Fully Functioning Dual Controls

[Greg Bockelman]

I know that in order to give or receive dual instruction in an airplane it must have fully functioning dual controls. But what does that mean in practice? I know that a throw over style yoke such that one might find in a Bonanza or Cessna 195 does not qualify, but what about an airplane that has a single control stick in between the two pilots? I have a guy that says it is legal, but I am not sure.

 

[RotorAndWing]

I know that in order to give or receive dual instruction in an airplane it must have fully functioning dual controls. But what does that mean in practice? I know that a throw over style yoke such that one might find in a Bonanza or Cessna 195 does not qualify, but what about an airplane that has a single control stick in between the two pilots? I have a guy that says it is legal, but I am not sure.

Does both pilots have rudder pedals? Can they both reach the throttle?

If the stick is between the 2 front seats (side by side) I don't see a problem.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Yes and yes. I don't either, but the way the FAA looks at things . . .

Another piece to the puzzle is that the only brake is a bicycle style brake handle that is mounted on the control stick.

 

[RotorAndWing]

Yes and yes. I don't either, but the way the FAA looks at things . . .

You're hangin' around Levy too much.



In Order 8900.2 it discusses giving a practical test with such aircraft:

d. Aircraft with Single Controls. At the discretion of the examiner, an aircraft furnished
by the applicant may have a single set of controls. Tests for the addition of aircraft category,
class, or aircraft type ratings to private and commercial pilot certificates may be conducted in
single-control aircraft under the provisions of § 61.45(e).

And..........

91.109 Flight instruction; Simulated instrument flight and certain flight tests.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free balloon) that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully functioning dual controls. However, instrument flight instruction may be given in an airplane that is equipped with a single, functioning throwover control wheel that controls the elevator and ailerons, in place of fixed, dual controls, when—
(1) The instructor has determined that the flight can be conducted safely; and
(2) The person manipulating the controls has at least a private pilot certificate with appropriate category and class ratings.
(b) An airplane equipped with a single, functioning throwover control wheel that controls the elevator and ailerons, in place of fixed, dual controls may be used for flight instruction to conduct a flight review required by § 61.56 of this chapter, or to obtain recent flight experience or an instrument proficiency check required by § 61.57 when—
(1) The airplane is equipped with operable rudder pedals at both pilot stations;
(2) The pilot manipulating the controls is qualified to serve and serves as pilot in command during the entire flight;
(3) The instructor is current and qualified to serve as pilot in command of the airplane, meets the requirements of § 61.195(b), and has logged at least 25 hours of pilot-in-command flight time in the make and model of airplane; and
(4) The pilot in command and the instructor have determined the flight can be conducted safely.

 

[RotorAndWing]

And this : https://bonanza.org/forums/index.php?topic=2899.0

 

[poadeleted20]

With the exception of the throwover yoke under the restrictions in 91.109, the FAA Chief Counsel is on record as saying the instructor must always have access to the basic flight controls (pitch, roll, and yaw*) as well as power control (throttle). The question of a fixed central stick (as opposed to a throwover yoke) has not to my knowledge been addressed explicitly, but since they're happy with a single central engine control set always in the instructor's reach, I see no reason why they'd have a problem with that central stick, and since it's always in the instructor's reach, I don't see that being subject to the same restrictions as a throwover yoke.

* Pedal-less Ercoupes notwithstanding.

 

[JHW]

the throwover exemption is not longer needed for (single engine) beechcraft. Does it still apply to the 195?

 

[Greg Bockelman]

the throwover exemption is not longer needed for (single engine) beechcraft. Does it still apply to the 195?

Not sure. I don't have a problem with it in a Beechcraft, but not sure how I would feel about it in a 195. Not sure why. I am sure the insurance companies would have something to say about it.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Oh, BTW, Thanks, Ron. That is more or less what I thought about it. Was just covering my bases.

 

[poadeleted20]

the throwover exemption is not longer needed for (single engine) beechcraft. Does it still apply to the 195?

For the 195, if you stay within the parameters of 91.109 (a) and (b), no exemption would be needed unless there is something in the C-195 type certificate or an AD or the like, and I don't think there is. OTOH, for a single-engine Beechcraft as well as the 195, if you go beyond the parameters of 91.109(a)/(b), the exemption would still be necessary.

 

[gismo]

Another piece to the puzzle is that the only brake is a bicycle style brake handle that is mounted on the control stick.

FWIW, dual brakes have never been required for anything. And AFaIK there's no requirement for any brakes on either side other than the airplane's type certificate.

 

[jesse]

FWIW, dual brakes have never been required for anything. And AFaIK there's no requirement for any brakes on either side other than the airplane's type certificate.

That is my understanding as well. Lots of trainers don't have dual brakes. I don't have brakes in the majority of the aircraft I instruct in.

 

[EdFred]

I don't even have toe brakes in the Comanche. I had them in the Cherokee, but never used them near the end. I used the hand brake instead.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

FWIW, dual brakes have never been required for anything. And AFaIK there's no requirement for any brakes on either side other than the airplane's type certificate.

I understand that. It is just that the location of the brake handle is on the stick. Not that it makes THAT much difference, but it COULD be an issue.
I will just have to wait and see.

 

[poadeleted20]

That is my understanding as well. Lots of trainers don't have dual brakes. I don't have brakes in the majority of the aircraft I instruct in.

Most of the planes I've seen with dual controls but not dual toe brakes are Pipers with a central brake handle so the instructor can still stop the plane. Absent such a means of stopping the plane like that, I would decline to give primary training to someone not already pilot rated.

And yes, I know that Cubs have heel brakes, but they are dual heel brakes, so I lump them in.

 

[gismo]

Most of the planes I've seen with dual controls but not dual toe brakes are Pipers with a central brake handle so the instructor can still stop the plane. Absent such a means of stopping the plane like that, I would decline to give primary training to someone not already pilot rated.

And yes, I know that Cubs have heel brakes, but they are dual heel brakes, so I lump them in.

Copilot brakes are optional and somewhat rare on Bonanzas and even more so on Barons. Of course primary training in Bonanzas and especially Barons is also pretty rare.

 

[jesse]

Copilot brakes are optional and somewhat rare on Bonanzas and even more so on Barons. Of course primary training in Bonanzas and especially Barons is also pretty rare.

I have not given primary training in a Baron..but I have given primary training in Bonanzas where I did not have brakes. It's not a big deal.

 

[gismo]

I have not given primary training in a Baron..but I have given primary training in Bonanzas where I did not have brakes. It's not a big deal.

I wouldn't worry about it in a Bonanza unless the field was short and even then I'd expect anyone beyond solo would be reasonably competent with the brakes. In a Baron it's a little different due to the higher landing speed and greater static thrust. With no wind my airplane requires some (not much) braking to stop on a 5000 ft runway even if I touch down early and slowly.

 

[jesse]

I wouldn't worry about it in a Bonanza unless the field was short and even then I'd expect anyone beyond solo would be reasonably competent with the brakes. In a Baron it's a little different due to the higher landing speed and greater static thrust. With no wind my airplane requires some (not much) braking to stop on a 5000 ft runway even if I touch down early and slowly.

Sounds about right. I've found most people are reasonably competent with the brakes on a nosewheel after the first two or three flights.