Non CFII Giving Instrument Instruction

[caliginousface]

So I have read through these three threads:

http://forums.jetcareers.com/cfi-corner/47285-cfi-non-cfii-giving-instrument-instruction.html

http://forums.jetcareers.com/general-topics/90533-instrument-rating-time-requirments-2.html

and

http://forums.jetcareers.com/technical-talk/52402-cfi-teaching-instrument.html

and there are two answers that result, and no one has a definitive answer from the FAA.

1) A CFI (not CFII) can give instruction, for student pilots, in actual or simulated conditions as required for private certificate. In addition, they can also provide instruction that is not part of the 15 hours of "instrument flight training" required by 61.65, so essentially the remaining 25 hours of the total 40.

2) A CFI (not a CFII) is NOT allowed to give instruction to instrument rating applicants for ANY requirement set forth by 61.65.

---

Can a CFI (non II) take a student pilot into actual, can that time be counted towards the 3 hours for a private certificate because the instructor was not a CFII?

(I say yes, because there is nothing saying I CANNOT, or that it has to be simulated and NOT actual.)

Now, I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that the 3 hours from private pilot training can be used to satisfy the total 40 hours for the instrument rating. But since I wasn't a CFII at the time of taking my student into actual, is that time not creditable?


I was talking with an old student of mine who is now trying to finish his private, but at the time I was not a CFII when I took him into actual. A debate with other instructors on my question has made me re-think my reasoning, and may have screwed him out of an hour of instrument instruction required for his certificate.

 

[nosehair]

Can a CFI (non II) take a student pilot into actual, can that time be counted towards the 3 hours for a private certificate because the instructor was not a CFII?

Yes.

Now, I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that the 3 hours from private pilot training can be used to satisfy the total 40 hours for the instrument rating. But since I wasn't a CFII at the time of taking my student into actual, is that time not creditable?

That time is creditable. It isn't being used towards 61.65(d)(2)(i)

 

[PA44-LUV]

As the previous poster mentioned, the time is creditable because the private student is not technically receiving "instrument" instruction, but instruction with flying the aircraft "solely by reference to instruments." You are correct in that the regulations do not specify whether that it is simulated or in actual. Everyone I know uses their 3 hours during private training towards their instrument rating because like you said, you only need 15 hours of instrument time with an instrument instructor.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Now, I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that the 3 hours from private pilot training can be used to satisfy the total 40 hours for the instrument rating. But since I wasn't a CFII at the time of taking my student into actual, is that time not creditable?

The 40 hours is "actual or simulated instrument time" only 15 hours of which need to be "instrument flight training from an authorized instructor" (CFII).

Other than the 15 instrument training, it can be with a CFI, CFII, under the hood with his uncle Charlie, a private pilot acting as safety pilot, or with his instrument-rated aunt Gertrude who let him fly the airplane in actual.

 

[ProudPilot]

Yeah, look at it this way.

If you take a student up to learn how to fly in and out of clouds safely, you got there because of YOUR (not his) instrument rating. You're being a good CFI showing them how not to kill themselves while in the clouds, but in no way really teaching them the proper techniques for long duration flight in IMC, just more safety items.

Now, if you start teaching instrument approaches, MOCA, OROCA, MEA, etc etc etc and pull out the low IFR Enroute... you've gone too far. Really, a CFII checkride once you've got your CFI done is a piece of cake.

So, can you see where the difference lies now? The FAA WANTS you to train your student how not to get in trouble VFR into IMC. However, they want to save IFR for a different rating and an instructor with a bit more training in such topics.

Have fun and fly safe!

 

[anthenry]

I instructed on the socal coast and many times was left instructing privates in IMC. We had to get IFR departures and approaches and then instruct on top. I even occasionally got socal approach to allow me to work between 3 VOR's in IMC when the layer was too thick to get above. If I didn't there would have been weeks at a time where they could not train due to the marine layer. It is completely legal and not shady in the least.

And once again, there is nothing against a CFI doing any type of instruction as long as both pilots are rated in the aircraft and when the sign off comes the CFI-I signing off has personally comleted all required tasks with the student.

 

[caliginousface]

Alright thanks guys. I was making all these arguments as well, but was left with "That doesn't make sense, then why is an instrument rating on your instructor certificate required if you can take pilots into IMC?"

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Alright thanks guys. I was making all these arguments as well, but was left with "That doesn't make sense, then why is an instrument rating on your instructor certificate required if you can take pilots into IMC?"

It's required for one reason and one reason only - to give instruction that is to count s toward "instrument training or instrument proficiency endorsements.


"They" can make whatever arguments they want.

 

[drunkenbeagle]

The instrument time for my private was in IMC, no problem at all with that. My CFI was not a CFII at the time.

It is much easier to explain marginal VFR and IMC by actually showing what it looks like.

If you are someplace with marginal weather most of the year, probably a good idea to show students anyway. At least that way they know when they hear traffic at the outer marker, they are about to see something pop out of the clouds and onto final.