FAA Posts NPRM For Pilot, Flight Instructor Rules Flight School Certification Also Included In The Notice
The FAA is proposing several changes to its pilot, flight
instructor, and pilot school certification rules.
The proposals include:
1) Requiring pilot-in-command (PIC) proficiency checks for pilots
who act as PIC of single-piloted, turbojet-powered airplanes.
2) Allowing pilot applicants to apply for a private pilot
certificate and an instrument rating concurrently.
3) Making allowance in the rule to provide for the issuance of
standard U.S. pilot certificates on the basis of an international
licensing agreement between the FAA and a foreign civil aviation
authority. The FAA has recently entered into such an agreement with
the civil aviation authority of Canada.
The FAA is also proposing to allow pilot schools to use
Internet-based training programs without requiring schools to have
a physical ground training facility. The FAA is proposing to allow
pilot schools and provisional pilot schools to apply for a combined
private pilot certification and instrument rating course.
The FAA also proposes to revise the definition of "complex
airplane." Because of changing technology in aviation, the results
of successful research, and an international agreement, the FAA has
determined these proposed changes to the pilot, flight instructor,
and pilot school certification rules are necessary to ensure pilots
are adequately trained and qualified to operate safely in the
National Airspace System.
The FAA has determined these proposals are needed to respond to
changes in the aviation industry and to further reduce unnecessary
regulatory burdens.
Comments must reach the FAA on or before November 30, 2009. They
can be made online, or delivered via mail, fax, or courier.
FMI: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-20957.pdf
I didn't see this when I made the other post. So, I'll copy it over here for reference...
My primary concern went to §61.129(a)(3)(ii), being able to teach for a single engine commercial certificate without need for a retractable gear aircraft. But, I don't think the requirement should be changed for multiengine aircraft.
My comment submitted:
"I agree with the change for a single engine commercial ticket but have to disagree with the change for multiengine commercial. That's an adapted area to be aware of as part of procedures, both normal and emergency. Where is it more important than for those in multiengine who have increased their workload during emergency procedures by the very nature of the aircraft being multiengine equipped; particularly when headed for a professional career in aviation?
As for those seeking to operate one of the few single-engine retracts, I don't think it would be a bad thing to require a given number of hours over several flights before an endorsement is received. Right now, it's strictly a CFI's judgment call. I'd personally want to see at least five different flights before I signed off, even if everything was perfect from the start.
Yes, I know that means more regulation but it's really just a small change in place of what is currently in place."
