TSA rule, what does this mean?

On Apr 17, 10:48 am, wrote:
On Apr 17, 10:02 am, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:





On Apr 17, 9:45 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:

Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Apr 17, 8:58 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
As a TSA approved foreign flight training provider, I received the
follow from the TSA today...

"Who must participate in the Alien Flight Student Program (AFSP)?

Persons seeking flight training must submit a request if they are
not citizens or nationals of the U.S. and:

---They wish to receive flight training in the U.S. or its
territories, regardless of whether training will lead to an FAA
certificate or type rating; and/or

---They wish to receive flight training from an FAA-certificated
facility, provider, or instructor that could lead to an FAA rating
whether in the U.S. or abroad."

The updated text can be viewed at the Provider Frequently Asked
Questions page atwww.flightschoolcandidates.gov/provider_faq.htm.

If you need further assistance, please contact or
call (571) 227-4544."

Anyone understand what this means? The second part sounds like what
we've always believed. However, what does the first part mean? Does
it imply that someone receiving training from a non-CFI must be TSA
approved even if they are not seeking a rating?? Why is it both
"and" and "or"? I guess I'm having trouble with the intent.

-Robert

The "and/or" is ass covering. The "regardless" part first covers
somebody coming to you for say a BFR or aerobatics, neither will
lead to an FAA certificate or type rating.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

But if their intention is to require TSA approval for everything
(which is not the current understanding), why have the second part as
well?

-Robert

You are trying to apply logic to the writings of government. Shame on you.

But let's say you are a US certified CFI. The second graph says you can't go
to Iran and teach people to fly unless they are OK'd by the TSA even if the
Iranian government pays you to.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If that is true, its a very major change in understanding. The current
understanding is that only certain ratings require TSA approval. Other
things (tailwheel endorsements, BFR, etc) do not require TSA approval.
The first part seems to change this and say any U.S. based CFI cannot
provide **ANY** training (recurrent or otherwise) to a non-TSA
approved student. This is a major change. Now I need to see your
passport in order to do an FBO check out (training not leading to a
rating).

No, the first part only says a US based CFI can't
provide any training while inside the US.

First paragraph - no training of any kind inside the US
or its territories.

RIght, so when you show up for your FBO checkout or BFR you must bring
your passport to prove that you do not need TSA approval. Now pilots
need to bring their passport before flying with any CFI for any
reason.

-robert

Is everyone saying the rule has changed?

Getting a Flight Review or an FBO checkout is not "training", nor is adding
a tailwheel endorsement or high performance endorsement to an existing
rating.

This has been answered in previous information from TSA.

Time for more research?

BT


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
As a TSA approved foreign flight training provider, I received the
follow from the TSA today...

"Who must participate in the Alien Flight Student Program (AFSP)?

Persons seeking flight training must submit a request if they are not
citizens or nationals of the U.S. and:

---They wish to receive flight training in the U.S. or its
territories, regardless of whether training will lead to an FAA
certificate or type rating; and/or

---They wish to receive flight training from an FAA-certificated
facility, provider, or instructor that could lead to an FAA rating
whether in the U.S. or abroad."

The updated text can be viewed at the Provider Frequently Asked
Questions page at www.flightschoolcandidates.gov/provider_faq.htm.

If you need further assistance, please contact or
call (571) 227-4544."

Anyone understand what this means? The second part sounds like what
we've always believed. However, what does the first part mean? Does it
imply that someone receiving training from a non-CFI must be TSA
approved even if they are not seeking a rating?? Why is it both "and"
and "or"? I guess I'm having trouble with the intent.

-Robert

Read the attached pdf file in the previous the link in the original posting

Flight training does not include "recurrent training" (Flight Reviews),
proficiency training (IFR Proficiency Check), etc for those that already
hold a US rating

Reading the entire attached file
http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/IFR_Alien_Pilot.pdf from the Federal Register
tells me that nothing has changed from the original posting on Sept 20, 2004

BT


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
As a TSA approved foreign flight training provider, I received the
follow from the TSA today...

"Who must participate in the Alien Flight Student Program (AFSP)?

