CFI practical test - aircraft required

[kontiki]

I am sure this subject has been brought up before (why? because the
answer is not immediately obvious in the FARs) but I'd appreciate
some input from the knowledge base.

I'm close to scheduling my CFI checkride (practical teat to be precise)
and although I've always assumed it had to be performed in a complex
airplane (and have been doing all the right seat flying in one), I can
not find a direct refrence in part 61 as to the requirement for such an
airplane. The most pertinent references I can find refer to training
and logging PIC in ".. the category and class of aircraft that is
appropriate to the flight instructor rating being sought".

This sort of reference appears several times throughout 61.185 but I
never see a direct reference to a "complex" airplane. So my question,
and that raised by my instructor today (gold seal BTW) is where did
this come from? He assured me he did his CFI checkride in a 152...

Any comments [and FAR references] are appreciated.

[Peter Clark]

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:07:50 GMT, kontiki >
wrote:

>I am sure this subject has been brought up before (why? because the
>answer is not immediately obvious in the FARs) but I'd appreciate
>some input from the knowledge base.
>
>I'm close to scheduling my CFI checkride (practical teat to be precise)
>and although I've always assumed it had to be performed in a complex
>airplane (and have been doing all the right seat flying in one), I can
>not find a direct refrence in part 61 as to the requirement for such an
>airplane. The most pertinent references I can find refer to training
>and logging PIC in ".. the category and class of aircraft that is
>appropriate to the flight instructor rating being sought".
>
>This sort of reference appears several times throughout 61.185 but I
>never see a direct reference to a "complex" airplane. So my question,
>and that raised by my instructor today (gold seal BTW) is where did
>this come from? He assured me he did his CFI checkride in a 152...
>
>Any comments [and FAR references] are appreciated.

It's enumerated in the PTS - top of page 9 (bullet 3 under "Aircraft
and Equipment Required for the Practical Test" - "A complex airplane
must be furnished for the performance of takeoff and landing
maneuvers, and appropriate emergency procedures.")

I would expect that since CFIs can give complex/HP endorsements, it's
not unreasonable to have the CFI-ASEL checkride be conducted in such
an aircraft.

[kontiki]

Peter Clark wrote:

> It's enumerated in the PTS - top of page 9 (bullet 3 under "Aircraft
> and Equipment Required for the Practical Test" - "A complex airplane
> must be furnished for the performance of takeoff and landing
> maneuvers, and appropriate emergency procedures.")

I just noticed that... in fact, it references 61.45 which is not in my
ASA FAR/AIM. I also states that a complex airplane is only required for
the take-off and landings portion of the practical test.
>
> I would expect that since CFIs can give complex/HP endorsements, it's
> not unreasonable to have the CFI-ASEL checkride be conducted in such
> an aircraft.

I agree with this philosophy and mentioned that to him at the time.
No big deal, I was planning to use a complex airplane anyway, I was
just trying to find the exact reference.

[Peter Clark]

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:24:08 GMT, kontiki >
wrote:

>Peter Clark wrote:
>
>> It's enumerated in the PTS - top of page 9 (bullet 3 under "Aircraft
>> and Equipment Required for the Practical Test" - "A complex airplane
>> must be furnished for the performance of takeoff and landing
>> maneuvers, and appropriate emergency procedures.")
>
>I just noticed that... in fact, it references 61.45 which is not in my
>ASA FAR/AIM. I also states that a complex airplane is only required for
>the take-off and landings portion of the practical test.

No biggie. I'm doing the same thing for my CP-AMEL, twin for the
initial commercial and then a 172 for the ASEL addon since the complex
stuff is covered by the ME.

[kontiki]

kontiki wrote:

> Peter Clark wrote:
>
>> It's enumerated in the PTS - top of page 9 (bullet 3 under "Aircraft
>> and Equipment Required for the Practical Test" - "A complex airplane
>> must be furnished for the performance of takeoff and landing
>> maneuvers, and appropriate emergency procedures.")
>
>
> I just noticed that... in fact, it references 61.45 which is not in my
> ASA FAR/AIM. I also states that a complex airplane is only required for
> the take-off and landings portion of the practical test.

Actually, I just founf 61.45 in the FAR/AIN, it was just out of order. Anyway,
while not explicity stated, the requirement comes from 61.45(b)(1)(i)

Thanks for the input... now I have an answer for my instructor. hehe

[NW_PILOT]

"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:24:08 GMT, kontiki >
> wrote:
>
> >Peter Clark wrote:
> >
> >> It's enumerated in the PTS - top of page 9 (bullet 3 under "Aircraft
> >> and Equipment Required for the Practical Test" - "A complex airplane
> >> must be furnished for the performance of takeoff and landing
> >> maneuvers, and appropriate emergency procedures.")
> >
> >I just noticed that... in fact, it references 61.45 which is not in my
> >ASA FAR/AIM. I also states that a complex airplane is only required for
> >the take-off and landings portion of the practical test.
>
> No biggie. I'm doing the same thing for my CP-AMEL, twin for the
> initial commercial and then a 172 for the ASEL addon since the complex
> stuff is covered by the ME.

