Sport Pilot Talk

A little off-topic trivia, but the requirement for VFR pilots to have basic instrument flying skills was implemented in the early 1960s because of an alarming number of non-instrument rated pilots accidentally flying into IMC, developing spatial disorientation, and fatally crashing due to loss of control. Initially it was a voluntary program, and non-instrument rated pilots satisfactorily completing a course in basic instrument flying skills were rewarded with a blue FAA seal on their paper pilot certificate. The goal was to ensure the pilot had sufficient instrument proficiency to maintain straight and level flight in IMC and be able to execute a 180 degree turn to get back to VMC. The voluntary program worked so well that sometime in the mid-sixties it became part of the training required for private pilots. Today's plastic pilot certificates have the blue seal in the upper right corner indicating the airman has basic instrument flying skills.

Attached is a section of 8900.1 explaining "Blue Seal" Pilot Certificates.

And here I always thought the blue seal was the one that balanced the red ball on its nose at the circus.

drseti wrote:And here I always thought the blue seal was the one that balanced the red ball on its nose at the circus.

malexander wrote:Anyway, It's sort of been pointed out here (by a female, no less, CFI on this forum) that we're of lower/lesser "quality" than they are.

I don't see that as much as some people say. It certainly comes from the most elitist pilots but the average pilot might only confuse an LSA with a fat ultralight which is understandable. But I think this will change even more when/if the weight and speed limits are raised.

SP might take less training but there's nothing (I guess besides money and time) stopping someone from opting to get more training voluntarily. A sport pilot who does upset recovery training and practices aerobatics and can do heavy maintenance on their own airplane is going to be the safer, better pilot than a private pilot who got away with the minimum hours training and rents 172s. But most private pilots will think to themselves that a SP can only fly a Quicksilver and doesn't even know how to operate a transponder but that's based on nothing more than a misunderstanding.

Get yourself an aerobatic airplane and get some aerobatic training and you won't have to listen to anyone call you an inferior pilot.

I trained in a Cessna 162 which has a VH well above 87 knots, and before my solo cross country, I did the little required hood time. Never knew the blue seal was for that as on my sport license the seal is black, since sport pilots aren't really required to know instrument stuff.

I just checked. My commercial pilot certificate has the blue seal. The seal is black on my CFI, Remote Pilot, and mechanic certificate (I guess instrument training is irrelevant for that, even though I'm a CFII).

drseti wrote:

3Dreaming wrote:

Absolutely true! In fact, in my capacity as a DPE over these past couple of years, I have noticed that the most common discrepancy I notice when giving practical exams is missing logbook endorsements.

On my DPE website, I've posted for the benefit of both applicants and their Recommending Instructors examples of the logbook endorsements required to take an SP checkride. Here is the page:

http://SportPilotExaminer.US/endorse.htm

The 61.39(d)(2) endorsement is apparently not well known either. I fortunately had the foresight to print the endorsement out for my CFIS to sign when I was taking the Jabiru solo prior to my Proficiency Check. I was the first one he ever had to do. So I gave him a little ground instruction. We reviewed the FAR and AC61-65H. A little knowledge was transferred both ways.

Nsconductor wrote:The 61.39(d)(2) endorsement is apparently not well known either.

Either I'm missing something, or that was a typo.
Doesn't 61.39(d)(2) apply to ATPs?

I gave him a little ground instruction. We reviewed the FAR and AC61-65H. A little knowledge was transferred both ways.

That's the beauty of being a CFI - we always end up learning something from our students! In fact, I've always maintained that the best way to learn something well is to teach it.

drseti wrote:

Nsconductor wrote:The 61.39(d)(2) endorsement is apparently not well known either.

Either I'm missing something, or that was a typo.
Doesn't 61.39(d)(2) apply to ATPs?

I gave him a little ground instruction. We reviewed the FAR and AC61-65H. A little knowledge was transferred both ways.

That's the beauty of being a CFI - we always end up learning something from our students! In fact, I've always maintained that the best way to learn something well is to teach it.

I suspect he meant 61.31 (d). He is a helicopter , glider pilot adding airplane privileges, and would need this endorsement to make solo flights.

Nsconductor, When adding a category at the sport pilot level you only need this endorsement if you want to make solo flights before the proficiency check. The solo flights are not required.

I suspect he meant 61.31 (d). He is a helicopter , glider pilot adding airplane privileges, and would need this endorsement to make solo flights.

Nsconductor, When adding a category at the sport pilot level you only need this endorsement if you want to make solo flights before the proficiency check. The solo flights are not required.

Nope. D2. Here is the language from 61-65H from the sample endorsement in appendix A.72

A.72 To act as pilot in command of an aircraft in solo operations when the pilot does not hold an appropriate category/class rating: § 61.31(d)(2).
I certify that [First name, MI, Last name] has received the training as required by
§ 61.31(d)(2) to serve as a pilot in command in a [specific category and class] of aircraft. I have determined that [he or she] is prepared to solo that [make and model] aircraft. Limitations: [optional].

If we look at the specific section of the FAR it is general and does not mention ATP


(d) Aircraft category, class, and type ratings: Limitations on operating an aircraft as the pilot in command. To serve as the pilot in command of an aircraft, a person must—

(1) Hold the appropriate category, class, and type rating (if a class or type rating is required) for the aircraft to be flown; or

(2) Have received training required by this part that is appropriate to the pilot certification level, aircraft category, class, and type rating (if a class or type rating is required) for the aircraft to be flown, and have received an endorsement for solo flight in that aircraft from an authorized instructor.

I was waiting for my Prof check and realise I did not need solo time. I wanted to keep flying but did not need a CFI ( or to keep paying him ) so I needed the solo endorsement.

Nsconductor wrote:I suspect he meant 61.31 (d). He is a helicopter , glider pilot adding airplane privileges, and would need this endorsement to make solo flights.

Nsconductor, When adding a category at the sport pilot level you only need this endorsement if you want to make solo flights before the proficiency check. The solo flights are not required.

Nope. D2. Here is the language from 61-65H from the sample endorsement in appendix A.72

A.72 To act as pilot in command of an aircraft in solo operations when the pilot does not hold an appropriate category/class rating: § 61.31(d)(2).
I certify that [First name, MI, Last name] has received the training as required by
§ 61.31(d)(2) to serve as a pilot in command in a [specific category and class] of aircraft. I have determined that [he or she] is prepared to solo that [make and model] aircraft. Limitations: [optional].

If we look at the specific section of the FAR it is general and does not mention ATP


(d) Aircraft category, class, and type ratings: Limitations on operating an aircraft as the pilot in command. To serve as the pilot in command of an aircraft, a person must—

(1) Hold the appropriate category, class, and type rating (if a class or type rating is required) for the aircraft to be flown; or

(2) Have received training required by this part that is appropriate to the pilot certification level, aircraft category, class, and type rating (if a class or type rating is required) for the aircraft to be flown, and have received an endorsement for solo flight in that aircraft from an authorized instructor.

I was waiting for my Prof check and realise I did not need solo time. I wanted to keep flying but did not need a CFI ( or to keep paying him ) so I needed the solo endorsement.

Yep, but you said 61.39 (d) (2) in your original post. I was simply pointing out that that I suspected you meant 61.31 instead of 61.39.

Ah, 61.31 makes perfect sense. 61.39 (which indeed applies to ATP ratings) does not, and as I suspected, was clearly a typo. Thanks for the clarification. It's not as though I've never made a typo myself.