Tailwheel instruction at Gaston's?

Diana

Diana

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
6,163
Location
Southwest MO
Display Name
Display name:
Diana
Will there be anyone at Gaston's with a taildragger that is insured for instruction? Someone asked me about the possibility of getting some tailwheel instruction during that weekend sometime. Ours isn't insured for flight training.
 
YGBSM

Diana said:
Will there be anyone at Gaston's with a taildragger that is insured for instruction? Someone asked me about the possibility of getting some tailwheel instruction during that weekend sometime. Ours isn't insured for flight training.
Click to expand...
 
Out of curiosity, just what is it that our young pilot who is a regular wants to accomplish?
 
Honestly, I'd be interested in doing something like this myself. I've always wanted a little tailwheel time.
 
I'd love to get a TW endorsement! It's on the list of things to do!
 
There might be someone -- It'd probably be rather hard for anyone to get an actual tailwheel endorsement in as that takes some time..but..quite possible I suppose.
 
Hi Guys,

Diana said:
Nope. It was a question sent to me by one of our young pilots who is a regular on these forums. :)
Click to expand...

That guy is me...(Thanks Diana for checking for me:))

Greg Bockelman said:
Out of curiosity, just what is it that our young pilot who is a regular wants to accomplish?
Click to expand...

While I realize that

Diana said:
Eventually get a TW endorsement.

(Dave, I wasn't planning to out you this soon. ;))
Click to expand...

is pretty unrealistic for such a period of time, I would most definitely be interested in an "intro" to TW. My thinking is that there is going to be more than enough qualified planes/pilots, I've just been having trouble finding an insurable plane....I most definitely would not want to take away from someone's vacation time, however:no:

Have a good evening,

Thanks,

Brent
 
Brent, from my experience at Gaston's, you'll find no trouble getting some stick time, but making it into significant and loggable instructional time may be tougher- there's a lot of flying to be done, and a lot of people wanting to fly!
 
I'd love to get recurrent with the tailwheel too. It's been three years since I flew one.
 
Diana said:
Will there be anyone at Gaston's with a taildragger that is insured for instruction? Someone asked me about the possibility of getting some tailwheel instruction during that weekend sometime. Ours isn't insured for flight training.
Click to expand...

It's only flight training after the flight is completed ;)
 
Let me guess. Was this written by someone who has obviously never dealt with a knowledgeable adjuster?

EdFred said:
It's only flight training after the flight is completed ;)
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Let me guess. Was this written by someone who has obviously never dealt with a knowledgeable adjuster?
Click to expand...

Naw, he's never had anything go wrong.
 
SCCutler said:
Naw, he's never had anything go wrong.
Click to expand...

Obviously, if he thinks what's written in the logs has much to do with how the adjuster will evaluate the claim. I'm guessing maybe 5% (at most) of aircraft accidents have anything in the log regarding the circumstances.

Avemco says 50% of their claims are from ground damage. What logbook entry would you expect to see for a hailstorm?
 
wabower said:
Obviously, if he thinks what's written in the logs has much to do with how the adjuster will evaluate the claim. I'm guessing maybe 5% (at most) of aircraft accidents have anything in the log regarding the circumstances.

Avemco says 50% of their claims are from ground damage. What logbook entry would you expect to see for a hailstorm?
Click to expand...

Talk about a non-sequitor.
 
EdFred said:
Talk about a non-sequitor.
Click to expand...

OK, what entry would you expect for these?

Gear-up?
Ground loop?
Veer off?
Loss of directional control?
Mid-air?
Fuel Exhaustion?
Fuel Starvation?
CFIT?
VFR into IFR?
Land long?
Land short?
 
wabower said:
OK, what entry would you expect for these?

Gear-up?
Ground loop?
Veer off?
Loss of directional control?
Mid-air?
Fuel Exhaustion?
Fuel Starvation?
CFIT?
VFR into IFR?
Land long?
Land short?
Click to expand...

61.51 will answer all your questions provided the pilot isn't dead.
 
EdFred said:
61.51 will answer all your questions provided the pilot isn't dead.
Click to expand...

I love it when some reg is allegedly the answer to a crash claim.

If you're thinking that reg controls (or even influences) the adjuster's determination of what really happened, my advice would be to follow one of them around for a few days and watch the process unfold.

