CFII Before CFI

"Jim Burns" wrote in message
...
FARs??? Shouldn't we be using "Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14 -
Aeronautics and Space, Volume (insert #) Chapter (insert #) Part (insert
#)
as Regulated by the Federal Aviation Admiistration, Department of
Transportation, of the United States of America"? How on earth would we
know what someone is talking about if we just used "FAR's"?
Duh.
snip
Gee that was my problem when I first went to work for the government. There
FAR means Federal Acquistion Regulations. I had a hell of a time unlearning
FAR= Fedral Aviatiobn Regulations.
Don't even begin to thibnk about NASA abreviations there many many ones that
we use in aviaiton that have a totally different meaning In the Huge N tiny
a Monstrous S and world size A (NASA)

guess duh is my first name

Roy, I was with a friend of mine who inquired about getting a CFII as his
intitial instructor certificate. He visited a school in Westfield, MA a few
years ago. The instructor there firmly said "It's an add-on; you can't do it
that way; you have to get he CFI first". I then advised my friend to find
another school. Their instructor didn't know too much about Part 61.


"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
Judah wrote:

I'm confused. Doesn't CFI stand for certificated Flight Instructor?

The problem with the terms "CFI" vs. "CFII" is that it leads to the common
confusion that a CFII is a "more advanced" rating/certificate/whatever
than
a "just plain CFI". That's not true.

I hold two certificates from the FAA. One is my commercial pilot
certificate, the other is my flight instructor certificate. Each of those
certificates has ratings that go along with it. On my pilot certificate,
I've got "airplane single-engine land" and "instrument airplane". On my
instructor certificate, I've got "airplane single engine" and "instrument
airplane".

What makes this confusing is that on the pilot certificate, having the
airplane rating was a pre-requisite to getting the instrument rating.
This
is NOT true for the instructor certificate. While it is common for an
instructor to get the airplane rating before the instrument rating, it
doesn't have to be that way, and in fact, it's not terribly uncommon for
people to get the instrument rating as their initial instructor rating.

If for example, I had done that, I would have been able to give instrument
instruction (i.e. towards an instrument rating or an IPC) in an Archer to
a
pilot who already had a single-engine land rating on his pilot
certificate,
but I would NOT have been able to give somebody primary training or a BFR
in that same airplane until I also went out and got an airplane rating.

Leave it to the FAA to invent such a bizarre and complex system.

"Judah" wrote in message
. ..
Bob Moore wrote in
46.128:

It is indeed one of the problems in aviation today that we have
Flight Instructors who do not read and understand the regulations.
We are NOT CFIs nor CFIIs....The FAR defines our certificates as
FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR. In fact, the remainder of the FARs refer to the
requirement for an AUTHORIZED INSTRUCTOR.

I'm confused. Doesn't CFI stand for certificated Flight Instructor?
Doesn't
BFR stand for biennial Flight Review?

In many places, CFI stands for Chief Flying Instructor (often a role
specified by the appropriate authority as part of the approvals process) and
flying instructors designated as FI(A) for aeroplanes for example.

Having the word certified is a bit redundant because someone who is not
certified cannot act as a flying instructor legally.

Roy Smith wrote in
:

The problem with the terms "CFI" vs. "CFII" is that it leads to the
common confusion that a CFII is a "more advanced"
rating/certificate/whatever than a "just plain CFI". That's not true.

Admittedly, before this thread started, I was not aware that ASEL rating on a
Flight Instructor certificate was not a prerequisite for the Instrument
rating, like on a Private Pilot certificate. That being said, I don't think
my lack of this particular knowledge was caused by the use of the term CFI
vs. CFII. However, it probably would have been clear if the typical
discussion included 3 distinct abbreviations: CFI-A, CFI-I, and CFI-AI.

Judah wrote
Admittedly, before this thread started, I was not aware that ASEL
rating on a Flight Instructor certificate was not a prerequisite for
the Instrument rating, like on a Private Pilot certificate. That being
said, I don't think my lack of this particular knowledge was caused by
the use of the term CFI vs. CFII. However, it probably would have been
clear if the typical discussion included 3 distinct abbreviations:
CFI-A, CFI-I, and CFI-AI.

