Do I have a leg to stand on with the FAA?
- Thread starter JohnT
- Start date
Cyper42
Well-Known Member
I took my CFI initial through BDL this summer, run into the identical crap, word for word. They are blowing smoke I suspect. I was ready in and made my first attempt in Nov. and a retest in May and to do 1 short field more and didn't get that done til June or July ( the months blur together at that point.) this of course is not counting about a 8-10 rescheduled tests. Those tests were moved for a mix of weather, aircraft issues, meetings/ FAA required training, so not their faults but not really in a hurry to get it done either.
On a side note, another CFI candidate of the school had a attitude indicator go belly up on a flight test. which made the inspector called for an end to the test. Fine judgement call, his/her decision. but the FSDO then required a mechanics inspection, placard and a SPECIAL FLIGHT FERRY PERMIT to get it home in VFR day conditions. I ask anyone to find in FAR 91.205 where an attitude indicator/ artificial horizon is required for vfr day ops.
Just don't get discouraged, you are not the only one to have been jerked around by this FSDO and have a bad taste left in their mouth.
pilotmec
Well-Known Member
I understand the frustration but keep in mind, CFI initials are only a very small part of an ASI's job.
Most of the applicants I had were not even close to prepared so there is another test to be scheduled. I hated testing on FOI (I think it's stupid) and never had a failure because of it. Most failures were on lack of system knowledge, which is private pilot stuff. DPE's can be Santa Clauses.
As for the attitude indicator being inop, without an approved MEL, if it's certified to be in the plane it must work in order to be an airworthy aircraft. A Special Flight Permit IS required to be legal to get home. And just in case some one thinks they can sneak home without one, check insurance requirements. They got teeth, not the FAA.
The OKC FSDO schedules check rides when the call is made by the applicants CFI. If it can't be accomplished in 2-3 weeks, it may go to DPE. That decision is made by Regional HQ.
Among other things, this is one of the reasons I'm glad to be out of the FSDO.
So then 91.213 is just window dressing then? I'm so confused.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
No, no, a thousand times no under 91.
A150K
Well-Known Member
Sound's like he's confusing 91 for 135.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
I had an FAA inspector do just that in my tripacer. I made him pull up 91.213 on his phone and showed him he was wrong. He was not real happy about it.
USMCmech
Well-Known Member
It's not very reassuring to know that a FSDO inspector doesn't understand 91.213. This is PPL level knowledge, and something that I as a member of the flying public expect FSDO inspectors to know.
z987k
Well-Known Member
Lol. I don't.
Our poi doesn't even understand our opspecs.
Dugie8
Well-Known Member
Heck, POIs don't understand what they can and can't approve.
Decompression testing on iPads....
Houston
Well-Known Member
What is your reference to support that contention?
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
What?
What?
What?
Wait, what?
I mean, did something change with respect to 91.213(d) relief that I completely missed? Please, enlighten us...
Cyper42
Well-Known Member
[quote="pilotmec, post: 2251045, member: 16431"
As for the attitude indicator being inop, without an approved MEL, if it's certified to be in the plane it must work in order to be an airworthy aircraft. A Special Flight Permit IS required to be legal to get home. [/quote]
The school does not have an MEL, the attitude indicator is in the aircraft Cessna POH equipment list as a -S or standard item not a -R for required for FAA certification. With the POH not saying we need it in the airplane we fall back to 91.205. 91.205 doesn't say we need it for day VFR so we go to 91.213(d) and we can fly it with a PIC determination that it would not affect the flight and placard it inop.
at least that is what should have happened as per the FARs own written word.
As far as I know certified to be in the airplane does not mean required. If that were the case we would need a new STC every time a A&P pulled a radio a put in a new one. Although to be fair I am not an A&P and I know there is a pile of sign offs to got with that sort of work, but as far as I know the sign offs are there to say it has been installed correctly, the radio is certified to be in an airplane and it did this to the weight and balance. A new type cert is not written up every time avionics or radios are installed right?
As for the attitude indicator being inop, without an approved MEL, if it's certified to be in the plane it must work in order to be an airworthy aircraft. A Special Flight Permit IS required to be legal to get home. [/quote]
The school does not have an MEL, the attitude indicator is in the aircraft Cessna POH equipment list as a -S or standard item not a -R for required for FAA certification. With the POH not saying we need it in the airplane we fall back to 91.205. 91.205 doesn't say we need it for day VFR so we go to 91.213(d) and we can fly it with a PIC determination that it would not affect the flight and placard it inop.
at least that is what should have happened as per the FARs own written word.
As far as I know certified to be in the airplane does not mean required. If that were the case we would need a new STC every time a A&P pulled a radio a put in a new one. Although to be fair I am not an A&P and I know there is a pile of sign offs to got with that sort of work, but as far as I know the sign offs are there to say it has been installed correctly, the radio is certified to be in an airplane and it did this to the weight and balance. A new type cert is not written up every time avionics or radios are installed right?
USMCmech
Well-Known Member
One thing that is a pet peeve of min is 91.205, or more accurately the overemphasis that flight training places on it.
Many pilots mistakenly believe that 91.205 is the final word on required equipment for an aircraft to be airworthy. It is not, the TCDS is the final word on whether an aircraft is airworthy. The manufacturers list in the POH is a quick reference for commonly installed equipment, but not an exhaustive list.
