Page 1 of 2

CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 7:36 am
by mhaleem
It appears that the majority of aviation forums where sport pilot certification is mentioned, the topic of dual time not counting towards private certification from a CFI-S is mentioned. I am baffled by what appears to be a lack of disclosure or unwillingness to educate the consumer.

Here is what I think I understand:

(1) Sport Pilot-20 hrs; Private-40 hrs (20 hr difference)
(2) No matter who provides the instruction, a transitioning sport pilot will have to obtain 3 hours of of night flight training, 3 hours of instrument flight training, and the prep for the private pilot PTS requires 3 hours of time.
(3) If the sport pilot transitions from a LSA to a C172/C150, factor another 3-5 hours for this aircraft transition.

Thus far the additional training separate from the additional 20 hour difference between the sport and private add up to 12-14 hours of additional hours needed no matter who does the training (leaving an additional 6-8 hrs required to obtain the 20 hrs). So to me it appears that the the supposedly lost dual hours from a CFI-Sport are little to nil when adding up the numbers for transitioning. If we are arguing about 6-8 hrs, which honestly in the flight training world is not a big issue, is this something that should be gaining a lot of attention or is promoted as a means to de-value the instruction from a CFI-Sport? Someone please help me with this one!!!

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:14 am
by 3Dreaming
When you look at instruction the difference is only 15 for sport and 20 for private, a 5 hour difference. The problem is it is not just the night, instrument, and the extra cross country that needs to be covered. You have to do everyrthing again. Granted it will not take as long the second time around, but it has to be logged. Take a look at 61 sub part "E" for everything that must be taught by an authorized instructor for the private pilot. These are the items that you will need to re-do because a sport CFI is not an authorized instructor for the private pilot.
If the training had been done by a 61 sub part "H" instructor the transition would be like you described, except in my opinion the transition to the larger aircraft will not take that much time.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:11 am
by mhaleem
I guess what I'm saying is knowing the sport pilot will need 20 additional hours anyway to achieve the private, I don't see how the sport pilot with the ability to takeoff, land, plan & fly cross countries will surpass forty hours by that much; unless of course if the school is trying to milk him/her for dollars!!! the three hours of instrument, night, test prep and a/c transition (if needed) will eat into 12 hours of that 20. The additional 8 hours or more can be utilized to make up any additional requirements (longer x-countries required for private as an example)

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:44 am
by drseti
Mo, to put things in perspective, take a look at my PP add-on curriculum for licensed Sport Pilots:

This $3k package includes 15 hours of dual, 3 of solo, 14 hours of individualized ground instruction, and the study materials required to upgrade. The numbers are somewhat more than your estimate, and admittedly more than the bare-bones minimum FAA requirements -- but forty years of teaching have me convinced that these are realistic requirements to gain PP skills. The hours of dual are sufficient to satisfy PP requirements even if the SP was earned under the guidance of a Subpart K flight instructor. If the skills are present and demonstrated, I have no problem with taking such a student forward for the PP.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:17 pm
by 3Dreaming
I think you missed my point. If the training was done by a sport CFI then all of these items will need to be taught and logged from a sub part "H" instructor for the transitioning student.
§ 61.107 Flight proficiency.
(a) General. A person who applies for a private pilot certificate must receive and log ground and flight training from an authorized instructor on the areas of operation of this section that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought.

(b) Areas of operation. (1) For an airplane category rating with a single-engine class rating:

(i) Preflight preparation;

(ii) Preflight procedures;

(iii) Airport and seaplane base operations;

(iv) Takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds;

(v) Performance maneuvers;

(vi) Ground reference maneuvers;

(vii) Navigation;

(viii) Slow flight and stalls;

(ix) Basic instrument maneuvers;

(x) Emergency operations;

(xi) Night operations, except as provided in § 61.110 of this part; and

(xii) Postflight procedures.

