@23:00 what about using one of those brother P-touch label markers? Not sure if you can use alcohol in order to remove the adhesive without damaging the writing printed on the plastic card?
I could make an app to make NOTAMs not just human readable, but integrate with a map app and in like 30 minutes using an AI. Aviation IT is stuck in the '70s. It's so bad it's embarrassing.
It would seem that changing the language to person would require a pilot to get current by flying by themselves. I would think they should have oft the passenger language.
The change in language was to make it clear a CFI is not a passenger. A pilot could fly to become current on their own, but as we mentioned in the video that would be unwise. Far too risky to be considered a good decision. They could and should become current again with a CFI along for the flight. That extra set of eyes coupled with the experience of the CFI may not only lead to currency, but also a lesson or two learned along the way that could be helpful in the future.
@@MadPropsAero true, the defined a CFI as not being a passenger. They did not state that a CFI is not a person. I tend to agree with this original comment. Why change to “person” if they intended it to include being able to fly with a CFI when the original “passenger” would have done that. I agree far more dangerous to state that you cannot regain night proficiency with a CFI, but when was the last time the FAA was accused of being competent when making some of these rule changes?!
In the video, logging of PIC time is mentioned frequently in referencing 61.57. However, 61.57 pertains to acting as PIC, which is different than logging it.
Exactly, depending on the ratings of the individuals, when flying with a safety pilot, and who is and who is not current - dictates who is the acting PIC. The add on to 61.57 seems more like a suggestion than anything else
Viewers (and guests) like you make this channel so much more gratifying to produce than it might have been. We appreciate you, @AlphaKilo.Warrior. You're a rock star.
Another great thing you can use too is I totally switched away from paper which I think is not a good thing but is it easier on me with my Flight bag in electronic so I use two apps that has the fire engines and that’s connected to the Code of Federal Regulations or the E code of federal Regulations so when I use is called lost another one I use is so just wanna throw that in there
This was absolutely excellent! Well done. Regarding 61.193 (c), we had a guy at our airport years ago that was a CFI and advertising “Flight Training” on Groupon when in actuality the flights were Chicago lake front sight seeing tours. “Come see Chicago from the air and learn to fly while we’re at it” kind of thing. Virtually no one that flew with him actually intended to learn to fly…it was a true “134.5” operation. For years, the FAA tried everything to nail this guy to no avail. We tossed him off our airport and I think he eventually went out of business. 61.193 (c) now gives the FAA a way to deal with this.
I'm CFI/II/ME, and never passenger when giving training or reviews. I assumed for decades as revised FAR's clarifies and as described in this video. I do not think definition changes, only clarifies.😮
We've not come across an airplane with three sets of controls, but if there is one we suspect the CFI could take two pilots aloft on a currency flight. Or course a CFI could take a pilot and a passenger on the same flight, but only the pilot manipulating the controls would become current. The third pilot in the back seat would simply be a passenger.
@ you misunderstood. Some instructors would take 2 students up and go to a far airport and switch students. Does the non flying student count as a passenger?
Question, a pilot is not night current, she flies with a second pilot who has lots of recent night experiences in a similar airplane ( like a Piper or Cessna,)During a night flight the first pilot shoots several landings and regains night currency. Legal or not? Does a CFI need to be night current to fly at night with a none night current pilot to get the pilot current?
Love these questions, just make sure you read these regs yourself. CFRs don't make great YT content, because these guys are leaving out quite a bit. 1st question, you may have a point here: 61.57 just says that the non-current pilot just has to "make the landings" while "acting as sole manipulator of the flight controls" (does not have to be PIC or log PIC), but they can certainly start logging pic immediately upon the 3rd landing. 2nd question, I think they got you with 61.57(a)(2) - for the non-current pilot, the CFI is "necessary" to act as PIC, so they have to be night current. For the CFI, I don't think the non-current pilot is "necessary for the conduct of the flight". That may also be why they changed the wording from "passengers" to "persons".
Not. The first pilot cannot fly at night with a passenger until after they’ve logged 3 takeoffs and landings to a full stop. She can’t become current again while flying with a passenger. The fact that the other person onboard is a pilot is not a factor. If they're not a CFI providing instruction (which would be legal) they're a passenger. They're not a required crewmember or instructor. Thus, the 1st pilot would be flying at night, with a passenger, when she's not current to be flying at night with a passenger. We hope that helps.