They ask a lot of other questions, many of which are not directed to the pilot or the passenger. This is not to suggest that a pilot or occupant of the aircraft might lie about the events surrounding a flight that ended bent, but probably just the adjuster's method of writing an accurate report.
 
wabower said:
I love it when some reg is allegedly the answer to a crash claim.

If you're thinking that reg controls (or even influences) the adjuster's determination of what really happened, my advice would be to follow one of them around for a few days and watch the process unfold.

They ask a lot of other questions, many of which are not directed to the pilot or the passenger. This is not to suggest that a pilot or occupant of the aircraft might lie about the events surrounding a flight that ended bent, but probably just the adjuster's method of writing an accurate report.
Click to expand...

Hey, you asked what would go in a logbook, I pointed out the reg about logbooks. :D

My point is, if I am shown by writing in my logbook (or the student's logbook) that I was giving TW instruction on 3 previous flights, and we prang it on flight #4, it's pretty much a given that #4 is going to be more instruction. If there is no entry at all, it is a bit more difficult, albeit not impossible to say instruction was being given.
 
Last edited:
I believe my comment was in response to your facetious suggestion that the logbook should only be completed after the fact. Since most log entries are made after the flight is completed, the wink suggested to me that the absence of a log entry would somehow influence the outcome of some followup action related to an unforeseen outcome of the flight.

The context of the thread related to flight training vs other operations, and insurance coverage related to training. Having BTDT with numerous prior events, the intent of my post was to point out the fallacy such an approach. YMMV
 
wabower said:
I believe my comment was in response to your facetious suggestion that the logbook should only be completed after the fact. Since most log entries are made after the flight is completed, the wink suggested to me that the absence of a log entry would somehow influence the outcome of some followup action related to an unforeseen outcome of the flight.

The context of the thread related to flight training vs other operations, and insurance coverage related to training. Having BTDT with numerous prior events, the intent of my post was to point out the fallacy such an approach. YMMV
Click to expand...

It's not instruction unless it is logged. Not really winking this time. And yes if I had a no instruction clause on my insurance policy and was doing someone a favor by giving them a complex/HP endorsement, I wouldn't put it in a logbook until they were signed off.

My policy doesn't say I can't give instruction, just that I can't make a charge.
 
Last edited:
I'm insured for instruction in unowned singles. However, I would be FOOLISH to undertake that in the Blueberry, and I would never do it even if permitted. It does, however, allow Diana and Tom some protection when Tom is out tolerating my finding my feet again.......

Ed, if you take that attitude you've obviously never encountered an inspector doing the smell test. You will wish to God that you had been legimitately insured and had been logging properly.

No contemporaneous logging means the inspector can call the flights whatever he desires and HE WILL MAKE IT STICK.

I am only insured for instruction in the twin on a month by month basis- when I have a student. It's $7200 per year. Think about it.
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
It does, however, allow Diana and Tom some protection when Tom is out tolerating my finding my feet again.......
Click to expand...
Bruce, Tom is looking forward to flying with you again this year at Gaston's. :)
 
Diana said:
Bruce, Tom is looking forward to flying with you again this year at Gaston's. :)
Click to expand...
C'mon Diana. You need SOME twin time in your log.....though the green side stays down.
:D

I just ordered up the oil change so that I won't run up against that wall June 14....
 
Last edited:
So lesson learned, don't give rides with both sets of controls installed, because in the event of a mishap there may have been instruction going on! /Sarcasm Off/
 
AWACSEng said:
So lesson learned, don't give rides with both sets of controls installed, because in the event of a mishap there may have been instruction going on! /Sarcasm Off/
Click to expand...

With a real toolbag inspector it sounds like that can be the case. And I am *not* being sarcastic. The FAA is never here to help us. Remember nearly every FAR is about what we can't do.
 
Knock yourself out and think whatever you want to think. Insurance adjusters take a very literal view of policy terms and conditions, and are very good at bird watching "if it walks, swims and quacks like a duck . . ."

Follow one around for a few days and listen to the conversations. It's not their first rodeo.



EdFred said:
It's not instruction unless it is logged. Not really winking this time. And yes if I had a no instruction clause on my insurance policy and was doing someone a favor by giving them a complex/HP endorsement, I wouldn't put it in a logbook until they were signed off.

My policy doesn't say I can't give instruction, just that I can't make a charge.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top