CFI Military Competency

[Huggyu2]

The comment period for the NPRM to make it easier for military instructor pilots to get their CFI certificate has passed. Now what? If they decide to go though with this, how long will it take?
If you know these answers, please chime in.

 

[midlifeflyer]

There's no required schedule. If the FAA has one in mind, I haven't seen it.

Once the comment period is over, an agency can head right to the final rule, extend the comment period, or drop the whole thing. At times, the comments themselves raise questions and the agency writes a new proposed with a new comment period. Even if the agency goes straight to final rule, the wading through the comments and making changes and corrections, writing the final rule and the "Supplemental Information" (explanation and commentary) that goes along with it takes time and may give way to other priorities.

 

[Huggyu2]

Thank you.
I went through the changes being proposed: it's a pretty long list. And I suppose that means lots of time weigh it.

 

[AC560]

Thank you.
I went through the changes being proposed: it's a pretty long list. And I suppose that means lots of time weigh it.

Well when you get yours if you don't have it already you can give me my high altitude endorsement.

 

[Razor_B]

This is from another message board:

John Lynch is the POC.

I wrote to Mr. Lynch this mornining, his response below:

The comment period closed on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on May 8.
The rulemaking team is reviewing the comments and have begun drafting the
final rule. To date, we have not established a time schedule for issuing
the final rule, but the plans are for a November 2007 issuance timeframe
for the final rule. Normally, the rule becomes effective within 30 days
after the issuance date. The majority of the comments have been positive
for the military flight instructor proposal.


John D. Lynch
AFS-810
(202) 267-3844

 

[nosehair]

What is that proposal? I haven't heard / read anything in CFI military comp.

 

[Mud Eagle]

Here is a thread from another forum about it:

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/showthread.php?t=9606

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

The problem with this rule change will be that while the military instructor pilots can teach (no doubt) this is only about half of what a civilian CFI must have knowledge of. For example: Mastery of part 61 is the most important thing as far as keeping your students legal as well as qualifying them for solo and solo X-C, as well as qualifying them and endorsing their students for their flight tests. Military pilots unfortunately have no knowledge of these areas of pilot certification or of the PTS, the Airplane Flying Handbook, or the many AC's that pilots are held responsible for.

 

[Huggyu2]

The problem with this rule change will be that while the military instructor pilots can teach (no doubt) this is only about half of what a civilian CFI must have knowledge of. For example: Mastery of part 61 is the most important thing as far as keeping your students legal as well as qualifying them for solo and solo X-C, as well as qualifying them and endorsing their students for their flight tests. Military pilots unfortunately have no knowledge of these areas of pilot certification or of the PTS, the Airplane Flying Handbook, or the many AC's that pilots are held responsible for.

This is true with many pilots. However, those that plan to pursue instructing new pilots for their PPL will spend the time to learn those intricacies before they sign their name to a legal document. Just like a 22 year old civilian pilot that runs through Sheble's quick-and-dirty CFI checkout.
All of my friends that want their CFI have no intent to do this, with the exception of teaching their kids to fly.
For me, I would like it because it is a credential that I need to open some other aviation avenues I'm pursuing.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

This is true with many pilots. However, those that plan to pursue instructing new pilots for their PPL will spend the time to learn those intricacies before they sign their name to a legal document. Just like a 22 year old civilian pilot that runs through Sheble's quick-and-dirty CFI checkout.
All of my friends that want their CFI have no intent to do this, with the exception of teaching their kids to fly.
For me, I would like it because it is a credential that I need to open some other aviation avenues I'm pursuing.

I am sure you have heard the expression, "A little knowledge is dangerous." That is the case here except it is most dangerous to the military IP/civilian CFI converts. I am not concerned about the safely of the new CFI's students, mostly my concern is for the FAA certificates of the newly converted CFI. As far as the FAA is concerned one "Oh $hit" is not off-set by any number of "at-a-boys," including any number of air medals. One mistake and the FAA will come after a CFI with full force including certificate action (suspension or revocation). Trust me, there is much complexity to civilian certification and while I fully support some type of an easy conversion for military flight instructors to civilian, I do believe that at least an in depth oral test is necessary for the instructors sake. And as you look at the motivation of your statements, "All of my friends that want their CFI have no intent to do this (teach flying), with the exception of teaching their kids to fly. For me, I would like it because it is a credential that I need to open some other aviation avenues I'm pursuing. The question must then be: Why even get the CFI if you feel you would really not be qualified to use it. And if you're really not qualified to use it, I would think that the last students you would want is your own children. The FAA certified CFI is not for just teaching people to fly, his or her job is getting them properly certified. If you want to just let your kids fly a little and move the controls, you don't need a CFI certificate for that. FYI: I know of a well established CFI who was generally speaking in good stead with the FAA office, he made one mistake on an endorsement and the FAA came after him. The CFI thought it was just a misunderstanding. The result: A one year revocation of all pilot and instructor certificates.

