CFI Sport - End the impotence!!!

Helen · Post by **Helen** » Mon Aug 16, 2010 7:43 pm

I'm happy to announce that the National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI) is working on a joint project with AOPA to petition the FAA for a rule change to allow due credit for appropriate training given by sport instructors. Please join us! NAFI welcomes all sport pilot instructors and our committee welcomes your participation. Please drop me a line at [email protected] if you would like to participate in this important project.

Helen

Paul Hamilton · Post by **Paul Hamilton** » Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:17 pm

Sounds good Helen. This is good for all. This is the direction we need to go.

DKarnage · Post by **DKarnage** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:01 am

Has there been any development with this?

Paul Hamilton · Post by **Paul Hamilton** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:53 pm

DKarnage wrote:Has there been any development with this?

Yes,
Helen organized a group who provided relevant input and has this is being submitted the FAA through AOPA to be fixed. It will take a while.

Helen should be credited with doing what is required to fix this (I feel the best way it can be done). Action was taken and in process.

It is in the works. I am sure Helen will notify us if we can assist in any way.

Jim Stewart · Post by **Jim Stewart** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 2:43 pm

My personal experience is that the sport pilot instruction that I got was *not* nearly as good as the CFI instruction. My first sport pilot instructor didn't even know how to initiate flight following. He made other obviously incompetent mistakes like taxiing without clearance at a towered airport and accepting a special vfr clearance with a light sport license.

Maybe the sport pilot instructors here are competent to give PP training. The one that I used and spent $$$ on was not. I would not support this rule change.

Paul Hamilton · Post by **Paul Hamilton** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 3:24 pm

Jim Stewart wrote:Maybe the sport pilot instructors here are competent to give PP training. The one that I used and spent $$$ on was not. I would not support this rule change.

Jim,
Just because you got a bad CFIS (in your opinion) does not mean all are that way. I think it is important to look for the best doctors, lawyers, and wives. There are good and bad in all those categories including flight instructors.

There are plenty of examples where CFI (private pilot) flight instructors provide sub standard services but it does not make them all bad.

I think if you look at Helens motivation and high standards for her flight school that overall, CFIS can make better instructors for many applications.

Sorry you got one you did not like.

ArionAv8or · Post by **ArionAv8or** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:19 pm

Paul Hamilton wrote:
Jim Stewart wrote:Maybe the sport pilot instructors here are competent to give PP training. The one that I used and spent $$$ on was not. I would not support this rule change.
Jim,
Just because you got a bad CFIS (in your opinion) does not mean all are that way. I think it is important to look for the best doctors, lawyers, and wives.

OMG, don't get me started on the whole bad wives discussion. I find it funny you mentioned the best lawyers and wives in the same sentence. I have had a couple of bad wives in the past and just glad I had a better lawyer than her, LOL. I would definitely agree that one bad apple does not spoil the whole bunch. The other thing to look at Jim is the CFIS may not be to blame as much as the person who trained him. Just my two cents worth.

bryancobb · Post by **bryancobb** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:20 pm

Jim Stewart wrote:My personal experience is that the sport pilot instruction that I got was *not* nearly as good as the CFI instruction. My first sport pilot instructor didn't even know how to initiate flight following. He made other obviously incompetent mistakes like taxiing without clearance at a towered airport and accepting a special vfr clearance with a light sport license.

Maybe the sport pilot instructors here are competent to give PP training. The one that I used and spent $$$ on was not. I would not support this rule change.

Jim,
I'll just make 2 succinct comments.
1) Knowing how to use Flight Following service is NOT a PTS equirement for a Sport Pilot License. I routinely use flight following on all VFR flights away from my home airport. I DO NOT TEACH SPORT PILOT STUDENTS ANYTHING ABOUT THIS UNTIL AFTER THEIR CHECKRIDE. I ONLY teach pilotage/dead-reckoning, diversion, and lost procedures to pre-checkride students. REMEMBER...THIS IS AN ENTRY-LEVEL RATING.
2) Sport Pilots including CFI's need training and a logbook endorsement for operations at a SPECIFIC airport if it is a Class D or above field. Your CFIS was not trained properly for that field. There is a lot lot of difference in incompetence and ignorance.