Don't forget the Examiner can request any task for any certificate or rating
you hold!

[Peter Duniho]

"NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
...
> Don't forget the Examiner can request any task for any certificate or
> rating
> you hold!

Since when?

[Jim Macklin]

You also need an airplane available that can be legally
spun.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Peter Clark" >
wrote in message
...
| On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:07:50 GMT, kontiki
>
| wrote:
|
| >I am sure this subject has been brought up before (why?
because the
| >answer is not immediately obvious in the FARs) but I'd
appreciate
| >some input from the knowledge base.
| >
| >I'm close to scheduling my CFI checkride (practical teat
to be precise)
| >and although I've always assumed it had to be performed
in a complex
| >airplane (and have been doing all the right seat flying
in one), I can
| >not find a direct refrence in part 61 as to the
requirement for such an
| >airplane. The most pertinent references I can find refer
to training
| >and logging PIC in ".. the category and class of aircraft
that is
| >appropriate to the flight instructor rating being
sought".
| >
| >This sort of reference appears several times throughout
61.185 but I
| >never see a direct reference to a "complex" airplane. So
my question,
| >and that raised by my instructor today (gold seal BTW) is
where did
| >this come from? He assured me he did his CFI checkride in
a 152...
| >
| >Any comments [and FAR references] are appreciated.
|
| It's enumerated in the PTS - top of page 9 (bullet 3 under
"Aircraft
| and Equipment Required for the Practical Test" - "A
complex airplane
| must be furnished for the performance of takeoff and
landing
| maneuvers, and appropriate emergency procedures.")
|
| I would expect that since CFIs can give complex/HP
endorsements, it's
| not unreasonable to have the CFI-ASEL checkride be
conducted in such
| an aircraft.

[Bill Zaleski]

Not true.


On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 19:28:26 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote:

>You also need an airplane available that can be legally
>spun.
>
>
>--
>James H. Macklin
>ATP,CFI,A&P

[Rachel]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> You also need an airplane available that can be legally
> spun.
>
Only if you're required to do spins on the checkride.

[Peter Clark]

Well, yes and no. The task (section XI, task G) notes that an
endorsement may be substituted for that task, but the task is
required. In the event of no endorsement (or the examiner not
substituting it), a spin-capable aircraft would be required.

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 01:32:40 GMT, Bill Zaleski
> wrote:

>Not true.
>
>
>On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 19:28:26 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote:
>
>>You also need an airplane available that can be legally
>>spun.
>>
>>
>>--
>>James H. Macklin
>>ATP,CFI,A&P

[Rachel]

Peter Clark wrote:
> Well, yes and no. The task (section XI, task G) notes that an
> endorsement may be substituted for that task, but the task is
> required. In the event of no endorsement (or the examiner not
> substituting it), a spin-capable aircraft would be required.

If a complex aircraft is required for takeoffs and landings, how would
one manage that? I can't imagine bringing two aircraft to FSDO (if a
FSDO visit was required). Are any complex aircraft ok to spin? The one
I did my CFI in wasn't.

[Peter Clark]

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:27:13 -0600, Rachel > wrote:

>Peter Clark wrote:
>> Well, yes and no. The task (section XI, task G) notes that an
>> endorsement may be substituted for that task, but the task is
>> required. In the event of no endorsement (or the examiner not
>> substituting it), a spin-capable aircraft would be required.
>
>If a complex aircraft is required for takeoffs and landings, how would
>one manage that? I can't imagine bringing two aircraft to FSDO (if a
>FSDO visit was required). Are any complex aircraft ok to spin? The one
>I did my CFI in wasn't.

I don't know about the complex aircraft question, but I'm sure there's
some way around it if you had to demonstrate them. How about go to
the FSDO, pick up the examiner, bring them back to your home field for
the spin portion of the exam? Or have your CFI ferry the spin capable
aircraft over to the airport the checkride was going to take place in
with you then disappear for a while you get the checkride over with?
Once the examiner is assigned, I presume it would be fair game to ask
them if they'd accept the endorsement so you can arrange appropriate
aircraft for all the pieces of the checkride?

[Jim Macklin]

Two aircraft may be required. The Beech F33C was acrobatic,
T34 are now subject to an AD. If the examiner knows and
respects the school and or recommending CFI, they will
usually accept the "spin endorsement" but an examiner always
has the option to require everything, that means more than
one plane is always a possibility. You note that I said
"available" in my original post. It is a good idea to know
what to expect and to have a suitable plane reserved if the
examiner wants to spin. [Some really like to spin and some
will anything to avoid it.]


