Sport Pilot CFI Under Mosaic

[Pilot99B]

With sport pilot becoming a lot more useful under Mosaic, is there going to be any demand for sport pilot only CFIs?

 

[midlifeflyer]

I think the answer depends on two things.

Will the expansion of sport privileges to more “traditional” aircraft lead to more people opting for that initial certification level or just used as a fallback for already certified pilots? Flight schools with all LSA training fleets have existed for a few years. Out of curiosity, I contacted one I know. 100% of their students have private pilot candidates. Is that experience more universal? Will it continue? Dunno.

If there is an increase in sport pilot candidates, will the current CFI fleet simply train them too?

My WAG is that we will see more long term benefit from the innovations permissible within the consensus-based LSA certification space than a demand for sport-only instructors.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I would add the possibility that with the increased aircraft eligibility for Sport Pilots, there might be opportunity for a CFI-SP to give flight reviews to pilots with higher level certificates with a couple of caveats…
One, there would probably need to be some education for the general pilot population to know that a flight review given by a CFI-SP counts for everything else, and
Two, the CFI-SP would need to have a good enough reputation that higher-level certificate holders would choose him over a CFI-A.

 

[billsgs126]

Of the many, many pilots that I know, two . . . 2 . . . obtained Sport Pilot Certificates. (I know. This is an unscientific survey, under the current rules, and something MOSAIC is supposed to address.)

Neither had plans to do anything more than fly as a hobby. One upgraded to a Private several years after obtaining the Sport.

As I understand it, at least under the current rules, there is no advantage to the Student Pilot to use a CFI-S rather than a regular CFI.

 

[Dana]

I wouldn't say there's going to be any more "demand" for SP CFIs, but certainly more opportunity. You may see more high time private pilots obtaining a CFI-SP certificate, for example, since they don't have to deal with getting their commercial and instrument rating first. I've been it myself. And it's more attractive, now that that CFI-SP can instruct in the FBO's C-152 or 172 instead of being limited to pre-MOSAIC LSAs.

 

[Lowflynjack]

I had a friend who got his Sport Pilot License for Powered Parachutes. When he wanted to move to fixed-wing planes, he bought a Luscombe, which fit the Light Sport rules. Because he was already a pilot, he only had to have two instructors sign him off. Luckily for him, his Sport Pilot instructor was also a Private Pilot instructor, so when he decided to move up to Private Pilot, his previous instruction counted toward this.

Not sure how the new rules work, but I'd be thinking about this if I was a new student.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I had a friend who got his Sport Pilot License for Powered Parachutes. When he wanted to move to fixed-wing planes, he bought a Luscombe, which fit the Light Sport rules. Because he was already a pilot, he only had to have two instructors sign him off. Luckily for him, his Sport Pilot instructor was also a Private Pilot instructor, so when he decided to move up to Private Pilot, his previous instruction counted toward this.

Not sure how the new rules work, but I'd be thinking about this if I was a new student.

61.109(l) Permitted credit for flight training received from a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating. The holder of a sport pilot certificate may credit flight training received from a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating toward the aeronautical experience requirements of this section if the following conditions are met:

(1) The flight training was accomplished in the same category and class of aircraft for which the rating is sought;

(2) The flight instructor with a sport pilot rating was authorized to provide the flight training; and

(3) The flight training included either—

(i) Training on areas of operation that are required for both a sport pilot certificate and a private pilot certificate; or

(ii) For airplanes with a VH greater than 87 knots CAS, training on the control and maneuvering of an airplane solely by reference to the flight instruments, including straight and level flight, turns, descents, climbs, use of radio aids, and ATC directives, provided the training was received from a flight instructor with a sport pilot rating who holds an endorsement required by § 61.412(c).

 

[Noah Lorang]

I would add the possibility that with the increased aircraft eligibility for Sport Pilots, there might be opportunity for a CFI-SP to give flight reviews to pilots with higher level certificates with a couple of caveats…
One, there would probably need to be some education for the general pilot population to know that a flight review given by a CFI-SP counts for everything else, and
Two, the CFI-SP would need to have a good enough reputation that higher-level certificate holders would choose him over a CFI-A.

