Yeah the length is excessive, just got off on a tangent late at night.... As for being OCD, well, although I might be, I don't keep mine nor my students' logbooks that ideally up-to-snuff - just trying to pick brains and see what others do.
rickair7777 (and Twin Wasp, I'm not leaving you out
), you say AC 61-65 will keep someone out of trouble with the FAA, but let's say you're training a student pilot and give them all the appropriate endorsements (verbatim per 61-65) for a local solo: Presolo aeronautical knowledge endorsement, endorse their student pilot certificate, and the presolo flight training endorsement in the logbook (ensuring it's 90 days current). The presolo flight training endorsement basically says that the student has received training in, and is proficient in, the maneuvers listed in 61.87 (d for airplane single engine). I don't want to twist your words here, but I'll ask, are you saying that endorsement alone is adequate and what the instructor writes in the remarks for each of the flights is more or less irrelevant? I know you didn't say this explicitly but that's the topic I'm trying to attack.
My thinking is that the REMARKS for the flights leading up to that endorsement and solo must contain the key words for those maneuvers/procedures in 61.87(d) since 61.87(c) says:
"Prior to conducting a solo flight, a student pilot must have: Received and logged flight training for the maneuvers and procedures of this section..."
Additionally, the requirement for the instructor to endorse the student pilot's logbook is a separate regulation and actually repeated twice, both from the student's perspective and the instructor's:
(n) Limitations on student pilots operating an aircraft in solo flight. A student pilot may not operate an aircraft in solo flight unless that student pilot has received:
.......
(2) An endorsement in the student's logbook for the specific make and model aircraft to be flown by an authorized instructor, who gave the training within the 90 days preceding the date of the flight.
(p) Limitations on flight instructors authorizing solo flight. No instructor may authorize a student pilot to perform a solo flight unless that instructor has—
.......
(5) Endorsed the student pilot's logbook for the specific make and model aircraft to be flown, and that endorsement remains current for solo flight privileges, provided an authorized instructor updates the student's logbook every 90 days thereafter.
All of the above pertains to Part 61. For Part 141, you mentioned that if the student leaves there might be a problem. So I guess the question is, is it more important for a Part 141 instructor to show compliance to the school's approved course/syllabus, or to make the student's logbook easy to use for any potential future instructor? I think writing "Jeppesen - Private Pilot - Airplane Single Engine (v1.03) - Stage I - Lesson 2" should be adequate, but obviously that means the future instructor must reference that syllabus when reviewing the student's logbook (those come with the kit right?).
Does that clear it up? I think we kind of got off on a 61-65 tangent, which we all know those endorsements must be made, but I'm concerned with what should be written in the remarks so as to be totally covered and compliant with the regs.