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Rachel" > wrote in message
. ..
| Peter Clark wrote:
| > Well, yes and no. The task (section XI, task G) notes
that an
| > endorsement may be substituted for that task, but the
task is
| > required. In the event of no endorsement (or the
examiner not
| > substituting it), a spin-capable aircraft would be
required.
|
| If a complex aircraft is required for takeoffs and
landings, how would
| one manage that? I can't imagine bringing two aircraft to
FSDO (if a
| FSDO visit was required). Are any complex aircraft ok to
spin? The one
| I did my CFI in wasn't.

[Jim Macklin]

But you won't know until you're practical test has begun, if
the examiner verifies the logbook entry, but find you weak
on the oral portion, they may require you to demonstrate a
real spin. Thus you need an airplane certified for spins
AVAILABLE. If that takes two planes and even two days, so
be it.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Rachel" > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > You also need an airplane available that can be legally
| > spun.
| >
| Only if you're required to do spins on the checkride.

[BTIZ]

Show up with a Complex Aircraft and the Spin Endorsement completed..
If the Examiner REQUIRES the SPIN as part of the test.. then get a
continuance letter specifying what is complete and what is not complete and
what needs to be accomplished to complete.

It always boggles my mind.. it's the same as showing up for a Commercial
check ride in a non complex aircraft.. and swapping aircraft for a couple of
landings in complex aircraft... just do the whole check ride in complex.

BT

"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:27:13 -0600, Rachel > wrote:
>
>>Peter Clark wrote:
>>> Well, yes and no. The task (section XI, task G) notes that an
>>> endorsement may be substituted for that task, but the task is
>>> required. In the event of no endorsement (or the examiner not
>>> substituting it), a spin-capable aircraft would be required.
>>
>>If a complex aircraft is required for takeoffs and landings, how would
>>one manage that? I can't imagine bringing two aircraft to FSDO (if a
>>FSDO visit was required). Are any complex aircraft ok to spin? The one
>>I did my CFI in wasn't.
>
> I don't know about the complex aircraft question, but I'm sure there's
> some way around it if you had to demonstrate them. How about go to
> the FSDO, pick up the examiner, bring them back to your home field for
> the spin portion of the exam? Or have your CFI ferry the spin capable
> aircraft over to the airport the checkride was going to take place in
> with you then disappear for a while you get the checkride over with?
> Once the examiner is assigned, I presume it would be fair game to ask
> them if they'd accept the endorsement so you can arrange appropriate
> aircraft for all the pieces of the checkride?

[Rachel]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> But you won't know until you're practical test has begun, if
> the examiner verifies the logbook entry, but find you weak
> on the oral portion, they may require you to demonstrate a
> real spin. Thus you need an airplane certified for spins
> AVAILABLE. If that takes two planes and even two days, so
> be it.
>
>
Makes me glad my DE took my endorsement.

[Capt. Mike]

R u paying for my training in a complex for all the other required stuff ?

easy with my money pal..


"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:odkwf.8776$V.3820@fed1read04...
> Show up with a Complex Aircraft and the Spin Endorsement completed..
> If the Examiner REQUIRES the SPIN as part of the test.. then get a
> continuance letter specifying what is complete and what is not complete
> and what needs to be accomplished to complete.
>
> It always boggles my mind.. it's the same as showing up for a Commercial
> check ride in a non complex aircraft.. and swapping aircraft for a couple
> of landings in complex aircraft... just do the whole check ride in
> complex.
>
> BT
>
> "Peter Clark" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:27:13 -0600, Rachel > wrote:
>>
>>>Peter Clark wrote:
>>>> Well, yes and no. The task (section XI, task G) notes that an
>>>> endorsement may be substituted for that task, but the task is
>>>> required. In the event of no endorsement (or the examiner not
>>>> substituting it), a spin-capable aircraft would be required.
>>>
>>>If a complex aircraft is required for takeoffs and landings, how would
>>>one manage that? I can't imagine bringing two aircraft to FSDO (if a
>>>FSDO visit was required). Are any complex aircraft ok to spin? The one
>>>I did my CFI in wasn't.
>>
>> I don't know about the complex aircraft question, but I'm sure there's
>> some way around it if you had to demonstrate them. How about go to
>> the FSDO, pick up the examiner, bring them back to your home field for
>> the spin portion of the exam? Or have your CFI ferry the spin capable
>> aircraft over to the airport the checkride was going to take place in
>> with you then disappear for a while you get the checkride over with?
>> Once the examiner is assigned, I presume it would be fair game to ask
>> them if they'd accept the endorsement so you can arrange appropriate
>> aircraft for all the pieces of the checkride?
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

Yes, DE and Feds don't want to waste your money and their
time. But you never know for sure until after the test is
over. They can even call you back for a re-test anytime
they have reason to do so.

I instructed at an FBO located within walking distance of
the FSDO. We always gave spin training and the endorsement
and on the day of a CFI test, the applicant would reserve a
Skipper and a Sierra.

