Safe?

[Bluestreak]

As you wish.I've flown for two airlines,neither of which advocated timing an ILS.The MM is the MAP-if you have a failure,fly the miss and then figure it out.Honestly,how many times have you lost the GS at just the "right" time ? How can you know if it's your equipment or the GS transmitter that's failed ? Maybe the LOC transmitter will soon follow-then what ? I'm in Deak's camp.

 

[na265]

350driver you did the absolute correct thing. I once had been given the opportunity to deliver a 172 to a guy who had bought from the flight school I worked at after it closed. He had no business flying by himself. After 5 days of flying my a$$ off, it was time to go home. He was very upset with me when I would not sign him on a BFR. I stuck to my guns and went home. I also flew with a doctor who was trying to get a sign-off in a school Cherokee 6, I explained to him and the owner of the shool that after 3 flights with him I would not sign him off. They were not happy. That was 3 years ago, and no other Instructor would sign him off since then either. Remember, you maybe saving yourself some legal problems by not doing that sign-off, but, hopefully you saved them from an accident and making the evening news. Keep up the good work!

 

[ILLINI]

Thanks Avbug, I couldn't agree with you more about timing an ILS.

I loved the monkey and whiskey bottles technique!

 

[COOPERVANE]

Sign offs

I am constantly amazed at people who get upset when I won't sign them off for a high performance/complex/BFR in a 3 hour flight.

I once had a 63 year old who hadn't flown since his last BFR, and the time before that was his previous BFR. TWO flights in 4 years!!!
We flew in a 152 (a plane he had never flown), and he then
proceeded to tell me he was building a Bede-5 (flying coffin). Now is this someone whose logbook you want your name in?

Congrats for doing the right thing, mostly for their safety, but also for your future

 

[Rvrrat]

Hooray AvBug!!! He who is prepared for systems/equipment failure will not find himself forced to push a bad position.

IPCs & BFRs: It is true that these are not check rides however, I'm more than a little dismayed to see that the PTS theme was not picked up on more than it was besides AvBug & 350. Let's hope there aren't going to be a rash of 609 rides.

All the best,
Rvr

 

[Fixin2Lnd]

Hey 350Drvr,

I think you should do what you really want to do and that's go to Gulfstream International Training Academy. You sound like the type of candidate they are looking for. You would do well as a PFT copilot there. They would help you feel better about yourself and maybe you would gain some CONFIDENCE in your flying. Maybe they would even let you stick around after your 250hrs. Maybe for another $20k, they'd let you wash Cooper's car.
Admit it dude, you really want to go there but mommy and daddy won't kick up...

 

[tarp]

350,

You did it right. I'm twice your age and pretty gray so I don't get any of those "you're too young" comments anymore - I just get sheepish looks and "Yes,sirs".

1.) Safety is always job #1.

2.) The PTS, which is regulatory in nature, requires us to test the items noted in the preamble as IPC objectives. There is no "discretion" like in the old days. We must use the PTS to administer IPC's. Now I make sure that I ONLY use those items noted with the IPC tag and not ALL the PTS items. If I get a sharp guy/gal, then I might ask them if they want to have some fun.

3.) Any endorsement is a reflection of your judgement. You are under no obligation to endorse anybody that you don't feel comfortable with. In fact, you are doing the rest of us a big favor by NOT endorsing someone who does not meet your minimum level of proficiency.

Personally, I live by the three-strike rule. You're doing an IPC with a stranger. Get in the plane after checking all the paperwork and making sure it is legal for IFR. The student takes off and heads for a neighboring VOR, but never identifies the station (strike one). The person flies an adequate VOR approach but gets completely turned around on the missed approach and needs help to re-orient (strike two). At this point, there are two directions for the ride to go - I will usually talk to the person about not being nervous, about how this is nothing but a demonstration of skills, that IFR is So-o-o easy (not true, but we're trying to relax). The student goes on to nail everything else or continues the string of minor but potentially dangerous actions. I can't let a "potentially" dangerous person back in the system with my endorsement.

