CFII logging approaches

G

godspeed

New Member
Hi guys,

As a CFII, if i want to log an approach from a dual given instrument flight lesson, do i need to put down the hood time and reduce dual given time by the same amount?

Please advise.
 
godspeed said:
Hi guys,

As a CFII, if i want to log an approach from a dual given instrument flight lesson, do i need to put down the hood time and reduce dual given time by the same amount?

Please advise.
Click to expand...

What type of dual given was it? Are you teaching a CFII applicant or an instrument applicant (and that applicant is flying the airplane)? If the former, log it all as dual given plus whatever hood time you got while shooting the approach. If its the latter, you can't log the approach unless you're in actual IMC after passing the final approach fix.
 
gotWXdagain said:
What type of dual given was it? Are you teaching a CFII applicant or an instrument applicant (and that applicant is flying the airplane)? If the former, log it all as dual given plus whatever hood time you got while shooting the approach. If its the latter, you can't log the approach unless you're in actual IMC after passing the final approach fix.
Click to expand...

I am trying to see if i can demonstrate shooting an approach and log it for my instrument currency at the same time. In VMC, I will probably have my hood on during the approach and have my student (instrument rating applicant) to be my safety pilot.

Could you please explain why i can log all the hood time and dual given while flying specifically with CFII applicant?
 
Yes you can still give dual while under the hood, and no it doesn't just have to be with a double eye applicant.
Demonstrate and log.
 
Are you giving instruction the entire time you're under the hood flying the airplane? "As flight instructor" doesn't mean the student is always flying, it's all the time in which you are providing flight instruction.

For an instrument rating applicant, providing flight instruction in this manner would be wearing the hood and having the student act as safety pilot, while at the same time demonstrating the maneuver. And how to perform it. If you're flying solely by reference to instruments, you can log that as such and the approach as well.

For a CFII Applicant, you'd be wearing the hood and playing the "dumb" student to simulate some common errors that they would see as an instrument instructor, as such providing flight instruction and simulated instrument.
 
thanks guys! i agree that instructors can be under the hood and still providing instruction to student. the info i've found on the FARs only mentions:
- flying solely by instruments
- under IMC or simulated weather condition

it doesn't specifically prohibit instructors giving instruction while under the hood.
 
godspeed said:
thanks guys! i agree that instructors can be under the hood and still providing instruction to student. the info i've found on the FARs only mentions:
- flying solely by instruments
- under IMC or simulated weather condition

it doesn't specifically prohibit instructors giving instruction while under the hood.
Click to expand...


BE FRIGGIN CAREFUL! How can you trust your student to look for traffic and also assure he/she is learning something in the process? If you want to log the time, file IFR and go into IMC. I say this from personal experience as a young CFI, I made the mistake of trusting my student, however only 70%. Little voice in my gut said look up, sure enough aircraft at our alt, opposite direction getting bigger. BE CAREFUL! We don't need anymore mid air's
 
nocturnalaviator said:
BE FRIGGIN CAREFUL! How can you trust your student to look for traffic and also assure he/she is learning something in the process? If you want to log the time, file IFR and go into IMC. I say this from personal experience as a young CFI, I made the mistake of trusting my student, however only 70%. Little voice in my gut said look up, sure enough aircraft at our alt, opposite direction getting bigger. BE CAREFUL! We don't need anymore mid air's
Click to expand...

Agreed. However a quick call to approach before the IAP would help with the traffic as well.
 
How exactly is your student going to benefit from paying for you to maintain currency on his dime? For the life of me I can't see a reason for the need to do this.
 
Codyjp said:
How exactly is your student going to benefit from paying for you to maintain currency on his dime? For the life of me I can't see a reason for the need to do this.
Click to expand...

Here here! I can't imagine why you would need to demonstrate everything, to include wearing a hood. If you're demonstrating an approach to him, I would think you'd want to be able to look at him and get feedback from his expressions and interaction.

Don't you have a PCATD at your school you can use to maintain IFR currency?
 
Yeah, if you pulled this garbage with us you would not be here much longer. Not smart, and your currencey should not be done on the backs of your students. Terrible customer service and they will figure things out quick. Only log actual in IMC while teaching your students as a II... otherwise no.
 
Alright nay sayers, I don't see a problem with it.

It is one of two valid methods of showing a student how to do an approach.