@@MadPropsAero We think you are missing his point and may not have watched the video because those belly buttons on board are called persons in the reg now instead of passengers, but I digress. His idea is that the first pilot is the [passenger]/person. You said that they can't "fly" with a [passenger] because they aren't night current, but that's not what 61.57 says. It says that they can't "act as PIC carrying persons" until they have "*made* 3 t/o & landings..." What says that they can't "make the t/o and landings" with the other night current pilot "acting as pic" ? Obviously no training is required so it can't be misconstrued as flight training. There is no requirement that the pilot be solo or with a CFI, only that they can't "act as pic while carrying persons other than those necessary for the conduct of the flight" and having a PIC on board is most certainly necessary for the conduct of the flight.
@@bt8469 we appreciate your insistence on making this very simple question far more complicated, but it really is fairly simple. The original question revolves are a non-current pilot carrying a second person on a flight to gain currency. That's not allowed unless the second person is a CFI. Regardless of whether the other occupant of the aircraft is a non-pilot, a new pilot, a highly experienced pilot, or a small child - they are a passenger by definition. The regulations clearly say the flight for currency must be made with no other person or property are carried aboard the aircraft except those necessary for the conduct of the flight. A second person is not necessary. We're sorry you've misconstrued this rule to mean a pilot who is not current can carry passengers. Sitting beside a current pilot while they make the 3 takeoffs and landings does not make the passenger a current pilot. It just doesn't work that way.
@ The only reason the question seems very simple by your interpretation is because you add personal opinion to the language of the regulation that is not already stated or implied. We note your lack of quotation or reference. You state that: "The regulations clearly say the flight for currency must be made with no other person or property are carried aboard the aircraft except those necessary for the conduct of the flight." Where do they say "...the flight for currency..."? We'll make it easy for others reading this, they don't say anything about being along for a flight, they only prohibit "acting as pic". The regulations (still in 61.57) clearly state that the non-current pilot cannot "act as pic carrying persons" (not "passengers"; another nuance you seem oblivious to) until they "make the required landings". However sorry you are, you also seem incapable of understanding a question that challenges the very premise of your own understanding when your opinions are as discounted as everyone else's. If you can make the argument using the sole stated or directly implied language of the regulations, not your opinion, then feel free to condescend to others's understanding, or at the very least and God forbid, mere questions concerning the regs. This basic premise of understanding is crucial and you'll need to tread carefully, because their are other areas of the regs pertaining to different kinds of currency that could be considered as well. The cannon of English law is characterized such that missing language should be considered intentionally left out, and existing language should not be considered superfluous.
Thanks guys - I read the passenger changes in a similar way, but made a video a few months ago with some scenarios to consider, especially for Robinson helicopter pilots - see what you think: ruclips.net/video/cPKi2TeeFKg/видео.html
I hope the FAA doesn't think that after 20 years of flying I'm going to go back and change my logged PIC time and recalculate all of my totals for some several thousand flights.😂
Excellent review of the changes. Greater safety because both persons in the pilot seats are qualified pilots actually is a slightly shaky assumption. Sometimes that arrangement can result in each person relaxing a bit and relying on the other to take action when action is needed, resulting in inadequate or no action, and there are incidents or accidents to support that. Actually I would include Tenerife on that list.
All the CFIs we've ever known were people. Although to be fair, if aliens do indeed walk among us as some believe, it is possible there are CFIs who are not people. We're just not aware of them. 😄
You may be far better versed than most, but these videos are designed to serve a broad audience that ranges from students to ATPs. We’re sorry you didn’t find value in this one.
Have a ASEL + GL, but fly under SPORT pilot privileges and drivers license medical. Can I receive night flying training even though SPORT pilots can’t fly at night? What happens after MOSAIC?
Yes, you can absolutely fly with a CFI (even in a Light Sport Aircraft) at night to get insight into how night flying works. Getting more training is always better than getting less. As for MOSAIC, that rule hasn't been officially released yet. We have expectations, but no absolute rock solid rules yet. It should go into effect later in 2025. You can bet we'll get into it when the FAA releases the details.
