flyingcheesehead
Touchdown! Greaser!
Just wondering if anyone's had a chance to review the proposed changes to Part 61 yet?
A few things caught my eye: (item number, reg number)
15) 61.31(d)(2) This reg is odd, and looking at the FAA's proposal to delete it, shouldn't even exist in the first place. "Supervised PIC?"
26) 61.51(e)(1)(iv) Yet another way to log PIC... By performing the duties of PIC while under the supervision of a qualified PIC. When I first read the summary, I thought maybe that would allow someone doing the "supervised solo" under 61.129(b)(iv) to log PIC but that doesn't appear to be the case. It looks like some kind of non-CFI training type of thing that won't really apply to us little guys.
30,31) 61.57 c,d,f,g
I can't really tell what the change is for when you need an IPC, or the currency period itself.
The rest of the changes are being discussed in "Cleared for the approach."
37) 61.65 d-f
10 hours of the 50 XC PIC time for an instrument rating must be in the category of aircraft for which an instrument rating is sought. For instance, if I was going to add Instrument-Helicopter I'd have to do at least 10 more hours of XC PIC in a helicopter instead of just counting airplane time. Makes sense.
57) 61.129(a)(3)(i) Clarifies what types of instrument training are required for commercial students but actually specifies a "view-limiting device." I may send a comment in on this, as training in actual IMC kicks the crap out of any view-limiting device.
62) 61.129(a)(3)(iii) et al This one's a biggie. It would allow the dual commercial cross countries to be performed either IFR or VFR, whereas right now they're required to be done VFR. I bet Ron Levy will chime in on this one! I dunno if I agree with their reasoning either (that many students are working on IR/Comm concurrently, so let them do the XC's IFR). Odd.
64) 61.129(a)(4) et al would allow the solo XC requirements for all categories and classes to be CFI-"supervised" solo similar to how the multi requirements are now. They're claiming that insurance requirements have made this necessary, but IMHO any insurance carrier that demands an instructor aboard for a cross country needs to die, now.
73) 61.195(c) 1-2 would require any instrument training for commercial and ATP certificates be given by a CFII. Currently, a CFII is only required for doing instrument ratings.
What say y'all to these and the rest of the changes?
A few things caught my eye: (item number, reg number)
15) 61.31(d)(2) This reg is odd, and looking at the FAA's proposal to delete it, shouldn't even exist in the first place. "Supervised PIC?"
26) 61.51(e)(1)(iv) Yet another way to log PIC... By performing the duties of PIC while under the supervision of a qualified PIC. When I first read the summary, I thought maybe that would allow someone doing the "supervised solo" under 61.129(b)(iv) to log PIC but that doesn't appear to be the case. It looks like some kind of non-CFI training type of thing that won't really apply to us little guys.
30,31) 61.57 c,d,f,g
I can't really tell what the change is for when you need an IPC, or the currency period itself.
The rest of the changes are being discussed in "Cleared for the approach."37) 61.65 d-f
10 hours of the 50 XC PIC time for an instrument rating must be in the category of aircraft for which an instrument rating is sought. For instance, if I was going to add Instrument-Helicopter I'd have to do at least 10 more hours of XC PIC in a helicopter instead of just counting airplane time. Makes sense.
57) 61.129(a)(3)(i) Clarifies what types of instrument training are required for commercial students but actually specifies a "view-limiting device." I may send a comment in on this, as training in actual IMC kicks the crap out of any view-limiting device.
62) 61.129(a)(3)(iii) et al This one's a biggie. It would allow the dual commercial cross countries to be performed either IFR or VFR, whereas right now they're required to be done VFR. I bet Ron Levy will chime in on this one! I dunno if I agree with their reasoning either (that many students are working on IR/Comm concurrently, so let them do the XC's IFR
). Odd.64) 61.129(a)(4) et al would allow the solo XC requirements for all categories and classes to be CFI-"supervised" solo similar to how the multi requirements are now. They're claiming that insurance requirements have made this necessary, but IMHO any insurance carrier that demands an instructor aboard for a cross country needs to die, now.
73) 61.195(c) 1-2 would require any instrument training for commercial and ATP certificates be given by a CFII. Currently, a CFII is only required for doing instrument ratings.
What say y'all to these and the rest of the changes?
