CFI Renewal through Duties and Responsibilities

KLB

KLB

Well-Known Member
I was talking to the OKC FSDO the other day about my CFI renewal. I don't think I quite made it with the 80% pass rate. It came down to the very last student on the very last day as a CFI. Anyway, they mentioned something about getting my CFI renewed through something called "duties and responsibilities" where my various 135 checkrides can count toward my CFI renewal. I called my ACP, asked him about it, and he didn't have a clue.

Does anyone know anything about this?
 
Yeah, it used to be that if you were a 121 Capt, you could get signed off on the basis of your recurrent training. That's what I've heard, anyways. I bet that's what your FSDO folks are thinking of, and it could have very well been for 135 as well. A month ago I talked to the local FSDO folks and they said you couldn't do that anymore.

If anyone knows of a FSDO examiner that does this, let us know, as it would be worth jumpseating in to get it done.
 
Well it looks that I just going to have to break down, pay the 150 bucks, and do the American Flyers online course. Anybody know how to do it in less than 16hrs?:)
 
DE727UPS said:
Yeah, it used to be that if you were a 121 Capt, you could get signed off on the basis of your recurrent training. That's what I've heard, anyways. I bet that's what your FSDO folks are thinking of, and it could have very well been for 135 as well. A month ago I talked to the local FSDO folks and they said you couldn't do that anymore.

If anyone knows of a FSDO examiner that does this, let us know, as it would be worth jumpseating in to get it done.
Click to expand...

It is rumoured that the ATL FSDO will do this in you are a 121 instructor... You might want to give them a call if you are.

G
 
DE727UPS said:
If anyone knows of a FSDO examiner that does this, let us know, as it would be worth jumpseating in to get it done.
Click to expand...
Problem is that if it can no longer be done, if you found one that still does it, it would be invalid.

I'm not sure about this, but I think the "duties and responsibilities" signoff has its basis in FAR 61.197(a)(2)(ii):

==============================
A record showing that, within the preceding 24 calendar months, the flight instructor has served as a company check pilot, chief flight instructor, company check airman, or flight instructor in a part 121 or part 135 operation, or in a position involving the regular evaluation of pilots;
==============================

I think this language was a little looser before the 1997 Part 61 revision. Lynch had a discussion about it in the defunct Part 61 FAQ. But even tightened up, I wouldn't be surprised if some inspectors take the view that a Part 121 or 135 multi-crew captain needs to evaluate his pilots every day and might do a signoff on that basis.

Philosopher, ruomrs aren't necessary - 121 instructors seem to fit the exact words of the rule pretty well.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Problem is that if it can no longer be done, if you found one that still does it, it would be invalid.

I'm not sure about this, but I think the "duties and responsibilities" signoff has its basis in FAR 61.197(a)(2)(ii):

==============================
A record showing that, within the preceding 24 calendar months, the flight instructor has served as a company check pilot, chief flight instructor, company check airman, or flight instructor in a part 121 or part 135 operation, or in a position involving the regular evaluation of pilots;
==============================

I think this language was a little looser before the 1997 Part 61 revision. Lynch had a discussion about it in the defunct Part 61 FAQ. But even tightened up, I wouldn't be surprised if some inspectors take the view that a Part 121 or 135 multi-crew captain needs to evaluate his pilots every day and might do a signoff on that basis.

Philosopher, ruomrs aren't necessary - 121 instructors seem to fit the exact words of the rule pretty well.
Click to expand...

What about those of us Captains that are required to fill out effectiveness reports for any probationary pilots we fly with? I think that directly relates to "a position involving the regular evaluation of pilots." These are actual written evaluations submitted online.
 
FlyChicaga said:
What about those of us Captains that are required to fill out effectiveness reports for any probationary pilots we fly with? I think that directly relates to "a position involving the regular evaluation of pilots." These are actual written evaluations submitted online.
Click to expand...
Matt,

The CLE FSDO does it for exactly that reason... check your pm's

Bob
 
There yeah go....

CLE FSDO.

Midlife says it doesn't happen.

I'm waiting for someone to say it does and set the story straight.

I don't know, though. Midlife is like NEVER wrong.
 
DE727UPS said:
There yeah go....

CLE FSDO.

Midlife says it doesn't happen.

I'm waiting for someone to say it does and set the story straight.

