You are very welcome! You are correct. Too many people are using that single regulation to determine flyability. In fact, I did a couple stage checks just before New Year where the students relied only on 91.205 to determine airworthiness. The only part of 91.213 they knew or used was to remove/disable and placard the inoperative equipment. I think folks might be confused because the first half of 91.213 is all about MEL--so they figure that must be it and ignore the rest. Memorizing ATOMATOFLAMES/FLAPS is a good start, but memorizing the entire process would be better. What do others think?
@@ScottKoonCFI I’m practicing for my check-ride…hope sometime in May….living in Michigan in the winter…ugh…struggle to get VFR minimums….and this kind of video is exactly what I’m looking for. I want the DPE is say…yea…this person knows her stuff! I downloaded your flowchart and plan to keep it with the POH and type data sheet, so I can show how I determined airworthiness. I’m pretty sure I will be the only student at my school that will have this information available. BTW…thanks for the VOR vid. I was having issues with that….and I think you were the instructor that said everyone has trouble with it because no one knows how to teach it. Now after passing the exam with a 95 and not completely focused just on that…I was wondering…what was all the fuss? I love VOR and that’s my favorite instrument now. Maybe we all just need time to use it and then it comes easier.
Thank you so much for the comment! I completely understand. I’m in Minnesota, and we are also struggling to find weather that fits within the VFR minimums-We’ve had two flyable days in the last two and a half weeks. Using videos and reviewing materials are excellent ways to keep your skills sharp. I’m glad you are leading the way and helping set a new standard for determining airworthiness and also excited that you are doing so well with VOR theory and navigation. It sounds like you are becoming well prepared for your check ride. Keep studying and practicing. I wish you the best of luck. Most importantly, don’t forget to let us know how things go! Thank you again!!
@@ScottKoonCFI MN is not that far away….hope to take a lesson with you sometime! I want to take advantage of all the great RUclipsrs out there helping me on my journey.
You are right. Michigan isn’t that far away. In fact, I flew into the Grand Rapids area with a customer. If you are headed my way, drop me a message or an email. Scott dot koon at online-cfi dot com.
Thanks for sharing. The decision chart is good, but fairly high level. I added a bit more detail in the chart I created based on 91.213d. Thanks again, for sharing this!
Had a dpe tell me this yesterday in an instrument check ride. Why would you spend time writing all of that out when you can simply say 91.205 and open up your far/aim? So true. I think from a dpe’s perspective you having an in depth understanding of the far/aim is better than memorizing some dumb acronym. I guess at the end of the day they both satisfy the requirement, one just looks more professional and the other makes you look like a 5th grader. I will be learning chapter and part numbers from now on.
I agree. Understanding (and being able to apply) the CFR is the critical piece. The challenge (and danger) with ATOMATOFLAMES, FLAPS, GRABCARD, etc. when trying to determine airworthiness is that it is only part of the decision-making process. While they can be useful, relying only them can definitely get someone in trouble. Thanks for the comment.
Hmmmm.. If you send me an email at scott dot koon at online-CFI.com, I’ll try to email it to you. Sorry for the inability to download. Thanks for letting me know.
Great video it really helped me how to evaluate and understand Airworthiness. Quick question does the KOEL override the Equipment list? Or do I still have to go over the Equipment list and see if it's required if it's not mentioned on the KOEL? Thank you!
Thanks for the really good question. The regulation states the inoperative equipment cannot be “Indicated as required on the aircraft's equipment list, *OR* on the Kinds of Operations Equipment List for the kind of flight operation being conducted”. To me the “OR” in that statement means both need to be considered. Having said that, I haven’t seen an example where the equipment list and the KOEL are in conflict. In the examples I’ve seen the KOELs lists the equipment required by the equipment list as required for ALL Kinds of Operations. However, my experience with this is not exhaustive. If others have examples where they contradict each other, please put it in the comments. I hope this helps. Thanks for the comment/question!
I’m in Southern Minnesota. I try to use examples from different places in the US, but you’ll notice a lot tend to be from the upper-Midwest (grin). Thanks for the comment and thanks for asking.
Did I put 19.205 in a slide or say it? If I did, I'm sorry, I meant 14 CFR 91.205 which lists the minimum required equipment for various kinds of operations. Thanks.
Thanks Scott! The flow chart is great I’ll be using it to help my students!
Excellent! Glad it is useful! Thanks for the comment! Fly safe, my friend!
Thank you…you covered all the questions I had regarding 91.205….that section taken by itself…but is what everyone cites….is not the whole picture.
You are very welcome! You are correct. Too many people are using that single regulation to determine flyability. In fact, I did a couple stage checks just before New Year where the students relied only on 91.205 to determine airworthiness. The only part of 91.213 they knew or used was to remove/disable and placard the inoperative equipment. I think folks might be confused because the first half of 91.213 is all about MEL--so they figure that must be it and ignore the rest. Memorizing ATOMATOFLAMES/FLAPS is a good start, but memorizing the entire process would be better.
