New CFI Temp, what is my expiration
- Thread starter Blip16
- Start date
So you're saying if you are doing instruction for the purpose of logging the time as dual given, then you must have a CFI certificate on your person. Correct? And if you are just doing instruction for the hell of it (no intentions of logging as dual given) then you don't need the CFI certificate with you (regardless whether you even have it or not)
If thats the case, then how on earth can the FAA determine whether the instruction being given is with the intent to be logged or not?
When the FAA ramp checks me and I'm found to be doing instruction without my CFI certificate on my person, they are going to have to prove that I was exercising my CFI privileges, meaning I was intending on logging that flight towards a certificate or rating. My question, is how the heck does the FAA go about determining this?
There is no distinction (that I know of) that distinguishes between "instruction" per 119.1, and "instruction" as defined by 61.193 except by the intention of the pilots to log that flight.
What do you think "student instruction" is then? It means instructing students in airplanes for pay. What else could it mean?
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
Whether or not enforcement is difficult doesn't change the requirement.
(Hmm, let's see... CFI and student pilot. Student's logbook and CFIs logbook show history of instruction. Cross-checking the rental records and other students of the instructor shows that this CFI has never gone on "just a flight" with a student without the student logging it as dual. Heck, the student in question will probably be more than happy to admit it was an instructional flight rather than get on the bad side of the FAA at this early stage of his career by backing up is CFI who is clearly trying to get away with something.
Come to think of it, might not be all that hard to satisfy an FAA administrative judge that "more likely than not" this was a flight for logable instruction)
Besides, you can make the exact same "hard to prove" argument about a pilot certificate and medical. So two pilots are preflighting a 172 and an inspector does a ramp check. How does he prove which is PIC? Or for that matter that there was any intention to fly?
For that matter, how about airworthiness issues with the aircraft? It hasn't flown yet, how does the FAA prove that it wasn't just a simple ground check with no intent of taking to the air. Nothing wrong with a grounded unairworthy aircraft is there?
Point is that the rule is there and you can either simply follow it or do a bad job of playing jailhouse lawyer in an effort to claim it doesn't really exist.
Captain_Bob
Well-Known Member
July 31st, 2009
I'm not in any way advocating that people not follow this rule. I just think it is odd that the FAA would make it mandatory that you have on board with you proof of being a CFI when you can do the exact same thing (sans the extremely trivial aspect of logging the time towards a certificate or rating) with just a regular ol' commercial license.
I understand the requirement of having a medical and pilot certificate with you when you act as PIC. There may be times when the FAA would want proof NOW that you are who you are. I just don't see how this is translate to needing to see an instructor's credentials RIGHT NOW. I can understand it if there was a requirement that a recommending instructor must have his CFI certificate with him when presenting his student to a DPE for a checkride, since recommending a student is specifically a privilege ONLY allowed by CFI's.
Legally speaking, that doesn't mean anything. So what? Two people had flown together in the past and have logged the time towards a rating. That doesnt legally prove anything.
Anyways, what if it was a father/son CFI combo flying on a holiday weekend?
Apples and oranges. Again, I'm not saying the rule shouldn't be followed because it's hard to prove. It just didn't add up to me that the FAA would make a regulation that is almost 100% un-enforceable.
Anyways, we're not talking about wiggling out of something safety related. We're talking about doing instruction in a plane (which you are 100% qualified to do) without proof on your person.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
We'll have to agree to disagree on what the evidence would allow a finder of fact to make a decision based on. If you were a judge, you might decide that a student pilot flying with is his instructor 3 days before the checkride is probably =not= receiving instruction to be logged; I'm pretty sure others (including a few of the judges themselves) would disagree with you..
Why does the FAA insist on it? Beats me. Maybe your example of having it at checkride time is the reason. Why bother trying to write a regulation that identifies a bunch of very specific times when you must have it, thereby inviting all sorts of so-called "smart" people to find loopholes when it's so much simpler and cleaner to say, "acting as a CFI? Let's see your certifciate."
Rules like this are incredibly common. From pilot, medical and CFI certifciates to proof of insurance when driving a car. You almost never really need it, as you put it, "right NOW." Yet the rules are there. Maybe it just saves work for the enforcers, so they don't have to look it up.
True Eeforcement will take care of itself when it needs to. It usually does.