One of my points exactly!
However, there is no Land/Sea (ASEL) rating on the Flight Instructor
Certificate, and it would be CFI-IA instead of CFI-AI. As a matter of
fact, it would have to be either CFI-IA, CFI-IH, or CFI-IP

Bob Moore

Bob Moore wrote in
46.128:

One of my points exactly!
However, there is no Land/Sea (ASEL) rating on the Flight Instructor
Certificate, and it would be CFI-IA instead of CFI-AI. As a matter of
fact, it would have to be either CFI-IA, CFI-IH, or CFI-IP

Hi Bob,

I was with you for that part. But in your second round, you got on quite the
soapbox.

I am still interested in understanding your objection to the use of the term
"biennial Flight Review" to describe a Flight Review that generally is taken
approximately every two years to satisfy a specific FAA requirement.

It's probably because of your concern that the term might imply that you
absolutely need to have one every two years. But I just don't think it's
practical to call it a

FRTMBCWITP2CMU1OTCLITCFRA

(for "Flight Review That Must Be Conducted With In The Previous 24 Calendar
Months Unless 1 Of The Conditions Listed In The CFRs Applies.")

BFR is so much easier to say...

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...

If you know that you want to end up with both the CFII and the CFI
(ASEL for instance) then getting the CFII first is probably not a bad
idea because instead of one really hard checkride (the initial CFI)
and then a really easy checkride (the CFII add-on), you have to medium
hard checkrides (CFII initial (including all the FOI), then just the
CFI(ASEL for instance) add on. However, if you get the CFII and quite
w/o getting the CFI-ASEL/AMEL/etc then you have an almost worthless
rating.

Great information. Thanks for this thread, folks...

So, realistically a lot of CFIs are low-time commercial pilots trying to
build hours, which means they can't possibly have a whole lot of instrument
time. For a guy like me who got his instrument shortly before his
commercial, but--having been jamming on the commercial in VFR--hasn't logged
much actual IMC, I don't think it would be appropriate for me to take the
CFII and then try to impart that wisdom on pilots who might conceivably have
two or three times more flight experience than I.

How much experience under IFR/IMC do you guys feel like a person should have
in order to effectively (not just legally) perform as a CFII?

-c

"Bob Moore" wrote in message

We are NOT CFIs nor CFIIs....

Weird. Virtually every instructor endorsement in my logbook includes either
"CFI" or "CFII"

-c

Gattman wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...

If you know that you want to end up with both the CFII and the CFI
(ASEL for instance) then getting the CFII first is probably not a bad
idea because instead of one really hard checkride (the initial CFI)
and then a really easy checkride (the CFII add-on), you have to
medium hard checkrides (CFII initial (including all the FOI), then
just the CFI(ASEL for instance) add on. However, if you get the CFII
and quite w/o getting the CFI-ASEL/AMEL/etc then you have an almost
worthless rating.

Great information. Thanks for this thread, folks...

So, realistically a lot of CFIs are low-time commercial pilots trying
to build hours, which means they can't possibly have a whole lot of
instrument time. For a guy like me who got his instrument shortly
before his commercial, but--having been jamming on the commercial in
VFR--hasn't logged much actual IMC, I don't think it would be
appropriate for me to take the CFII and then try to impart that
wisdom on pilots who might conceivably have two or three times more
flight experience than I.
How much experience under IFR/IMC do you guys feel like a person
should have in order to effectively (not just legally) perform as a
CFII?
-c

While great to have real world experience there are plenty of people
teaching plenty things with little or no real world experience in the
subject.

Gattman wrote
Weird. Virtually every instructor endorsement in my logbook includes
either "CFI" or "CFII"

My Flight Instructor Certificate states that I have priveliges as a
FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR. The letters CFI appear only as a part of the
certificate number and although one of my ratings is INSTRUMENT-
AIRPLANE, the letters CFII appear nowhere on the certificate.

When indorsing a student's logbook and am asked for my certificate
number, I too place the letters CFI after 1450645 because that is my
certificate number.

As a practicing flight instructor for the past 37 years in addition
to being a Naval Aviator and Pan American pilot, I find that in general,
flight instructors aren't the brightest bulbs on the planet.

Bob Moore
FI ASE-IA
ATP B-707 B-727 L-188