Hey Todd just wanted to let you know that I passed my CFI checkride today! Thank you for all the time and effort you put in these videos. For sure I’ll recommend my students to this channel.
Passed my CFI initial a couple of weeks ago, thanks for your great videos make it easy to understand FOI and regs, by the way, you were my DPE on my private check-ride.
Hey Todd, thanks for the great insights. Just a quick question on 61.49, you'd said that YOU specifically do not have to be the students CFI in order to give the re-test 61.49 endorsement, and that there is no minimum time to retrain the student on the areas they were deficient in. My question, with relativity to the retraining; is that in reference to the 61.39 A.1 endorsement? Just making sure w/in the 2 calendar months that they've received flight training? I know that if a Part 61 student 'fails' a ride, then the only endorsement you have to give is the 61.49(re-test) endorsement but I just wanted to clarify
Actually the time from for retraining is only 60 days. This is stated in the Notice of Disapproval that the DPE would give the applicant. The re-endorsing instructor would only need to verify that that time frame has not lapsed before the recheck takes place. This instructor would also need to verify that all of the other endorsements to act as PIC are also still within that time frame. Otherwise, the re-endorsing CFI would also need to regive those as well.
On that biggest lie topic, both my instructor and me found the new knowledge-test ACS codes to be so generic as to be nearly useless.(instrument ACS) I might be able to see them as semi useful for a very low score especially if the problem was concentrated in one area. But I scored in the mid 90s and basically ended up with as many topic codes as missed questions. I can sort of recall certain questions that I wasn't fully confident on, and combine that with the ACS codes; but if I already know my weakness, or I didn't miss the question that I thought I missed, then really what good is the code? Besides that, about half of the questions that made me scratch my head were not difficult based on the subject matter, my problem was in trying interpret the poorly revised/edited question and answer set. It's like they just shirk the proof reading of knowledge test questions off on intern with a poor grasp of the underlying material. (ie. Do they really mean increase attitude or is it a spellcheck error of altitude? Along with a few gotcha questions.)
I agree with the testing codes - and the FAA is trying to work on a better solution. Eventually, all of the test codes will mimic the lines in the respective ACS, so you will be able to know precisely where the weak areas are.
Todd, great vids. All of them! One ?: In the vid, you mentioned the endorsements as A.32 and A.33 Should that not be 34 and 35 for the commercial? Thanks again
Todd, this video is great. I would recommend a short video addressing 61.129 (4) - Ten hours of solo flight time in a single engine airplane or 10 hours of flight time performing the duties of pilot in command in a single engine airplane with an authorized instructor on board. This sentence is a gotcha….the “airplane or 10” specifically the word “or”. I had done my night with an instructor on board and XC solo. That scenario does NOT meet the reg. I have been told that is something DPE’s have been told to to look for and could really upset a commercial checkride in the first 30 minutes.
Had a couple questions for you: 1) Is the 61.49 the only endorsement required after failure or is a new or "current" 61.39(a)(i)&(ii) also required? 2) You mentioned that training conducted towards an instrument rating can count towards the commercial requirements if logged as "per 61.129," but what about if the specific elements of 61.129(a)(3)(i) were logged instead (i.e. attitude instrument flying, partial panel skills, etc.)? Will entries encompassing all listed elements and totaling at least the 10 required hours satisfy that requirement even if 61.129 is not specifically written?
1) As long as it has not been more than 60 days since the original 61.39(a)(6)(i)&(ii), then yes. 2) You have to look at it as an FAA inspector would. Do your remarks denote that the required training was given, or not? The wording is everything.
