The wording of the FAR is indeed confusing. However, the PTS for
flight instructor (airplane) clearly states that a
commercial/instrument or ATP is a prerequisite for the checkride. I
know that the PTS is not regulatory, but if you don't satisfy the PTS
requirements you won't pass the checkride regardless of what you think
the FAR says.

Also, I believe that only an airplane or airship instructor rating
requires an instrument rating. In that context, the wording "OR
privileges on that person's pilot certificate that are appropriate to
the flight instructor rating sought" starts to make some sense.


"Chris" wrote in message ...
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks the "OR" in that regulation is
alittle wordy.

-Chris



"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Larry Fransson" wrote in message
news:2003112817560816807%larry@larryandjennynet...
For a flight instructor certificate with an airplane rating, you must
have
a commercial certificate with an instrument rating. If you're going for a
helicopter CFI, you don't need the instrument rating.

I have to admit, I understand why Chris could not parse 61.183(c)(2). It
says a person needs "an instrument rating, OR privileges on that person's
pilot certificate that are appropriate to the flight instructor rating
sought".

If you're not trying to get qualified to instruct instrument flight, why
would you need an instrument rating, assuming you had all the other
necessary privileges on your pilot certificate? What does "privileges on
that person's pilot certificate that are appropriate to the flight
instructor rating sought" actually mean?

I'd never actually looked at this particular line that closely, and had
always assumed you are required to have an instrument rating to get a
flight
instructor certificate. But now I don't see how the regulation
specifically
says this (though I admit, the regulation is worded so oddly, I'm not
really
sure what it DOES say ). The Part 61 FAQ seems to say that you DO need
an instrument rating, but does not clarify what the reasoning behind that
conclusion is. They seem to think the regulation is clear as written.

Pete