floridaCFII

I only log landings if I'm actually landing the plane (for a demo landing, etc). Anything with the student on the controls goes in the student's logbook, even if I have to help a bit.

As far as logging IAPs... I log it only if I'm in actual at or after the FAF.

avanti

OK here's another question. What do you folks out there think about the CFII taking a student through a cloud layer (i.e. IFR to VFR on top) so that they can go to the practice area? I am a CFII in LA, and we have a turbulence and icing free marine layer many days, which prevents taking off VFR. I was trained this way (at American Flyers SMO) and so I did it with my student the other day. It literally took less than 30 seconds to go through the clouds, and I of course had gotten a wx briefing, knew no icing, no turbulence, airport was well above IFR landing mins, and I knew where VFR was at (not too far away to the east). BUT! The flight school owner ripped me a new one for this when we got back. Any comments?

floridaCFII

I've done it several times. It lets you do the lesson, and it gives the student valuable experience and (if they are a private student) it gives them a taste of instrument flying. As long as you are instrument current and know where the tops are, I see nothing wrong with what you did.

I think the flight school owner is out of his mind. Does he not want you flying through clouds at all? How are you supposed to do instrument training?

johnso29

I did it all the time. Sometimes in the midwest we would have WEEKS of low overcast, but the tops were low as well. I didn't want my students going weeks without flying, otherwise you're back at square one. They need to fly at least 3 times a week, IMHO. I often got an IFR plane, filed, went, and just CXD when I was on top. I see NO problem with it. In regards to the flight school owner, I would rip him a new one back. If he isn't comfortable with people going actual in his planes, then he shouldn't provide IFR capable airplanes. Sounds like someone wants the extra money for the IFR planes/training, but doesn't want the risk of pilots going actual. Seems hypocritical to me. I say screw him, go actual whenever you want. Take him along if need be. Then maybe he would have a little more faith in your capabilities.

mmaviator

i also did that in san diego....with the morning layer you needed to takeoff ifr and get above and cancel ifr(atc knew this and would always ask if we're vfr)...anyways the layer would always burn off

Pilotpip

If you're flying around with primary students all day it's pretty hard to imagine that you can't get three landings in a 90 day period.

If currency is an issue, demonstrate something new to your student. Show them a power off 180 or something like that. If we had a little time to burn I'd challenge the student to a little competition. Accuracy landing, soft field, etc.

NoyGonnaDoIt

There are any number of reasons why a flight school owner might not want CFIs taking primary students into actual instrument conditions without being out of his mind. Who knows? It might be an insurance-related.

Mitragorz

Quite a few times, I've had an instructor say to me "Mind if I take this one?"

No problem with me at all.

Jeffro

Check out this "Legal Briefing" article from AOPA (login required) regarding night currency requirements for students and instructors. It's not how I would have interpreted the FARs.

http://www.aopa.org/members/ftmag/ar...m?article=5994

Here's the interesting paragraph from the FAA. I assume it would apply to day currency as well:

...for purposes of section 61.57(b), an authorized instructor providing instruction in an aircraft is not considered a passenger with respect to the person receiving instruction, even where the person receiving the instruction is acting as PIC. (The instructor must be current, qualified to instruct, and hold a category, class, and type rating in the aircraft, if a class and type rating is required.) The instructor is not a passenger because he is present specifically to train the person receiving instruction. Neither is the person receiving instruction a passenger with respect to the instructor. This training may take place, even though neither pilot has met the 61.57(b) requirements.

CaptainTeezy

A few DE's have said that if you take over the controls at any point on final then you can log a landing...I would also say that you are responsible for that landing as a CFI and I personally don't see a problem with saying it is a landing in your logbook. However, there is no real reason to log landings, unless you need currency, which is not hard as a CFI. This is one of those gray areas that has a very limited outcome either way. Falsifying records is serious, but the landing issue will never help someone screw another person out of a job. It is not equivalent to logging false hours.

Also, as far as hours...there is a debate about "flight time." MOST people get charged for the entire time the airplane was running/battery was on (Most Hobbs meters). But a good .2 to possibly as high as .5 could be spent on the ground. When you go to get a job then most airplanes just have a TACH...the tach usually determines what they charge the customer or pay the pilot. Also some airplanes don't run the meter if the gear is down. Some pilots add .1 for every landing. Some people actually look at their watch and start counting at take off.

Technically...the time you spend taxing and doing a run-up doesnt count as a loggable time to some people even though you pay for it!

Remember this...you can get different answers from different people...even if they are BOTH with the FAA.