reply With Quote
Advertising above will not show if you are a registered user.
Old 02-11-2011, 01:55 PM   #32 (permalink)
Prime Minister
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: CRJ
Posts: 14,223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rotorhead1026 View Post

IIRC, CFII can technically instruct (instrument only) in category, as long as s/he has a commercial multi. Legal is one thing, though, and qualified is another.
That used to be the case based on the wording of the regulations, but that has been changed by a recent FAA Legal Opinion. You need an MEI to teach anything in a twin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rotorhead1026 View Post
I'm personally not a fan of these safety pilot / PIC "schemes", and I expect a lot of interviewers aren't either. You have to do what you have to do, but there are always consequences - especially for short cuts. Y'all be careful out there ...
Some employers (or some interviewers) might look down on it or possibly even exclude it, but plenty of folks have gotten hired with SP time. You're better off with a 135 or MEI twin time, but SP time is better than 2800 TT and 28 ME
rickair7777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 02:38 PM   #33 (permalink)
Does NOT get weekends off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: ERJ - 145
Posts: 834
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
That used to be the case based on the wording of the regulations, but that has been changed by a recent FAA Legal Opinion. You need an MEI to teach anything in a twin.


Do you know when that changed? I have some documentation that says if you have an Instrument on your CFI, you can teach in twins (instrument only stuff) since your insturment rating is not class specific (Instrument AIRPLANE). I was also under that impression that you can teach instruments in a twin, just not twin stuff (IE Vmc rolls, drag demos, engine failures, or sign off an applicant for a ME add on).

Did the regulation change backwards? For instance, lets say you get your MEI as initial then you get your II. Can you teach instruments to a private pilot in a 172?
snippercr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 03:28 PM   #34 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
rotorhead1026's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: The Far Side
Posts: 879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snippercr View Post
Do you know when that changed?
I haven't seen that ruling, obviously. I do know a fellow who got his CFII (helicopter) added to his CFI certificate - before he got the CFI helicopter. He could - technically - give instrument instruction in helicopters. This was ten or twelve years ago, though. Lately the chief counsel has been all over the map, with overly restrictive rulings in some cases, and very loose ones (like safety pilot PIC) in others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777
but plenty of folks have gotten hired with SP time. You're better off with a 135 or MEI twin time, but SP time is better than 2800 TT and 28 ME
I'm sure there have been people hired, but I doubt safety pilot time was a big factor. 2800tt, 200me, with 172 hours of it as SP probably doesn't do much. If it gets you over the hump for a rating - or in the front door - then more power to you.
rotorhead1026 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 03:49 PM   #35 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
rotorhead1026's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: The Far Side
Posts: 879
Default

Here's 61.195 b and c ...


Quote:
(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.

(c) Instrument Rating. A flight instructor who provides instrument training for the issuance of an instrument rating, a type rating not limited to VFR, or the instrument training required for commercial pilot and airline transport pilot certificates must hold an instrument rating on his or her pilot certificate and flight instructor certificate that is appropriate to the category and class of aircraft used for the training provided.
Some of this verbiage was added three or so years ago, IIRC. It's still clear as mud (there is no "class" instrument rating - for airplanes anyway), but there's less wiggle room for "same category". B prohibits any flight training "off class", but then C mentions instrument training - which might be differentiated from flight training. I'll bet the FAA's ruling made B limiting, but like I said I haven't seen it. Got a link, anyone?

Last edited by rotorhead1026; 02-11-2011 at 05:15 PM.
rotorhead1026 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 07:12 PM   #36 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
hc0fitted's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: ERJ 145-FO
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
That used to be the case based on the wording of the regulations, but that has been changed by a recent FAA Legal Opinion. You need an MEI to teach anything in a twin.


You do not need and MEI to instruct in a twin ..... If you are a CFII you can tech Instruments and Instruments ONLY in a twin . I just did my MEI and that question came up in the oral .

Last edited by rickair7777; 02-11-2011 at 08:58 PM.
hc0fitted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 08:58 PM   #37 (permalink)
Prime Minister
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: CRJ
Posts: 14,223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hc0fitted View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
That used to be the case based on the wording of the regulations, but that has been changed by a recent FAA Legal Opinion. You need an MEI to teach anything in a twin.


You do not need and MEI to instruct in a twin ..... If you are a CFII you can tech Instruments and Instruments ONLY in a twin . I just did my MEI and that question came up in the oral .
Old tribal knowledge, it was changed last year and apparently not everyone got the memo. Actually I think the FAR was changed several years ago but the FAA had to issue a legal opinion to clarify what 61.195 now says.

Here's the memo...

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/.../Grayson-2.pdf
rickair7777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2011, 02:59 AM   #38 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
rotorhead1026's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: The Far Side
Posts: 879
Default

Quote:
We note that FAA Order 8900.1, 5-503, which you referenced in your letter, is inconsistent with the current regulation.
In fact the letter is stamped 4 January 2010 - and they'd apparently not caught up with the new interpretation, paperwork wise. It had been over two years. It seems that many of these rulings catch the rest of the agency by surprise. "Oh, oh yeah, this is what we mean".

Good link. Thank you.

Last edited by rotorhead1026; 02-12-2011 at 05:36 AM.
rotorhead1026 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2011, 05:10 AM   #39 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
hc0fitted's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: ERJ 145-FO
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
Old tribal knowledge, it was changed last year and apparently not everyone got the memo. Actually I think the FAR was changed several years ago but the FAA had to issue a legal opinion to clarify what 61.195 now says.

Here's the memo...

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/.../Grayson-2.pdf
Oh man thanks for that im going to share this information
hc0fitted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2011, 11:11 AM   #40 (permalink)
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bellanca View Post
I've had bad luck with getting picked for ramp checks, but have never had them look at my log books. It has happened to me 3 times in my 278 hours of flying. But they have picked on me for the pettiest of things.


Huh? Things that are against the regs that you think are petty? If it is in the regs, it doesn't matter how stupid you think the rules are, they are still against the regs.

And I thought a look at your logbook was a given....

Edit: What on earth have you been doing that you've been ramp checked three times?? I can't say I personally know anyone who has been ramp checked, especially with your time.
WingsNthings is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Time building opportunity for me, Q's nimdabew Flight Schools and Training 9 09-14-2010 03:00 PM
Bad Flight Time? Stallog Career Questions 10 01-15-2010 07:26 PM
Multi time building in SoCAL u08204 Flight Schools and Training 1 01-10-2008 02:11 PM
Multi Time Building in Ft. Lauderdale Mrsmith42e Flight Schools and Training 2 05-24-2007 02:46 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:41 AM.


vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2012 Internet Brands, Inc.