Because when dealing with CFI privileges, it's not simpler and cleaner at all.
Just about every single privilege a pilot certificate gives you, can only be exercised in a cockpit. Therefore it seems natural for there to be a rule that states you must have your certificate with you when you are operating in that cockpit.
On the other hand, a instructor certificate only unique privilege it grants it's holder that can be exercised in the plane (that I can think of right now), is doing a BFR, and an IPC. Those are the only two times when you are exercising a unique privilege of an instructor certificate while you are in the air. By "unique privilege" I mean a privilege that isn't already granted to you with your commercial license (i.e. "giving instruction").
Actually now that I think about it, the reason that rule is there is probably to force those instructors who don't have a medical (and therefore have no way to claim they're doing the instruction as a commercial pilot) to take along their CFI for identification instead. But for someone like me, if the FAA tries to give me crap for flying without my CFI card when I'm with a student (which will never happen because I keep my CFI card with my medical and commercial in my wallet which I never forget), I'll just tell them I'm exercising my commercial certificate privilege of giving student instruction. If they tried to bring up the fact that I was intending on logging it towards the student's rating, I'll just say that that decision to log it or not is made on the ground after the flight when I'm debriefing the student. Which is an instructor privilege, but I'm not in an airplane, so 61.3 doesn't apply.
Does anyone know of a situation when this has come up? I'm curious to how the FAA would handle such a case...
nosehair
Well-Known Member
butt,
it used to be that you did'nt have to have your cfi cert with you, but that reg has changed and been quoted to you. Are you in the 'old school' who has not been updated on the requirement?
and a savvy faa inspector always does a ramp check on an airplane coming in from a flight, not going out.
They are aware that you could always say you were just looking, and you really haven't busted the reg until you fly without the proper documents.
but whatever your personal gig is with this reg, the fact remains, you must have your cfi cert with you if you are giving instruction.
Ask any FSDO or FAA inspector. this one won't have the 10 different answers by 10 different inspectors like most technical questions do.
The required documents for pilot, instructor, and airplane, are really black-and-white.
it used to be that you did'nt have to have your cfi cert with you, but that reg has changed and been quoted to you. Are you in the 'old school' who has not been updated on the requirement?
and a savvy faa inspector always does a ramp check on an airplane coming in from a flight, not going out.
They are aware that you could always say you were just looking, and you really haven't busted the reg until you fly without the proper documents.
but whatever your personal gig is with this reg, the fact remains, you must have your cfi cert with you if you are giving instruction.
Ask any FSDO or FAA inspector. this one won't have the 10 different answers by 10 different inspectors like most technical questions do.
The required documents for pilot, instructor, and airplane, are really black-and-white.
If thats the case, then there has no be a reason why the FAA decided to make that change. Anyone know this reason? When was the change made?
I know for a fact people get ramp checked before a the flight. I was even ramp checked before the flight once.
I understand what you are saying, but are you understanding what I'm saying? You have the ability to give instruction with or without a CFI certificate. Why should having a instructor certificate take away the ability to instruct using your pilot certificate?
It's like saying any pilot being a passenger in a plane must have their certificates on them. You have the ability to be a passenger with or without a pilot certificate, why is it required that you have it? Being a passenger is not a privilege of the pilot certificate. Why would you need your pilot certificate if you aren't exercising any pilot privileges...
The point I'm getting at is why do you have to prove you're a flight instructor when doing instruction, when you don't even need to be a flight instructor to do instruction in the first place?
Do you agree with me that you can do instruction (and get paid for it) with just a commercial? The "logging it or not" bit is after the fact.
You have proof of this?
Why? Because you say so?
moxiepilot
Well-Known Member
:sigh:
What is it that you don't agree with? Are you saying a commercial pilot can not instruct? What about 119.1?
Are you saying having a CFI certificate takes away your commercial privilege to instruct? If so where does it say that in the regs?
I don't understand why no one else can see this the way I see it...
PanJet
Well-Known Member
Where are you getting that part 119 says a commercial pilot can instruct? Commerical pilots can NOT instruct without a CFI certificate. Riding along with another pilot and giving them tips is NOT instruction as far as the regs are concerned, and if you're charging someone for "instruction" without a CFI you are in the wrong, regardless of whether or not you were going to log it. The only thing part 119.1 says is that Part 119 does not apply to "Student Instruction." It does not grant any privileges. Student instruction is listed because it is a commercial operation, which requires a commercial license, but you can't reverse that and say that because it's a commercial operation you only need a commercial license.