What do others think?
@@ScottKoonCFI I’m practicing for my check-ride…hope sometime in May….living in Michigan in the winter…ugh…struggle to get VFR minimums….and this kind of video is exactly what I’m looking for. I want the DPE is say…yea…this person knows her stuff! I downloaded your flowchart and plan to keep it with the POH and type data sheet, so I can show how I determined airworthiness. I’m pretty sure I will be the only student at my school that will have this information available. BTW…thanks for the VOR vid. I was having issues with that….and I think you were the instructor that said everyone has trouble with it because no one knows how to teach it. Now after passing the exam with a 95 and not completely focused just on that…I was wondering…what was all the fuss? I love VOR and that’s my favorite instrument now. Maybe we all just need time to use it and then it comes easier.
Thank you so much for the comment! I completely understand. I’m in Minnesota, and we are also struggling to find weather that fits within the VFR minimums-We’ve had two flyable days in the last two and a half weeks. Using videos and reviewing materials are excellent ways to keep your skills sharp. I’m glad you are leading the way and helping set a new standard for determining airworthiness and also excited that you are doing so well with VOR theory and navigation. It sounds like you are becoming well prepared for your check ride. Keep studying and practicing. I wish you the best of luck. Most importantly, don’t forget to let us know how things go! Thank you again!!
@@ScottKoonCFI MN is not that far away….hope to take a lesson with you sometime! I want to take advantage of all the great RUclipsrs out there helping me on my journey.
You are right. Michigan isn’t that far away. In fact, I flew into the Grand Rapids area with a customer. If you are headed my way, drop me a message or an email. Scott dot koon at online-cfi dot com.
Wow just incredible how you’ve covered this topic. Ty
You are very welcome. I’m glad it was helpful! Thanks for the comment!
Awesome, thanks Scott!
You are very welcome! Thanks for the comment!
Thanks for this video. I love this flow idea.
Thank you! I’m glad it was helpful! Thanks for the comment!
This is a great resource!
I was not familiar with the Type Certificate Data Sheet thank you Scott
Glad the video was helpful! Thank you for the comment!!
Excellent, thank you 👍
You are very welcome!
AC 91.67A is a good resource and on there is a PIC decision making sequence!
Thanks for sharing. The decision chart is good, but fairly high level. I added a bit more detail in the chart I created based on 91.213d. Thanks again, for sharing this!
Thanks for the info
You are very welcome!
Had a dpe tell me this yesterday in an instrument check ride. Why would you spend time writing all of that out when you can simply say 91.205 and open up your far/aim? So true. I think from a dpe’s perspective you having an in depth understanding of the far/aim is better than memorizing some dumb acronym. I guess at the end of the day they both satisfy the requirement, one just looks more professional and the other makes you look like a 5th grader. I will be learning chapter and part numbers from now on.
I agree. Understanding (and being able to apply) the CFR is the critical piece. The challenge (and danger) with ATOMATOFLAMES, FLAPS, GRABCARD, etc. when trying to determine airworthiness is that it is only part of the decision-making process. While they can be useful, relying only them can definitely get someone in trouble. Thanks for the comment.
Check instructor asked me. "You get in your plane and find out the turn coordinator does not work. Can you still fly?"
What was your answer? Thanks for commenting!
I get "Internal Server Error" when I try to download the flowchart.
Hmmmm.. If you send me an email at scott dot koon at online-CFI.com, I’ll try to email it to you. Sorry for the inability to download. Thanks for letting me know.
Great video it really helped me how to evaluate and understand Airworthiness. Quick question does the KOEL override the Equipment list? Or do I still have to go over the Equipment list and see if it's required if it's not mentioned on the KOEL? Thank you!
Thanks for the really good question. The regulation states the inoperative equipment cannot be “Indicated as required on the aircraft's equipment list, *OR* on the Kinds of Operations Equipment List for the kind of flight operation being conducted”. To me the “OR” in that statement means both need to be considered.
Having said that, I haven’t seen an example where the equipment list and the KOEL are in conflict. In the examples I’ve seen the KOELs lists the equipment required by the equipment list as required for ALL Kinds of Operations. However, my experience with this is not exhaustive. If others have examples where they contradict each other, please put it in the comments.
I hope this helps. Thanks for the comment/question!
Awesomeness
Thanks! Glad you liked this!
Hello Scott, what state do you instruct in?
I’m in Southern Minnesota. I try to use examples from different places in the US, but you’ll notice a lot tend to be from the upper-Midwest (grin). Thanks for the comment and thanks for asking.
You put 19.205 in vid… just fyi
Wow. Thanks for catching that!
Could have been worse. It could’ve been 19.502, and that would have been really confusing. Awesome video and explanation, Scott!
19.205?
Did I put 19.205 in a slide or say it? If I did, I'm sorry, I meant 14 CFR 91.205 which lists the minimum required equipment for various kinds of operations. Thanks.