Valid spin endorsement for CFI?

[JimNtexas]

I did spins on almost every flight from the first when I learned to fly in Cubs and champs way back in 1971.

Reviewing my old logbook, I find this entry early in my training:

"10/23/1971: Champ 7AC - .6 - Spins - left & right: OK, [cfi name] CFI xxxxxxxxxxxx"

Would this be valid now for the CFI required Spin training?

 

[vclean]

Since you're an aspiring CFI, you should be an authority on Part 61. Review 61.183(i)(1). The endorsement states 'applicant is competent and possesses instructional proficiency...'. It seems your spin endorsement from '71 would not satisfy current CFI spin endorsement requirements. For an 'official' answer ask the examiner or fsdo you intend to take your CFI ride with if they would accept the endorsement from '71.

 

[JimNtexas]

I haven't started CFI training yet, but I think I'll plan on getting that updated. Why bait the examiner unless the law is clearly on my side, which it sounds like it isn't.

Spins are fun in any case.

 

[vclean]

If the law is on your side, you should have no fear asking questions of your DE or FSDO. As a CFI you should develop a relationship with the FSDO and DE's in your area. If the endorsement isn't valid, best to find out now instead before the checkride.

 

[Flyingtoohigh]

More over, do you feel that you are proficient in spin avoidance and recovery manuevers, given the length of time that has passed since your training?

Worst comes to worst, get an instructor and a 152 for 45 minutes and spin baby, spin!

 

[midlifeflyer]

I haven't started CFI training yet, but I think I'll plan on getting that updated.

It's not an update. It's different than the endorsement you already have.

Bear in mind that, as vclean pointed out, the spin endorsement for the CFI is not an endorsement that you're okay doing spins. Like every other CFI-related requirement, It's an endorsement for "instructional proficiency" - that you have the air and ground knowledge and ability to =teach= spins and the other spin-related topics.

I don't see anything in the old endorsement that says =any= of that.

 

[nosehair]

Endorsements

What you describe seems like a "logbook entry", which is different from an "endorsement". An endorsement, in the text of "spin endorsement" or "solo endorsement", is a legal statement by a qualified CFI approving or supporting certain actions which are outlined or required of CFI's in the training process. It isn't sufficient to note in the logbook, "spins ok", or "ok for solo". This used to be sufficient, in a place and time, far far away, long long ago, but not anymore.
You will need an endorsement that copies FAR 61.183(i)(1) pretty much word-for-word with all the buzz words "instructional proficiency in stall awareness, spin entry, spins, and spin recovery procedures" in that endorsement.
Did'ja ever hear the story about how that specific phrase became necessary instead of just the word "spins"?

 

[Iceman21]

I don't have the FARs in front of me but in order to satisfy the requirements to recieve the indorsement you must log BOTH ground and flight instruction on Spins, Spin Entry, and the cause/recovery of spins to the instructional level.

 

[U-I pilot]

Just to clerify....

This endorsement must be given by an instructor who has had the CFI 24 calender months yadda yadda yadda correct?
I would assume this is correct since by endorsing you are saying you've instructed an instructor candidate....

 

[U-I pilot]

im talking non grandfather claused......gotta be CFI for 24 months and that stuff, not just any old cfi for this endorsement right?
This is kinda a new question

 

[groundpointsix]

No you will not need an endorsement...


The FAR's were rewritten in '97, specifially part 61... you were grandfathered in as long as you have spin training logged. And as long as you logged time in something HP or Complex, you won't need either one of those endorsements either.

Check your FAR/AIM again. 61.183(i)(1) and (2). You're confusing the spin endorsements with the high performance and complex endorsements under 61.31(e) and (f). That being said, as I read the FARs, you can get away with not having the endorsement, but you will have to demonstrate them to the examiner-- so why not just get the endorsement and skip having to teach spins under the stress of a checkride?

 

[Iceman21]

im talking non grandfather claused......gotta be CFI for 24 months and that stuff, not just any old cfi for this endorsement right?
This is kinda a new question

Refer to FAR 61.195(h)(1):

The ground training provided to an initial applicant for a flight instructor certificate must be given by an authorized instructor who- (i) Holds a current ground or flight instructor certificate with the appropriate rating, has held that rating for at least 24 calender months, and has given at least 40 hours of ground training..... and so on

 

[350DRIVER]

but you will have to demonstrate them to the examiner-- so why not just get the endorsement and skip having to teach spins under the stress of a checkride?

I think you are mistaken junior...

It is my understanding that you will only have to demonstrate the spins during the practical portion of the checkride only IF requested to do so by the inspector, I think this is far from a "given". I tried to find the specific far but was unable to locate where it mentions this. I am pretty sure that if you look into this you wil see that it is a call that is up to the specific inspector that is doing your ride.

3 5 0

 

[rumpletumbler]

With a .6 and having to get high enough to do them you probably only did one each way. I'd say do a few more just for familarity. I've not heard of anyone having to do them on the CFI ride. I believe you do have to demonstrate them if you fail the practical doing stalls on your next checkride. I had over two hours of them in a terrorhawk many years ago and the guy didn't sign me off because I wouldn't do them with full flaps etc. which was against the POH. He is now flying a Lear 55 or 60 so he is still alive.....soo before I got my CFI I went up and did a couple and got the signoff.

 

[jimtrustycfi]

Spins?

Remember, it's me as your instructor today, saying that you can spin and teach them, not someone in '71. It will probably be your last time to do them unless you plan on teaching a lot of instructors. A lot more to the question than just spinning too. Was the aircraft you trained in certified for spins and aerobatics? How much fuel was on board? What category W. & B. were you in? Can you describe for me, as an examiner exactly what you and the airplane did in slow motion on the greaseboard? Would you mind if we did a couple in the air today on the checkride? I'll do them and you teach! Just be prepared for the checkride and follow the outlines given in the PTS. Remember, it's all about your teaching ability, not your flying............(Lrn2Fly)

 

[midlifeflyer]

This endorsement must be given by an instructor who has had the CFI 24 calendar months yadda yadda yadda correct?

Yes.

This is not an endorsement that you are capable of doing spins safely. It's an endorsement about the ability to =teach= them.

The 61.183(i) endorsement is "from an authorized instructor indicating that the [CFI] applicant is competent and possesses instructional proficiency in stall awareness, spin entry, spins, and spin recovery procedures after providing the applicant with flight training in those training areas in an airplane or glider, as appropriate, that is certificated for spins; and

Like other initial CFI requirements it needs to be done by a 24-month CFI.

On another comment, the examiner =may= accept the endorsement as evidence of instructional proficiency, but if the CFI candidate fails the test because of deficiencies in this area, "the examiner must test the person on stall awareness, spin entry, spins, and spin recovery instructional procedures in an airplane or glider, as appropriate..."

 

[groundpointsix]

I think you are mistaken junior...

It is my understanding that you will only have to demonstrate the spins during the practical portion of the checkride only IF requested to do so by the inspector, I think this is far from a "given". I tried to find the specific far but was unable to locate where it mentions this. I am pretty sure that if you look into this you wil see that it is a call that is up to the specific inspector that is doing your ride.

3 5 0

I will agree with you on this. I read the regulation a bit too fast and typed my response without thinking. You're right, the spins are not a given on the practical, unless you failed the practical the first time due to a lack of spin knowledge.

 

[Iceman21]

I think you are mistaken junior...

I tried to find the specific far but was unable to locate where it mentions this.
3 5 0

FAR 61.183 (i)(2) covers what you were referring to.

 

[350DRIVER]

FAR 61.183 (i)(2) covers what you were referring to.

Thank you Iceman21

3 5 0