 

[Huggyu2]

Let me clarify that I didn't write, nor will I be, "...really not qualified to use it." I've already been working toward it, and will be ready/prepared when I do use my CFI certificate. My plan for using it is not for teaching basic flight instruction. But I will be using the certificate.
But you did made some good comments. Thank you for your insight and viewpoints.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Thank you for your insight and viewpoints.

You are welcome. I hope I am not discouraging you and I'm pleased to see that you are now taking training to be certified under the current procedures. As I am sure you are learning, there is much to become acquainted with. As a CFI you are expected to be an expert on Part 61. I think you must now be aware of how a military IP could easily get himself into trouble by something as simple as signing off a flight review and maybe forgetting to show 1-Hour of ground school given, or signing off a student for X-C when the 90 day solo endorsement had lapsed or the 24-months of the student certificate/Class III medical had expired. While these points may seem minor, they are all MAJOR to the FAA.

 

[Huggyu2]

You are absolutely correct. I'm brushing up on this stuff slowly, but constantly, and my civilian CFI buddies are routinely asked "what about this" questions from me. And when the time comes when/if I start using it, you can bet I'll get some prep done, and buy my buddy who's a Designated Examiner many beers to get me up to snuff.
None of us can afford to get our licence suspended.

 

[Razor_B]

military instructor pilots can teach (no doubt)

This is what is key. Let's not loose sight of this fact. There is a huge talent pool out there that hasn't been tapped yet. Now it will.

I've been teaching for about 15 years in the Air Force and I really enjoy it. I've instructed in aircraft from primary (this is an airplane) training to U-2, T-38 and B-707 advanced training. I know how to teach. As a military pilot I am well versed in how to follow regulations so now I'll follow Part 61, great. It isn't going to be a big deal for me to learn 61 and the other regs that are required. I'm sure the written exams that I will be required to pass will ensure I have the requisite knowledge to dot the I's and cross the T's.

Like Huggy said, when I have a question about something, I'll ask my buds that are CFI's (or AOPA or NAFI or EAA) and get the answer. Just like I do today.

 

[nosehair]

I'm sure the written exams that I will be required to pass will ensure I have the requisite knowledge to dot the I's and cross the T's.

I'll follow up UndauntedFlyer's comments with some emphasis on this point.

You would think that the written tests would cover this more since a large percentage of instructor and student violations are on endorsements and insufficient knowledge of requisite paperwork regarding civilian pilot and maintenance records,...but, it ain't so. Unless they devise a special test exclusively focused on Part 61 certification knowledge.

The average civilian trained flight instructor is sadly uninformed as to the depth of knowledge required to properly navigate the cesspool of certification regulations. Unfortunately, a lot of civilian trained pilots think that passing the written tests demonstrates sufficient knowledge. It is not. It is only a small "snapshot" of the required depth of knowledge in each area. The oral portion of the flight test actually is supposed to determine the proficiency of the knowledge.

And methinks the military IP will not be required to "demonstrate" practical knowledge of Part 61 and 91. He/She will probably only do a written test.
So we are only concerned that you guys not get caught with your pants down when first dealing with "the FAA".

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

I'll follow up UndauntedFlyer's comments with some emphasis on this point.

You would think that the written tests would cover this more since a large percentage of instructor and student violations are on endorsements and insufficient knowledge of requisite paperwork regarding civilian pilot and maintenance records,...but, it ain't so. Unless they devise a special test exclusively focused on Part 61 certification knowledge.

The average civilian trained flight instructor is sadly uninformed as to the depth of knowledge required to properly navigate the cesspool of certification regulations. Unfortunately, a lot of civilian trained pilots think that passing the written tests demonstrates sufficient knowledge. It is not. It is only a small "snapshot" of the required depth of knowledge in each area. The oral portion of the flight test actually is supposed to determine the proficiency of the knowledge.

And methinks the military IP will not be required to "demonstrate" practical knowledge of Part 61 and 91. He/She will probably only do a written test.
So we are only concerned that you guys not get caught with your pants down when first dealing with "the FAA".