IANAL or a fed, but I'm not totally sure that this is true (though it would be nice if it were true). 61.413 covers the privileges of a CFI-S and saysa) If you hold a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, you are authorized, within the limits of your certificate and rating, to conduct ground training, flight training, certain checking events, and to issue endorsements related to:

(a) If you hold a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, you are authorized, within the limits of your certificate and rating, to conduct ground training, flight training, certain checking events, and to issue endorsements related to:
...
(6) A flight review or operating privilege for a sport pilot, or training to maintain or improve the skills of a sport pilot;

That suggests to me that a CFI-S is restricted to giving training to sport pilots and cannot provide that training to holders of higher level pilot certificates, even if they are only operating using sport pilot privileges -- they're still private (or commercial) pilots, not sport pilots.

MOSAIC added a 61.413(d) explicitly saying that CFI-S can be compensated, but made no other changes to 61.413 that I see, and none to 61.56.

I looked into this to try to answer the question of whether a CFI-S could now offer transition training to private/commercial pilots for aircraft like most of the RV family that are now sport eligible. The insurance requirements I have access to don't specify CFI-S vs CFI, so you could argue that a CFI-S would meet their requirements, and if the pilot was a sport pilot it would fall under 61.413(a)(6); I don't see how providing training to a non-sport pilot (even in a sport eligible aircraft) to maintain or improve skills would be allowed with just a CFI-S.

Am I missing anything?

 

[MauleSkinner]

IANAL or a fed, but I'm not totally sure that this is true (though it would be nice if it were true). 61.413 covers the privileges of a CFI-S and saysa) If you hold a flight instructor certificate with a sport pilot rating, you are authorized, within the limits of your certificate and rating, to conduct ground training, flight training, certain checking events, and to issue endorsements related to:



That suggests to me that a CFI-S is restricted to giving training to sport pilots and cannot provide that training to holders of higher level pilot certificates, even if they are only operating using sport pilot privileges -- they're still private (or commercial) pilots, not sport pilots.

MOSAIC added a 61.413(d) explicitly saying that CFI-S can be compensated, but made no other changes to 61.413 that I see, and none to 61.56.

I looked into this to try to answer the question of whether a CFI-S could now offer transition training to private/commercial pilots for aircraft like most of the RV family that are now sport eligible. The insurance requirements I have access to don't specify CFI-S vs CFI, so you could argue that a CFI-S would meet their requirements, and if the pilot was a sport pilot it would fall under 61.413(a)(6); I don't see how providing training to a non-sport pilot (even in a sport eligible aircraft) to maintain or improve skills would be allowed with just a CFI-S.

Am I missing anything?

61.303 (applicability to Sport Pilot rules) says

“This subpart applies to applicants for, and holders of, sport pilot certificates. It also applies to holders of recreational pilot certificates and higher, as provided in § 61.303.”

Since the subpart for Sport Pilots also applies to holders of higher certificates, they are eligible for the privileges of Sport Pilots, including taking instruction or flight review from a CFI-SP.

 

[Noah Lorang]

61.303 (applicability to Sport Pilot rules) says

“This subpart applies to applicants for, and holders of, sport pilot certificates. It also applies to holders of recreational pilot certificates and higher, as provided in § 61.303.”

Since the subpart for Sport Pilots also applies to holders of higher certificates, they are eligible for the privileges of Sport Pilots, including taking instruction or flight review from a CFI-SP.

Privileges and limitations of a CFI-S are in subpart K though, so the applicability of subpart J is kind of irrelevant. I agree that higher certificate pilots are eligible for the privileges of a sport pilot, but 61.413 is constraining on the instructor as to what they may do with their instructor certificate, not the recipient of instruction.

Interestingly, despite 61.413 referring to "the skills of a sport pilot", there is no definition of a "sport pilot" that I can find -- I interpret it to mean the "holder of a sport pilot certificate", but you could argue it's "anyone exercising the privileges of a sport pilot".