This is quite a bit more than just adding night, instrument, extra cross country, and prep for the checkride. It's OK for this to be taught by a sport CFI for a sport pilot, but not for the private pilot. That instruction must come from a sub part H CFI.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 2:05 pm
by VL Roberts
Most of those requirements could be folded into the 3 hour prep, just a matter of the student demonstrating the skills to Practical Test Standards.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 3:39 pm
by 3Dreaming
VL Roberts wrote:Most of those requirements could be folded into the 3 hour prep, just a matter of the student demonstrating the skills to Practical Test Standards.

That may be true, just make sure they are all logged by the sub part "H" instructor, or you don't meet the requirements for the private.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 7:56 pm
by mhaleem
Hey guys/gals does this look like a foreseeable scenario (Taking into account that each student is unique in their flight training)

FAA Minimums: Private Pilot: 40 hrs (20 hrs dual, 10 hrs solo)
Sport Pilot: 20 hrs (15 hrs dual, 5 hrs solo)

National Averages: Sport-35 hrs Private-65 hrs

Sport to Private Transition:

Private Transition:
3 hrs cross country – dual
3 hrs night training- dual
3 hrs instruments – dual
3 hrs checkride prep- dual
5 hrs a/c transition from LSA to conventional a/c- dual
5 hrs additional solo needed from sport pilot solo
Total 22 hrs

22 approx hrs needed to transition from sport to private if sport training done with CFI Sport or 19 approx hours if sport training done with CFI. Areas of operation for private pilot rating will be achieved during the transition course.

If sport training done with CFI 3 hr cross country requirement can be deleted if distance requirements are met during sport training. All additional solo requirements can be done during sport training with CFI-Sport or CFI. Night training, instrument, checkride prep and a/c transition have to be done with CFI anyways.

If transition training done when CFI-Sport conducted training for sport:
using FAA minimums:

20 hrs (Sport) + 22 hrs (add. private hours needed) = 42 hrs (2 hrs more than FAA mins)

If training done with CFI Sport using national average hrs:
35 hrs (Sport) + 22 hrs (add. Private hours needed) = 57 hrs (8 hrs less than nat’l avg)

If transition training done when CFI conducted training for sport:
using FAA minimums:

If training done with CFI using FAA mins: 20 hrs(Sport) + 19 hrs add private hours = 39 hrs

If training done with CFI using national avg hrs:
35 hrs (Sport) + 19 hrs add private hours = 54 hrs

* The above are examples and numbers could vary based on student ability, frequency in training, etc.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 8:17 pm
by drseti
Looks pretty good, Mo, and rather close to my curriculum. One minor problem, however:

mhaleem wrote:If training done with CFI using FAA mins: 20 hrs(Sport) + 19 hrs add private hours = 39 hrs

39 hours is, of course, less than the FAA required 40 hour minimum. Not likely to be a problem, since I've yet to have a Sport Pilot candidate complete in 20 (in fact, 26 hours is the minimum in my SP curriculum; most go 30 to 35).

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:49 pm
by mhaleem
Not to beat a dead horse, but if a student obtains a sport license at 20 hrs and adds 20 hrs of dual training needed for the private (that they will have to repeat as a consequence of training with a CFI-Sport) along with 5 additional solo hrs needed to compensate for the higher solo times for the private, I get 45 hrs, which we all know is typically not achieved by the average student (of course many schools will not tell a student that the FAA minimum for achieving a private could possibly be the FAA min of 40 hrs X 2, which makes this very common topic of being wary of sport cfi instruction if one decides to later transition a mute point). Schools are beating the "CFI-Sport Instruction is useless" thing into the ground instead of educating the consumer; there could be more folks interested in pursuing the CFI-Sport rating if schools didn't make them feel as though their instruction is/could be useless!! One thing I know is many folks don't finish the private due to cost/many constraints, and we could have many more good licensed pilots flying if the separation syndrome were not present. The instruction forum has been lull for a while, so figured I would add a discussion point.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:24 pm
by MovingOn

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:37 pm
by Merlinspop
Beating a dead horse is much less cruel to the horse than beating a live one...

