TC question: Which ratings must be taught by an instructor

having a hard time trying to find the answer to this one as i thought all of them needed to be taught by an instructor.

1. sea plane
2. multi-engine

?

There is no requirement for either of those to be done by an instructor. I do seaplane ratings, no instructor rating here.

interesting. thanks for your response duffman

I agree, I am an instructor... When it comes to a 'Class' Rating then the person providing training must hold a CPL and have 50hrs on class and 10h on type.
There are no PIC requirements.

here is the reference. I took the time to remove irrelevant info... Read through... Pay close attention to the Instrument one because there's two parts to it...
Cheers!

425.21 Qualifications of Flight Instructors

(1) A person who acts as a flight instructor shall be the holder of a pilot permit or pilot licence for the category, class and type of aircraft, as appropriate, on which the flight training is conducted.

(2) A person who conducts flight training in any category of aircraft, where the trainee does not hold a pilot permit or pilot licence for that category, or conducts a flight review, shall:
(a) have a flight instructor rating for the category of aircraft used for the training; and
(b) for aeroplanes, have experience of not less than 50 hours flight time on the class of aeroplane used for the training; or


(4) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a night rating shall have a flight instructor rating for the category of aircraft used for the training.

(5) A person who conducts flight training in a multi-engine aeroplane where the trainee does not have a multi-engine class rating shall:
(a) be the holder of a Commercial Pilot Licence or an Airline Transport Pilot Licence;
(b) have multi-engine pilot experience, which if acquired on centre thrust multi-engine aeroplanes may be credited toward qualifying a pilot to provide centre thrust multi-engine flight instruction only; and
(c) have experience of not less than 50 hours flight time on multi-engine aeroplanes with not less than 10 hours on the type of aeroplane used for the training.

(6) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a landplane class rating or a seaplane class rating shall:
(a) be the holder of a Commercial Pilot Licence or an Airline Transport Pilot Licence; and
(b) have experience of not less than 50 hours flight time on the class of aeroplane used for the training.

(7) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of an aircraft type rating shall:
(a) in the case of training for a holder of an aeroplane pilot permit or pilot licence:
(i) be the holder of a Commercial Pilot Licence - Aeroplane or an Airline Transport Pilot Licence - Aeroplane; and
(ii) have experience of not less than 50 hours flight time on the class of aeroplane used for the training, of which not less than 10 hours must be on the aeroplane type;


(8) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a VFR Over-the-Top rating shall have a flight instructor rating for the category of aircraft used for the training.

(9) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of an instrument rating shall be the holder of a Commercial Pilot Licence or an Airline Transport Pilot Licence, have an instrument rating and:
(a) have a flight instructor rating; or
(b) have experience of not less than 500 hours pilot-in-command flight time, of which:
(i) not less than 100 hours shall be on the applicable aircraft group, and
(ii) in the case of Group I aircraft, not less than 10 hours shall be on the type of multi-engine aeroplane used for the training.

(10) A person who conducts flight training for experience in aerobatic manoeuvres shall:
(amended 2006/12/14; previous version)
(a) in the case of aeroplanes, have a Flight Instructor Rating - Aeroplane - Aerobatics; or

(12) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a Flight Instructor Rating - Aeroplane or a Flight Instructor Rating - Helicopter shall have a Class 1 flight instructor rating for the category of aircraft used for the training.

(13) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a Flight Instructor Rating - Aeroplane - Aerobatic shall have a Class 1 Flight Instructor Rating - Aeroplane - Aerobatic.

(14) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a Flight Instructor Rating - Glider shall have a Flight Instructor Rating - Glider.

(15) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a Flight Instructor Rating - Glider - Aerobatic shall have a Flight Instructor Rating - Glider - Aerobatic.

(16) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a Flight Instructor Rating - Balloon shall have a Flight Instructor Rating - Balloon.

(17) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a Flight Instructor Rating - Gyroplane shall have a Flight Instructor Rating - Gyroplane.

(18) A person who conducts flight training toward the issuance of a Flight Instructor Rating - Ultra-light Aeroplane shall have:
(a) a Flight Instructor Rating - Ultra-light Aeroplane; or
(b) a Flight Instructor Rating - Aeroplane.

(19) A person who conducts flight training, using a synthetic flight training equipment, approved in accordance with section 606.03 of the Canadian Aviation Regulations, toward the issuance of a pilot licence or rating shall
(a) meet or have met the flight instructor rating qualifications for the applicable licence or rating; and
(b) have received instruction on the operation of the synthetic flight training equipment from a person trained in the operation of the device.

thanks for taking the time rick, i appreciate it.

so basically after reading through the CAR

For aeroplanes, have experience of not less than 50 hours flight time on the class of aeroplane used for the training.

Instructor ratings ARE required for: Night Rating, VFR-OTT.

NOT required for: multi-engine (need only CPL or ATPL); landplane OR seaplane class rating.

