Instrument rating hours requirements

[MooneyBob]

The rules say a pilot needs 40 hours logged in the actual or simulated conditions in order to be able to get the check ride endorsement. It also says that 15 of those hours have to be with the CFII as a part of the IR training. Does it mean that 25 hours could be done under hood with only a safety pilot that it is not CFII or even CFI?

[Hank]

Yep.

[MooneyBob]

I have logged 33 hours and many approaches with my CFII. He left for vacation but I want to keep building my time toward the check ride. If I use a safety pilot and keep flying under hood and shooting approaches I can log it as the simulated instrument experience and count it for my 40 hours requirements, right? When he comes back I will fly with him again and he will evaluate my progress of course, but theoreticaly I will be legally ready for the check ride, right?

I have done my 250nm and written.

[larryb]

Correct

[flyboy]

I have logged 33 hours and many approaches with my CFII. He left for vacation but I want to keep building my time toward the check ride. If I use a safety pilot and keep flying under hood and shooting approaches I can log it as the simulated instrument experience and count it for my 40 hours requirements, right? When he comes back I will fly with him again and he will evaluate my progress of course, but theoreticaly I will be legally ready for the check ride, right?

I have done my 250nm and written.

yes that is correct, but you will still need the sign off from your CFII

[midlifeflyer]

Yes, but don't get too excited about saving cost. Most people need more than those 15 hours of instruction and spend too much of their safety pilot time practicing how to do things incorrectly.

 

My usual advice is to treat the safety pilot time as the instrument student's equivalent of solo. To work out a plan with the CFII to integrate practice with the lessons.

[MooneyBob]

Yes, but don't get too excited about saving cost. Most people need more than those 15 hours of instruction and spend too much of their safety pilot time practicing how to do things incorrectly.

 

My usual advice is to treat the safety pilot time as the instrument student's equivalent of solo. To work out a plan with the CFII to integrate practice with the lessons.

I have already 33 flight hours under hood of instructions from my CFII and many hours on my home simulator. As I said I will continue with him after he is back from his vacation and I will continue until he says I am ready. I don't rush anywhere and saving money is not my priority.

[cbarry]

Just remember: (1) The other control seat is occupied by a safety pilot who possesses at least a private pilot certificate with category and class ratings appropriate to the aircraft being flown.

[Ratherbflying]

Bob, couple of things that may be of interest:

As cbarry points out, your safety pilot must hold a certificate for ASEL. They do not have to have been endorsed for complex to safety pilot in your J.

However, if they are endorsed, they can log their time in your right seat as PIC. This is a great incentive for someone building PIC hours.

As midlife suggests above, find somebody who will kick your butt like a CFII would. Pick a very knowledgeable Instrument rated pilot who will help you plan a rocking one hour flight with few if any straight lines. Shoot the full approach, fly the missed and set up for the next approach.

If possible, light up with ATC. It's good practice for you and helps the safety pilot by getting traffic advisories.

Sadism is a nice trait in a safety pilot. I was flying last weekend with a buddy training for his instrument and set him up for an ILS approach where I knew the glide slope was notam'ed out of service. He lined up on final and the CDI red flagged his vertical guidance but he never noticed. I let him fly for a bit and then commented to him that it was amazing how well he was holding the glide slope (the Garmin centers the bar when the red flags are up.) I then asked him to level off for a bit and it finally started to dawn on him that something was wrong. He was a little steamed at me for a while but by the time we parked the plane all was forgiven.

[triple8s]

One thing to remember flying an airplane in IFR conditions is as serious a business as it gets, when everything goes as planned the single pilot is a busy SOB. All the training and the quality of the training is for one purpose and that's to keep you alive and the minimums are just that minimum.

[mike_elliott]

15 hours is the minimum required instruction time with a CFII, but the reality is that more will be required unless the student is exceptional to meet PTS standards of all tasks. There are 2 elements here. 1) Are you check ride ready (the easiest of them) and 2) Are you ready for real world single pilot IFR. For example are you really prepared to recover from an unusual attitude because your AI failed in the soup? As triple8s stated, this is serious business. It is the CFII's job to teach you everything he can to keep you from legally killing yourself, and that is a tall order in 15 hours of dual.

To get my signature, I have to answer the question "would I allow my sweetie or my children to fly IFR with you?" No its not in the PTS anywhere, but its the gold standard I use to determine if you are ready.

[midlifeflyer]

As midlife suggests above, find somebody who will kick your butt like a CFII would. Pick a very knowledgeable Instrument rated pilot who will help you plan a rocking one hour flight with few if any straight lines. 

 

Although it says it takes a point from what I said, I suggested nothing of the sort and disagree completely. A safety pilot is not an instructor. He's there to watch for traffic, potential airspace violations, and things that might be dangerous. If he's knowledgeable about IFR, he has the advantage of knowing what you are attempting to and be able to see certain problems but a safety pilot not there to teach or to be a sadist or to throw you curve balls. 

 

He's there to allow you to practice since you can't do solo with a hood. 