I once had a former Naval aviator as a CFI student. He
needed very little training except for civil regs and
procedures, he was a great stick, I learned a lot from him.
His former jobs in the Navy included instructor in T28s and
flying the C130 to the South Pole for a couple of years. He
had two great war stories about exciting take-offs. One was
in white-out conditions using the radar to avoid the
buildings at the end of the runway and to stay aligned with
the take-off path [aim for the buildings but liftoff in time
to miss them.] The other was the one he thought was the
most interesting...picking up some scientists off a glacier.
The slope was such that they could not get up to rotation
speed, the side load on the skis because of the slope was
just too much. When the scientist described the glacier and
the valley beyond, he decide to fly off the end below stall
speed and not land there again.


"Rachel" > wrote in message
. ..
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > But you won't know until you're practical test has
begun, if
| > the examiner verifies the logbook entry, but find you
weak
| > on the oral portion, they may require you to demonstrate
a
| > real spin. Thus you need an airplane certified for
spins
| > AVAILABLE. If that takes two planes and even two days,
so
| > be it.
| >
| >
| Makes me glad my DE took my endorsement.

[Jim Macklin]

Use a Skipper, C150/152/Tomahawk etc for most of the CFI or
commercial test and just use the complex as required is the
least expensive way to do it. But people's egos get in the
way and they want the size and power of the complex
airplane.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Capt. Mike" > wrote in message
. ..
|R u paying for my training in a complex for all the other
required stuff ?
|
| easy with my money pal..
|
|
| "BTIZ" > wrote in message
| news:odkwf.8776$V.3820@fed1read04...
| > Show up with a Complex Aircraft and the Spin Endorsement
completed..
| > If the Examiner REQUIRES the SPIN as part of the test..
then get a
| > continuance letter specifying what is complete and what
is not complete
| > and what needs to be accomplished to complete.
| >
| > It always boggles my mind.. it's the same as showing up
for a Commercial
| > check ride in a non complex aircraft.. and swapping
aircraft for a couple
| > of landings in complex aircraft... just do the whole
check ride in
| > complex.
| >
| > BT
| >
| > "Peter Clark" >
wrote in message
| > ...
| >> On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:27:13 -0600, Rachel
> wrote:
| >>
| >>>Peter Clark wrote:
| >>>> Well, yes and no. The task (section XI, task G)
notes that an
| >>>> endorsement may be substituted for that task, but the
task is
| >>>> required. In the event of no endorsement (or the
examiner not
| >>>> substituting it), a spin-capable aircraft would be
required.
| >>>
| >>>If a complex aircraft is required for takeoffs and
landings, how would
| >>>one manage that? I can't imagine bringing two aircraft
to FSDO (if a
| >>>FSDO visit was required). Are any complex aircraft ok
to spin? The one
| >>>I did my CFI in wasn't.
| >>
| >> I don't know about the complex aircraft question, but
I'm sure there's
| >> some way around it if you had to demonstrate them. How
about go to
| >> the FSDO, pick up the examiner, bring them back to your
home field for
| >> the spin portion of the exam? Or have your CFI ferry
the spin capable
| >> aircraft over to the airport the checkride was going to
take place in
| >> with you then disappear for a while you get the
checkride over with?
| >> Once the examiner is assigned, I presume it would be
fair game to ask
| >> them if they'd accept the endorsement so you can
arrange appropriate
| >> aircraft for all the pieces of the checkride?
| >
| >
|
|

[Capt. Mike]

Maybe too late for u. But...the correct way to do it is to do CFII first
with the FSDO. No complex, no T/O's & Lndg's no BS/ Just instruments stuff.
Then u do the basic CFI with u'r favorite DE.

M.


"kontiki" > wrote in message
...
>I am sure this subject has been brought up before (why? because the
> answer is not immediately obvious in the FARs) but I'd appreciate
> some input from the knowledge base.
>
> I'm close to scheduling my CFI checkride (practical teat to be precise)
> and although I've always assumed it had to be performed in a complex
> airplane (and have been doing all the right seat flying in one), I can
> not find a direct refrence in part 61 as to the requirement for such an
> airplane. The most pertinent references I can find refer to training
> and logging PIC in ".. the category and class of aircraft that is
> appropriate to the flight instructor rating being sought".
>
> This sort of reference appears several times throughout 61.185 but I
> never see a direct reference to a "complex" airplane. So my question,
> and that raised by my instructor today (gold seal BTW) is where did
> this come from? He assured me he did his CFI checkride in a 152...
>
> Any comments [and FAR references] are appreciated.
>

[BTIZ]

size and power of a Piper Arrow? I'm not talking Bonanza..

do all of your training in the traumahawk.. polish off in the arrow and use
the arrow for the check ride