 

[Dana]

A CFI-SP I know has a letter (pre MOSAIC) from the FSDO saying he can do flight reviews and tailwheel endorsements in a light-sport aircraft for higher rated pilots, but I don't know exactly how it's worded.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Interestingly, despite 61.413 referring to "the skills of a sport pilot", there is no definition of a "sport pilot" that I can find -- I interpret it to mean the "holder of a sport pilot certificate", but you could argue it's "anyone exercising the privileges of a sport pilot".

61.303 doesn’t define “sport pilot,” but it clearly states to whom the term “sport pilot” applies.

Also, stolen from another board in a galaxy far, far away…
This was answered years ago by AFS-610. Here's their comment:

Can a subpart-K flight instructor (sport pilot instructor) give a private pilot a flight review? Does the private pilot still need to get another flight review to exercise private pilot privileges?

As long as the flight review is performed in a light sport aircraft, yes the sport pilot instructor can administer the flight review. Since private pilots already hold sport pilot privileges, and since 14 CFR 61.56 only requires a flight review be "given in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated", the one flight review will satisfy the requirement. (Jay Tevis, AFS-610, 04/25/2011)

 

[billsgs126]

A CFI-SP I know has a letter (pre MOSAIC) from the FSDO saying he can do flight reviews and tailwheel endorsements in a light-sport aircraft for higher rated pilots, but I don't know exactly how it's worded.

I'm certainly no expert. But I don't see why a letter is required. Class, Category, Type . . .. Meaning that a CFI-S can train anyone in an aircraft that complies with the existing (but quickly fading) Sport Pilot restrictions.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I'm certainly no expert. But I don't see why a letter is required. Class, Category, Type . . .. Meaning that a CFI-S can train anyone in an aircraft that complies with the existing (but quickly fading) Sport Pilot restrictions.

As I noted…

there would probably need to be some education for the general pilot population

 

[billsgs126]

(T)here would probably need to be some education for the general pilot population . . ..

Oh, I am more like a First Lieutenant pilot . . . certainly not a General pilot.

But, under the current rules, if a CFI-S offers training in a qualifying (LSA) aircraft, as I read what you have posted (and have read before) it counts regardless of the "student's" certificate.

Can a subpart-K flight instructor (sport pilot instructor) give a private pilot a flight review? Does the private pilot still need to get another flight review to exercise private pilot privileges?

As long as the flight review is performed in a light sport aircraft, yes the sport pilot instructor can administer the flight review. Since private pilots already hold sport pilot privileges, and since 14 CFR 61.56 only requires a flight review be "given in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated", the one flight review will satisfy the requirement. (Jay Tevis, AFS-610, 04/25/2011)

Again I will cite youth and inexperience, but I do not understand (and genuinely want to).

 

[Clip4]

With sport pilot becoming a lot more useful under Mosaic, is there going to be any demand for sport pilot only CFIs?

Why would a flight school manager want to hire a sport CFI and how much less do you believe they should be paid?

 

[Dana]

Why would a flight school manager want to hire a sport CFI and how much less do you believe they should be paid?

Well, the sport CFI won't leave them and their students in the lurch when an airline job is offered...

Our local FBO employs two CFIAs (who also double as charter pilots) and two sport CFIs who are very busy handling the sport students and tailwheel endorsements and yes, flight reviews in the Cub for pilots who don't want to do it in a spam can. I don't know how much less they're paid. It will be interesting to see how the dynamics change now that the sport CFIs can instruct in the 152 and 172.

 

[Half Fast]

Out of curiosity, I contacted one I know. 100% of their students have private pilot candidates. Is that experience more universal? Will it continue? Dunno.

I know that First Landings in Apopka, FL, has specialized in SP training. At one time, they could boast they had trained over 20% of all SPs in the country. I did both SP and PP there, and I'll be interested to see how their business model might change.

 

[Half Fast]

Well, the sport CFI won't leave them and their students in the lurch when an airline job is offered...

