Logging requirements for taking a CFI checkride?

[PeterNSteinmetz]

This is related to my other thread on lesson plans. But I am trying to figure out now exactly what is required to be logged to take a CFI checkride. 61.183 seems to list the eligibility requirements, which include the endorsements on training in specific knowledge areas and flight operations, but I don't see any requirement that you have to have logged specific ground instruction on these areas.

Is there an FAA circular, handbook, or order that requires this?

I have been dealing with an examiner who was quite insistent that this was required, but I can't find that authority right now.

Can any CFIs or DPEs comment on this?

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

OK, partially answered my own question. 61.185 (a)(2) states "
(a) A person who is applying for a flight instructor certificate must receive and log ground training from an authorized instructor on:

(2) The aeronautical knowledge areas for a recreational, private, and commercial pilot certificate applicable to the aircraft category for which flight instructor privileges are sought; and"

But is there any guidance on how much? And whether such training must be logged specifically for each of those areas?

I am also curious if that is a typical requirement by an examiner?

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

If it isn't logged specifically for each of those areas, it didn't happen.

Thanks. Interesting. So for example, there needs to be a log entry stating that on a certain date, the applicant was given ground instruction on "Applicable Federal Aviation Regulations of this chapter that relate to recreational pilot privileges, limitations, and flight operations;" for 61.81 (b)(1). And another similar for 61.18 (b)(2), and so on through (b)(12)(ii).

It can't say, "provided ground instruction on applicable Federal Aviation regulations relating to Recreational pilot, Private pilot, and Commercial pilot certificates".

Is a requirement for this level of detail common from DPEs? And if so, is there an FAA advisory circular, handbook, or order that specifies this?

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

ac 61.65H, appendix A, has sample endorsements.

Right, for the endorsements they have to be fairly precise. But my question regards the logging of the ground instruction required by 61.185(a)(2). How specific does that need to be? In addition to the required endorsement.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Same.

Thanks. And do you know if there is anyplace where such a requirement is spelled out officially. Like an advisory circular, handbook, order, or regulation? I did a quick search and didn't find that level of specificity in the Order 8900.2C, but may just be missing it.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

When I took my ATP Airplane ME checkride, the DPE basically had me demonstrate and explain all the airwork maneuvers as I did them and six days later I returned for my MEI ride after a 1.3 hour flight with a CFI.

So in preparing for that checkride, did he require in review of your logbooks that each required knowledge was explicitly mentioned in an entry? So he could check them off on a checklist?

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

They’ve seen the endorsements enough they know what they look like. Some will use a checklist some don’t. Doesn’t matter to you anyway, you need them and as a CFI candidate need to know how to write them as well. Your reference material you might be using to discuss endorsements and which ones are needed should include the AC. Nowadays it’ll be a scenario: You want to solo your student. What exact endorsements have you given already and what do you need to add?

Yes, I understand that about the endorsements. What I am concerned about here is the level of logging required for each knowledge element required.

From what others say, it seems the DPEs are moving in this direction of more detailed logging, but where is this actually spelled out? And how would a new CFI applicant know this is the way it is supposed to be done?

It seems that the FAA should be examining to the written standards that any student can look at. So where are those?

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Nope. I had two endorsements in my logbook and that's all he needed.

Had I walked in cold off the street, he may have looked deeper, but we had a good discussion of multi-engine subjects and endorsements during the (very brief) oral eval.

Thanks for the report. And this was fairly recently, is that correct?