Instrument you can either have CPL/ATPL or Instructor Rating

sagabwoy wrote:Instrument you can either have CPL/ATPL or Instructor Rating

Just to be clear - majority of the IFR training can be with an experienced CPL/ATPL; however, there is a minimum required to be conducted with an instructor.

Just to be clear - CAR 421.46(3)(ii) does
not require any instruction at all for the
majority of the 40 hours of hood time.

Feel free to log it as PIC. Or you could
log dual from your dog, if he is qualified
to act (and thus log) PIC.

Colonel Sanders wrote:Just to be clear - CAR 421.46(3)(ii) does
not require any instruction at all for the
majority of the 40 hours of hood time.

Feel free to log it as PIC. Or you could
log dual from your dog, if he is qualified
to act (and thus log) PIC.

So, your saying that I could bring a friend with me in the aircraft to act as a lookout and I could fly " under the hood" and log hood time as long as my friend isn't INSTRUCTING me?

Now that sounds sketchy, but would it be legal?

You don't have to take my opinion on this.

I strongly encourage you to READ CAR 421.46(3)(ii)
as it is only a few lines, and is not very complicated.

Probably before you were born - admittedly,
this was before the CARs, but the PLH had the
same wording - I showed up for my initial
group 3 IFR.

I had carefully read the PLH and had logged 40 hours
of hood time, the majority of which was PIC (but not
solo). I had my father in the right seat. He used to
be an F-104 test pilot, but TC doesn't think he's much
of a pilot compared to them. All his military and civilian
instrument and instructor ratings had long since lapsed,
but he didn't log the time. As if he would need to.

Anyways, TC Inspector - no delegates back then,
everyone laughed at the mere idea - says I don't
have the required experience because of my hood
time being mostly PIC. I replied, that's not what
the PLH says. He phones his boss. Then he phones
his boss's boss, who agrees with me. So, we do the
ride and he signs off my initial group 3 IFR in a
very snaky single. Picked up a little light rime.

All this to say ...

READ THE REGULATIONS

I have bird-dogged the exact one, so you can't
complain that you can't find it. It's only a few
sentences - it shouldn't take all day to read it.
It's not very complicated, compared to the six
thousand page PDF data sheets I get dropped
on me.

As a low-time pilot, you need to remember the
important difference between the paper world,
and the real world.

At the end of your training, you want to both
have the paper, and have the real-world skill
to fly in cloud.

Try not to lose sight of that dual objective.

(b) Experience

An applicant shall have completed a minimum of:

(i) 50 hours of cross-country flight as pilot-in-command in aeroplanes or helicopters of which 10 hours must be in the appropriate category; and

(ii) 40 hours of instrument time of which a maximum of 20 hours may be instrument ground time. The 40 hours instrument time shall include a minimum of:

(A) 5 hours of dual instrument flight time acquired from the holder of a flight instructor rating ,

(B) 5 hours in aeroplanes where the applicant is applying for a Group 1, 2 or 3 instrument rating or in helicopters where the applicant is applying for a Group 4 instrument rating,

(C) Fifteen (15) hours of dual instrument flight time provided by a qualified person as specified in section 425.21(9); and
(amended 1998/03/23; previous version)

(D) one dual cross-country flight under simulated or actual IMC conditions of a minimum of 100 nautical miles, the flight to be conducted in accordance with an IFR flight plan to include at, two different locations, an instrument approach to minima.


Not saying I'm going to attempt this but.... 20 of the 40 hours must be instructed - 5 by an instructor with an IFR rating and 15 hours by a qualified person as specified in section 425.21(9).

So the other 20 hours of buildup time can be with a unqualified pilot friend in the right seat acting as a lookout - and I would log the time as hood PIC.
There's probably more for me to dig into. I bet there is a clause about "hood training" somewhere.

Just for the record guys I hope you remember,

Does not mean because its LEGAL that it is SAFE!

So although the CARs says often you need a minimum of this many hours for a certain rating its always better to be with someone who knows what they're doing.

Too many differences between one person to the next. One guy could be an ace while another needs more instruction. Same goes for the instructor, some are good some shouldn't be one.

The point is stop trying to save money by avoiding flying with someone whom has relevant experience (although some experienced instructors don't have much relevant experience)
Learn your material and rules but remember to exercise caution always be more restrictive than the rule itself. Just be careful and if it seems sketchy. than it probably is.

There are a lot of Regs like that and that's Operators have SOP's.

MY recommend is play if safe and do the right thing.. Do more than the minimum with an instructor or even all of it!!!! don't be complacent!!!

Cheers

Rick

RickPilot33 wrote:Just for the record guys I hope you remember,

Does not mean because its LEGAL that it is SAFE!

So although the CARs says often you need a minimum of this many hours for a certain rating its always better to be with someone who knows what they're doing.

Too many differences between one person to the next. One guy could be an ace while another needs more instruction. Same goes for the instructor, some are good some shouldn't be one.

The point is stop trying to save money by avoiding flying with someone whom has relevant experience (although some experienced instructors don't have much relevant experience)
Learn your material and rules but remember to exercise caution always be more restrictive than the rule itself. Just be careful and if it seems sketchy. than it probably is.