I had three CFIs leave for the airlines when I was training for SP. I complained to the school owner, and he put me with a sport CFI (who was a better instructor, BTW) since he was going to be around for a while, and he finished me up. I don't know what he was earning, but I'd be surprised to learn it was less than the other CFIs.

 

[billsgs126]

I had three CFIs leave for the airlines when I was training for SP. I complained to the school owner, and he put me with a sport CFI (who was a better instructor, BTW) since he was going to be around for a while, and he finished me up. I don't know what he was earning, but I'd be surprised to learn it was less than the other CFIs.

Having just obtained my commercial, I did not feel that I could do nearly as good of a job as a CFI as those who had taught me. Sure it was fresh, but I did not have an iota of the relevant experience.

I am not disrespecting CFIs, I had some great ones and know many other great ones. But, I also have heard about many with 300 hours and are just looking at getting to 1500 without accumulating more debt. I haven't read the final draft, but I would think that being a CFI-S would be a path that was more interesting to someone who had a desire to teach and stick around than to one looking for a stepping stone.

 

[Clip4]

Well, the sport CFI won't leave them and their students in the lurch when an airline job is offered...

Our local FBO employs two CFIAs (who also double as charter pilots) and two sport CFIs who are very busy handling the sport students and tailwheel endorsements and yes, flight reviews in the Cub for pilots who don't want to do it in a spam can. I don't know how much less they're paid. It will be interesting to see how the dynamics change now that the sport CFIs can instruct in the 152 and 172.

Your local FBO is nuts.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I haven't read the final draft, but I would think that being a CFI-S would be a path that was more interesting to someone who had a desire to teach and stick around than to one looking for a stepping stone.

It probably wouldn’t be more interesting, but if you aren’t eligible for a CFI-A, -I, etc., you’re more likely to not be on a “stepping stone” track. (Or as noted below, at least further away from the next stepping stone.)

 

[MauleSkinner]

Your local FBO is nuts.

Why?

 

[Clip4]

Having just obtained my commercial, I did not feel that I could do nearly as good of a job as a CFI as those who had taught me. Sure it was fresh, but I did not have an iota of the relevant experience.

I am not disrespecting CFIs, I had some great ones and know many other great ones. But, I also have heard about many with 300 hours and are just looking at getting to 1500 without accumulating more debt. I haven't read the final draft, but I would think that being a CFI-S would be a path that was more interesting to someone who had a desire to teach and stick around than to one looking for a stepping stone.

Possibly, but it can also be a path for someone with less financial resources to build 1500 hours and go to the airlines like a traditional CFI. They just have to get the IR and Comm later, t

 

[Clip4]

Why?

A sport CFI on the basic level is a private pilot instructing. If you are operating a flight school today, 75% of the brand spanking new CFI-As are neither very good pilots or good instructors. Here are some issues a school employing sport CFIs face.

1. Any time you employ less experienced CFIs, you are going to experience increased maintenance costs. Tires, engine damage, fender benders, undetected maintenance issues,
2. More liability with less experienced and qualified CFIs. We haven’t heard from insurance world yet and you will.
3, One of the issues with employees in any company is proper supervision. A flight school is going to have to better supervise these CFIs, just like a company does any time they hire less experienced and less trained employees.
4. Employee morale and dissatisfaction. Some on this forum tell me the CFIs at a school should submit to a customer interview process. If that’s occurring, the customer is going to gravitate away from the sport CFIs and the company isn’t going to allow the sport CFI to instruct in many of their aircraft the FAA says they are quailed to teach in, but the sport CFI certainly is going to believe he should be getting the same consideration as the CFI-A. If both sport and As are employed in the same setting, the sports will be treated as children of a lesser god. And if the company thinks the As should be helping or supervising the sports, that isn’t going fly either.

 

[MauleSkinner]

A sport CFI on the basic level is a private pilot instructing. If you are operating a flight school today, 75% of the brand spanking new CFI-As are neither very good pilots or good instructors. Here are some issues a school employing sport CFIs face.

