§ 61.87 (i)

On Wednesday, August 12, 2020 at 9:14:56 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
On Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 5:41:22 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Sunday, August 9, 2020 at 11:30:29 PM UTC-5, SoaringXCellence wrote:
Except if you look at the reg, the pre-solo test is not required to be written, but I think that is a great way to "prove" you'd done the test. An Oral test meets the requirement, but you may have a hard time remembering what you asked if an FAA inspector was investigating an incident.

MB
Thank you all for a robust exchange.

What prompted the question in the first place was I was told flatly "there are no FAR violations" followed by "you are wrong".

It's abundantly clear why the requirement exists. Burt, your point is well taken with regard to the exemption. I think I could make a solid case against gratuitous disassembly for the sake of a class (Grob 102 ADs on wing spigots come to mind here) but I am convinced that the need for the training is there pre-solo. I say that having helped on a landout only weeks ago. It was time consuming and tedious, but everything was put back together before it went back into the hangar. I don't think any of us lost any sleep that night over how it was done.

But the requirement for the training is there.

It's kind of amusing that only a week ago I had a CFI-G tell me I didn't know WTF I was talking about.
That could be achieved as simply as giving the student the written procedure for glider assembly to review. You don't actually have to rig a glider in the presence of the student.

Tom

Never a disagreement as to how it might be accomplished.

The disagreement began and ended with the idea that it needed to be accomplished pre-solo at all.


No longer a problem for me. I'm flying at another club and I'll finish my work up there. I guess somebody got butt hurt or something that I dared to ask a question without getting their approval.

For them a traditional raven sign off

Alpha
Mike
Foxtrot