I don't know, though. Midlife is like NEVER wrong.
Click to expand...


I asked one of the inspectors at the Long Beach FSDO and he said all he needed was a letter or something to prove to him that you're a 121 captain, and he'd do it.
 
I've got training records that prove I'm a 121 Capt. What's the guys name? Even though I just renewed, I'd love to see how this works.

How can this be, Midlife? Sounds like there is a lot of misinformation floating about.
 
I know of two Colgan guys, one now moved on, who as recently as a year ago renewed their CFI on the sole basis of being a 121 captain. When I renewed mine earlier this month at the NYC FSDO, they asked me if I was doing it on the 121 airline captain basis. I paid and did the American Flyer's course cause I haven't quite upgraded yet. It can be done.
 
I wish I had more time to explore some options on the 135 side. I've done some uh....two crew stuff...yeah thats right...really I did I tell yah!:buck:
 
DE727UPS said:
There yeah go....

CLE FSDO.

Midlife says it doesn't happen.

I'm waiting for someone to say it does and set the story straight.

I don't know, though. Midlife is like NEVER wrong.
Click to expand...

DE727UPS said:
How can this be, Midlife? Sounds like there is a lot of misinformation floating about.
Click to expand...

Don, you must be reading a different post than I am. No where does Midlife say that it can't be done. Here is his post:


MidlifeFlyer said:
Problem is that if it can no longer be done, if you found one that still does it, it would be invalid.

I'm not sure about this, but I think the "duties and responsibilities" signoff has its basis in FAR 61.197(a)(2)(ii):

==============================
A record showing that, within the preceding 24 calendar months, the flight instructor has served as a company check pilot, chief flight instructor, company check airman, or flight instructor in a part 121 or part 135 operation, or in a position involving the regular evaluation of pilots;
==============================

I think this language was a little looser before the 1997 Part 61 revision. Lynch had a discussion about it in the defunct Part 61 FAQ. But even tightened up, I wouldn't be surprised if some inspectors take the view that a Part 121 or 135 multi-crew captain needs to evaluate his pilots every day and might do a signoff on that basis.

Philosopher, ruomrs aren't necessary - 121 instructors seem to fit the exact words of the rule pretty well.
Click to expand...

Where does he say that it can't be done???
 
DE727UPS said:
Midlife says it doesn't happen.
Click to expand...
No he didn't. The tightening of the language in 1997 had something to do with inspectors =automatically= giving 121 captains signoffs without regard to whether the inspector had knowledge of pilot-evaluation duties or experience.

Thanks, Steve.

BTW,
I don't know, though. Midlife is like NEVER wrong.
Click to expand...
is not true either.
 
"..if you found one that still does it, it would be invalid"

"SAN FSDO will renew 121 or 135 PIC"

I guess my point is Midlife is saying if you get an inspector to sign you off, it would be invalid. No? Or could he sign you off if he "knows" you but not if he doesn't.

It sounds like SAN FSDO is doing it.

I've got a buddy who's a DE in Riverside and a UPS flight standards guy. I'll email him and see what he says. I remember asking him to sign me off on a CFI renewal when he gave me my release to the line check on the 767. He just kinda laughed at that.
 
DE727UPS said:
"..if you found one that still does it, it would be invalid"
Click to expand...
Let's try the full thought:

"if it can no longer be done, if you found one that still does it, it would be invalid."

Notice that little 2-letter word at the beginning?

The fact that you can find some FSDO inspector who will sign you off because he knows your first cousin once removed wouldn't make it okay. You have to look at what the rules require. Here, the rules do provide for renewal of a CFI certifciate based on certain types of training-related activities. Meet the requirements, everyone's okay. Get the signature because he knows your cousin, not okay.

Besides, wasn't it you that said (full thought):
Yeah, it used to be that if you were a 121 Capt, you could get signed off on the basis of your recurrent training. That's what I've heard, anyways. I bet that's what your FSDO folks are thinking of, and it could have very well been for 135 as well. A month ago I talked to the local FSDO folks and they said you couldn't do that anymore.

If anyone knows of a FSDO examiner that does this, let us know, as it would be worth jumpseating in to get it done.
Click to expand...
If they ever could do that, looks like they can't anymore. And
Problem is that if it can no longer be done, if you found one that still does it, it would be invalid.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top