1. Any time you employ less experienced CFIs, you are going to experience increased maintenance costs. Tires, engine damage, fender benders, undetected maintenance issues,
2. More liability with less experienced and qualified CFIs. We haven’t heard from insurance world yet and you will.
3, One of the issues with employees in any company is proper supervision. A flight school is going to have to better supervise these CFIs, just like a company does any time they hire less experienced and less trained employees.
4. Employee morale and dissatisfaction. Some on this forum tell me the CFIs at a school should submit to a customer interview process. If that’s occurring, the customer is going to gravitate away from the sport CFIs and the company isn’t going to allow the sport CFI to instruct in many of their aircraft the FAA says they are quailed to teach in, but the sport CFI certainly is going to believe he should be getting the same consideration as the CFI-A. If both sport and As are employed in the same setting, the sports will be treated as children of a lesser god. And if the company thinks the As should be helping or supervising the sports, that isn’t going fly either.

He gave no indication that these CFIs were inexperienced.

 

[billsgs126]

If both sport and As are employed in the same setting, the sports will be treated as children of a lesser god.

There are many businesses that require a college degree. Of those I am aware of, at the entry level, each that hires AAs (2-year degree) treats them differently than BAs (4-year degree).

 

[billsgs126]

He gave no indication that these CFIs were inexperienced.

In theory, under the existing rules a CFI-S could have half of the total time, half of the solo / PiC time, have zero Complex time, lack an IR, and have zero night time. Which I suppose does not matter if you are teaching someone to fly a Cub or Cessna 140 daytime VFR as a hobby.

Of course there are many CFI-Ss with oodles more time than a newly christened "regular" CFI.

 

[MauleSkinner]

In theory, under the existing rules a CFI-S could have half of the total time, half of the solo / PiC time, have zero Complex time, lack an IR, and have zero night time. Which I suppose does not matter if you are teaching someone to fly a Cub or Cessna 140 daytime VFR as a hobby.

Of course there are many CFI-Ss with oodles more time than a newly christened "regular" CFI.

And, in theory, a CFI-SP could be a 20,000-hour ATP who retired and quit renewing a medical before he decided to become an instructor.

Bottom line is that making an assumption about experience based solely on what ratings exist on one’s instructor certificate is pretty ridiculous.

 

[billsgs126]

Bottom line is that making an assumption about experience based solely on what ratings exist on one’s instructor certificate is pretty ridiculous.

I am not defending those who make assumptions . . . they make an ass-of-u-and-me . . . well . . . if you use ass-u-me, not ass-u-mptions. It's just that the band is broader and begins lower.

 

[Clip4]

He gave no indication that these CFIs were inexperienced

Minimally, they are lacking the flight training, which is experience, involved with the IR and commercial certificates. If they had both, they would not have opted for a sport CFIs cert.

The BS that less training equals provides a similar result is just that.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Minimally, they are lacking the flight training, which is experience, involved with the IR and commercial certificates. If they had both, they would not have opted for a sport CFIs cert.

true..but it saves them from the fallacy instrument and commercial experience has much value at the Sport Pilot level, allowing them to focus on more appropriate skills.

The BS that less training equals provides a similar result is just that.

A “similar result” isn’t necessarily a good thing.

 

[Half Fast]

true..but it saves them from the fallacy instrument and commercial experience has much value at the Sport Pilot level, allowing them to focus on more appropriate skills.

A “similar result” isn’t necessarily a good thing.

Not to mention that LSAs typically require better stick & rudder skills than 172s and Cherokees. Plus SP slow flight is tested to a more challenging requirement than PP, since SP did not fall under the new ACS and slow flight must still be demonstrated at minimum controllable airspeed.

 

[Dana]

A sport CFI on the basic level is a private pilot instructing. If you are operating a flight school today, 75% of the brand spanking new CFI-As are neither very good pilots or good instructors.

He gave no indication that these CFIs were inexperienced.

