If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
But just to be on the safe side, as part of the long list of
endorsements required by FAR 61.31, No need. 61.31 (k) Exceptions. (2) The rating limitations of this section do not apply to- (ii) The holder of a student pilot certificate; |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
I find it hard to believe that a competent instructor would...
I do too, but that begs the question of whether, =given= that the instructor did this and the examiner allowed it, would the student be legally able to fly a taildragger without a separate endorsement. I can actually think of scenarios where this might occur, but it is not necessary to do so in order that the question make sense. Jose -- The price of freedom is... well... freedom. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
The question was about the practical test and the private
certificate. Having all required endorsements is required for taking the practical test. -- James H. Macklin ATP,CFI,A&P -- The people think the Constitution protects their rights; But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome. some support http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties. "Robert M. Gary" wrote in message oups.com... | But just to be on the safe side, as part of the long list of | endorsements required by FAR 61.31, | | No need. | | 61.31 | (k) Exceptions. | (2) The rating limitations of this section do not apply to- | (ii) The holder of a student pilot certificate; | |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
61.31
(k) Exceptions. (2) The rating limitations of this section do not apply to- (ii) The holder of a student pilot certificate; Tnanks, that helped me find the section that had the tailwheel stuff. The tailwheel stuff is not a =rating= limitation, so this exception doesn't appear to apply. The tailwheel rule 61.31(i) refers to "additional training", but does require an "endorsement". I know there are recommended wordings for endorsements, but are there =required= wordings for them, specifically for this one? The endorsement must "find the person proficient in the operation of a tailwheel airplane". It could be argued that simply letting the student solo in a tailwheel airplane, and endorsing the student pilot's logbook for solo flight, constitutes a finding of proficiency; it could be counter argued that the level of proficiency is not =necessarily= up to private pilot standards. It could be (though it is admittedly unlikely) that despite all the tailwheel training, the instructor does not believe the student is PP proficient in a tailwheel, but is PP proficient in everything else, and would pass a checkride in a nosewheel airplane but flunk a tailwheel checkride. So, he signs the student off in a 152 and the student gets his PP license. He has the training, but not the proficiency, in a tailwheel airplane. (Yes, it would be a dumb CFI; you don't know any?) This would support the interpretation that SP solo endorsements are =not= sufficient as PP tailwheel endorsements. Jose -- The price of freedom is... well... freedom. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
"Jose" wrote I do too, but that begs the question of whether, =given= that the instructor did this and the examiner allowed it, would the student be legally able to fly a taildragger without a separate endorsement. I can actually think of scenarios where this might occur, but it is not necessary to do so in order that the question make sense. As others have written, the student does need to go back, and have an instructor that taught him in a tailwheel write an endorsement. It also brings up another question. How would the student fly a nose dragger, that he had never been signed off in? It is my understanding that a student must be signed off in every different model of plane. -- Jim in NC |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
Jose
I think the examiner couldn't do it without the proper endorsements on the license for the aricraft being used for the flight check. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
How would the student fly a nose dragger, that he had never been signed off in? It is my understanding that a student must be signed off in every different model of plane.
One scenario - the student is the daugher of a CFI who owns a 152 and she has flown it right seat since she was twelve (with the father in the plane of course!) None of this time was logged but the student is competent. The daughter wants to learn to fly, but "not from daddy" and falls in love with a blue cub on the field. The instructor's cute too. She takes lessons, gets all the way to the checkout, and the cub moves on. The cub owner is a friend of dad and knows how the daughter flies the 152 (in fact, she has flown them both in a 172) quite competently. So, the instructor signs her off for the test and the FAA examiner takes her for the checkride, which she passes. Jose -- The price of freedom is... well... freedom. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
No, this actually happened to a friend of mine. Did all his private
training in a Cessna 140 but his CFI recommended taking the checkride in the C-152 because he needed more time to meet the PTS in the tailwheel. However, once he received his private he had to surrender his student ticket, making him not legal for the tailwheel until he got the proper endorsement. When it comes to checkrides, it comes down to time. You may be lucky to find one 4 hour time slot in 30 days with an examiner around here. If you've got to change a student into another plane to make things work, you do what you have to do. I had to change a student from a Cherokee to a C-172 1 week before his checkride when the Cherokee started to look unreliable (I suspected it was going to need more extensive repairs than the FBO thought, sure enough the A&P opened it up and said the same thing). It was moving the student into the C-172 vs.to delay the checkride for 6 weeks until the examiner had another slot. Most students don't want to move 6 weeks out when they are expecting to take their checkride next week. -Robert |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 03:23:32 GMT, Jose
wrote: snip The tailwheel rule 61.31(i) refers to "additional training", but does require an "endorsement". I know there are recommended wordings for endorsements, but are there =required= wordings for them, specifically for this one? The endorsement must "find the person proficient in the operation of a tailwheel airplane". It could be argued that simply letting the student solo in a tailwheel airplane, and endorsing the student pilot's logbook for solo flight, constitutes a finding of proficiency; it could be counter argued that the level of proficiency is not =necessarily= up to private pilot standards. It could be (though it is admittedly unlikely) that despite all the tailwheel training, the instructor does not believe the student is PP proficient in a tailwheel, but is PP proficient in everything else, and would pass a checkride in a nosewheel airplane but flunk a tailwheel checkride. So, he signs the student off in a 152 and the student gets his PP license. He has the training, but not the proficiency, in a tailwheel airplane. (Yes, it would be a dumb CFI; you don't know any?) This would support the interpretation that SP solo endorsements are =not= sufficient as PP tailwheel endorsements. been awhile since i've paged through my logbook. heck i'm surprised i could find it. i received most of my primary flight instruction in a conventional gear aircraft. my old "ok to solo" entries sure appear to be dated to expire in 90 days-and make no specific mention of "tailwheel". IMHO, in my case, this would not meet the requirements of the FAR for a "one time" endorsement. BTW, i took my ppsel 'ride in a complex/high performance aircraft. without getting into a big discussion of whether or not i was "legal" to take the ride, my next flight/entry in my log after the ride & temp issuance was my complex/high performance "one time" endorsement. it was about 3 weeks later that i took the time to get my "one time" tailwheel airplane signoff. my impression at the time was that without these endorsements, regardless of my "tailwheel" training and complex/high performance checkride, i couldn't act as PIC of either. YMMV TC |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
tailwheel endorsement
my impression at the time was that without these endorsements,
regardless of my "tailwheel" training and complex/high performance checkride, i couldn't act as PIC of either. That's true today too. Once you surrender your student ticket for your private you must have the endorsements. -Robert |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tailwheel units on ebay | Victor Bravo | Home Built | 1 | July 24th 05 09:47 AM |
Tailwheel Crosswind Landing | Piloting | 32 | December 6th 04 02:42 AM | |
Advice on flying Pitts with Haigh Locking Tailwheel | Ditch | Home Built | 19 | January 4th 04 10:18 PM |
Tailwheel endorsement | John Harper | Piloting | 58 | December 12th 03 01:48 PM |