Military Instructors - New FAA Proposal

granlistillo said:
I always thought you had to have that endorsement or training letter for a P-51? Cool. (Not doubting you, as I recall you have some flight time in WWII airplanes)
Click to expand...

You are right, actually, because of the Mustang being ex-military and having an engine with greater than 800 hp. It does require an ETR.

Maybe a T-6 is a better example of an airplane that legally you could go jump in, but a sane person wouldn't.
 
Hacker15e said:
That's true for operational fighter instructors (I'm guessing that's also true for operational heavy IPs also based on your post), but anyone who is an SUPT IP knows very well how to operate in the airspace system VFR.
Click to expand...

this
 
Hacker15e said:
Where the REAL issue is going to sit is with (the lack of) a thorough understanding of the CFR and all the ins-and-outs of endorsements, sending students to checkrides, etc. That's where military-trained "CFIs" can -- and will -- get themselves into trouble if they don't do some serious bookwork before trying it out.
Click to expand...

Good point, and I would extend that further to just general FAA/FAR knowledge. There are a lot of bits of minutae in the FARs that pertain to light civil aviation that none of us in the military pipeline get much exposure to (most isn't applicable). While every winged aviator I know is thoroughly familiar with our OPNAV instructions (Navy version of the FARs, generally mirrors most FAA regs), I have heard some extremely uninformed things come out of mil pilot's mouths WRT FAR's. It just isn't covered in our training pipeline with much thoroughness, and especially if you go onto the jet track, you really miss a lot of the VFR/non-class A operating info that every light civil aviator worth his salt knows cold. Nothing that a few hours of studying the big blue book couldn't solve, but it is a change in operating mentality for sure.

That said, I think this is a great idea, though what do I know :)
 
Well, I think the same thing should apply to airline instructors/APDs/LCAs. Mostly, because my CFI has expired and I don't want to go through the hassle of having it renewed. :p
 
Hacker15e said:
That's true for operational fighter instructors (I'm guessing that's also true for operational heavy IPs also based on your post), but anyone who is an SUPT IP knows very well how to operate in the airspace system VFR.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be difficult for a military IP to go out and learn the commercial maneuvers; they're basically watered-down versions of what you learn in SUPT Phase II Contact. I think military IPs would make great CFIIs with all the instrument flying we do. But, the Air Force barely scratches the surface on VFR training (maybe it's different for Herk drivers, etc, and guys who go to PIT). It's not like the civilian world where you're very well versed in VFR procedures before you even start instrument training. The AF starts you on Day 1 with an IFR clearance out to the MOAs.

Also, operational IPs (who are, in fact, eligible for a CFI now) don't really fly with students anyway. They supervise local training sorties in their specific airframe with pilots who are already qualified in the jet. Big difference between that and flying with a pre-solo student pilot who has never flown an airplane before.

Not that I think this is a bad idea....it isn't. But it wouldn't hurt them to go around the block a few times in a general aviation aircraft before they start signing people off.
 
germb747 said:
It wouldn't be difficult for a military IP to go out and learn the commercial maneuvers; they're basically watered-down versions of what you learn in SUPT Phase II Contact. I think military IPs would make great CFIIs with all the instrument flying we do. But, the Air Force barely scratches the surface on VFR training (maybe it's different for Herk drivers, etc, and guys who go to PIT). It's not like the civilian world where you're very well versed in VFR procedures before you even start instrument training. The AF starts you on Day 1 with an IFR clearance out to the MOAs.

Also, operational IPs (who are, in fact, eligible for a CFI now) don't really fly with students anyway. They supervise local training sorties in their specific airframe with pilots who are already qualified in the jet. Big difference between that and flying with a pre-solo student pilot who has never flown an airplane before.

Not that I think this is a bad idea....it isn't. But it wouldn't hurt them to go around the block a few times in a general aviation aircraft before they start signing people off.
Click to expand...
I will say that it sucked for me to have to relearn everything that I originally learned nigh 15 years ago for the oral, and one thing that I will say is that we ex-military instructors aren't used to taking someone with zero knowledge on that first flight. We all had an intense ground school prior to ever sitting in the cockpit of a T-34, and all of our students had a screening process.
 
As a furriner I'm not sure how to look up these proposals, nor the current regs. So here's my query:

Do the FAA regs cover the case of foreign military instructors applying for an instructor rating in the USA? I should point out that I don't have any stake in this, just asking out of curiosity. I'll leave aside the whole INS / Homeland Security implications, but let's just say an applicant NOT from Nth Korea, or Yemen, or Syria, or Sudan .....

Here in Aus, this is catered for in CAO 40.1.7, which in essence says:

Graduates of the Royal Air Force (UK) and the Royal New Zealand Air Force Central Flying Schools are exempted from the requirement to complete another training course for the issue of a Grade 3 aeroplane instructor rating. These instructors are eligible for the same exemptions as ADF Instructors.