@ had it since 1981, not taking a chance of failing 3rd class at 71 just to get into BASIC MED, failure would force sale of both planes and even lose glider privileges. Staying with drivers license medical,passage of MOSAIC would allow me to fly every plane I’ve ever flow on just the drivers license option
@@MichaelHainen-g1m actually, you may fly gliders (including motor gliders) even if you fail your medical. Gliders may be flown without a medical. There is nothing in the glider regs stating otherwise (regardless of 'why' you don't have a medical). While some gliders may qualify as light sport aircraft due to their weight and performance, gliders are in a Category of their own. They are not categorized as "airplanes". Categories are: Airplane, Glider, Rotorcraft, Lighter Than Air, Powered Lift, Powered Parachute, Weight Shift, and Rocket (yes...there's a Category for that!). For reference purposes, look at 61.23(b)(3). Keep in mind that you are still governed by the self-certifying rules of 61.53 regardless of having a medical or not.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
@23:00 what about using one of those brother P-touch label markers? Not sure if you can use alcohol in order to remove the adhesive without damaging the writing printed on the plastic card?
If that works for you, go for it.
From a former USAF/ANG aircrew member please change NOTAM back to it's original meaning. DEI has no place in aviation.
I’m afraid we don’t hold much sway on that point, but we can’t disagree with you. Notice to Airmen made all the sense in the world to most pilots.
I could make an app to make NOTAMs not just human readable, but integrate with a map app and in like 30 minutes using an AI.
Aviation IT is stuck in the '70s. It's so bad it's embarrassing.
Just keep calling it Notice To Airman. Everyone adds that after giving the new definition anyway.
@@jtjames79It is called SkyVector
If it wasn't for DEI you wouldn't be in aviation.
Good stuff. Thanks
Thank you, @bobcfi1306. Without viewers like you we would be at a loss for what to do with all our insights and advice. Merry Christmas to you!😎
It would seem that changing the language to person would require a pilot to get current by flying by themselves. I would think they should have oft the passenger language.
The change in language was to make it clear a CFI is not a passenger. A pilot could fly to become current on their own, but as we mentioned in the video that would be unwise. Far too risky to be considered a good decision. They could and should become current again with a CFI along for the flight. That extra set of eyes coupled with the experience of the CFI may not only lead to currency, but also a lesson or two learned along the way that could be helpful in the future.
@@MadPropsAero true, the defined a CFI as not being a passenger. They did not state that a CFI is not a person. I tend to agree with this original comment. Why change to “person” if they intended it to include being able to fly with a CFI when the original “passenger” would have done that.
I agree far more dangerous to state that you cannot regain night proficiency with a CFI, but when was the last time the FAA was accused of being competent when making some of these rule changes?!
@ you can get night current with a CFI along. It’s the preferred and totally legal method.
My instructor's last name is 'Persons'
I fly with CFIs all the time. I’ve flown with over 200 CFIs and always count it as PIC time
In the video, logging of PIC time is mentioned frequently in referencing 61.57. However, 61.57 pertains to acting as PIC, which is different than logging it.
That’s an interesting perspective.
Exactly, depending on the ratings of the individuals, when flying with a safety pilot, and who is and who is not current - dictates who is the acting PIC. The add on to 61.57 seems more like a suggestion than anything else
Great episode, love the Mad Props discussions from the last few weeks. Smash that like button!
Viewers (and guests) like you make this channel so much more gratifying to produce than it might have been. We appreciate you, @AlphaKilo.Warrior. You're a rock star.
Another great thing you can use too is I totally switched away from paper which I think is not a good thing but is it easier on me with my Flight bag in electronic so I use two apps that has the fire engines and that’s connected to the Code of Federal Regulations or the E code of federal Regulations so when I use is called lost another one I use is so just wanna throw that in there
This was absolutely excellent! Well done. Regarding 61.193 (c), we had a guy at our airport years ago that was a CFI and advertising “Flight Training” on Groupon when in actuality the flights were Chicago lake front sight seeing tours. “Come see Chicago from the air and learn to fly while we’re at it” kind of thing. Virtually no one that flew with him actually intended to learn to fly…it was a true “134.5” operation. For years, the FAA tried everything to nail this guy to no avail. We tossed him off our airport and I think he eventually went out of business. 61.193 (c) now gives the FAA a way to deal with this.