There are a lot of Regs like that and that's Operators have SOP's.

MY recommend is play if safe and do the right thing.. Do more than the minimum with an instructor or even all of it!!!! don't be complacent!!!

Cheers

Rick

I see where your coming from Rick, I am all for safety.
But it leaves me scratching my head when I see these rules in the states:

Logging Time: Safety Pilot

A safety pilot is required by FAR 91.109(b) when the other pilot is "under the hood."

The safety pilot:

Must be at least a private pilot. (FAR 91.109[1])
Must hold the category and class ratings (airplane, single-engine land) for the aircraft flown. (FAR 91.109[1])
Must have a current medical. As a required flight crewmember, the safety pilot must have a current medical certificate. (FAR 61.3[c])
Must occupy the other control seat (normally, although not required, the right or "copilot's" seat). (FAR 91.109[1])

Safety pilot.

Pilot-in-command time may be logged if acting as PIC.
The two pilots must agree that the safety pilot is the acting PIC.
PIC time may be logged only while the other pilot is "under-the-hood."
PIC time may be logged because FAR 61.51(e)(1)(iii) allows certificated pilots to log PIC when acting as PIC of an aircraft on which more than one pilot is required by the regulations (91.109) under which the flight is conducted. A safety pilot is required for "hood work."
Second-in-command time may be logged if not acting as PIC.
Usually the case if the safety pilot cannot act as PIC. An example might be when the safety pilot is not endorsed for the particular airplane (such as in a high-performance aircraft).
SIC time may be logged because FAR 61.51(f)(2) allows a pilot to log all flight time during which he acts as second in command of an aircraft under which more than one pilot is required by the regulations (91.109) under which the flight is conducted.

Other considerations

Summary of logging PIC. Both pilots may log PIC time if the safety pilot is the acting pilot in command. FAR 61.51(e) allows both the sole manipulator of the controls and the acting PIC to log PIC time.
Acting as PIC. The safety pilot should not take the role as acting PIC lightly. What if the aircraft is involved in an accident, incident, or violates a FAR?
High-performance aircraft. AOPA has a letter of interpretation that states when the safety pilot is not the acting PIC, a high-performance "sign-off" is not required. However, some FAA divisions may interpret the regulations differently. Prudence suggests that the safety pilot be endorsed for high-performance aircraft and thoroughly familiar and current in the aircraft.
Recording flight. AOPA suggests that both pilots include in their logbook the name of the other pilot. This may assist you if the FAA ever questions the logged time.

A single-yoke aircraft may not be used unless:

The single-engine airplane is equipped with a single throwover control wheel. (FAR 91.109[3])
The safety pilot determines the flight can be conducted safely. (FAR 91.109[3])
The person manipulating the controls is at least a private pilot who holds the category and class ratings of the aircraft being flown. (FAR 91.109[3][ii])


I don't think this is unsafe. If two pilots are completely aware of the mission at hand and they have a proper briefing regarding possible inflight scenarios then I don't think this is unreasonable.

If we all cut holes through the sky in the same aircraft all over the world then what makes this practice unsafe if I am doing it north of the border?

After reading all the info from this link:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=87765

I believe I have all the answers to the questions I have asked.

20 of the 40 hours must be instructed - 5 by an instructor with an IFR rating and 15 hours by a qualified person

You are making up your own regulations
which are different from the CARs, which
only require 15 hrs from a "qualified person"
5 hrs of which must be an instructor.

The other 25 hours of hood time can be
logged with you PIC or dual, your choice.

Nowhere does it say that (A), (B), (C) and
(D) must be mutually exclusive.

(A) if you avoided the Sim then (A) is covered as part of the PPL.

If you have a Canadian PPL you can likely get an instrument rating without any further flight time with a Flight Instructor.

So, your saying that I could bring a friend with me in the aircraft to act as a lookout and I could fly " under the hood" and log hood time as long as my friend isn't INSTRUCTING me?

Now that sounds sketchy, but would it be legal?

Its not sketchy, it's a very good idea. Some time with an instructor is a good idea, but so is some without. Think of all the solo practice you did for your PPL. This is just the closest thing, for an Instrument Rating. Don't get used to relying on someone who knows more than you in the other seat. They won't always be there.

I got my PPL last fall and I'm working on the night rating now. As I understand it, the five hours dual instrument time that I did during the PPL training counts towards the ten that I need for the night rating.

I hadn't been planning to go for a VFR OTT rating but, I wondered after reading this thread, would I only need another five hours dual instrument time with the instructor? Standard 421.44 refers to the "Flight Instructor Standard - VFR OTT" and I eventually found that. It specifically allows credit for PPL and night instrument instruction hours.

Even without further ratings or instruction though, it sounds like a PPL holder could start practicing and logging PIC hood time with a suitable lookout riding along. Is that right?

Edit: Sorry, I just noticed that another thread just below this one at the moment already answers my question: http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... =3&t=95100