BT

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:iPkwf.41025$QW2.1292@dukeread08...
> Use a Skipper, C150/152/Tomahawk etc for most of the CFI or
> commercial test and just use the complex as required is the
> least expensive way to do it. But people's egos get in the
> way and they want the size and power of the complex
> airplane.
>
>
> --
> James H. Macklin
> ATP,CFI,A&P
>
> --
> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> some support
> http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
> See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.
>
>
> "Capt. Mike" > wrote in message
> . ..
> |R u paying for my training in a complex for all the other
> required stuff ?
> |
> | easy with my money pal..
> |
> |
> | "BTIZ" > wrote in message
> | news:odkwf.8776$V.3820@fed1read04...
> | > Show up with a Complex Aircraft and the Spin Endorsement
> completed..
> | > If the Examiner REQUIRES the SPIN as part of the test..
> then get a
> | > continuance letter specifying what is complete and what
> is not complete
> | > and what needs to be accomplished to complete.
> | >
> | > It always boggles my mind.. it's the same as showing up
> for a Commercial
> | > check ride in a non complex aircraft.. and swapping
> aircraft for a couple
> | > of landings in complex aircraft... just do the whole
> check ride in
> | > complex.
> | >
> | > BT
> | >
> | > "Peter Clark" >
> wrote in message
> | > ...
> | >> On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:27:13 -0600, Rachel
> > wrote:
> | >>
> | >>>Peter Clark wrote:
> | >>>> Well, yes and no. The task (section XI, task G)
> notes that an
> | >>>> endorsement may be substituted for that task, but the
> task is
> | >>>> required. In the event of no endorsement (or the
> examiner not
> | >>>> substituting it), a spin-capable aircraft would be
> required.
> | >>>
> | >>>If a complex aircraft is required for takeoffs and
> landings, how would
> | >>>one manage that? I can't imagine bringing two aircraft
> to FSDO (if a
> | >>>FSDO visit was required). Are any complex aircraft ok
> to spin? The one
> | >>>I did my CFI in wasn't.
> | >>
> | >> I don't know about the complex aircraft question, but
> I'm sure there's
> | >> some way around it if you had to demonstrate them. How
> about go to
> | >> the FSDO, pick up the examiner, bring them back to your
> home field for
> | >> the spin portion of the exam? Or have your CFI ferry
> the spin capable
> | >> aircraft over to the airport the checkride was going to
> take place in
> | >> with you then disappear for a while you get the
> checkride over with?
> | >> Once the examiner is assigned, I presume it would be
> fair game to ask
> | >> them if they'd accept the endorsement so you can
> arrange appropriate
> | >> aircraft for all the pieces of the checkride?
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
>
>

[Rachel]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> Use a Skipper, C150/152/Tomahawk etc for most of the CFI or
> commercial test and just use the complex as required is the
> least expensive way to do it. But people's egos get in the
> way and they want the size and power of the complex
> airplane.
>
>

Can you do commercial maneuvers in a 152? I'm trying to imagine that.
I just did my commercial from the right seat and talked myself through
everything. By the time I got my CFI, it was easy. Saved a lot of time
and money, even though I did a lot of it in the 172RG.

[Jose]

> Use a Skipper, C150/152/Tomahawk etc for most of the CFI or
> commercial test and just use the complex as required is the
> least expensive way to do it.

Is this true even if paying by the hobbs at a busy airport?

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jim Macklin]

Sure you can do "commercial maneuvers" in a CE 152. A
chandelle is a coordination maneuver, not graded on actually
gain altitude. On a hot day, you night only gain 100 feet
at gross [all dual in a 152 is at gross with two men]. A
Bonanza might gain ten times that, but you are graded on
getting the "best" performance doing the maneuver as
described in the PTS.
The 150/152 cabin is tight with two men, not a lot of
shoulder and hip room, so the use of a larger airplane may
be necessary. It may not even be possible to carry a
minimum fuel load and be under certified gross weight,
depends on the size of the pilots [2 x 200+] pilots doesn't
leave much for fuel, oil and charts, fuel reserve and lesson
fuel.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.




"Rachel" > wrote in message
. ..
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > Use a Skipper, C150/152/Tomahawk etc for most of the CFI
or
| > commercial test and just use the complex as required is
the
| > least expensive way to do it. But people's egos get in
the
| > way and they want the size and power of the complex
| > airplane.
| >
| >
|
| Can you do commercial maneuvers in a 152? I'm trying to
imagine that.
| I just did my commercial from the right seat and talked
myself through
| everything. By the time I got my CFI, it was easy. Saved
a lot of time
| and money, even though I did a lot of it in the 172RG.

[Jim Macklin]

Sure it is true. Flight experience required for a rating is
measured in hours, not miles. There is a requirement for
both hours and minimum distance for x-c, but the less
expensive airplane will wait the same time on the ground as
the more expensive complex airplane.
The Hobbs meter [John W. Hobbs] invented the meter and sold
his company to Stewart Warner. [I knew his daughter, who
was a friend of my sister.] The Hobbs meter may be
connected to the engine oil pressure, an air speed sensor,
or on complex aircraft the landing gear. FBOs like the oil
pressure switch since it starts counting when you start the
engine. The aircraft owner like the other since FAA
maintenance time in service is from lift-off to touch down.
Flight time is from first aircraft movement under power with
the intention of flight until stopping.