The first 10 or 15 hours of Dual Instruction, given by a CFIS, is really what the rule change is attempting to address. This 10 hours is pre-cross-country, when you are learning to get up, get down, and a little crosswind and emergency procedures work. Sport Instructors are NOT attempting to gain the priviledge of teaching a Sport Student beyond the Sport Pilot knowledge level. We just want the first 10 or 15 hours of PRIMARY dual we give to be creditable toward higher ratings!

Helen · Post by **Helen** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:01 pm

DKarnage wrote:Has there been any development with this?

The NAFI committee submitted our recommended wording to the AOPA legal affairs folks who are taking our joint proposal and running with it.

AOPA is in the process of submitting an unrelated request for some part 61 language clean-up. Such does not require the full rule making process. They are trying to decide if the subpart K proposal can be successfully included in that proposal to shorten the time until implementation of if they need to submit it for the full rule making process.

Helen

Jim Stewart · Post by **Jim Stewart** » Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:08 pm

The other thing to look at Jim is the CFIS may not be to blame as much as the person who trained him. Just my two cents worth.

Good point. He was in the very first batch of sport pilot instructors certificated. All he had was some ultralight experience. I don't have a clue how he was trained, but it wasn't by a CFI. Early on he made lots of noise about training to "a higher standard" than PP. What a crock. He was also a DPE for sport pilots, the first batch again. Until his certificate was suspended. Twice. I think you guys on the west coast have a pretty good idea of who I'm talking about. Am I bitter. Yes. Wasted thousands of dollars and had to relearn a lot of stuff the right way.

1) Knowing how to use Flight Following service is NOT a PTS equirement for a Sport Pilot License. I routinely use flight following on all VFR flights away from my home airport. I DO NOT TEACH SPORT PILOT STUDENTS ANYTHING ABOUT THIS UNTIL AFTER THEIR CHECKRIDE. I ONLY teach pilotage/dead-reckoning, diversion, and lost procedures to pre-checkride students. REMEMBER...THIS IS AN ENTRY-LEVEL RATING.

It may not be a requirement for a sport pilot student, but it damn well ought to be a requirement that a light sport instructor/DPE knows how to do it himself.

2) Sport Pilots including CFI's need training and a logbook endorsement for operations at a SPECIFIC airport if it is a Class D or above field. Your CFIS was not trained properly for that field. There is a lot lot of difference in incompetence and ignorance.

Well, he was operating an aircraft at an airport in violation of the FAR's and describing his behavior as correct to a student.

Totally agree with your second statement.

Pawlander · Post by **Pawlander** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:59 am

bryancobb wrote: 2) Sport Pilots including CFI's need training and a logbook endorsement for operations at a SPECIFIC airport if it is a Class D or above field. Your CFIS was not trained properly for that field.

Bryan, the way that was worded could easily be misinterpreted by some as meaning a licensed sport pilot (not a STUDENT sport pilot) would need an endorsement for each Class D or above airport you want to fly to. That, of course, is not the case.

FAR 61.325 requires a single endorsement in your Sport Pilot logbook before you can fly into Class D or above airports, but once you have that endorsement, you can fly into all of them (except certain specifically enumerated Class B's).

To obtain that endorsement, the CFI must train you in the airspace rules, use of radios, communications, navigation equipment, etc. You must also receive actual training, including three takeoffs and full stop landings at an airport (ANY airport) with an operating control tower.

bryancobb · Post by **bryancobb** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 10:27 am

No interpretation to it. I was wrong. I was stating what I thought I remembered to be correct. Thanks for refreshing my memory.[/quote]

3Dreaming · Post by **3Dreaming** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 11:02 am

Bryan, you were thinking as an instructor. A sport pilot student must have the same training as required by 61.325, but it is done under 61.94. The training for the student must be done at the specific airport for which they are operating, and it is only good for 90 days. The instructor should also sign off that the training required by 61.325 has also been done. Tom

Sport Pilot Talk

CFI Sport - End the impotence!!!

CFI Sport - End the impotence!!!

My Comment

No Interpretation