Odd Bylaw.....

[c172captain]

It is completely possible that the owner of the aircraft simply does not want training being conducted, which would explain why you would not be allowed to fly it even with an instructor.

For the possible argument that "instrument training is done in the plane"--if a private pilot is training for his instrument, he still does know how to fly the plane, so it's just knowledge/VOR tracking/ILS training, not initial stuff where the plane might get junked.

What I'm trying to say is, and I bring this up from seeing it happen, sometimes people simply do not want student pilots flying their planes, with an instructor or not, for fear that the student pilot will trash the plane with screwed up landings and what not. I'm not trying to say that you're a bad pilot or that you deserve this discrimination nor do I believe this rhetoric; but some people do. Food for thought.

 

[surreal1221]

The not used for training is a good reason.

Even in instrument training. I'm not too sure if I want some instructor that I don't know using my plane to demonstrate unusual attitudes and appropriate recovery techniques to a student.

Not all instrument training is benign, and even some of us would consider none of it benign in any fashion.

 

[Holocene]

Exec makes you file a flight plan for any flight beyond 50nm. VFR flight plans are lame/serve no purpose. Yeah you crash, but you'll probably die on impact anyway. Plus the FSS always claims you're late closing the plan and they mention S&R operations were initiated when you closed the plan BEFORE your ETA.

 

[Blip16]

any training done now prior to getting your PPL will not count towards IR, well the total time and experience will, but the training time won't count for IR

 

[youngflyer]

any training done now prior to getting your PPL will not count towards IR, well the total time and experience will, but the training time won't count for IR

Ahhhh. I was unaware of this. How do people with a combined ir and private do this? Also, just to provide clarification, anyone with a private and up can fly the 182, and it can be used for instrument training, just not for student pilots.

 

[jhugz]

any training done now prior to getting your PPL will not count towards IR, well the total time and experience will, but the training time won't count for IR

Please elaborate?

 

[DPApilot]

yeah, how would you get your pvt with instrument....?

 

[Blip16]

Please elaborate?

you can't "double dip" so to speak. until you have a PPL, you are training for "flight by reference to instruments" not "basic attitude flying" i know it is cutting hairs. maybe i am wrong and someone can post the regs that you can do this, my understanding that any simulated instrument or actual flown in while training for PPL doesn't count towards IR.

i know there were some places testing doing both at the same time, but i have no clue how they did it, so like i said if someone can post that, i will definetly stand corrected

 

[BrewMaster]

1) I would imagine insurance has a lot to do with it.
2) If he let's one student go out, now he has to start letting everyone go out. He would probably is just keeping the rule the way it is so he doesn't start getting requests from everyone.

 

[BrewMaster]

you can't "double dip" so to speak. until you have a PPL, you are training for "flight by reference to instruments" not "basic attitude flying" i know it is cutting hairs. maybe i am wrong and someone can post the regs that you can do this, my understanding that any simulated instrument or actual flown in while training for PPL doesn't count towards IR.

i know there were some places testing doing both at the same time, but i have no clue how they did it, so like i said if someone can post that, i will definetly stand corrected

I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night so I'm ready to be corrected, but I think it is a little of both. I do see what you mean by training for one or the other, but the 3 hours of "instrument" training for the PPL counts towards your simulated instrument time. Sooooooo.............?

 

[Blip16]

I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night so I'm ready to be corrected, but I think it is a little of both. I do see what you mean by training for one or the other, but the 3 hours of "instrument" training for the PPL counts towards your simulated instrument time. Sooooooo.............?

but technically the 10hr requirement for commercial can't be accomplished when doing IR training either.

my point is the regulations you are training under. until you have a PPL, you are training for "Basic instrument maneuvers" which is not the same as "Flight by reference to instruments: 61.107 vs 61.65

 

[DPApilot]

but technically the 10hr requirement for commercial can't be accomplished when doing IR training either.

my point is the regulations you are training under. until you have a PPL, you are training for "Basic instrument maneuvers" which is not the same as "Flight by reference to instruments: 61.107 vs 61.65

correct, for the required 3 hours are "basic instrument manuevers", which is why you don't need a double eye. But if your a stu pi and have 10 hours of actual with a double eye, then it counts, because that is flight with refrence to instruments. At least that's my understanding.

 

[Blip16]

correct, for the required 3 hours are "basic instrument manuevers", which is why you don't need a double eye. But if your a stu pi and have 10 hours of actual with a double eye, then it counts, because that is flight with refrence to instruments. At least that's my understanding.

only if it is logged as such, but it is up to the DPE AFAIK

 

[jhugz]

Just got off the phone with the CLE FSDO and they agreed with me. They did not see a problem with combining the two. He said he would call me back some time this afternoon after he had a chance to review the regs and ask a couple other inspectors. Till then we wait.

 

[surreal1221]

I called the ATL FSDO and they agreed with me.

 

[jhugz]

I called the ATL FSDO and they agreed with me.

I in no way was trying to show up Buick and I hope he knows it. My conclusion is not certain yet as he wanted to question a couple other inspectors and look at the regs himself. I was just trying to help the previous poster and thought the most direct way of getting a straight answer would be to call the FSDO and get it from the horses mouth. Since you are going to be a ... on every post I will make from now on, welcome to my ignore list.

 

[c172captain]

While a respectable source, a FSDO is not the most reliable source of information. I once called 3 different FSDOs (LAX, VNY, LGB) and got 3 completely different answers that actually contradicted each other. :banghead:

 

[surreal1221]

Exactly.

The only source is the FAA's legal counsel. Sorry. I'll have to search for the letter, but I recall seeing a decision to someone asking essentially the same question regarding double dipping, and it's not what the regulations mean - as in - it's not to be done. Hopefully someone can beat me to it, perhaps even tgrayson.

 

[C150J]

I'm not sure about double-dipping, but I got my private and instrument on my 17th birthday with no qualms. Had about 170 hours, though. No double-dipping. I had to get a sign-off for every X-C I accomplished for the 50-hour requirement (part 61 instrument experience requirement). I have three pages of endorsements glued into my baby logbook.

 

[jhugz]

I'm not sure about double-dipping, but I got my private and instrument on my 17th birthday with no qualms. Had about 170 hours, though. No double-dipping. I had to get a sign-off for every X-C I accomplished for the 50-hour requirement (part 61 instrument experience requirement). I have three pages of endorsements glued into my baby logbook.

Thanks for the post...I know someone like you were I did my flying...same situation.