You're the CFI...

cf, you can quit with the s/he and him/her thing.

we know it was a chick



... NOT BEING SEXIST... he said she!

Update #2:

After turning on the master and standby batteries to start up the plane and put it back in the hangar, I observed something... The tach time. It's only viewable on the screen, yet my student had put the correct ending tach time, despite the fact that s/he had no screens to read the tach off of.

This, coupled with some other things, makes me think she may be lying about this whole ordeal, which, if substantiated, is certainly grounds for me not flying with him/her any more.

Any theories on *why* this student would do that??

I guess that's what I would do??? Maybe write a revokation in their logbook too?

It's a long uninteresting story as to why, but it involves social obligations and the airport s/he went to is the closest to his/her house other than my airport. Anticipating I'd go pick up the plane, s/he planned on calling parents to come pick my student up, allowing him/her to make said social obligation (although the timeframe seems strange).

If I'm being lied to (and also my company, which would have to have the plane looked at by maintenance, not to mention taking the airplane off the line for a day or two), it's BS.

Since the trust issues have been discussed I'll propose another angle. This scenario is one that has become too easy with modern avionics and is one of the reasons I have not been real excited to see them in new trainers. GPS and MFDs make it far too easy for someone to push "direct" and follow the pretty line on the screen. A student with (1)OBS, a knee board and a flight plan form is not very likely to stray off course (on purpose). The same person with an MFD is far more tempted because all he has to do is push "direct" and come home.

The perfect trainer should have (2) seats, steam gages, no GPS and no autopilot.

Yep, that's the game plan!

I'm my own C.P. Have discussed with the owners though.

I've never that type of problem.*knock on wood* I think my students no that I would go all incredible hulk on their butts if they ever did something so stupid and careless.

If she has social obligations, it would take nothing more than a call, in a reasonable amount of time befoe the flight, to cancel the lesson.

I've never seen anything official on revoking endorsements. My method would be to write the word "revoked" over it with the date and my initials, perhaps with a diagonal line through it.

The more I instruct, the more I think along these lines.

I sent out a girl on her first solo XC this morning. She flew a 152 with one VOR receiver. Want to know what the navigation was in and out of one of the airports?

...when you come to this line of mountains, follow the valley on the west side, and make sure it's the right valley by looking for a stream at the bottom. Follow it until you hit the big lake, then turn east, around the mountain, and the airport will be dead ahead, a little to the north of the town. After a stop and go, follow the road out of town to the south, until you come to the lumber mill, then fly a heading until you can pick up this VOR...

She said everything went great and she had a good time.

I can see why glass cockpits could be trouble for some students.

I know I'm chiming in late; and, I agree with a lot of what's already here. You guys sure have been busy while I've been working...

I see two things: first, your student is willing to break the rules (endorsement to go to airport XC2 only and goes to ABC) even when YOU state that if time needs to be built you will endorse x-c additionally for airport DEF.

Second, you have not exerted your responsibility. You had indications the student was going to build time (or wanted to), YOU recommended airport DEF. Without more information from you as to why you didn't endorse DEF, there is little else to remark on regarding that.

DON'T think I'm busting your nuts Chris - If anything comes across as snarky in the post that is not what I'm getting at here.

You mention "they head off on x-c", are you using that to eliminate the student's sex? or was this a solo flight with a passenger?

Now, ultimately, the student messed up by going to ABC without permission, but did the right thing by landing at XYZ.

As to my perspective, I would drop the student no questions because of the fact that they indicated prior to takeoff that they had plans to do something other than what was endorsed. That's it, end of story, find someone else to train you.

You I'm sure also learned something from this. Keep up your guard and good work.

Let me just use the real identifiers for clarity.

I endorsed My airport - BFR - HUF - 4I7 - My airport
S/he flew BFR-HUF-CFJ-My airport

The "they" is just me trying to be gender neutral (and grammatically incorrect)

I'd still can the student.

Going to CFJ = BAD. Taking off from CFJ = WORSE.

Soloing an airplane, one hundred forty five dollars.
Flying cross country by yourself, three hundred ten dollars.
Crashing at an airport your instructor didn't endorse, priceless.

* MAJOR THREAD HIJACK IN PROGRESS *

The courtesy car at Bedford, IN (BFR) is the worst one I have EVER driven. Period.

* END HIJACK *

So the student was verbally instructed by the CFI to go ahead depart from CFJ and fly back without a logbook endorsement? Or am I misunderstanding?

Good constructive thread, with good comments- but if I were posting under my real name with real airport ID's, and especially if the above is true, I might consider asking one of the higher powers to kindly make an exception to an old rule, and make this thread disappear.

Don't take this the wrong way, but like Ralgha implied- you need to be a lot more assertive about stuff like this.

Just my thoughts... for whatever they're worth.

From what I understand, the student went to CFJ without an endorsement and departed without talking to the instructor (therefore no endorsement). I believe the inst. had no knowledge of the arrival and departure from the airport which was not endorsed