Questions for CFIs

[SkyHog]

Hello,

I have some questions regarding legality of logbooks I wanted to go over before I start to implement them into my electronic logbook. IF one were to scan a logbook endorsement and input it to a computer, would that scan still be a legal and valid endorsement, should the original logbook get lost?

Also: Which logbook endorsements would you say are the most popular ones that I should include by default with the logbook (it would be customizeable to add more later). Is there a standard place to get the wording of these endorsements? My hardcopy logbook has them, but I don't know if they're still validly worded.

 

[cherokeeflyboy]

Take a look at AC 61-65 available on line
APPENDIX 1. CONTENTS - INSTRUCTOR ENDORSEMENTS
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/01bd2ad02302ca9f862569b90070939b/$FILE/AC61-65D.pdf

 

[SkyHog]

Take a look at AC 61-65 available on line
APPENDIX 1. CONTENTS - INSTRUCTOR ENDORSEMENTS
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/01bd2ad02302ca9f862569b90070939b/$FILE/AC61-65D.pdf

Sweet! Thanks for that, that will be an immense help!

 

[poadeleted20]

IF one were to scan a logbook endorsement and input it to a computer, would that scan still be a legal and valid endorsement, should the original logbook get lost?

I do not believe the FAA has ever explicitly addressed the issue of whether a copy of an endorsement is a valid endorsement. However, I also do not believe the FAA has ever violated anyone over having a copy rather than the original if the original has been lost/destroyed.

Also: Which logbook endorsements would you say are the most popular ones that I should include by default with the logbook (it would be customizeable to add more later).

I'm not sure "popular" is the issue -- "required" is. Thus, every 61.56 flight review, 61.31 additional training endorsement, etc., would have to be included.

 

[SkyHog]

I'm not sure "popular" is the issue -- "required" is. Thus, every 61.56 flight review, 61.31 additional training endorsement, etc., would have to be included.

You misunderstand me here, I'm looking for the ones used most often by CFIs to include with the logbook program I'm writing. The ability to add more will be there, but I want it to ship with a bunch preloaded.

 

[poadeleted20]

You misunderstand me here, I'm looking for the ones used most often by CFIs to include with the logbook program I'm writing. The ability to add more will be there, but I want it to ship with a bunch preloaded.

Don't bother -- they change too darn often. I'm still facing logbooks with blank endorsements made obsolete by the August 1997 Part 61 changes. Too many instructors sign them without read them carefully to see if they're the old or current wordings, creating problems for examiners and subsequent instructors, not to mention their trainee. I recommend leaving them out, and letting the instructors go to the version of AC 61-65 that is current when they do the training to get the right words.

 

[gismo]

Don't bother -- they change too darn often. I'm still facing logbooks with blank endorsements made obsolete by the August 1997 Part 61 changes. Too many instructors sign them without read them carefully to see if they're the old or current wordings, creating problems for examiners and subsequent instructors, not to mention their trainee. I recommend leaving them out, and letting the instructors go to the version of AC 61-65 that is current when they do the training to get the right words.

But this one is "electronic". With a little more work Nick could probably incorporate a means to download the latest wording right out of AC 61-65 each time they changed.

 

[poadeleted20]

But this one is "electronic". With a little more work Nick could probably incorporate a means to download the latest wording right out of AC 61-65 each time they changed.

If Nick can figure out how to get his logbook system to automatically check the FAA web site for AC 61-65 updates (the way, say, Adobe Acrobat Reader checks for updates every time it starts), and then change any blank endorsements to match, more power to him. If not, I'd say skip it.

 

[SkyHog]

But this one is "electronic". With a little more work Nick could probably incorporate a means to download the latest wording right out of AC 61-65 each time they changed.

If Nick can figure out how to get his logbook system to automatically check the FAA web site for AC 61-65 updates (the way, say, Adobe Acrobat Reader checks for updates every time it starts), and then change any blank endorsements to match, more power to him. If not, I'd say skip it.

Well, I'll have to see what I can do. The problem will be if the FAA ever restructures their website, the links will break.

Unless I manually take if from them, put it in data and then grab the data from a different location. That's what I'll likely do....

But then I gotta work on a disclaimer since I'll be manually providing the data. Typos could be a big deal.

 

[poadeleted20]

Sounds too hard to me -- let the instructors do their jobs.

 

[gismo]

If Nick can figure out how to get his logbook system to automatically check the FAA web site for AC 61-65 updates (the way, say, Adobe Acrobat Reader checks for updates every time it starts), and then change any blank endorsements to match, more power to him. If not, I'd say skip it.

There ya go Nick. You said you liked a challenge.