CFI teaching instrument

[MJPilot]

How much of instrument training can a basic CFI do?
Can he/she instruct an instrument student if he has already the 20 hours required from a CFII? What about instrument training given to a student already having an IFR-rating?
I have asked several people including examiners and have received mixed answers.
How will the FAA look at it (suspend license, warning, ...)?
In my opinion, everything way beyond 3 hours basic instrument training for the purpose of the PPL is ok.

 

[MJPilot]

*** CORRECTION ***
Everything way beyond the 3 hours is NOT ok.

 

[172driver]

An instrument applicant must receive 15 hrs dual instrument training from an authorized instructor (CFII), 3 hrs within 60 days, and the 250 NM X-C. Any other training may be accomplished by a CFI.

Any time the regs refer to 'instrument training,' or an 'authorized instructor,' a CFII must be present. "Instrument time' may be accomplished with a CFI or a safety pilot.

 

[midlifeflyer]

A one-I can provide instrument training of any kind, at any time, and the student can log training received. =But= instrument instruction by a one-I doesn't count toward teh requirements of any certificate or rating. (The 3 hours for the PPL isn't "instrument training", it's "instructioin in flight solely by reference to instruments". Sounds similar but is treated differently)

After looking at a whole bunch of rules and official opinions, I came up with this (maybe incorrect) paradigm of instrument training:

If an instructor =is not= required by an FAR, any CFI can give instruction.

If an instructor =is= required by an FAR, a CFII is required.

That's the view that justifies letting CFIs log training given for the part of the instrument requirements that are not required instruction — the part that could be done with a private pilot acting as a safety pilot. It's really not to benefit the student (since the time doesn't "count" as instruction toward the rating) but to let CFIs build time and develop instrument teaching skill. And it should be logged by the student in such a way that it leaves no question that it isn't to be counted toward the rating.

All work in an FTD requires an "authorized instructor." Why bother having this requirement unless the instructor is to play an instructional role? This therefore falls into my "instructor required" box and my opinion if it is to be used to instrument work, it must be a CFII.

(I'm leaving out discussion of other types of people authorized to give instrument instruction)

Compare that to general IFR proficiency work in an airplane. Except for an IPC sign-off (which requires a II), no instructor is required. The pilot may simply go up with a private pilot as safety pilot. So a CFI who goes up may give loggable proficiency instrument instruction.

 

[MJPilot]

Let 's just say then that an instrument rated pilot, Jim, wants to get current and chooses a simple "I" for some recurrency training (NOT an IPC). Now, Jim finds a brandnew Garmin 430 GPS and gets some new training/knowledge in GPS approaches, which he never has done before.
2 weeks down the road, he finds himself in IMC conditions, but nevertheless feels confident enough to ask for a GPS approach.
Something goes wrong and he crashes short of the runway.
The FAA and insurance look at his logbook and guess what they find...

Now, it becomes a legal matter, and I do not think that the "I" which has given the instrument instruction will have an easy task convincing both parties of his authorothies.

 

[midlifeflyer]

MJPilot said
Let 's just say then ...

But you're raising a personal competency issue, not an authority one. It's about an instructor staying within the limits of her competence, not her certificate. What's safe isn't always legal and what's legal isn't always safe. Nor smart.

Of course, if you're a CFI giving what amounts to primary instruction in the use of some new IFR equipment, inquiring minds will want to know.

Doesn't apply just to GPS. GAMA recommends that =all= transition training involving an instrument rated pilot be done with a CFII. So, CFIs should stop doing checkouts or complex transition training if a pilot happens to be instrument rated?

But it's not always the case. The inquiry will focus on more that "how many I's do you have?" As an extreme illustration, let's add to your scenario.

The CFII teaches in Arizona and hasn't been in actual in 2 years. Although flying multiple aircraft, 90% of his instrument work is primary instrument training in the schools 172. He has some experience with the Garmin 430, even took an authorized class in it, but has about 3 hours experience in using it for anything other than pushing the Direct button and punching in some numbers.

The CFI has 200 hours of actual, 30 in the past year. Although a renter, when the CFI goes on a personal flight and expects IMC, she takes the club's 2002 Skylane with a Garmin 430 and uses it as her primary form of navigation, usually doing a GPS approach unless minimums are such that an ILS would be a much better idea. Because she knows the unit, she is the "go-to" person for training in Garmins and the flight school, and all the other instructors come to her for advice.

When that accident happens, which one would =you= rather be?

 

[CitationLover]

be careful reading into what an "authorized instructor" means in the FAR, unless it is specifically defined in that section, the first section of the part, or part 1.

an example:
any cfi can give a spin endorsement for an initial cfi candidate even though the reg states only an "authorized instructor" (which in the part 61 cfi section you would think, ie read into, means a 2-yr instructor).

 

[midlifeflyer]

any cfi can give a spin endorsement for an initial cfi candidate even though the reg states only an "authorized instructor" (which in the part 61 cfi section you would think, ie read into, means a 2-yr instructor).

I wasn't aware of the exception for spin training. Where can it be found?

 

[CitationLover]

it doesn't state it explicitly, thus it is a grey area (like a lot of reg's).

i got this confirmed from Larry Sturm of the Charlotte FSDO because we had a DE saying the spin endorsement HAD to be done within the 3 hrs prep time requirement from 61.39. we kinda beat the spin stuff around.

 

[JediNein]

Careful on the GPS training. Two FSDOs in CA consider avionics training to be "instrument instruction" requiring a CFII.

So much easier to just get CFI, CFII, and MEI ratings and be covered...

Your FSDO will vary.

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein
GPS and Avionics Instructor
Newly Minted MEL Pilot

P.S. I'd rather be the instructor on the ground wondering what happened while reading about the crash in the FAA's incident record system.