For all the frustration the regulations may cause us, they have real value. Thanks for sharing a great example.
Courts changed the meaning of ‘commercial’…
If the government eliminates Daylight Savings Time (spring forward) then there will be more time in the “day” to fly at night. so stay current.
I guess you are cool if you show guitars in the back ground after all Ward Carroll does it and he is cool.
Not necessarily cool, but very enthusiastic.
I'm CFI/II/ME, and never passenger when giving training or reviews. I assumed for decades as revised FAR's clarifies and as described in this video. I do not think definition changes, only clarifies.😮
Does that mean a cfi cannot take 2 students up for currency training?
We've not come across an airplane with three sets of controls, but if there is one we suspect the CFI could take two pilots aloft on a currency flight. Or course a CFI could take a pilot and a passenger on the same flight, but only the pilot manipulating the controls would become current. The third pilot in the back seat would simply be a passenger.
@ you misunderstood. Some instructors would take 2 students up and go to a far airport and switch students. Does the non flying student count as a passenger?
@@davidhtims if the non-flying person in the aircraft isn't a required crewmember, or a CFI, they are by definition a passenger.
In other words, a "passenger" is anybody who has no business whatsoever being on board an aircraft, other than to enjoy the scenery.
Question, a pilot is not night current, she flies with a second pilot who has lots of recent night experiences in a similar airplane ( like a Piper or Cessna,)During a night flight the first pilot shoots several landings and regains night currency. Legal or not?
Does a CFI need to be night current to fly at night with a none night current pilot to get the pilot current?
Love these questions, just make sure you read these regs yourself. CFRs don't make great YT content, because these guys are leaving out quite a bit.
1st question, you may have a point here:
61.57 just says that the non-current pilot just has to "make the landings" while "acting as sole manipulator of the flight controls" (does not have to be PIC or log PIC), but they can certainly start logging pic immediately upon the 3rd landing.
2nd question, I think they got you with 61.57(a)(2) - for the non-current pilot, the CFI is "necessary" to act as PIC, so they have to be night current. For the CFI, I don't think the non-current pilot is "necessary for the conduct of the flight". That may also be why they changed the wording from "passengers" to "persons".
Not. The first pilot cannot fly at night with a passenger until after they’ve logged 3 takeoffs and landings to a full stop. She can’t become current again while flying with a passenger.
The fact that the other person onboard is a pilot is not a factor. If they're not a CFI providing instruction (which would be legal) they're a passenger. They're not a required crewmember or instructor. Thus, the 1st pilot would be flying at night, with a passenger, when she's not current to be flying at night with a passenger.
We hope that helps.
@@MadPropsAero
We think you are missing his point and may not have watched the video because those belly buttons on board are called persons in the reg now instead of passengers, but I digress. His idea is that the first pilot is the [passenger]/person. You said that they can't "fly" with a [passenger] because they aren't night current, but that's not what 61.57 says. It says that they can't "act as PIC carrying persons" until they have "*made* 3 t/o & landings..."
What says that they can't "make the t/o and landings" with the other night current pilot "acting as pic" ? Obviously no training is required so it can't be misconstrued as flight training. There is no requirement that the pilot be solo or with a CFI, only that they can't "act as pic while carrying persons other than those necessary for the conduct of the flight" and having a PIC on board is most certainly necessary for the conduct of the flight.
@@bt8469 we appreciate your insistence on making this very simple question far more complicated, but it really is fairly simple.
The original question revolves are a non-current pilot carrying a second person on a flight to gain currency. That's not allowed unless the second person is a CFI. Regardless of whether the other occupant of the aircraft is a non-pilot, a new pilot, a highly experienced pilot, or a small child - they are a passenger by definition. The regulations clearly say the flight for currency must be made with no other person or property are carried aboard the aircraft except those necessary for the conduct of the flight. A second person is not necessary.
We're sorry you've misconstrued this rule to mean a pilot who is not current can carry passengers. Sitting beside a current pilot while they make the 3 takeoffs and landings does not make the passenger a current pilot. It just doesn't work that way.