Most FBOs use the tach time, which counts revolutions
divided by expected cruise rpm to get time in service for
maintenance schedules but charge by the Hobbs that measures
time by the clock with the engine running. [hint---low rpm
cruise saves fuel and time in service since the tach time is
slower.]


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
|> Use a Skipper, C150/152/Tomahawk etc for most of the CFI
or
| > commercial test and just use the complex as required is
the
| > least expensive way to do it.
|
| Is this true even if paying by the hobbs at a busy
airport?
|
| Jose
| --
| Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[kontiki]

I already have a spin training sign-off.

Rachel wrote:
> Jim Macklin wrote:
>
>> You also need an airplane available that can be legally spun.
>>
> Only if you're required to do spins on the checkride.

[Jim Macklin]

But that does not require the examiner to waive the
demonstration, it merely allows the examiner to do so. Some
examiners really like to spin.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"kontiki" > wrote in message
...
|I already have a spin training sign-off.
|
| Rachel wrote:
| > Jim Macklin wrote:
| >
| >> You also need an airplane available that can be legally
spun.
| >>
| > Only if you're required to do spins on the checkride.
|

[Otis Winslow]

kontiki wrote:
> I am sure this subject has been brought up before (why? because the
> answer is not immediately obvious in the FARs) but I'd appreciate
> some input from the knowledge base.
>
> I'm close to scheduling my CFI checkride (practical teat to be precise)
> and although I've always assumed it had to be performed in a complex
> airplane (and have been doing all the right seat flying in one), I can
> not find a direct refrence in part 61 as to the requirement for such an
> airplane. The most pertinent references I can find refer to training
> and logging PIC in ".. the category and class of aircraft that is
> appropriate to the flight instructor rating being sought".
>
> This sort of reference appears several times throughout 61.185 but I
> never see a direct reference to a "complex" airplane. So my question,
> and that raised by my instructor today (gold seal BTW) is where did
> this come from? He assured me he did his CFI checkride in a 152...
>
> Any comments [and FAR references] are appreciated.
>

When I took mine it needed to be in a complex. (Used an Arrow)

[Jose]

> the less
> expensive airplane will wait the same time on the ground as
> the more expensive complex airplane.

Yes, but you'll have to do it twice. You need to runup, take off, and
land, and taxi both aircraft in order to accomplish the test using a
non-complex one for part of the test. You pay 100% for that time, which
compensates to some degree for the fact that the more expensive airplane
(which you would have otherwise been using for the entire test) costs more.

I know of no FBOs that charge by tach. I have run into one FBO aircraft
whose hobbs is connected to the master switch - you pay $100/hr for
testing the stall warning and setting up radios even before the engine
starts. So it doesn't matter (to the renter) what the FBO uses for
maintanence, and there's no incentive (to the pilot) to engage in low
RPM cruise. FBOs I know will use tach times 1.2 if the hobbs is "too
low" (broken). With all that, there's a lot of overhead to switching
airplanes in the middle of the test.

I'm not convinced that it's not cheaper to just stay with the same
airplane for the entire test.

Now training, that's another thing.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[ktbr]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> But that does not require the examiner to waive the
> demonstration, it merely allows the examiner to do so. Some
> examiners really like to spin.
>
>
>
yes, I am aware of that, I have read part 61 in that regard.
If for some reason I am required to go back and demonstrate
spin recovery then I will.

[Robert M. Gary]

That is what I had to do. I brought my Mooney and the Decathlon.

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

BTW: One of the reasons I had to bring my Mooney was that my POH also
prohibits cross countrol stalls, something the examiner can select from
the POH. I did speak with a CFI who used to teach cross control stalls
in a Mooney anway. One day he aged 20 years in 2 minutes, he no longer
does them. :)

-robert

[Rachel]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> The 150/152 cabin is tight with two men, not a lot of
> shoulder and hip room, so the use of a larger airplane may
> be necessary. It may not even be possible to carry a
> minimum fuel load and be under certified gross weight,
> depends on the size of the pilots [2 x 200+] pilots doesn't
> leave much for fuel, oil and charts, fuel reserve and lesson
> fuel.


Oh, right, that's why I stopped flying them. I'm at 150, so it limited
my instructors and flying buddies. Really limited fuel.

[Rachel]

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> That is what I had to do. I brought my Mooney and the Decathlon.
>
> -Robert
>
How do you bring two aircraft? I did my initial with a DE, so traveling
wasn't a problem, but I don't know how I would have gotten two aircraft
to the nearest FSDO - 75 miles away.

