Appendix A A-7 unintended consequences. Failure of pilots to follow ATC taxi instructions is the number one cause of runway incursions.
A.6.2.5 SA. SA is another step that begins with preflight planning. Some pilots only think of SA in terms of flight operations. So, they may maintain this mindset when the aircraft is on the ground. Reframing SA to cover all phases of flight is one more step in reducing pilot errors. To maintain SA, pilots should adopt a heads-up attitude when taxiing. This industry best practice is also a step to reduce the risk of an inadvertent runway incursion.
A.6.2.6 Aircraft Lights. Proper use of aircraft lights is an additional procedure that GA pilots often overlook. Aircraft lights allow others to have some idea of the pilot’s intentions. Proper use of the aircraft lights should be a defined element in every pilot’s set procedures.
A.7 How to Make the Best Use of the FAA Safety Team (FAASTeam) and the Pilot Proficiency Program (WINGS) in Your Program of Instruction. Flight instructors have at their disposal a vast and totally free resource of personnel and tools to help them better do their jobs both on the ground when conducting ground instruction, as well as in the air during actual flight training. That resource is the FAASTeam. The FAASTeam is coordinated through the FAA’s Safety Promotion Program Office (SPPO) and consists of a network of FAASTeam Program Managers (FPM) throughout the United States.
A.7.1 The FAASTeam has joined forces with individuals and the aviation industry to create a unified effort to reduce GA accidents and to foster and promote a positive safety culture in the GA community. These collaborative partners include:
1. FAASTeam Members: individuals who make a conscious effort to promote aviation safety and a positive safety culture;
2. FAASTeam Representatives (REP): aviation safety volunteers who wish to work closely with FPMs to actively promote safety; and
3. FAASTeam Industry Members (FIM): companies or associations of people that have a vested interest in aviation safety.
A.7.2 The FAASTeam’s website, https://www.faasafety.gov/, is the prime FAASTeam education and communication tool. Flight instructors are highly encouraged to register for an account, which is free. Registered users automatically receive email announcements of local and national safety seminars and webinars held throughout the country, and they can specify topics of interest for safety notices.
A.7.3 One of the many FAASTeam tools available to the instructor is the WINGS program.
T he WINGS program is a structured, documented process. WINGS instructors are expected to provide evaluation and training necessary to ensure airmen are proficient in each element of each WINGS activity. WINGS instructors also seek to improve pilot performance to better than certification standards require. WINGS offers three levels of achievement: Basic, Advanced, and Master.
Appendix A A-8 A.7.4 WINGS subjects are designed to target specific emphasis areas derived from accident data and are delivered through personal contact with flight instructors as well as through frequent live seminars and webinars given throughout the United States. Pilots attain and maintain WINGS phases on a rolling basis based on very simple and easy to understand requirements. Recordkeeping and verification are accomplished online; however, WINGS applicants do not need internet access to participate. As has been in the past, achievement of any level of the WINGS program will substitute for a flight review.
Flight instructors need to be aware of and conversant in how this program works and how it and the many other resources available to them through the FAASTeam can benefit both their clients and them.
A.7.5 Flight instructors can earn WINGS credit for completing a FIRC, and those who instruct in the WINGS program can establish their flight instructor recent experience based on WINGS instructional flight activities. Flight instructors can also increase their client pool through delivery of WINGS post-certification proficiency training. For complete details, please refer to Advisory Circular (AC) 61-91, WINGS—Pil ot Proficiency Program. Also, see sample lesson plans in Appendix B, References and Job Aids, Figure B-2, Sample Lesson Plan: Safety Trends in GA, and Figure B-3, Sample Lesson Plan: How to Make Use of the FAA Safety Team.
