getting wings credit for activity?

[\__[Ô]__/]

I recently completed an instrument proficiency check. I'm trying to get wings credit for it from my CFII but my request for credit went to his old email and he couldn't log into the faasafety site. Since he's leaving soon for a summer job, he isn't going to have time to figure it out and validate it.

I have his signed endorsement saying i successfully completed the check. Is there any other way I can get wings credit for it?

 

[somorris]

Based on my experience, you need him to validate. He doesn't have to be where you are, he can do it from wherever he can find an internet connection. He may need to log in and change his e-mail Call him. I had to keep bugging last time until I got it done.

 

[\__[Ô]__/]

Yeah, I know he can do it anywhere with a network connection, but I think the bigger issue is that he doesn't care much for the program to begin with and it seemed like a hassle for him to get it working (in fairness, he did spend 20-30 minutes trying to get the account changed to his new email so he could get a password to log in)... if it had just worked for him he would have done it, but i doubt he's interested in putting a lot of effort into figuring it out. And I know he doesn't have much time to do it right now either. So I don't think bugging him is going to work. I was hoping there was some other option.

 

[kgruber]

It is too much trouble and not worth the time and frustration. Even AOPA, at a FIRC, suggested that the program is too broken to be worthwhile.

 

[poadeleted20]

Let your local FSDO FAASTeam Program Manager know about the problem. It should be reparable at that level.

 

[wsuffa]

With a logbook entry, all you need is some other kindly CFI to verify the logbook entry and then confirm it on the Wings site. The CFI that verifies on the Wings site need not be the same one that gave you the IPC or training.

 

[poadeleted20]

With a logbook entry, all you need is some other kindly CFI to verify the logbook entry and then confirm it on the Wings site. The CFI that verifies on the Wings site need not be the same one that gave you the IPC or training.

I don't know about you, Bill, but I don't verify for Wings credit training I didn't give unless I know and have communicated with the instructor who did the training.

 

[jnmeade]

I don't know about you, Bill, but I don't verify for Wings credit training I didn't give unless I know and have communicated with the instructor who did the training.

Is the second CFI certifying that the training was accomplished, or certifying that the training was logged? It would seem to me that the second CFI is only certifying that an entry for eligible activity was made.
I thought you said that a CFI could take another CFI's entry as substantiating training for a flight check, for example, a Subpart K CFI could accept a Subpart H CFI's log entry that instrument training had been conducted as required by the solo cross country FAR. Does a CFI have to know the training CFI to accept a spin training entry before recommending a CFI candidate for a check ride?

 

[poadeleted20]

Is the second CFI certifying that the training was accomplished, or certifying that the training was logged? It would seem to me that the second CFI is only certifying that an entry for eligible activity was made.

That's my personal policy on this issue. Since every CFI has an account with FAASafety.gov and can validate any Wings events they complete, it should never be a problem for the instructor who did the training to do the validation. So, if that instructor chooses not to do that validation, I am not comfortable doing it based solely on a log entry without knowing why that instructor chose not to do so (and hearsay isn't enough for me in that situation).

I thought you said that a CFI could take another CFI's entry as substantiating training for a flight check, for example, a Subpart K CFI could accept a Subpart H CFI's log entry that instrument training had been conducted as required by the solo cross country FAR. Does a CFI have to know the training CFI to accept a spin training entry before recommending a CFI candidate for a check ride?

That's another story entirely. The regulations governing practical tests do not require the recommending instructor to do more than check that the training has been logged as required by the regulations. If, for example, the instructor who conducted the spin training logged it so anyone reviewing the log entry can see that all the elements required by the regulation were completed (usually done by citing the regulation in the log entry), then the recommending instructor can endorse that trainee for the CFI ride. OTOH, if the log entry just says "Spin Training" with the providing instructor's signature, then I could not endorse that person for the CFI ride, since that entry does not document fulfillment of the regulatory requirements.

 

[\__[Ô]__/]

With a logbook entry, all you need is some other kindly CFI to verify the logbook entry and then confirm it on the Wings site. The CFI that verifies on the Wings site need not be the same one that gave you the IPC or training.

Thanks, this is what i ended up doing. Don't know why I forgot I could have any CFI do it. I found one who knows both me and my other CFI and he was happy to do it.

It is too much trouble and not worth the time and frustration. Even AOPA, at a FIRC, suggested that the program is too broken to be worthwhile.

I probably wouldn't do wings stuff just to do wings stuff, but I figure if I'm doing the work anyway, I might as well get credit if I can.

That's my personal policy on this issue. Since every CFI has an account with FAASafety.gov and can validate any Wings events they complete, it should never be a problem for the instructor who did the training to do the validation. So, if that instructor chooses not to do that validation, I am not comfortable doing it based solely on a log entry without knowing why that instructor chose not to do so (and hearsay isn't enough for me in that situation).

Hadn't thought of that, but it makes perfect sense. Yeah, if someone came to me wanting me to validate work they did with someone else, I guess I would want to know why the other CFI didn't do it. In my case the guy who's validating it knows both of us and understands why the other guy can't do it. I've also run across many CFIs who don't do any Wings stuff and wouldn't be interested in validating activities.

 

[wsuffa]

I've also run across many CFIs who don't do any Wings stuff and wouldn't be interested in validating activities.

Unfortunately, there are quite a few like that.

Since the IPC counts, no reason you shouldn't take credit for it, do another credit, and do the requisite online courses (extending your BFR at the same time).

But I also respect Ron's decision to endorse only under limited circumstances.

 

[denverpilot]

This is why you discuss these things up front. The CFI certainly knows if he's kept his contact info current with the Wings website, and your only trump card is up front before you pay. Plus it's a better way to do business.

After that, you're completely at the mercy of his disorganized life.

What's it take him? Five minutes to toss an e- mail to his FAASTeam rep to fix it?

Now your only trump card is not to hire him or her again. But it's a tad unfair since you didn't communicate that you desired Wings credit up front.

That said, there's a lot of old CFIs out there who couldn't figure out how to drive a web browser faster than an hour and a half to even find the FAASTeam website, let alone log in, who's aviation skills are worth learning.

YMMV. I say forget it, but learn to ask up front next time, unless you feel like dragging the CFI into using a system they obviously found no value in, prior to your phone call. But it's your call if it's worth it to you.

 

[jnmeade]

I probably wouldn't do wings stuff just to do wings stuff, but I figure if I'm doing the work anyway, I might as well get credit if I can.

It may help document training which you can use to reduce insurance rates or demonstrate recurrent training if that ever becomes an issue. As you say - you're dong the work anyway, it doesn't hurt to have it documented.

 

[denverpilot]

It may help document training which you can use to reduce insurance rates or demonstrate recurrent training if that ever becomes an issue. As you say - you're dong the work anyway, it doesn't hurt to have it documented.

Never seen any of our insurers or ones we've quoted ask about Wings... which gives direct feedback on its results, perhaps.

Not on the forms, so the Actuaries must not see any change in the numbers.