[Jim Macklin]

2 days or a friend to ferry



"Rachel" > wrote in message
...
| Robert M. Gary wrote:
| > That is what I had to do. I brought my Mooney and the
Decathlon.
| >
| > -Robert
| >
| How do you bring two aircraft? I did my initial with a
DE, so traveling
| wasn't a problem, but I don't know how I would have gotten
two aircraft
| to the nearest FSDO - 75 miles away.

[Robert M. Gary]

In Sacramento, all initial CFI checkrides are done by DEs. The only
difference between an initial CFI and a regular checkride is that the
FSDO assigns the DE, you can't pick. The DE happened to be based at the
airport I keep my Mooney at.

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

When I took my CFI checkride everyone thought it was amazing I did it
in one day. The oral was over 8 hours and the practical was about 2
hours. I guess long summer days help. I also had gotten near 100% on
the written and aced through the initial oral regarding FOI. I had made
up flash cards and memorized every aspect of FOI. That turned out to be
a great start for the checkride.
During the oral I had to develop a lesson plan for 180 precision
approaches (a commerical manuever). I actually taught it different than
the FAA says to (the FAA says to use best glide abeam the numbers, I
said use 80 knots). I was able to successfully explain to the examiner
than if we cooked it in downwind at best glide in the Mooney we would
end up gliding forever and that a Mooney pilot really would want to be
set up for landing at such a low altitude, vs. still in best glide
mode. He agreed that it was better to stay close to the airport vs.
spending several miles drifting away from the airport to lose speed.

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

BTW: One common practice with some FSDOs is to ask the applicant the
inspection requirements for an ELT as you walk in the door. If you get
it wrong they dismiss you off the bat. I think they think its good to
fail you right off teh bat to show they are serious (and that they are
oh, so important people :) ).

-Robert

[Jim Macklin]

Also, If you setup a "best glide" speed you just gave up the
option to adjust the approach, I would use best glide + 5,
which give me more energy and allows me to extend the glide
by slowing down those 5 knots. I can kill speed with a
slip.

Years ago, in Tulsa, the FAA expected a CFI initial to take
2 days. Getting a good score on the written (knowledge
test) is a good thing, but just to raise the alternate
issue...the examiner/inspector is required to ask questions
about areas missed on the written, if you have a 95-100% he
has fewer questions guided into areas he has to check. A
80-90% grade shows you did study and not just squeak by and
it gives several known questions that you can prepare
yourself for...otherwise the examiner will likely really go
looking to find a weakness and you don't know what your
weaknesses might be.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| When I took my CFI checkride everyone thought it was
amazing I did it
| in one day. The oral was over 8 hours and the practical
was about 2
| hours. I guess long summer days help. I also had gotten
near 100% on
| the written and aced through the initial oral regarding
FOI. I had made
| up flash cards and memorized every aspect of FOI. That
turned out to be
| a great start for the checkride.
| During the oral I had to develop a lesson plan for 180
precision
| approaches (a commerical manuever). I actually taught it
different than
| the FAA says to (the FAA says to use best glide abeam the
numbers, I
| said use 80 knots). I was able to successfully explain to
the examiner
| than if we cooked it in downwind at best glide in the
Mooney we would
| end up gliding forever and that a Mooney pilot really
would want to be
| set up for landing at such a low altitude, vs. still in
best glide
| mode. He agreed that it was better to stay close to the
airport vs.
| spending several miles drifting away from the airport to
lose speed.
|
| -Robert
|

[Jim Macklin]

There was a flight instructor located at Grand Lake,
Oklahoma many years ago. He owned a CE 172 seaplane and was
busy teaching. He also was a DE and gave many private and
commercial flight tests. When the examiners in Tulsa were
all busy, he would often get the over-flow. He told me
about the private pilot applicant was scheduled to arrive at
the airport on Grand Lake at 11:00. He was at the airport
at 10:00 and waiting to the student to arrive when he saw an
airplane fly over the airport at pattern altitude. The
airplane continued on and circled back and flew away to the
west, then a few minutes later it returned from another
direction. This search pattern around the airport continued
for over an hour, the airplane crossing overhead every 10 or
15 minutes.

Finally the student landed. The student was handed a pink
slip because he had failed pilotage and navigation.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| BTW: One common practice with some FSDOs is to ask the
applicant the
| inspection requirements for an ELT as you walk in the
door. If you get
| it wrong they dismiss you off the bat. I think they think
its good to
| fail you right off teh bat to show they are serious (and
that they are
| oh, so important people :) ).
|
| -Robert
|

[Robert M. Gary]

If you used best glide + 5 in a Mooney you would have time to circle
over the airport about 5 times. I used best glide - 20.

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

I was able to get a student in for her private checkride 5 minutes
after scheduling once. Apparently the examiner had an applicant show up
for a private checkride without a transponder inspection. Apparently, a
lot of people think the transponder inspection is only required for
IFR, not. In anycase, the examiner was sitting around with nothing to
do and took my student on the spot.