 

 

 

However, if they are endorsed, they can log their time in your right seat as PIC. This is a great incentive for someone building PIC hours.

 

Yes, but a lot of pilot/owners would be very uncomfortable with someone else being PIC in their airplane. Maybe endorsed, but is he covered by the open pilot warranty or in some other way authorized by your insurance to fly the airplane? If not, consider the scenario where on the 3rd flight in the series (the safety pilot having logged PIC time on the first two), there's a mishap. The airplane is damaged and your insurer rightly denies coverage because the PIC was not insurance-qualified to act as PIC in the aircraft.

[mike_elliott]

 

 

 

Yes, but a lot of pilot/owners would be very uncomfortable with someone else being PIC in their airplane. Maybe endorsed, but is he covered by the open pilot warranty or in some other way authorized by your insurance to fly the airplane?

He is not covered at all, even if he meets the open pilot warranty. The plane will be, but more than likely, the insurance company will subrogate their losses against him.

[Ratherbflying]

Midlife, sorry if I misinterpreted your post. But if you don't see the value of learning from a talented safety pilot, well then we'll have to agree to disagree. To each his own.

Regarding the PIC thing, I'm sorry I didn't include a link so you could have educated yourself.

http://www.aopa.org/Pilot-Resources/Learn-to-Fly/Logging-Cross-Country-Time/Logging-Time-Safety-Pilot

Both pilots log PIC. The insurance company is fat dumb and happy.

[triple8s]

I have in the neighborhood of 600hrs and have had 5 instructors along the way. I'm not counting CFI's that have just went on a lesson or two that's 5 that I have dozens and dozens of time with. That being said I can NOT stress enough how big of a difference there are in them. One I had was very cautious but did very little to build confidence, I know of another who is so complacent I would never use him for anything. My last instructor is an ex navy flier, who flew in Vietnam, went on to fly 737's and started flying at 16 in south Florida. This fellow is a very disciplined guy, has a syllabus that is gone over before every lesson and the flight is discussed after. I've never had an instructor so thorough. He also is a very strong believer in aerobatics, he almost insists on aerobatic training for all his students, engine failures are practiced often, very often. Before I started training with him I inquired from a fellow at the airport and he told me how much he charges, he isn't the cheapest but the funny thing is........he is busy everyday and I know why. This guy is good, damn good, he is a straight shooter and if he says you are ready, you're ready. I suggest anyone that intends on flying don't skimp on training, any moron can climb in a plane and point it here or there direct to -> but when the SHTF in the clouds the cheap training will cost you everything.

[midlifeflyer]

Ratherb, I guess we'll have to disagree to disagree on the insurance thing also. I'm pretty familiar with the FAA's rules on who the FAA allows to be a safety pilot and who the FAA allows to act as anf log PIC. But I'm also familiar with aircraft insurance policies and what they say about when they have to pay out.

 

Interesting though. You seem to be saying that you can let someone who does not meet the open pilot warranty or is an included pilot and the insurance company can't refuse to pay a claim if there an accident because the FAA says he can fly it.

[midlifeflyer]

He is not covered at all, even if he meets the open pilot warranty. The plane will be, but more than likely, the insurance company will subrogate their losses against him.

 

You are correct. I said"covered by the open pilot warranty" not "covered by the insurance policy" but can see how it could be misinterpreted..

[Ratherbflying]

Mid,

I'm not saying anything. I'm reporting what the regs and the aopa state. If they are wrong it's you're duty to contact them and get things corrected.

K, we're done for this today because I have to make sure the wife has a Happy Mothers day. But i enjoyed this.

Have a great rest of the weekend.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[mike_elliott]

You are correct. I said"covered by the open pilot warranty" not "covered by the insurance policy" but can see how it could be misinterpreted..

agreed, your words "he is covered" is what I thought to mean the non owner pilot not the plane

[midlifeflyer]

Mid,

I'm not saying anything. I'm reporting what the regs and the aopa state. If they are wrong it's you're duty to contact them and get things corrected.

K, we're done for this today because I have to make sure the wife has a Happy Mothers day. But i enjoyed this.

Have a great rest of the weekend.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

The regs and the AOPA are fine. Both say that in order for a safety pilot to log PIC, he must also be acting as PIC. 

 

Reg:

============================== 

(1) A sport, recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot may log pilot in command flight time for flights-

...

 

(iii) When the pilot, except for a holder of a sport or recreational pilot certificate, acts as pilot in command of an aircraft for which more than one pilot is required under the type certification of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted;

============================== 

 

and AOPA:

 

==============================

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.

==============================

 

But your owner's contract with the insurance company says that in order for the company to pay the policy, the acting PIC must be acceptable to the insurance company.

 

So, in the posted situation, the safety pilot may certainly act as PIC and he may log PIC time but if there's a mishap, the insurer is free to deny coverage.

 

That risk may be acceptable to you. It may not be to others.

 

If you choose to misunderstand that final point, that's OK.

[fantom]

Sadism is a nice trait in a safety pilot.

 

Maybe, as long as it isn't an constant habit.