The demonstration of the approach will be the same if you have the hood on or off, and yes you can make eye contact with the hood on. Getting to personally use the approach does not make it illegal, unethical or dirty and it reeeeeeally doesn't make you unprofessional (no matter how much that word likes to be thrown around).
 
Codyjp said:
How exactly is your student going to benefit from paying for you to maintain currency on his dime? For the life of me I can't see a reason for the need to do this.
Click to expand...
That's a pretty big assumption on your part - that the only reason for a CFII to go under the hood is to get current on someone else's dime.

I've noticed that one of the most effective ways to teach someone how to avoid certain common instrument pilot errors, such as over-correction, is to watch someone else do it.

My CFII did it with me in the airplane during my instrument training. Asked me to correct him when he did things wrong. One of the best lessons I had.

Later, while working on my CFII, I was trying to get re-acquainted with NDB approaches (which were always a problem for me). So I had my instructor fly one and explain what he was doing. He did. It was perfect. Of course, he was looking out the window the whole time so I told him to make it "real" by putting on the hood.

Why would you think that the demonstrate model becomes useless when we get to instrument training? Obviously, if the CFI is doing it for the purpose of maintaining his currency, there's a problem. And there are ways to accomplish it, like two students in the airplane, that don't involve the CFI going under the hood.

But there can be a definite educational benefit for the CFII to go under the hood, and not every one has screwing someones else as the motive.
 
Demonstrating maneuvers is a great approach for some elements of flight training, don't get me wrong.

I just don't understand why the CFII can't do his demonstration, while also maintaining a vigilant scan outside. This would allow the student to fully engage themselves in observing the relationship between what they see inside on the instruments vs. what they see by looking outside.

Another thing I'll do with students who over correct is I'll have them fly an approach and ask them at times to glance outside for a moment. Often, seeing what they've done in the flesh really hits home and it makes them realize what their over correction looks like.

I have used students to serve as safety pilots to maintain currency, but I've always covered the time myself since I don't feel like it should be their burden.
 
Codyjp said:
Demonstrating maneuvers is a great approach for some elements of flight training, don't get me wrong.

I just don't understand why the CFII can't do his demonstration, while also maintaining a vigilant scan outside.
Click to expand...
Because it's not real.

If I'm a student with a problem tracking a VOR final approach course, it doesn't give me warm fuzzies to watch my CFII demonstrate tracking solely by reference to the instruments when he has the runway plainly in view. Heck, I bet the student could do that just fine.

"I'm really having trouble with crosswind landings. Would you demonstrate one?"
"Sure. Let's just wait for some calm winds and I'll show you how to do it."​

Yes, there are other ways to accomplish the goal. Selecting the best one for that student is part of what teaching is all about.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Because it's not real.

If I'm a student with a problem tracking a VOR final approach course, it doesn't give me warm fuzzies to watch my CFII demonstrate tracking solely by reference to the instruments when he has the runway plainly in view. Heck, I bet the student could do that just fine.

"I'm really having trouble with crosswind landings. Would you demonstrate one?"
"Sure. Let's just wait for some calm winds and I'll show you how to do it."​

Yes, there are other ways to accomplish the goal. Selecting the best one for that student is part of what teaching is all about.
Click to expand...

Do you think a seasoned CFII is going to trust a 200hr or less pilot to have a full fledged habit of adequate scanning inside and outside the a/c? If so please let me know which airspace you're in so I'll know to avoid it.

Yeah nice analogy with the crosswind landings, a lot different than saying, "No problem i'll wear a hood and restrict my vision for 60% of the time I'm showing you this." Please.

How about selecting the best one not only for your student, but also for yourself, and the safety of others who aren't knowledgeable of your intentions. It's not ATC's job to be on a traffic watch for you. Time permitting basis, they do it, but it's your fault when things go wrong. Maybe you're the type to proudly say, "We have him on the fish finder" If you have the resources, demonstrate in the simulator. IFR flying is nothing more than a thinking game, what can't you teach in a ground based simulator, away from distractions, that you can teach in an airplane? (Minus the feelings of flight of course.) And if you're so opposed to the sim, file IFR and be in the system. Then I can see you possibly wearing the hood, but even then, it's your license, your life. It may offend some but it's not ment to when I say, "I trust no one but myself."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top