Nosehair: Your advice is right on.

Surprisingly the CFI writtens will only address subject like Psychology of Teaching and then something about how various certification maneuvers are done, VFR and IFR. However, as Nosehair has said, this will not be anywhere near enough information.

There is an FAA way and a military way of doing most everything from stalls to lazy eights and a CFI must be an expert on how the FAA wants these things done as well as the areas of special emphasis to be taught. An airplane instructor must be intimately familiar with the Airplane Flying Handbook, the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, many FAA Advisory Circulars, the AIM, the FAR's, especially part 61, the Practical Test Standards along with acceptable standards for Private Pilot ASEL, Private Pilot AMEL, Commercial Pilot ASEL, Commercial Pilot AMEL, and the Instrument Rating-Airplane.

The Flight Instructor test, when it is administered by an FAA inspector or a DPE, is the most difficult test given by the FAA because of all the FAA certification knowledge that an applicant must have and be able to demonstrate. Again, it’s not the facts of flying that will be hard to learn, it will be all the administrative and certification information.

Good luck and I'm pleased that you want to be a CFI.

 

[Huggyu2]

Update: I spoke to FAA HQ on Friday, and they said the implementation has slipped to November. He didn't elaborate, but just said it was a staffing/bureaucrating delay.

 

[Huggyu2]

10 Nov 08 is the date. Apparently, their still trying to figure out how to implement certain parts of the changes. For example: since the military flying physical will count in lieu of a Class II medical (maybe it's Class I, but I can't remember), what will those pilots carry to prove they have the military physical?

A lot of strong opinions on whether this should take place, but like it or not, it will be here in about 10 weeks.

 

[JAFI]

I have some real bad feelings about this subject. When an average CFI candidate gets into CFI training he/she has been in the "system" for many months to years. By the system I mean the type of (non military) aircraft and their non military systems, student aircraft operations, non military certification standards, etc. The military primary training environment has basically the same kind of student. Same age, college level, experience level and go into a standard environment. In non military training your student can be from 15 to 80 years old, from no education or aviation background to Doctors/Lawyers/ heads of corporations, Moms or Dads who always wanted to fly, junior or Sis who is there because Mom or Dad is making them be there. The standard "military" training way of doing things has a tough time working with many non military students. To just issue a CFI certificate because of military background is in IMHO a "Political" hand out.

If you think this should be done then the opposite should be true, I should be able to just go fly a military aircraft that I am rated for (how many Military IP’s have operated a Cessna 150 or a light piston twin?). Can they operate one – with aircraft specific training, no doubt in my mind. Can they just be certified to teach in one based on military experience, God help us.

I will give you an example: I was in a standardization meeting where a Chief pilot (CP) was briefing new hired CFI’s. The Chief Pilot was a retired Fighter pilot. The subject of teaching spin recovery was discussed. One of the new CFI’s asked how to best determine the direction of spin to give the proper rudder input. The Chief Pilot said:” Just look at the Artificial Horizon (AH), it will show you the rotation of the aircraft in any situation”. The new CFI’s all bought the answer, after all, he was the Chief Pilot and a retired Fighter pilot. I commented that (in the flight schools aircraft) the AH was a vacuum instrument (not electric like military fighters) that would tumble if a weak vacuum source was present plus it was not able to follow the aircraft through all roll and pitch maneuvers. In civilian training aircraft the AH was a Secondary Instrument. The CP argued with me even after we pulled out several manuals that backed up what I had to say.

The CP went back to his military training to answer a question. It worked for military aircraft but not the Cessna 152 he was now working in. And you could not tell him anything, after all, he was a retired military IP. I was just a civilian CFI with dozens of years “in the system”.

Are Military IP’s able to teach? – Yes. Should they get a CFI based on teaching only in a C5A/F16/or what ever? I say not with out some aircraft specific and non military “training system” practical exam.

 

[Huggyu2]

I'm going to waste a little more typing on this,... but just a little.
I suppose a lot of folks think that military pilots are just going to quit their day jobs, run down to the local FBO, and sign up to be 172 instructors, en masse, and they will all think they are "ready to go" in the piston single world with their CFI in hand.
Military "pilots" are still "pilots",... just like everyone on this forum. And as a group, they are not stupid enough to think they can just overnight become a 172 instructor.

Now, that said, many can. Why? Because they already own a piston single, and they fly it pretty well.