A.8 FAA Regulatory, Policy, and Publications Changes and Updates. Regulations, poli cies, and aviation safety-related publications are continually changing, and part of the job of the flight instructor is to keep themselves up to date to ensure that what they are teaching their students is current and accurate. This can be difficult for flight instructors, whether they are part-time weekend instructors with jobs elsewhere, or very busy fulltime instructors at flight schools with high activity levels. Nevertheless, this requirement remains critically important because effective recurrent flight instructor training directly relates to the quality of flight instruction provided to pilots and the furtherance of flight safety. The FIRC offers an ideal opportunity for the flight instructor to learn about what has been changing in the regulatory and policy areas that are so important in their conduct of their profession. Therefore, the FAA expects all FIRCs to provide training of pertinent developments that occurred since the attendee’s last established recent experience. This, in turn, places an expectation on the FIRC provider to diligently research and keep abreast of the dynamic regulatory and policy environment within which the flight instructor and their students must operate. This, clearly, will necessitate ongoing and often substantial revisions in their course materials. In many cases, providers will have to revise material “on the fly” as policies and regulations change. The FAA expects FIRC providers to immediately update their presentation materials to reflect relevant changes in FAA regulations, FAA policies, and FAA safety-related publications
(e.g., FAA ACs and handbooks) to stay completely up to date at all times. The provider may make such changes to this topic content without prior approval at any time, provided such changes accurately reflect the current regulatory or policy state.
A.9 How to Conduct an Effective Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) and Flight Review. Flight instructors perform one of the most vital and influential roles in aviation.
Along with training applicants to become first-time pilots, these aviation educators provide essential pilot evaluations and continuing training to ensure safe flight
Appendix A A-9 operations. Flight instructors influence the entire GA safety culture. They are not only responsible for pilots to meet aviation proficiency standards, but also bear responsibilities for the safety of every passenger who entrusts their life to a pilot’s knowledge, skill, and judgment. The FIRC provider’s role of providing continuing training to instructors is crucial. For example, the continuing training provided by FIRCs to flight instructors enables the flight instructor to conduct meaningful IPCs and flight reviews.
A.9.1 The IPC. T he instrument flight instructor who administers the IPC described in § 61.57(d) must know how to conduct an IPC effectively. Providers should ensure that flight instructors receive the level of continuing training necessary to meet this goal.
Airman Certification Standards (ACS) or practical test standards (PTS), as applicable, for the instrument rating stipulates that the flight portion of an IPC must include certain aeronautical tasks (required maneuvers) specific to instrument flying. All flight instructors should know that the ACS or PTS guide (as applicable) contains this information. The maneuvers and procedures selected for the IPC must include those listed in the Rating Task Table in the current edition of the ACS or PTS guide, as applicable (e.g., FAA-S-AC S -8C, Instrument Rating ‒ Airplane Airman Certification Standards). The instrument instructor conducting the IPC should also know that the instructor has the discretion to require any other maneuver(s) necessary to determine that the pilot can safely operate under instrument flight rules (IFR) in a broad range of conditions appropriate to the aircraft flown and the ATC environment selected. In any case, the flight instructor should pay particular attention to those areas within the PTS identified as “Special Emphasis.” New ACS replacement guides do not label “Special Emphasis” areas, since all required tasks are emphasized.
A.9.2 The Flight Review. A flight review is a training event in which proficiency is evaluated.
Thus, it is a proficiency-based exercise wherein the airman is required to demonstrate the safe exercise of the privileges of their pilot certificate. It can be considered an industrymanaged recurrent training program. All active pilots must receive some level of recurrent training on a regular basis in order to continue to exercise their pilot privileges.
At a minimum, pilots may meet that requirement through a flight review, which must be conducted at least every 24 calendar months, as established in § 61.56. However, the FAA recommends that pilots complete a flight review as needed, not just once every 24 calendar months. The flight instructor typically conducts flight reviews. Many pilots never encounter a flight instructor except for that every 24 calendar month requirement.
