Flight Instructor HQ

Which FAA controls you?

Posted By:

Glenn Hake

3
Posts

#1 Posted: 11/25/2009 16:56:41 Modified: 11/28/2009 12:45:51

A Designated Examiner stated that my logbook and student pilot endorsements were not acceptable because "Any endorsement on the applicant's student pilot certificate or in the applicant's log book should show the make and model of aircraft, i.e. C150M. There are a number of C150 models." I wrote only "C150" on student pilot certificates and logbook endorsements.

This was news to me and being an old fart I'm resistant to unnecessary or bureaucratic change, so I mentioned to the examiner that this seemed contrary to the definition of specific make and model under "Type" in FAR 1. I also mentioned that as a student and as an instructor (way too many years ago) I was associated with flight schools that used various models of the venerable 150 interchangeably under close FAA supervision and student pilot certificates were never endorsed in each 150 “model”, not to mention the scheduling nightmare this would cause. The intent was/is to differentiate between a model 150 and a model 172.

I asked the examiner for new FAA guidance for making endorsements apparently contrary to FAR 1. He said that was his FSDO's interpretation of "specific make and model", and could point to no new changes in regulations or FAA guidance.

In case I missed something at recurrent training I would like to learn. Did something change or does your FSDO also interpret the regulation this way?
goggles

Jack Kenton

7
Posts

#2 Posted: 12/2/2009 19:26:07

I've no idea as to what my local FSDO requires, but if this is what they're doing these days, they have too much time on their hands. It used to be that the FSDOs were involved in aviation safety, not dotting I's and crossing T's.

Brian Von Bevern

8
Posts

#3 Posted: 12/3/2009 22:14:07

He's wrong. I can see perhaps someone out to prove themselves might object if you didn't log "Cessna 150" instead of "C150," but a Cessna 150L and a Cessna 150M are the same "type" of airplane, certified on the same type certificate. The make is "Cessna" and the model is "150"; otherwise Cessna would have to undergo type certification for each different upgrade, which they didn't.

Brian V

Andrew Ovans

133
Posts

#4 Posted: 12/15/2009 12:45:25

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/MainFrame?OpenFrameSet

If you look up a Type certificate, the FAA clearly indicates the model of an aircraft as a 150, with a 150M a different model. It doesn't matter who is right or wrong, it isn't each FSDO's deal to prove anything about themselves. They represent the FAR's. We all know a FAR can be twisted this way or that to make it make sense to your application.

Each model of aircraft (say 150 since we are talking about the 150) is equipped differently. Different materials, instruments, engine, prop, Etc....all have different parts from model to model. Just because I have a certain prop on my 150 doesn't mean I can just swap parts with another (any model) 150.

The only true 150, is the first model built. It was built for 3 years. In 1961, it became the 150A. The only way the endorsement would be "legal" is if the training was done, and the student is authorized solo privileges in a 150 built before 1961. Blame Cessna, not the FSDO.

On a more extreme side, the P-51 A is different than a B/C, and different than a D. Just because they look alike, they aren't the same airplane. These are all P-51's, but that is where it ends.

If you still think its wrong, look at published ref speeds over time on the 150. I haven't looked, but I will bet they are different from model to model. I know for sure the 172's have different Vx and Vy speeds over different models.