Instrument training without a CFII

[Alchemy]

I've recently come upon an opportunity to "ride along" with an instrument rated private pilot on a fairly long cross country trip. I am a CFI but do not have my II yet. If we file IFR, can I still log it as dual given as long as we're in VMC? If we hit some IMC, I should omit that time from "dual given", correct? If we shoot an approach, should I log the approach or not?

[Grabo172]

From FAR 61.195
[ QUOTE ]
(c) Instrument Rating. A flight instructor who provides instrument flight training for the issuance of an instrument rating or a type rating not limited to VFR must hold an instrument rating on his or her flight instructor certificate and pilot certificate that is appropriate to the category and class of aircraft in which instrument training is being provided.


[/ QUOTE ]

What this says to me is that you can log the whole thing as dual given since the pilot is instrument rated already and as long as it's not used for IPC purposes (61.57 (d) ) ...
So Log away!

(you just can't log the instrument time as your own instrument time if you are not the sole manipulator of the control per 61.51.(g)(2) )

[E_Dawg]

Alchemy I believe you can log the entire flight as dual given even as a CFI because you could be teaching the student other things, not instrument training. This is based on some searches I have done at propilot.com, they seem to know their stuff and back it up with references.

Just that the student can't use it as part of the 15hrs that MUST be given by a II for the instrument.

[sixpack]

Hopefully this kind of flight is only a small percentage of what's in your logbook. I'd hate to have to explain to the hiring manager at Skywest, why 35% of my hours were sitting in the right seat on a XC with somebody who already knew how to fly a XC in this airplane.

[kellwolf]

I can think of several reasons why you'd be doing that. Maybe there's some equipment in that plane the student isn't familiar with. A XC is an excellent opportunity to do that. Not a lot of manuevers, most straight and level, so you can teach things like that. In the Cirrus MOST of the training is a XC, but that is b/c the thing is so darn fast.

[bluelake]

....as for logging the approach.. log it if you PERFORM (your hands on the yoke and switches) it.. meaning you doing it, not presiding over it or observing it or supervising it.

[Alchemy]

If an interviewer asks I could just say this guy is working on his commercial (which he is). He's building towards his 250 hrs total time, taking his family along, wants to get some pointers along the way and have another qualified pilot in the right seat. This is nothing much different from what an instructor does on any other cross country flight....


Which brings me to another question. I flew right seat in a P210 today and I don't have a high altitude endorsement. It was for an older fellow who was current and appropriately rated to fly the plane, but just wanted an extra pilot along (not a bad idea for a 70 year old). I plan on logging this flight as dual given but not PIC. Correct?

[cime_sp]

What is the service ceiling on the P210...you only need the endopresement if it is greater than 25,000 feet I believe. I'm too lazy to look it up, but if it is only certified to 24K then you don't need the endoresement

[stuckingfk]

[ QUOTE ]
What is the service ceiling on the P210...you only need the endopresement if it is greater than 25,000 feet I believe. I'm too lazy to look it up, but if it is only certified to 24K then you don't need the endoresement

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have anything handy at the moment, but if the plane is pressurized, you have to have a high altitude endorsement, regardless of its service ceiling.

[Mr_Creepy]

Luc I think the other guy is right. You only need a high altitude sign-off if the service ceiling is over 25k.

[ QUOTE ]

14 CFR 61.31 (g) Additional training required for operating pressurized aircraft capable of operating at high altitudes. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (g)(3) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a pressurized aircraft (an aircraft that has a service ceiling or maximum operating altitude, whichever is lower, above 25,000 feet MSL), unless that person has received and logged ground training from an authorized instructor and obtained an endorsement in the person's logbook or training record from an authorized instructor who certifies the person has satisfactorily accomplished the ground training. The ground training must include at least the following subjects ...


[/ QUOTE ]

Although in the next paragraph it just says "pressurized aircraft" - but I think it implies the 25k ceiling:

[ QUOTE ]
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (g)(3) of this section, no person may act as pilot in command of a pressurized aircraft unless that person has received and logged training from an authorized instructor in a pressurized aircraft, or in a flight simulator or flight training device that is representative of a pressurized aircraft, and obtained an endorsement in the person's logbook or training record from an authorized instructor who found the person proficient in the operation of a pressurized aircraft. The flight training must include at least the following subjects:

(i) Normal cruise flight operations while operating above 25,000 feet MSL;

(ii) Proper emergency procedures for simulated rapid decompression without actually depressurizing the aircraft; and

(iii) Emergency descent procedures.


[/ QUOTE ]

[EatSleepFly]

I think you need it for ANY pressurized aircraft.

Pressurized is pressurized. FL240 isn't any different than FL250 in how you operate the system.

[Mr_Creepy]

You may NEED it but is it REQUIRED?

[EatSleepFly]

Whats the difference?

I sure wouldn't want to taxi up and get ramped in a P210 without it.

[stuckingfk]

Hey John, the reason why I posted it was because on a my private pilot checkride by the DPE I was asked that.

"Did you see that P210 out on the ramp earlier today," said Mr. DPE.

"Sure did, nice aircraft," said me.

"What do you need to fly that aircraft assuming you have you ppl already."

"High performance endorsement, complex endorsement, at least 3 takeoffs/landings in the past 90 days in a SE aircraft if I am going to take passengers, hmmm, that is about it."

"What about a high altitude endorsement, do you need one of those?"

"I don't think so, as long as you stay below the 25K."

So later on he told me that I was wrong. He said that no matter even if you aircraft (ie P210) has a ceiling lower than 25K, you need training in pressurized aircraft operations, so yes you need a high altitude endorsement.

[SATXaviator]

What about logging it as a safety pilot?

[cime_sp]

[ QUOTE ]
Whats the difference?

I sure wouldn't want to taxi up and get ramped in a P210 without it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe you are incorrect. The reg specifically states that it is not all pressurized aircraft but "pressurised aircraft capable of operating at high altitudes". In 61.31(g)(1) it specifically defines what they are talking about..."(1) Except as provided in paragraph (g)(3) of this section, no person may act as PIC of a pressurized aircraft (an aircraft that has a service ceiling or maximum operating altitude, whichever is lower, above 25,000 feet MSL)unless that person...."

http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=148

The T210 has a service ceiling of 28,500 feet but would NOT need a high altitude endorsement since it is not pressurized.

The P210 has a service ceiling of exactly 25,000 feet so it would also NOT need a high altitude since it is not GREATER than 25,000 feet as specified in the reg.

It does not matter what you plan to fly at as well, instead the determining factor is what the aircraft is capable of.

Also, just because a DE said something that doesn't mean that he/she is right. My boss is a DE for my are and he is wrong all the time! Don't ever tell them they are wrong though if you're on a checkride!!!

I hat the dame regs and their interpretation/ambiguity!!!!!

[Mr_Creepy]

Ask 5 FAA Inspectors for an interpretation of a reg and you will get 5 different answers.

[EatSleepFly]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe you are incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]

It happens.

For some reason I always had it in my head that any pressurized aircraft required the endorsement. Upon reading it, I guess I agree with you guys. Doesn't make sense, but thats the FAA for you...