Some flight instructors consider the flight review a chore that they would rather not do and are often unclear as to how to properly conduct one when they do. The instructor should understand that the authority to conduct a flight review, and thereby allow a pilot to continue to exercise their privileges as pilot, is a major responsibility and offers them an opportunity to assess and enhance a pilot’s aviation skills, and thus contribute directly to the safety of GA. Flight instructors should also understand that the flight review is not to be construed or conducted as a test, that there is no pass or fail, and that it is intended to be a learning experience. Flight reviews are not standalone programs of training that are the same for every pilot. Each flight review is unique to the skills and experience level of the pilot receiving the review. The instructor should be well versed in how to quickly assess a pilot’s skills and experience and to fine-tune the review “on the fly” to effectively confer new knowledge or to refine skills already possessed. Most pilots know
Appendix A A-10 that a flight review requires a minimum of 1 hour of training on the ground and 1 hour of flight training as provided by § 61.56(a). This may create an unrealistic expectation of some pilots. Many pilots may not remember that § 61.56(a)(2) also requires that the review must include “[a] review of those maneuvers and procedures that, at the discretion of the person giving the review, are necessary for the pilot to demonstrate the safe exercise of the privileges of the pilot certificate.” Each pilot has individual needs that may easily require more time to resolve to satisfactorily complete a flight review. To prevent unrealistic expectations, the instructor should address the minimum time requirement and pilot proficiency requirement for a flight review before conducting it.
The flight instructor who conducts a flight review normally uses more than an hour on the ground and an hour in the air to accomplish this in a useful way.
A.9.3 IPC and Flight Review Considerations. Flight instructors should possess a thorough understanding of the requirements and process for conducting an IPC or flight review when they agree to conduct one. They should also understand that FAA AELS directly affects safety of flight. Instructors should know that regulations require pilots to meet and maintain FAA AELS for all grades of pilot certificates issued under part 61. When a flight instructor conducts a flight evaluation and/or flight training event, the instructor should identify any pilot that does not demonstrate FAA AELS. In cases like this, the instructor should provide a logbook entry for training received, advise the pilot of the instructor’s finding, and notify their appropriate Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) for further action. AC 60-28, FAA English Language Standard for an FAA Certificate Issued Under 14 CFR Parts 61, 63, 65, and 10 7, provides information and guidance regarding English language standards required by these 14 CFR parts. The 2018 revision of AC 61-98, Currency Requirements and Guidance for the Flight Review and Instrument Proficiency Check, included a new section on the FAA AELS. Flight instructors should also know how to instantly formulate an effective plan of action that will make the difference between a pointless exercise that only meets the regulatory requirements, and a truly effective IPC or flight review. The pilot under review/evaluation should come away knowing something they did not know before, possess a degree of skill they did not have before, and meet proficiency standards required to conduct a safe flight. While the FAA requires providers to present the IPC and flight review as a core topic, they should emphasize the importance of the IPC, flight review, and instructor’s role in reducing GA accidents throughout the entire FIRC program.
A.10 Ethics and Professionalism in the Role of the Flight Instructor. A professional is a person who receives compensation for some unique knowledge or skill that they may possess. Ethics has been defined as what a person does when no one is watching. The mark of a quality professional is that the individual maintains the highest level of ethics in everything they do, but most particularly in their professional field. This very much applies to the flight instructor who, by virtue of the fact that the instructor receives compensation for their skill and knowledge, is a professional. Professionals who hold their field of endeavor in high esteem and who take pride in their accomplishments in their chosen fields tend to maintain high ethical standards without even thinking about it.
It becomes an inherent quality when one takes pride in their work. Unfortunately, many in the flight instructor community do not easily recognize their own accomplishments and the critical role they play as instructors in the global world of aviation. This can be
Appendix A A-11 particularly true of those instructors who see themselves as “only” instructing to build the hours necessary to move on to the air carriers where they plan on flying “real” airplanes.
