Obtaining Flight Instructor Certificate

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

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
om...
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.

Since the clause containing the "or" applies only to ratings for which an
instrument rating is required, I don't follow your logic there. I just
don't see why the regulation is written that way. It could be MUCH clearer,
and your suggestion doesn't cause it "to make some sense" in my opinion.

Pete

On 2003-11-30 13:38:20 -0800, "Peter Duniho" said:

Since the clause containing the "or" applies only to ratings for which an
instrument rating is required, I don't follow your logic there. I just
don't see why the regulation is written that way. It could be MUCH clearer,
and your suggestion doesn't cause it "to make some sense" in my opinion.

You don't actually need an instrument rating for all of the ratings listed. Here's
how 61.183(2) reads:

(2) An instrument rating or privileges on that person's pilot certificate that is appropriate
to the flight instructor rating sought, if applying for--
(i) A flight instructor certificate with an airplane category and single-engine class rating;
(ii) A flight instructor certificate with an airplane category and multiengine class rating;
(iii) A flight instructor certificate with a powered-lift rating; or
(iv) A flight instructor certificate with an instrument rating

The "or" may make sense when you think of ratings in a broader sense, encompassing
all flying machines, not just airplanes. I previously mentioned the example of a
multiengine rating restricted to VFR. That would certainly seem to exclude "instrument
privileges" in the case of (ii), where the pilot might have an instrument rating, but no
instrument privileges in multiengine airplanes. If we take a broader look, you might think
about a pilot who has a commercial certificate with an airplane single engine rating, a
rotorcraft helicopter rating, and an instrument helicopter rating. Obviously, that pilot has
an instrument rating, but it certainly does not include instrument privileges for any
airplane ratings.

Does that begin to make some sense?

"Larry Fransson" wrote in message
news:2003113014312075249%lfransson@comcastnet...
You don't actually need an instrument rating for all of the ratings
listed.

I know. That was my point.

The "or" may make sense when you think of ratings in a broader sense,
encompassing
all flying machines, not just airplanes.

How so? The regulation you quoted clearly restricts the "or" clause to
airplanes, powered-lift aircraft (which are basically airplanes, and it's
because of that they are included with airplane-related regulations), or
instrument instruction in any aircraft.

That's my whole point. Andrew's statement was to the effect that the "or"
is there for aircraft other than airplanes. My reply was that the "or"
specifically applies only to aircraft like airplanes. I honestly have no
idea what YOUR point is here.

[...] If we take a broader look, you might think
about a pilot who has a commercial certificate with an airplane single
engine rating, a
rotorcraft helicopter rating, and an instrument helicopter rating.
Obviously, that pilot has
an instrument rating, but it certainly does not include instrument
privileges for any
airplane ratings.

Does that begin to make some sense?

It in no way explains why the clause beginning with "or" is present in the
regulation.

Pete