And, BTW, will the 200-hour-total-time CFI be ready to jump into a Cirrus, or an AT-6 warbird and start teaching? No. But I don't expect that they will do that. Despite their "youth", they are not dumb either. They will know their limits, and respect them.

Addtionally, it's fairly myopic if you think that a CFI/MEI/CFII rating is only good for teaching new pilots in a 172.

To summarize: when the military pilots get their instructor certificates, their skull will not jettison, followed by their brain ejecting.

And like it or not, it's going to happen in 10 weeks.

 

[Razor_B]

Huggy, you crack me up. Thanks for the update. Cheers.

Off on a 3 day to Dublin tomorrow. Guinness, yum.

 

[Andy Neill]

For example: since the military flying physical will count in lieu of a Class II medical (maybe it's Class I, but I can't remember), what will those pilots carry to prove they have the military physical?

When I got military flight physicals, I would ask the flight surgeon for and receive an FAA CLass II at the same time. What's wrong with that?

 

[nosehair]

When I got military flight physicals, I would ask the flight surgeon for and receive an FAA CLass II at the same time. What's wrong with that?

That military flight surgeon was also a designated FAA AME. He was also authorized to sign FAA physicals. Not all military flight surgeons are. It is an individual additional authority/responsibility that is taken on by the individual person.

 

[Andy Neill]

That military flight surgeon was also a designated FAA AME. He was also authorized to sign FAA physicals. Not all military flight surgeons are. It is an individual additional authority/responsibility that is taken on by the individual person.

Granted, but they were readily available in my day. Are they not now?

 

[nosehair]

I suppose a lot of folks think that military pilots are just going to quit their day jobs, run down to the local FBO, and sign up to be 172 instructors, en masse, and they will all think they are "ready to go" in the piston single world with their CFI in hand.

No, not 'en masse', but some will.

There will be the few innocent naive types who think that flying a jet or big complex airplane means that flying a 172 is 'simple and easy', and won't require any traininmg, and the "checkout" is routine and needed only for insurance and paper purposes.

I know, because I used to be a young flight instructor near an Air Force Base, and young jet fighter pilots would come out to rent out 172.

Some would balk at even having to demonstrate a trip around the pattern, but almost all had to have several hours of stalls, slow flight, civilian non-tower traffic patterns, etc., to become proficient enough to solo.

Some...could not do it at all. Well, they gave up after 5 or so hours and couls not take-off or keep the airplane straight.

They don't use the rudder in a jet. Not like us prop guys do. It's a completely different animal...in the primary stage.

....HOWEVER...as we all know, the regulations are VERY MINIMAL, and just because it is legal does not mean it is safe.

The up side is that most military instructors are VERY GOOD at instructing. They are not time builders like us. They are actually experienced pilots who become instructors, and I think the GA instructor force, overall, will be enhanced with the experience.

It was with the military that I got most of my 'atypical' experience, such as:

Spin proficient before solo. Spins were on the pre-solo checkride.

Simulated SE forced landings by pulling the mixture or fuel valve off.

Real dirt-road forced or short-field landings.

Instrument checkrides that require no more than 1/4 needle deflection on partial panel.

Multi-engine engine cuts at:
1) just immediately prior to reaching Vmc
2) just after lift-off with landing runway remaining
3) just after lift off just after no available ruway remaining, but less than 50 feet.
One of these would be on the primary checkride.

Multi-Engine instrument approaches on one engine partial panel fixed card ADF....yes, that's right.

'Course, that was a lifetime ago...don't know what it is now.

 

[Andy Neill]

...and uphill both ways in a snow storm!

 

[nosehair]

...and uphill both ways in a snow storm!

Oh, you were there too?:beer:

 

[nosehair]

Granted, but they were readily available in my day. Are they not now?

I don't really know, but I suspect it is a different world now. What with everybody being so 'sensitive', and 'liability' cautious.

Back in our day, an instructor or doctor didn't have to worry about being sued because his advice or treatment didn't work out. I suspect today's doctor doesn't want to sign anything he does not have to.

 

[AC560]

All I want is a high altitude endorsement from Huggyu2

 

[Huggyu2]

All I want is a high altitude endorsement from Huggyu2

The beauty of this is that you'll also get your jet-powererd taildragger endorsement too! :beer:

Andy N,
Yes, there's a shortage of flight docs qualified to give the FAA Class II. They have to get time off to attend training in Ok City.

Razor,
Good to hear from you Bro!!!! Guinness,... yum!