The typically poor wages often found in the field of flight instruction does not help the perception of instructors’ professionalism. While not pervasive throughout the industry, flight instructors and others involved in aviation should guard against this mindset. Flight instructors represent the finest individuals in GA. They should be mindful of this fact and of the responsibility that it entails. Flight instructors have the duty of fostering and ensuring safety through careful and thoughtful training. For example, signing a flight review endorsement in a pilot’s logbook, possibly for a friend, when not actually having conducted one or having conducted only a cursory check is unethical. However, the perception of the seriousness of such a poorly conceived event is largely dependent on those self-perceived factors of ethics and professionalism. If the flight instructor has the attitude that “it doesn’t really matter because I am moving on to the airlines anyway,” then that instructor’s perception of this infraction will be very different than that of their colleagues. Most flight instructors understand that flight instructing is an honorable profession, even if temporary, and they take pride in their ability and authority to conduct flight reviews. Instructors should always be mindful of their responsibility and duty to maintain the highest ethical standards (to always do the “right thing”) and how those high standards directly contribute to safety in GA, regardless of their future personal goals.
While providers are required to present ethics and professionalism as a core topic, they should also weave this theme throughout the entire FIRC program.
A.11 How to Teach Pilots to Avoid LOC. Instructors should know that the GAJSC cited aircraft LOC as the number one cause of GA fatalities from 2012 through 2021. The General Aviation Accident Dashboard reports that 210 fatal GA accidents and 344 GA fatalities occurred in the NAS during 2021. In-flight LOC, mainly stalls, accounted for the largest number of GA fatal accidents. LOC refers to aircraft accidents that result from situations in which a pilot should have maintained or regained aircraft control, but did not. The overwhelming majority of GA accidents are avoidable. Flight instructors can make a significant impact on reducing GA accidents by providing targeted mentoring and training to pilots and students. FIRC presentations should include the following information in their LOC lesson:
A.11.1 Training Accidents. Tra ining accidents have occurred because the flight instructor and trainee were not in agreement regarding manipulation of the flight controls. A recommended three-step process of exchange includes a verbal handoff from the pilot flying, verbal acceptance by the pilot taking over, and a verbal and visual confirmation that the exchange has taken place by the pilot ceding control. The procedure to be used for exchange of flight controls should be briefed before flight. In addition, instructors need to maintain diligence while providing instruction. A flight instructor should always be ready and in a position to take over control of the aircraft when doubt exists as to the safe outcome of any flight operation or maneuver.
A.11.2 Traffic Pattern Operations. One area where pilots have experienced LOC accidents is while maneuvering in an airport traffic pattern. In response, the FAA is asking FIRC providers to focus on three traffic pattern issues. The first is the risk of a departure stall;
the second is the risk of LOC if attempting to return to the field after an engine failure on
Appendix A A-12 takeoff; and the third is the risk of LOC on the base to final turn. The pilot’s ability to avoid a stall is a factor in all three scenarios.
A.11.3 Departure. Flight instructors should provide training ensuring pilots of small, singleengine aircraft depart in coordinated flight at the best-rate-of-climb speed (VY) for normal takeoffs and maintain this speed to the altitude necessary for a safe return to the airport in the event of an emergency. Instructors should emphasize that a departure at best-angle-of-climb speed (VX) is used only for obstacle clearance and short-field takeoff procedures. Flight instructors should also emphasize the risks and potential consequences of climbing out at speeds less or greater than what is required for a particular type of takeoff.
A.11.4 Return to Field/Engine Failure on Takeoff. Flight instructors should demonstrate and teach trainees when and how to make a safe 180-degree turnback to the field after an engine failure. Instructors should also train pilots of single-engine airplanes not to make an emergency 180-degree turnback to the field after a failure unless altitude, best glide requirements, and pilot skill allow for a safe return. Instructors should also emphasize that to return to the runway the pilot just took off from will require more than a 180-degree turn. This emergency procedure training should occur at a safe altitude and should only be taught as a simulated engine-out exercise. A critical part of conducting this training is for the flight instructor to be fully aware of the need for diligence, the need to perform this maneuver properly, and the need to avoid any potential for an accelerated stall in the turn. The flight instructor should demonstrate the proper use of pitch and bank control to reduce load factor and lower the stall speed during the turn. After completing this demonstration, the flight instructor should allow the trainee to practice this procedure under the flight instructor’s supervision. Flight instructors should also teach the typical altitude loss for the given make and model flown during a 180-degree turn, while also teaching the pilot how to make a safe, coordinated turn with a sufficient bank. These elements should give the pilot the ability to determine quickly whether a turnback will have a successful outcome. During the before-takeoff check, the expected loss of altitude in a turnback, plus a sufficient safety factor, should be briefed and related to the altitude at which this maneuver can be conducted safely. In addition, the effect of existing winds on the preferred direction and the viability of a turnback should be considered as part of the briefing.