It says so in 119.1. A holder of a commercial pilot certificate can be compensated for instructing in an airplane.
Yes they can. It says so in 119.1. You don't even need a pilot certificate at all to do instruction. You just can't be the PIC while you do it. And if you don't have the commercial, you can't get paid for it.
Have a reference where the FAA defines the multiple "student instruction" as being different?
Huh? Then what does it apply to? It bluntly says "student instruction". What else could that mean?
What? A few things wrong with this. First off, you do not need a commercial pilot certificate to get paid to flight instruct. The CFI certificate gives you the ability to charge for instruction whether or not you have a commercial or not. Many pilots continue to instruct and get paid after they can no longer hold a medical certificate.
All of the things listed in 119.1 are things you can do and get paid for with just a commercial license and nothing else. Crop dusting, firefighting, sight seeing, banner towing, etc. What makes you think "student instruction" is any different?
PanJet
Well-Known Member
I still don't see where you are getting that. Part 119 talks about certification of air carriers, etc, and Part 119.1 is a list of commercial operations that do not require special certification (i.e. 121, 135, etc.) Just because student instruction is listed there does NOT mean a commercial certificate automatically gives you that privilege. Try reading part 119.1 (e). It does NOT say "a commercial pilot can do any of these things just because he/she holds a commercial certificate." What it does say is, "Except for operations when common carriage is not involved conducted with airplanes having a passenger-seat configuration of 20 seats or more, excluding any required crewmember seat, or a payload capacity of 6,000 pounds or more, this part does not apply to—" It is only a list of commercial operations that do NOT require special certification by the FAA.
Same argument as above. Okay, so if you don't need a pilot certificate, then why does my CFI (and yours) say "Valid only when accompanied by pilot certificate No. xxxxxxx"? I'll explain more of this in a second.
What does multiple "student instruction" have to do with anything? All I was saying is that if you ride along with another pilot and give him/her tips about flying, that's not what the FAA considers "instruction." They will never accept it as legal instruction time.
This is wrong.
FAR 61.183
"To be eligible for a flight instructor certificate or rating a person must: (c) Hold either a commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot certificate..."
Need I say more?
Also, the only reason people "continue to instruct" without a medical is because they already have commercial certificates and CFI certificates before they lost their medical, and they are NOT exercising the privileges of their pilot certificate (assuming they aren't PIC), but rather their CFI certificate, therefor negating the need for a medical. By your argument, they would HAVE to have a medical because they would be exercising a privilege of a PILOT certificate.
Same argument again. Part 119 is NOT a list of privileges automatically given to commercial pilots.
Which is exactly my point. You don't need any extra certification to do student instruction and get paid to do it. Therefore, you can instruct with just a commercial license and get paid for it.
The commercial license by nature allows you to get paid for your piloting service, granted its not common carriage. There is no list of things you can and cannot do, you can do it as long as it's not common carriage.
119.1(e) 1-10 is a list of operations that satisfy the requirements of common carriage, but are not considered common carriage.
Thats a good question. I honestly don't know. Ask it to the people who legally instruct with a CFI who do not have a pilot license (because it was revoked, or some other reason).
What do you mean by "accept it as legal instruction time"? Do you mean as time required for a certificate or rating? I agree. I never said it did. You have to be a CFI to do that kind of training.
Are you saying its illegal?
You need a commercial license to apply for a CFI. If you lose your commercial license the next day, but you still have your CFI intact, you're legal to instruct and get paid to do it. Many people lose their pilot license privileges by either revocation or a lapsed medical, yet they still keep on truckin'.
I'm not saying you have to have a commercial to instruct. I'm saying the commercial gives you privileges to instruct, as well as the CFI giving you that privilege.
Its like having a drivers license from Ohio and Indiana. When you're driving in Indiana, are you using your Ohio drivers license, or your Indiana license? If you get ticketed, which license gets the points?
Thats sort of a bad example because it's impossible to have a drivers license in two states at the same time, but the same thing is happening here. You have a commercial license that allows you to instruct students and get paid to do it, you also have the CFI license which gives you the exact same privilege. I'm saying, why do you have to have both on board with you, when only one of them actually gives you the privilege? You don't need to prove you're a CFI, because you don't need the CFI to do a training flight for pay.