Exactly. This particular FBO has one experienced CFIAI who cancels his student's lesson whenever a charter comes up, and a shifting cast of younger CFIs who keep moving on. Meanwhile, the two CFI-SPs are older, have been flying small planes for years and have lots of hours in them, and instruct because they want to instruct, not to build hours. Who do you think is going to do a better job instructing a student who just wants to fly around in a Cub or similar on a nice day?

 

[Clip4]

Exactly. This particular FBO has one experienced CFIAI who cancels his student's lesson whenever a charter comes up, and a shifting cast of younger CFIs who keep moving on. Meanwhile, the two CFI-SPs are older, have been flying small planes for years and have lots of hours in them, and instruct because they want to instruct, not to build hours. Who do you think is going to do a better job instructing a student who just wants to fly around in a Cub or similar on a nice day?

I think what you are describing is the exception vs the norm in the training world on multiple levels.

 

[Clip4]

Not to mention that LSAs typically require better stick & rudder skills than 172s and Cherokees. Plus SP slow flight is tested to a more challenging requirement than PP, since SP did not fall under the new ACS and slow flight must still be demonstrated at minimum controllable airspeed.

Oh please. I have instructed for decades. I have never heard of a single student flunking a check ride for slow flight when it was minimum controllable in the private pilot practical test standard task VIII. A. That’s how tough it was.

 

[Kiddo's Driver]

A sport CFI on the basic level is a private pilot instructing. If you are operating a flight school today, 75% of the brand spanking new CFI-As are neither very good pilots or good instructors. Here are some issues a school employing sport CFIs face.

1. Any time you employ less experienced CFIs, you are going to experience increased maintenance costs. Tires, engine damage, fender benders, undetected maintenance issues,
2. More liability with less experienced and qualified CFIs. We haven’t heard from insurance world yet and you will.
3, One of the issues with employees in any company is proper supervision. A flight school is going to have to better supervise these CFIs, just like a company does any time they hire less experienced and less trained employees.
4. Employee morale and dissatisfaction. Some on this forum tell me the CFIs at a school should submit to a customer interview process. If that’s occurring, the customer is going to gravitate away from the sport CFIs and the company isn’t going to allow the sport CFI to instruct in many of their aircraft the FAA says they are quailed to teach in, but the sport CFI certainly is going to believe he should be getting the same consideration as the CFI-A. If both sport and As are employed in the same setting, the sports will be treated as children of a lesser god. And if the company thinks the As should be helping or supervising the sports, that isn’t going fly either.

I am interested to see what happens in the next year when my son picks up his Sport CFI & we look at him instructing in my newly Light Sport-compliant Socata Tampico.
Perhaps at some point, I will complete my CFI as well.
The town I live in is in a CFI desert. 45 minutes in any direction to get to one. I feel like there is an opportunity here.

 

[billsgs126]

I think what you are describing is the exception vs the norm in the training world on multiple levels.

The first level being that Sport Pilot training itself is the exception not the norm.

 

[MauleSkinner]

The first level being that Sport Pilot training itself is the exception not the norm.

And in the case of @Dana ’s FBO, it sounds like students might end up with a better training process if the started off with a Sport Pilot certificate working with the stable instructors, and then upgrading to Private and beyond with the time builders.

 

[billsgs126]

And in the case of @Dana ’s FBO, it sounds like students might end up with a better training process if the started off with a Sport Pilot certificate working with the stable instructors, and then upgrading to Private and beyond with the time builders.

I have stated on multiple occasions that I think that the "standard" track of having those who just obtained a Commercial and CFI teach is a horrible template. I have probably as often said that I benefited from multiple CFIs who were not looking to gain 1250 or so hours and leave. I know that I have said that I chose not to go the CFI route because it would be a horrendous disservice to those who taught me.

My trajectory is Commercial --> ATP. But there are so many who just want to buy a Ercoupe, 120, or Luscombe and have fun. In my opinion (which with $1.29 plus tax will buy you a doughnut) a CFI-S would likely be a more appropriate (and hence better) choice than a "regular" CFI.