-Robert

[Jim Macklin]

The problem that I see with that is that if you are
undershooting and need to save the power -off approach, you
need to lose more altitude to gain speed. At +5 I can cross
control to add drag, but I can gain distance by slowing and
resume coordinated flight, also gaining distance. I would
also have the prop control to gain distance by retarding the
control to a lower rpm. If I needed more drag, I can push
the control to a higher rpm.

I have little time in the M231 and it had spoilers.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| If you used best glide + 5 in a Mooney you would have time
to circle
| over the airport about 5 times. I used best glide - 20.
|
| -Robert
|

[Robert M. Gary]

I think the difference in a Mooney is that best glide, Vy, etc are so
far from Vso. The best glide speed in the Mooney is 120 while the Vso
speed is 64. That's just a hell of a lot of speed to bleed off from the
time you are abeam to the time you cross the numbers. At 80 you still
have a lot of slipping to do anyway.

This also makes Vx take offs strange. You pull the nose off at 60 but
Vx is 94. As a result a short field ends up looking more like a
softfield, holding to gain Vx speed. I think the laminor wing requires
a lot more speed to reach efficiency. To make it worse, Mooneys are
light on power, vs. planes of similar class. 200hp for the Mooney, a
Bonanza or Cessna of similar performance would be 230hp.

-Robert

[Al]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:3IXwf.41206$QW2.8243@dukeread08...
> The problem that I see with that is that if you are
snip...
> I would
> also have the prop control to gain distance by retarding the
> control to a lower rpm. If I needed more drag, I can push
> the control to a higher rpm.
>

If the engine is windmilling, how will the prop control affect your
glide. If I understand correctly, the constant speed prop attempts to
maintain an RPM. Unless it is a feathering prop, that RPM cannot be set
below about 2000. If you are power off and gliding, the prop will windmill
at about 800 rpm, and the prop will be on the low pitch stop regardless of
the position of the handle. Correct?

Al

[Jim Macklin]

Try it, glide with the prop control retarded and then push
it in...blade angle will change and the drag will change.



"Al" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:3IXwf.41206$QW2.8243@dukeread08...
| > The problem that I see with that is that if you are
| snip...
| > I would
| > also have the prop control to gain distance by retarding
the
| > control to a lower rpm. If I needed more drag, I can
push
| > the control to a higher rpm.
| >
|
| If the engine is windmilling, how will the prop control
affect your
| glide. If I understand correctly, the constant speed prop
attempts to
| maintain an RPM. Unless it is a feathering prop, that RPM
cannot be set
| below about 2000. If you are power off and gliding, the
prop will windmill
| at about 800 rpm, and the prop will be on the low pitch
stop regardless of
| the position of the handle. Correct?
|
| Al
|
|

[Al]

Ok, so if the blade angle changes, the windmilling RPM changes also, right?

Al


"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:JKZwf.41229$QW2.8024@dukeread08...
> Try it, glide with the prop control retarded and then push
> it in...blade angle will change and the drag will change.
>
>
>
> "Al" > wrote in message
> ...
> |
> | "Jim Macklin" > wrote
> in message
> | news:3IXwf.41206$QW2.8243@dukeread08...
> | > The problem that I see with that is that if you are
> | snip...
> | > I would
> | > also have the prop control to gain distance by retarding
> the
> | > control to a lower rpm. If I needed more drag, I can
> push
> | > the control to a higher rpm.
> | >
> |
> | If the engine is windmilling, how will the prop control
> affect your
> | glide. If I understand correctly, the constant speed prop
> attempts to
> | maintain an RPM. Unless it is a feathering prop, that RPM
> cannot be set
> | below about 2000. If you are power off and gliding, the
> prop will windmill
> | at about 800 rpm, and the prop will be on the low pitch
> stop regardless of
> | the position of the handle. Correct?
> |
> | Al
> |
> |
>
>

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-01-09, Rachel > wrote:
> If a complex aircraft is required for takeoffs and landings, how would
> one manage that? I can't imagine bringing two aircraft to FSDO (if a
> FSDO visit was required). Are any complex aircraft ok to spin? The one
> I did my CFI in wasn't.

Some FSDOs (Houston, for example) require you bring two planes if
your complex can't be spun (some can be: there is an aerobatic Bonanza). They
also bring airworthiness inspectors for you, and people have gone away
with the threat of a violation due to some trivial obscure item that
technically makes the plane unairworthy (such as a curled placard).
When a friend of mine went for his CFI, there were *three* airworthiness
inspectors going over the plane with a fine toothcomb before the ride!

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

[Jim Macklin]

He wasn't charged for the test either.



"B A R R Y" > wrote
in message
...
| On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:36:23 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
| > wrote:
|
| >
| >Finally the student landed. The student was handed a
pink
| >slip because he had failed pilotage and navigation.
|
| Now THAT's funny...
|
|