Tough Qs on the CFI-initial

[E_Dawg]

Got it in a week, assuming the plane is fixed by then, good wx, etc.

What were some of the questions that threw you off?

[braidkid]

Finding all the required inspections in the aircraft maintenance log. It was the first time I had opened the thing and the first question he asked me. Other than that I was very well prepared. Good luck on your exam.

[pilotjww]

Be prepared for lots of logbook endorsements explanations, and be ready to justify, in CFRs or AFH or PHAK or AIM, anything you say.

[EatSleepFly]

I got asked a lot of scenario-type endorsement questions.

I also had to pick apart and provide a super in-depth analysis of Eights on Pylons.

Aerodynamics were another big thing. Had to explain lots about aerodynamics.

Very little on WX, very little on systems (he asked a few questions out at the plane).

There were a couple of other tricky questions he asked me, and I may have written them down- I'll see if I can find them.

[Josh]

I'm watching this thread for anything as well.

I see no problem seeing what other questions are asked on checkrides. It makes sense, that the examiner will ask things that your future students may. Now only if I can find someone to give you all the common "someday, someone will ask you..." since there is nearly infinite topics, and details that could be brough in on a CFI ride.

In any case, whenever I'm going somewhere, and may show up early, I open up the ASA oral exam guide. I really like the ASA books. Gives a question, quick answer, and a reference. If you went and read and understood every part in that book, I'd say that would be 90% or more of the oral prep needed.

But, I see where you are at asking now. That extra 10%, or whatever else you may need to know is the hard stuff.

Maybe a running list, on a thread here, for each rating. Questions asked, and answers given. Each time someone completes a ride, they could post any new questions that are not already there. Would make for some good reading in the final prep for whatever ride someone has coming up.

Josh

[pscraig]

1. PROVE this aircraft is airworthy.
2. Be able to prove any answer, so carry some books in with you.

The ASA oral guide was very useful.

[pilot602]

Can you reference th ASA in the test or do you mean for preparation purposes only?

[aviator]

I have to say also the "prove this aircraft is airworthy" question. It goes way beyond find the last annual inspection.

Stuff like- Find the current status of life limited parts per T.C.D.S

Or maybe- Current status listing of all applicable Airworthiness directives including time or date of recurring action.

[Alchemy]

TCDS? What does this stand for?

Your question intrigued me so I asked our flight school's A&P about life limited parts today. He said there are no life limited parts for most small aircraft operated under part 91. He said the engine manufacturer TBO times were simply reccomendations and that there is no set timeframe within which the engine, prop, or airframe must be replaced. I suppose there are some cases where life limited parts are specified in the type certificate, such as Ciruss's planes. I believe the SR22 airframe is only good for 6000 hours? In any event, I gathered from the A&P that your average aluminum skinned, recip powered small airplane doesn't usually have life limited parts, and if it does, it they will be specified in the type certificate.

One interesting thing I found out today is that the aircraft I'm taking my CFI ride in has an STC for aftermarket rosin sunvisors......From this it's pretty clear that any time you add equipment to the aircraft no matter how minor, you need to get an STC for it. I also found out today that even if you are replacing a radio with the exact same make and model radio, you have to file it as an alteration with the FAA......the serial number of each piece of equipment on the airplane is noted in the type certificate.

Finding compliance records for the A&D's is easy enough....there is a list of them in the maintenance records, including required corrective action, date of compliance, and frequency for recurring AD's. The A&P makes an entry in the logbook every specified number of hours for the recurring AD's.

[EatSleepFly]

[ QUOTE ]
TCDS? What does this stand for?


[/ QUOTE ]

Type Certificate Data Sheet

[pilot602]

[ QUOTE ]
He said the engine manufacturer TBO times were simply reccomendations and that there is no set timeframe within which the engine, prop, or airframe must be replaced.

[/ QUOTE ]

ADs can life-limit parts on part 91, light aircraft. Make sure you check those.

[pilot602]

Did you take the ride yet, Ed?

[E_Dawg]

No

The airplane's been down for almost two weeks now and the ride has been rescheduled 3x.

We'll hear the plane should be ship shape by xxx, so we schedule it, then xxx comes close and the plane still isn't ready, etc.

Is it possible to hate airplanes but love flying?

[Alchemy]

I'm in the same boat as Ed now....my CFI ride was supposed to be tomorrow but I found out today the stall/gear warning horn was inop and can't be fixed for several days. I'm now up on the 22nd.

[pilot602]

Re; & Alchemy.

Welcome to my world! I think I've had only two checkrides go off as planned (not delayed due to MX). It sucks ... but you "get used to it."*













* Not really.

[E_Dawg]

My instrument has been the only ride that went 'as planned' the first time around. Oh well

[Buzo]

This is one I was asked and a friend failed for not knowing.

Can you as a CFI no II teach a commercial applicant with no instrument rating all the requirements?

[Alchemy]

Yes, why not? The commercial applicant only needs 10 hours of instruent training of which at least 5 must be in single engine airplanes. A CFI with no II can give basic instrument training required for a private or commercial license.

I'm probably wrong though, since it sounds like a trick question.

[EatSleepFly]

My answer would have to be no, a CFIA (no II) may not teach a VFR-commercial applicant all of the requirements. The applicant would have to fly with a CFII for the "10 hrs. of instrument training" requirement.

Here's my reference (FAA Chief Counsel Opinion, 8/7/97):

[ QUOTE ]
If the simulated instrument time that a student pilot receives in order to qualify for the Private Pilot Certificate in accordance with 61.109(a)(3), (b)(3), and (e)(3) is given by a CFI without the authorization to give instrument instruction, then that time may only be logged as instruction received time and it cannot be used to fulfill the requirements of another higher certificate or an instrument rating. A CFI, without instrument authorization, may give the flight training required in 61.109(a)(3), (b)(3), and (e)(3), [because it] is not considered "instrument instruction."

[/ QUOTE ]

[Buzo]

ESF is correct.

[Alchemy]

Okay. Why is the instrument training for the private pilot not considered "instrument instruction" while the instrument training for the commercial is?

The FAA isn't being very consistent there, but it's good to know none the less. Thanks.

[Buzo]

The private says 3 hours of flight by reference to instruments while the instrument and commercial are instrument training.

[pilot602]

[ QUOTE ]
flight by reference to instruments

[/ QUOTE ]

Alchemy .. that phrase is the key. The FAA makes it a point to call training for private pilots "flight by reference to instruments" and everything else "instrument training." Instrument training includes, IFR procedures, ATC procedures, etc. Flight by ref. to instruments is just that ... basic attitude flying off the instruments.

That's an awfully crappy question to get failed on, though. I'm starting to get nervous ...

[Alchemy]

61.109(a)(3)

[ QUOTE ]
3 hours of flight training in a single engine airplane on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments, including straight and level flight, constant airspeed climbs and descents, turns to a heading, recovery from u nusual flight attitudes, radio communications, and the use of navigation systems/facilites and radar services appropriate to instrument flight;

[/ QUOTE ]

So the difference in semantics is "flight training in a single engine airplane on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to instruments" vs "instrument training". Didn't realize there was a difference. I was under the impression that a CFI with no II could give instrument instruction, only they couldn't sign anyone off for a practical, IPC, or instrument written.

[EatSleepFly]

[ QUOTE ]
That's an awfully crappy question to get failed on, though. I'm starting to get nervous ...

[/ QUOTE ]

You got that right. I happened to know that one, but only because I'd been asked it before and did the research. It makes me wonder though, how many of those little nitpicky things are out there that I might be misunderstanding? Not many, I hope.