New FAR 61.193 amendment

S

SLB

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Feb 23, 2025
Messages
114
Display Name
SLB
Home Airfield
KJST
I see the FAA has limited 'elective and specialized training' to certificated pilots only, instead of allowing them as part of the inital training curriculum. This includes"transition training to operate a new aircraft of the same category and class, aerobatic training, formation training, and mountain flying,” among others.
Article
What are considered 'others'? I get the aerobatic and formation restrictions, but mountain flying is particularly important for some of us...
Thoughts?
 
What is the problem that this is supposed to address?

What if your flight school runs out of Pipers and you have to transition to a Cessna?
 
SLB said:
I see the FAA has limited 'elective and specialized training' to certificated pilots only, instead of allowing them as part of the inital training curriculum. This includes"transition training to operate a new aircraft of the same category and class, aerobatic training, formation training, and mountain flying,” among others.
Article
What are considered 'others'? I get the aerobatic and formation restrictions, but mountain flying is particularly important for some of us...
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

can't see the article unless member of AOPA. Can you post more information?
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
What is the problem that this is supposed to address?

What if your flight school runs out of Pipers and you have to transition to a Cessna?
Click to expand...

Maybe the FAA is trying to tamp down excessive hours spent not concentrating on PPL basic training. CFI's padding the hours for financial gain not in the students best interest? Just guessing.
 
Half Fast said:
The problem of having an insufficient regulatory morass to justify a large bureaucracy. I'm sure there will be more to come.
Click to expand...
I did hear the supposition that it was the result of some young folks at the FAA making a name for themselves by rewriting the syllabus for PPL. That being said, it seems teaching student pilots acrobatics and formation flying is a poor decision.
 
SLB said:
I did hear the supposition that it was the result of some young folks at the FAA making a name for themselves by rewriting the syllabus for PPL. That being said, it seems teaching student pilots acrobatics and formation flying is a poor decision.
Click to expand...

Is that really going on often enough to require a new regulation?
 
"In addition to prohibiting elective and specialized training for student pilots, the FAA made clear its view that providing introductory flights to individuals with no intention of becoming pilots would fall outside of the privileges of a flight instructor certificate. The FAA said these flights would likely be considered air tours and a violation of the new FAR 61.193(c)."

And that, I suspect, is where all this originated, with the warbird operators skirting the commercial operation rules by claiming thrill rides were "instruction".
 
The AOPA article doesn't have a link to the actual proposed rule, or NPRM. That seems like a pretty big hole in the article.

If the language actually prohibits transition training into new airplanes, that's just dumb. Your student starts off in the school's 172 but then it breaks and he wants to switch to the 152. Nope, sorry, you're stuck in the 172, we can't provide you training for a new aircraft.

And as previously mentioned, mountain training for people living in the mountains.

I guess I get the genus of the intent, but if it's written as indicated in the AOPA article, it seems very poorly thought out.

Does anyone have a link to the NPRM? I couldn't find it.
 
Reading the CFR with changes in-line, I don’t interpret it to mean what AOPA or the FAA implies it means with respect to 61.193(a)(7).

9a1a64e397447053c2a4b102d719fe23.png
 
So discovery flights not allowed now? Students will actually need a student pilots license before first flight?
 
Looks like it's designed to crack down on air tours disguised as discovery flights, and "Part 134.5" operations where they throw a "student pilot" into the front seat of a pressurized twin for "cross country instruction".

However, it leaves some common operations that should be legal in question. Checkouts in additional aircraft types during training, high performance endorsements for a student pilot with a C182 for example, and providing intro flights when you don't have any clue whether that person is going to pursue a certificate (and they probably don't either).
 
Wasn't a relatively recent NYC crash and fire related to an operator that some claimed was doing sight seeing tours disguised as discovery flights? I don't remember the details and am too lazy to look them up. If so, seems lousy to change a rule based on one operator.
 
RussR said:
That one? That's old news. Why is AOPA just now writing an article about it? I figured they must be talking about a new change.
Click to expand...
They still have a stick up their a$$ about the warbird case. It took AOPA until now to create the most negative possible interpretation of this amendment so they can scare us with it.
 
bbchien said:
They don't want to allow spin training. Just "spin avoidance and don't get pregant go there".
So it occurs. There is just no logbook entry.
Click to expand...
Somehow the whopping 3 hours of training under the hood is a valid use of time, but how to recover from an incipient spin is beyond the pale. Madness.
 
My initial training was 53-54. My instructors were ex military. Yes indeed I had spin training. Fun fun fun!
Never ever would I think of using using rudder to tighten up an overshoot turn to final!
 
bonefishpete said:
So discovery flights not allowed now? Students will actually need a student pilots license before first flight?
Click to expand...
61.193 are Instructor Privileges. You don't need to be an instructor to provide a "discovery flight" under the FAA 25 mile rule covered in 91.146, 91.147 and 119.1.e.

A "student" would have been vetted per the TSA rules, have a logbook, and completed some ground school before a flight lesson. The "student" does not need the student certificate until ready to solo. But the IACRA process for the student certificate should have been started with the TSA review.
 
are we back to being allowed to call students students?
 
SLB said:
Somehow the whopping 3 hours of training under the hood is a valid use of time, but how to recover from an incipient spin is beyond the pale. Madness.
Click to expand...
A lot more people are killed by VFR into IMC than recoverable spins.
 
Dana said:
It might make it worse, by giving a pilot a false sense of security.
Click to expand...

Depends how you introduce it. My first VFR intentionally done into IMC was at 8.0hrs with a CFI/CFII in his 60s. He filed and had me fly.

It was a low broken layer with overcast above and the intent was to hop 15mi over to the next airport.

It was definitely an education in how easy it could be to be a statistic.
 
Dana said:
It might make it worse, by giving a pilot a false sense of security.
Click to expand...
Are there any statistics showing a change after it was introduced in the mid-50s but prior to around 1990 when they started reducing the total time requirement for an instrument rating?

And maybe some data after the reduction?
 
MauleSkinner said:
I doubt that the 3 hours of flight by reference to instruments does much to change that.
Click to expand...
It's not enough, but it's something. I doubt spin training does anything to reduce stall/spin accidents, since the unintentional ones are rarely recoverable anyway.

Dana said:
It might make it worse, by giving a pilot a false sense of security.
Click to expand...
The same could be said for almost any training.

TCABM said:
Depends how you introduce it. My first VFR intentionally done into IMC was at 8.0hrs with a CFI/CFII in his 60s. He filed and had me fly.

It was a low broken layer with overcast above and the intent was to hop 15mi over to the next airport.

It was definitely an education in how easy it could be to be a statistic.
Click to expand...
Same. I ticked over 10 hours on my first IMC flight, probably as we were shooting the ILS back in. It was a vivid illustration of why people get killed that way. Sky was overcast with bases between 400-700 feet. I took off from runway 320 and was in the left turn to 270 when we hit the clouds. INSTANTLY, I felt like I was turning right instead of left.

I had maybe a half hour under the hood before I got my private, just to do unusual attitudes. The rest of the training was done in actual. My CFI said "Congratulations, you now have more actual than I did when I got my instrument rating."

It was just the right way to be introduced - Scary enough to keep me from thinking I could do it, but probably enough that I'd be able to survive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top