A.11.5 LOC/Base to Landing. Specialized flight training that emphasizes establishing and maintaining a stabilized approach and landing also reduces the risk of LOC in an airport traffic pattern. A properly executed base-to-final turn considers crosswinds and enables pilots to begin final approach lined up with the intended runway’s extended centerline.
Instructors should instruct the pilot to reject an approach and initiate a go-around when the pilot cannot maintain a stabilized approach.
A.11.6 Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC). An other area where pilots have experienced LOC is while maneuvering in IMC. Vertigo or spatial disorientation has been a significant factor in many aircraft upset accidents. The common result when a non-instrument-rated pilot inadvertently continues flight into IMC is spatial disorientation of the pilot and LOC of the aircraft. Pilots who are instrument rated, but
Appendix A A-13 not instrument proficient, are also susceptible. Recovery from such a situation can be nearly impossible. Additionally, instrument-rated pilots maneuvering in IMC that fail to prioritize actions properly and utilize Crew Resource Management (CRM) may become inattentive or distracted, thus losing SA, which too often can lead to an LOC.
A.11.7 Pilot Proficiency. Studi es have shown that LOC is most likely to occur when pilots lack proficiency. However, mitigation of this risk can be accomplished using personal currency programs and proficiency training. Proficiency is essential when an unforeseen, abnormal, or emergency situation presents itself. Conditions exceeding personal skill limitations can present themselves at any time and can occur unexpectedly. When this happens, the pilot needs to be able to avoid being startled, make appropriate decisions in a timely manner, and exercise skills at a proficiency level needed to meet the situation.
Personal currency programs serve to develop and maintain pilot proficiency by promoting attributes such as aeronautical knowledge, aeronautical skill, and ADM. Pilot proficiency pays off because a highly proficient pilot can avoid or manage an in-flight emergency in a routine, safe, and efficient manner. The GAJSC recommends that pilots place emphasis focused on their specific proficiency needs by including training that may exceed regulatory minimum currency requirements. FIRCs can use this information to emphasize proficiency and training programs to reduce the risk of GA accidents. FIRC providers should include awareness training for instructors to learn that the GAJSC is the primary vehicle for government–industry cooperation, communication, and coordination on GA accidents. A FIRC provider’s LOC lesson should emphasize that GAJSC findings reveal common pilot errors leading to LOC, while GAJSC recommendations provide appropriate antidotal actions to reduce LOC and GA accidents. This information includes personal skill limitations, distractions, and spatial disorientation that lead to GA accidents. The flight instructor’s awareness of this information can directly benefit the effectiveness of student training. Trainees should understand that poor ADM, poor weather conditions, runway incursions, and poor aeronautical skills hold the potential to trigger LOC. The GAJSC is a vital contributor to the goal of reducing GA accidents.
Flight instructors should consider GAJSC findings and recommendations when conducting flight reviews, IPCs, and instructing other pilots on creating their personal currency action plans. AC 61-98 and the Airplane Flying Handbook (FAA-H-8083-3) both include sections pertaining to LOC.
A.12 ACS. Sinc e September 2011, the FAA has worked with aviation community stakeholders to improve standards, guidance, and test development practices for airman certification.
The ACS framework integrates and aligns standards, guidance, and testing for airman certification. The ACS is built on today’s PTS, which establishes the skill performance metrics for each flight proficiency element listed in the regulations for an airman certificate or rating. The ACS replaces the PTS when it is published. The ACS does not change or lengthen the check ride (practical test). Rather, its integrated approach will provide better guidance to applicants, instructors, and evaluators during each phase of the airman certification process. The ACS also enables the FAA to keep airman testing fully aligned with regulations, performance standards for knowledge and skill, and guidance materials such as handbooks. Additionally, the FAA is working with industry to refine ACS and its implementation plan. The rollout date for releasing the initial ACSs for Private Pilot-Airplane (PAR) and Instrument Rating Airplane (IRA) was June 15, 2016.