91.205 is an absolute minimum of instrumentation for ANY aircraft. Only the most ghetto homebuilt will be restricted by 91.205, virtually every certified aircraft will have a much more restrictive list in the POH than 91.205. If you look at TOMATO FLAMES, you will not find one word about flight controls, a propeller, wheels, ect., all of which are obviously important.
The breakdown goes like this
91.205 - unless you built the airplane in your garage ignore this and proceed to step two
The KOEL in the POH - there is often many things not required by 91.205 listed here. Since generally speaking manufacturers data trumps the FARs, this is what you have to live by. For example, the DA-20 required EGT and CHT gauges to be operational for day VFR
Any STCs
Any ADs
The TCDS
mike shiflett
Well-Known Member
Good topic. The attitude indicator is not required by the equipment list in the aircraft I assume. If that is the case and there is no MEL then 91.213(d) is the correct rule. The determination from the pilot must be made that it is not necessary for the flight, it is not required by an AD or the equipment list or kinds of operation list etc. Then the attitude indicator MUST be either removed from the airplane or de-activated and there must be a placard to say In Operative. In this case removing the item or de-activating it is probably not something the pilot can do, so maintenance would need to do it. In that case a logbook entry must be made to reflect that.
Lastly, the airplane can be flown like this until the next REQUIRED inspection where the item must be removed or repaired or the maintenance person makes another logbook entry attesting that the item has be inspected again and the airplane is airworthy as such.
All of the above assumes that the equipment list or kinds of operations list in that particular airplane list this item as not being required.
- Mike Shiflett
Lastly, the airplane can be flown like this until the next REQUIRED inspection where the item must be removed or repaired or the maintenance person makes another logbook entry attesting that the item has be inspected again and the airplane is airworthy as such.
All of the above assumes that the equipment list or kinds of operations list in that particular airplane list this item as not being required.
- Mike Shiflett
Passed on april 25th!!! I have been flying non-stop since then, racked up 170hrs dual given, and about 40 hrs ground since the checkride. Its been challenging to say the least, at times I'm more of a therapist than a cfi, lots of diverse personalities/cultures i'm dealing with, but I'm having a lot of fun. Already Signed off 3 solos and had a 'gimme' PVT pilot sign off, I did his final 3 hours, he passed, his primary instructor essentially gifted it to me as a prize for conquering the faa examiners.
Our school has recently signed a contract with Piedmont airlines, I met the recruiter briefly in between flights, he gave me the rundown etc. I'm coming up on 800 hrs, no multi, trying to finish the atp written before july 31 etc....
I've never failed a checkride until I got to the cfi, which I failed 3 times. Will this present a problem for future job opportunities? I understand 1 failure of the cfi check is understandable, but how is 3 failures going to go over in a job interview?
regards,
JohnT
Our school has recently signed a contract with Piedmont airlines, I met the recruiter briefly in between flights, he gave me the rundown etc. I'm coming up on 800 hrs, no multi, trying to finish the atp written before july 31 etc....
I've never failed a checkride until I got to the cfi, which I failed 3 times. Will this present a problem for future job opportunities? I understand 1 failure of the cfi check is understandable, but how is 3 failures going to go over in a job interview?
regards,
JohnT
I briefly have looked at the previous posts regarding required equipment.
The morning of the checkride (the one I finally passed on), during the preflight, the stall warning light (1969 piper arrow) was not functioning. Another delay of course, thankfully, the maintenance guy was there, put a spare wing stall switch in, signed the logbooks, and I was off. Bottom line, if its in the plane, it needs to be functioning, especially if you paying a visit to the fsdo. These guys were hasslin me for a dime sized chip of paint on the wingtip, for a brief second I thought they were going to ground it. Passed the ride, signed the papers. As a I was taxiing out prepping to go home, the nosewheel tire went flat. BDL is a busy place at 4pm during the week, I had three jets behind me that were stuck and had no way out. Took a good 30 mins to get towed out. Ruined a few peoples' day for sure, but I passed, and most importantly the flat didnt occur on the checkride.
The morning of the checkride (the one I finally passed on), during the preflight, the stall warning light (1969 piper arrow) was not functioning. Another delay of course, thankfully, the maintenance guy was there, put a spare wing stall switch in, signed the logbooks, and I was off. Bottom line, if its in the plane, it needs to be functioning, especially if you paying a visit to the fsdo. These guys were hasslin me for a dime sized chip of paint on the wingtip, for a brief second I thought they were going to ground it. Passed the ride, signed the papers. As a I was taxiing out prepping to go home, the nosewheel tire went flat. BDL is a busy place at 4pm during the week, I had three jets behind me that were stuck and had no way out. Took a good 30 mins to get towed out. Ruined a few peoples' day for sure, but I passed, and most importantly the flat didnt occur on the checkride.
SpiceWeasel
Tre Kronor
So as per the usual, FSDO fiefdoms don't know their own rules.
z987k
Well-Known Member
The fsdo is wrong. As you gain experience you'll come to understand the feds know less than anyone about their own rules. Also that you will have to stand up to them and occasionally go over their head.