FAA's view on type-specific transition training

FAA has a facebook :rofl:
 
Not only that there is a typo in their title.

Piltos: Find a flight instructor familiar with your aircraft type
Click to expand...

I are a pilto. :D
 
RotorAndWing said:
No it's not, it's a suggestion.
Click to expand...
Yes, what's in that video is a suggestion, but as I actually said (as opposed to how you chose to interpret I said), that recommendation is also in plenty of guidance such as AC's and Handbooks. In any event, it should provide some insight into what the new Manager of the General Aviation and Commercial Division (which writes all those Part 61 rules) thinks.

Or are you trying to say that getting appropriate type-specific training before flying a new type is not part of any FAA guidance?
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Yes, what's in that video is a suggestion, but there's plenty of guidance behind that suggestion in the AC's and Handbooks. In any event, it should provide some insight into what the FAA thinks.
Click to expand...

That video is what Mr. Viola thinks. Bottom line, there is nothing regulatory about type specific check outs for any single or twin below 12,500 (excluding endorsements).

Please stop trying to convince anyone this is "policy" or any such nonsense. It's a Facebook video (not very well done) of his opinion.

And please try to understand what "guidance" means versus regulatory. :rolleyes2: Even John Duncan has stated that regulation will take precedence over guidance.
 
RotorAndWing said:
That video is what Mr. Viola thinks. Bottom line, there is nothing regulatory about type specific check outs for any single or twin below 12,500 (excluding endorsements).

Please stop trying to convince anyone this is "policy" or any such nonsense. It's a Facebook video (not very well done) of his opinion.

And please try to understand what "guidance" means versus regulatory. :rolleyes2: Even John Duncan has stated that regulation will take precedence over guidance.
Click to expand...

Is the FAA really that lax?

If I posted a video with my own opinions and advice, represented as though they were NASA's, I'd be in a heap of trouble and the video would last a few milliseconds.

The agency's opinions are determined by the Administrator or those he delegates the authority to.
 
MAKG1 said:
Is the FAA really that lax?

If I posted a video with my own opinions and advice, represented as though they were NASA's, I'd be in a heap of trouble and the video would last a few milliseconds.

The agency's opinions are determined by the Administrator or those he delegates the authority to.
Click to expand...

I'm sure if John Duncan saw that incredibly **** poor video and the caption that couldn't even spell "pilot" correctly Mr. Viola would have some explaining to do.

If Mr. Viola does another video and says "I don't like hamburgers, I prefer hot dogs when I go on my Saturday morning $100 "hot dog run", then Ron would be here telling us it's now "policy" not to call it a "hamburger run" and "I'm just showing you what the FAA thinks on the subject". :rolleyes2:
 
He even says in the video that you can fly with a private certificate but you should get checked out.

"Both airplanes you can fly with your private pilot certificate but you should get checked out."
 
gitmo234 said:
He even says in the video that you can fly with a private certificate but you should get checked out.

"Both airplanes you can fly with your private pilot certificate but you should get checked out."
Click to expand...

Not bad advice, but don't look at it as policy or anything else but a suggestion.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Ron.....were you holding the camera for that? :hairraise:
Click to expand...

Thanks *******, i now have coffee all over my computer monitor :rofl::rofl::rofl:

There's a bigger issue here (If it is actual guidance). The gentleman in the video has put out incorrect advice which appears to be from the FAA, and pilots could potentially act upon, because he said directly that you "should" but dont have to get checked out
 
gitmo234 said:
Thanks *******, i now have coffee all over my computer monitor :rofl::rofl::rofl:

There's a bigger issue here (If it is actual guidance). The gentleman in the video has put out incorrect advice which appears to be from the FAA, and pilots could potentially act upon, because he said directly that you "should" but dont have to get checked out
Click to expand...

you laugh....but he was there. I seen him heckling the NTSB lady. :nono:
 
The guy's right. When I moved from my lovely little Cessna 150 to my Cherokee I didn't need a checkout or anything according to the rules. I was good to go. I still did more than a few laps around the pattern with a CFI though, and was glad I did.
 
RotorAndWing said:
That video is what Mr. Viola thinks. Bottom line, there is nothing regulatory about type specific check outs for any single or twin below 12,500 (excluding endorsements).

Please stop trying to convince anyone this is "policy" or any such nonsense. It's a Facebook video (not very well done) of his opinion.

And please try to understand what "guidance" means versus regulatory. :rolleyes2: Even John Duncan has stated that regulation will take precedence over guidance.
Click to expand...
You really should stop saying I said things I didn't say, and then chastising me for what I didn't say, and then accusing me of twisting words.
 
Last edited:
So do we think that the FAA folks can only speak to the actual FARs and not to what might be a very good idea? If you are willing to listen to advice and suggestions from CFIs and your fellow pilots, why not from the guy at the FSDO? Or don't you consider them to be a reliable voice of experience and knowledge?
 
I thought it was a joke. There may be a few rogue guys out there, but I thought everyone got a checkout to fly a new type. For the few that don't, I highly doubt that PSA is going to make the difference.
 
Noticed that "piltos" is fixed today, after a big hint. :rofl:

As far as the content goes, nothing wrong with a suggestion, but it does not even come close to policy.
 
Kritchlow said:
I thought it was a joke. There may be a few rogue guys out there, but I thought everyone got a checkout to fly a new type. For the few that don't, I highly doubt that PSA is going to make the difference.
Click to expand...
I've found that insurance companies tend to ensure that (whether owned or renting) a pilot does need an appropriate checkout before flying a new airplane solo.

Yes, of course there are probably a few rogues out there.....but I'm willing to bet those rogues don't pay attention to the FAA's FB page, let alone anything else the Feds might put out 'officially'.
 
I agree with the notion that when flying a new type you need a checkout from an instructor with time in that type.

When my club got our Cardinal RG insurance required a checkout. I flew with an instructor who I was told was good at this sort of thing, and after a 'checkout' that consisted of an hour of ADF holds I asked him some type specfic questions and it came out that we were both on our first flights in a Cardinal RG.

The Cardinal isn't the Space Shuttle, but like most airplanes it has quirks and techniques that can only be learned by flying one. That CFI wasted my time and money.

Respectfully Ron, I'm a little confused by your take that this video carries some kind of legal weight.

For example, in our discussions on GA simulators and part task trainers, we've discussed when that sort of training can and can't be logged for different purposes.

People have pointed out that different flight schools have offical FSDO letters spelling out exactly how these devices may be used.

When you disagree with these FSDO letters you point out that a FSDO letter really means nothing, only the Chief Counsel can issue official guidance.

So which is it?

This is my core problem with the way the FAA handles it's regulatory duties. In reality there is no 'FAA' when it comes to GA operations.

The rules are whatever the particular FAA employee you're dealing with thinks they are, and are subject to instant change by some other FAA employee.
 
So what do we do when there is only one seat. How do pilots ever learn how to fly single seat aircraft?

Reading the aircraft flight manual/POH and talking to someone that has already flown the type should be enough for an appropriately rated pilot to get in, fly and learn the new aircraft on their own.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Reading the aircraft flight manual/POH and talking to someone that has already flown the type should be enough for an appropriately rated pilot to get in, fly and learn the new aircraft on their own.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what Yeager and Robin Olds did back in the day when they got in a new jet :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top