Hood Time

[currysonic]

I just wanted peoples opinions on how to log or get hood time.

An older pilot told me you can basically log hood time with anyone that can fly an airplane (PPL). Then recently I learned I could log hood time and PIC! would save me alot of money as I was lucky enough to get into an Air Share thing (For which I am extremely grateful, since they thought CPL students monopolize airplanes ).

The thread touches on it but I want the peanut gallery's feedback.

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... =3&t=94997

Thanks!

[Colonel Sanders]

Cheapest way is probably in a sim. Most
people max out the half time allowed.

[BTyyj]

The local FTUs here charge half of what it'd cost to rent a plane for their sim. IIRC, sim time isn't loggable for anything but instrument, so I feel that with cost being so high, it really isn't financially worthwhile to use the sim.

[dave_091]

The local FTUs here charge half of what it'd cost to rent a plane for their sim. IIRC, sim time isn't loggable for anything but instrument, so I feel that with cost being so high, it really isn't financially worthwhile to use the sim.

50% savings off of 20 hours is pretty substantial. Plus, hood time is only time under the hood while flying. If your on the sim your logging instrument hours almost instantly, no need to pay for run up time, etc. So in the end a sim can save more than just the initial 50% off the cost of renting the aircraft at your school.

[photofly]

There's no requirement for the other person to hold a PPL. Your responsibility as PIC remains to avoid the risk of a collision per CAR 602.21 - however you choose to do that is up to you. If you can teach your dog to bark at airplanes close by, go for it.

Personally I know lots of people without a PPL whose eyesight is good enough to spot traffic. In fact I'd take quite a few of them over many PPLs I know, who'd be too interested in the instruments inside and not enough in looking outside.

[currysonic]

Thank for the replies!

Yeah I plan to do half on the sim. Our Air Share rate is $55/hour dry per tach time, so its still very economical. I plan to take a friend who can help me spot for things while I am under to hood, unless I can borrow someones airplane spotting dog.

[Colonel Sanders]

This is what I use:

[Big Pistons Forever]

Don't forget you need to take a cat as well, or the dog will get bored and take a nap.

[rt777]

So, If I am a PPL, and I am doing hood work as PIC in a 172 for example, and my lookout for traffic is another PPL. Can I log the hood time? or just PIC. I was told you cannot log hood time without an instructor on board.

[photofly]

If you're both PPL holders - neither of you instructors - then only one person can log any time - the PIC. If that person is under the hood, the time is simulated instrument flight time.

If one of you is an instructor, and the aircraft is obtained at arm's length from that person, and is instructing you for a licence or rating, or carrying out a flight review, then the instructor can be PIC and the other can log dual, simulated instrument flight time.

Generally the CARs don't permit "random" dual, you have to be being instructed for a rating or licence or flight review (CAR405.11), recieve a pre flight briefing and comply with all the other training requirements before you can log dual. I suspect lots of people don't take that very seriously, though.

I was told you cannot log hood time without an instructor on board.

That's clearly incorrect: only five hours of the instrument time required for an IR are required to be with a Flight Instructor.

[Big Pistons Forever]

This is what I use:

Lets see you have both an airplane instructor and a aerobatic instructor rating so that makes you a Double Instructor and a Little Dog Owner



Sorry I could not resist

[rt777]

If you're both PPL holders - neither of you instructors - then only one person can log any time - the PIC. If that person is under the hood, the time is simulated instrument flight time.

If one of you is an instructor, and the aircraft is obtained at arm's length from that person, and is instructing you for a licence or rating, or carrying out a flight review, then the instructor can be PIC and the other can log dual, simulated instrument flight time.

Generally the CARs don't permit "random" dual, you have to be being instructed for a rating or licence or flight review (CAR405.11), recieve a pre flight briefing and comply with all the other training requirements before you can log dual. I suspect lots of people don't take that very seriously, though.

I was told you cannot log hood time without an instructor on board.

That's clearly incorrect: only five hours of the instrument time required for an IR are required to be with a Flight Instructor.

At my FTU we do a lot of flying under the hood, and they tell us not to log the hood time if you're not with an instructor. Interesting

[Colonel Sanders]

they tell us not to log the hood time if you're not with an instructor

Your FTU is operating by it's own made-up
rules, which are different from the CARs.

This is actually quite common. Many people
will tell you to do things, that you are not
legally required to do. Salesmen come to mind.

Do believe everything you see on the Shopping
Channel?

I would strongly encourage you not to believe
what you read here, or are told at your FTU, or
see on the Shopping Channel. Instead, read
CAR 421.46(2)(b) for yourself.

It's only a page of text. How people can continue
to argue about only a page of text mystifies me.
It's really not that complicated.

Note that there is no regulation (except perhaps
CAR 602.01) which prohibits solo hood time, which
of course would be PIC.

One senior flight instructor here claims the TC Inspectors
in his Region encourage it, which I have trouble believing.
They do a lot of really nutty stuff, but that's insane,
IMHO. I spent four years of my life at the Tribunal,
Tribunal Review, Federal Court and Federal Court
of Appeals discussing the interpretation and application
of CAR 602.01 so I think I have a pretty good understanding
of it, and I can't see it allowing solo hood time.

[Shiny Side Up]

First, I'm hardly senior.

Second, as strange as it may sound, that's not the craziest conversation I've ever had with someone from Transport. That particular one stemmed from a customer who had a real hate on for paying instructors, and possibly the only student I ever regretted teaching. But just to be clear, in my relatively short time in aviation (again hardly senior) I've had these edicts from TC inspectors.

