Student-Instructor question (USA)

or maybe the landing debrief..

BT

"Mark James Boyd" wrote in message
news:3fbfd650$1@darkstar...
We've asked the same question and our answer came through
Costello, our insurance carrier. Paraphrasing here,
'The instructor must on the field (on the ground) and
be in a position to observe the takeoff.' Being in
the towplane that is towing the student doesn't count.


At our club, the gliders have no radios, so the CFI
is really there for the launch and maybe tow (he can
still talk to the tow pilot on the radio).
This seems consistent with Costello and what our
insurance requires. Having the CFI ensure a preflight is
done, trim is set right for T/O, spoilers are
locked for T/O, tow rope isn't tangled, etc. can be done
on the ground right before tow.

Requiring a CFI for landing makes little sense to me
(other than for comic relief).

Ray Lovinggood wrote
Of course, to us it seems, it doesn't matter if the
instructor is on the ground watching or in a towplane
towing or on the space station: he can't do anything
to help if something goes awry.

Exactly.

It's a dumb requirement, and it shows a total lack of understanding of
(or disregard for) the purpose of solo flight. Why does the private
ticket require solo time? What can the student possibly practice solo
that he can't practice with me in the back?

The purpose of solo flight is to impress upon the student the
life-and-death nature of his decisions. It is a chance for him to
make his own mistakes, and deal with them. It is an essential process
not in the development of skill, which can be developed just as well
(actually better) in dual instruction, but of judgment.

When you tell a student that he can't fly unless there is an
instructor on the field, you are sending a clear and unmistakable
message. You're telling the student that his decision to launch is
subject to review and may be overruled by that instructor. You are
therefore encouraging him to launch even if he's not sure it's a good
idea - because he knows (correctly or otherwise) that if it's a bad
idea, the instructor will overrule him. You can tell him otherwise
until you're blue in the face, but actions speak louder than words.

Michael

To my knowledge, there is no regulation to support the requirement for an
instructor to be present. I think this is just a requirement of the
insurance underwriter - which if in writing is binding.

Ivan

that is the rule.. for the insurance company..

and I don't know of any "smart" instructor that would allow any student to
fly solo on any given day without the instructor knowing it and reviewing
that the student is prepared, has a plan, and has reviewed the weather and
forecast changes for the next few hours.

the student is flying on the instructors ticket.. (power or glider)

JMVHO
BT

"Ivan Kahn" wrote in message
news:M8vwb.296102$Fm2.312218@attbi_s04...
To my knowledge, there is no regulation to support the requirement for an
instructor to be present. I think this is just a requirement of the
insurance underwriter - which if in writing is binding.

Ivan

In article eCzwb.6342$ML6.2557@fed1read01,
"BTIZ" wrote:

that is the rule.. for the insurance company..

and I don't know of any "smart" instructor that would allow any student to
fly solo on any given day without the instructor knowing it and reviewing
that the student is prepared, has a plan, and has reviewed the weather and
forecast changes for the next few hours.

the student is flying on the instructors ticket.. (power or glider)

Here in New Zealand, being able to fly without an instructor on the
field is a relatively advanced rating. Traditionally, quite a large
number of things have been independently signed off in your logbook --
ratings for particular aircraft, front seat passenger rating, back seat
passenger rating, cross country rating, aerobatics rating, independent
operations rating, etc.

A few years ago the powers here rolled a number of these into a single
"Qualified glider pilot" endorsement but I notice that my logbook is now
endorsed:

Qualified Glider Pilot approved for independent operations.
Approved for independent cross-country operations (list of types).

I don't know for sure, but this leads me to believe that it might be
possible to have the "Qualified Glider Pilot", but still fly only when
an instructor is present on the field.

In any case, "present" means something like: was there in the morning,
discussed your plans (which might simply be "local soaring"), talked
about anything unusual about the day's weather (and for newbies, check
if they've flown in similar weather, and perhaps give a quick check
flight), and the weather hasn't changed too much since then.

It's perfectly OK for the instructor to be off-field at lunch, or in
another glider, or in the tow plane or the workshop (i.e. they might not
be "on duty" as an instructor, but simply qualified as an instructor).

-- Bruce

"BTIZ" wrote
and I don't know of any "smart" instructor that would allow any student to
fly solo on any given day without the instructor knowing it and reviewing
that the student is prepared, has a plan, and has reviewed the weather and
forecast changes for the next few hours.

Then both I and the instructor who soloed me must not be "smart."
When I was soloed, it was three trips around the patch while the
instructor watched (and NOT with a radio) and then you're on your own.
When I solo a student, it's the same way. If I didn't trust the
student's judgment in making the go/no-go decision, I wouldn't have
soloed him. If I knew that due to lack of experience with certain
conditions his judgment in some specific area was still not
sufficiently developed, I would enter an appropriate restriction in
his logbook.

"Needs prior permission for each individual flight" is not an
appropriate restriction. The only justification for such a
restriction is that the student's judgment is not sufficiently
developed to make a go/no-go decision at all. That means he's not
ready to solo, regardless of how well he can wiggle the stick.

Michael

"Ivan Kahn" wrote in message
news:M8vwb.296102$Fm2.312218@attbi_s04...
To my knowledge, there is no regulation to support the requirement for an
instructor to be present. I think this is just a requirement of the
insurance underwriter - which if in writing is binding.

Ivan


It may not even be a requirement of the insurance underwriter. It may just
be a requirement of Costello (SSA insurance). When Costello sells
insurance through the SSA plan there is always a requirement for a "cockpit
check-out" by a CFI. I have insurance underwritten by AIG, the same
insurance underwriter as for the SSA plan, and there is no such requirement.
Perhaps Costello makes a few extra requirements of his own.

Duane

Ray, we got the same answer. The logic behind this
can be explained that the instructor could evaluate
the surface wind at the launch site, view the ground
and pattern traffic and any other pitfalls evident
at the moment. These things could not be assessed
from the air. Specious? Maybe. Maybe some day the
instructors will be hired by the insurance companies.

At 11:54 22 November 2003, Ray Lovinggood wrote:
Bob,

We've asked the same question and our answer came through
Costello, our insurance carrier. Paraphrasing here,
'The instructor must on the field (on the ground) and
be in a position to observe the takeoff.' Being in
the towplane that is towing the student doesn't count.

Of course, to us it seems, it doesn't matter if the
instructor is on the ground watching or in a towplane
towing or on the space station: he can't do anything
to help if something goes awry.

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

'Nolaminar' wrote in message
...
Does instructor have to on the ground when a student
is flying?
Can the CFIG be towing or giving other instruction?
GA