Appendix A A-14 On May 31, 2024, the FAA adopted a final rule to amend 14 CFR part 61 by incorporating by reference (IBR) the ACS and PTS. This final rule incorporates thirty pilot and flight instructor ACS and PTS in part 61 by reference through a centralized IBR section in new § 61.14. To ensure that the implementation of the ACS is successful, stakeholders need to understand how to utilize the ACS for training and testing. Flight instructors play a leading role in this regard. For this reason, FIRC providers also need to support the introduction of ACS and the 2024 ACS IBR by providing ACS training to their attendees. Therefore, FIRC providers should develop a comprehensive lesson that facilitates the understanding, implementation, and utilization of ACS. You can find more information concerning ACS at https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/acs/.
A.13 Flight Instructors: Accepting a Remote Pilot or Student Pilot Certificate Application. Flight instructors need to understand that significant changes in the process of applying for and issuing student pilot certificates took effect on April 1, 2016, in conjunction with a new rule adopted by the FAA. Since April 1, 2016, Aviation Medical Examiners (AME) are no longer able to issue student pilot certificates. The FAA has released a final rule that requires student pilots to apply for a plastic student pilot certificate from a FSDO, Designated Pilot Examiner (DPE), Airman Certification Representative (ACR), or a flight instructor. Under the authority of the FAA, the 14 CFR part 107 rules were enacted on August 29, 2016. Now, an aviation safety inspector (ASI), DPE, ACR, or a flight instructor accepts remote pilot applications. AC 61-65, Certification: Pilots and Flight and Ground Instructors, reflects these changes. This lesson provides flight instructors training for their review and acceptance of an application for a Student Pilot Certificate or an application for a Remote Pilot Certificate. This lesson should provide training for the submission of both the Integrated Airman Certification and Rating Application (IACRA) and the paper applications. This lesson should also provide training to flight instructors regarding their responsibility to evaluate the applicant’s eligibility for meeting FAA AELS. FIRC providers should develop a comprehensive lesson to facilitate the flight instructor’s full understanding and implementation of their new responsibilities regarding this topic.
• You can find more information concerning part 107 pilot certification at https://www.faa.gov/uas/commercial_operators/become_a_drone_pilot.
• You can find more information concerning student pilot certification at https://www.faa.gov/pilots/become/student_cert/.
Appendix B B-1 APPENDIX B. REFERENCES AND JOB AIDS B.1 FAA Advisory Circulars (AC) (current editions): https://www.faa.gov/regulations_pol icies/advisory_circulars/.
• AC 60-28, FAA English Language Standard for an FAA Certificate Issued Under 14 CFR Parts 61, 63, 65, and 107.
• AC 61-65, Certification: Pilots and Flight and Ground Instructors.
• AC 61-91, WINGS—Pi lot Proficiency Program.
• AC 90-109, Transition to Unfamiliar Aircraft, provides additional information and guidance pertaining to transition to experimental or unfamiliar airplanes.
• AC 90-114, Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast Operations.
• AC 107-2, Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Small UAS).
B.2 FAA Handbooks and Manuals (current editions): https://www.faa.gov/regulations_po licies/handbooks_manuals/.
• FAA-H-8083-3, Airplane Flying Handbook.
• FAA-H-8083-9, Aviation Instructor’s Handbook.
• Other handbooks and manuals, as applicable.
B.3 FAA Web Resources:
• Airman Certification Standards (ACS) (all current editions):
https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/acs/.
• Beyond the Buttons: Mastering Our Marvelous Flying Machines:
https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/library/documents/2007/Mar/15239/7.1%20TA A%20Flying%20Skills%20MarApr07.pdf.
• FAA/Industry Training Standards: Personal and Weather Risk Assessment Guide:
https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/training_testing/training/fits/guidance/Pers%2 0Wx%20Risk%20Assessment%20Guide-V1.0.pdf.