Persons seeking flight training must submit a request if they are not
citizens or nationals of the U.S. and:

---They wish to receive flight training in the U.S. or its
territories, regardless of whether training will lead to an FAA
certificate or type rating; and/or

---They wish to receive flight training from an FAA-certificated
facility, provider, or instructor that could lead to an FAA rating
whether in the U.S. or abroad."

The updated text can be viewed at the Provider Frequently Asked
Questions page at www.flightschoolcandidates.gov/provider_faq.htm.

If you need further assistance, please contact or
call (571) 227-4544."

Anyone understand what this means? The second part sounds like what
we've always believed. However, what does the first part mean? Does it
imply that someone receiving training from a non-CFI must be TSA
approved even if they are not seeking a rating?? Why is it both "and"
and "or"? I guess I'm having trouble with the intent.

-Robert

On Apr 17, 3:32 pm, "BT" wrote:
Is everyone saying the rule has changed?

Getting a Flight Review or an FBO checkout is not "training", nor is adding
a tailwheel endorsement or high performance endorsement to an existing
rating.

This has been answered in previous information from TSA.

Time for more research?


In one case they say "receive flight training in the U.S. or its
territories, regardless of whether training will lead to an FAA
certificate or type rating", sounds like a larger scope of "training".
Let us know what your research shows though.

-Robert

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message ...
: Jose wrote:
: But let's say you are a US certified CFI. The second graph says you
: can't go to Iran and teach people to fly unless they are OK'd by the
: TSA even if the Iranian government pays you to.
:
: What if you are not a CFI? Can you do it then?
:
: Jose
:
: Sure, well at least the FAA wouldn't care. DHS might.
:
:

Here's the latest...Only TSA approved folks can use MS Flight Sim...


;-)

Read the attached pdf file in the previous the link in the original posting

Flight training does not include "recurrent training" (Flight Reviews),
proficiency training (IFR Proficiency Check), etc for those that already
hold a US rating

Reading the entire attached file
http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/IFR_Alien_Pilot.pdf from the Federal Register
tells me that nothing has changed from the original posting on Sept 20, 2004

BT


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Apr 17, 3:32 pm, "BT" wrote:
Is everyone saying the rule has changed?

Getting a Flight Review or an FBO checkout is not "training", nor is
adding
a tailwheel endorsement or high performance endorsement to an existing
rating.

This has been answered in previous information from TSA.

Time for more research?


In one case they say "receive flight training in the U.S. or its
territories, regardless of whether training will lead to an FAA
certificate or type rating", sounds like a larger scope of "training".
Let us know what your research shows though.

-Robert

Here's the latest...Only TSA approved folks can use MS Flight Sim...
;-)

Yeah, I see the smiley, but I'm not convinced it won't come to that.
Amazing it's still legal to teach chemistry.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose writes:

Amazing it's still legal to teach chemistry.

You don't see too many chemistry sets, though. They used to be popular; now
they are just a source of litigation. The few that exist have such a small
selection of harmless chemicals that they aren't worth the time.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Apr 17, 7:06 pm, "BT" wrote:
Read the attached pdf file in the previous the link in the original posting

Flight training does not include "recurrent training" (Flight Reviews),
proficiency training (IFR Proficiency Check), etc for those that already
hold a US rating

Reading the entire attached filehttp://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/IFR_Alien_Pilot.pdffrom the Federal Register
tells me that nothing has changed from the original posting on Sept 20, 2004

BT

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in oglegroups.com...



On Apr 17, 3:32 pm, "BT" wrote:
Is everyone saying the rule has changed?

Getting a Flight Review or an FBO checkout is not "training", nor is
adding
a tailwheel endorsement or high performance endorsement to an existing
rating.

This has been answered in previous information from TSA.

Time for more research?

In one case they say "receive flight training in the U.S. or its
territories, regardless of whether training will lead to an FAA
certificate or type rating", sounds like a larger scope of "training".
Let us know what your research shows though.

-Robert- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What do you think the "flight training not "lead(ing) to an FAA
certificate or type rating" refers to?

-Robert

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Jose writes:

Amazing it's still legal to teach chemistry.

You don't see too many chemistry sets, though. They used to be
popular; now they are just a source of litigation. The few that exist
have such a small selection of harmless chemicals that they aren't
worth the time.

What, can't get anyhting decent into your shoes, eh?

Bertie