PanJet
Well-Known Member
I meant special certification in terms of an operating certificate such as part 121 or part 135, not pilot certification. Look at the title of part 119. It says right there that it is about "Certification: Air Carriers and Commercial Operators" (NOT PILOTS). Pilot certification is found under Part 61. A very basic knowledge of the FAR's should tell you that.
I never disputed that a commercial license allows you to get paid for "piloting" service. I guess if you choose you can charge for your services as something as simple as a safety pilot if people would actually pay you for it. However, "Flight Instruction" is an activity that is specifically regulated and governed by the FAR's.
As far as the bolded sentence, by your own argument there is "no list of things you can and cannot do." True to your words, 119 is NOT a list of commercial pilot privileges.
You just said it for me. It is a list of operations. It is not a list granting any privileges. The thing I don't think you get here is that just because all of those things are listed as commercial operations doesn't mean you don't need any additional certification for it, which you DO for flight instructing.
That's because they aren't "legally" instructing without a pilot's license unless they are doing ground instruction as a ground instructor.
Once again, you're proving my argument for me. If instruction is not for a certificate or rating than what is it for? You're also required to be a CFI to do BFR's, IPC's, endorsements, etc. What else is there? Okay, so if you want a refresher course on landings and pay your commercial pilot buddy to come help you out, sure that's legal, but it cannot be logged as instruction nor is it "instruction." In that situation, your buddy would be paying you to fly him around while you talked about how you flew essentially. He couldn't log it because you would be the PIC and you can't both log the same time unless you're both required crew members (as in the case of safety pilot). If he was PIC than you couldn't log it at all, and therefore you really couldn't do it because you are no longer a required crew member. Since you can't log it as instruction (since you aren't a CFI hypothetically), you aren't exercising any privilege other than seat warmer. I guess if he/she wants to pay you for that the FAA doesn't govern paying passengers to ride along, which is what you'd be.
You might be missing my point, giving out pointers is fine, but giving "student instruction," the kind that actually means something and can be logged can only be done by a CFI.
Wrong. Unless you are a ground instructor, it is illegal use a CFI certificate without a valid pilot's certificate. It says so right on the certificate. If "many people" are practicing this activity, they are doing so illegally. Also, don't forget that a lost medical does NOT affect the validity of the pilot certificate. The pilot certificate, so long as it has not been revoked, is as valid 50 years from now as it was the day it was issued regardless of your medical. However, you cannot use it to act as a required crew member without a current medical. I think what you meant is that "many people" instruct without a valid medical, not without a valid pilot's certificate.
Well I am.
Okay, if the commercial gives you the same privilege as the commercial, than why even have a CFI certificate? Take a look at the commercial pilot privileges in part 61. It says NOTHING in there about being able to instruct.
Again, I stress that Part 119 is NOT pilot certification and does NOT give pilots privileges. That is Part 61's job. Just look at the titles of the parts.
Because the only one that gives you the privilege is the CFI certificate, which is required to be on board along with the pilot certificate that is also required to act as a CFI.
I know by this point I'm not going to convince you of my argument. "Student instruction" in terms of the FAA can only be done by a CFI.
I never disputed the fact that you can charge for your services as a pilot, but answer this question: How are you going to market this activity? It can't be instruction, because you aren't a CFI, and you can't give instruction without being a CFI. Are you going to call it "Pointers School" and actually charge people for it? Think about it practically. I guarantee that if you are charging for "Flight Instruction" without a CFI and get caught by the FAA you WILL get a case made out of it.
In part 61 under commercial pilots, it's pretty broad. It just says basically "you can now get paid, but don't do common carriage". It's not going to spell out every single thing you can now get paid to do. Part 119.1 just clarifies what is and isn't common carriage. And since those things listed aren't common carriage, they fall within the scope of what can be done for pay by a commercial pilot.
I disagree with you saying 119.1 doesn't give you any privileges. If 119.1 didn't exist, owners of flight schools, crop duster companies, and sightseeing companies would have to apply for part 135 and 121 certificates, meaning the plain ol' commercial certificate is not enough. 119.1 does exist, and because of it, I can do flight instruction, I can crop dust, I can do all those things with nothing more than a commercial. It doesn't really give you any privileges per se, it just sort of gives you back privileges you would have lost to the common carriage catchall.