• Flight Instructor Training Modules:
https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/training/fits/training.
• General Aviation Pilot’s Guide to Preflight Weather Planning, Weather Self- Briefings, and Weather Decision Making (current edition):
https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/courses/content/33/346/GA%20Weather%20De cision-Making%20Aug06.pdf.
• Online Resources for Certificated Flight Instructors, FAA Safety Team (FAASTeam):
https://www.faasafety.gov.
Appendix B B-2
• Personal Minimums Checklist:
h ttps://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/training_testing/training/fits/guidance/persona l%20minimums%20checklist.pdf.
• Practical Test Standards (PTS) (all current editions):
https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/test_standards/.
• Risk Management Teaching Tips:
https://www.faasafety.gov/gslac/ALC/libview_normal.aspx?id=6107.
B.4 Other Resources:
• Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA): http://www.aopa.org/.
• AOPA Tools for Certificated Flight Instructors: https://www.aopa.org/training-andsafety/cfis/flight-instructor-resources/tools-for-cfis.
• Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA): https://www.eaa.org/.
• Flight Service (Leidos): https://www.1800wxbrief.com/.
• General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA): https://gama.aero/.
• National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI): https://www.nafinet.org/.
• Society of Aviation and Flight Educators (SAFE): https://www.safepilots.org/.
Appendix B B-3 Table B-1. Minimum Hour Assurance Plan Matrix [Required to be included in an online training course outline (TCO)] Example: 16-Hour Course Content
ASSURANCE PLAN MATRIX
CORE TOPICS Lesson Presentation Actual Time (LMS1 1 The provider’s learning management system (LMS) is required to ensure that each attendee actively engages each lesson in its entirety.
) Pretest Allotted Time (optional2 2 A pretest is a learning tool that may count as part of a lesson, but should not constitute an excessive amount of the lesson time.
) Lesson Support Graph/Data Allotted Time3 3 This column is optional, as graphs/additional data may be included without a specified time for attendees to review.
Allotted Break Time4 4 Credited break time may not exceed 2 hours of the 16-hour course content.
E nd of Lesson and/or Final Exam Allotted Time5 5 Total testing time may not exceed 1 hour of the 16-hour course content minimum requirement (see paragraph
Hours Minutes Minutes Minutes Minutes Navigating the 21st Century: Aircraft Automation
1.0 0 0 Attendee Discretion 4 Security-Related SUA 1.0 0 0 “ 4 TSA 1.0 0 0 “ 4 Culture of Safety 1.0 0 0 “ 4 Safety Trends in GA 1.0 0 .4 “ 5 Pilot Deviations .75 0 0 “ 4 FAASTeam .75 0 .3 “ 4 Regulations .75 0 0 “ 4 Flight Review & IPC .75 0 .3 “ 5 Ethics & Professionalism .75 0 0 “ 4 Loss of Control (LOC) .75 0 0 “ 4 Airman Certification Standards (ACS) .75 0 0 “ 4 Accepting a Remote Pilot or Student Pilot Certificate Application .75 0 0 “ 4 ELECTIVE TOPICS6 6 Elective topics are encouraged, not required.
Who is GAJSC .5 0 0 “ 3 Teaching ADM .5 0 0 “ 3 Total Time (in Hours) Actual Hours (LMS):
12 Allotted Hours:
0 Allotted Hours:
1.0 Allotted Hours:
2.0 Allotted Hours:
1.0
11.1
0.6).
Appendix B B-4 Figure B-1. Sample Training Course Outline Cover Page ORVILLE & WILBUR’S FIRC SCHOOL Airplane Flight Instructor Refresher Course Training Course Outline (Live Classroom) Conducted By:
Orville & Wilbur’s FIRC School 1234 Airport Road Baltimore, MD 12345 Phone: (123) 456-7890 FAX: (123) 456-7891 Point of Contact:
John Smith, Chief Instructor Phone: (123) 567-8901 Email: jsmith@yourfircschools.com