Graduates from other military flight instructor training institutions may apply to CASA for consideration and an exemption from completing a course of flight instruction for the issue of a Grade 3 instructor rating. Each case will be individually assessed. However, these applicants will still need to complete the instructional principles and methods course, be recommended by the CFI of an instructor school, pass the flight test, and hold a CP(A)L or
ATP(A)L with a night VFR rating or a command aeroplane instrument rating.
Click to expand...
 
Timmypig said:
As a furriner I'm not sure how to look up these proposals, nor the current regs. So here's my query:

Do the FAA regs cover the case of foreign military instructors applying for an instructor rating in the USA? I should point out that I don't have any stake in this, just asking out of curiosity. I'll leave aside the whole INS / Homeland Security implications, but let's just say an applicant NOT from Nth Korea, or Yemen, or Syria, or Sudan .....

Here in Aus, this is catered for in CAO 40.1.7, which in essence says:
Click to expand...

Two areas cover this. Going backwards in order:
FAR 61.73 essentially permits foreign military pilots assigned to pilot duties with the US military (exchange pilots), to be granted a commercial if the pilot holds a pilot certificate in their home country and takes the US commercial written.
FAR 61.41 permits foreign military pilots to credit flight training toward the requirements of a US pilot certificate given by an Armed Forces instructor as long as the foreign government is a contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.
 
germb747 said:
It wouldn't be difficult for a military IP to go out and learn the commercial maneuvers; they're basically watered-down versions of what you learn in SUPT Phase II Contact. I think military IPs would make great CFIIs with all the instrument flying we do. But, the Air Force barely scratches the surface on VFR training (maybe it's different for Herk drivers, etc, and guys who go to PIT). It's not like the civilian world where you're very well versed in VFR procedures before you even start instrument training. The AF starts you on Day 1 with an IFR clearance out to the MOAs.
Click to expand...

In Pensacola and probably Corpus, 80-90% of our flying is VFR. We launch VFR, enter civilian fields VFR, enter Class C/D airspace VFR, enter the MOA VFR, exit the MOA VFR, etc, etc. Hell, we even do instrument procedures VFR with stud pretending to be IFR. It isn't until post primary until the VFR stuff starts to go away. So IP's that instruct in primary have a good understanding of VFR flying. I did not prior to that however. It isn't rocket science and not that hard to learn. If a pilot can earn his wings flying in the military, he or she can learn and fly GA.
 
I don't have a problem with it at all. It's probably no crazier than being an active part 121 captain and getting your CFI certificates automagically renewed with a FSDO visit every 24 months without a knowledge or practical exam.
 
Do you need to have a CFI to be a check-airman or instructor for one of the majors? I have flown with several reservists who do this in their real jobs, so I guess that could be an application for this (if you need a CFI that is).
 
ahsmatt7 said:
Would this make it a hell for a lot harder for guy/gals with fresh CFI tickets to find jobs when they have to compete with pilots from the military?
Click to expand...

If so, so what? The CFI designation was not created as a means for new CFIs to find jobs... it was created as a means of identifying those pilots with the necessary skill sets required for teaching other pilots.
 
I don't have a problem with it at all, especially since they have to take the written. That should clue them in on areas they really need to study or seek help on.

As far as Military Mech's getting civilian A & P licenses I am not so sure about. From what I know in the military the mech's are pretty specialized (e.g engines, avionics, sheetmetal, etc) and don't get much experience in other areas? Also how much exprience do the have with Piston engines?

If I am wrong and the military has well rounded mechanics then give them their A & P.
 
PeterPilot said:
Yes, but it would be better if they learned BEFORE they received the CFI.
Click to expand...

Doesn't that apply to anything? My point being is I would say most military pilots shouldn't have a problem transitioning to the GA side of the house. Not hard but granted, having an understanding of the type of flying would be key. I for one would not want to instruct or give check rides in aircraft that I was unfamiliar with, don't care if it's something as simply as a C-172. I might have 3000 military hours, 600 carrier landings, both prop and jet time but a competent instructor pilot with many hours in the C-172 is going to initially fly it better than me (or should in a perfect world), hell may even be better period with enough time and experience.
 
///AMG said:
Do you need to have a CFI to be a check-airman or instructor for one of the majors? I have flown with several reservists who do this in their real jobs, so I guess that could be an application for this (if you need a CFI that is).
Click to expand...
Nope, an ATP can instruct in air transport service in aircraft of cat, class and type ass applicable for which he is rated. In fact to be a DPE or PPE there is no requirement for CFI, unless you have a FSDO that requires it:mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top