When considering your endorsement, break the entire ride into categories: For me, I think in terms of:

Excellence - a commanding authority over the airplane and situations.

Minimums - doing what the PTS says.

Borderline - stretches my personal safety to the limits

Unsafe- just outright unsafe at any speed.

The top two get immediate signoffs.

 

[Timebuilder]

I was asked to give an IPC last week, and there were many items I took into account:

1) He was an older, experienced pilot who was not arrogant. He showed a willingness to learn during the preflight briefing, and didn't mind when I "clarified" the procedure for lost comm.

2) He had already spent thousands of hours finishing a Wheeler Express kit, with a 260hp engine, and did a nice job. I took his attention to detail into account.

3) He approached the ride as a learning experience. As stated above, the ride isn't a test so much as a chance to improve. I instructed, and he learned (definition: change of behavior) to be a better instrument pilot.

4) As I signed his logbook, I recommended that he come by every month for a short ride to shoot an approach or two, to make these IPC's easier, or even unecessary if he can stay current.

You have to feel your comfort level in these matters. The fact that your IPC client blew his stack indicates that you probably did the right thing, and maybe even saved the life of him and his family. He might go out and get a signature. On the other hand, he might go get some more training somewhere, after he calms down and looks at the experience. Sometimes, after the adrenalin subsides, an attorney can take a logical look at the experience and decide on appropriate action.

So, take all these posts into consideration for your next IPC.

I'll bet it will go a lot better.

 

[bobbysamd]

Signing off ICCs and BFRs

Oops, sorry, IPCs and Flight Reviews.

You have to use some judgment and take your trainee's needs into account. While at ERAU, I gave IPCs regularly to a senior flight line faculty member. This man gave me my new-hire standardization training. I respected him and he respected me. He knew all the rules and AIM intimately. He didn't always fly to standards for me, but I felt that he was safe, so I'd sign him off. I knew and he knew he was not going to launch into hard IFR.

Riddle instructors would sign off each other for IPCs and flight reviews. We expected nothing less of each other than Commercial-Instrument PTS standards. That was not unreasonable at all because (1) we were current; (2) we were setting the examples for our students, (3) we should be proficient; we were demonstrating maneuvers to students to standards and (4) we indeed were taking our students into real IMC conditions. The aeronautical knowledge was an obvious given.

In Civil Air Patrol each pilot has to take an annual Form 5 checkride. CAP regulations required that pilots had to fly to Private Pilot PTS standards or better to pass their Form 5s. Most people only needed 1.0 to 1.5. I always signed off a biennial for my folks because I felt they had exhibited the requrements of 14 CFR 61.56 if they met PTS standards.

I had one older member come to me every year for his Form 5. This was a retired AF general who had been flying for years, but did not fly much each year. I never really looked forward to giving him his Form 5 because his flights took hours. Once he got the rust off and flew to PTS standards, I signed him off.

Having said all this, I agree 100% with 350 Driver's decision and rationale. I would have done the exact same thing. I assume his trainee was not a regular customer but someone off the street. If it is someone you know and whose abilities you know, you should keep these considerations in mind. Use some judgment. But, if it is a stranger, you have every right to satisfy yourself that the person is safe. 14 CFR 61.57(d) states that an IPC consists of "a representative number of tasks required by the instrument rating practical test." Therefore, it is not unreasonable to apply PTS standards as a yardstick of the person's abilities. Moreover, this attorney should try reading the law (the FARs). He'd see that 14 CFR 61.193 and 61.195 vests flight instructors with the authority, i.e. the "position," to judge his skills, age notwithstanding. I work for attorneys and am not surprised by this guy's attitude. Attorneys typically can't stand it if someone whom they regard as a lesser person tells them what to do.

Good decision on 350 Driver's part. That's my two cents.

 

[Fixin2Lnd]

Bobbysamd,

Do you fly for an airline or do you instruct?