1) Winterfronts are standard equipment and should be installed year round.
2) Slips are bad and should be removed from the flight training syllabus, and struck from the collective knowledge of pilots everywhere.
3) There's no one in this country who has learned to fly on a Cirrus.
4) You cannot teach steep turns without an attitude indicator.
5) Commercial pilots are not qualified to do walk arounds on aircraft. Only AMEs can determine if an airplane is airworthy.

Sometimes you got to just pretend you didn't have those conversations or the world would be just too crazy to get through on a daily basis.

[Colonel Sanders]

Best to just smile and nod.

[photofly]

First, I'm hardly senior.

He's talking moral stature.

What's the hard-on against slips all about?

[Shiny Side Up]

He's talking moral stature.

That even less so.

What's the hard-on against slips all about?

Had a TC inspector who wanted to fail one of my class 4 on a test due to the fact he did a forward slip while demonstrating the forced approach excersise. We endured a long tirade about how they were bad, particularly how in his opinion how they risked getting into a spin by slipping. I suspect that the inspector/examiner had scared himself during one once upon a time, or thought he did one and spun, or maybe his instructor pounded it into his head a long time ago. Doesn't really matter. Maybe a guy who could slip an airplane later screwed his wife.

Either way, to add to it, while he wanted to mark a fail on the flight test record, he did not want to write his commentary down on said record. When I challenged him on that, and stated my intent to contest the test results, he backed down and changed his mind to a pass result.

I could go on about this unsavoury fellow, like the time before he was at transport and was a DFTE and made a PPL student divert into a 3.5 hour flight test (said student later overcame this unfriendly start to aviation to go fly CF-18s) but lets stop there before I get too worked up.

[photofly]

Were you tempted to point out that they're a required manoeuvre to obtain a PPL?

TP13723 Ex. 15:

Aim

To determine that the candidate can demonstrate a safe and effective slipping manoeuvre to increase a rate of descent or for crosswind landing conditions.

I'm all for examiner discretion, but it's there in boilerplate text...

[Shiny Side Up]

Oh, I did. That's when it became very apparent that this was his opinion rather than flight test standard we were disputing. According to him, said standard should be changed, to which my reply was that until it is, he had no right to fail the candidate. If he was going to, he had better have the balls to put that in writing, to which he didn't. I don't think I have to tell you that our relationship has been adversarial ever since. As of late he has taken to refusing to serve any customers that have come from my school, which I've debated making another formal complaint about.

edit: either way, we probably shouldn't hijack this thread any further with my list of grievances with TC.

[Colonel Sanders]

Sigh.

I wish people at TC could understand that they
need to set an example with their behaviour, not
indulge in these kind of petty campaigns, of which
I know more than a little about.

[currysonic]

Well its only for me CPL "IFR" time. I will be sure to let you all know how it turns out haha!

I plan on getting a buddy to sign their license number on it as my plane spotter/safety pilot, to insure safety. Weather has been so bad lately in the west coast its been keeping me from going. =( Still have 3.5 hours I can do on Sim though so I'm happy!

[rt777]

they tell us not to log the hood time if you're not with an instructor

Your FTU is operating by it's own made-up
rules, which are different from the CARs.

This is actually quite common. Many people
will tell you to do things, that you are not
legally required to do. Salesmen come to mind.

Do believe everything you see on the Shopping
Channel?

I would strongly encourage you not to believe
what you read here, or are told at your FTU, or
see on the Shopping Channel. Instead, read
CAR 421.46(2)(b) for yourself.

It's only a page of text. How people can continue
to argue about only a page of text mystifies me.
It's really not that complicated.

Note that there is no regulation (except perhaps
CAR 602.01) which prohibits solo hood time, which
of course would be PIC.

One senior flight instructor here claims the TC Inspectors
in his Region encourage it, which I have trouble believing.
They do a lot of really nutty stuff, but that's insane,
IMHO. I spent four years of my life at the Tribunal,
Tribunal Review, Federal Court and Federal Court
of Appeals discussing the interpretation and application
of CAR 602.01 so I think I have a pretty good understanding
of it, and I can't see it allowing solo hood time.

Well said.

As much as people hate reading the CARs, they do have ultimate legal terms over everything.

[Colonel Sanders]

its only for me CPL

I don't think you mentioned that before. All
of the 35 hours of dual IAW CAR 421.30(4)(a)(ii)(A)
must be

"under the direction and supervision of the holder
of a Flight Instructor Rating — Aeroplane"

tl;dr Hood time for the CPL has different rules
than hood time for the instrument rating.

READ THE REGULATIONS

[Shiny Side Up]

I don't think you mentioned that before. All
of the 35 hours of dual IAW CAR 421.30(4)(a)(ii)(A)

One should note that in that train of thought, Sim time doesn't help towards a CPL. If one is interested in minimizing costs of a CPL, there's no point doing Sim unless you need more than 10 hours of practice on air excersises with an instructor to pass the test. If one is doing a CPL and an IFR rating concurrently though, that changes things a bit, but again depends on one's circumstances. In my opinion for the CPL, with the exception of a few demonstrations, there really isn't a lot of place for buying Sim time if you're interested in saving money. They used to count those ten hours of sim one could do towards the total 200 hour requirement, but that's no longer the case.

[currysonic]

its only for me CPL

I don't think you mentioned that before. All
of the 35 hours of dual IAW CAR 421.30(4)(a)(ii)(A)
must be

"under the direction and supervision of the holder
of a Flight Instructor Rating — Aeroplane"

tl;dr Hood time for the CPL has different rules
than hood time for the instrument rating.

READ THE REGULATIONS

Thought I should update everyone.

I did do my Hood Time with an instructor since I realized, CPL Hood requires an instructor (Thanks Colonel!). Saved some time for hood time that I will go through during flight test, but otherwise I'm gold.

Thanks for the doggie picture and chats everyone!