To sum it all up, a commercial pilot can do anything and get paid for it, as long as it's not common carriage. Part 119.1 is a list of exemptions that would normally be outlawed by the common carriage rules, but are exempted. Its like a white list.
I don't know. You seem to take "flight instruction" as meaning "instruction given by a certified flight instructor". I don't quite think that is what the FAA had in mind when they use that phrase.
The reason I say this is because in part 61, every single dual requirement is worded as "time with a qualified instructor". To me thats the FAA's way of differentiating between instruction with someone not qualified (someone without a CFI) and a qualified one (with a CFI and the appropriate ratings).
If "student instruction" means as you say it does, then why does the FAA go the extra mile to specify "with a qualified instructor"?
Again, you're using "student instruction" to mean "instruction by a CFI". I take that phrase to mean slightly less specifically, "to give a student instruction in an airplane". In other words, the dictionary definition of "instruction"
This is a little off my original topic, but I always thought you didn't have to have a pilot certificate to be a flight instructor. Maybe I'm remembering wrong. Maybe I remember being told you don't have to have a commercial license, but rather at least a private to act as a CFI. Like if the day after getting your CFI the FAA downgrades your certificate to a private, you can still instruct and even get paid. Something like that. This was all from a DME who was a career CFI.
I don't know. There are lots of people out there who want to sharpen their skills but do not necessarily want a rating. Aerobatic training comes to mind. There is no aerobatic checkride, so aerobatic training is training not for a certificate or rating. You don't need a CFI to give aerobatic instruction, all you need is a commercial.
You're assuming the only kind of instruction that exists is the kind for a certificate or rating. There are lots of instances when instruction comes into play (for hire). Getting checked out in a new aircraft type, aerobatic instruction, that banner towing sign off thing; all of those are instruction that doesn't necessarily need to be done by a CFI, yet still "matter".
The way I see it, a commercial certificate held by someone without a second class medical is the same thing (for all intents and purposes) as a person with a commercial certificate which was revoked. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong.
Nor does it say anything about being able to accept payment for doing aerial photography, or flying family members. It just says "you can get paid to fly, just don't do common carriage (with the exception of 119.1)"
I've always regarded the instructor certificate as a "signature" certification. The way I see it, the only time you ever really get to use your privileges as a CFI is when you're signing something.
Anyone can instruct. A hobo off the street can try to teach someone how to fly. That hobo can't log it, or act as PIC while he does it, nor can he get paid, but theres nothing stopping him from instructing.
A private pilot can instruct too. He can't get paid to do it, nor can he log it as time by a "qualified instructor", but theres nothing stopping him from parting some of his knowledge.
Hey, even just a plain ol' commercial pilot can instruct. He can get paid (119.1 says training flights don't count as common carriage, nor does it define "student instruction" specifically as instruction done by a CFI), but he can't log that time for the student to use towards his checkride.
As far as the CFI goes, his instructing privileges are the exact same as the commercial pilot. He can instruct, get paid, act as PIC while he does it, and in addition to that, he has the unique ability to sign 8710's and student logbooks making the instruction he gives legal in the eyes of the part 61 requirements of "with a qualified instructor".
Thats pretty much it. The only thing unique a CFI gets to do that a commercial pilot can't do is sign things. This is why I don't think its right for the CFI to have to bring with him his CFI certificate whenever he instructs. If there was a rule that says you must have your CFI certificate with you when you sign your name on a 8710, or when you give someone a tailwheel endorsement, to me it would make sense. It would be a silly as hell rule, but it makes some sense.
Isn't it part 91 that gives pilots the ability to do preventative maintenance? There are privileges all over the FARs that are given to pilots, not just part 61.
I don't know, ask aerobatic schools.
You're totally caught up on the word "instruction" meaning "instruction by a CFI". If the FAA wanted such a specific meaning, they would clearly define it as such. Nor would they need to specify "with a qualified instructor" in the regs where an actual CFI is required.
nosehair
Well-Known Member
Oh, I get it. You've seen those CFI's of a while back, who were on the street corner with cardboard signs saying "Will fly for food".
Well, that's changed, too.
Now they want real money...and there's some ugly rumors that they want benefits, too...like a regular job.