@
The only reason the question seems very simple by your interpretation is because you add personal opinion to the language of the regulation that is not already stated or implied. We note your lack of quotation or reference. You state that: "The regulations clearly say the flight for currency must be made with no other person or property are carried aboard the aircraft except those necessary for the conduct of the flight."
Where do they say "...the flight for currency..."? We'll make it easy for others reading this, they don't say anything about being along for a flight, they only prohibit "acting as pic".
The regulations (still in 61.57) clearly state that the non-current pilot cannot "act as pic carrying persons" (not "passengers"; another nuance you seem oblivious to) until they "make the required landings". However sorry you are, you also seem incapable of understanding a question that challenges the very premise of your own understanding when your opinions are as discounted as everyone else's.
If you can make the argument using the sole stated or directly implied language of the regulations, not your opinion, then feel free to condescend to others's understanding, or at the very least and God forbid, mere questions concerning the regs.
This basic premise of understanding is crucial and you'll need to tread carefully, because their are other areas of the regs pertaining to different kinds of currency that could be considered as well. The cannon of English law is characterized such that missing language should be considered intentionally left out, and existing language should not be considered superfluous.
What is the regulatory Definition of Person ? : )
We’re going to guess they mean “human being.” But we could be wrong. We’ll just wait for official verification.
@@MadPropsAero try 14 CFR part 1
@@bigclosetmusic4925 better not ask Katanji Jackson Browne of SCOTUS fame she can’t even describe what a woman is
Thanks guys - I read the passenger changes in a similar way, but made a video a few months ago with some scenarios to consider, especially for Robinson helicopter pilots - see what you think: ruclips.net/video/cPKi2TeeFKg/видео.html
Really good content! Thanks for sharing the link.
I hope the FAA doesn't think that after 20 years of flying I'm going to go back and change my logged PIC time and recalculate all of my totals for some several thousand flights.😂
We don't think they were specifically focused on you and your logbook entries, @AV8R_1. But we could be wrong.
Excellent review of the changes. Greater safety because both persons in the pilot seats are qualified pilots actually is a slightly shaky assumption. Sometimes that arrangement can result in each person relaxing a bit and relying on the other to take action when action is needed, resulting in inadequate or no action, and there are incidents or accidents to support that. Actually I would include Tenerife on that list.
Isn’t a CFI a person?
All the CFIs we've ever known were people. Although to be fair, if aliens do indeed walk among us as some believe, it is possible there are CFIs who are not people. We're just not aware of them. 😄
Maybe the FAA could define “woman”?
Can't be done. No one knows. 😂😂😂
I knew the rules guys. Pls cut your videos in half. Too much gibberish.
You may be far better versed than most, but these videos are designed to serve a broad audience that ranges from students to ATPs. We’re sorry you didn’t find value in this one.
Have a ASEL + GL, but fly under SPORT pilot privileges and drivers license medical. Can I receive night flying training even though SPORT pilots can’t fly at night? What happens after MOSAIC?
Yes, you can absolutely fly with a CFI (even in a Light Sport Aircraft) at night to get insight into how night flying works. Getting more training is always better than getting less. As for MOSAIC, that rule hasn't been officially released yet. We have expectations, but no absolute rock solid rules yet. It should go into effect later in 2025. You can bet we'll get into it when the FAA releases the details.
Get your pvt pilot rating.
@ had it since 1981, not taking a chance of failing 3rd class at 71 just to get into BASIC MED, failure would force sale of both planes and even lose glider privileges. Staying with drivers license medical,passage of MOSAIC would allow me to fly every plane I’ve ever flow on just the drivers license option
@@MichaelHainen-g1m actually, you may fly gliders (including motor gliders) even if you fail your medical. Gliders may be flown without a medical. There is nothing in the glider regs stating otherwise (regardless of 'why' you don't have a medical). While some gliders may qualify as light sport aircraft due to their weight and performance, gliders are in a Category of their own. They are not categorized as "airplanes". Categories are: Airplane, Glider, Rotorcraft, Lighter Than Air, Powered Lift, Powered Parachute, Weight Shift, and Rocket (yes...there's a Category for that!). For reference purposes, look at 61.23(b)(3). Keep in mind that you are still governed by the self-certifying rules of 61.53 regardless of having a medical or not.