I'm already a PPL, so this doesn't apply to me, but I have friends that I'm trying to convince to get a license, and most are busy professionals that, in my opinion, would benefit from getting a SPL first, so that they can go flying with their spouses and friends earlier.

Thoughts for discussion -
1. We all know that it is the rare student that completes an SPL or PPL (from scratch) in anywhere near the minimum. BUT, assuming a person gets a SPL, then is ACTIVE flying with their SP privileges, getting comprehensive flight reviews... would it be more reasonable to think that this person would be more likely to 'finish up' going from SP to PPL in closer to the minimum required (whether the initial training was done by a CFI-S or a CFI), since in theory they've had many hours of experience to hone their skills?

2. If a person with a SPL goes to a CFI-big plane (I'm positive I'll get the subpart H and K distinction backward) for their Flight Reviews, can they work it out such that the basic flight maneuvers covered during the review COUNT toward the PPL dual requirements as well as the flight review? "Life" caused my PPL training to be spread across many years, some years 0 hours, even. At the end of it all, though, these few hours here and there were swept together into a pile of hours and all counted (with a push at the end to make sure the recency requirements were met). If, through concerted planning with the ultimate goal in mind, flight review hours can be made to count for both purposes, then the 'final push' at the end wouldn't be that large of an expenditure. One could conceivably even work cross country dual into a flight review, pausing along the way to review slow speed, etc.

Again, this doesn't apply to me. I'm just trying to think of ways for a person to go the SP route first, but steadily move forward toward the PPL.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:39 pm
by mhaleem
I think you misunderstood me; my post was not about the sport pilot rating but instruction from a sport cfi not counting towards the dual hour requirement for the private pilot rating.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 1:58 pm
by Merlinspop
mhaleem wrote:I think you misunderstood me; my post was not about the sport pilot rating but instruction from a sport cfi not counting towards the dual hour requirement for the private pilot rating.

I didn't. If a person gets their Sports Pilot training from a CFI-S, those hours of dual do not count at all towards a Private Pilot License. Period. End of Story.

Your point is that (If I did in fact understand your point) moving from a LSA to, say, a C-172 would necessitate a certain amount of transition training regardless of what flavor of instructor did the initial SP training (or rust removal if the pilot was inactive), so the impact of having to do extra training with a CFI is negated, either partially or almost completely, depending on circumstances. I was just adding to that thought and wondered if training received during a Flight Review (which every pilot has to do anyway) can be made to count for both the review and eventual PPL required hours, if flown by the required type of CFI.

Either way, I DO fully agree with you that most flight schools are doing a disservice to GA at large by, as you said, " beating the 'CFI-Sport Instruction is useless' thing into the ground." It most certainly is not. Limiting, perhaps, but not useless.

Re: CFI-S versus CFI

Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:15 am
by Jack Tyler
In game theory, environmental science and other social sciences, the FBO dynamic Mahleen describes - which has been mentioned here many times over the years - is sometimes referred to as the Tragedy of the Commons. It refers back to the post-Magna Carta era when the nobleman's exclusive grazing areas were now made available to all the Commoners' animals. Each Commoner was incented to maximize his animal's grazing on the Commons to fatten them up, which resulted in overgrazing that equally hurt all the Commoner's cattle. There was no overarching coordination of the limited resource (Commons grazing land) so everyone acted out of self-interest and no one benefitted.

This dynamic surfaces in various ways within recreational aviation, it seems to me. The initial establishment of the LSA Industry suffered from this, big time IMO, behaving in an 'every man for himself' fashion. The individual FBO is similarly incented to maximize their gains by claiming the PPL training for which they are already equipped is good, and the SP training for which they would incur additional effort and expense is not. But GA as a whole doesn't benefit from this attitude and, as we've seen mentioned here over and over, large and less populated regions of the country don't offer the prospective flight student - that 'limited resource' mentioned above - the lower cost and shorter completion times the SP license was meant to provide. This in turn is one reason why we see more migration of PPL and above licensed pilots to SP flying while the number of SP licenses issued remains relatively anemic.